Boxjobox on modalism

[Boxjobox]

Originally Posted by Raptor

Without the Holy Spirit, our faith would be useless. It would be like having the reality of "light" and the star, the "sun", but no sun rays. If there are no sun rays that convey the light through the sun, no rays to reach the earth, the earth would still be in darkness, frozen and dead. All of the following are directly from verses in the Bible, and this list does not include everything. The Holy Spirit is mysterious, like the wind; He is everywhere and has done and does many things, that only He could do because He is God:

The Holy Spirit

• [B]is the author, the source of the entire Bible [/
• is the Spirit of truth that guides into all the truth

The biggest problem with WLs teaching was his taking snips of scripture, molding them together, coming up with his conclusion, making a statement based on his conclusion, speaking as if his conclusion was scripture, having all the saints Buy into and repeat his “scriptural” conclusion until everyone believed his conclusion was scripture.
Raptor, the scripture does not say the Spirit IS God, rather the Spirit of God. The scripture does say God the Father. And Paul beseeches us to keep the unity of the Spirit by confessing One God and Father, who is above all, through all and in all. You list the Spirit as the source of the entire bible; we should give earnest heed to what IS written and not alter thing to draw conclusions. Paul, in that great letter to the Ephesians, makes known the God and Father of our Lord Jesus. I think this would be the Spirit guiding us into all truth.

Modalism is a branch that shoots out of a God is three persons tree. A tree that the Holy Spirit does not guide us into. The Holy Spirit and Jesus and the Scripture guides us plainly, clearly into One God, The Father. WL lived off the three persons tree and filled the saints with this fruit, alls the while, the scripture spoke of Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus.
Jesus, after raising from the dead, spoke to Mary and said I ascend to my God and your God and my Father and your Father. God raised Christ from the dead and seated him at His right hand- gave him the highest position in the universe, put him over all and gave him as head to the church. I think this should be the content of the church, not that three person tree! which was NOT written by the Holy Spirit!

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Boxjobox

Modalism is a branch that shoots out of a God is three persons tree. A tree that the Holy Spirit does not guide us into. The Holy Spirit and Jesus and the Scripture guides us plainly, clearly into One God, The Father. WL lived off the three persons tree and filled the saints with this fruit, alls the while, the scripture spoke of Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus.
Jesus, after raising from the dead, spoke to Mary and said I ascend to my God and your God and my Father and your Father. God raised Christ from the dead and seated him at His right hand- gave him the highest position in the universe, put him over all and gave him as head to the church. I think this should be the content of the church, not that three person tree! which was NOT written by the Holy Spirit!

I thought Modalism would be from the "God is one" tree - that is God is one person, manifested in three stages. I'm I missing something here?

[Sons to Glory!]

Since these messages got moved to alt views, I will post this on here (afraid to say anything on regular forum as it might be censored): I don't understand why this is an alt view worthy item! Don't Boxjobox lives matter too?!

Seems like there's some "red-headed stepchildren" around here . . . or am I missing something?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Since these messages got moved to alt views, I will post this on here (afraid to say anything on regular forum as it might be censored): I don't understand why this is an alt view worthy item! Don't Boxjobox lives matter too?!

Too funny.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Too funny.

Glad somebody appreciates my oft-offbeat humor. Whatever I bring up on the Modalism thread is seemingly ignored by the moderator more and more. I guess he thinks he's ignoring bad behavior or . . .

Feeling a little persona non grata over there, but Jesus still loves me in spite of myself, and that's what's most important!

[Boxjobox]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

I thought Modalism would be from the "God is one" tree - that is God is one person, manifested in three stages. I'm I missing something here?

Depends on who you listen to or follow. There are numerous branches and theological/philosophical branches that come off the one God- three person tree, and every group and individual seems to have their own version. Modalism is also God manifests himself as 3 persons. Everyone seems to have name labels to describe everyone else’s view, and the argument goes on and on, division after division. I would say it’s Jezebel and all her daughters, but what do I know? What I do know is that the whole concept was not introduced by the apostles guided by the Holy Spirit, because Paul clearly and plainly says that the oneness of the spirit is keeping the testimony of one God the Father. Is it not strange that this is so overlooked by all who claim the scripture is the word of God? You would think Paul wrote to keep the oneness professing a one God/ three person thing.

[Boxjobox]

The church definitely needs to be recovered, where the scripture is lifted up, and the monkey business is rejected. The church of WL/LSM does not do this. They are actually more full of the non scriptural triune god thing than the Catholic or Lutheran assemblies. In the last two, you get more of a sense of the awesomeness of God our Father- which is shoved out the door by the LSM crowd.
If the Holy Spirit insists on one God, the Father, that should be the stance of the Church. Oh, how there is a great need for Recovery!

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Boxjobox

Depends on who you listen to or follow. There are numerous branches and theological/philosophical branches that come off the one God- three person tree, and every group and individual seems to have their own version. Modalism is also God manifests himself as 3 persons. Everyone seems to have name labels to describe everyone else’s view, and the argument goes on and on, division after division. I would say it’s Jezebel and all her daughters, but what do I know? What I do know is that the whole concept was not introduced by the apostles guided by the Holy Spirit, because Paul clearly and plainly says that the oneness of the spirit is keeping the testimony of one God the Father. Is it not strange that this is so overlooked by all who claim the scripture is the word of God? You would think Paul wrote to keep the oneness professing a one God/ three person thing.

Yes . . . I pointed out the labeling of Christians in an earlier post somewhere . . . just the action of labeling others creates division. So what if we have differing views and perspectives of this "elephant!" As long as we accept Jesus as the one Way, Truth & Life, I see little profit in much of the rest of the conniptions we tend to go through - proverbial angels dancing on the head of a pin thing IMHO.

[Raptor]

Originally Posted by Boxjobox

Raptor, the scripture does not say the Spirit IS God, rather the Spirit of God.

God is Spirit.

[Boxjobox]

Originally Posted by Raptor

God is Spirit.

Yes, God is spirit- eternal immortal, invisible. But I’m referring to the Holy Spirit given to us by God. Angles are spirits as well according to the scriptures. There are evil spirits. All entities listed as spirit are not God. The Holy Spirit shows us quite clearly in scripture that the one true God is the Father John 17.3

[Raptor]

Originally Posted by Boxjobox

Yes, God is spirit

Yes, and there is no separate Holy Spirit. God is Spirit, the Holy Spirit.

Don´t bother to reply, I´m not going to further this discussion, God the Son is also God, in case you were wondering.

[Boxjobox]

Originally Posted by Raptor

Yes, and there is no separate Holy Spirit. God is Spirit, the Holy Spirit.

Don´t bother to reply, I´m not going to further this discussion, God the Son is also God, in case you were wondering.

In reviewing posts, I saw that I missed this one, which is well worth responding to. Raptor follows the Lee method of theology of mixing, matching and coming up with derivative meanings and declaring that the derivatives are Bible truths.

John 4, where Jesus tells us that God is spirit, is a very chocked full chapter of John’s. It’s particularly interesting because Jesus is talking to a Samaritan woman about God, himself the messiah, and Jesus speaking of God as the Father who desires worshipers.
Raptor seems to have the one God three persons down pretty well, and uses the old “God the Son” , and makes the transition from God is spirit to God is the Holy Spirit readily. Thus, in his reading of scripture ( which I hope he does) more than likely when reading, let’s say Ephesians, his thinking more than likely would automatically breeze over a Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus, internally translating that into a trinity persons thing, and in reading Paul’s beseeching the Ephesians to keep the oneness of the Spirit by holding to One God and Father of all, would, because that section talks about one Spirit, and one Lord, translate this into a triune thing as well, and slide easily over one God and Father, rendering the whole thought as Paul being a triunist, and therefore, anyone who would even question the trinitarian view is a reprobate fool.

But then, we still have Jesus’ word to the Samaritan woman that God-whom Jesus calls The Father, whom Paul and Jesus tells us is the one true God, desires worshippers, ie fellowship.

Most peculiar thing to take scripture and through various devices, to have what is written take on a quite different meaning and then practice the derivation rather than the truth.

[Boxjobox]

Originally Posted by Boxjobox

In reviewing posts, I saw that I missed this one, which is well worth responding to. Raptor follows the Lee method of theology of mixing, matching and coming up with derivative meanings and declaring that the derivatives are Bible truths.

John 4, where Jesus tells us that God is spirit, is a very chocked full chapter of John’s. It’s particularly interesting because Jesus is talking to a Samaritan woman about God, himself the messiah, and Jesus speaking of God as the Father who desires worshipers.
Raptor seems to have the one God three persons down pretty well, and uses the old “God the Son” , and makes the transition from God is spirit to God is the Holy Spirit readily. Thus, in his reading of scripture ( which I hope he does) more than likely when reading, let’s say Ephesians, his thinking more than likely would automatically breeze over a Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus, internally translating that into a trinity persons thing, and in reading Paul’s beseeching the Ephesians to keep the oneness of the Spirit by holding to One God and Father of all, would, because that section talks about one Spirit, and one Lord, translate this into a triune thing as well, and slide easily over one God and Father, rendering the whole thought as Paul being a triunist, and therefore, anyone who would even question the trinitarian view is a reprobate fool.

But then, we still have Jesus’ word to the Samaritan woman that God-whom Jesus calls The Father, whom Paul and Jesus tells us is the one true God, desires worshippers, ie fellowship.

Most peculiar thing to take scripture and through various devices, to have what is written take on a quite different meaning and then practice the derivation rather than the truth.

I see dear brother Untohim falling in the same quandary. Wanting to discuss the WL/LSM/LC thing only in terms of orthodox, ie church doctrine/history, where as WL on one hand would dismiss the source of triunism as degraded Christianity, yet, pull up the doctrine as legitimate, yet expanding on it with his own theological views, which were steeped in the trinitarian thought. At the same time, purporting to claim scripture as the source for all his teachings, yet making a business out of his processed triune god material. Alls the while, Paul tells us there is but one God, the Father. So how do we discuss the WL/LSM problem without bringing up the “elephant in the room”? We dismiss the whole notion of there being a legitimate elephant. How can we have an honest discussion about the whole Lee thing, the whole concept about recovery, about the ministry, and remain in the 4th century orthodoxy. I tend to think recover is no longer a topic people want to consider, and I tend to think that most of those who left the LC have probably returned to “ poor, poor, christianity” and the concept, zeal for the recovery of the church, and for that matter, whether the church as any real meaning at all, has drifted into a past history worthy only of historical discussion.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Boxjobox

I see dear brother Untohim falling in the same quandary. Wanting to discuss the WL/LSM/LC thing only in terms of orthodox, ie church doctrine/history, where as WL on one hand would dismiss the source of triunism as degraded Christianity, yet, pull up the doctrine as legitimate, yet expanding on it with his own theological views, which were steeped in the trinitarian thought. At the same time, purporting to claim scripture as the source for all his teachings, yet making a business out of his processed triune god material. Alls the while, Paul tells us there is but one God, the Father. So how do we discuss the WL/LSM problem without bringing up the “elephant in the room”? We dismiss the whole notion of there being a legitimate elephant. How can we have an honest discussion about the whole Lee thing, the whole concept about recovery, about the ministry, and remain in the 4th century orthodoxy. I tend to think recover is no longer a topic people want to consider, and I tend to think that most of those who left the LC have probably returned to “ poor, poor, christianity” and the concept, zeal for the recovery of the church, and for that matter, whether the church as any real meaning at all, has drifted into a past history worthy only of historical discussion.

What "recovery" and the "restoration" movements are missing is a Pentecost, with rushing mighty wind, tongues of fire, and speaking many languages.

That's what originated the foundational early church. Don't get that and the recovery and restoration are just hollow claims and efforts.