Lee's Trinity

[OBW]

I note the quote from Lee on today's (2/1/2017) sidebar and it is one of the more controversial aspects of his teaching. It was the major factor that provoked the letter from 70 biblical scholars. It is the place where he equivocates and dances all over the spectrum more than any other.

Let's start with the quote:

Originally Posted by WLee

The traditional explanation of the Trinity is grossly inadequate and borders on tritheism. When the Spirit of God is joined with us, God is not left behind, nor does Christ remain on the throne. This is the impression Christianity gives. They think of the Father as one Person, sending the Son, another Person, to accomplish redemption, after which the Son sends the Spirit, yet another Person. The Spirit, in traditional thinking, comes into the believers, while the Father and Son are left on the throne. When believers pray, they are taught to bow before the Father and pray in the name of the Son. To split the Godhead into these separate Persons is not the revelation of the Bible.

I find this kind of speaking to be overly simplistic and naïve. To declare that in human terms there is simply only one person is to presume something not in the record (the scripture).

There was a discussion (here or the BARM) several years ago concerning the crucifixion and whether all of the Godhead was “present” in the death of Jesus. (Not just present at the death, but also died there.) I recall a fair bit of thought that based on the general presumption of one person that God the Father felt the pain but did not die. But I wonder if we are simply taking a different form of Human perspective to arrive at that conclusion.

Maybe the issue is not with there being only one person, but with the manner in which they are one. I note that Abugian and his crew at the BARM were pretty stuck on the “oneness is in essence” idea. I cannot say that it is right or wrong. But I do note that it is essentially what has been taught by the non-modalist side of Christianity as far back as there are writings outside of the Bible itself.

I do not dismiss the Bible from the discussion. But it is clear that defining the Trinity and the precise relationship of the Three as One God was never its goal. It was not made a lynchpin of Christian theology. Why? I don’t know. But it was not.

But when we start to look at the evidence that is in the Bible, it really doesn’t support Lee as much as we often think it does. It is in Lee’s statement (above, last sentence) declaring the traditional form of prayer — bow and pray to the Father in the name of the Son — to be “not the revelation of the Bible.” But I find that the very manner in which Jesus taught the disciples to pray to support this in a significant way. “Our Father in heaven . . . .” There is never a switch in direction of the prayer. It is to the Father. Not the Son or the Spirit. No, it does not end with “in Jesus name.” But while not exactly the same thing, Jesus did direct us to ask in his name. Not to ritualistically tack it on the prayer, but to be one with Him in our request and therefore an agent of his in prayer.

But that does not change that it is “in His name,” not to him or to the Spirit. It remains to the Father. I think the verse may even say something like "whatever you ask the Father in my name . . . ."

Prayer is to the Father. That is the record in the scripture.

And I am struck by Jesus’ prayer that we would be “one as we are one . . . .” I don’t care how you parse what follows. We are not one among ourselves in the way that a one-person God would be. That is a oneness beyond attainment at a time that it needs to be prayed about. If Jesus was only referring to oneness in the next age, then there is no need to pray about it. At that time things will be as they are intended to be. No need to earnestly pray to the Father about it.

I still don’t know what kind of oneness that is because other than “You in me and I in them” nothing is said to describe it. And if it is just about the fact that Jesus is in us, then still no need to pray about it. That is the way it is Jesus is in us (unless we are reprobates).


Thoughts?