Originally posted by RJHindsI already been that...
Well, then you must agree that what I quoted Witness Lee as writing does not agree with Orthodox Christianity. That leaves it up to you to check those references for yourself to see if what I quoted is true and accurate. If they are, then the only conclusion is that Witness Lee was teaching a false doctrine different from that of Orthodox Christianity.
...[text shortened]... at the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit is the same person. That is the heresy of Modalism.
4 edits
Originally posted by kevinlee123Kevin,
I know but his pride has usurped him. He doesn't need to look further because these so-called 70 Christian scholars and ministry leaders are experts in research so he probably won't listen us or the DCP brothers.
Even I don't have anything to say further that because I'm not prone to speak English but I don't belittle myself.
Do you remember how the church Corinth gave the Apostle Paul such a hard time? They even went so far as to accused him of taking advantage of them financially.
By God's sovereignty Paul was reluctantly forced to have to respond to some of the suspicious Corinthians that he was playing shady financial games with their offerings.
A faithful servant of God sometimes will have evil rumors circulated by suspicious people that that servant is just interested in getting their money.
Here Paul response to these suspicions in the Second Corinthian letter:
Behold, this third time I am ready to come to you, and I will not be a burden; for I do not seek what is yours but you. For the children ought not to store up for the parents, but the parents for the children.
But I, I will most gladly spend and be utterly spent on behalf of your souls. If I love you more abundantly, am I loved less?
But let it be so! I did not burden you, but, as some of you say , being crafty, I took you by guile.
Did I take advantage of you through anyone I sent to you? I entreated Titus and sent with him the brother. Titus did not take advantage of you, did he?
Did we not walk in the same spirit? In the same steps? (2 Cor. 12:14-18)
These exchanges were related to the suspicion of some Christians even, in the church in Corinth, that the apostles and co-workers as a team coordinating with Paul were playing sneaky tricks to make themselves financially better off.
It was a shameful affair (for the church) to be carried away with such suspicions. But God's sovereignty allowed it to be recorded and placed in the Word of God for our edification.
Some unethical religious people will cheat people out of money. But just as surely, sometimes a faithful servant of God whose financial dealings are above reproach, will be nonetheless accused of "being crafty" though such a one is being utterly spent, pouring out his or her time and labor in Christ, for the sake of the ones being served.
The purposely recorded phone call by Sal Benoit to Witness Lee was a such an affair. And I am waiting for any further knowledge concerning it from DCP.
As for RJHinds, it is possible that I will just stop reading his comments today. If by now he has not been able to point out how Witness Lee taught improperly about the Triune God, it is not likely he'll do any better from this point on. Actually, this is not the first time his accusations could not be backed up.
2 edits
Originally posted by kevinlee123No, he is not listening to anyone except the post flood evolutionists like Duane Gish and Henry Morris, Kent Hovind or Ken Ham.
I know but his pride has usurped him. He doesn't need to look further because these so-called 70 Christian scholars and ministry leaders are experts in research so he probably won't listen us or the DCP brothers.
Even I don't have anything to say further that because I'm not prone to speak English but I don't belittle myself.
I think I will just have to stop reading his garbage because it is a waste of time. Some other readers may be helped with considering fairer evidence of Witness Lee's ministry. And you could just put a little note below your posts that English is not your mother language.
My Philippine language is ZERO so you have my respect for being bilingual and bold to write in English.
Originally posted by sonshipAll you have to do is open your eyes to see that Witness Lee is teaching heresy.
Kevin,
Do you remember how the church Corinth gave the Apostle Paul such a hard time? They even went so far as to accused him of taking advantage of them financially.
By God's sovereignty Paul was reluctantly forced to have to respond to some of the suspicious Corinthians that he was playing shady financial games with their offerings.
...[text shortened]... from this point on. Actually, this is not the first time his accusations could not be backed up.
4 edits
Christ and the Holy Spirit are spoken of separately which are also distinct from God the Father in the Godhead.
Here is an example of Christ and the Holy Spirit being spoken of as distinct yet one in the SAME CHAPTER -
1.) DIstinct - John 14:16 - "And I will ask the Father, and He will give you ANOTHER Comforter, that He may be with you forever, even the Spirit of reality, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not behold Him or know Him ..."
2.) One and the Same (not seperate) - verse 17b,18 - " ... because it does not behold Him or know Him, but you know Him, because He abides with you and shall be in you.
I will not leave you as orphans; I am coming to you."
In The Mending Ministry of John Witness Lee taught that "I am coming to you" not leaving the disciples as orphans means that the Holy Spirit is coming to them. Or that is that Jesus Christ is coming to them as the Holy Spirit.
Most Bible teachers interpret the Lord’s words in verse 3, “I am coming again and will receive you to Myself,” to refer to His second coming. However, in verse 18 the Lord again says, “I will not leave you orphans; I am coming to you.” Then He adds, “Yet a little while and the world beholds Me no longer, but you behold Me; because I live, you shall live also. In that day you shall know that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you” (vv. 19-20).
And again in the same book -
Through His death and resurrection He has brought us into the Triune God. For this Triune God we are the many abodes of the Father’s house. This is the church! The church is implied in John 14 in this wonderful way. The church is our home, yet we are all rooms (abodes) in which the Father and the Son may dwell.
You may never have heard such an interpretation of John 14 before. I hope you will not pass off my words as a peculiar way of looking at these verses. If you take the traditional interpretation, you will destroy these four chapters. To consider these verses as referring to literal heavenly mansions is too low, too physical. Such an interpretation is off. John 14 through 17 reveals that we the redeemed ones, through the death and resurrection of Christ, have been brought into the Triune God. The thought here is the Triune God, not heavenly mansions. Because we have been brought into Him, we become Christ’s mystical Body. As His mystical Body, the church is the house of God. In this house of God, which is the real temple of God, are many abodes. Each of us is one of these abodes.
Since "The Lord is the Spirit" (2 Cor. 3:17) is also in the New Testament, Lee's exposition is quite orthodox.
Since "the last Adam became a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45) is ALSO in the New Testament, Witness Lee's exposition on John 14 is quite orthodox.
Some critics do not believe the larger scope of things uttered in the New Testament concerning the Triune God. They have a truncated and lopsided viewpoint from which they criticize others who take a fuller scope of what the Bible says.
I believe we discussed all of this before on Witness Lee's Local Church Cult Thread 159943 started in Jul 2014.
1 edit
With regard to 2 Cor. 3.17, "Now the Lord is that Spirit," the emphasis here is on the word "Now," for the Lord has risen to the right hand of the Father and has given His Spirit to indwell as the veil is now rent.
Where the emphasis is placed depends upon what the believer reading would like to emphasis. "Now" is fine with me.
This "Now" applies throughout the whole church age and even unto eternity. The Lord Jesus is the Spirit.
We see from Romans 8:10 and 34 that Jesus Christ is located in two places:
1.) In the believers
2.) At the right hand of God
"But if Christ is in you, ... the spirit is life because of righteousness" (v.10)
"Who is he who condemns? It is Christ Jesus who died and, rather, who was raised, who is also at the right hand of God, who intercedes for us." (v.34)
Jesus Christ is located in the Christians and also in the third heavens at the right hand of God interceding for the Christians.
Never be so overassuming as to think this means the Lord is the Spirit in the sense they derive it,
This writer is saying never be over assuming to believe what the Scripture plainly says - "Now the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is there is freedom."
The writer is saying do not be over assuming and believe 2 Cor. 3:17. This is pitiful.
the prime teaching of modalists.
"And the Lord is the Spirit" is a prime teaching of the New Testament. And if the Lord was not the Spirit then the same New Testament would not say that Jesus Christ is in us -
"Test yourselves whether you are in the faith; prove yourselves. Or do you not realize about yourself that Jesus Christ is in you, unless you are disapproved?" (2 Cor. 13:5)
Witness Lee is one Christian teacher who has helped thousands to enter into richer spiritual lives of oneness and victory by telling them strongly what Paul taught - "Jesus Christ is in you" .
Modern day religionists say this is over assuming. But we have entered into vastly richer experience of God by standing WITH the Bible in faith - Jesus Christ the Lord is in us. The Lord is the Spirit.
What is behind a critic discouraging Christians from standing in faith on what the New Testament plainly teaches ? We wrestle not against flesh and blood but principalities and powers and spiritual forces of evil.
Who then is "the Lord" in "Now the Lord is the Spirit"? It is Christ Jesus -
"For we do not preach ourselves but Christ Jesus as Lord ..." (2 Cor. 4:5)
Witness Lee is one faithful servant of God both experiencing himself and helping other to enter into the enjoyment of Jesus Christ living in them, according to the pure word of the New Testament.
Misreading the Scriptures is not a humble position to take at all. Considering all the Scripture that keeps the Son and the Spirit distinct (and we can find no verses making them the same in all regards), there should be no excuse for priding oneself on the special teaching of modalism, all the while saying they are not modalist.
I would ask the writer is "Now the Lord is the Spirit" means "Now the Lord is the Spirit" or mean something else, like "Now the Lord [IS NOT] the Spirit".
The misreading is on the critic's part. It says "Now the Lord is the Spirit". And no wonder, because "the last Adam became a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45) .
Witness Lee's ministry helped thousands to enter into a richer oneness in the church life and a deeper enjoyment of Jesus Christ by reading and believing the New Testament.
And this recovery of the Lord will not be stopped by man.
This is doubletalk. The infamy of the doubletongue by leeists truly excites the flesh and I am sure they get off on it.
It is no more doublespeak to say the Holy Spirit is distinct from Jesus yet Jesus the Lord is also the Spirit, than it is to say -
"The Word was with God, and the Word was God." (John 1:1)
Witness Lee was one Christian brother who taught thousands that just as they stand upon the word that the Word was with God and was God, so also we should stand that there is the Spirit of the Lord and the Lord is the Spirit.
Blind religionists call this modalism. This is pitiful.
This is instead taking the full scope of the word of God and saying "Amen! We will believe that."
As the doubletongue is given energy, sin begets sin, and you will see more doubletalk in future episodes, for it is like a drug and can't be stopped. Rationalization upon rationalization never is a sign of repentance.
The critic wants us to repent for believing "Now the Lord is the Spirit" (2 Cor. 3:17) .
The critic wants us to repent for believing "the last Adam became a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45) . But standing by faith on the precious promises of God empowers us, energizes us to overcome.
I would encourage this critic so proclaim after awakening "Praise the Lord. Now the Lord Jesus Christ is the Spirit. The Spirit dwells in me. The Jesus Christ lives in me. I am not disapproved. Christ is in me."
I would encourage the critic to try standing upon the word of God for the subjective experience of Christ and stop believing only in an objective God "out there" like a Moslem.
The Lord's recovery is recovering that Christ Himself can make His home in our hearts by faith.
We praise the Lord that "the last Adam became a life giving Spirit" to impart Himself into us as divine life. He said that He came that we may have life and have it abundantly (John 10:10). So He became the life giving Holy Spirit that He might give us Himself as divine life.
This is not modalism. This is the pure precious promise of the New Testament. And we will have more trouble if we do not believe these precious promises.
So on one hand the Holy Spirit came down upon Jesus at His baptism appearing in the form of a dove. Right? That is the Spirit and Jesus being distinct. No problem believing this.
On the other hand the same Bible says "the last Adam became a life giving Spirit." And no doubt, that "life giving Spirit" is the Holy Spirit that gives divine life.
Originally posted by RJHindsThat thread a long ago didn't convince me that Witness Lee was a modalist. ^_^ I've already read those links way back. So, I'm ahead of you of those charges.
I believe we discussed all of this before on Witness Lee's Local Church Cult Thread 159943 started in Jul 2014.
Originally posted by sonshipThat critic's name is Troy Brooks. He's totally a whako.With regard to 2 Cor. 3.17, "Now the Lord is that Spirit," the emphasis here is on the word "Now," for the Lord has risen to the right hand of the Father and has given His Spirit to indwell as the veil is now rent.
Where the emphasis is placed depends upon what the believer reading would like to emphasis. [b]"Now" is fine with me.
...[text shortened]... " [/b] And no doubt, that "life giving Spirit" is the Holy Spirit that gives divine life.[/b]
2 edits
A little more attention to Troy's arguments.
In Witness Lee modalism, does it feel like those in the dark are leading gullible souls down a path of destruction?
What it "feels" like ? Well for those of us who stand upon the truth that Jesus Christ is in us and the Lord is the Spirit, it "feels" like we finally have a way to live the church life in a normal way and in oneness.
It feels wonderful to realize that everything we need is in Christ and Christ is in us as the Spirit with our spirit. Wonderful! And Watchman Nee's wise words ring so true - if I can get it close if not exact -
"The problem is not that we do not have enough Christ. It is that we have too many things other than Christ."
On the five continents Christians are realizing the All-inclusive Christ, everything we need, is indwelling our spirit. And Paul's very last written words to Timothy are well worth proclaiming from the housetops -
"The Lord be with your spirit. Grace be with you." (2 Tim. 4:22)
Its a strange thing that some are fighting against knowing and enjoying that the Lord is with our spirit, by crying "Modalism, Modalism". These are Christians who must want to be like Moslems. They only want an objective trinity or an objective God far off, up there, far away in a very traditional way.
But some of us want to be recovered back to the Lord Jesus being experienced as with our spirit. For the last Adam became a life giving Spirit. Amen.
No matter how hard they and Witness Lee try marry Witness Lee to Watchman Nee by altering the latter's writings, creating new writings and by other means, Nee and the little flock had no affiliation with them later on. If Nee was released from prison, his chastisement would be palpable against Witness Lee.
A word about the "little flock".
The believers who were meeting as local churches during the time Watchman Nee was working in China used a published hymnal. That may have been a hymnal published by the Brethren. I am not sure. But it had "Little Flock" on it.
Consequently, the churching saints meeting on the ground of one city / one church began to be known as "The Little Flock." People always have a way to assign some designation to Christians.
For example, Nee said, "Always remember that God has committed Christ, the Holy Spirit, the word, and the light to the church.
It is totally laughable that Troy would insinuate that Witness Lee ever taught otherwise.
Today she is able to give light, word, the Holy Spirit, and Christ to men.
In so many thousands of words we heard the same thing again and again from brother Witness Lee.
The one difficulty is our uncleanness, our impurity" (The Ministry of God's Word, p. 243, CFP white covers). Christ and the Holy Spirit are spoken of separately which are also distinct from God the Father in the Godhead.
In The Revelation of the Triune God According to the Pure Word of the Bible by Witness Lee, a booklet focused on a outlined presentation of how Lee considered the Trinity, the following except makes impossible the charge of Modalism to be leveled at Witness Lee.
E. All Three Exist at the Same Time
The Father, Son, and Spirit all exist at the same time. Notice John 14:16-17: “And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; even the Spirit of truth.” In these two verses we have the Son praying to the Father that the Father would send the Spirit. Hence, the Father, the Son, and the Spirit are all present at the same time.
In Ephesians 3:14-17 Paul says that he will pray the Father to grant us to be strengthened by His Spirit in our inner man that Christ may make His home in our hearts. In this passage we have the Father, the Spirit, and Christ the Son. All exist at the same time. The Bible does not say that the Father existed for a certain period of time and then the Son came; that after a certain period of time the Son no longer existed and was replaced by the Spirit. There is not a verse that says this. The Bible in this passage indicates that the Father listens to the prayer, the Spirit will strengthen the saints, and the Son, Christ, will make His home in their hearts. Here again, it is clear that all Three exist at the same time.
Second Corinthians 13:14 says, “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit, be with you all.” Here are mentioned the grace of Christ the Son, the love of God the Father, and the fellowship or communion of the Holy Spirit. All Three are present at the same time.
First Corinthians 12:4-6 speaks of the Spirit of gifts, the Lord of administrations, and the God of operations. Here we see the Spirit, the Lord, and God. Once again, the Spirit, the Son, and the Father are shown to exist and work at the same time. The Spirit is giving gifts, the Lord is administering, and God the Father is operating. Therefore, we do not believe that the Father has ever ceased to exist, that the Son came to replace Him, and that, after a time, the Spirit replaced the Son. We believe that all Three, the Father, the Son, and the Spirit, are eternal and exist at the same time.
http://www.contendingforthefaith.org/responses/booklets/revelation.html [ My bolding ]
Modalism teaches that when the Father exists, the Son and the Spirit do not. When the Son exists, the Father and the Spirit do not, and when the Holy Spirit exists, the Father and the Son do not.
Copied here from "Modalism, Tritheism, or the Pure Revelation of the Triune God by Ron Kangus - (a co-worker of Brother Witness Lee who happened also to be a graduate of Princeton Theological Seminary, to the best of my knowledge).
[My bolding]
MODALISM
Some Definitions
Let us begin with modalism. Because this term is unfamiliar to many Christians, we need to define four words-mode, modal, modalism, and modalist. According to its philosophical meaning, a mode denotes the appearance or form assumed by a thing; it refers to the manifestation, form, or manner of arrangement of some underlying substance. The adjective modal specifies the mode of a thing as distinguished from its substance or essence. Modalism is the theological doctrine that the Father, Son, and Spirit are not three distinct Persons, but rather three modes or forms of activity under which God manifests Himself. A modalist is an adherent of the theological doctrine of modalism.
The Modalistic Concept of the Trinity
According to the modalistic concept of the Trinity, the Father, the Son, and the Spirit are not equally and eternally co-existent, but are merely three successive manifestations of God, or three temporary modes of His activity. Modalism, which is actually a form of unitarianism, denies that God in His own inner being is triune. Rather, it claims that the Father, Son, and Spirit are either temporary or successive roles adopted by God in carrying out the divine plan of redemption and that they in no way correspond to anything in the ultimate nature of the Godhead.1 Modalism does not recognize the independent personality of Christ, but regards the incarnation as a mode of the existence or manifestation of the Father.2 For the modalists, the Father, Son, and Spirit only refer to the way in which God reveals Himself, but bear no relation to His inner being.3
1 edit
So here's what bothers some of our critics and the critics of Witness Lee.
If Ron Kangus says of Modalism -
. 1 Modalism does not recognize the independent personality of Christ, but regards the incarnation as a mode of the existence or manifestation of the Father.
then WHY do we teach -
1.) " And the Word became flesh " (John 1:14) or
2.) "... the last Adam became a life giving Spirit" .
Some critics say - "You're teaching modes. You're teaching that the Word who was God became flesh or that Christ became the Holy Spirit. Vintage Modalism !! "
Well, we are QUOTING the Bible.
It is not even an interpretation. These are QUOTATIONS.
And we should believe ALL that the word of God teaches. If it is paradoxical it is just paradoxical. We can still EXERIENCE the Triune God.
"In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." (John 1:1)
This is sheer mysterious paradox. But it is the oracles of God. And we not Witness Lee nor other Christians are "Modalist" simply because they believe this -
The Logos was WITH God.
The Logos WAS God.
The Logos (with God and was God) "became flesh and tabernacled among us" (John 1:14)
Some Christians want to believe all that the Bible says.
We do not feel to nullify one revelation to uphold another.
We feel to say "Amen" to both revelations.
This we find to be the most blessed way.
1 edit
Below is one of Witness Lee's real practical usages of the teaching of 2 Corinthians 3:17 . As you can see it is not for theological debate but rather for very practical experience.
THE LORD BEING THE SPIRIT,
AND WHERE THE SPIRIT OF THE LORD IS,
THERE BEING FREEDOM
Second Corinthians 3:17 says, “And The Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.” Our heart needs to turn to the Lord, and The Lord is the Spirit. Thus, our heart must turn to the Spirit. The Spirit is within us today. We have to turn to the Lord, the Spirit, within us. This is wonderful. We have to learn to turn within to our spirit to fellowship with the Lord so that we can be mingled with the Spirit. We are always facing the outside and are turned away from the Lord. Thus, we have to learn to turn within where the Lord is. The Lord is the Spirit, so when we turn to the Lord we are turning to the Spirit. In addition, the Spirit is within us. Thus, in order to turn to the Lord, we have to turn to our spirit within. When we turn back to our spirit within, we sense the presence of the Lord. However, whenever we turn to the outside, to the soul, there is no presence of the Lord.
The Lord is the Spirit within us, our person is on the outside, and our heart is in between the Lord and us. When the heart turns outward, it turns away from the Lord. This is the veil. When the heart turns inward, it turns to the Lord, and the veil is taken away. How do we know if we are turning to the Lord or turning away from the Lord? In 2 Corinthians 3 Paul says The Lord is the Spirit and that where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. Freedom is the big proof. Where the Lord is, there is freedom. When the Lord is in our mind, our mind is freed. When the Lord is in our emotion, our emotion is freed. And when Lord is in our will, our will is freed.
From The Way For A Christian To Mature by Witness Lee
http://www.ministrybooks.org/SearchMinBooksDsp.cfm?id=3504CC7FDC
3 edits
Originally posted by sonship
So here's what bothers some of our critics and the critics of Witness Lee.
If Ron Kangus says of Modalism -
. [b]1 Modalism does not recognize the independent personality of Christ, but regards the incarnation as a mode of the existence or manifestation of the Father.
then WHY do we teach -
1.) " And the Word became ...[text shortened]... another.
We feel to say "Amen" to both revelations.
This we find to be the most blessed way.The Logos was WITH God.
The Logos WAS God.
This is a false teaching that cannot be established from the Greek text. The text actually reads,
En Arche en ho logos, kia ho logos en pros ton theon, kia theos en ho logos.
The last clause you will note 'kia theos en ho logos', the term theos has no definite article making it both linguistically and grammatically a predicate noun. This is very important because it means that the writer intended us to understand not that the Word WAS God as you have erroneously asserted, but that the word WAS divine. In the most strictest conservative translation the text should actually read 'the word was a god' to indicate the indefinte Greek construct. There is no room and certainly nothing in the text to state that the Word was God and your denial of this is simply wilful ignorance.
Why your translators have translated the other clauses correctly according to the grammatical structure of the Greek idiom and ignored it with regard to the last clause I cannot say although I suspect its simply another case of religious bias being imposed upon scripture. If the Writer had wanted to say 'the Word was God', he would of necessity have to have written, 'kia ho theos en ho logos'. But he did not, what he actually wrote was 'kia theos en ho logos.'
"the Word was Divine" (Goodspeed, E.J. An American Translation N.T. 1923).
"the Logos was Divine" (Moffatt, J. The Bible 1950).
"And what God was, the Word was" (New English Bible 1961).
"the Word was Divine" (Schonfield, H.L. Authentic N.T. 1956).
"The Word was with God and shared his nature" (Translator's N.T. 1973).
"and the nature of the Word was the same as the nature of God" (Barclay, W. N.T. 1968).
http://www.angelfire.com/space/thegospeltruth/trinity/verses/Jn1_1.html
4 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI am sorry but I simply don't believe you.
The Logos was WITH God.
The Logos WAS God.
This is a false teaching that cannot be established from the Greek text. The text actually reads,
En Arche en ho logos, kia ho logos en pros ton theon, kia theos en ho logos.
The last clause you will note 'kia theos en ho logos', the term theos has no definite article making it both linguistical ...[text shortened]... 'kia ho theos en ho logos'. But he did not, what he actually wrote was 'kia theos en ho logos.'
And I don't trust your Greek translating skills.
And you are likely to dismiss any scholarly disagreement with your assessment as conspiracy and collusion. So it is pretty pointless to argue about it.
Any translations not going along with your New World Translation "the word was a god" you are programmed to dismiss as biased conspiracy and collusion - the prejudice of all Christiandom.
By the way, I have not yet looked at your explanation about the Acts passage. It is on my to-do list though.
New International Version
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
New Living Translation
In the beginning the Word already existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God.
English Standard Version
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
New American Standard Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
King James Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Holman Christian Standard Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
International Standard Version
In the beginning, the Word existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God.
NET Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was fully God.
Aramaic Bible in Plain English
In the origin The Word had been existing and That Word had been existing with God and That Word was himself God.
GOD'S WORD® Translation
In the beginning the Word already existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Jubilee Bible 2000
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the God, and the Word was God.
King James 2000 Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
American King James Version
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
American Standard Version
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Douay-Rheims Bible
IN the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Darby Bible Translation
In [the] beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
English Revised Version
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Webster's Bible Translation
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
8 edits
Originally posted by sonshipI don't care whether you believe me or not i have provided the reasoning why its a false teaching and an erroneous translation. If you can point out from that reasoning and the actual Greek text why its erroneous then please do so, stating that you don't believe me is not a reason and in fact its rather clear that you are willfully ignorant.
I am sorry but I simply I don't believe you.
And I don't trust your Greek translating skills.
And you are likely dismiss any scholarly disagreement with your assessment as [b]conspiracy and collusion. So it is pretty pointless to argue about it.
Any translations not going along with your New World Translation "the word was a god" you are ...[text shortened]... [/b]
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
[/quote][/b]
On the basis therefore of the reasons that I provided Witness Lee is a false teacher and a charlatan.
Tell us why 'kia theos en ho logos', is not an indefinite Greek clause and the term theos a predicate noun. I repeat I don't care what you believe, I am not interested in what you believe, i am interested in what the Bible actually says. All of the translations that you cite are corrupt and biased for they do not accurately convey (for the reasons I have given) what the Greek text actually says.
If you know this and yet continue in your charade does that not make you wilfully ignorant and therefore morally reprehensible? If Witness Lee also knew this and continued in his charade, does that not also make him willfully ignorant and morally reprehensible?