Posted by Steve B., et al on 4/5/2001, 1:44 pm

Posted by Steve B. on 3/16/2001, 3:56 pm [I've been doing more thinking about the dual nature doctrine that the Chapel taught. Below are some thoughts on the subject that I've posted on my Web page in the Spirituality/Wrong Turns/Oneness Doctrine Section. I've also spiffed up the rest of the site, and finally added a link to the Chapel Memorial Board. I've always meant to add the link, but just never seemed to remember to do it when I happened to have the time.] When I took the “Advanced Unfolding Revelation of God” class at Community Chapel Bible college, Mike Sabourin started off the first day by lecturing on “The Importance of the Subject.” Today, twenty years after taking that class and thirteen years after the collapse of the Chapel, I find it rather poignant that one of the reasons given was that the Chapel’s version of Oneness was “a safety against cult teaching - an unsound understanding of the nature of God opens one up to mistaken teaching.” I now believe UROG (as we referred to the Chapel's version of the Oneness doctrine) was itself false doctrine, and also that it was one factor that made us vulnerable to the scandalous behavior that caused the collapse of the Chapel. This at first may seem an unlikely charge, but if what people believe has any affect on the course of their day-to-day lives, then I think I have a pretty strong case. Community Chapel collapsed in a scandal because relationships among the members of the body of Christ there had been seriously perverted by the teaching that God was moving among them in “spiritual unions” or “connections.” I think I can see how the Chapel’s flawed view of the nature of Jesus led to its flawed view of the nature of our relationship to him, and therefore of the nature of our relationship to each other in his Body, the church. In the Chapel's theology we were asked to see Jesus as “the glorified Son of Man,” with whom we could fellowship apart from his deity, which was said to be due only to the Father dwelling in him, not to his own nature. As early as 1983, Don was talking about the need for a “spiritual union” with the glorified Son of Man. In September of 1983, Don preached a sermon series on “Having Fellowship with the Son of Man.” The notes I took of it include these remarks: Is Jesus worshipped as deity only, or also as the son of man? The word ‘Christ’ does not speak of deity; it speaks of humanity (‘Christ’ means anoninted—God is the anointer, not the anointed.) We are to worship the Son of Man—not the man of Nazareth, but the glorified Son of Man... It is God's will that we have fellowship w/His Son: ? Col 1:9 - fellowship w/his Son. It is not enough to have fellowship legally. He wants us to have it exprerientially. It is not enough to legally put on X—God wants it experientially. We need a real spiritual union.—a flow both ways. God wants us to know Him. This union starts when we are born-again and increases through several steps. BHS, etc. The love of the Son of Man is not romantic—it shd not be difficult for men to experience—it is a spiritual thing—He died for us and is now glorified. When “spiritual unions” did arrive three years later, here is how Barbara described her first experience with one: Jesus was there—with me—looking into my eyes and seeing everything I was. With all knowledge, He still gave me unconditional acceptance. I looked into his eyes and I saw Jesus my Friend, my Savior, my Lover and Bridegroom! I was experiencing Jesus with skin on! We never touched. Our spirits merged—we became one. The song ended. Overwhelmed, I staggered to the wall. Another song began; he came to me and we worshipped again. When that song ended, he said, “Thank you, Barbara,” and backed away to the door. I slumped to the floor in complete joy and ecstasy. ...It was 3:00 a.m. before I could walk down the stairs to my car. I knew that Jesus, the glorified Son of Man, had—in union with another human being's spirit—manifested Himself to me, and by doing so, our spirits melded into one. I was certain the Father had answered Jesus' prayer of John 17:21—‘That they may be one as we are.’ So it was clearly in the context of the pursuit of “fellowship with the glorified Son of Man” that the doctrine of spiritual connections developed and grew. In that pursuit relationships between brothers and sisters in the Lord were perverted, leading to the downfall of not only the pastor's ministry and marriage but also to that of the Chapel itself. I hope it is obvious that I am not saying Oneness doctrine in and of itself inevitably leads to degraded relationships in the body of Christ. All of us who were at the Chapel know there were several other obvious factors that contributed to the crisis. But it is equally obvious to me that an incorrect view of the nature of Christ, of his relationship to the Father, and of our fellowship with both, also contributed to our destruction as a church. In a word, the Chapel's “dual nature” doctrine played a part in opening us to deception. Because we were worshipping and pursuing fellowship not with God but with (as we thought) a glorified man, we got further and further off the path as we tried to walk with Him. [Continued...] Steve Born Email: srborn@seanet.com Home page: http://www.seanet.com/~srborn/