Quote:
Originally Posted by HBJ
One of the theological problems with the Local Church is being accused of modalism. A website I found says "Modalism and Monarchianism are two false views of the nature of God and of Jesus Christ that appeared in the second and third centuries AD. A modalist views God as one Person instead of three Persons and believes that the Father, Son, and Spirit are simply different modes or forms of the same divine Person."
Now I did hear Brother Lee say "Jesus became the life - giving Spirit"
"Became" has modalist connotations. But Scripture is plain: God exists in three co-eternal, co-equal Persons. What do you all think?
|
This subject comes up on this site in periodic cycles. Last time I responded with my views on the “ trinity” issue, it was relegated to the alt site. But, since you asked what I think, I thought I would opine.
It seems absurd to me to speak about the scripture as the word of God, and then to hold to a caveat of trinitarianism doctrine as truth. The scripture does not contain teachings on God being triune, so this is a man made position that will continuously be argued from man made positions, which divide the people of God.
If WL really recovered the local church other than just in name, it would have resulted in the saints speaking similar to the teachings of Paul. In all of Paul’s epistles, he opens with a greeting along the line of Grace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus. Paul speaks often of the God of our Lord Jesus, the God and Father of our Lord Jesus, God who raised Christ Jesus from the dead- this is the ministry, the thought of Paul. In other words, the speaking and teaching of the church WL tried to say he recovered would have to be filled with this kind of content. Trinitarianism came centuries after this, and has since been nothing but a source of division, fighting, and mockery- it has gained nothing for the testimony.
The thought of trinitarianism is really that the scripture did an inadequate job of presenting the truth of God and needs outside help. You can see from the various replies on this post that it is a whirlwind of confusion. As if there is something wrong with sticking to the NT presentation of One God, the Father, as Paul so succinctly states to the Corinthians, and that Jesus is the Christ, the son of the Father, and that God raised him from the dead, and set him at His right hand as Lord over all. The church should be filled with praises to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus, and prayers to our God and Father- our language and thought should match that of the apostle Paul, who never included a teaching that God is triune! Is there something wrong with sticking to the NT verbiage? The triune god, processed triune god, fully god fully man, god-man, god-men, god the son, god the Holy Spirit, god became a man so man, etc. are not the words of the NT, so why are they ours? The revelation, the thought given to us in the NT is that Jesus is the son of God, sent to die for our sins and that God raised him from the dead. This is the gospel, and the content of the church. Peter was not given the revelation that Jesus is God, that God is triune and on this rock Jesus would build his church.
A recovery of the church, a return to the truth, would stick to the simple speaking given in scripture- WL in “recovering” the church, brought it back to only the 4th century and then dumped his load of his personal form of trinitarianism refuse, which wholly polluted the whole concept of recovery. A true recovery would have resulted in the saints taking the sweet scriptural revelation of God our Father and Jesus, the anointed son, bringing us into a similar position as sons. There is a reason-from God himself, why this was what was presented in the NT. Trinitarianism has altered the gospel, the understanding of the scripture, appreciation of God our Father, and really, the important relation we have in and through Christ Jesus in our relation to God the Father.