Posted on 02/14/2009 9:43:20 AM PST by restornu
"God Became Man So That Man Might Become A God." St. Athanasius
... when the intellect has been perfected, it unites wholly with God and is illumined by divine light, and the most hidden mysteries are revealed to it. Then it truly learns where wisdom and power lie... While it is still fighting against the passions it cannot as yet enjoy these things... But once the battle is over and it is found worthy of spiritual gifts, then it becomes wholly luminous, powerfully energized by grace and rooted in the contemplation of spiritual realities. A person in whom this happens is not attached to the things of this world but has passed from death to life." St. Thalassios, "On Love, Self-control and Life in accordance with the Intellect" Philokalia (Vol. 2)", p. 355)
'Can a man take fire into his bosom, and his clothes not be burned?' (Prov. 6:27) says the wise Solomon. And I say: can he, who has in his heart the Divine fire of the Holy Spirit burning naked, not be set on fire, not shine and glitter and not take on the radiance of the Deity in the degree of his purification and penetration by fire? For penetration by fire follows upon purification of the heart, and again purification of the heart follows upon penetration by fire, that is, inasmuch as the heart is purified, so it receives Divine grace, and again inasmuch as it receives grace, so it is purified. When this is completed (that is, purification of heart and acquisition of grace have attained their fullness and perfection), through grace a man becomes wholly a god." St. Simeon the New Theologian (Practical and Theological Precepts no. 94, Writings from the Philokalia on Prayer of the Heart; Faber and Faber pgs. 118-199)
Unfortunately for the critics, a review of Christian history illustrates that this doctrine was and is a common belief of many Christians; modern critics are perhaps the exception, rather than the rule.
Saint Irenaeus, who may justly be called the first Biblical theologian among the ancient Christians, was a disciple of the great Polycarp, who was a direct disciple of John the Revelator.[4] Irenaeus is not a heretic or unorthodox in traditional Christian circles, yet he shares a belief in theosis:
Like the LDS, Irenaeus did not believe that this belief in any way displaced God, Christ, or the Holy Ghost:
Yet, Irenaeus—whom it is absurd to exclude from the ranks of orthodox Christians—believed in theosis in terms which agree with LDS thinking on the matter:
Also:
And:
And:
And, Irenaeus considers the doctrine clearly Biblical, just as the LDS do:
Further quotes from Irenaeus available here.
Said one Protestant theologian of Irenaeus:
Clement, an early Christian leader in Alexandria, also taught the doctrine of deification:
And:
Origen also defined what it means to "participate" in something:
Justin the Martyr said in 150 A.D. that he wishes
Also,
In 347, Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria and participant in the council of Nicea, said:
He also states that Christ "became man that we might be made divine." [24]
Augustine, considered one of the greatest Christian Fathers, said
Jerome also described the deification of believers as an act of grace, which matches the LDS understanding precisely:
Jerome goes on to say that we should
The Westminster Dictionary of Christian Theology describes "deification" thusly:
Joseph Fitzmyer wrote:
According to Christian scholar G.L. Prestige, the ancient Christians taught that the destiny of man was to become like God, and even to become deified.[30]
William R. Inge, Archbishop of Canterbury, wrote:
Yet, these "arrogant and shocking" doctrines were clearly held by early Christians!
This view of the early Christians' doctrines is not unique to the Latter-day Saints. Many modern Christian writers have recognized the same doctrines. If the critics do not wish to embrace these ancient doctrines, that is their privilege, but they cannot logically claim that such doctrines are not "Christian." One might fairly ask why modern Christians do not believe that which the ancient Christians insisted upon?
http://en.fairmormon.org/Deification_of_man
Colorcountry was born mormon, temple-sealed. She KNOWS what beliefs were/are taught. You can speak for what YOU believe, however. You certainly do not speak for what other mormons/exmormons KNOW of the beliefs.
Lets see, ....there was a council of the gods in heaven. They all got together to decide about the forming of the earth. One of the gods had a plan to send spirits to earth to take upon themselves body form.
That's a great idea, said the gods, what shall these spirit children DO while they are on earth?
One of the spirit children who was also a god, his name was Lucifer, thought that it would be a great idea if all the spirit children were forced to love the God and worship him without any choice.
But another of the spirit children who was a god, his name was Jesus thought a better option would be to send the children to earth to be tempted so that they would have a CHOICE about whether or not to worship the God.
This caused a war in heaven where some of the spirit children sided with the angels and Jesus - while some of the spirit children sided with the demons and Lucifer. The council of the gods chose Jesus plan - and for their rebellion Lucifer, and the demons were cast out.
Those of us who were born mormon were especially valiant in the spirit world. We were rewarded by being born into noble Mormon families.
The spirit children who refused to take sides in the war in Heaven were cursed by having to be born with black skin on earth. But never fear....the book of Mormon promises that if they are obedient, they will become white and delightsome like the rest of us.
THAT, my friends is what I was taught in Mormon Sunday School. If you don't believe my wild tale, I have excerpts from my Patriarchal blessing to prove it.
I have asked this question off and on over the months, and I only get snide remarks or mis-directed answers like your's.
Just what do the Non-Mormon-Christians believe happened before “In the beginning”?
Sounds about as inviting as the mooselimb moon god story. Kinda has a similar ring to it actually. Like some crafty crazy cult leader made it all up.
If God did not reveal it in scripture then it is not for us to know at this time or any time not in God’s will.
Why is such idle speculation important to you?
I have asked this question off and on over the months, and I only get snide remarks or mis-directed answers like your's.
What about my comment, "Colorcountry was born mormon, temple-sealed. She KNOWS what beliefs were/are taught. You can speak for what YOU believe, however. You certainly do not speak for what other mormons/exmormons KNOW of the beliefs." are you describing as "snide or mis-directed"?
Your comment, "what you think we believe" is directed at CC, who knows what the beliefs are. Perhaps, in the name of ecumenism, you would like to rephrase that comment to her?
no , you and much of christianity have that all screwed up as per the apostasy that is under way now. God is the only God and Jesus did nothing of his own will. He said even He was not good, but only His father in heaven was. God would not call himself not good, sorry, you guys are just WRONG and need to come back to your commonsense. You are unwittingly trying to confuse people just as you have been confused.
Why is such idle speculation important to you?
+++++++
Thanks for your reply.
We have scripture that speaks of our time with Heavenly Father before this world was created, and it is often ridiculed by those who do not believe in God leading His children today through his Prophet.
In the heat of the Missouri Mormon War of 1838, Joseph Smith made the following claim, I will be to this generation a second Mohammed, whose motto in treating for peace was the Alcoran [Koran] or the Sword. So shall it eventually be with usJoseph Smith or the Sword!
It is most interesting that a self-proclaimed Christian prophet would liken himself to Mohammed, the founder of Islam. His own comparison invites us to take a closer look as well. And when we do, we find some strikingand troublingparallels. Consider the following.
Mohammed and Joseph Smith both had humble beginnings. Neither had formal religious connections or upbringing, and both were relatively uneducated. Both founded new religions by creating their own scriptures. In fact, followers of both prophets claim these scriptures are miracles since their authors were the most simple and uneducated of men.
Both prophets claim of having angel visitations, and of receiving divine revelation to restore pure religion to the earth again. Mohammed was told that both Jews and Christians had long since corrupted their scriptures and religion. In like manner, Joseph Smith was told that all of Christianity had become corrupt, and that consequently the Bible itself was no longer reliable. In both cases, this corruption required a complete restoration of both scripture and religion. Nothing which preceded either prophet could be relied upon any longer. Both prophets claim they were used of God to restore eternal truths which once existed on earth, but had been lost due to human corruption.
Both prophets created new scripture which borrowed heavily from the Bible, but with a substantially new spin. In his Koran, Mohammed appropriates a number of Biblical themes and charactersbut he changes the complete sense of many passages, claiming to correct the Bible. In so doing he changes many doctrines, introducing his own in their place. In like manner, Joseph Smith created the Book of Mormon, much of which is plagiarized directly from the King James Bible. Interestingly, the Book of Mormon claims that this same Bible has been substantially corrupted and is therefore unreliable. In addition, Joseph Smith went so far as to actually create his own version of the Bible itself, the Inspired Version, in which he both adds and deletes significant portions of text, claiming he is correcting it. In so doing he also changes many doctrines, introducing his own in their place.
As a part of their new scriptural spin, both prophets saw themselves as prophesied in scripture, and both saw themselves as a continuation of a long line of Biblical prophets. Mohammed saw himself as a continuation of the ministry of Moses and Jesus. Joseph Smith saw himself as a successor to Enoch, Melchizedek, Joseph and Moses. Joseph Smith actually wrote himself into his own version of the Bibleby name.
Both prophets held up their own scripture as superior to the Bible. Mohammed claimed that the Koran was a perfect copy of the original which was in heaven. The Koran is therefore held to be absolutely perfect, far superior to the Bible and superceding it. In like manner, Joseph Smith also made the following claim. I told the Brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding its precepts, than by any other book.
Despite their claim that the Bible was corrupt, both prophets admonished their followers to adhere to its teachings. An obvious contradiction, this led to selective acceptance of some portions and wholesale rejection of others. As a result, the Bible is accepted by both groups of followers only to the extent that it agrees with their prophets own superior revelation.
Both Mohammed and Joseph Smith taught that true salvation was to be found only in their respective religions. Those who would not accept their message were considered infidels, pagans or Gentiles. In so doing, both prophets became the enemy of genuine Christianity, and have led many people away from the Christ of the Bible.
Both prophets encountered fierce opposition to their new religions and had to flee from town to town because of threats on their lives. Both retaliated to this opposition by forming their own militias. Both ultimately set up their own towns as model societies.
Both Mohammed and Joseph Smith left unclear instructions about their successors. The majority of Mohammeds followers, Sunni Muslims, believe they were to elect their new leader, whereas the minority, Shiite Muslims, believe Mohammeds son was to be their next leader. Similarly, the majority of Joseph Smiths followers, Mormons, believed their next prophet should have been the existing leader of their quorum of twelve apostles, whereas the minority, RLDS, believed Joseph Smiths own son should have been their next prophet. Differences on this issue, and many others, have created substantial tension between these rival groups of each prophet.
Mohammed taught that Jesus was just another of a long line of human prophets, of which he was the last. He taught that he was superior to Christ and superceded Him. In comparison, Joseph Smith also made the following claim.
I have more to boast of than ever any man had. I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam. A large majority of the whole have stood by me. Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man ever did such a work as I. The followers of Jesus ran away from Him, but the Latter-day Saints never ran away from me yet.[4] In light of these parallels, perhaps Joseph Smiths claim to be a second Mohammed unwittingly became his most genuine prophecy of all.
Joseph Smith made this statement at the conclusion of a speech in the public square at Far West, Missouri on October 14, 1838. This particular quote is documented in Fawn M. Brodie, No Man Knows My History, second edition, (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1971), p. 230231. Fawn Brodies footnote regarding this speech contains valuable information, and follows. Except where noted, all the details of this chapter [16] are taken from the History of the [Mormon] Church. This speech, however, was not recorded there, and the report given here is based upon the accounts of seven men. See the affidavits of T.B. Marsh, Orson Hyde, George M. Hinkle, John Corrill, W.W. Phelps, Samson Avard, and Reed Peck in Correspondence, Orders, etc., pp. 579, 97129. The Marsh and Hyde account, which was made on October 24, is particularly important. Part of it was reproduced in History of the [Mormon] Church, Vol. III, p. 167. See also the Peck manuscript, p. 80. Joseph himself barely mentioned the speech in his history; see Vol. III, p. 162.
John Ankerberg & John Weldon, The Facts on Islam, (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 1998), pp.89. Eric Johnson, Joseph Smith & Muhammed, (El Cajon, CA: Mormonism Research Ministry, 1998), pp. 67.
Documentary History of the [Mormon] Church, vol.4, pp.461.
Documentary History of the [Mormon] Church, vol.6, pp.408409.
No, your history does not make your call for ecumenism look valid.
Your ‘scripture’ ain’t Scripture.
If God did not reveal it in scripture then it is not for us to know at this time or any time not in Gods will.
+++++++++++++++++=
You seem to believe that God will still reveal new information to us.
Is that so?
Oh you betcha. Soon’s I get up there I got dozens of questions for God.
(kinda think I won’t have to ask though)
Can your conclusions about God be wrong?
He did not say He Was not good. He said “There is none good but God.”
Read it one more time.
Just what do the Non-Mormon-Christians believe happened before In the beginning?
_________________________________________________
I’m not a mormon and I am also a Christian...
I believe I have answered this one for you several times in the past...
As have others in these threads...
As we know from the Bible,
“In the beginning, God...” and “In the beginning was the Word...”
But I repeat myself...
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. Genesis 1:1
Jhn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Jhn 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
Jhn 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
John 1:1-3
Now a question that you and some others have be asked repeatedly...
What was untrue about Presbyterianism ???
And a new question that deals with the history of the mormon believers and not their beliefs...
Please tell me what you know about Brigham Young and the handcart companies...
I will.. sorry for delay, I am divorced and have my kids this weekend, I will get you good references tomorrow.
It would change my mind about the specific charge that I made, but it would not get me to convert to mormonism. Now, do you accept that IF there are translation errors from KJV that made it into the BOM, that Joseph Smith has serious credibility issues?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
your answer stops at “In the beginning” and says nothing about BEFORE “in the beginning”
thank you
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.