The Triad Distinguished by Deification
Nigel Tomes
The Local Church movement began by emphasizing
The Normal Christian Life and
The Normal Christian Church Life (W. Nee). However, the ‘Lord’s Recovery,’ under the leadership of Witness Lee (
Li Changshou) --the ‘Minister of the Age’ --was never content to be ‘normal;’ it was never satisfied simply to be one among many diverse expressions of Christ’s Church. The Local Church always claimed a privileged status—whether the sacramental ‘ground of locality’ or the highest revelation. In his final years Witness Lee appropriated Eastern Orthodoxy’s deification dogma, pronouncing it “the highest peak of the divine revelation in the entire Bible.”
0 Thus deification—“man becoming God”—became the distinctive, defining characteristic of LSM’s Local Church. Deification is now a tenet of the faith in LSM’s Local Church; it has entered their creed.
1“We in the local churches hold that man may become God in God's salvation,” LSM’s Kerry Robichaux declared authoritatively.
In adopting this stance, LSM has aligned itself with a select group of ‘Christian Churches’ for whom the deification dogma is a key defining characteristic. To my knowledge there are three such groups forming a virtual triad distinguished by the deification doctrine – [1] the Eastern Orthodox Church, [2] the ‘Mormon’ Church of the Latter Day Saints (LDS) and [3] the ‘Local Church of the Recovery,’ linked to Witness Lee & his publishing arm—Living Stream Ministry (LSM). Here we briefly ‘set the stage’ for an examination of the similarities and differences between the members of this triad, ‘fellow travelers’ in the cause of deification.
[1] Eastern Orthodoxy
There is no doubt that theosis (deification) is the main tenet of the Orthodox Church. Consider the following:
· Michael Horton says “Deification (theosis)...is the central theme of Eastern Orthodox soteriology.”2
· Daniel L. Migliore, states “Deification Theosis is a central theme of Eastern Orthodox theology and spirituality, summed up ...[by] Athanasius: ‘God became human that we might become divine’.”3
· Joseph Burgess, Jeffrey Gros write, “For the Orthodox theosis is a central theological and religious idea.”4
Sin, the Fall & Salvation
For Eastern Orthodoxy, deification is not merely an adjunct to their theological system; it colors the whole. Orthodoxy’s view of sin, mankind’s fall and salvation differs drastically from key evangelical tenets. Professor Donald Fairbairn, in a sympathetic presentation (quoting Orthodox writers) observes,
5 “Orthodoxy holds a somewhat different concept of sin than that of Western Christians. Zernov writes, ‘
The East regards sin as only a temporary malady [illness] which hurts man, but does not annihilate his God-like image.’ Auxeutios offers a similar explanation of sin, ‘
Man did not ‘fall’ into a state where his nature became sinful. He chose to remain and indulge in his own undeified nature...[Man’s] fall was not from the heights of heaven, but from a precious road;
so man is not to be judged too harshly for his error’.” Mankind’s fall was not so serious. Orthodoxy contends that sin is merely a short-term sickness, it did not impart the sinful nature to the human race and it was a minor misstep, a misdemeanor. Along the same lines, Fritz Ridenour maintains,
6 the “Orthodox do not agree that man is bound by a totally corrupt, sinful nature. According to the Orthodox, through the Fall,
mankind did not inherit guilt through Adam, but instead man inherited death, mortality and corruption.
When mankind fell in Adam, it was a ‘departure from the path,’ not a drastic plunge from a state of blessedness.” Hence Orthodoxy rejects Calvin’s dictum of the ‘total depravity of mankind’ (Rom. 3:10-18).
The “Fall of mankind” (Gen. 3) was merely a ‘minor bump in the road,’ an obstacle on the path to deification. So, for the Orthodox, “the fallen state is not drastically different from the original created state; the fallen state is the condition of people who have turned aside from the path they were to follow [--i.e. to
theosis]”
7
Jesus’ main role for Orthodoxy, is to remove obstacles on the path to man’s deification. Due to this notion, it is not Christ’s atoning death, but rather “The incarnation…[that] is the central redemptive event in Eastern Orthodoxy.”
8 Hence, as Orthodoxy’s deification doctrine evolved, there was a subtle “shift in emphasis regarding the decisive saving event, from Jesus’ death as atonement for sin, to his birth & incarnation as the divine taking the human into itself. Despite the Pauline insistence that central to the gospel was the affirmation that ‘Christ died for our sins’ (1 Cor. 15:3), the creeds shift the focus from the atoning death to incarnation.”
9 These developments are far from innocuous.
Justification De-emphasized
Since sin, guilt and condemnation is not a major problems, in Orthodoxy’s view, it follows that redemption (atonement) and justification do not receive the same emphasis as Protestant or evangelical Christianity. Scholars observe that “In Eastern Orthodox soteriology, following Saint Athanasius, the emphasis on salvation is
not justification, but divinization.”
11 In fact, Paul Gavrilyuk observes that “In most patristic treatments of
theosis, justification plays next to no role at all.”
12 Fritz Ridenour notes that “Evangelical Protestant scholars believe that the Orthodox deification approach to salvation leaves them practically ignoring the doctrine of justification by faith. For example, [Professor] Donald Fairbairn observes that ‘most elements of the orthodox understanding of salvation actually pertain to sanctification.’ Fairbairn also comments that the major Orthodox ‘proof text’ of deification –2 Peter 1:4—lies in the middle of a passage about sanctification.”
13 Thus Dr Fairbairn says, “To use Protestant terminology, one can generalize that the Orthodox understanding of salvation consists mainly of elements related to what we call the process of sanctification (becoming Christ-like)...”
14
In Orthodoxy justification by faith is de-emphasized. Moreover justification’s judicial (or forensic) aspect is denigrated and/or denied. This ought not to be surprising; if there is no sin, no guilt, there is no legal case against man as a sinner! The Orthodox pay lip service to justification at times; e.g. one Orthodox scholar says:
“The Orthodox view baptism as both a justifying event and the beginning of theosis [deification]...In the justifying event, believers are given a new identity—are made Christ-like (theosis) through their mystical union with Him in baptism.”15
“Mystical union in baptism,” sounds familiar, though placed in a foreign context. But, the “justifying event,” referred to here, is Orthodoxy’s sacrament of infant baptism; it is not a believing response to Christ’s redemptive death. Orthodoxy is as far from the Reformation’s “justification by faith,” as the East is from West!
Deification—the Path to Sinless Perfection
Since the Fall was a minor detour which did not produce man’s sinful nature, sinless perfection is an attainable goal. In the Orthodox view, people on the path to deification can become sinless: Nicholas Bamford explains that “Deification allows the person to enter ...the Divine state of the Spirit within and without. In this state for Maximus [‘the Confessor,’ AD 580-662], the person is
unable to ‘fall’ again...deified persons become sinless by ‘habit of virtue and knowledge’.”
16
The Sacramental Path to Perfection/Deification
Despite their ‘high theology’ of deification, Orthodoxy’s practical path to deification is paved with the seven sacraments— infant baptism (which justifies), ‘Chrismation’ where the newly-baptized infant is anointed with specially consecrated oil of myrrh (imparting the Holy Spirit), partaking the Eucharist (the transubstantiated body & blood of Christ), confession, holy orders (ordination to the priesthood, etc), marriage, holy unction (anointing of the sick). Plus there are prayers to the saints and the Virgin Mary, assisted by Orthodox icons.
[2] The Mormon ‘Church of the Latter Day Saints’ [LDS]
Deified Mormons have all divine attributes, do as God does & are as God is
Eastern Orthodoxy is not alone in making deification a central tenet. The Mormon ‘Church of the Latter Day Saints’ [LDS] founded by Joseph Smith Jr. (1805-1844) and based in Salt Lake City, Utah, USA, also holds this doctrine. Mormons teach deification—that men can become gods. Ross Anderson calls it the Mormon “grand vision of progress to godhood.” He asserts “the principle of eternal progression toward exaltation [i.e. godhood, deification] remains the cornerstone of the Mormon worldview.”
17
This is confirmed by Mormon literature stating that: “The ultimate desire of a Loving Supreme Being [i.e. God] is to help his children enjoy all that he enjoys. For Latter day Saints, the term, ‘godhood’ denotes the attainment of such a state—one of
having all divine attributes and doing as God does and being as God is.”
18
Note that exalted (deified) Mormons become God in life, nature and all other respects (with no caveats). They can “do as God does,” creating and ruling, becoming Gods, equal with the original Creator God! Mormons contend that such “Exaltation to the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom is reserved for members of the [Mormon] Church of the First Born.” Moreover, “This exalted status...is available to be received by a man and wife...through the eternal [celestial] marriage covenant of the [Mormon] temple.”
19 Jesus asserted that in the resurrection there is no marriage (Matt. 22:30; Luke 20:35). However, Mormons feel free to override Jesus’ teaching with their own extra-biblical canon.
“As man is, God once was; as God is, man may become”—Lorenzo Snow (1844)
Eastern Orthodoxy propounds Athanasius’ maxim. Mormons trump that with their own maxim: “’As man is, God once was; as God is, man may become.” This couplet is attributed to Lorenzo Snow (1814-1910) the 5th President of the LDS Church (1898-1901).
21 It is memorized and recited by LDS youth.
22
Snow’s maxim summarizes the teaching of Mormon founder, Joseph Smith Jr. (1805-1844). On April 7, 1844, a few months prior to his death, in the course of a funeral address, Smith stated, “God himself was once as were are now, and is an exalted man, who sits in yonder heavens...I am going to tell you how God came to be God.”
23
Clearly Mormons echo Athanasius’ notion that man becomes God. In defense of the latter half of their maxim—man’s deification--Mormons appeal to the same Church Fathers cited by Eastern Orthodoxy and also cited by Witness Lee & LSM’s Local Church.
24 Yet Mormons go one step beyond Athanasius, claiming “As man is, God once was...” i.e. that God Himself was, at one time, a Man who got promoted (elevated, deified) to become God.
The Mormon maxim’s opening assertion seems to be Joseph’s Smith’s innovation. Smith made the heretical claim that God is a deified Man—currently He is God; but previously He was a man! Consistent with this, Smith argued that “’the Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s’...[Thus] reducing the gap between the human and divine.”
25 In terms of logic it is simply extends the notion that ‘man becomes God.’ If Christian overcomers (e.g., martyrs like Stephen, James, Peter, & Paul plus the ‘Blessed Virgin Mary’?) have ‘become God,’ there are currently many ‘Gods,’ most of whom were previously men. It is only a slight generalization to allege that all current “Gods” (including the Creator God) were previously men! Such incremental ‘steps of logic,’ go well beyond biblical truth into the realm of heresy. Here is proof that man’s wisdom is foolish in God’s estimation (1 Cor. 1:20, 25).
Humans are ‘Gods in Embryo’
David Rowe summarizes Mormon views, saying, “The person Mormons call Heavenly Father was once a human just like us and simply worked his way up! That’s how he became a god. Furthermore the couplet teaches that every human being can do the same thing
if we do the
right thing—i.e., if we are obedient to the ‘gospel’ of Mormonism with our lives. That’s why Mormons understand humans to be ...’gods in embryo’—the very stuff of godhood...”
26
Mormon’s ‘Felix Culpa’—the Fortunate Fall
Mormons view mankind’s ‘Fall’ (Gen. 3) as a ‘fortune fall,’ a blessing in disguise. They aver that “Adam’s fall was a step
downward,” but teach that “it was also a step
forward...in the eternal march of human progress [to deification].” Mormon Scripture asserts that, if they had not fallen, Adam & Eve ‘would have had no children ...[and] no joy, for they knew no misery’ (2 Nephi 2:23).”
27 By their own admission, the LDS Church “discounts the notion of Original Sin & its ascribed negative impact on humanity...[Adam & Eve] did choose mortality, and [yet] in so doing made it possible for all of us to participate in Heavenly Father’s great, eternal plan,”
28 they say.
[3] LSM’s Local Church of Witness Lee
For the Local Church “
The ‘diamond’ in the ‘box’ of the Bible is the revelation that in Christ God has become man in order that man might become God...The vast majority of today's Christians neglect [this] crucial point in the Bible...” according to Witness Lee.
29 This doctrine has been discussed in detail above.
Conclusions
Our purpose was to ‘set the stage’ for a comparison—including both similarities & differences--between the members of this ‘triad,’ for whom deification is a central dogma and distinguishing characteristic. Both in N. America and elsewhere on the globe, people are more likely to meet young, white-shirted, Mormon [LDS] missionaries proclaiming their ‘high gospel’ of deification, than young, white-shirted, FTT trainees from LSM also proclaiming a ‘high gospel’ of deification. The parallel seems to cry out for a comparison.
Elitist
LSM’s Local Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Mormons’ LDS Church each claim to be the “only true Church,” offering the only path (or at least the highest probability of attaining) to deification. According to LSM’s “blended brothers” the chances of qualifying as ‘an overcomer’ outside the Local Church movement are slim to none. On the other hand, adhering to LSM-endorsed practices—
HWMR, LSM’s ‘7 Feasts,’ the FTT-trainings, ITERO, BfA, PSRP, BNPB, ‘prophesying’ regularly in Local Church meetings, etc—enables the “dispensing of the Triune God,” facilitating deification and qualifying one as ‘an overcomer.’ Both Orthodoxy and the LDS Church have their equivalent paths and practices. All members of this triad are elitist.
Extra-biblical Sources
All three members of the triad—Eastern Orthodoxy, the Mormons’ LDS Church and LSM’s Local Church buttress their claims that deification is a biblically-based doctrine with appeals to extra-biblical sources. They all appeal extensively to the Church Fathers of the early centuries, following the original apostles and the NT authors. Athanasius is the usual starting point, accompanied by a supporting cast of Church Fathers. Proof texts from Scripture—2 Peter 1:4; Psalm 82:6, etc.,--‘take a back seat’ in most presentations. This ought to alert us that an extra-biblical notion is being imposed upon Scripture via
eisegesis. The Church Fathers’ writings are elevated to equality with Scripture to legitimize this dogma. The Mormon LDS Church explicitly adds
the Book of Mormon & other writings to Scripture to validate this doctrine along with their other aberrant teachings. LSM’s Local Church does this implicitly by appealing to the “interpreted Word”—Witness Lee’s ministry, “canonized in 1997,” via LSM’s
Recovery Version—alongside God’s “inspired Word,” canonized in AD 497.
Ethics
A crucial dimension of this discussion ought to be the ethical impact of the deification dogma on the attitudes and actions of adherents. The notion of deification narrows, blurs, or eliminates the biblical distinction between God, the Creator, and His creatures (including humankind). Mauro Properzi asserts that deification has the effect of “reducing the gap between the human and divine.”
31 Robert Klingenberg warns about the ethical impact of this narrowing, saying, “God, His holiness, His righteousness, and His justice are no longer impressive or imposing when you are a god yourself. The fear of God becomes non-existent. That is why the confession of sin and asking God for forgiveness in the ‘We Are Gods’ church services is seldom, if ever, done. After all, gods seldom blow it. And if they do goof up, they will just shake hands as gods with God, and the rare infraction is forgotten.”
32 Certainly for Mormons, since God was once a Man and we are men becoming Gods, the Creator-creature distance is narrowed and is ultimately destined to be eliminated.
What are the ethical effects of LSM’s deification dogma? Witness Lee knew how to incite a congregation; he used his rhetorical skills to promote deification, saying, “We may be able to say that we ‘become
like God’ in life & nature, but
do we have the boldness to say that we ‘become God’ in life & nature? ...Have you not been born of man? Then are you not man?...In the same way,
since we are born of God...are we not God?...Since we are born of God,
we may say and even we should say that we are God in life and nature but not in the Godhead.”
33 After such messages, hordes of young people spilled into the streets of Anaheim, CA., declaring “I am God! I am God!” They wakened residents and disturbed neighbors. However, it is doubtful that anyone was convinced that these trainees were being deified! Moreover, most observers were unimpressed by the ethical impact of LSM’s deification dogma. Will the long-term ethical effects of LSM’s deification dogma be any better?
Nigel Tomes,
Toronto, CANADA
May, 2016
Notes: Thanks to those commenting on earlier drafts. The author alone is responsible for the contents of this piece. The views expressed here are solely the author’s and should not be attributed to any believers, elders, co-workers or churches he is associated with.
0. Witness Lee, Living a Life According to the High Peak of God's Revelation, Ch. 5, Sect. 2 (emphasis. added)
1. “We in the local churches hold that man may become God in God's salvation,” says LSM’s Kerry Robichaux, adding, “We are persuaded by our study of the Word of God and by our understanding of God's economy. We are also confirmed by the ancient testimony of the church.” [Kerry S. Robichaux, Truth Concerning the Ultimate Goal of God's Economy, Ch. 1, Sect. 10]
2. Michael Horton, The Christian Faith: A Systematic Theology for Pilgrims on the Way, p.
3. Daniel L. Migliore, Faith Seeking Understanding: An Introduction to Christian Theology, 3rd ed. p.
4. Joseph A. Burgess, Jeffrey Gros, Growing Consensus: Church Dialogues in the United States, 1962-1991, Vol. 1, p. 359
5. Donald Fairbairn, Eastern Orthodoxy through Western Eyes, pp. 74-75 (emphasis added)
6. Fritz Ridenour, So What's the Difference? p. 64 (emphasis added)
7. Donald Fairbairn, Eastern Orthodoxy through Western Eyes, p. 76
8. Kelly M. Kapic, & Bruce L. McCormack, Mapping Modern Theology: A Thematic & Historical Introduction, p. 285
9. James D. G. Dunn, Neither Jew Nor Greek: A Contested Identity, p. 822
10. [Blank]
11. Douglas M. Beaumont (ed.) Evangelical Exodus: Evangelical Seminarians & Their Paths to Rome, p. note 32 (emphasis added)
12. Paul L. Gavrilyuk, “The Retrieval of Deification: How a Once-despised Archaism became an Ecumenical Disideratum,” Modern Theology, Vol. 25:4 (Oct. 2009) p. 653
13. Fritz Ridenour, So What's the Difference? p. 65
14. Donald Fairbairn, Eastern Orthodoxy through Western Eyes, p. 92
15. [Stanley N. Gundry, James J. Stamoolis & J. I. Packer, Three Views on Eastern Orthodoxy & Evangelicalism, p. 39 (emphasis added)]
16. Nicholas Bamford, Deified Person: A Study of Deification in Relation to Person & Christian Becoming, (2011) p. 154 (emphasis added)
17. Ross Anderson, Understanding Your Mormon Neighbor: A Quick Christian Guide ..., p.
18. Mormonism 2010 Handbook on Mormonism, p. 404 (emphasis added)
19. Mormonism 2010 Handbook on Mormonism, p. 404
20. [Blank]
21. LDS President Lorenzo Snow often referred to this couplet as having been revealed to him by inspiration during the Nauvoo period of the church. See, for example, Deseret Weekly, 3 November 1894, 610; Deseret Weekly, 8 October 1898, 513; Deseret News, 15 June 1901, 177; and Journal History of the Church, Historical Department, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Salt Lake City, 20 July 1901, p. 4. See also “’As man is, God once was; as God is, man may become.’ God is a deified Man; man’s deification depends on the Mormon sacraments [Mormon baptism, etc].” [Patrick W. Carey, Joseph T. Lienhard, “Joseph Smith Jr. (1805-1844)” Biographical Dict. of Christian Theologians, p. 470]
22. Mormonism 2010 Handbook on Mormonism, p. 404
23. Susan Wolverton, Having Visions: Book of Mormon Translated & Exposed in Plain English, p. 107
24. See for e.g. Terryl Givens, The Latter-day Saint Experience in America, p. 111
25. Mauro Properzi, Mormonism & the Emotions: Analysis of LDS Scriptural Texts, p. 70
26. David L. Rowe, I Love Mormons: A New Way to Share Christ with Latter-day Saints, p. 56 (emphasis original)
27. Daniel K. Judd, “The Fortunate Fall of Adam & Eve,” in No Weapon Shall Prosper: New Light on Sensitive Issues, ed. Robert L. Millet (Religious Studies Center, BYU; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2011), 297–328.
28. Daniel K. Judd, “The Fortunate Fall of Adam & Eve,” in No Weapon Shall Prosper: New Light on Sensitive Issues
29. Witness Lee, Life-study of 1 & 2 Sam., pp. 203-204
30. [Blank]
31. Mauro Properzi, Mormonism & the Emotions: Analysis of LDS Scriptural Texts, p. 70
32. Robert Klingenberg, Modern Christianity Corrupted, p.
33. W. Lee, Move of God in Man, Message 2, pp. 20-21, (emphasis added).
---------------------------------------------------------
-