Quote:
Originally Posted by UntoHim
It may cast some doubt in your mind, and in the mind of Witness Lee, but it hasn't for the vast majority of Christian teachers and scholars for the past 2000+ years. So everybody has been interpreting this passage wrong for two millennia, and out of nowhere this Witness Lee fellow got it right. How convenient. How improbable.
Well one good reason is that the apostle Paul wasn't teaching modalism, and he never taught that Jesus Christ, the second of the Godhead, became the Holy Spirit, the third of the Godhead. Witness Lee went further in a lot of things, mostly because he thought he was the only person on earth speaking as God's oracle. Who needs to be bound up by all those poor, poor traditional and historic interpretations when you da man! The Bible says WHAT I SAY IT MEANS, GOT THAT MOO COW!
Of course not! That's puttin on your thinkin cap Ohio! Now don't stop there...keep going. Since you now admit that the reference to pneuma/spirit in 1 Cor 15:45 is not a definitive reference to the Holy Spirit, what spirit are we talking about? If I was talking to Witness Lee, I would expect to hear "how many spirits are there that give life?" but you're not going to do that to us, are you Ohio?
So back to my question. If this occurrence of pneuma/spirit is not a reference to the Holy Spirit, why not?
-
|
So Paul tells the Corinthians (1Cor.8) that there is one God, the Father, and one Lord Jesus Christ. Paul does say that there are a whole lot of gods and lords, but to us there is One God The Father. He also says that there is not in all men that knowledge. This all seems pretty clear speaking and straightforward to me, and it is the belief that governs my scripture reading and practicing of the Christian faith.
In that regard, it seems almost insane that people spend so much time arguing about a trinity god. I mean, we are 2000 years past Paul’s writing and the best we can do is argue over something that no one can come to an agreement over, and the basis for this argument is really the Nicene Creed, written 3 centuries after Paul’s writing, which seems to be taken as authority over Paul’s clear statement. So in other words, the argument over 1 cor15.45b, which, if that statement of Paul results in a theoretical theological argument that tries to squeeze in a trinity with perhaps a modalistic tendency which then would negate Paul’s clear relating to the Corinthians that there is one God, the Father, brings us to divisions of thought and sectarian associations, also negates Paul’s admonition in Ephesians to maintain a oneness be keeping the view of one Lord, Jesus and ONE God, the Father.
Is there perhaps a reason we do not grasp the concept of the Holy Spirit because we long left the scriptural instruction of the greatest commandment of loving the one true God and created a different entity which is now the replacement of the one true God. It seems to me that I read about this this falling away and false teaching business, and “fornication” somewhere in Revelation 2 and 3. That old Nicene creed created a nasty beast!! If the Spirit has walked away from it, but people holding on to it have unceasing theoretical arguments about it, and about the departed Spirit, that’s truly spiritual insanity.