Justification and Theosis: What Does the Bible Teach?

[@Seraphim-Hamilton]

Hours of and hundreds of pages of exclusive content below: Become a patron: www.patreon.com/kabane Or subscribe to my Substack: seraphimhamilton.substack.com/ Exclusive content by Patreon & Membership Tiers (each tier includes all content from lower tiers) Tier 1: DAILY Scripture reflections ranging from 2-5 pages per day, six days a week. Tier 2: Weekly half hour video, featuring a topic relating to Biblical studies, church history, apologetics, and related subjects. Tier 3: An exclusive course (ultimately over ten hours long) on the Old Testament, with new installments of over an hour each uploaded weekly. Tier 4: A monthly 1 on 1 call or voice chat where we can discuss any topic of your choosing. Join our Discord: discord.gg/fGNNB8P6CJ Answering Protestantism from the Bible in 17 Hour Lecture Set: buy.stripe.com/5kA2bz6Y467K4JaaEJ Sample lecture: kzbin.info/www/bejne/qaG0gKWbjJ14es0 Bundle with "Answering Calvinism from the Bible" for a discount (23 hours total): buy.stripe.com/9AQ8zX4PWeEg1wYeUY To just get "Answering Calvinism from the Bible" buy.stripe.com/aEUeYl4PW0Nq5Ne7su To schedule a one-time one hour call, simply send $50 to the following link with your email address: www.paypal.com/paypalme/seraphimhamilton

[@GospelSimplicity]

That intro animation is awesome

[@lanestp]

The second or third time I took communion in the Orthodox Church it felt like I swallowed a coal, it wasn’t until then I understood Isaiah.

[@presupping4eva]

@@lanestp What does this mean?

[@IlluminedOne]

True story

[@j.g.4942]

@@presupping4eva probably means, God gave him confirmation of Christ's real presence (human and Divine, body and soul) in the Eucharist. Then he joined with the Apostles' saying, "where else can we go, you have the words of eternal life."

[@DCWoodWorking]

Really informative! God bless ☦️

[@PsychoBible]

I love it! I'll be looking forward to each part of this series.

[@zowens40]

Is there a part two to this video? I scanned the following videos and they seemed to stand alone. To my understanding, it was the first of a series. Loved it. Im interested in more. Thank you!

[@Seraphim-Hamilton]

Here's another part: kzbin.info/www/bejne/pn-wn615j9ylrtU My goal is to make these videos so that any of them can be watched independently or as part of the whole series. Hope you enjoy them!

[@raymondcannon2141]

Great stuff. ☦

[@NavelOrangeGazer]

Broke: either/or Woke: both/and

[@TheTransfiguredLife]

Haha, I like this one!

[@livingtoaster1358]

Hey I'm a protestant here, more closely to Presbyterian and everything you said I absolutely agree with, Justification is what God does to us in order that we would be who we were originally meant to be. In essence God justified us and restores and is restoring us to our original design which is partaking in the Divine Glory of God I believe the only thing I might disagree with and maybe this is from my own misunderstanding of what you're saying is that once we are justified we aren't fully sanctified, and "fully" being the key term. We are sanctified when we have been justified however the sanctification or the Theosis, is also an ongoing process for when we were justified God makes us His temple as He dwells in there however there are things within the temple that still needs to be filled with light

[@harrygarris6921]

I think the disconnect is that we don’t have in Orthodoxy such a thing as self determined assurance of salvation. We have assurance in the justice of God’s judgment, in His love, in His righteousness, that He will separate the sheep from the goats on the last day and do this perfectly. So while there may be some reality to this idea of being “in a state of grace” as the Catholics call it, or your final destination being determined at the moment of your death, we really don’t place much emphasis delineating this boundary between this and the state of condemnation, nor do we claim absolute knowledge of what state we happen to be in at any given time. There’s more of a general sense of trust in Jesus Christ’s judgement. This is often illustrated by Orthodox priests in catchesis as a pathway, we’re either walking one direction towards Christ or walking the other way away from him, and salvation would come as a result of the direction that we’re moving and not through reaching a given point along the path. Because that direction we’re moving in this life continues on after it, with us either eternally moving towards God or towards our own destruction. C.S. Lewis illustrates this idea of eternal movement towards God as the heavenly experience quite well in the final chapter of The Last Battle.

[@AlexPetrusaitis]

Thanks for making this video. I have a few questions if you have the time to answer them. 1. If our goal is to become "Like Christ" what is the origin of this cause? Why become like Christ? 2. What is the difference between Theosis and Sanctification? 3. Are you arguing, in a round about way, that in the Gospels, Jesus' role is a law giver/enforcer? 4. When you say we are legally justified by God do you mean by his law? If so, how will we ever knownif we measure up to obeying his Laws? I apologize for not being able to watch the rest of your video. The Lord be with you.

[@eddardgreybeard]

*1. If our goal is to become "Like Christ" what is the origin of this cause? Why become like Christ?* Original sin is the idea that man knew the difference between good and evil. He lacked that divine wisdom, and sin entered the world. Christ is the New Adam, and John straight up taught in his letters (1 Jn 2:5-6) this is exactly what Christ meant when He told us to take up our cross and follow Him. Christ also said in the Gospel of Matthew that we are to be perfect as the Father is perfect. This is precisely how Christ is the Way. *2. What is the difference between Theosis and Sanctification?* Sanctification is more the process and Theosis is the end goal. *3. Are you arguing, in a round about way, that in the Gospels, Jesus' role is a law giver/enforcer?* Jesus defined the law. We had the laws but didn't understand how to properly keep them. Just as the sermon on the Mount taught us that adultery can be committed by looking at another woman with lust in our eyes, or we can commit murder by killing our neighbor in our hearts by hating them, Jesus did precisely that. *4. When you say we are legally justified by God do you mean by his law? If so, how will we ever known if we measure up to obeying his Laws?* We do the best we can, Christ will be the judge of that. We have confidence in His mercy, but never presume it by claiming to be "saved."

[@thenarrowdoor7]

One thing i never understood on why st paul said without the shedding of blood there is no forgevness of sins and in many places we can see no blood has been shedd and sins were forgiven so please explain this to me thank u

[@bjornlarsen7440]

@@thenarrowdoor7 if the passage you are referring to is in hebrews, the context is establishing that the new covenant is superior to the old covenant. And the scripture itself is this. “Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.” ‭ And I’ll just bring to attention the author actually states that under the law ALMOST everything is purified by blood. So I think there is no real discrepancy but you might have missed that one word.

[@thenarrowdoor7]

@@bjornlarsen7440 i still dont get it , its almost everything ? What about the sins that were foregiven without blood ? Because GOD doesnt change so i dont understand

[@bjornlarsen7440]

@@thenarrowdoor7 yeah so some things do not require blood, not all sin leads to death. You will find that principle in 1 John as well.

[@thenarrowdoor7]

@@bjornlarsen7440 ok so why then paul said without the shedding of blood there is no forgivness of sins ? Thats what i dont understand its either every single sin needs blood or not at all , because GOD doesnt change or have a conflict

[@bjornlarsen7440]

It’s way more nuanced and I don’t think I have explained much, hopefully someone else sees this thread and can elaborate better than I can. I’m not a teacher brother and I often find it difficult to transition my understanding into words or concepts.

[@marincusman9303]

Is there any difference between “divinization” and “deification” as terms?

[@gracenroses7471]

@@marincusman9303 no, they mean the same thing.

[@MultiMobCast]

❤

[@LadderOfDescent]

Has the second coming already taken place for the saints that have achieved theosis? In other words, if I interact with a monk tomorrow who is deified, is he living in the future …but now? To put it crass, at this monastery I visit, I feel like I’m talking to time-hoping angels…aka the monks. I swear I’m ok and not crazy 😂

[@IlluminedOne]

The second coming has not technically happened for them although we know their status. But as for the rest of your comment, for truly deified Saints like St. Paisios, Elder Ephraim, and even modern living saints like the above whose names we may not know - yes you’re not far off from the possibility. Now, is every monk doing this? Absolutely not. It’s still rare, but by God’s grace and His gifts to us, He gives these men and women to reveal Himself and continue pointing to something higher

[@wv9459]

Wait, so is that story of Solomon returning the baby to its rightful mother, a picture of justification/ theosis? Like we are the baby and the evil ones tried to steal us from God (the rightful mother). But then God, the judge justified the baby and returned him to where he should be? If that makes sense

[@RedBullGreenBear]

According to Seraphim, it seems like the mother was justified. In that analogy... King = God Mother = us Pretender = evil one/adversary Baby = our inheritance/eternal life

[@j.g.4942]

I'm surprised how similar this content is to Luther in the Lutheran tradition. Obviously Luther often emphasises Baptism and adoption (the whole, God's Word and work in Baptism still stands strong against the lies of satan; that Lutherans find their identity in Baptism rather than anything else; rebuking the devil and temptation with "I am Baptised"), yet he also teaches the real change of the person and Christ's consuming in Holy Communion (just to say the language of participation isn't emphasised but is still present). Also I love the burning coal, the perichoresis of two natures, that touches lips and cleanses souls.

[@j.g.4942]

@JunkyJeeMail Luther was excommunicate and condemned, for rejecting salvation by created grace in favour of salvation by the grace of Christ's righteousness. I suppose if you think Christ is a creature then it would be created grace. And he and the second Martin (Chemnitz) distinguished between the nature and work of Christ, yet maybe not their synonyms. Also the Mystical Union is possible in the Happy Exchange, as explained by Luther.

[@j.g.4942]

@JunkyJeeMail well, ok, but the Lutheran pastors I know and the Lutheran books I've read say many similar things to Seraphim in this video. I'm being honest here too

[@j.g.4942]

@JunkyJeeMail The other comment thread was deleted, but I think it's still important to note that Luther and Lutherans reject that a created infused grace justifies and rather it is Christ's Divine/uncreated Righteousness that justifies (we tend toward the language of 'grace as the attitude of favour' and 'righteousness as the thing: favour'). While it might not be expressed the same as "the Orthodox Christology confessed by the God-bearing Fathers and confirmed by the Ecumenical Councils" (we tend to use the analogy of heated iron more than the hot coal), to say he taught salvation by a created grace is an abuse of language and history. I'm not sure that you realise the Lutheran reformation was, in part, a siding with the German Mystics against the Scholastics. Feel free to claim politics, culture, language, and power had their parts too; they always do.of

[@j.g.4942]

@JunkyJeeMail no. No confessional Lutheran is bound to accept all the rulings of the councils, because councils have erred. In my communion we teach functionally that the Holy Spirit is breathed by the Father through the Son (after all we still hold to the three Western Creeds, we see ourselves as 'Apostolic', 'Nicaean', and 'Athanasian', and condemn both the Arians and Semi-Arians). We would, instead of councils, point to the texts that call the Spirit 'of the Father/God' and 'of the Son/Christ' and then leave it to mystery as to how it works in the Godhead; as to economically, the Breath of God carried the Word into Mary, and Jesus breathed on the Apostles the Spirit of God (there's a real relationship between the Son and the Spirit).

[@j.g.4942]

@JunkyJeeMail I've just done some reading and found this quote as an example of early 'Lutheran' thought on the Filioque (it hasn't really changed): "The Father, indeed, is the first hypostasis of the All-Holy Trinity, for He is the origin, source, and cause of the others [Son and Holy Spirit]. And the Son is the second [hypostasis], by reason of origin but not of time, being posterior to the Father and anterior to the Holy Spirit. Also, the Holy Spirit is the third [hypostasis], being posterior to both [Father and Son] by reason of origin." Also that "the Spirit proceeds from the Son and principally from the Father". The way it's taught in my communion is the Father is the first person of the Trinity, the Son the second, and the Holy Spirit is the Third; things go from the Father to the Son to the Spirit who is with us. Or, we pray with/by the Spirit, through the Son to the Father. As to which of the Ecumenical Councils accepted by the Eastern Orthodox we think erred; I haven't been taught them, the ones that Rome accepts I'm a little familiar with and the conciliarism of the Council of Constance (otherwise accepted) was later condemned as an error, thus it seems that councils can err. That might not be a satisfactory response for you, and fair enough; still there are good reasons Lutherans are reserved in viewing Popes, Bishops, Councils and Fathers as infallible. However, that's getting far afield from the OP's topic; especially considering how much of our writings quote, reference and refer to the same.