Modalism

[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?

[Trapped]

I've tried to figure out their position on this in the past and given up. In the very same paper the LC will say the Father, Son and Spirit are eternally distinct and then in the next paragraph stalwartly affirm that they are each other.

[Sons to Glory!]

Personally, I just steer clear of most conversations about the nature of the Triune God. I don't think I've ever participated in a satisfactory and profitable conversation about that! Human beings exist in a physical universe consisting of three dimensions (plus time and the psychological and spiritual realms), and I suppose God occupies many more dimensions. So what human can ascertain this kind of limitless Being!?

One can present a plethora of verses supporting the three aspect of the Almighty, while a multitude of scripture same can also be stated for the one aspect. Where does that leave us? If I could evoke our moderator's (UntoHim) wisdom from another thread and apply it here, what does knowing this do for us practically? Not much from my standpoint!

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Trapped

I've tried to figure out their position on this in the past and given up. In the very same paper the LC will say the Father, Son and Spirit are eternally distinct and then in the next paragraph stalwartly affirm that they are each other.

I concluded long ago that the Bible "contradicts" itself, saying God is one, yet revealing 3 distinct identities. So I decided long ago that I could know God and yet not completely understand God.

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Personally, I just steer clear of most conversations about the nature of the Triune God. I don't think I've ever participated in a satisfactory and profitable conversation about that! Human beings exist in a physical universe consisting of three dimensions (plus time and the psychological and spiritual realms), and I suppose God occupies many more dimensions. So what human can ascertain this kind of limitless Being!?

Me too! The only "argument" or discussion about God that I think is valuable is believing in the deity of Christ.

I have long believed that the modalism accusations are bogus and inconsequential. If we deem these charges of modalism against the Recovery are essential, then we must also view the tri-theism charges against Catholics and others as equally essential.

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Personally, I just steer clear of most conversations about the nature of the Triune God.

Bro, I haven't seen you steer clear yet! And why would anyone want to? What could be more significant than going back and forth about the nature of God? Please don't tell me that you still subscribe to the ole "doctrines don't matter, we only care for life!" garbage taught in the Local Church. The little sect of the Local Church of Witness Lee is one of the most doctrine soaked religions on earth. They've got a doctrine for just about everything. The problem is that most of the doctrines have nothing to do with what is taught in the Bible.

I don't think I've ever participated in a satisfactory and profitable conversation about that!

Sorry to hear that. Maybe you can just watch from the seats on this one, would that work better for you?

One can present a plethora of verses supporting the three aspect of the Almighty, while a multitude of scripture same can also be stated for the one aspect. Where does that leave us? Not much from my standpoint! If I could evoke our moderator's (UntoHim) wisdom from another thread and apply it here, what does knowing this do for us practically?

Where does that leave us? Well, hopefully it leaves us with a plethora of verses and a multitude of Scripture...sounds pretty good to me! I don't think the term "aspects" is theologically accurate...but I'll give that some thought and get back to you on that.

What does knowing what do for us practically? Do you mean knowing about God? Knowing about his nature, character, wisdom, righteousness, sovereignty and love? I couldn't think of any better practical knowledge to have!
-

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Sorry to hear that. Maybe you can just watch from the seats on this one, would that work better for you?

Just so you know, my short answer really is just like your's over on the "difference between soul & spirit" thread, whether you see that or not - that is, what's the practicality dude? In my opinion, we'll never zero in (aka "corner Jello") on this 3-in-1 or 1-in-3 or some combination thereof nature of God thing, so therefore there is zero profit in my book in all the back-n-forth. So yes, I'm pretty given to sit this out if that's what's going on. But you go ahead and try to have fun with it - I'll have more fun watching on the sidelines . . . . (and who know, maybe after 2,000 years of trying, you'll be the one to actually get it)

[aron]

Originally Posted by Trapped

In the very same paper the LC will say the Father, Son and Spirit are eternally distinct and then in the next paragraph stalwartly affirm that they are each other.

It's simple - Christ is the Father (God made flesh) now as the Spirit in you, crying Abba Father back to Him. Since you also are the Father (not as an object of worship, though- that would be heretical), because you are the Body of Christ (remember, the Church is Christ) then you can see here the Father, in the Father, crying out to the Father. It's very clear.

And not only, but since Jesus prayed that we'd all be one even as he's one with the Father, then Trapped is really aron the Father and vice versa...

...but seriously, true religion is more about what James said, to visit those who need help. This is in accord with Jesus' life and teachings, and is to follow Jesus, and the apostles. Not disputations over words and logical leaps which go to the realm of rapidly diminishing returns.

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by aron

It's simple - Christ is the Father (God made flesh) now as the Spirit in you, crying Abba Father back to Him. Since you also are the Father (not as an object of worship, though- that would be heretical), because you are the Body of Christ (remember, the Church is Christ) then you can see here the Father, in the Father, crying out to the Father. It's very clear.

And not only, but since Jesus prayed that we'd all be one even as he's one with the Father, then Trapped is really aron the Father and vice versa...

...but seriously, true religion is more about what James said, to visit those who need help. This is in accord with Jesus' life and teachings, and is to follow Jesus, and the apostles. Not disputations over words and logical leaps which go to the realm of rapidly diminishing returns.

Thanks for a hearty chuckle, aron!

[OBW]

Originally Posted by HBJ

One of the theological problems with the LC is being accused of modalism.

The theological problem is not that they are accused of modalism, but that they do espouse a form of modalism.

Yet at the same time they declare that the three are co-eternal and co-equal.

And given the complexity of what is described in the scripture that most of us have distilled into what we call the doctrine of the Trinity, it is not surprising that there are variations.

The real problem is that Lee, while believing in the doctrine of the trinity, couldn't see the use for the "three" and therefore over-argued the "One."

Now surely they are One and they are Three. And it is not entirely understood, even though we have devised a rather detailed doctrine to explain it. Go view the Lutheran Satire episode where St. Patrick tries to explain the trinity to a couple of Irish yokels. The point (well made) is that there is no simple way to understand it. So if you think you have distilled it to something "simple," you have failed and have only part of the truth (at best).

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by OBW

The theological problem is not that they are accused of modalism, but that they do espouse a form of modalism. Yet at the same time they declare that the three are co-eternal and co-equal.

This goes to a crucial point - just because a genuine Christian is taught heresy does not make them a heretic - it only makes them deceived when it comes to that particular doctrine, teaching or standing. Witness Lee taught a form of modalism, which makes him a heretic. Modalism has been condemned by the church since the earliest days, and has crept up from time to time ever since. Lee also taught a form of the orthodox doctrine of the trinity along side of the heretical (and so did a number of other heretical teachers throughout history), however it should go without saying that teaching heresy in one breath, while teaching and espousing orthodoxy in the next, in no way mitigates, much less excuses the heresy.

For centuries the genuine Christian church has taught and espoused a view of the Trinity which holds that "God is one being in three Persons". Heretics like Witness Lee usually end up doing one or both of the issues addressed in the Athanasian Creed: "Confounding the persons" and "Dividing the substance" of God. Most orthodox Christian teachers, scholars and apologist would tell you that Lee's "processed Triune God" teaching is heretical because it is a form of modalism in which the Persons of God are confounded and/or the substance of God is divided.

I think the late Nabeel Quareshi does an excellent job of "explaining the Trinity" in this short YouTube video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0JpwOSKRC0
-

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by aron

And not only, but since Jesus prayed that we'd all be one even as he's one with the Father, then Trapped is really aron the Father and vice versa...

Wow, you have taken inferential Leeisms into outer space!

Originally Posted by UntoHim

This goes to a crucial point - just because a genuine Christian is taught heresy does not make them a heretic - it only makes them deceived when it comes to that particular doctrine, teaching or standing.

The real problem of Lee's teachings here is not the over-emphasis of the Oneness side of theology to counteract the over-emphasis of the Threeness side of theology but the loss of our loving and obedient relationship with God as Igzy/Cal has so often posted.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by OBW

Now surely they are One and they are Three. And it is not entirely understood, even though we have devised a rather detailed doctrine to explain it. Go view the Lutheran Satire episode where St. Patrick tries to explain the trinity to a couple of Irish yokels. The point (well made) is that there is no simple way to understand it. So if you think you have distilled it to something "simple," you have failed and have only part of the truth (at best).

This silly little satire video you linked to, to me shows the absurdity of us, in our so very limited human thinking, of trying to grasp the nature of God! Yet that won't stop us from going around & around trying to "corner this Jello." And though it is impossible for us to do, that also won't stop us from declaring that someone else hasn't done a good job of cornering the Jello either. (remember, we are called "sheep" for a reason)

Originally Posted by Ohio

The real problem of Lee's teachings here is not the over-emphasis of the Oneness side of theology to counteract the over-emphasis of the Threeness side of theology but the loss of our loving and obedient relationship with God as Igzy/Cal has so often posted.

And that's a great observation! Like the study of food without actually eating it. The purpose of it all is to know this One and that He wants to have a loving relationship with us. Lee, by so much focus on the nature of the Triune God, was most likely guilty of leaving out the critical aspect of love (which, don't forget, he confessed at the end of his life). That is, God is like a giant steamroller when it comes to getting His purpose! No, He loves us and will be Our Guide, even unto death.

[Raptor]

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?

I don´t see where WL teaches modalism. 1 Cor. 15:45 says, "So also it is written, "The first Man, Adam, became a living soul." The last Adam became a life-giving spirit." (NASB). Of course, that is not the only verse in the Bible about God , but that is what that verse says. So what does it mean, and why (it seems) so few books or sermons or whatever talk about this?

What I do feel I learned very wrongly in the Recovery is the lack of emphasis in the knowledge, experience, praise, worship, fellowsip, relationship, (please add more words) with the Father. Jesus constantly refererred to the Father; Jesus said He would reveal the Father to whom He would choose to. Paul prayed to the Father all the time. As far as I can remember the Father is barely mentioned in the Recovery except for the last 15 minutes of the table meeting on Sundays. I cannot remember one single time that somebody addressed prayers to the Father in the prayer meeting or any meeting. (that is different than teaching modalism, though).

Also, I remember being taught to shy away from strongly or bolding considering God as 3 Persons, because that could lead to tritheism. WL would say that many in christianity unconciously believe there are 3 gods. So he would teach instead that we should not emphasize that they are 3 Persons, but they are rather a hypostasis, i.e. from Wikipedia "In Christian theology, a hypostasis is one of the three hypostases (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) of the Trinity". He would say that they are like the 3 feet of a stool,---that is one stool, three feet. As a hypostasis, they are supporting elements.

After leaving the Recovery, one day I think I was reading a post from somebody here in LCD, addressing the matter of how the teachings about the TG in the Reoovery depersonalized the Godhead. As I read I felt the presence of the Lord move in me and in prayer I wept and repented and came back to realize my Triune God, is three living, real, personable, dear Persons!!!!

Yes they are one and three, no earthly math or logic applies here. I do see there are "overlaps", though, many times their name or place overlaps with one another, or are "switched" for one another. How could it be surprising if there is only one God? There has to be overlap, they are one. But wait, they are also three...it´s not for analysis, it´s for extasis! It´s awesome, but rather HE is awesome!!!!

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Raptor

I don´t see where WL teaches modalism. 1 Cor. 15:45 says, "So also it is written, "The first Man, Adam, became a living soul." The last Adam became a life-giving spirit." (NASB). Of course, that is not the only verse in the Bible about God , but that is what that verse says. So what does it mean, and why (it seems) so few books or sermons or whatever talk about this?

Good points Raptor. What I can tell you from my personal experience that I didn't see where Lee taught modalism either...that is for the 20 years I sat at the man's feet. I also thought that 1 Cor. 15:45 was teaching that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, became the Holy Spirit. I believed that with my whole heart and soul. What I also believed was that Witness Lee was the only person speaking as God's oracle, and was essentially infallible when it came to the interpretation of Scripture, and because of this, I never cracked the pages of the writings of any other Christian teacher. Why would I? I had all the riches I needed right before me in those Life Studies!

Well, then a funny thing happened to me on the way to my sobriety and return to the real riches, the real high peak truths and the real Gospel. I couldn't find one notable, reputable biblical teacher, scholar or apologist (in history or contemporaries) that taught that 1 Cor 15:45 is telling us that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, became the Holy Spirit. As a matter of fact, most of these teachers, scholars and apologist taught that the apostle Paul was not making a theological statement about the Trinity at all. And the more I reviewed 1 Cor 15 IN IT'S ORIGINAL CONTEXT, became familiar with the grammatical structure of the Koine Greek, and coupled all this with the teachings of all the Scripture writing apostles, I came to the realization that Mr. Witness Lee was full of bologna (now there's a deep, articulate theological term for ya . )

**I have much more to say about all this, including answering some of the other concerns and contentions posted here, but I'm going to be out of pocket for most of the rest of the day.**
-

[Raptor]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

I also thought that 1 Cor. 15:45 was teaching that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, became the Holy Spirit...I couldn't find one notable, reputable biblical teacher, scholar or apologist (in history or contemporaries) that taught that 1 Cor 15:45 is telling us that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, became the Holy Spirit.
-

Well, to start, nowhere in the Bible does it say that Jesus became the Holy Spirit, and neither did WL say that either...1 Cor 15:45 is just one verse that points to a very important truth covered by many other verses. One way to summarize it is that the resurrected Jesus is very different than the Jesus before resurrection. Something happened to Him through death and resurrection that changed Him, it changed His "form" if you will, for a lack of a better word.

One portion that points to this change is found in John 7:37-39, "“If anyone is thirsty, let him come to Me and drink. 38 “He who believes in Me, as the Scripture said, ‘From his innermost being will flow rivers of living water.’” 39 But this He spoke of the Spirit, whom those who believed in Him were to receive; for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified." Most translations add the word "given", instead of "the Spirit was not yet, because....".

Regardless, the point here is that nobody could drink of Jesus while He was in the likeness of the flesh; He was not in a "drinkable form" if you will. What is the drinkable form? "But this He spoke of the Spirit". The Spirit is what can be drunk; so at that time was not the Holy Spirit there? Of course the Spirit was there, but nobody could drink of Him yet, it says, "those who believed in Him were to receive". The receiving, the drinking is in the future, why? The Spirit was there, yes, but not in a drinkable form, it says "the Spirit was not yet". Why was not the Spirit ready to be drunk? "Because Jesus was not yet glorified". The glorification of Jesus is related to the Spirit, His glorification "affected" the Spirit in such a way that made the Spirit, changed the Spirit into a form that is drinkable. So here it equates coming to Jesus and drinking of Him to receiving the Spirit. How can you come to Jesus and drink the Spirit? Well, because the last Adam became the life-giving Spirit.

Another portion is also found in John 20:19-22, "So when it was evening on that day, the first day of the week, and when the doors were shut where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in their midst and said to them, “Peace be with you.” 20 And when He had said this, He showed them both His hands and His side. The disciples then rejoiced when they saw the Lord. 21 So Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you; as the Father has sent Me, I also send you.” 22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit"

The doors were shut but Jesus suddenly appeared, how can this be? Because the resurrected Jesus had a different form, He could just appear even when the doors were shut, yet He still had a body with the physical signs on His hands and side. Then He spoke to them and breathed on them, and as a result they received the Holy Spirit. The receiving of the Spirit is related to the Lord´s very breath, breathing on them. How can His breathing result in them receiving the Holy Spirit? Well, because the last Adam became the life-giving Spirit.

So there are many verses that show the Lord Jesus changed His physical form of flesh into a another form in resurrection. This new form has a physical body but displays many new characteristics that indicate He is also spiritual. The resurrected Jesus

had a physical body of flesh and bones, Luke 24:39
appeared in a room with closed doors, John 20:19
breathed on His disciples and they received the Holy Spirt, John 20:22
appeared in a different form to two disciples, Mark 16:12
suddenly disappeared from the disciples after they recognized Him, Luke 24:31
came and stood in a room that had the doors locked, John 20:26
had a body with scars where Thomas could introduce his fingers and hand into, John 20:27
appeared to Mary, His diciples, the 500

How could this be? Well, because the last Adam became the life-giving Spirit.

And many other verses like 2 Cor. 3:17-18, where it is talking about Christ as Lord, and then says, "Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. 18 And we, who with unveiled faces all reflect the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into His image with intensifying glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit." And what about the verses that plainly mention "the Spirit of Jesus", and "the Spirit of Jesus Christ" (you can look them up). How could this be? Well, because the last Adam became the life-giving Spirit.

We know there is a Holy Spirit, but is the Spirit of Jesus then another Spirit, a different Spirit? Is it also divine? Are there now two divine Spirits? And what about the Spirit of Christ, and the Spirit of Jesus Christ? Are they the same? But the New Testament also mentions the Spirit of God, the Spirit of holiness, the Spirit of His Son, the Spirit of your Father, the Spirit of life, the life-giving Spirit, the Spirit, the Spirit of the Lord, the Lord Spirit, the seven Spirits of God. So how many Spirits are there? How many are divine? How many can give life? How many are Holy?

To top it off, the mark of the genuine christian faith is that "Jesus Christ is in you" 2 Cor. 13:5, "Test yourselves to see if you are in the faith; examine yourselves! Or do you not recognize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you-- unless indeed you fail the test" Is this literal? Is Jesus Christ actually inside a believer like the Bible says, or is it just figurative? How can this be? Well, because the last Adam became the life-giving Spirit.

In summary there is only one divine, Holy Spirit. This Spirit, though, could not enter man, nor impart life into man, nor regenerate man, nor indwell man until something happened, that is, that Jesus would die, resurrect, be glorified and change His form into a physical/spiritual form in resurrection. Words fail to adequately describe the event, to describe Him, but it is like through the glorificatoin of Jesus, the Holy Spirit included or added into Himself the very incarnation, human living, death, and resurrection of Christ. Now the Holy Spirit has become drinkable, He is in a form that can be received, can enter into man, can give life to man, can give man the experiences of the life of Jesus, the experiences of the reality of the cross, the living in the resurrection of Christ. Now these realities have been added to the Spirit, they were not in the Holy Spirit before, because the Spirit was not yet, because Jesus had not yet been glorified. How can all of this be? Well, because the last Adam became the life-giving Spirit.

[Ohio]

Great post Raptor.

Thanks for addressing so many of the verses that most Christians seem to ignore or try to "wish out" of the New Testament. I also refuse to reject these verses just because WL taught them, and we know he had other issues.

It seems so foolish to apply human logic and understanding to our God. Those are the arguments we hear all the time. How can God be one when Jesus prayed to the Father and the Holy Spirit descended like a dove upon Him??? How? I can't explain! Neither can I explain creation.

Neither can I explain how Jesus can appear and disappear with the disciples, and still eat food and have 5 holes in His body. How can Jesus live in me? How come the two on the road to Emmaus could not tell that Jesus was different? Wasn't He just mercilessly beaten and killed beyond recognition just a few days prior?

Jesus first instructions to the disciples after His resurrection were to "believe" and at the same time to shock all their preconceived notions of God. I am not here to reconcile "irreconcilable" truths about God. That would be a foolish impossibility. I am hear to believe God, and to believe His word.

It would really help the church of God, if we could end our binary mindset. Stop being a prisoner of two ideas -- modalism or tri-theism. The truth lies between these two extremes, yet seems to reinforce both extremes ... at times.

[Sons to Glory!]

I think last two posts by Raptor & Ohio were effectively informative, but not not commenting further . . . want to see what others have to say . . . . .

[aron]

Originally Posted by Raptor

So how many Spirits are there? How many are divine? How many can give life? How many are Holy?

How many Spirits are there? Good question. We don't know.

In the gospels, Jesus says that "Whoever is ashamed of me and my words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of them when he comes in his glory and in the glory of the Father and of the holy angels."

Here you have the glory of the Son, the Father, and the holy angels. The NT says that angels are spirits (Heb 1:14), so holy angels are holy spirits. How many holy spirits? We don't know. But why does Jesus in his proto-trinitarian formula, superimpose 'holy angels' for what we expect should be Holy Spirit? I don't know. Do you? Did Lee? Or did he ignore this inconvenient verse?

I don't have an answer, but I suspect that the writer of the Apocalypse, the disciple John, was there in the gospels and heard Jesus speak of multiple spirits thusly. When John wrote of multiple spirits before the throne of God, and going out to all the earth (Rev 1:4, 4:5, and 5:6) did his gospel experience factor in? Of course it did. How much? We don't know.

When the holy angel carried John away "in spirit", how could John both be "in spirit" and carried by a non-capital "H" holy spirit? How many holy spirits are there?

When the tongues of flame sat over their heads on Pentecost, how many spirits were in the room? Just one?

Then we have the plural spirits in Hebrews 12:9 "Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?" Does the Holy Father give life to holy spirits, plural? Apparently.

The question before is is not, "What do we [want to] believe" but "What did Jesus believe", and what did John and the author of Hebrews believe. If you read Jesus' recorded statements in the gospels, or John's Revelation, it isn't as "clear" as Witness Lee said it was. So, should we be subject to WL's truncated Bible and partial logic? I say, No. There's a spirit of control at work, and we should reject it. Only be subject to the Father of spirits, and live. Do not be conformed to the spirit of this age.

Religious conformity is one of the strongest spirits of this age. Please - let the Bible be your guide... all of it, not just the 'convenient' parts. Please don't 'become' an unwitting vector of the spirit of control and conformity that ran WL and now runs his minions.

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Raptor

Well, to start, nowhere in the Bible does it say that Jesus became the Holy Spirit,

Of course it doesn't. That would be modalism, and the Bible doesn't teach modalism!

and neither did WL say that either...

Oh, he most certainly did. Here are just a few I conjured up in just a minute or two.

"The Son is the Father, and the Son is also the Spirit... and the Lord Jesus who is the Son is also the Eternal Father. Our Lord is the Son, and He is also the Father."
Witness Lee, Concerning the Triune God
(Anaheim: Living Stream Ministry, 1973)

"Through the process of resurrection, the Man who ended the old creation became the life-giving Spirit, the germinating element of the new creation."
Life Study of 1 Corinthians

"When He entered into resurrection, He became the Spirit who gives life"
Life Study of 1 Corinthians

"The Father, the Son, and the Spirit are not three separate persons or three Gods; they are one God, one reality, one person."
Witness Lee, The Triune God to Be Life to the Tripartite Man
(Anaheim: Living Stream Ministry, 1970)

1 Cor 15:45 is just one verse that points to a very important truth covered by many other verses. One way to summarize it is that the resurrected Jesus is very different than the Jesus before resurrection. Something happened to Him through death and resurrection that changed Him, it changed His "form" if you will, for a lack of a better word.

Ok, this is your interpretation of Witness Lee's interpretation. That's nice, but you're not really addressing the matter at hand. Witness Lee clearly and strongly taught that Jesus Christ, the 2nd Person of the Trinity, BECAME the Holy Spirit, the 3rd Person of the Trinity. The rest of your post, while giving a very good interpretation of Lee's teachings, totally skirts the issue at hand. Here's the issue at hand, Raptor:

Originally Posted by HBJ

Now I did hear Brother Lee say "Jesus became the life - giving Spirit"

Yeah, I heard that too, HBJ. I heard it so many times that I believed it with all my heart and mind. Look, I attended hundreds upon hundreds of training and conference meetings where I heard Witness Lee speak, in person, unfiltered and unedited by Ron Kangas. I know what the man taught. To my knowledge, he never repudiated this false teaching, and neither has the current leadership of the Local Church.

Yes Raptor, something did happen to the Lord Jesus through death and resurrection that changed Him, and if you read 1 Corinthians chapter 15 carefully, the apostle Paul clearly states that upon our resurrection, the very same change will take place with our physical bodies. The Lord Jesus' physical body was changed into a glorified, "spiritual body" (πνευματικός σῶμα) Vs 44. The apostle was not teaching that the Lord Jesus became the Holy Spirit, and no reputable, commonly accepted, orthodox Christian teacher, scholar or apologist, throughout the church history, has ever taught that the Lord Jesus became the Holy Spirit.

The rest of your post, while delivered with great precision and passion, is a vain attempt to use biblical terms and language to confirm an unbiblical teaching. There is one God. There is only one Father. There is only one Son. There is only one Spirit. There is only one God, and this God is seeking those that will worship him in spirit and in truth.
-

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by Raptor

Well, to start, nowhere in the Bible does it say that Jesus became the Holy Spirit, and neither did WL say that either...

Here's where Witness Lee said it:

"Let us now turn to 1 Corinthians 15:45. This verse says, “The first man Adam became a living soul; the last Adam became**a life-giving spirit” (Gk.). According to this verse, the last Adam, who is Christ, became a life-giving Spirit. Some twist this verse, saying that it speaks of “a life-giving Spirit,” not “the life-giving Spirit.” But besides the Holy Spirit who gives life is there another Spirit who gives life? To say that there are two Spirits giving life is to teach another great heresy. Whether the article is definite or indefinite, the last Adam, who is Christ Himself, became a Spirit, a life-giving Spirit. At this point we must refer to John 6:63, where the Lord says, “It is the Spirit that giveth life” (Gk.). In this chapter the Lord Jesus said that He was the bread of life to give life to people. Eventually, He indicated that in order to be life to people as the bread of life, He must be the Spirit, for it is the Spirit who gives life. Furthermore, 2 Corinthians 3:6 says, “The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.” Is not the Spirit in this verse the Holy Spirit? Can we say that besides this Holy Spirit who gives life there is also another Spirit who gives life? No, we dare not say this.

A second way of twisting this verse is to say that the life-giving Spirit here is not the Holy Spirit, but the Spirit of Christ as a person. Those who twist the verse in this manner say that just as we have a spirit, so Christ also has a spirit. Then they proceed to say that the spirit here is the spirit of Christ, not the Holy Spirit. Certainly, the Spirit in this verse is the Spirit of Christ. But do you believe that besides the Holy Spirit there is another Spirit who is the Spirit of Christ? Or, to put the matter another way, do you believe that besides the Spirit of Christ there is another Spirit called the Holy Spirit? If you believe this, your mind must be darkened. No one with an enlightened mind would believe this."

There is no precise quote "Jesus became the Holy Spirit" but the typical winding reasoning of "if the life-giving Spirit Jesus became is something besides the Holy Spirit then that is the heresy of saying there are two Spirits who give life, and you are a meathead if you think that." Thus.....Jesus became nothing other than the Holy Spirit.

From his 1977 book, What a Heresy—Two Divine Fathers, Two Life-Giving Spirits, and Three Gods! The quote can be found here, in the section "The Heresy of Two Life-Giving Spirits": https://contendingforthefaith.org/en...#heresyspirits

[Raptor]

Originally Posted by Trapped

There is no precise quote "Jesus became the Holy Spirit"

That is what I said.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

And that's a great observation! Like the study of food without actually eating it. The purpose of it all is to know this One and that He wants to have a loving relationship with us. Lee, by so much focus on the nature of the Triune God, was most likely guilty of leaving out the critical aspect of love (which, don't forget, he confessed at the end of his life). That is, God is like a giant steamroller when it comes to getting His purpose! No, He loves us and will be Our Guide, even unto death.

Great analogy, bro, but you prolly don't want to say that or mention John 6.57 too loudly around here.

Originally Posted by Raptor

I don´t see where WL teaches modalism. 1 Cor. 15:45 says, "So also it is written, "The first Man, Adam, became a living soul." The last Adam became a life-giving spirit." (NASB). Of course, that is not the only verse in the Bible about God , but that is what that verse says. So what does it mean, and why (it seems) so few books or sermons or whatever talk about this?

What I do feel I learned very wrongly in the Recovery is the lack of emphasis in the knowledge, experience, praise, worship, fellowsip, relationship, (please add more words) with the Father. Jesus constantly referred to the Father; Jesus said He would reveal the Father to whom He would choose to. Paul prayed to the Father all the time. As far as I can remember the Father is barely mentioned in the Recovery except for the last 15 minutes of the table meeting on Sundays. I cannot remember one single time that somebody addressed prayers to the Father in the prayer meeting or any meeting. (that is different than teaching modalism, though).

After leaving the Recovery, one day I think I was reading a post from somebody here in LCD, addressing the matter of how the teachings about the TG in the Recovery depersonalized the Godhead. As I read I felt the presence of the Lord move in me and in prayer I wept and repented and came back to realize my Triune God, is three living, real, personable, dear Persons!!!!

Yes they are one and three, no earthly math or logic applies here. I do see there are "overlaps", though, many times their name or place overlaps with one another, or are "switched" for one another. How could it be surprising if there is only one God? There has to be overlap, they are one. But wait, they are also three...it´s not for analysis, it´s for extasis! It´s awesome, but rather HE is awesome!!!!

Great points here! I could give the same testimony.

But don't be intimidated by the push back here. And note that way too many Christian brothers (and even scholars) have just been wrongly influenced by that horrible translation in the KJV of verses I John 5.7-8, the so-called Johannine comma. It has helped skew Christian thought for centuries.

Years ago one church even threw me out for mentioning God is One and that error in the KJV. Most people take their theology fairly seriously, even if it means throwing the brothers under the bus or out the door.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Raptor

I don´t see where WL teaches modalism. 1 Cor. 15:45 says, "So also it is written, "The first Man, Adam, became a living soul." The last Adam became a life-giving spirit." (NASB). Of course, that is not the only verse in the Bible about God , but that is what that verse says. So what does it mean, and why (it seems) so few books or sermons or whatever talk about this?

Every time this particular verse comes up, I feel a little like Inigo Montoya in The Princess Bride. "You keep mentioning that verse. I do not think it means what you think it means." (to paraphrase a bit)

The reason that there are not a lot of other writers who said what Lee says is that when you put the verse into its context, it is simply not talking about the Holy Spirit. The whole context is the kind of body that is received in resurrection. And Paul has been using the resurrected Christ as the example. He refers to the nature of Christ's resurrected body as "spiritual." He doesn't really give it a lot of definition. But the presumption is that the body that could be touched, yet could disappear and could enter a room with locked doors is the idea. It is not simply anything.

When Paul gets to the part that we lable verse 45, he is saying that Jesus first had a physical body like Adam, but in resurrection it became something different. He did not invoke the "Third" of the trinity simply because he said "spirit." God is spirit. The Father is spirit, the Son is spirit, and the Holy Spirit is spirit. "Holy Spirit" is the name of the third of the trinity. Everything of "spirit" is not subsumed into the Holy Spirit. So all of Lee's "there's just one spirit" talk is "simply" wrong.

[Sons to Glory!]

But ya know, it's interesting because the passage that verse (1 Cor 15:45) is in certainly talks about the resurrection, but also includes us in there. His body is sown and then resurrects. The grain of wheat fell into the ground to die to bring all of us grains forth, right? What I've seen recently is that the church - the new man - is implied all the way through this chapter. It's no mistake then that 15:45 (a life-giving Spirit) is in there . . .

[Ohio]

Yes Jesus Christ, the Last Adam, resurrected with a spiritual body as OBW has assured us, but Paul also goes beyond this and writes definitively that this same Jesus Christ became life-giving Spirit.

So ... perhaps OBW has a convenient "half-faith" which makes the scriptures so much easier to "digest" that which is beyond human comprehension. Jesus would call that the "leaven of the Pharisees," and warned us to beware.

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by OBW

The reason that there are not a lot of other writers who said what Lee says is that when you put the verse into its context, it is simply not talking about the Holy Spirit...

Question for my dear brothers Ohio and Sons to Glory!
Is every occurrence of the word pneuma (Gk πνεῦμα) a reference to the Holy Spirit? If not, why not?

***It would be super keen if Ohio could answer this one without any ad hominems or snide references to the "leaven of the Pharisees"****
-

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Yes Jesus Christ, the Last Adam, resurrected with a spiritual body as OBW has assured us, but Paul also goes beyond this and writes definitively that this same Jesus Christ became life-giving Spirit.

So ... perhaps OBW has a convenient "half-faith" which makes the scriptures so much easier to "digest" that which is beyond human comprehension. Jesus would call that the "leaven of the Pharisees," and warned us to beware.

Sorry to bring this up at such a late date, but I have mostly not been active in this form for the past year (as should be obvious).

Ohio: Your assertion that the verse says "Spirit" rather than "spirit" is without basis. Paul was in the midst of a discussion about the nature of the body we will receive in resurrection. That discussion starts way before v45 and continues for several more verses beyond. Within that discussion, the Holy Spirit is not part of the conversation. To make such an assertion is to presume that Paul stopped one conversation on something else, and for 1/2 of what we call a single verse, suddenly said something about the Holy Spirit that has no bearing on the discussion it is within, then went back to the actual discussion. In short, a "squirrel" moment for Paul.

Besides, since Jesus is life-giving, and is part of the Godhead which is (are all) "spirit," he can be both life-giving and spirit without being the Holy Spirit. Lee's assertion that there is only one live-giving spirit and that is the Holy Spirit is simply false. And this verse does nothing to shore up his "became" heresy.

"Our organic union with the Lord is also in the Spirit. Christ and the Spirit are not two separate persons. They are one person. This is a divine mystery that is beyond human understanding. Christ is the Spirit (1 Cor. 15:45b; 2 Cor. 3:17). The One who did on the cross, resurrected from the dead, and ascended to the heavens is Christ. But this Christ enters into us as the Spirit. When we call ‘O Lord Jesus,’ the Spirit gets into us." Witness Lee, “The Organism of the Triune God
in the Organic Union of His Divine Trinity,”
(Anaheim, CA: Living Stream Ministry, 1988), 21

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

"Our organic union with the Lord is also in the Spirit. Christ and the Spirit are not two separate persons. They are one person. This is a divine mystery that is beyond human understanding. Christ is the Spirit (1 Cor. 15:45b; 2 Cor. 3:17). The One who did on the cross, resurrected from the dead, and ascended to the heavens is Christ. But this Christ enters into us as the Spirit. When we call ‘O Lord Jesus,’ the Spirit gets into us." Witness Lee, “The Organism of the Triune God
in the Organic Union of His Divine Trinity,”
(Anaheim, CA: Living Stream Ministry, 1988), 21

On more than one occasion, Witness Lee taught that God was "one person". (as in the quote above) On many other occasions he taught the orthodox view of "the three persons of the Godhead—the Father, the Son, and the Spirit." (Concerning the Triune God)

This is just one of a myriad of examples one could give to show that Witness Lee was sloppy and inaccurate at best, and on many occasions, taught what could be considered rank heresy. Thankfully, Lee's influence among Christians outside of the little sect of the Local Church is about zero.

Biblical Notes – Isaiah 9:6

“1. Isaiah is not confusing Jesus the Messiah with the first person of the Trinity.

Isaiah isn’t teaching us that God the Son, the second person of the Trinity, is the same person as God the Father. (The early church denounced this idea as the heresy of modalism.)

It’s unlikely Isaiah has the Trinity in mind at all when he says the Messiah will be called Everlasting Father. It’s not the Messiah’s role within the Godhead, but the Messiah’s character toward us that Isaiah has in mind. Concerning the language of “Everlasting Father,” Sam Storms calls it “a descriptive analogy pointing to Christ’s character . . . he is fatherly, father-like, in his treatment of us.”

2. Isaiah is highlighting the divine nature of the Messiah.

More than any other author, Isaiah loves to speak of eternity. He speaks of God as “the One who is high and lifted up, who inhabits eternity, whose name is holy” (Isa. 57:15). And here in Isaiah 9:6 he uses the same type of language to refer to the Messiah. He’s the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end—the one who is and who was and who is to come—the Almighty (Rev. 1:8).

Isaiah is speaking of a child who will be born some 700 years in the future—yet he makes clear that this child is the author of eternity, the “father of time”! This truly boggles the mind.

3. Jesus the Messiah is the only one who can reveal God’s fatherly character to us, for he is one in nature and essence with the Father.

Isaiah couldn’t have fully seen the light of glory that shone from Jesus when he dwelt among us. But from Jesus’s own lips, words such as these were spoken:

I am the Father are one . . . know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father. (John 10:30, 38)Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, “Show us the Father”? Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? (John 14:9–10a)

If you want to know what God is like, look at Jesus. Jesus is the perfect image of God, and the exact representation of his being. Jesus alone makes the Father known. Indeed, no one can come to the Father except through him (John 14:6).

Perfect Father

Herman Bavinck observed that Jesus “takes away our guilt and again opens the way to [God’s] fatherly heart.” Everything you’ve ever dreamed a father could be—everything you’ve ever wanted from your relationship with your earthly father—Jesus is and will be for you. Your Messiah will forever be perfectly father-like in the way he shepherds and leads you. In Jesus, you have a perfect father forever.

Sadly, the word father doesn’t always bring to mind someone who shepherds, affirms, and stays close. Instead, it connotes adjectives like distant, aloof, passive, absent, unreliable, selfish, uncaring, and cruel. Even among Christian families, far too many children experience emotional indifference and self-centered neglect from their dads.

Not so from Jesus. Jesus, your Everlasting Father, came down at Christmas into a broken and sinful world to fill our hearts with heaven’s love, and to teach us how to love one another. He came to make sons and daughters out of his enemies. This is the Father’s gift to us at Christmas.

Our Everlasting Father

How comforting it is to read, “His name shall be called . . . Everlasting Father” (Isa. 9:6). Once we become a child of Christ’s, we are his and he is ours forever. Forever. There will be no goodbyes with him. Nothing in all creation will be able to separate us from his love. Not even death itself—indeed, it will only draw us nearer.

“There is no unfathering Christ, and there is no unchilding us,” Charles Spurgeon once said. “He is everlastingly a father to those who trust in him.” Praise God for our eternal security in Christ, our Everlasting Father.”

Website Reference:
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/a...asting-father/

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Amazing. On one thread we have trinitarians, doubletarians and now a unotarian(aka Unitarian)! Well, we can't all be right, now can we?

When it comes to God, we are all wrong! None can be right, eh?

Yet throughout history God's children have lived side-by-side believing only "that Christ died for our sins according to the scripture, was buried and raised on the third day." (I Cor 15.1-4) Our common faith, eh?

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Sorry, but I am going to be rather strict on this thread. The topic is modalism as taught by Witness Lee. I'll allow some latitude...but just a little.

Since you ended with a happy face, let me throw out another idea for your consideration.

Coming back to I Cor 15.45, would you agree if the translation were, "The last Adam became life-giving S/spirit."

• The Greek text has a definite article "the" preceding "last Adam"
• The Greek text has no article preceding "life-giving"
• The Greek text specifies no case for S/spirit

In other words, I have never specifically said that "Jesus the Son is the Holy Spirit." Rather, following death and burial, the body of the Last Adam was raised in incorruption, was raised in glory, was raised in power, was raised a spiritual body becoming life-giving spirit.

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I have never specifically said that "Jesus the Son is the Holy Spirit." Rather, following death and burial, the body of the Last Adam was raised in incorruption, was raised in glory, was raised in power, was raised a spiritual body becoming life-giving spirit.

Maybe you didn't, but Witness Lee sure did, and this thread is not about what you have said or even what you believe...it is about what Witness Lee taught publicly for over 50 years. I was there. You were there. Let's not play games and pretend he didn't teach what we all know that he did. It's on tape. It's in the published books. I still have reams upon reams of notes up in my attic confirming what's on the tapes and what is published.

The rest of your statement is pretty much what most Christian teachers have been teaching for centuries. This is what is taught because this is what the apostle Paul was teaching in 1 Corinthians 15.
-