I'm going to briefly sketch out what I understand to be a proper Reformed way to speak about theosis, mostly as a mental exercise and also for feedback. So, here goes:
Man is designed by nature to be the image and glory of God. He reveals, represents, and rules for God in creation. Every facet of his constitution in body and soul was crafted for this end. This is his final cause, toward which his whole self organically strains.
Imaging God is not a static state from the beginning but man's proper end. Man begins as the image of God, but incompletely developed, as a child begins as a man but not a mature man. The full glory of imaging God is to the whole man what physical adulthood is to the body.
This end of man is natural but not attainable within nature as such. Human nature is not self-enclosed, but is designed to reach outward and upward toward filial union with God in His Son through His Spirit. Man is naturally incomplete without a supernatural union.
This is not particularly strange. Just as the body needs food from outside itself to achieve its natural maturity, so the whole man needs the Trinity to achieve its natural supernatural maturity (𝘯𝘰𝘵 a typo).
For reasons known in full only to God, the perfected end of man is separated from his original state by a rather drastic border, a hard line between unglorified and glorified man. Even this, nonetheless, belongs to man's nature, like metamorphosis to a butterfly.
The full glory of man is his confident rule over creation in holiness, justice, immortality, power, wisdom, beauty, and every divine virtue for which God has fitted the nature of man at its absolute maximum capacity.
However, the metamorphosis dividing glorified from unglorified man is impossible for nature "in the raw." Human nature strives and longs for it, but it requires the presence of the Spirit, the incarnation of the Son, and the filial love of the Father.
Only when man is united by the Spirit within him to the flesh of the proper and natural Son of the Father to share in His place and inheritance can he finally realize all that he was made for and become a creature that, if we saw him now, we would be strongly temped to worship.
This is where we could speak of theosis, not an alteration of, addition to, or replacement for man's proper, original nature but the ultimate transfiguration of his state into that for which his whole being has always been designed as the great, bright, and glorious image of God.
This is the best I can do in a few minutes on Twitter, I think. I'm not 100% satisfied with some parts, but the general contours seem right to me. Open to feedback, of course.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with ℭ𝔞𝔩𝔢𝔟 𝔖𝔪𝔦𝔱𝔥

ℭ𝔞𝔩𝔢𝔟 𝔖𝔪𝔦𝔱𝔥 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @CalebDixonSmith

8 Jun
My "worldview" (𝘤𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘦) in a handful of quotes:
"Everyone should eat and drink, and find enjoyment in all his toil, for these things are a gift from God." — Solomon, the wisest man ever
"There is no such thing on earth as an uninteresting subject; the only thing that can exist is an uninterested person." — G. K. Chesteron
Read 8 tweets
21 May
I wrote these 4 years ago, so cut me some slack, but they're still worth reposting.
Theologians answer: "Do you renounce the Devil and all his works?"
Athanasius: The Son of God became a Devil-renouncing man that I might renounce the Devil as a son of God.
Augustine: God grant me to renounce the Devil, but not yet.

Aquinas: I answer that I do indeed renounce the Devil and all of his works, just as Augustine says, “God grant me to renounce the Devil.”
Read 24 tweets
9 Oct 20
A thread: In John 6, Jesus says, "All the Father gives me will come to me; and him who comes to me I will not cast out," and "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him." These verses take high place in a common argument that the passage teaches most of TULIP.
No one can come unless the Father draws? Total depravity.
The Father gives people to the Son before they can even come to Him? Unconditional election.
All of these given people will come? Irresistible grace.
Jesus will never cast them out? Perseverance of the saints.

Well...
In one sense, this passage certainly does provide material from which these points of Calvinism might be legitimately inferred. However, we should note that the context in John and the overall passage indicates a different primary referent.
Read 16 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(