Lee's Trinity

[Evangelical]

The Bible says:

1 Cor 15:45 So also it is written, “The first man, Adam, became a living soul”; the last Adam became a life-giving Spirit.

If the last Adam i.e. Christ did not become the Spirit, then we have a problem - there are TWO life giving spirits in the universe. How can there be two Holy Spirits? This is equivalent to saying there is more than one God. Christ is one life giving spirit, and the Holy Spirit is another. How can the life-giving spirit which Christ became, be any different from the Holy Spirit, the "Spirit of Christ" ?

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

The Bible says:

1 Cor 15:45 So also it is written, “The first man, Adam, became a living soul”; the last Adam became a life-giving Spirit.

If the last Adam i.e. Christ did not become the Spirit, then we have a problem - there are TWO life giving spirits in the universe. How can there be two Holy Spirits? This is equivalent to saying there is more than one God. Christ is one life giving spirit, and the Holy Spirit is another. How can the life-giving spirit which Christ became, be any different from the Holy Spirit, the "Spirit of Christ" ?

This is one of the most easy errors to refute. Start your reading several verses before 45 and see what Paul was talking about. He was discussing the nature of the body that Christ received in resurrection. Paul, in referring to a body that is touchable, yet can be invisible and move into and out of locked room, he said that it was "spiritual" meaning that it was not simply physical.

When he gets to verse 45, he has not changed subjects. He compares the nature of the body that man receives at birth (as represented by Adam) to what Jesus received in resurrection. That body was "spiritual" and he called it "spirit." In no part of the discussion, which continues on for a few more verses, is there any reference to the Holy Spirit or to the Father, or to the Triune God in general. It just isn't there. It is forced into the verse by removing it from its context and forcing false understanding onto the words.

God is spirit. But God isn't the Holy Spirit. Jesus is spirit. But Jesus isn't the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is also spirit.

The nature of God is spirit. The fact that the name of one of the three uses the word "spirit" in it does not deny the nature of being "spirit" to the other two unless they simply become that one.

And the whole "there is only one life giving spirit" mantra is something Lee made up. He didn't find it in the scripture. Jesus gives life. He is spirit. So he is a life giving spirit. The same can be said of the Father. These are facts you can find in the scripture. Lee conveniently ignored them and fabricated this false construct to push the envelope — the discussion of the Trinity — into the ditch of modalism.

And since Lee was fond of saying that it is in the Bible and suggesting that you can look it up for yourself, I think it might do you some good to look for references that support what I just said and only if you can't find them come back and try to hint that I am wrong. Don't just look for the ones that support your position. I've read them many times. And you started your post with one of the most popular ones — and one of the most ridiculous ones at that.

The fact that you can continue to spout that one as a proof text is evidence that you will look no further than where Lee wanted you to look. You will not even consider evidence from the Bible that refutes it.

Says a lot for the theological integrity of your teachings.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by OBW

This is one of the most easy errors to refute. Start your reading several verses before 45 and see what Paul was talking about. He was discussing the nature of the body that Christ received in resurrection. Paul, in referring to a body that is touchable, yet can be invisible and move into and out of locked room, he said that it was "spiritual" meaning that it was not simply physical.

When he gets to verse 45, he has not changed subjects. He compares the nature of the body that man receives at birth (as represented by Adam) to what Jesus received in resurrection. That body was "spiritual" and he called it "spirit." In no part of the discussion, which continues on for a few more verses, is there any reference to the Holy Spirit or to the Father, or to the Triune God in general. It just isn't there. It is forced into the verse by removing it from its context and forcing false understanding onto the words.

God is spirit. But God isn't the Holy Spirit. Jesus is spirit. But Jesus isn't the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is also spirit.

The nature of God is spirit. The fact that the name of one of the three uses the word "spirit" in it does not deny the nature of being "spirit" to the other two unless they simply become that one.

And the whole "there is only one life giving spirit" mantra is something Lee made up. He didn't find it in the scripture. Jesus gives life. He is spirit. So he is a life giving spirit. The same can be said of the Father. These are facts you can find in the scripture. Lee conveniently ignored them and fabricated this false construct to push the envelope — the discussion of the Trinity — into the ditch of modalism.

And since Lee was fond of saying that it is in the Bible and suggesting that you can look it up for yourself, I think it might do you some good to look for references that support what I just said and only if you can't find them come back and try to hint that I am wrong. Don't just look for the ones that support your position. I've read them many times. And you started your post with one of the most popular ones — and one of the most ridiculous ones at that.

The fact that you can continue to spout that one as a proof text is evidence that you will look no further than where Lee wanted you to look. You will not even consider evidence from the Bible that refutes it.

Says a lot for the theological integrity of your teachings.

Sorry, but I can tell you are heading down the wrong path as soon as you said:

"God is Spirit but not the Holy Spirit"

What sort of a confused mind would say such a thing?

There are two life giving spirits? There are two "Spirits of life"? Again, what sort of a confused mind would say such a thing?

I understand there are various kinds of spirits in the universe. But more than one life-giving, creative spirit is a bit of a stretch.