LSM’s Deification Doctrine—Biblical or Blasphemous? Nigel Tomes

[Cal]

Here is what I think is an intelligent question.

How does one become God in life and nature but not the Godhead? What part of God is not Godhead? How can anything truly be God but not be the Godhead? Is there some small corner of God that is not the Godhead?

Bottom line: If it's God, then it's the Godhead. And if it's not the Godhead, then it's not God.

There is no way to "be God" and not be the Godhead.

Isn't that "doing the math?"

Also, claiming one can be God but not the Godhead opens the door wide to claims that Jesus was God but not Godhead.

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Sheepdawg

So when the apostle John states that "what we will be has not yet appeared" (other translations have it rendered as "what we will be has not yet been manifested"..), do you, in your mind, believe that what he is actually saying is "what we will be is still heavily shrouded in mystery" or "what we will be is impossible to know and cannot be known"?

Come on dawg, you're pullin a Li Changshou on me bro. Don't be that way! You're doing the same thing Witness did when he engaged in that silly rhetoric of "how many life giving Spirits are there?!". You're being either theologically naive, or just begging the question as far as you can beg it. Either way it ain't pretty.

"What we will be" is somewhat shrouded in mystery, at least as far as what we know from the Gospels and the writings of the early apostles. The closest we get is probably found in a chapter you should be very familiar with - 1 Corinthians 15. The apostle Paul relates how we will "all be transformed" and given a "spiritual body". (Gk: ψυχικός ψυχικός) This, of course, is at the time of our resurrection. Our Lord Jesus has been resurrected and became our forerunner in receiving a spiritual body - And THIS, by the way, is the actual meaning of "the last Adam became a life-giving spirit". (a discussion for another day!) This gives us our best description of "what we will be like"....like it or not.

But, let's not get too far off the beaten path of the LSM's Deification Doctrine. According to Lee's later teachings, and those apparently espoused by the Blended brothers, we are actually becoming God in life and nature during our physical, earthly lives. As so many other's have point out here, the scriptures do not support such a notion. "Partaking of the divine nature" is NOT becoming the divine nature, or life as it were. "Shall be like him" is NOT becoming him during our time on earth. You can't provide scriptures to support such a notion because there just ain't any to be found.

I really don't know what it is you really think, but it certainly looks like you've never really considered (or maybe you choose not to mull very deeply over these things, I don't know) that when a grain of wheat falls into the ground (and dies), and then sprouts and shoots back up again to become the full-bodied cereal, the grains that it produces are EXACTLY the same as the original. They are not just 'like' the original grain, they are LIKE the original grain! Nothing more, nothing less! In Life. In Nature. Period.

No you obviously don't know what it is I really think....and how could you from one post that contained just a couple of verses and three short paragraphs! (sorry it was late and I was falling asleep at the keyboard). Interesting that you used the "grain of wheat falls into the ground and dies" analogy - that is the exact same analogy that Paul used in 1 Corinthians 15. Of course Paul expanded and expounded upon this (using the analogy of earthly and heavenly bodies). Yes the grain that the seed produces are exactly the same as the original, but this is something they BECOME at the end of a process, and this is what is referred to by the apostle John in 1 John 3 and also by the apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 15. Now what Peter was referring to in 2 Peter 1:4 ("Partakers of the divine nature") is something related our current disposition here in our earthly life - the here and now - which is why he mentions "all things that pertain to life and godliness" in the preceding verse (vr 3).

And Jesus IS from our species. He IS of the human race. He IS a genuine human being. He IS a man in every way conceivable! And He IS also absolutely God! He IS our great God and savior! (Titus 2:13).

Actually Jesus came to die for our species - rightly noted by Charles Wesley in that familiar hymn - "And bled for Adam’s helpless race". No he is NOT a man in every way conceivable - that would mean that he became sinful. You did get the great God and savior part right.

He died. He fell into the ground.

Right. But we have not yet. Keep that in mind. But we have a hope, and every dawg has his day.


-

[aron]

Originally Posted by Igzy

How does one become God in life and nature but not the Godhead? What part of God is not Godhead? How can anything truly be God but not be the Godhead? Is there some small corner of God that is not the Godhead?

Bottom line: If it's God, then it's the Godhead. And if it's not the Godhead, then it's not God.

And that's where the disclaimers come in: "We're becoming EXACTLY like God*"

(*Well, not exactly. Not in the Godhead. Not as an object of worship. That would be heretical.)

But God doesn't have disclaimers, and partialities. There aren't "baby Gods" and "acting Gods"; not in this age. And if there are, in fact "levels" or "degrees of God-hood" in another age, Jesus was pretty specific: "Don't waste your time with empty speculation. Take care of each other. Don't presume anything." See e.g. "What is that to you? You follow Me." in John 21. I could cite another half-dozen verses.

Originally Posted by Igzy

There is no way to "be God" and not be the Godhead.

Isn't that "doing the math?"

Also, claiming one can be God but not the Godhead opens the door wide to claims that Jesus was God but not Godhead.

Math is an exercise in logic. If A = B, and B = C, then A = C. And so on. If the Word was God, and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, most of us agree that this means that Jesus was God incarnate. And Jesus Himself used this methodology: "If the Christ was the seed of David, then how did David in spirit call Him Lord, saying the LORD said to my Lord, sit at my right hand..."

Or how about this for logic: "Oh no! Now we've seen God, and we're going to die!!!" Hey dummy, didn't the angel just promise us a child? How are we going to have a child if we're dead? Calm down. Relax and take a deep breath. (cf Judges 13)

But the consensus of the flock is a safeguard for letting our logic take us beyond what's been clearly stated, or even inferred. Let me follow with an example of carrying logic too far.

"If Mary is the mother of Jesus (e.g. 'How then does the mother of my Lord visit me' in Luke 1:43), and Jesus is God, then how can we not say that Mary is the Mother of God?" Um, sorry but if God is without beginning ("from everlasting to everlasting You are God" [Psa 90:2]) then it doesn't make sense for me that God has a mother. And suffice it to say that I'm not alone in this opinion.

Ultimately, theosis as an idea in the LC rests on the fact that Lee said it. Here's LC logic: There is only one apostle per age (oriental culture, more than logic). Therefore whatever the 'apostle' says is right. So if Lee taught theosis, then it is true. Who are you to question the apostle?!? Surely your heart is dark and rebellious!

That is the LC logic.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by aron

Ultimately, theosis as an idea in the LC rests on the fact that Lee said it. Here's LC logic: There is only one apostle per age (oriental culture, more than logic). Therefore whatever the 'apostle' says is right. So if Lee taught theosis, then it is true. Who are you to question the apostle?!? Surely your heart is dark and rebellious!

That is the LC logic.

Right, and as I've said in other ways, you can either think Lee was an apostle who should not be questioned, or you can objectively analyze his teachings. But you cannot do both. The only way to objectively analyze what Lee taught is to assume he was not such an apostle. Otherwise, the psychological pressure to agree with him will interfere with your reasoning ability.

This fact, by the way, is a sound reason to refrain from bestowing "apostle" status on any Christian since the earliest age of the church.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by aron

"If Mary is the mother of Jesus (e.g. 'How then does the mother of my Lord visit me' in Luke 1:43), and Jesus is God, then how can we not say that Mary is the Mother of God?"

Um, sorry but if God is without beginning ("from everlasting to everlasting You are God" [Psa 90:2]) then it doesn't make sense for me that God has a mother. And suffice it to say that I'm not alone in this opinion.

DO THE MATH?!?

This is absolutely the best example we have from those who love to DO THE MATH and add fallen ideas to the Word of God. What do we get when we "do our math," we get Mary worship. "Oh but it makes so much sense." Being raised Cat'lic I have dealt with this kind of distorted "math" my whole life.

Perhaps my favorite SheepDawg would like to reconsider his comment.