Local Church Discussions  

Go Back   Local Church Discussions > Apologetic discussions

Apologetic discussions Apologetic Discussions Regarding the Teachings of Watchman Nee and Witness Lee

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 07-16-2008, 09:34 AM   #11
KSA
Member
 
KSA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Russia
Posts: 173
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aron View Post

KSA, I don't understand this kind of theology, sorry. Lee didn't do a good job explaining it to me. No one has, so I suspect either I'm dull or it doesn't matter too much. I probably just haven't 'got it' yet.
Okay, let me state my reasons for starting this thread. One of the major accusation against LC is that of modalism. However, I found out that those who set this accusation do not really know theology well. My discussion at the Bereans proved it. When we touch this matter two things usually come up: 1) Is Witness Lee's theology scriptural? 2) Is Witness Lee's theology "orthodox" i.e. in accordance with historical Christian faith. At the beginning of this thread I stated that Witness Lee's view of incarnation is not "orthodox" - he taught that Christ was the incarnation of the entire Trinity, when "orthodox" or "historical" approach is that Christ was the incarnation of the 2nd Person of the Trinity - the Son. Now we have to face a question: which position is scriptural? And is it important? If not, why? If yes, why?

Ohio, if this thread doesn't take off well, I will share some of my thoughts. But I will wait a bit longer, maybe someone will pick this topic up. SpeakersCorner, how about you?
KSA is offline   Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:33 PM.


3.8.9