In an
attempt to downplay the LDS appeal to early patristic writings supporting a
more “robust” understanding of deification than that of the mere “glorification”
model of reward within much of Protestantism, we find this classic example of
shifting the goalpost from Christina Darlington in her recent book:
[I]f the Mormon belief in men becoming gods
was taught by the first and second century Christians, why is this belief
completely absent from all creedal confessions of the early Christian Church?
Again, historic Christianity clearly does not support the LDS belief in the “eternal
progression” (i.e., godhood) of mankind. (Christina R. Darlington, Misguided by Mormonism But Redeemed by God’s
Grace: Leaving the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for Biblical
Christianity [2d ed.; 2019], 46)
Did you notice the
shift in goalposts? Darlington moves from wanting evidence from the writings of first and second century
Christian writings to confessions (or
“symbols”)—there are very few creedal confessions in early Christianity, and
often they were drawn up in response to perceived heresy (both “orthodox” and “heretic,”
in both the east and west, accepted a doctrine of theosis [informed, as was
Athanasius’ theology thereof, by a transformative
understanding of justification, contra Darlington’s soteriology!]).
Notwithstanding, for an overview of early Christian writings that teach a view
of theosis much closer to the Latter-day Saint model than one finds within, not
just Protestantism, but even Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, see:
Jordan Vajda, "Partakers of the Divine Nature": A Comparative Analysis of the Patristic and Mormon Doctrines of Divinization (this is a work based on Vajda's MA dissertation: at the time of writing, he was a Roman Catholic priest. Based on his studies, he would later convert to the LDS Church).
My friend Errol Amey has shared this list on facebook a few times on the topic of early Chrisitan belief in the doctrine of deification/theosis from the Ante-Nicene (i.e., pre 325) Christian writers:
"And we have
learned that those only are deified who have lived near to God in holiness and
virtue"
(Justin Martyr, ca.
160, First Apology 21, in Ante-Nicene Fathers 1:170)
"all men are
deemed worthy of becoming 'gods,' and of having power to become sons of the
Highest"
(Justin Martyr, ca.
160, Dialogue With Trypho 124, in Ante-Nicene Fathers 1:262)
"Neither, then,
immortal nor yet mortal did He make him, but, as we have said above, capable of
both; so that if he should incline to the things of immortality, keeping the
commandment of God, he should receive as reward from Him immortality, and
should become God"
(Theophilus, ca. 180,
To Autolycus 2:27, in Ante-Nicene Fathers 2:105)
"And again: 'God
stood in the congregation of the gods, He judges among the gods.' [Psalms 82:1]
He [here] refers to the Father and the Son, and those who have received the
adoption"
(Irenaeus, ca. 180,
Against Heresies 3:6:1, in Ante-Nicene Fathers 1:419)
"Therefore, as I
have already said, He caused man (human nature) to cleave to and to become, one
with God. . . . And unless man had been joined to God, he could never have
become a partaker of incorruptibility."
(Irenaeus, ca. 180,
Against Heresies 3:18:7, in Ante-Nicene Fathers 1:448)
"It is not
possible to live apart from life, and the means of life is found in fellowship
with God; but fellowship with God is to know God, and to enjoy His goodness.
Men therefore shall see God, that they may live, being made immortal by that
sight, and attaining even unto God"
(Irenaeus, ca. 180,
Against Heresies 4:20:5-6, in Ante-Nicene Fathers 1:489)
"Or how shall
man pass into God, unless God has [first] passed into man?"
(Irenaeus, ca. 180,
Against Heresies 4:33:4, in Ante-Nicene Fathers 1:507, brackets in original)
“we have not been
made gods from the beginning, but at first merely men, then at length gods”
(Irenaeus, ca. 180,
Against Heresies 4:38:4, in Ante-Nicene Fathers 1:522)
"For it must be
that thou, at the outset, shouldest hold the rank of a man, and then afterwards
partake of the glory of God."
(Irenaeus, ca. 180,
Against Heresies 4:39:2, in Ante-Nicene Fathers 1:523)
"our Lord Jesus
Christ, who did, through His transcendent love, become what we are, that He
might bring us to be even what He is Himself."
(Irenaeus, ca. 180,
Against Heresies 5: Preface, in Ante-Nicene Fathers 1:526)
"Since the Lord
thus has redeemed us through His own blood, giving His soul for our souls, and
His flesh for our flesh, and has also poured out the Spirit of the Father for
the union and communion of God and man, imparting indeed God to men by means of
the Spirit, and, on the other hand, attaching man to God by His own
incarnation, and bestowing upon us at His coming immortality durably and truly,
by means of communion with God"
(Irenaeus, ca. 180,
Against Heresies 5:1:1, in Ante-Nicene Fathers 1:527)
Irenaeus taught that
"at the resurrection of the just," men will be "passing beyond
the angels, and be made after the image and likeness of God"
(Irenaeus, ca. 180,
Against Heresies 5:36:3, in Ante-Nicene Fathers 1:567)
"Being baptized,
we are illuminated; illuminated, we become sons; being made sons, we are made
perfect; being made perfect, we are made immortal. 'I,' says He, 'have said
that ye are gods, and all sons of the Highest.' [Psalms 82:6]"
(Clement of
Alexandria, The Instructor 1:6, in Ante-Nicene Fathers 2:215)
"It is then, as
appears, the greatest of all lessons to know one's self. For if one knows
himself, he will know God; and knowing God, he will be made like God . . . But
that man with whom the Word dwells does not alter himself, does not get himself
up: he has the form which is of the Word; he is made like to God; he is
beautiful; he does not ornament himself: his is beauty, the true beauty, for it
is God; and that man becomes God, since God so wills. Heraclitus, then, rightly
said, 'Men are gods, and gods are men.'"
(Clement of
Alexandria, The Instructor 3:1, in Ante-Nicene Fathers 2:271)
"On this wise it
is possible for the [true] Gnostic already to have become God. 'I said, Ye are
gods, and sons of the highest.' [Psalms 82:6]"
(Clement of
Alexandria, ca. 195, Stromata 4:23, in Ante-Nicene Fathers 2:437)
"Whence at last
. . . it is that knowledge is committed to those fit and selected for it. It
leads us to the endless and perfect end, teaching us beforehand the future life
that we shall lead, according to God, and with gods; after we are freed from
all punishment and penalty which we undergo, in consequence of our sins, for
salutary discipline. After which redemption the reward and the honours are
assigned to those who have become perfect; when they have got done with
purification, and ceased from all service, though it be holy service, and among
saints. Then become pure in heart, and near to the Lord, there awaits them
restoration to everlasting contemplation; and they are called by the
appellation of gods, being destined to sit on thrones with the other gods that
have been first put in their places by the Saviour."
(Clement of
Alexandria, ca. 195, Stromata 7:10, in Ante-Nicene Fathers 2:539)
"The [true]
Gnostic is consequently divine, and already holy, God-bearing, and
God-borne."
(Clement of
Alexandria, ca. 195, Stromata 7:13, in Ante-Nicene Fathers 2:547)
"it will be
impossible that another god should be admitted, when it is permitted to no
other being to possess anything of God. Well, then, you say, we ourselves at
that rate possess nothing of God. But indeed we do, and shall continue to
do—only it is from Him that we receive it, and not from ourselves. For we shall
be even gods, if we shall deserve to be among those of whom He declared, 'I
have said, Ye are gods,' [Psalms 82:6] and, 'God standeth in the congregation
of the gods.' [Psalms 82:1] But this comes of His own grace, not from any
property in us, because it is He alone who can make gods."
(Tertullian, ca. 200,
Against Hermogenes 5, in Ante-Nicene Fathers 3:480)
"And thou shalt
be a companion of the Deity, and a co-heir with Christ, no longer enslaved by
lusts or passions, and never again wasted by disease. For thou hast become God
. . . these God has promised to bestow upon thee, because thou hast been
deified, and begotten unto immortality."
(Hippolytus, ca. 225,
Refutation of All Heresies 10:30, in Ante-Nicene Fathers 5:153)
"I am of opinion
that the expression, by which God is said to be 'all in all,' means that He is
'all' in each individual person. Now He will be 'all' in each individual in
this way: when all which any rational understanding, cleansed from the dregs of
every sort of vice, and with every cloud of wickedness completely swept away,
can either feel, or understand, or think, will be wholly God; . . . when God
will be the measure and standard of all its movements; and thus God will be
'all,' for there will no longer be any distinction of good and evil, seeing
evil nowhere exists;"
(Origen, ca. 225, De
Principiis 3:6:3, in Ante-Nicene Fathers 4:345)
“And thus the
first-born of all creation, who is the first to be with God, and to attract to
Himself divinity, is a being of more exalted rank than the other gods beside
Him, of whom God is the God, as it is written, ‘The God of gods, the Lord, hath
spoken and called the earth.’ [Psalms 50:1] It was by the offices of the
first-born that they became gods, for He drew from God in generous measure that
they should be made gods, and He communicated it to them according to His own
bounty. The true God, then, is ‘The God,’ and those who are formed after Him
are gods, images, as it were, of Him the prototype.”
(Origen, Commentary
on John 2:2, in Ante-Nicene Fathers 9:323)
“Now it is possible
that some may dislike what we have said representing the Father as the one true
God, but admitting other beings besides the true God, who have become gods by
having a share of God. They may fear that the glory of Him who surpasses all
creation may be lowered to the level of those other beings called gods. We drew
this distinction between Him and them that we showed God the Word to be to all
the other gods the minister of their divinity . . . As, then, there are many
gods, but to us there is but one God the Father, and many Lords, but to us
there is one Lord, Jesus Christ”
(Origen, Commentary
on John 2:3, in Ante-Nicene Fathers 9:323)
"What man is,
Christ was willing to be, that man also may be what Christ is."
(Cyprian, ca. 250,
Treatises 6:11, in Ante-Nicene Fathers 5:468)
"[The chaste man
will become] identical in all respects with God"
(Lactantius, ca.
304-313, Divine Institutes 6:23, in The Mystery-Religions 106-107)
"the saints also
can enjoy precisely the same kind of fellowship with the Father [as Jesus
Christ.]"
(Eusebius, in Early
Christian Doctrines 226)
"[God] made man
for that purpose, that from men they may become gods."
(Jerome, The Homilies
of Saint Jerome 1:106)
"I too might be
made God so far as He is made Man."
(Gregory of
Nazianzus, Oration 29:19, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers Series 2, 7:308)
It should
also be noted that some Jewish sources also support a form of deification. Here
is an ancient Rabbinic quote promising plural worlds to the faithful as part of
their eschatological reward that should add food for thought:
The Holy One, blessed be He, will in the
future call all of the pious by their names, and give them a cup of elixir of
life in their hands so that they should live and endure forever. . . . And the
Holy One, blessed be He, will in the future reveal to all the pious in the
World to Come the Ineffable Name with which new heavens and a new earth can be
created, so that all of them should be able to create new worlds. The Holy One,
blessed be He, will give every pious three hundred and forty worlds in inheritance
in the World to Come. . . . To all the pious the Holy One, blessed be He, will
give a sign and a part in the goodly reward, and everlasting renown, glory and
greatness and praise, a crown encompassed in holiness, and royalty, equal to
those of all the pious in the World to Come. The sign will be the cup of life
which the Holy One, blessed be He, will give to the Messiah and to the pious in
the Future to Come. (Midrash Alpha beta diRabbi Akiba BhM 3:32)
Of course,
we will never be “independent” of God, as some caricature LDS theology. As we read
in the Doctrine and Covenants, for instance:
And saw the holy
angels, and then who are sanctified before his throne, worshipping God, and the
Lamb, who worship him forever and ever . . . And to God and the Lamb be glory,
and honor, and dominion forever and ever. Amen. (D&C 76:21, 119)
And the graves of the
saints shall be opened; and they shall come forth and stand on the right hand
of the Lamb when he shall stand upon Mount Zion, and upon the holy city, the
New Jerusalem; and they shall sing the song of the Lamb, day and night forever
and ever. (D&C 133:56)
Boyd K. Packer wrote something explicitly teaching this, too:
The Father is the one true God.
This thing is certain: no one will ever ascend above Him; no one will ever
replace Him. Nor will anything ever change
the relationship that we, His literal offspring, have with Him. He is Elohim,
the Father. He is God. Of Him there is only one. We revere our Father and our
God; we worship Him. (Boyd K. Packer, "The Pattern of our
Parentage," Ensign Nov. 1984 pg. 69)
In light of Isa 43:7,
whatever glory we receive, the telos
will be the further glorification of God the Father. Interestingly, there is a
New Testament/Christological basis for such. Reformed Baptist Tony Costa wrote the following
about the Carmen Christi (the Christological hymn in Phil 2:6-11):
[Phil 2:5-11’s depiction of the exalted Jesus] does
not replace God or take worship from God. God is worshipped through the worship
of the exalted Jesus. The worship which is given to the exalted Jesus does not
usurp the worship of God, nor does it rival the worship of God; it rather complements the
worship of God and facilitates it. Paul thus includes the exalted Jesus within
Christian worship. The eschatological grande finale for Paul
is the ultimate and universal glorification of God which God has purposed to be
achieved through the worship of the exalted Jesus. The importance and
centrality of the risen Jesus in relation to Christian worship, which I have
argued from the beginning of this study, is evident here. God cannot be
ultimately and maximally glorified according to Paul, without, or apart from,
the exalted Jesus. Paul thus sees worship from a teleological perspective as
fulfilled in the ultimate expression of honor that is given to God by
the entire cosmos, through the agency of the exalted Jesus. (Tony Costa, Worship
and the Risen Jesus in the Pauline Letters [Studies in Biblical
Literature vol. 157; New York: Peter Lang, 2013], 249)
Col 2:9-15
For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells
in bodily form, and in Him you have been made complete, and He is the head over
all rule and authority; and in Him you were also circumcised with a
circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the
circumcision of Christ; having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you
were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised
Him from the dead. When you were dead in your transgressions and the
uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having
forgiven us all our transgressions, having canceled out the certificate of debt
consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it
out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. When He had disarmed the rulers
and authorities, He made a public display of them, having triumphed over them
through Him. (Col 2:9-15 NASB)
Commenting on verse 9 ("For in him dwells the fullness of deity bodily" [NRSV]), as well as vv.10-15, Clinton Arnold wrote:
Participating in Christ’s Fullness Christ has not only delivered his people from the domain of darkness, but he has brought them into his kingdom and bestowed on them his salvation . . . What Paul says about Christ [in Col 2:9] he immediately applies to the church by declaring, “in him you are filled” (εστε εν αυτω πεπληρωμενοι). The “in him” (εν αυτω) marks a major motif of the entire theological section of 2:9-15. Paul is hereby attempting to help these believers understand the full significance of being in Christ, especially as it relates to their concern about supernatural powers and their temptation to follow the solution offered by “the philosophy.” His solution is for them to gain a fuller- appreciation for their resources in Christ and to grasp hold of their leader and supplier (2:19) and to concentrate on the things above where Christ is at the right hand of God (3:1).
The fullness of God—his power and his grace—are bestowed on believers by virtue of their incorporation into Christ. As Lightfoot has said, God’s πληρωμα is “transfused” into them. The perfect periphrastic construction (εστε . . .πεπληρωμενοι) emphasises their share in the divine fullness as part of their present experience. (Clinton Arnold, The Colossian Syncretism [Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1995], 293-95; square brackets added for clarification)
Although the focus is on Christ’s superiority over the angels following his exaltation (‘having become as much superior’), the author also maintains the exalted status of Christ before creation (1:2; 1:10). The author seems to be using angels as ‘midpoint’ between humanity and God. As such,
[t]hey mark out the cosmic territory. They function, so to speak, as measures of ontological status. To be above the angels is to be God, to be below the angels is to be human. Above the angels is to be human. Above the angels, Jesus transcends all creation, sharing the divine identity as Creator and Ruler even of the angels. Below the angels, Jesus shares the common identity of earthly humans in birth, suffering, and death. (Bauckham, Jesus and the God of Israel: ‘God Crucified’ and Other Studies in the New Testament’s Christology of Divine Identity [2008],241)
The Son, who was with God from the beginning of creation (1:2; 1:10), is in his incarnation made lower than the angels (2:9). Following his purification of sins, he is exalted and so made higher than them again. In that sense, he becomes again—as a human being—higher than the angels. (Peter Orr, Exalted Above the Heavens: The Risen and Ascended Christ [New Studies in Biblical Theology 47; London: Apollos, 2018], 21, emphasis in bold added)
Such shows that in New Testament theology, there is a positive view of the potential of humans which makes perfect sense if one holds "robust deification," not the weak model one finds in other theologies, including Darlington's.
Rev 3:9, 21
Rev 3:9, 21
Note one of the glorious promises to those who endure in Rev 3:9, 21 (this is Christ Himself speaking through John):
Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee . . . To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.
In 3:21, believers are promised to sit down on Christ’s throne, which is the Father's very own throne! Interestingly, Christ sitting down on the throne of the Father is cited as prima facie evidence of his being numerically identical to the “one God” (see the works of Richard Bauckham on “divine identity” on this issue), and yet, believers are promised the very same thing! This is in agreement with John 17:22 in that we will all share the same glory and be one with Christ and God just as they are one. Sitting in it does not indicate, contra Robert M. Bowman, Richard Bauckham, et al, ontological identification with God (cf. Testament of Job 32:2-9, where Job is promised to sit on God’s throne, something that is common in the literature of Second Temple Judaism and other works within the Jewish pseudepigrapha and elsewhere).
As for Rev 3:9, believers are promised that they will be the future recipients of προσκυνέω. While some may try to downplay the significance of this term, in all other instances where it is used in the book of Revelation it denotes religious worship (Rev 4:10; 5:14; 7:11; 9:20; 11:1, 16; 13:4, 8, 12, 15; 14:7, 9, 11; 15:4; 16:2; 19:4, 10, 20; 20:4; 22:8, 9). Only by engaging in special pleading and question-begging can one claim it does not carry religious significance in Rev 3:9 (cf. my discussion on whether Jesus receives λατρευω in the New Testament).
To add to the discussion, here is the exegesis provided by New Testament scholar, Jürgen Roloff, on these important verses:
[3:9] With the same words that are in 2:9, the claim of the Jews to be the assembly (synagōgē) of God and the people of God's is rejected as false. Because they rejected Jesus as bringer of God's salvation, in truth they subordinated themselves to the dominion of God's adversary. Israel's heritage and claim are completely transferred to the Christian community. To it, therefore, also belongs the promise, originally made to Israel, that at the end time of the Gentiles will enter the city of God and subjugate themselves to the people of God (Isa. 60:14 and elsewhere). Indeed, among those who then come will be the unbelieving Jews, who will realize that Jesus loved them and that means he chose them; (cf. Isa. 42:1) and made them into the people of God. When mention is made of "bowing down" before the feet of the church, this assumes full participation of the church in the kingdom of Christ and sitting with him on his throne (v. 21) . . . [3:21] The final word about overcoming in the series of letters has particular importance. It summarizes in conclusion the central promise of salvation, which is the promises heretofore was sounded several times with variations and modifications, by using another Synoptic expression of Jesus (Luke 22:30b; Matt 19:28 [Q?]: to those who overcome is promised here participation in Jesus' heavenly kingdom. Thus, just as Jesus sits on his throne (cf. 5:6) beside God as equal ruler on the basis of his having overcome and thereby shares his dominion, so also will those who have overcome for his sake receive a place in his messianic rule (cf. 20:6) with unlimited communion, and even equality, with him. (Jürgen Roloff, Revelation [Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993], 61, 65-66)
Interestingly, Solomon in 1 Chron 29, the very same chapter he received the same worship as Yahweh, he also sits on the throne of Yahweh. On the topic of people other than Yahweh sitting on the throne of Yahweh, Patrick Navas (author of Divine Truth or Human Tradition? A Reconsideration of the Roman Catholic-Protestant Doctrine of the Trinity in light of the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures) wrote the following which serves as another refutation of the “divine identity” argument based Jesus sitting on the throne of Yahweh:
This is yet another area where Latter-day Saint theology and practice is more commensurate with “biblical Christianity” and not the theologies of our Evangelical opponents.
Another text that helps to underscore the fallaciousness of Wallace’s reasoning is found in 1 Chronicles 29:[23] which says:
“Then Solomon sat on the throne of the Jehovah as king in place of David his father. And he prospered, and all Israel obeyed him.”
Here Solomon is portrayed as one who “sat on the throne of Jehovah as king.” Does this text imply that Solomon therefore “shares all the attributes of Jehovah,” or that Solomon is ontologically “Jehovah,” or that he is a member of the “Godhead”? No. It simply means that Solomon occupied a position of supreme/royal authority over the people of Israel as Jehovah’s agent or representative. To sit on Jehovah’s throne does not make one ontologically Jehovah (or one who has all of Jehovah’s attributes as Wallace wrongly implies), but makes one an individual whom Jehovah has invested with kingly authority as his appointed and ruling representative. Solomon sat down on Jehovah’s earthly throne in Jerusalem. Following his resurrection, the supremely exalted Messiah, Jesus, sat down “at the right hand of the majesty on high”—in heaven itself, with all things in subjection to him, with the obvious exception of God himself (Heb. 1:3; 1 Cor. 15:27). (Patrick Navas, Response to Daniel Wallace)
This is yet another area where Latter-day Saint theology and practice is more commensurate with “biblical Christianity” and not the theologies of our Evangelical opponents.
For a book-length treatment of theosis in light of both the Bible and the patristic texts by a Latter-day Saint, see:
D. Charles Pyle, I Have Said Ye are Gods: Concepts Conducive to the Early Christian Doctrine of Deification in Patristic Literature and the Underlying Strata of the Greek New Testament (Revised and Supplemented) (CreateSpace, 2018)
See also the discussion of deificiation in Blake T. Ostler, Exploring Mormon Thought, Volume 3: Of God and Gods (Salt Lake City: Greg Kofford Books, 2008), pp. 321-426
