Local Church Discussions  

Go Back   Local Church Discussions > Alternative Views - Click Here to Start New Thread

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 07-08-2020, 08:16 AM   #11
Boxjobox
Moderated Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 829
Default Re: Boxjobox on modalism

Quote:
Originally Posted by UntoHim View Post
So what do we do when someone like Witness Lee comes along and says the Lord "illuminated him" to teach that the Son is the Father, and the Son became the Holy Spirit? Should we throw up our hands and just say "It's all a big mystery! Who knows! Lee's approach is as good as anyone else's!". Sorry my brother, but I don't trust man's personal "illuminations" any further than I could throw em.(and that includes mine) This is why our theology should be based in and upon the historical, orthodox teachings/interpretations. God is more than capable and willing to "illuminate" us within the bounds of the historical orthodoxy established since beginning.

It should go without saying that Witness Lee decided that he was never going to be restricted or bound to anything or anyone. He even went far beyond his mentor and guru Watchman Nee. For all his faults, Nee did not teach modalism. Nee did not teach that the Son is called the Father, or that Jesus Christ became the Holy Spirit.


But you're perfectly willing to be beholden to what Witness Lee's thinking was, right? What gives bro? Why the discrepancy?
-
I just had to bring this one over from the main site to the dungeon. Poor Untohim, he is caught up in man’s 4 th century teachings, which Awareness eloquently explained of the participants “voting” on truth, and wants to argue that WL was invalid for his opinions? To talk about modalism and WL without having a good debate about trinitarianism, which is the root and stalk of modalism, is just plain silly! Trinitarianism, God the Son, the 2nd person of the trinity were never the discussion of the foundational church. One only has to read through Acts and the gospels presented there to realize what the apostles thought about the resurrected Jesus. For Untohim, to grasp at his orthodoxy as his truth and not accept the beseeching of Paul to hold to One God, the Father is such a deviation in itself. If WL would have been the ministry to recover the church, this is the first item that should have been recovered. Muddling in the tar pit of tri theism and throwing the gooey stuff at each other in the name of truth will never clean up the 4th century errors; thus the recovery of the church will not occur. I would think Untohim would probably do best sitting in a Catholic mass and pondering trans substantiation. This too was the teaching of orthodoxy, and didn’t Jesus say “ this is my body”?
Boxjobox is offline   Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may post attachments
You may edit your posts

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



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:52 AM.


3.8.9