[zeek]

Originally Posted by aron

Well, it seems that the Scylla and Charybdis here, the two sides on which we can founder, are to say, "It is so clear to me", as WL did, or to say "nobody can understand this; it's unknowable", as we might be tempted to do.

Obviously we don't know all the oral discussion that surrounded this epistle. But we have the commentary of those who were only a few generations removed, at most, and were still privy to some of the accompanying oral discussions, i.e., "What the apostle meant when he wrote to the Corinthians, was this..." And it seems WL deliberately ignored this, and the accompanying humility of only having your logic and the text at hand. How little we know, and understand, even with the ancients to guide us! And how much less when we spurn them as guides!

But I would rather like to interpose another interpretive grid, here, and that is the idea of literary antecedent. If Paul was going to introduce such a notion, that Jesus Christ became the Holy Spirit in resurrection, don't you think he would point to scriptural precedent for it? This was, after all, "the people of the book"; all the time you got, "as the scripture says", or "that the scriptures might be fulfilled"... don't you think the prophets would have intimated the incarnated Messiah becoming the Holy Spirit, more than just the spices mixed with oil in Exodus 25, the significance of which anointing ointment, apparently, Paul never picked up on?

So what, if anything did Paul, use as a reference for this revelation of the processed Jesus Christ? Jesus had publicly taught, "It is the Spirit that gives life, the flesh profits nothing." Everybody knew of the breath of God bringing life, from Genesis onward. Surely Paul was aware of the failure of the flesh and the hope of life in the Spirit! After Corinthians, probably, Paul wrote Romans, with its great passages on the law of the Spirit giving life... (if I remember my chronology correctly).

Instead, it seems that WL argued that Paul had these oracular "squirrel!" moments which were embedded in the accompanying text, and missed by everyone, including Paul (!) and then 2,000 years later along comes the "last apostle" and puts the jigsaw puzzle together. And voila, God is processed, before our very eyes. And on sale, too, for merely twelve dollars. Step right up, folks, get your revelation, while it lasts. Only at the Living Stream Ministry book room.

Delightfully argued, aron. In swerving Mr. Lee was not unlike the rest of us. He did admit, [as repeatedly recorded in his Life Studies and pamphlets] that christology and the trinity were mysteries. But, then he argued with such conviction for his position that one got the impression that he had unraveled the mystery with absolute certainty. No, he was not so different than the rest of us it seems, except for his vehemence, his claim to be MOTA, and the way he administered his MOTA authority. I don't wish judge him based on his position on an ambiguous Bible verse. My problem with Lee had more to do with how he held his putative position and how that was affecting me and others I cared about. As I'm sure you are aware, he and his followers sue people for disagreeing with them. I was labeled a negative brother by the elder of my local church because I wouldn't support one of Lee's lawsuits against Christians.