11,141
edits
Vaylism: Difference between revisions
→Denial of the Deity of Christ
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
==Denial of the Deity of Christ== | ==Denial of the Deity of Christ== | ||
Lee Vayle denied the deity of Jesus Christ and, as far as we can determine, preached a mashup of Nestorianism | Lee Vayle denied the deity of Jesus Christ and, as far as we can determine, preached a mashup of Nestorianism and Arianism. It's difficult to tell exactly what Lee Vayle taught on this issue because his teaching was convoluted and complicated. However, this should come as no surprise because the teachings of William Branham on the subject are also confused and convoluted. | ||
'''[[Arianism]]''' was a heresy first taught by Arius (ca. AD 250–336) in Alexandria, Egypt. Arius asserted that the Son of God was a subordinate entity to God the Father. Similar doctrine is also taught by Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons. | '''[[Arianism]]''' was a heresy first taught by Arius (ca. AD 250–336) in Alexandria, Egypt. Arius asserted that the Son of God was a subordinate entity to God the Father. Similar doctrine is also taught by Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons. | ||
| Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
[[Nestorianism]] is the heretical doctrine that Jesus existed as two persons, the man Jesus and the divine Son of God, rather than as a unified person. | [[Nestorianism]] is the heretical doctrine that Jesus existed as two persons, the man Jesus and the divine Son of God, rather than as a unified person. | ||
What we do know is that Lee Vayle and his followers deny the deity of Jesus Christ, believe that Jesus Christ was a man who was simply possessed by God. As a result, they also deny the incarnation. | |||
Here are a few quotes by Lee Vayle that clearly demonstrate the heretical nature of his teaching: | |||
:''Well, let's just talk about this then, and go back two thousand years at the time of the Lord Jesus Christ when He was upon earth here, the Father indwelling the Son. "This is My beloved Son, and I the Father am pleased to dwell in him." '''Now neither the Father nor the Son were impersonating each other, or someone or something else, as to their individuality and separateness. In other words, the Father was the Father and the Son was the Son. We're talking of individuals.''' | |||
:''...Now, yet the Father indwelt the Son, and yet they had a separateness, and though '''the two roles were there simultaneously as were the two persons''', they still were not one like my finger's one. There is a oneness that you and I can apprehend by scripture, which simply says, "He that is joined to the Lord is one spirit." | |||
:''...Now, the Son was the physical body and manifested himself, but the Father also manifested Himself through the Son. You say, "Hey just a minute now, we've got this... this is really bad. We've got dual personalities here." Yup. Don't you know the Father actually spoke through the mouth of Jesus? True. "Thy words were altogether in my tongue. You moved my tongue and I heard myself talk." Oh you talk about a dilly! How many heard that tape, where that strange kind of voice speaks through Bro. Branham on the tape, and says, "This is not Bro. Branham speaking, this is the Lord Jesus Christ." How many heard that? Let's get that tape and play it. Find the place and play it. So everybody hears it. | |||
:''...So, '''again we have a duality.''' We have a prophet in whom this Spirit is, which is Almighty God. Giving him the works, which everybody knows has to be of God, vindicating the man is of God, pointing to the words, which that people have to have to get them ready! | |||
:''...God, His Own prophet, with the man of His choosing, also called a prophet, and '''William Branham had his role, and God had His role, and they're absolutely individual and separate, and yet one met within the other.''' | |||
:''...Now, where is He? On the throne. See, '''you're looking today at our elder brother''', we're looking at Him in every aspect of God in life, that's the family of God, and we're seeing here that He is the author and the finisher. And notice what it says, He sat down at the right hand of God. That's been changed. He's on the throne of God! Waiting for us. That's why Bro. Branham said, "When He died, I was there paying for my sins on Calvary. When He rose, I rose with Him." '''And the truth is, when He climbed on His Father's throne, then we had to climb on with Him!'''<ref>Lee Vayle, Leadership #11, Accepting The Person Christ, 21 Aug 1994</ref> | |||
:''All right, now. He's putting the two together; and remember, Bro. Branham said, "'''Jesus was a dual personality'''." And we know that the Father indwelt him. | |||
:''...Now, '''when we're looking at Jesus, we're looking at duality''', and the big thing is this: what if we find that '''God merely made a body for him, and this Son of God was allowed to inhabit this body and come down here.''' Could he then do for us what is necessary to be done? No! By no means, no! Because Jesus, the Son, is not Jehovah-Shepherd, although he is the Shepherd, that's conferred upon him. '''He is not even Jehovah-Savior''', although that is also part of it, and conferred upon him. He is not the Supplier; '''He is not the Healer''', though every one of those things are in him on the grounds of him being the Son of God and God Himself operating as all of those nine tremendous characteristics and qualities of grace that God has toward us, were actually poured into Christ, because the fullness of the Godhead was in him bodily. | |||
:''...God indwelling that body, God was amongst us. And yet It says, "Thou shalt call His name, the born one, Jesus, for he shall save us from our sins." And God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto him. '''It's a duality, the Father and the Son, but the Son is not God!''' The Son is the Son of God. He had a beginning. Essentially he is like God, but he's not God. God does not have the value and virtue of being able to make a decision. | |||
:''...Now right in there you can see this body born, was born with a personality, the man, we call 'Christ Jesus', and at that time, God came in to his very being, and now, as Bro. Branham said, "You have a duality." | |||
:''...So what we're looking at now is the supreme Deity of Jesus, not as the Trinitarians, not as the Oneness, but we're seeing the supreme Deity of Jesus. '''God has now invaded him and taken over so that Jesus has now sublet his body to God''': God in perfect supremacy, complete Dictator in this body, completely running it, "He that has seen me has seen the Father. You're looking at me, aren't you?" So what is it? he says, "It's not William Branham does these things ever so perfectly, tells these things and they come to pass," nor was it Jesus, the man. It was God. And that was the body of God. Even though it was the body of Jesus, it was the body of God. | |||
:''...There's more than one place where the Father and Son are a complete unit, '''a duality: two people dwelling in one flesh''', that evidently God Himself prepared for Jesus. And then It says, "God was in Christ reconciling the world."<ref>Lee Vayle, Godhead - #2, 3 Oct 1999</ref> | |||
:''...the church has made '''the great mistake in making Jesus equal to God''' — which he is in a certain way — '''but he’s not God. He’s not Deity'''. I’m sorry, but he’s not, because God is not in him. No way. What God was in him is not Deity, same as what God is in you is not Deity, concerning Deity Himself, which is Sovereign God and Creator and Maintainer.''<ref>Lee Vayle, Godhead Q&A #4: Tangibility of God, 11-05-2000 </ref> | :''...the church has made '''the great mistake in making Jesus equal to God''' — which he is in a certain way — '''but he’s not God. He’s not Deity'''. I’m sorry, but he’s not, because God is not in him. No way. What God was in him is not Deity, same as what God is in you is not Deity, concerning Deity Himself, which is Sovereign God and Creator and Maintainer.''<ref>Lee Vayle, Godhead Q&A #4: Tangibility of God, 11-05-2000 </ref> | ||