Modalism

[UntoHim]

Raptor, I admire your persistence, I really do. But you either do not know what modalism is, or you're in complete denial of what Witness Lee actually taught.

"The Son is the Father, and the Son is also the Spirit... and the Lord Jesus who is the Son is also the Eternal Father. Our Lord is the Son, and He is also the Father."
Witness Lee, Concerning the Triune God
(Anaheim: Living Stream Ministry, 1973)

"Through the process of resurrection, the Man who ended the old creation became the life-giving Spirit, the germinating element of the new creation."
Life Study of 1 Corinthians

"When He entered into resurrection, He became the Spirit who gives life"
Life Study of 1 Corinthians

"The Son is called the Father; so the Son must be the Father. We must realize this fact. There are some who say that He is called the Father, but He is not really the Father. But how could He be called the Father and yet not be the Father?... In the place where no man can approach Him (I Tim. 6:16), God is the Father. When He comes forth to manifest Himself, He is the Son. So, a Son is given, yet His name is called 'The everlasting Father.' This very Son who has been given to us is the very Father."
Witness Lee, The All-Inclusive Spirit of Christ
(Los Angeles: The Stream Publishers, 1969), pp. 4-5

"...the entire Godhead, the Triune God, became flesh."
Witness Lee, God's New Testament Economy
(Anaheim: Living Stream Ministry, 1986), p. 230

"Therefore, it is clear: The Lord Jesus is the Father, the Son, and the Spirit, and He is the very God. He is also the Lord. He is the Father, the Son, the Spirit, the Mighty God, and the Lord."
Witness Lee, The Clear Scriptural Revelation
Concerning the Triune God

"The Father, the Son, and the Spirit are not three separate persons or three Gods; they are one God, one reality, one person."
Witness Lee, The Triune God to Be Life to the Tripartite Man
-

[Raptor]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Raptor, I admire your persistence, I really do. But you either do not know what modalism is, or you're in complete denial of what Witness Lee actually taught.

"The Son is the Father, and the Son is also the Spirit... and the Lord Jesus who is the Son is also the Eternal Father. Our Lord is the Son, and He is also the Father."
Witness Lee, Concerning the Triune God
(Anaheim: Living Stream Ministry, 1973)

"Through the process of resurrection, the Man who ended the old creation became the life-giving Spirit, the germinating element of the new creation."
Life Study of 1 Corinthians

"When He entered into resurrection, He became the Spirit who gives life"
Life Study of 1 Corinthians

"The Son is called the Father; so the Son must be the Father. We must realize this fact. There are some who say that He is called the Father, but He is not really the Father. But how could He be called the Father and yet not be the Father?... In the place where no man can approach Him (I Tim. 6:16), God is the Father. When He comes forth to manifest Himself, He is the Son. So, a Son is given, yet His name is called 'The everlasting Father.' This very Son who has been given to us is the very Father."
Witness Lee, The All-Inclusive Spirit of Christ
(Los Angeles: The Stream Publishers, 1969), pp. 4-5

"...the entire Godhead, the Triune God, became flesh."
Witness Lee, God's New Testament Economy
(Anaheim: Living Stream Ministry, 1986), p. 230

"Therefore, it is clear: The Lord Jesus is the Father, the Son, and the Spirit, and He is the very God. He is also the Lord. He is the Father, the Son, the Spirit, the Mighty God, and the Lord."
Witness Lee, The Clear Scriptural Revelation
Concerning the Triune God

"The Father, the Son, and the Spirit are not three separate persons or three Gods; they are one God, one reality, one person."
Witness Lee, The Triune God to Be Life to the Tripartite Man
-

You neither explain what modalism is, neither do you explain why what you quoted from WL is modalism.

[UntoHim]

Raptor, Modalism was explained and discussed right at the start of the thread, and has been explained and discussed here on this forum for about 12 years now. For some reason you seem to think if you don't agree with the explanations, or that it has not been explained to your satisfaction, that means it has not been explained. This is not how reasonable discussions can continue on a forum like ours.

As Trapped has stated, Witness Lee taught the orthodox teaching/doctrine/understanding of the Trinity, and he also taught a form of modalism. Again, it is not classic modalism, but rather a convoluted form of modalism. My contention has been that Lee clearly "confounded the Persons" of the Godhead with his processed God teaching. This also has been discussed at length on our forum, but I am willing to give at lease a cursory review of this if you want.

Originally Posted by HBJ

One of the theological problems with the Local Church is being accused of modalism. A website I found says "Modalism and Monarchianism are two false views of the nature of God and of Jesus Christ that appeared in the second and third centuries AD. A modalist views God as one Person instead of three Persons and believes that the Father, Son, and Spirit are simply different modes or forms of the same divine Person."
Now I did hear Brother Lee say "Jesus became the life - giving Spirit"
"Became" has modalist connotations. But Scripture is plain: God exists in three co-eternal, co-equal Persons. What do you all think?

Originally Posted by Trapped

I've tried to figure out their position on this in the past and given up. In the very same paper the LC will say the Father, Son and Spirit are eternally distinct and then in the next paragraph stalwartly affirm that they are each other.

Originally Posted by OBW

The theological problem is not that they are accused of modalism, but that they do espouse a form of modalism.

Originally Posted by UntoHim

For centuries the genuine Christian church has taught and espoused a view of the Trinity which holds that "God is one being in three Persons". Heretics like Witness Lee usually end up doing one or both of the issues addressed in the Athanasian Creed: "Confounding the persons" and "Dividing the substance" of God. Most orthodox Christian teachers, scholars and apologist would tell you that Lee's "processed Triune God" teaching is heretical because it is a form of modalism in which the Persons of God are confounded and/or the substance of God is divided.

-

[Raptor]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Raptor, Modalism was explained and discussed right at the start of the thread, and has been explained and discussed here on this forum for about 12 years now. For some reason you seem to think if you don't agree with the explanations, or that it has not been explained to your satisfaction, that means it has not been explained. This is not how reasonable discussions can continue on a forum like ours.

As Trapped has stated, Witness Lee taught the orthodox teaching/doctrine/understanding of the Trinity, and he also taught a form of modalism. Again, it is not classic modalism, but rather a convoluted form of modalism. My contention has been that Lee clearly "confounded the Persons" of the Godhead with his processed God teaching. This also has been discussed at length on our forum, but I am willing to give at lease a cursory review of this if you want.
-

That the Spirit of Jesus is the same as the Holy Spirit and that there cannot be 2 divine Spirits has been explained and discussed in the New Testament for centuries now. For some reason you seem to think if you don't agree with the explanations, or that it has not been explained to your satisfaction, that means it has not been explained. This is not how reasonable discussions can continue on a forum like ours.

Who came up with the definition of the convoluted form of modalism?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

As Trapped has stated, Witness Lee taught the orthodox teaching/doctrine/understanding of the Trinity, and he also taught a form of modalism. Again, it is not classic modalism, but rather a convoluted form of modalism. My contention has been that Lee clearly "confounded the Persons" of the Godhead with his processed God teaching. This also has been discussed at length on our forum, but I am willing to give at lease a cursory review of this if you want.

It has long been my contention that the Bible has "confounded the persons" of the Godhead. The early church attempted to "straighten out" these "inconsistencies" in the Word of God by introducing new phrases like "3 Persons, but one God."

Many Bible "scholars" over the centuries went along with this new terminology in order to deal with heresies like Arius, the unitarian who fathered the JW/Boxjobox movements. Athanasius, the great Arius-slayer, gave us another, perhaps worse, heresy that "man becomes god," fathering other cults like the Mormons.

I guess we are free to pick our poison. I think it's best to stick to the Bible, "inconsistencies" included.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I guess we are free to pick our poison. I think it's best to stick to the Bible, "inconsistencies" included.

Yes, and hence the thought that although we can find verses for 3-in-1 AND 1-in-3, both are true. Why? Because He's God, and we can't effectively wrap our widdle minds around His nature.

[Raptor]

1 Pet. 1:11,12. "Concerning this salvation, the prophets who foretold the grace to come to you searched and investigated carefully, trying to determine the time and setting to which the "Spirit of Christ" in them was pointing when He predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories to follow."

The Spirit of Christ was speaking to the prophets before His incarnation.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Raptor

1 Pet. 1:11,12. "Concerning this salvation, the prophets who foretold the grace to come to you searched and investigated carefully, trying to determine the time and setting to which the "Spirit of Christ" in them was pointing when He predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories to follow."

The Spirit of Christ was speaking to the prophets before His incarnation.

I can't figure Him out . . . . . . He is God.

But who can know!? As John Locke said, "I cannot understand the mystery of a single flower; neither was it intended that I should!"