Quote:
Originally Posted by UntoHim
Witness Lee flat out claimed that "the Father was called the Son" (and by extension he claimed the Father became the Son). He also went further to claim that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, "became the Life-Giving Spirit" (and by extension he claimed that Jesus Christ became the Holy Spirit). These claims/teachings/doctrines involve the very nature of the Godhead, and thus they involve matters that touch the very foundational core of the Christian faith.
So, back to 1 Corinthians 15:45 we come.
|
And this is the reason that a bunch of armchair theologians are busy working through Lee's nonsense. So far, going back at least to Walter Martin's complaints and most of what has gone on since, there has been a lot who have over-labeled, or have simply labeled (or at least supplied insufficient information on why the label applies). Over at the Bereans forum, Justyn just goes into his description of that alternate form of modalism. But it does not seem to fit (at least to me) and he won't take the time to really show how he thinks Lee's theology fits it. I think Walter Martin did better, but my recollection of the audio was that while he seemed (to me) to accurately point to what was wrong, he didn't describe the error sufficiently for those who might not already have thought through it.
In other words, he correctly pointed to one or more of Lee's errors. His somewhat blunt approach may have seemed cold to some, but he was right. But for those who don't understand the theology, especially when you have been constantly fed an aberrant version of theology, someone needs to slow down and show why, for example, 1 Cor 15:45 does not say Jesus became the Holy Spirit. In fact 1 Cor 15:45 makes no reference to the Holy Spirit.
Let the actual Word of God be the revelation. I really don't need to know much theology to step back from that passage and see that Lee was wrong. In fact, if he was right, then he should have milked it as evidence that we are all becoming God since Paul has used Jesus after the resurrection as the example of what our bodies become in resurrection — the Holy Spirit.
Yeah. Right.
What the Bible actually teaches us is wonderful. But compared to the world of over-adjectivized, uber-spiritual phrases found in message after message by Lee, the actual Bible seems dull. It is more about real life in the real world lived in this age as it would if there had been no fall. There wasn't a lot of meetings in the garden. God came along once a day. And it was good. When he chastised Israel, it was about idolatry and their abuse of there fellow man, especially the "marginal" — widows, orphans, aliens among them. It was not for having dull meetings. Sitting in pews. Hearing one man speak.
That last one is funny to me. We all wax so nostalgic about everyone speaking in the meetings. But I would rather have one to three really say something with meaning and application than get stirred-up over an excited bunch of popcorn kernels popping up to shout little exciting snippets that do not prepare me for my day(s) to come. It is exciting. It seems special. But I think Paul was right when he said to be in order. And the only order in all of that would be the rare occasion when an elder actually stands up and tells someone to sit down. And that is the part we now hate the most.
And while one chapter earlier in 1 Corinthians, I do not think that Paul meant what the LRC is busy doing (or was busy doing pre- ministry station meetings) when he said "all can prophesy." Once again, the context speaks against it. The reading we seem to like for that one sentence is just to much "squirrel" to be understood in that way.
Prophets prophecy. Prophets are those with the gift (see chapter 12). And despite Paul's wish that all could prophesy, he did not declare that all have the gift. Just that if they are all going to do one thing, it would be better to prophesy than to speak in tongues. (Context). And then two chapters later, telling them to stop having three-ring circus meetings, he places limits on things. A few songs. A few tongues, but only if there is someone there who speaks the language. Two or three to prophesy (speak). And since prophets prophesy, then they are the only "all" who can prophesy. Those with other gifts are not suddenly given carte blanche to go beyond their gifts. To read it otherwise is to have yet another "squirrel" moment.