Absolutely agreed. And mysticism (so called) turns into human-led New Ageism without God-given knowledge and understanding through reading and studying (e.g. the Ethiopian, the Bereans, the very concept of catechising, etc).
@@Mic1904 indeed but the mystics play a vital role in the life of the church and they are downplayed to a fault. I think it’s smothering the life of the church and peoples lives
@@Mic1904 yeah but it’s not one or the other it’s a balance. A royal path if you will. The Church has a place for the mystics as well as the highly intellectual theologians.
@@arthurbrugge2457 how so? I would say it’s clearly bc of the opposite. Haha in my mind Christianity has completely become a religion of “do you believe x,y,z” and not of the experience of change that happens when you let Christ into your life
I can’t speak much to the theological side of it but practically speaking theosis seems to me to be obviously true. When someone commits their life to Christ… their behavior does change. Their worldview changes. Their outlook on life and on other people changes. It’s undeniable that pursuing Christ causes something to happen to the individual in this pursuit. It’s not just snow covering a dung heap, with salvation comes true transformation. I can attest to this myself having changed tremendously since becoming Christian. Previously I was so steeped in sin that my conscience was dead, and through participating in the life of the Church it is alive again. I don’t see how I could just hand wave this away.
I totally agree, but as a catholic I wonder at which point of realizing that do you conflict with Lutheran theology? If the human will is in bondage and unredeemable, then this sanctification would make us less human. I don't know if Luther said that sentence about the snow covered dung heap, but Lutherans certainly do. I don't see how you can take the concept of theosis into a theological framework based on sola fide and why you would do it, considering sola scriptura. In other words: At which point while pondering the mystery will one become catholic? BTW, a mystery is not primarily something unknowable (though it is that). I see it as a gold mine that gives treasures in many different situations. Stressing that we will never own *all* the gold of the mine distracts from the riches that we do get from it.
@fabianagco5902 the human will is in bondage but we are not irredeemable, since Christ redeemed us. Lutherans believe we are all made in the image of God but due to the fall we have a sinful nature. We have not become purely sin, though. That is to say, our very nature is not sin. However, we are deeply damaged by sin and part of being a Christian is being conformed to the image of Christ.
Yeah but you still have 1 John 2:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:18-19. And Ephesians 5:11 and 2 Corinthians 6 about not having fellowship with the not Christian things. You have Acts 15:20 and you have Exodus 20:4 and the verses surrounding Deuteronomy 4:12. The idolatry with reverencing icons isn’t tolerable just because it’s common. Christian unity is possible when you’re united around truth, but the discord is because some are in darkness and hate the light.
@@silversilk8438 spoken like a true schismatic. The OP said on this(doctrine) we should be able to unite, not that this is the only doctrine that matters. Unfortunately neither can you commune with us unless you cast out your 16th century heresies. Iconography was prevalent through the Old Testament in the very books that you quoted. I pray you to reread through them instead of just verse mining. Luke the Apostle was also the first iconographer. For theosis to be possible, Lutherans must first abandon the *Catholic* teaching of created grace.
@@AwesomeWholesome Lies and Truth have no fellowship. (2 Corinthians 6) Light and darkness have no fellowship, so I have no fellowship with you who call man-made traditions your light and Scripture's truths "heresies". I said it succinctly in my previous comment: "Christian unity is possible when you’re united around truth, but the discord is because some are in darkness and hate the light." You will find nowhere in scripture any reference to Luke painting. I know that if it were significant, God would have ensured to mention it. If it were important to depict Jesus then the gospels would contain a detailed description (or even any description) of His features. Instead, you don't know what colour his hair was, whether he had straight or crooked teeth, only, according to Isaiah 53:2, that he didn't look attractive. Deuteronomy 4:2 says "Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you." And Jesus rebukes the Pharisees for doing what you do. Matthew 15:8-9 says "This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." Iconography (which is idolatry) is a commandment of men you exalt as a doctrine, but it is no such thing. You honour God with your lips with many prayers, but you diminish the significance of God's Word and deny your need to obey it like the Pharisees and their "corban" tradition. Here is commandment 2 from Exodus 20. "4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. 5 *_Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them:_* for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; 6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments." Here is how commandment 2 is meant to be obeyed, as demonstrated by Hananiah, Azariah, and Mishael, Daniel's three friends, in Daniel 3. "14 Nebuchadnezzar spake and said unto them, Is it true, O Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, do not ye serve my gods, nor worship the golden image which I have set up? 15 Now if ye be ready that at what time ye hear the sound of the cornet, flute, harp, sackbut, psaltery, and dulcimer, and all kinds of musick, ye fall down and worship the image which I have made; well: but if ye worship not, ye shall be cast the same hour into the midst of a burning fiery furnace; and who is that God that shall deliver you out of my hands? 16 Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, answered and said to the king, O Nebuchadnezzar, we are not careful to answer thee in this matter. 17 If it be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of thine hand, O king. 18 But if not, be it known unto thee, O king, that we will not serve thy gods, nor worship the golden image which thou hast set up." Notice that there is no compromise here. There is no bowing to that image whatsoever, because rather than making provision for the flesh, to say "why, we don't truly worship these images and will worship our True God while bowing to this false image," they refuse utterly. That's the same refusal of all faithful Christians, of which you are not one because you honour, venerate, exalt, even worship images made by human hands which cannot speak or think or move or breathe or see or hear or feel. (Psalm 115). That's the vanity of idols. Also, you're adding tradition on top of God's fully sufficient Word. Luke never made any idols. The serpent in the garden was the first proponent of "Orthodox" theosis. God knows I've read the scriptures with diligent and eager attention and that His Word is so very clear that, why, here's John's word to end it off, for there's no space for discussion, no wiggle room on this issue: 1 John 5:21. "Little children, keep yourselves from idols. Amen."
Stared at the head in the bottom left corner the whole time trying to decide if it was mine or not. Definitely the right hair color, but I don't remember being quite so squirmy that day. I'll take it though, this means I've officially been in a J-Coopz video.
@UnboxingChristianity nah, sadly not well, not the place I'm going. Lutheranism is also really dead in England. My church is like 1 hour and 15 minutes away.
@@UnboxingChristianityNot at all. You'll maybe find 3 liberal congregations in the whole country. A Lutheran from Norway, when studying here, worshipped with a conservative Presbyterian church that I was brought up in - and honestly, that (or an exceptionally rare conservative Episcopal church) is genuinely the closest you would find theologically.
So very good and fleshed out. All of it. But particularly how you re-define mysticism since words and meaning can get lost and misinterpreted. And how you move it into sacramental theology and why it’s practiced.
Exclusivism among Christians sucks big style! For freedom you have been set free, yet we keep allowing men to bind our consciences under extra biblical syllogisms and sophistry! Great video.
You are definitely misinterpreting that verse. The verse doesn’t mean for freedom of interpreting Scripture your own way, it means freedom from the sinful ways of flesh as Galatians 5:13 says. The conscience being bound is not a work of the flesh, the conscience must necessarily be bound to Truth. The issue here is that you interpret the conscience’s of men being bound to Truth as something the Church cannot do, but only the Scriptures. The only issue with that is that this belief is novel and not found within the early Church. Over and over again the Apostles, NT writers, and Church Fathers stress that your conscience is to be bound to the Truth found in Scripture, Tradition, and the Teaching Office of the Church.
It doesn't matter if you are Catholic, Orthodox or Lutheran when it comes to realizing our union with God. When we realize the truth we transcend all the differences in religion or with anything else. Everything becomes one seamless whole. We are One with God not because of anything about us but rather because God created us and animates us and uses us for his good purposes. We are merely a vessel that God works through. Not only is it wrong for someone to say I am God it is equally wrong to say that we even have a life of our own. When we realize the very force of life that is within us is God's life and when we realize that God directs our steps and when we realize that no one comes to Christ unless God draws them and that absolutely everything comes from God there isn't any room left for self. Like Paul said it is no longer I but Christ. When Christ becomes absolutely everything to us that is when we have realized the truth and it is all God. The more we conform to God's Word as recording in the scriptures the more we clean the eyes of our heart the more we realize our life is literally in God and God is literally in us.
What I came away with from this video is that Theosis or Mystical union is a fad motif for salvation among some Lutherans. There’s precedent for a version of Theosis within the Lutheran tradition but it was never predominant and it probably fell away for a reason, namely that it isn’t the motif that is essential to make Sola Fide and Sola Gratia run like a well oiled machine. What is Lutheranism at its soteriological core when the fad passes? It’s not Theosis or the eccentric preoccupations of celebrity confessional Lutheran pastors.
I'm not sure it's a fad motif. It persists for a reason. Lutheran theology is dry without it. As important as Sola Fide and Sola Gratia are, later Lutheranism, determined to reject Roman Catholic abuses of mystical theology and allegorical interpretation of Scripture, also rejected the mystical theology of the centuries old Church. A big mistake, I think. Why, Luther himself, and the early Lutherans, were steeped in the writings of Johann Arndt and Theologica Germanica, which were very much in line with the Eastern mystical tradition! The renewed interest in the mystical theology of the early Church Fathers is good for the whole Church. Lutheranism is a Johnny-come-lately in the history of the Church. We would do well to take off our blinders and see if maybe, just maybe, we missed a thing or two.
What's this modern sola fide, sola gratia rubbish? Lutherans go with the original slogan, VDMA, the Word of the Lord Stands Forever! And so the Means of Grace accomplish the Happy Exchange of the Mystical Union; get your head out of Calvin's sand.
@@jamesbarksdale978 - Time will tell to what degree a Lutheran version of Theosis has any staying power with confessional Lutheranism as it has currently developed and manifested in our time. I'm not convinced the Lutheran Theosis motif has more lasting value than trying to stem the tide of Lutherans returning to Rome or entering Orthodoxy. As you noted, early Luther and Lutherans were steeped in the more mystical understandings of Arndt and the Theologica Germanica, but that falls away and Lutheranism continues without it. Semper Virgo was once a doctrine Luther and the other first generation Protestant reformers confessed, but this falls away and even though it is still on the books, 99 percent of the Lutherans you meet don't believe or confess SV and many think it is somehow a doctrine that is false and harmful to an orthodox confession of marriage. The core of Lutheranism is that it's an ecumenical preaching movement, dedicated to spreading the influence of it's understanding of Sola Fide, Sola Gratia, Sola Scriptura. Otherwise Lutheranism is rather like a shape shifter in terms of it's manifestation. You have Lutheranism like Pathfinder or King of Kings in Omaha, which is trying to keep Lutherans from outright becoming American evangelicals. Then you have St Paul in Hamel or Redeemer in Fort Wayne, or Dr. Cooper's pulpit trying to portray Lutheranism as very catholic minded, and with robust historical claims. The only thing uniting them all as confessional Lutherans is a dedication to preaching at least the three solas. Lutheranism is flexible enough to cope with the eccentric preoccupations of her celebrity pastors, but they just give way to the next fad that can be shoehorned into the matrix of Sola Fide, Sola Gratia, Sola Scriptura.
@@j.g.4942 - I have no idea how your comment addresses anything I said. It’s no small wonder Lutherans are leaving Lutheranism for Catholicism and Orthodoxy.
Orthodoxy without a doubt sees monasticism as its highest expression and asceticism as its synergistic contribution to salvation. The Orthodox say Theosis is salvation, thus merging justification and sanctification into one and consequently downgrading the power and message of free Grace. But they are beautiful souls with beautiful liturgies and a rich inner life. But at what point does interior prayer become implosion and visible unity mere exclusivist legalism at the margins of free Grace?
I am puzzled as to why would alleged merger of justification and sanctification lead to derogation of the Grace.? Those terms are almost never used in Orthodoxy as Theosis is not seen in a way typical legalistic approach to salvation of Heterodox. Our legalistic model of salvation does exist but is presented as an alternative to the Theosis aimed to those not capable of receiving and digesting more subtle model of Theosis. Following comments on this video reveal for whom the legalistic model was prepared: "conforming to chrism is not becoming g like Christ. w are not divine.", "Blasphemy.", etc.
Exclusivist? Yes. Legalistic? There has to exist some kind of “legal” structure for there to be any kind of legalism, and so far, Orthodoxy doesn’t have that. (It probably never will)
As an Orthodox Christian I can assure you the paragraph you just wrote is completely inaccurate. We regard marriage and the raising of children as profoundly holy, and this is why the majority of our clergy are married. We also regard celibacy as extremely holy, and for this reason, like Lutheranism, we have monasteries (there are surviving Lutheran monasteries in East Germany and Sweden, and there was one in the US, St. Augustine House, that was affiliated with the ELCA).
@@Aidanrvb09 Believe it or not, Orthodox legalistic model does exist. It receives so little attention that most of the Orthodox faithful would say "neah... we don't have it". Attention comes mostly from the Protestants who are, by seeking justification of their own legalistic systems in the writings of the early Church fathers, finding it and are excited about their alleged correctness. BTW: I do not see an answer to my first question tho...
My denomination is bonkers for silent contemplation and it irks me because God speaks through Christ not through silence. Word and sacrament are being replaced by silence and yoga. Christification and cruciformity (Gorman) seem more apostolic than pseudo Dionysus ism. Protestantism is being over run with Richard Rohr’s new age anneagram and Franciscan ism.
Rev. Cooper, you didn't really get around to presenting an Orthodox understanding of Theosis. What you presented wasn't even enough to qualify as a caricature of it. To dismiss it merely as a product of Pseudo Dionysus and going off to a mountain somewhere is unfortunate.
There is no theosis without being graphed into the body of the Holy Orthodox Church by baptism and communing of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. This “model” you described is what you get--mental ascent to an idea. You get the model, not the reality. Mental pontification as somehow a means of theosis. True theosis couldn’t be further apart from “the Lutheran version”. It’s not a college credit, It is incarnational. Living and breathing.
@@silversilk8438 Theosis IS salvation. Achievement is not the right word. You know theosis by the degree to which the soul has been healed. It will be unto eternity.
This was not a comparison between two different models, but it is a very basic introduction to the Orthodox understanding of theosis by a non Orthodox Christian. The authorship of St. Dionysius has been a long debated subject. If he is authentic, then history of philosophy is turned upside down because the founder of "Neoplatonism" is now a Christian. A strong argument against pagan philosophers who claim the superiority of Neoplatonism and slanders Christianity by saying it stole its theology from that school. It proves Protestantism to be demonstrably false because here is a traveller of Paul's, who was likely a bishop himself, teaching an ecclesiology Sacramentology, and monasticism that the Protestants are against. There is new scholarship by Truglia that disproves the pseudo myth, and aims to uphold the authenticity of the dionysian corpus.
@@andrewjenson1918Yes we become God. St. Maximus the Confessor says the Uncreated became creation so that creation becomes uncreated. “When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.” 1 Cor 15:28. We will see God face to face (that is a sign of equality in the ancient world) 1 Cor 13:12. We will be the friends of God (friends must be equals in the ancient world), We will be “Perfect as our Father in Heaven is perfect.” Sermon on the Mount. Jesus has the same love for us that the Father has for the Son: John 15:9. “that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me.” John 17:21 and many more
@@andrewjenson1918”I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are on” John 17:22 “I give my glory to nobody else than me.” Isaiah 48:11
Si te esfuerzas eres un campeón porque haces lo que puedes con lo que tienes. Necesito tiempo y ya no queda mucho. Me gustaría que reflexionases sobre la posibilidad de que el filósofo racional del siglo diecisiete Spinoza y yo tuviésemos razón y Dios es todo lo que existe, la primera realidad o causa que creó el resto. ¿Has leído a Spinoza? Nunca es tarde si la dicha es buena. ¿ Cómo es el Dios de Spinoza y cómo dicen que es? ¿Cómo es mi Dios y cómo dicen que es? No sé mucho, pero sé lo que sé, y he vivido lo suficiente como para saber que los ateos no quieren el fin de la religión porque yo quiero el fin de la religión y el ateísmo y estoy exhausto mentalmente y físicamente. Dios es la perfecta entidad metafísica de la que todo forma parte, perfecta vida con perfecto conocimiento con perfecto cielo e infierno eterno con perfecto karma porque todo lo que hacemos nos lo hacemos a Uno Mismo siendo Tiempo y Espacio eterno. Según mi teoría la vida de Dios empezó cuando fue creado el universo de uno mismo. ¿Para que creó Dios el universo? Dios no tenía una vida y creó literalmente un juego a vida y muerte eterna. Dios es literalmente un juego en serio donde tenemos que sobrevivir y si perdemos es para siempre. Es solo una idea que no puede hacer daño a nadie y está censurada. Pienso que cuando el cerebro se apaga causa la transformación de la mente para saberlo todo y seguir viviendo de ese modo a través de la vida de los demás. Todo está conectado, la vida y muerte están conectadas, todo es uno transformándose, todo es Dios. Estoy todavía trabajando cuando debería descansar. Necesito que el descubrimiento de que el ateísmo es una falacia lógica sea noticia. La verdad es el ateísmo es una falacia lógica que asume Dios es la idea religiosa del creador de la creación y concluye erróneamente que el creador no existe porque una idea particular de Dios no existe. Gracias.
It is interesting to see stubborn Protestants coming to realization of the true Christianity preserved in the Eastern Orthodox Church, but still walling themselves off of the originality by inventing their own versions of the same, through the changes of the terminology. Lord Jesus Christ is the template we ought to follow. In Him, restoration of our fallen nature did happen, by attaching it to His divine nature, thus reversing it to the state Adam was in before the fall. In a similar way, but by starting from our fallen human nature, we are called to partake in the divine nature (2 Peter 1, 4) in a way that we will, by God's Grace, receive His divine nature in us, joining it to our fallen human nature, and in turn, have our sick fallen nature also deified, healed from corruption caused by Original Sin, so that it becomes once again healthy, in a same way Adam's nature was before the fall. That is why it is said that we have received Sonship (Rom 8, 12), we are called to become brothers of Christ through adoption (Gal 4). Jesus Christ is Son of God by nature, and we are called to be sons of God by Grace. In the end, as the Holy Three are Three persons of God, eternal and uncreated, we are called to add us to the Holy Three thus becoming through His offering, one with Him in God (1 Cor 15, 28).
What is this "coming to the realization" as he explains that this has been present in our tradition from the beginning? It's crazy that Rome and the East like to claim that the fathers agree with them when they most certainly don't. You can find justification Sola Fide via Sola Gratia all over the fathers. I could quote mine it for hours but it wouldn't go anywhere.
And it's interesting to hear the EO and RC affirm reformation teaching while saying they reject it. Yet being arrogant while having the truth is something we Lutherans are very familiar with, usually we're less gaudy/subtle about it. PS we're gonna use different terms, we have to translate from Greek and Hebrew into German and now English.
actually my favorite part of this was how he identifies theosis with true faith when the EO church completely forgot about theosis until the 20th century
@@williamhoneycutt8868 Let me remind you... even oldest tradition of yours falls 15 CENTURIES short. If it is true what this guy is claiming, it was put under the rug. I have no sufficient amount of details about the alleged Theosis in your tradition to verify if it is true Theosis or not... it could be as well heretical as the remainder of your tradition, so I will refrain atm from making such claims. It is also interesting to note your desperation in attempts to find basis for heretical "solas" in the writings of the Eastern Orthodox holy fathers. I am sure wherever you have found in theirs texts word "alone", you have tagged it as proof of one of your heretical "solas". That still does not make you anything above Heterodox religious group. You are missing Apostolic Succession and that is the dead end.
@@j.g.4942 You are missing Apostolic Succession and that is the dead end. You can believe anything you want, completely copy Eastern Orthodox doctrines, but you will still be nothing above Heterodox religious group. To become The Church you will have to turn over to Eastern Orthodoxy to ordain clergy for you. Fact.
@@arthurbrugge2457Theologically enthusiasm doesn't mean what it means in plain speech. It literally means ' the God within'. Faith comes from outside of us 'extra nos'.
@@mysticmouse7261 Yes, I was simply making a poor excuse for a joke. Your explanation was great, though, and I agree that enthusiasm as thus defined is problematic, and what one often end up with when chasing after mystical experiences or "theosis". But do you not think there is room for theosis, as long as it is clearly defined, and there are limits set down which guard against stuff like enthusiasm?
@@lukericker8325Do tell. That isn't what Cooper or I are talking about. Your declaration about cosmological experience is not scriptural. It is arrogant and uninformed.
Yes, they do. Which is why St Philip first took the time to educate the learned Ethiopian regarding whether he truly understood what He was reading. The understanding that God granted him (through Philip), led him to the waters of baptism and into the faith. It's also why, when Paul brought the Gospel to them, the Bereans first studied to understand if His message of the Gospel fit the Scriptures (wonderful spoiler alert: it did! And it fulfilled them!) and then, as a result of this, believed. Understanding, granted by God, must not be pitted against the lived reality of Christ. They are part of the same.
@@drewpanyko5424 If filling your head with information, smoking cigars and pontificating at a brewery about being the predestined is doing it for ya……by all means.
The Church Fathers belong to the Catholic & Orthodox Church of the first 1,000 years and now 'belong' to the Holy Orthodox Church (to borrow Mr Cooper's expression). The prince of heretics Martin Luther was NOT a 'mystic' in any sense.
You are right in your position. We are not divine, and completely filthy compared to Christ. There will still be a process of us becoming more like him, as we progress in faith, belief and santification. This is theosis.
