Bishop's Epistle: Another Comforter (Answering Objections to Modalism)

(Excerpted from the book "Godhead Theology."

John 14:16 “And I will pray the Father, and He shall give you another Comforter, that He may abide with you forever.

Pluralists’ Objection to Modalism

In this passage, we have three persons in view. The Son is speaking, the Father is requested to send the Comforter. The word ANOTHER in this text is the Greek word “allos.” ALLOS means, “another one of the same sort.” Therefore, the Holy Spirit is “another person” of the Godhead, i.e. of the same sort as the Son.

Modalism’s Response

The word “another” is given in the Greek as “allos” or “heteros.” We are told by Thayer and Vine that, while these two words in the Greek represent two different understandings of the word “another,” the distinction between them many times becomes blurred, or even lost.

Allos designates “another of the same kind.” Heteros designates “another of a different kind.” While in most places the designation is maintained, there are a few instances where their individualities seem to be lost. An example of this is found in 1 Corinthians 12:8-10 and 14:17-19. Here the two words “allos” and “heteros” are alternated back and forth. Given, here is the example from 1 Corinthians 12:8-10. (The 14:17-19 passages follows a like pattern.)

1 Corinthians 12:8-10
8 ᾧ μὲν γὰρ διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος δίδοται λόγος σοφίας, ἄλλῳ (allos) δὲ λόγος γνώσεως
For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; another the word of knowledge
κατὰ τὸ αὐτὸ πνεῦμα,
by the same Spirit;

9 ἑτέρῳ (heterō) πίστις ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πνεύματι, ἄλλῳ (allō) δὲ χαρίσματα ἰαμάτων ἐν τῷ ἑνὶ
To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same
πνεύματι,
Spirit;

10 ἄλλῳ (allō) δὲ ἐνεργήματα δυνάμεων, ἄλλῳ (allō) [δὲ] προφητεία, ἄλλῳ (allō) [δὲ]
To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning
διακρίσεις πνευμάτων, ἑτέρῳ (heterō) γένη γλωσσῶν, ἄλλῳ (allō) δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν:
discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:

The word in our text (John 14:16) is allos. Normally, the idea would be, “a different one of the same kind.” When a word has a normal use, then that understanding should be the first consideration, and the one favored, unless the context of the passage gives a strong indication that the normal use of the word should be set aside and a secondary use applied. While all concerned will agree with this reasoning, it is the opinion of this writer that the true distinction of the word allos is maintained in our text.

First, to answer the Pluralists’ charge of multiple god-persons from this text, we need to look at the context of the passage and identify those mentioned within it. The one speaking is Christ, He says: “I will pray the Father, and He shall give you another Comforter;...” If we look to the very next verse, v17, the Comforter is identified as the Spirit of Truth; the Spirit of Truth, in turn, is identified as Christ in the last part of v17, where Jesus spoke of the Sprit of Truth and said, “...but ye know him for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you;” (In v6 we have already been told that Jesus is the Truth). Verse 18, however, is the clearest of all, in identifying the Comforter with Jesus: “I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you,” Jesus said. Could He have spoken more plainly?

Let’s look at it again. In v17b: Jesus identifies Himself as the Spirit of Truth; v17a: The Spirit of Truth is identified as the Comforter; add to this v26 where the Comforter is identified as the Holy Spirit, and we have the indisputable conclusion that Jesus and the Holy Spirit are one and the same!

We should look, once again, at v18; this time from the Greek text: Οὐκ ἀφήσω ὑμᾶς ὀρφανούς, ἔρχομαι πρὸς ὑμᾶς. (Ouk aphaso human orphanous, erchomai pros humas) “I will not leave you orphans, I am coming to you.” One must take note of the setting of this statement, in order to appreciate these words of Jesus. The Last Supper was over, Judas had departed to betray Him, He is speaking intimately with his disciples of personal things: of last minute things, things that He had purposely not spoken of until now. He spoke to them of the Father, v9; and He spoke to them of His death, that was only hours away. How distressing this must have been on the Apostles. Like children uncertain of their future, afraid of tomorrow, without their parent to guide them, the Apostles became fretful, and all of them at once clamored to ask Jesus questions that reflected their fears. It was as though they had lost all direction, and were reaching out from the darkness of their despair for a hand to ... comfort them. Simon Peter spoke first, and said, “Lord, whither goest thou?” Jesus told Simon that he could not go with Him. Just as a child, afraid of being left alone, Simon replied, “Lord, why cannot I follow thee? I will lay down my life for thy sake.” Why would Simon mention death if he did no have at least some idea that that was where the Lord was going? And why would he be pleading to follow his Master into death, if he were not afraid of being left alone? Now it is Thomas, his mind tearing at the words of Jesus, trying to make some sense of them: “And whither I go ye know and the way ye know.” Speaking from the cavern of his fear, his voice betraying more than his words ever could, Thomas asked, “Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way?” Philip speaks, “Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us.” Can you not hear his cry, “Lord, if we cannot go with you, please do not leave us without anyone, introduce us to the Father.”

Unto these fearing and fretful children, their Father speaks and says, “I will not orphan you, I am coming to you.” Oh friend, notice his words, I am (even now) coming to you. I am not leaving, I am actually coming. I am not going away, I am just arriving. I am with you now, but in just a moment I will be in you. My dying is an act of arriving. I must pass through my flesh in order to dwell within your flesh. It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I do not go away the Comforter will not come unto you. No, my children, I will not orphan you!

Notice, again, the scene: death, a father, fearful children, then a promise: “I will not leave you as orphans, I am coming to you.”

Jesus promised his disciples that He would not orphan them. An orphan is a child that is deprived of parents, one who is left to be cared for by someone other than its natural parents. Jesus is going to die and go away - the Holy Spirit is coming in His place. Do you not see the consequences of this? If the Holy Spirit is a separate person from Jesus, then the disciples were indeed orphaned. But, if the Holy Spirit is in fact Jesus in another mode/form, i.e. Spirit, then the disciples were not orphaned after all, and Jesus told the truth when he said: “I will not leave you orphans, I am coming to you,” Let God be true and every man a lair (Romans 3:4). Yea and Amen!

ALLOS

Much is made by Trinitarians, about the Greek allos, “another one of the same kind.” They feel that this word shows proof that the Holy Spirit is another person from Jesus. As we have already demonstrated, allos and heteros are used interchangeably in several passages of Scripture. So at best, those who would deny the oneness of Jesus with the Holy Spirit do not have a conclusive argument in the word “allos.”

However, the primary meaning of allos, i.e. “another one of the same kind,” does not pose Modalistic theology the slightest pause, when employed in this passage.

We are dealing with two words from the Greek: allos and heteros. Heteros, according to Thayer and Vine expresses qualitative difference, and denotes “another of a different sort.” According to the “Emptying of Deity” understanding of Philippians 2:6-8 regarded by Trinitarians, Jesus, at the time He spoke these words was of a “different sort” than the Holy Spirit. That is to say, according to their view the Son had emptied Himself of deity, while the Holy Spirit had not. The Son, according to this view, was something less than He was before the Incarnation, while the Holy Spirit remained unchanged. Therefore, according to the Trinitarian theology the Holy Spirit was a different god-person of a different quality (sort).

If, this concept would have been true (it is not, but if it had been) then the word heteros should have been used by Jesus to denote another of a different sort from Himself!!

The Modalist view, however, will allow for the Greek allos, “another of the SAME kind.” This is true, because in the Modalist view the deity that had been Incarnated in Jesus had not been emptied in any way. This is emphasized by Colossians 2:9. “For in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.” Therefore, the deity in Christ is the same quality (sort) as that of the Holy Spirit. In that “allos” implies (in its normal use) “another one,” we point to the fact that Jesus’ return as the Holy Spirit was in another mode of His existence in God’s economy of the Deity. Thus fulfilling the normal requirement of the Greek “allos” - DIFFERENT ONE, BUT SAME KIND.

Jesus promised His disciples that He would not orphan them, but that He, not another, would return as the Comforter. In Mark 16:12 we read, “After that, he appeared in another form unto two of them...” In another form! As a companion to this, Paul tells us in Colossians 1:27 that the Comforter, or Holy Spirit, that indwells the believer is “Christ in you, the hope of glory.”

Apostolically Speaking
☩ David Ignatius

If the ministry of the Bishop is a blessing to you, please consider leaving a monetary gift of any amount at the link provided here:

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=4EXSWA2A47ARC

This has been an excerpt from my book, Godhead Theology. You may acquire this book either from me, Amazon.com/Books or order it anywhere books are sold; request your public library acquire a copy. Ask for it by title and author.

http://www.amazon.com/Godhead-Theology-Modalism-Original-Orthodoxy/dp/1516983521/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1444861346&sr=1-1&refinements=p_27%3ABishop+Jerry+Hayes

Defense of 1 Timothy 3:16 (Answering Objections to Modalism)

http://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2019/06/defense-of-first-timothy-316-answering.html

Godhead Theology is a study of Christian Godhead theology. ... Was He God or not? In Godhead Theology Bishop Jerry Hayes follows that debate through the first 300 years of the Church's history. Our book is in five sections: Section One ... demonstrates Modalistic Monarchianism as the original orthodoxy of the Chruch; Section Two introduces the Apostolic Creed ... ; Section Three is an affirmation of Modalistic Monarchianism; Section Four is Modalism's responses to objection from the pluralists Trinitarians, Binitarians, Arians and Semi-Arians. Included are two comprehensive indexes: Subject Index and Scripture Index. 613 pages.

Own this classic book today by ordering from the link provided here:https://www.amazon.com/Godhead-Theology-Modalism-Original-Orthodoxy/dp/1516983521/ref=sr_1_4?keywords=Bishop+Jerry+hayes&qid=1554244653&s=books&sr=1-4

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT BY

PURCHASING OUR BOOKS OF YOUR LIBRARY

Be sure to listen and subscribe to the Bishop's Podcast: Apostolic Bishop, at:

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-apostolicbishops-podcast/id1472262392?fbclid=IwAR2FlRYnNsw5Vu_Bz4PjyEdiAxFMawhtD2BFr_S7WysrpFcYjuQYSHGAlZ

Bishop's Epistle

Thursday, September 10, 2015

Another Comforter (Answering Objections to Modalism)

No comments:

Post a Comment

Bishop, Abbot General