coptichymns.net - Sharing the Joy of Coptic Hymns Around the World

Biboboy

posted on Jun 17, 2009 - 10:26 PM

From mikokiko: I think what Bishoy is saying is that the Fathers point out that there really goes on a deification of our nature, not only on the moral level, but really on the ontological level, and I really believe that too.

Umm.. no I didn't say that. Nor do any of the Fathers.

_________________
"Our hearts are restless until they find rest in You, Lord" (St. Augustine, Confessions, I, 1).

"Pray gently and calmly,
Chant hymns with understanding and rhythm;
Then you will soar like a young eagle
High in the heavens"
+ St. Evagrius the Solitary, On Prayer, 82.

In Christ,
Bishoy
HCOC Member


+ To Protect and Preserve +

HCOC: Sing it! Live it! Love it!

Questions or comments on the copticheritage.org website? E-mail me!

Joined: Sep 28, 2004 | Posts: 755

mikokiko

posted on Jun 17, 2009 - 11:08 PM

Truth.Seeker, obviously when I say unite, I don't mean that our human nature has become "superglued" to the Divine Nature. I mean that our union is conditional, based on our will. Obviously we unite with God. What do you think communion is? "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him." It's a union beyond all scientific understanding. The only time this unity with God is complete is beyond the grave: that simple.

God Bless

Joined: Feb 11, 2003 | Posts: 1341

Truth.Seeker

posted on Jun 18, 2009 - 12:07 AM

When I read your previous post, it seemed to me that you were obviously saying otherwise (e.g. see Bishoy's disagreement above ).

When something happens on the ontological level, it's actually beyond "superglued." If your last post is what you think, then we do not disagree - but your previous post disagrees with this. There's nothing simple about this topic , especially because it's way beyond what we can scientifically point to. This reminds me of an explanation of H.G. Raphael about the Lord's true body being in the Eucharist through a joke ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgG7zaUB ... re=related

(Doesn't really have much to do with the topic ... but I thought you'd like it).

Joined: Feb 25, 2008 | Posts: 956

mikokiko

posted on Jun 18, 2009 - 06:43 AM

Well, unless I misunderstand the meaning in the word ontological, I really do believe that our nature is deified and glorified, and that when it does unite to God, we borrow from His Divine Attributes, becoming sons rather than creatures. That is, on a much smaller scale here on earth (where there are instances of this), than in heaven.

God Bless

Joined: Feb 11, 2003 | Posts: 1341

Truth.Seeker

posted on Jun 18, 2009 - 03:06 PM

Basically, we borrow from the Divine Energies, not the Divine Essence. Do you agree with that?

Joined: Feb 25, 2008 | Posts: 956

mikokiko

posted on Jun 18, 2009 - 03:29 PM

Well it's from the Divine Essence, because we unite with God, not just His activities (energies). The Powers we receive are from His incarnation, that's what it was for (Union of God and Man).

I'm not so sure I agree with some of the ideas of some EO, who say that the Divine Nature is so far and unlik anything we will ever know and see that we can't experience it, when we witness it everyday on the altar, where Bread and Wine, are transubstantiated into the Body and Blood of God Himself. In order for that to be true the Human Body and Blood must be united to His Divinity.

God Bless

Joined: Feb 11, 2003 | Posts: 1341

Truth.Seeker

posted on Jun 18, 2009 - 04:48 PM

To fully know and understand the Divine Essence, one would have to be God. To know it in part, is to know its energies ... refer to some of the quotes of the Fathers I have above.

Joined: Feb 25, 2008 | Posts: 956

lowlyman

posted on Jun 18, 2009 - 06:48 PM

From Truth.Seeker:To fully know and understand the Divine Essence, one would have to be God. To know it in part, is to know its energies ... refer to some of the quotes of the Fathers I have above.

Mikokiko,

all the fathers say that we become God by grace, not by nature. That is our nature doesn't become divine. rather our human nature is able to participate in God's work through the Spirit that dwells in us.

amen.

Joined: Apr 04, 2006 | Posts: 288

mikokiko

posted on Jun 18, 2009 - 07:45 PM

You guys misunderstood me...I never said that we can become God by nature. Obviously that is utter blasphemy. If we became God by nature, that would be utter contradiction, because only God is who He is by nature. Rather God at a certain point in time, became incarnate and united Humanity to the Divinity. Similarly, when we receive the Holy Spirit and it works in us through the Sacramental Life in the Church we unite our human nature with God (not completely), by partaking of the Mysteries of the Church. I never said that we can ever fully know God (His essence), but we can know bits and bits of it by becoming united to the Son. For Christ Himself says: "...No one knows the Son except the Father. Nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and the one to whom the Son wills to reveal Him." (Matthew 11:27)

We are still uniting ourselves (our human essence) to God (His Divine Essence), never fully, or permanently (until heaven), similar to what He did in the Incarnation. If you want to call this particpating in His energies, then I guess we are just giving different names to the same thing. But I'm not sure this is what is meant by saying participation in God's energies, as this is usually used to deny that we can ever at all become united to God and His essence, to make us gods.

God Bless

Joined: Feb 11, 2003 | Posts: 1341

lowlyman

posted on Jun 18, 2009 - 10:01 PM

maybe, we are talking past each other, but just to be clear:
St. Basil the Great tells us that “We know God from His energies, but we do not claim thatwe can draw near to His essence.”

notice that we don't even claim to draw near to His essence!
lowlyman

From mikokiko:You guys misunderstood me...I never said that we can become God by nature. Obviously that is utter blasphemy. If we became God by nature, that would be utter contradiction, because only God is who He is by nature. Rather God at a certain point in time, became incarnate and united Humanity to the Divinity. Similarly, when we receive the Holy Spirit and it works in us through the Sacramental Life in the Church we unite our human nature with God (not completely), by partaking of the Mysteries of the Church. I never said that we can ever fully know God (His essence), but we can know bits and bits of it by becoming united to the Son. For Christ Himself says: "...No one knows the Son except the Father. Nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and the one to whom the Son wills to reveal Him." (Matthew 11:27)

We are still uniting ourselves (our human essence) to God (His Divine Essence), never fully, or permanently (until heaven), similar to what He did in the Incarnation. If you want to call this particpating in His energies, then I guess we are just giving different names to the same thing. But I'm not sure this is what is meant by saying participation in God's energies, as this is usually used to deny that we can ever at all become united to God and His essence, to make us gods.

God Bless

Joined: Apr 04, 2006 | Posts: 288

mikokiko

posted on Jun 19, 2009 - 01:22 AM

Well, before we move on, I think we really need a proper definition of the Divine Energies. Remember, there is always a big difference from completely knowing God, and coming to, at least in part, know God (which immediately logically follows that we know His essence). The Former is not even in question, the latter must be true. God IS His essence. God's essence in other words is His very Being, its who He is. If we unite with God (which no one can deny happens), then we are coming in contact with His Nature (otherwise we are coming in contact Someone Who is NOT God, since in order for God to be Who He is, He must possess the Divine Nature).

God Bless

Joined: Feb 11, 2003 | Posts: 1341

Truth.Seeker

posted on Jun 19, 2009 - 04:13 AM

It is precisely because His essence is His existence that we do not partake in His divine nature, because then we become Him ontologically, instead of increasing in our likeness of Him. In other words...

God is absolutely good, that is one of the attributes of His essence. We increase in goodness through grace.

God is absolutely omniscient, that is one of the attributes of His essence. We increase in knowledge through grace.

God is absolutely holy, that is one of the attributes of His essence. We increase in holiness through grace.

Through His grace, we increase in having the attributes which He absolutely has by essence. These attributes are called "energies" because they are the manifestation of His essence.

Basically, it doesn't make sense to say "I partake in His essence, but only in a little bit," the "only in a little bit" is to measure how much of His attributes we possess - not the essence that is the source of these attributes.

Joined: Feb 25, 2008 | Posts: 956

mikokiko

posted on Jun 19, 2009 - 05:48 AM

Pretty much everything you said makes sense except for the last sentence. I'm not so sure that the energies of God, are the attributes of God (maybe, I'm wrong). But I do know that the essence of God being the "source" of these attributes is definitely a wrong statement to make. The Divine essence without its qualities, isn't the Divine essence. In otherwords, if we meet God's Holiness, we are meeting God's essence, because Holiness is the essence of God.

In fact we partake of the Divine Nature, as St. Peter wrote in his epistle. We directly partake of the Divine Nature, and come into contact with it. Just think of what it means to have the Holy Spirit in you. The Holy Spirit is God, and when He becomes a part of you, you are united to Him, and He transforms you to a state of godliness.

God Bless

Joined: Feb 11, 2003 | Posts: 1341

Truth.Seeker

posted on Jun 19, 2009 - 03:12 PM

How about this for an example:

The Son is eternally begotten from the Father, but without the Son, God doesn't exist, hence the Father doesn't exist. That doesn't mean the Son isn't eternally begotten from the Father.

What I wrote is not a new concept.

Joined: Feb 25, 2008 | Posts: 956

mikokiko

posted on Jun 19, 2009 - 08:40 PM

Could you clarify how what you just said corresponds to what I wrote?

Joined: Feb 11, 2003 | Posts: 1341

Truth.Seeker

posted on Jun 19, 2009 - 09:09 PM

"But I do know that the essence of God being the "source" of these attributes is definitely a wrong statement to make. The Divine essence without its qualities, isn't the Divine essence."

The latter seems to be your premise for the former. That is, since without its attributes, the Divine Essence wouldn't be the Divine Essence, we cannot say that it is their "source." I'm telling you that, althogh without the Son, there would be no Father, we still say that the Son is begotten of the Father.

In other words, "eternal causes" are a very different thing from "temporal causes" (and I think you put the essence and attributes in the latter category - that is what your rejection is based on).

The issue may be subtle though. If you've read stuff by C.S. Lewis, he seems to think that what is "good" is independent of God. If that's what you have in the back of your mind, it's harder to accept what I'm saying, because, the conclusion from that reasononing would be, well, God is the absolute of all that is independently good.

Joined: Feb 25, 2008 | Posts: 956

Truth.Seeker

posted on Jun 19, 2009 - 09:35 PM

St. Basil:

“We say that we know the greatness of God, His power, His wisdom, His goodness, His providence over us, and the justness of His judgment, but not His very essence… The energies are diversified, and the essence simple, but we say that we know our God from His energies, but do not undertake to approach near to His essence. His energies come down to us, but His essence remains beyond our reach… So knowledge of the divine essence involves perception of His incomprehensibility, and the object of our worship is not that of which we comprehend the essence, but of which we comprehend that the essence exists."

Saint Basil, Letter to Amphilochius 1,2 - Holy Apostles Convent, Dormition Skete. The Orthodox New Testament: vol.2 Acts, Epistles, and Revelation. Buena Vista, Colorado: 2nd Ed. 2000 p. 473.

St. Athanasius:

19. For as, although there be one Son by nature, True and Only-begotten, we too become sons, not as He in nature and truth, but according to the grace of Him that calleth, and though we are men from the earth, are yet called gods, not as the True God or His Word, but as has pleased God who has given us that grace; so also, as God do we become merciful, not by being made equal to God, <b>nor becoming in nature and truth benefactors.</b>

NPNF, Vol. 4, St. Athanasius, Discourses Against the Arians, discourse III, p. 404.

Joined: Feb 25, 2008 | Posts: 956

Truth.Seeker

posted on Jun 19, 2009 - 09:37 PM

Let me comment on what St. Basil said, because as I read the following in Romans 1, I think it points to what he said -

Romans 1:19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,

We can see His invisible attributes, but "even His eternal power and Godhead" are put on another plane because we come to know that through seeing His attributes.

Joined: Feb 25, 2008 | Posts: 956

mikokiko

posted on Jun 19, 2009 - 10:58 PM

Truth.Seeker,
Basically, it doesn't make sense to say "I partake in His essence, but only in a little bit," the "only in a little bit" is to measure how much of His attributes we possess - not the essence that is the source of these attributes.
The problem with the statement isn't the idea of eternal causation, but of separation. The same goes with your example about Divine Begetting. It's that you think that God's Attributes and His Divine Nature are two different things that I find erroneous, as if the Divine Nature was some sphere with protrusions that we would call His Attributes, so that we could touch the protrusions but not the sphere. Rather the Divine Attributes, are qualities, or to put more simply, are Descriptions of the Divine Nature. Think about that for a second. If we are experiencing God's Holiness when we are in union with Him, how are we not coming into contact with His very own Nature? Holiness is but a description of this Essence.

My contention here is not with the Attributes being the result of the Essence, but the idea that they can be experienced apart from the Essence. Similarly, the Son cannot be experienced apart from the Father, because both are fully united. The Son is said to be begotten, because He is the Emanation or the Light of the Father, the manifestation of God Himself. And when we come into contact with Christ, we come into contact with the entire Trinity. Similarly, coming into contact with God's Goodness, Sublimity or Love, does not mean that we do not come into contact with His Nature. They are descriptions of His Nature, not separate "protrusions" of it, as you were trying to use the word "source" in such a way.

So does that mean I disagree with St. Basil? We have to be careful not to treat words as we might mistakingly treat numbers in math equations. 47- 3, is the same as 104 - 60, although different numbers are used in the equations. Likewise, I might be saying that we can experience God's essence by uniting with Him, and St. Basil might be saying that we cannot, but do we mean opposite things? At first, I thought that we might have, when lowlyman first posted that quote, but when you put everything into context, it cast a different light on the situation.

Joined: Feb 11, 2003 | Posts: 1341

mikokiko

posted on Jun 19, 2009 - 11:23 PM

“We say that we know the greatness of God, His power, His wisdom, His goodness, His providence over us, and the justness of His judgment, but not His very essence… The energies are diversified, and the essence simple, but we say that we know our God from His energies, but do not undertake to approach near to His essence. His energies come down to us, but His essence remains beyond our reach… So knowledge of the divine essence involves perception of His incomprehensibility, and the object of our worship is not that of which we comprehend the essence, but of which we comprehend that the essence exists."

Well said. Now, let's think about it: if we know for a fact that Goodness, Wisdom, Power, and Greatness, are in fact qualities of God's Nature, then we can't say that we are absolutely dumbfounded about God's essence can we? That is, if we affirm that God IS Good, IS Wise, IS Powerful, IS Great, then we are really describing His qualities (and therefore speaking of His Nature).

But what St. Basil seems to say is, that we experience God, and learn more about Him through His dealings with us as His children, but we will never really KNOW and fully comprehend His Very Essence. OF COURSE!!! He is Infinite, and we are not. What we know of His Nature is so little, and it is only from His actions in dealing with us, when we unite to Him. But we can never KNOW His very essence, as it is. As the Bible says, no one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son, and the one to whom He wills to reveal Him (of course not completely).

If you read carefully, I think you will see that St. Basil uses different language to describe at least the same sentiments that I expressed to defend my position. In other words, we can't capture, we can't put our finger, we can't pain a picture of God's essence. It's far too big for our little minds to fathom. And yet by saying this we are realizing something about His essence aren't we? That it is infinite. The more we unite, and commune with Him, and partake of His Nature, the more we realize Who He is, but never fully.

Joined: Feb 11, 2003 | Posts: 1341

mikokiko

posted on Jun 19, 2009 - 11:23 PM

19. For as, although there be one Son by nature, True and Only-begotten, we too become sons, not as He in nature and truth, but according to the grace of Him that calleth, and though we are men from the earth, are yet called gods, not as the True God or His Word, but as has pleased God who has given us that grace; so also, as God do we become merciful, not by being made equal to God, nor becoming in nature and truth benefactors.

I'm not exactly sure why you would put this up, because I never denied that we become like God by grace. I never said we could do it of ourselves, of our own human nature. He deifies us, and He transforms our human nature when we unite with Him, not us. And I never said that we would ever become equal to Him. I said that we increase in godliness. No one could ever count to infinity, so how could we ever increase to the stature of Absolute Godhead? This might be a misunderstanding on your part of what I said.

Joined: Feb 11, 2003 | Posts: 1341

mikokiko

posted on Jun 19, 2009 - 11:24 PM

We can see His invisible attributes, but "even His eternal power and Godhead" are put on another plane because we come to know that through seeing His attributes.

Don't get me wrong, there is a distinction between the words "essence" and "attributes", they obviously both mean different things, they aren't synonyms. But neither can be what it is without the other, so it's understandable why St. Paul might speak of both of them. Actually St. Paul's point is that we can even see Our Lord's Eternal Power and Godhead in the world.

Sorry for the long post, I made a promise to try to be succinct with my points, but it doesn't always work

God Bless

Joined: Feb 11, 2003 | Posts: 1341

Truth.Seeker

posted on Jun 19, 2009 - 11:31 PM

I think the problem is that you think the Divine Essence can be quantified. Being united with the Holy Spirit in essence makes a person Christ Himself - if the person retains his humanity (the "quantifying" comes in saying, well, it's not unity with the whole of Divine Essence). That is why I put some stuff up which you don't disagree with. It's not your conclusion that I disagree with (except your first post), it's your premises - which I believe lead to a different conclusion than you.

St. Basil doesn't seem to be saying anything beyond what he said. The man "distinguishes" between His essence and His attributes just like I do. The man says we can't even approach His essence, let alone be united with it ontologically. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all Divine in Essence, but we can distinguish Them from Their relationships to Each Other.

I've got no problem saying we partake OF His nature (lest I be found to be disagreeing with St. Peter and the Holy Spirit), but that doesn't mean we (our nature) partakes IN His nature (because then we'd become Divine). We wouldn't be "gods," we'd be God.

If you say that we are non-ontologically united with His essence, we can rest from this conversation. So long as you say otherwise, it won't end .

Joined: Feb 25, 2008 | Posts: 956

mikokiko

posted on Jun 19, 2009 - 11:40 PM

Well, to be honest, I'm kind of afraid of using the word ontological (in either way), because I am not sure if I will be using it correctly. Rather, my position is, that we never FULLY unite with God, not that we end up uniting to 37.43% of the Divine Essence, because what's 37. 43% of Infinity? Rather, infinitiy is not a quantity but a quality. Likewise, when we unite to God, we are uniting to a quality not a quantity. If we ever did fully unite with God, then we'd be Christ, which of course is blasphemous to say.

Christ had in Him the full union of God and Man, which imparted to us the grace of uniting to the Trinity (again not fully). From this union, our human nature is transformed and glorified through deification. Complete deification (utter contradiction), will lead us to being God Himself. But we are deified to our maximum potential as humans. Similarly, we unite to God to our maximum potential as humans, through the grace that God has intended for us. That is my position.
St. Basil doesn't seem to be saying anything beyond what he said. The man "distinguishes" between His essence and His attributes just like I do.
And there is nothing wrong with that, as long as we realize how those attributes are in relation to His Nature (descriptions of its qualities).
The man says we can't even approach His essence, let alone be united with it ontologically.
St. Basil says:
So knowledge of the divine essence involves perception of His incomprehensibility...
Which is exactly what I said. We recognize that His essence is Infinite.
So long as you say otherwise, it won't end Smile.
Ha! You know me too well.

God Bless

Joined: Feb 11, 2003 | Posts: 1341

Truth.Seeker

posted on Jun 20, 2009 - 12:32 AM

Although I personally like to stay away from the word "deification," I have no problem with anything else you said.

Joined: Feb 25, 2008 | Posts: 956