Christification (theosis)

Status
Not open for further replies.

JM

Puritan Board Doctor
I've been following Dr. Jordan B. Cooper for a while now and finally order his book on Christification. Dr. Cooper defines it as,

"Christification is the ontological union of God and man, initiated through the incarnation, which the Christian partakes in through faith. Through this union, that which belongs properly to Christ, namely divine incorruptibility and immortality, is transferred to the believer by faith. This union is increased and strengthened as one participates in the sacramental life of the church, and it is demonstrated through growth in personal holiness."

Anyone else on this forum read the book?

Yours in the Lord,

jm
 
This may be kinda deep for me, but I'm pretty sure our union with Christ does not make us part of Christ. We don't share in his nature; we have his righteousness forensically attributed to us, but it is not our own. Our union with him is more like a marriage: my wife does not share my essence, even though we are covenantally joined.
Again, maybe I missed what Dr. Cooper is saying, but to me it sounds weird.
Oh, and I haven't read the book.
 
This may be kinda deep for me, but I'm pretty sure our union with Christ does not make us part of Christ. We don't share in his nature; we have his righteousness forensically attributed to us, but it is not our own. Our union with him is more like a marriage: my wife does not share my essence, even though we are covenantally joined.
Again, maybe I missed what Dr. Cooper is saying, but to me it sounds weird.
Oh, and I haven't read the book.


2 Pet 1:4 is often quoted in support. "by which have been given to us exceedingly great and precious promises, that through these you may be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust."
 
I have it but haven 't gotten around to reading all of it. Its been awhile since I cracked it open but, if I recall its interesting and there's nothing objectionable yet.
 
Depends on how they gloss it. I know Jordan isn't saying we become part of God's nature (EO don't really say that, either). We've always said as Reformed that our union is more ectypal than archetypal.
 
There is no blurring of the distinction between the created and the Creator.

Letham has a chapter in his systematics that may shed some light on the Reformed view of theosis. I'm reading it now.

jm
 
"Ontological union of God and man"? Sounds starkly unbiblical to me.

1 John 3:2
Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be:
but we know that, when he shall appear,
we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.
 
1 John 3:2
Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be:
but we know that, when he shall appear,
we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

We will be sons (and daughters) of God - not deity, like God Himself.
We shall be like Him - but not deity, like God Himself.

We are not divine and will never be divine. The Creator-creature distinction will always be in force. In heaven, we will be perfect, but we will still be creatures.

Remember, he used the phrase ontological union. Ain't gonna happen.
 
Christification or theosis in Orthodox thought, correct me if I'm wrong I haven't been in an Orthodox parish in 20 years, but God communicates His energies (attributes) through the nous or eye of the soul to man by grace. In Orthodox thought Christ came in the flesh to redeem humanity, this is why Orthodoxy tends to lean toward universalism, and in some sense all flesh is redeemed. This is why all are resurrected, saint and sinner, for judgment.

I have't finished the chapter by Letham yet but I like what I'm reading. Christification begins with justification, grounded in our mystical union with Christ and imputed, indwelling righteousness. To me the Orthodox lack the theological categories to get it right placing sanctification before justification and collapsing justification, adoption, sanctification and glorification into one theological blob.

Letham is excellent when dealing with the Lord's Supper!

Yours in the Lord,

jm
 
Christification or theosis in Orthodox thought, correct me if I'm wrong I haven't been in an Orthodox parish in 20 years, but God communicates His energies (attributes) through the nous or eye of the soul to man by grace.

This is correct. And since they do not believe the essence and the energies are the same thing, they can say that our having God's energies doesn't mean we become part of his essence.
redeem humanity, this is why Orthodoxy tends to lean toward universalism, and in some sense all flesh is redeemed.

Yes, they tend to see humanity as a universal, which is often glossed in a universalistic sense (though they officially deny that).
 
This is correct. And since they do not believe the essence and the energies are the same thing, they can say that our having God's energies doesn't mean we become part of his essence.


Yes, they tend to see humanity as a universal, which is often glossed in a universalistic sense (though they officially deny that).
Good. I attended an Orthodox parish 20 years ago and I'm happy I picked something up. :smug: :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top