(excerpt)
There actually is evidence of this sort of post-mortem activity in Jewish belief. For example, Rabbi Akiba, an early second century Jewish Rabbi, had this "detail" to offer on our exaltation.
"The Holy One, blessed be He, will in the future call all of the pious by their names, and give them a cup of exilir of life in their hands so that they should live and endure forever…And the Holy One, blessed be He, will in the future reveal to all the pious in the world to come the ineffable Name with which new heavens and a new earth can be created, so that all of them should be able to create new worlds…The Holy One, blessed be He, will give every pious three hundred and forty worlds in inheritance in the World to Come."[184 Midrash Alpha Beta diR. Akiba, BhM 3:32, quoted in Ralph Patai, The Messiah Texts (Detroit:Wayne State University Press, 1979), 251. Also cited in Bickmore, 245.]
One saying from the Talmud implies that man may be given the ability to create life:
Raba said: "If the righteous desired it, they could be creators, for it is written, But your iniquities have distinguished between yourselves and God."[Raba understands mabadilim in the sense of 'draw a distinction'. But for their iniquities, their power would equal God's, and they could create a world.] Raba created a man, and sent him to R. Zera. R. Zera spoke to him, but received no answer. Thereupon he said unto him:'Thou art a creature of the magicians. Return to thy dust.'(Sanhedrin 65b)
Another Talmudic saying speaks of man as God's equal, sharing with him the ruler ship over the world.
Even as it has been taught: One was for Himself and one for David: this is R. Akiba's view. R. Jose protested to him: Akiba, how long will thou profane the Shechinah?[By asserting that a human being sit beside Him.](Sanhedrin 38b)
Regarding the sayings above, Erich Fromm comments that,
"It is obvious that neither R.Akiba's view that the messiah sits on a throne beside God nor Raba's view that if only man were entirely pure he could create life, like God, are in any way official views of Judaism. But the very fact that two of the greatest rabbinical masters could express such 'blasphemies' shows the existence of a tradition related to the main current of Jewish thought: man, though being mortal and beset by the conflict between his godly and his earthly aspects, nevertheless is an open system and can develop to the point of sharing God's power and capacity for creation... Man is seen as being created in God's likeness, with a capacity for an evolution of which the limits are not set." (Erich Fromm, You Shall be as Gods (Holt, Rinehart and Winston: New York, 1966) 68-70.0)
So we see that the extra features in LDS theosis finds some level of support from a second century Jewish Rabbi. Does the Bible detail this doctrine? Certainly not. And this is all well and good for Latter-day Saints since we don't presuppose a requirement of sola scriptura. The extra features may or not be biblical in the sense that they are detailed in the Bible, though the Bible may indirectly allude to them. Latter-day Saints are ok with this, so long as the Bible doesn't explicitly forbid them. Evangelicals, however, by their own admission, cannot accept any doctrine not found in the Bible. Therefore, the convoluted nature of this criterion (i.e, "That's not in my Bible") is clearly in the Evangelical arena, not ours, and the Evangelical tendency to assume a valid argument against the LDS in these instances, is attributed to their tendency to read LDS doctrines under an Evangelical model of sola scriptura. They point out that some LDS doctrines don't meet their standards (being explicitly biblical), and then reinforce this point as if it carries some meaning in an LDS context. But since LDS are not bound by the Evangelical criterion, we remain unimpressed with these arguments. Even so, LDS apologists still try to draw the Bible in for support, which is the whole point of my book.
In the end, this is what it boils down to. Evangelicals can respect the LDS position for what it is or they can presume to read Evangelical presuppositions, such as sola scriptura, into LDS thought, for the purposes of creating "inconsistencies." If they persist in the latter, they will forever be tearing up a straw man.
In fact, this was the very first temptation that was presented to Man: to share this Godlike, if not Godly, ability to create something out of almost nothing
Theodore Askidas, Bishop of Caesarea (ca. 540 AD) went so far as to suggest that those who are deified will join in creating other worlds.[In Brian E. Daley, The Hope of the Early Church (Oxford University Press 1991): 189-90, with note 65, page 260; also in Daley,“What did ‘Origenism’ mean in the Sixth Century?”, in Origeniana Sexta, ed. Gilles Dorival et al (Leuven 1995): 635; also in Aloys Grillmeier, Christ in Christian Tradition, Vol. 2, Part 2: 409.]
Over one hundred years ago J. D. Davis wrote an intriguing article on the possibilities of sanctification after death. He concluded by writing:“who shall say that God may not safely go on creating new beings whom the host of those who are already perfected by trial and experience shall teach and train, thus filling up the great universe of God, whose limits no human eye has ever yet discovered? Nay, more, may he not go on forever enlarging and forever peopling this universe with happy beings?”[J. D. Davis,“Sanctification after Death,” Bibliotheca Sacra 50 (1893): 544-8, at page 548.]
Jesus taught that “he that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do”(John 14.12). Thomas Oden remarks that this is “one of the most astonishing statements reported of Jesus.”[Thomas C. Oden, Life in the Spirit. Systematic Theology Volume Three (San Francisco 1992): 62.]
May we not ask: If the redeemed are to be enthroned with Christ, and do greater works than even Christ Himself did, is it not possible to conclude that they will at least also do the works of Christ—create additional worlds as He had done, and is still doing? May they not people those new worlds, and teach their inhabitants, and ultimately redeem those who are willing to keep the commandments, and live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God? Maximus the Confessor wrote that “all that God is, except for an identity in ousia [substance], one becomes when one is deified by grace.”[Quoted in Jouko Martikainen,“Man’s Salvation: Deification or Justification?”, Sobornost 7.3 (London 1976): 180-192, at page 185.]
Philip A. Khairallah presents some interesting thoughts on the above ideas. He is a priest of the Melkite Rite, of the Holy Orthodox Church of Antioch, Alexandria and Jerusalem, in communion with the Church of Rome. He cites II Peter 1.4, and Athanasius, and then writes that “the one and only aim of human life on earth is union with God and deification.”“Marriage is eternal….[and] is another channel God has given to us for our deification.” He writes that “parents have a responsibility to their children in aiding them to grow in faith and wisdom, to achieve responsible adulthood, so that they too may seek their deification.”[Philip A. Khairallah,”The Sanctification of Life,” Emmanuel 96 (1990): 326, 395, 396-7.]
Cardinal Danielou wrote that one of the two purposes of creation is the “divinization of man.”[Jean Danielou, Christ and Us (New York 1962; 1st Paris 1961): 62.]
No comments:
Post a Comment