Why Christ's Deity is important

[Mr E]

Is it your position that upper limit for man is to become God? Isn't that the Original Sin?

This was the accusation of the Jewish leaders against Jesus whom they wanted to kill. See how he responded....

The Jewish leaders replied, “We are not going to stone you for a good deed but for blasphemy because you, a man, are claiming to be God.”
Jesus answered, “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, you are gods’? If those people to whom the word of God came were called ‘gods’ (and the scripture cannot be broken), do you say about the one whom the Father set apart and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?

 

[RedFan]

Is it your position that upper limit for man is to become God? Isn't that the Original Sin?

As I said when describing Athanasius's statement, "He wasn’t blaspheming that we would all become equal to God. He was commenting on restoration of mankind’s union with God."

 

[Wrangler]

As I said when describing Athanasius's statement, "He wasn’t blaspheming that we would all become equal to God. He was commenting on restoration of mankind’s union with God."

If Clement of Alexandria were posting on this site I suspect he would offer this one:

• I say, the Word of God became <the man Jesus Christ>, that you may learn from <the man Jesus Christ> how <men> may become God.

You think ‘becoming God’ and ‘restored union with God’ are equivalent expressions?

 

[Wrangler]

Is it your position that upper limit for man is to become God? Isn't that the Original Sin?

This was the accusation of the Jewish leaders against Jesus whom they wanted to kill. See how he responded....

The Jewish leaders replied, “We are not going to stone you for a good deed but for blasphemy because you, a man, are claiming to be God.”
Jesus answered, “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, you are gods’? If those people to whom the word of God came were called ‘gods’ (and the scripture cannot be broken), do you say about the one whom the Father set apart and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?

Same question to you. You thinking being God is equivalent to becoming God?

 

[Mr E]

Same question to you. You thinking being God is equivalent to becoming God?

No one becomes God. Only God is God.

 

[RedFan]

You think ‘becoming God’ and ‘restored union with God’ are equivalent expressions?

No. I think 'becoming ONE WITH God' and 'restored union with God' are equivalent expressions. And I think this is the sense that the Patristics I quoted were aiming at. It's a John 17:21 thing, or something similar.

 

[Wrangler]

No. I think 'becoming ONE WITH God' and 'restored union with God' are equivalent expressions. And I think this is the sense that the Patristics I quoted were aiming at.

If Clement of Alexandria were posting on this site I suspect he would offer this one:

• I say, the Word of God became <the man Jesus Christ>, that you may learn from <the man Jesus Christ> how <men> may become God.

You got to be kidding me!

 

[RedFan]

You got to be kidding me!

I wouldn't kid you, my friend. Try to stop looking at the man-become-God rubric as literally pantheistic, an idolatrous expression which the Church Fathers obviously didn't subscribe to, and consider it figuratively as an expression of attaining unity, and you'll capture the intended sense. As in Origen's formulation: "“from Him there began the union of the divine with the human nature, in order that the human, by communion with the divine, might rise to be divine.”

You wouldn't take Psalm 82:6 literally. You wouldn't consider declarations such as the Church is the Body of Christ as literally a reference to His physical body. Or declarations such as "Be ye perfect, even as your heavenly Father is perfect" (Matt. 5:48) as a reference to taking on God's literal essence. Or “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, lest he stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”(Gen. 3:22) as a concern that Adam would literally become God. Try to think of "God became man that man might become God" in a similar way.

 

[Wrangler]

Try to stop looking at the man-become-God rubric as literally pantheistic, an idolatrous expression which the Church Fathers obviously didn't subscribe to, and consider it figuratively as an expression of attaining unity, and you'll capture the intended sense.

Sorry. Words have meaning and I reject the claim that "becoming God" is an equivalent expression of "unity with God." I doubt this is what people have meant over the centuries and I cannot believe you believe that either. The "he is fully God" is not to be take figuratively as you now claim.

This is the final bastion of a failed argument; retreat from literal to figurative interpretation. Mark 1:1 Jesus is the son of God is literal. Nowhere does it say Jesus is God. This thread is about why the deity of Christ is important - not the unity with God.

As long as you admit that you are literally wrong about the trinity and the man-is-god thesis, I'm OK with that. In other forum, I was accused of being technically right. Literally correct. Technically correct. That is what I strive for. You and others can tell me I'm figuratively wrong all day long. That's not the street I'm driving down. That's not my lane. And neither is this thread. Thank you very much.

 

[Mr E]

I wouldn't kid you, my friend. Try to stop looking at the man-become-God rubric as literally pantheistic, an idolatrous expression which the Church Fathers obviously didn't subscribe to, and consider it figuratively as an expression of attaining unity, and you'll capture the intended sense. As in Origen's formulation: "“from Him there began the union of the divine with the human nature, in order that the human, by communion with the divine, might rise to be divine.”

You wouldn't take Psalm 82:6 literally. You wouldn't consider declarations such as the Church is the Body of Christ as literally a reference to His physical body. Or declarations such as "Be ye perfect, even as your heavenly Father is perfect" (Matt. 5:48) as a reference to taking on God's literal essence. Or “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, lest he stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”(Gen. 3:22) as a concern that Adam would literally become God. Try to think of "God became man that man might become God" in a similar way.

It's slightly similar to LDS theology, where they really do view Jesus as having both been an example and as teaching that men do ascend and become God-like, ruling over their own planets, creating their own worlds and populating them.

But I don't think that's what Jesus was an example of. It's not that man ascends, it's that God sends.... and the son/spirit He sends-- descends from a heavenly realm and nature to an earthly realm, taking up temporary residence in a body (home/tent/vessel) of flesh.

It's kind of the opposite of what Clement of Alexandria imagined. Origen gets closer to the mark, in that the One who descended, returns to the place he came from, restoring unity with the Father and resuming the place and nature he left behind. Jesus in this sense, was filled with a divine spirit who in him became flesh, just as all men have a divine spark within (the breath of life) and his mission was to lead our captive spirits back to the Father-- showing us the way to overcome the world and this prison of our own making.

 

[RedFan]

Sorry. Words have meaning and I reject the claim that "becoming God" is an equivalent expression of "unity with God." I doubt this is what people have meant over the centuries and I cannot believe you believe that either. The "he is fully God" is not to be take figuratively as you now claim.

If the "he" in "he is fully God" is a reference to Jesus Christ, I don't take that figuratively at all.

What I take figuratively is the "become God" part of the phrase "that man might become God" The Greek verb here is θεοποιηθῶμεν, a compound of "God" and "to make." So I might translate it as "might be made gods" -- but Greek scholars far smarter than I am say "it carries the connotation of participation in rather than actually becoming God. It is normally translated as “deified.” And if anyone reads St. Athanasius’ work, it is very clear that is the sense in which he was using it." https://timstaples.com/2019/does-the-catholic-church-teach-we-are-gods/

Therefore:

As long as you admit that you are literally wrong about the trinity and the man-is-god thesis, I'm OK with that.

I'm not going to admit I'm wrong about the Trinity. But the "man-is-god" thesis is not my thesis. If we examine Athanasius's Greek in context, we tend toward our unity with God rather than our identity with God.

 

[Wrangler]

If the "he" in "he is fully God" is a reference to Jesus Christ, I don't take that figuratively at all.

Now, you are just contradicting yourself. Before you said "becoming God" is a euphemism for unity but now, you're full on buying into the literal man-is-god thesis.

What I take figuratively is the "become God" part of the phrase "that man might become God" The Greek verb here is θεοποιηθῶμεν, a compound of "God" and "to make." So I might translate it as "might be made gods" -- but Greek scholars far smarter than I am say "it carries the connotation of participation in rather than actually becoming God. It is normally translated as “deified.” And if anyone reads St. Athanasius’ work, it is very clear that is the sense in which he was using it." https://timstaples.com/2019/does-the-catholic-church-teach-we-are-gods/

The bottom line is that you put no weight on the words of Jesus or Scripture and fully weigh the words of the early church fathers. I'm the opposite. I hold Scripture to be the inspired word of God and where anyone contradicts - or goes beyond - that is given zero weight.

8 No matter the source of the false gospel, even if it is preached by us or a heavenly messenger, ignore it. May those who add to or subtract from the gospel of Jesus be eternally cursed! 9 Listen again: if anyone preaches to you a gospel other than what you have accepted, may he find himself cursed!​

Galatians 1:8-9​

Therefore, going to back to this thread's title, "Why Christ's Deity is important;' is invalid. Scripture does not say Christ is a deity, let alone that this is important.