I've had a few discussions with members of Adventist groups (Jehovah's Witnesses, Seventh-day Adventists & Christadelphians) and have come to understand that people within the Adventist Faith Tradition believe / argue for the creature-christ doctrine of Arius (4th century). I was hopeful someone here could describe or break down the mechanics of this teaching for me in the specific context of Seventh-day Adventism. I'm coming from the perspective of Latin Rite Catholicism.
The Arian Creature-Christ Teaching - How Do Seventh-day Adventists define it?
- Thread starter Grunion
- Start date
Chief, I appreciate your thoughtful answers. I'd like to go slow here to make sure I'm understanding what you're saying.
I'll share a very short video of the Trinitarian concept of God,
Before we proceed could let me know if you agree with what this video is saying?
I'll share a very short video of the Trinitarian concept of God,
Before we proceed could let me know if you agree with what this video is saying?
Chief
Chief of Sinners.
I generally steer clear of objectifying God for the purpose of understanding His nature because of the danger of running into limitations of such an approach.
The best pattern that God Himself provided for everyone to understand His Oneness is marriage. Male and female He created them and then pronounced them one. God called them Man.
The anti-Trinitarian Pioneers developed "THE PERSONALITY OF GOD" Doctrine and defined it with precise language so there would be no ambiguity by what they were teaching. Ellen White confirmed their beliefs as correct with her prophetic gift. After years of hammering this Doctrine into Seventh-day Adventists Ellen White reminded the SDA Church that "THE PERSONALITY OF GOD" was a Pillar doctrine of the SDA Church. This was taken to such an extreme that the SDA Flesh God was called "THE SABBATH GOD" while the God of the Methodist, Lutheran, Calvinist, Catholic & Eastern Orthodox Creeds were called "THE SUNDAY GOD".
The above is one example of scores of examples of the leadership of the SDA Church "objectifying God" and classifying God's Nature all the while publicly rebuking the Lutheran, Baptist, Methodists and Reformed Churches for accepting the Trinity Doctrine from Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy. This seems or appears to be disingenuous and from someone looking at it from outside of Seventh-day Adventism it looks like the SDA Church had zero problems objectifying God and classifying God's nature which was originated by the SDA anti-Trinitarian Pioneers and subsequently affirmed by the prophetic ministry of Ellen White - yet, when someone tries to understand the SDA position they are stopped for the reasons you just gave. If I could warmly ask you to re-consider watching the 2 minute or less video I posted after you see the following affirmations from some SDA sources.
This one below from Ellen White REALLY caught my attention.
It didn't seem to be a mystery when they (SDA Pioneers / Ellen White) were codifying it. They even went to far to say that anyone who didn't believe that The Father had a body with all the members and parts of a perfect man WAS A PANTHEIST.
What Ellen just said is that the anti-Trinitarian Pioneer's teaching on the Personality of God is "eternal truth". Yet you won't entertain looking at this question from my point of view because you don't like to objectify God and try to understand God's Nature?
rob
Active member
I like what you said Chief, nice succinct EGW too.
I would like to add one point though not known to the average SDA: -
A study of the word dissolution
If it were true that the souls of all men passed directly to heaven at the hour of dissolution, then we might well covet death rather than life. Many have been led by this belief to put an end to their existence. When overwhelmed with trouble, perplexity, and disappointment, it seems an easy thing to break the brittle thread of life and soar away into the bliss of the eternal world. {DD 16.3}
It is a solemn thing to die, but a far more solemn thing to live. Every thought and word and deed of our lives will meet us again. What we make of ourselves in probationary time, that we must remain to all eternity.Death brings dissolution to the body, but makes no change in the character. The coming of Christ does not change our characters; it only fixes them forever beyond all change. {5T 466.2}
It was the sense of sin, bringing the Father’s wrath upon him as man’s substitute, that made the cup he drank so bitter, and broke the heart of the Son of God. Death is not to be regarded as an angel of mercy. Nature recoils from the thought of dissolution, which is the consequence of sin. {3SP 161.2}
We know Jesus humanity died, the breath of life returned unto the Father. But we also learn in the grave the body of Jesus did not fall into corruption. Meaning His body did not undergo "dissolution". Why is that?
My two pennies is that "muwth muwth" the second death, is about a separation of powers from the FATHER. In this sense things cease. Jesus divine nature did not die is correct in a sense if we define death as the dissolution of biology, but in another sense He experienced God head powers of separation. It proves that the Godhead for the first time in all eternity experienced separation, truly the sacrifice of love was an infinite gift. What do you think of this ?
Ps 22:1 My Strong Authority , my Strong Authority, why hast thou forsaken me? why art thou so far from Yashah, and from the words of my roaring? (with Hebrew intent)
Shalom
I would like to add one point though not known to the average SDA: -
A study of the word dissolution
If it were true that the souls of all men passed directly to heaven at the hour of dissolution, then we might well covet death rather than life. Many have been led by this belief to put an end to their existence. When overwhelmed with trouble, perplexity, and disappointment, it seems an easy thing to break the brittle thread of life and soar away into the bliss of the eternal world. {DD 16.3}
It is a solemn thing to die, but a far more solemn thing to live. Every thought and word and deed of our lives will meet us again. What we make of ourselves in probationary time, that we must remain to all eternity.Death brings dissolution to the body, but makes no change in the character. The coming of Christ does not change our characters; it only fixes them forever beyond all change. {5T 466.2}
It was the sense of sin, bringing the Father’s wrath upon him as man’s substitute, that made the cup he drank so bitter, and broke the heart of the Son of God. Death is not to be regarded as an angel of mercy. Nature recoils from the thought of dissolution, which is the consequence of sin. {3SP 161.2}
We know Jesus humanity died, the breath of life returned unto the Father. But we also learn in the grave the body of Jesus did not fall into corruption. Meaning His body did not undergo "dissolution". Why is that?
My two pennies is that "muwth muwth" the second death, is about a separation of powers from the FATHER. In this sense things cease. Jesus divine nature did not die is correct in a sense if we define death as the dissolution of biology, but in another sense He experienced God head powers of separation. It proves that the Godhead for the first time in all eternity experienced separation, truly the sacrifice of love was an infinite gift. What do you think of this ?
Ps 22:1 My Strong Authority , my Strong Authority, why hast thou forsaken me? why art thou so far from Yashah, and from the words of my roaring? (with Hebrew intent)
Shalom
rob
Active member
Greetings Grunion
I watched the video and my answer is NO.
The Father's power - Provider Love - would not function if such provider love providing had no-one for this love to respond to.
We also learn the Father's power is faithful - What does faith mean? If there is no other parts? Faith means to support someone
You cannot complete your loving if there is no-one to respond.
You cannot show faithfulness if there is no-one to support you.
Therefore the Elohiym Power is a Divine Family.
Some excuse a solitary God saying he created creatures to make His Provider love respond? yeah right? Like Adam the Father would be lonely. Romans 1:20 speaks of Creations opening our eyes into the Godhead Nature, so none are without excuse.
Also there is no such Hebrew word as "self" despite fuzzy translations to the contrary.
Mt 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
Notice a verse:-
Le 19:18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD. (KJV)
Le 19:18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as like: I am the LORD. (with Hebrew intent)
The word "k@mow" is a comparing word - meaning like
The first command is to love God with your heart
The second command is to love thy neighbour as God loves you.
Jesus speaks of only TWO types of love - not three - so self love does not exist
But provider love and responder love does - the Hebrew words are ahab and ahabah
Jer 31:3 The LORD hath appeared of old unto me, saying, Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love: therefore with lovingkindness have I drawn thee. (KJV)
Jer 31:3 The LORD hath appeared of "eternity" unto me, saying, Yea, I have "provider loved" thee with an everlasting "responding love": therefore with lovingkindness have I drawn thee.
This verse equates the Godhead with two functions of love. The ahab comes from the Father, the ahabah from the Holy Spirit, so that united the love flows from one spring. Therefore love flows from parts. The video is wrong.
Shalom
Hi Rob, I'll do my best to be charitable and not be too long winded here. If I'm not mistaken you said Christ was "part of the Godhead", right? If Arius (& Ellen White's) hypothetical scenario of the Son of God sinning would have been realized you, Ellen & Arius all affirm that part of the Godhead would have ceased to exist, eternally.
This is 100% anti-Trinitarian without doubt.
The Father would not be the Father without the Son, nor would the Son be the Son without the Father - in the unity of the Holy Spirit. Jesus was NOT 1/3rd of God Rob, Jesus is eternally 100% God. You should understand why your affirmations demonstrate you are not Trinitarian.
I'm fine with you just admitting you are not Trinitarian, I'd have no further questions for you if you did that and we could talk about something else that interests you. It's not reasonable to discuss the Trinity with you if you claim that the Son of God is "part" of the Trinity and that Son of God could eternally cease to be part of the Godhead leaving a "RUPTURE" as Ellen White called it. There would be nothing productive to come out any discussions on the Trinity.
Is there not any SDA's on this form that are willing to claim they are Trinitarian all the while asserting that part of God could have eternally died off leaving only the two remaining Beings?
This is 100% anti-Trinitarian without doubt.
The Father would not be the Father without the Son, nor would the Son be the Son without the Father - in the unity of the Holy Spirit. Jesus was NOT 1/3rd of God Rob, Jesus is eternally 100% God. You should understand why your affirmations demonstrate you are not Trinitarian.
I'm fine with you just admitting you are not Trinitarian, I'd have no further questions for you if you did that and we could talk about something else that interests you. It's not reasonable to discuss the Trinity with you if you claim that the Son of God is "part" of the Trinity and that Son of God could eternally cease to be part of the Godhead leaving a "RUPTURE" as Ellen White called it. There would be nothing productive to come out any discussions on the Trinity.
Is there not any SDA's on this form that are willing to claim they are Trinitarian all the while asserting that part of God could have eternally died off leaving only the two remaining Beings?
Last edited:
rob
Active member
Greetings Grunion
I re-read and compiled your earlier sentences so I can discuss your view properly.
Yes there is a EGW message "
Had the head of Christ been touched, the hope of the human race would have perished.Divine wrath would have come upon Christ as it came upon Adam. Christ and the church would have been without hope.55 {FLB 49.5}
Your other proof is dated "Signs of the times 1940" no such thing in EGW Writings.org - I assume such a message is not written by EGW and or I can't verify your presentations. Therefore the sentences are NOT inspired.
There is nothing in EGW writings.org regarding "rupture" whatever that means. Your question is really in a deep mystery - ? nothing said by EGW about what happens if Jesus would have broken faith.
[ Jesus-YHWH is in prophecy to have succeeded - Divinity knows the outcomes of all decisions before temptations happen. - Something things are too high for our thinking Ps 131:1 ]
I do not see Jesus-YHWH as 1/3 Divinity or 1/3 God as you claim.
If Mrs Dog died well Mr Dog would lose much, but Mr Dog is still fully a canine kind.
Grunion :"Is there not any SDA's on this forum that are willing to claim they are Trinitarian all the while asserting that part of God could have eternally died off leaving only the two remaining Beings?
Rob: "First off "Mr Dog, Mrs Dog and Puppy are all canine kind, that is one being. But there are three personalities of canine, or three persons of canine. Scripture says when you marry the personalities become unified as one.
Lev 18:8 for instance, a Wifes nakedness is the Father's nakedness, the torah equates them as the same.
If Jesus-YHWH had sinned, His Divinity could not die off as you claim, Nor do I see each member of the Divine Family as separate beings, they are separate persons, each with unique personalities of love, but not separate beings.
EGW never describes "three beings" however she does describe "three persons" or "three personalities"
so you made an error in your statement.
There are no EGW comments on what would have happened if Jesus-YHWH had broken faith.
First you need to understand what breaking faith means as a process.
1) This is why Jesus and the HS and the Father all live by faith in each other, so that breaking faith, is possible within the Godhead
If one lived all alone in one's own divine power, this is a pagan deity view, we have than three independent deities, polytheism - false view of ELohiym power in heaven.
But it is not like this :
They all have faith in each other and live by supporting each other.
This makes breaking off support, breaking faith, something even Divinity can do but would never choose to do.
When the angels sinned and broke faith in the Father, 1/6 angels repented and the Father took them back.
Not necessary for sin-offering for their missing. Have you considered that?
Why would Jesus have used his own power? to overcome a human carpenter mistake? to overcome sleep?
to make stones into bread being hungry? Such use of power is selfish and presumption. A sin.
2) Some say Jesus prayed so long to His Father that His entire day was planned and made provisions for so that by faith Jesus needed only repeat what was already told the night before. Wow we could only dream for a communion level such as this? My point is how much do you understand fervent prayer and fasting for the faith process?
3) It is my two pennies when the Father and the HS and the Son all left the Son to "die" on the Cross for "sin-offering"
the entire Elohiym Power was in agony - not just the Son. It is my understanding had Jesus failed in perfect faith, the entire Elohiym Power would have imploded taking all infinity with it !!
4) This kind of experience will be experienced by the 144,000 who live "imputed divine lives" without direct Divine imparted power, for a enough days to prove to the Opposer that divinity can be imparted to humans who continue to live without sinning. Should a single human fail, it would prove the entire process of salvation does not impute divinity by faith.
And God would be proved a lie and a fake !
You need to understand genuine faith and how the process functions.
Mrs White defines genuine faith as "to appropriate to yourself by faith the precious promises in the Word of God"
That means the Divine Powers become imputed to you - and you live in Divine Powers. - not selfishly but in humility.
You question is exactly the same as the question the 144,000 face - would any of them sealed for glory - break faith?
The answer is no. Satan will try to tempt them - but He fails - and God is true.
The same process and question you ask about Jesus.
Once you know how faith works as a process and what faith is, you will never break faith.
Shalom my friend
I re-read and compiled your earlier sentences so I can discuss your view properly.
Yes there is a EGW message "
Had the head of Christ been touched, the hope of the human race would have perished.Divine wrath would have come upon Christ as it came upon Adam. Christ and the church would have been without hope.55 {FLB 49.5}
Your other proof is dated "Signs of the times 1940" no such thing in EGW Writings.org - I assume such a message is not written by EGW and or I can't verify your presentations. Therefore the sentences are NOT inspired.
There is nothing in EGW writings.org regarding "rupture" whatever that means. Your question is really in a deep mystery - ? nothing said by EGW about what happens if Jesus would have broken faith.
[ Jesus-YHWH is in prophecy to have succeeded - Divinity knows the outcomes of all decisions before temptations happen. - Something things are too high for our thinking Ps 131:1 ]
I do not see Jesus-YHWH as 1/3 Divinity or 1/3 God as you claim.
If Mrs Dog died well Mr Dog would lose much, but Mr Dog is still fully a canine kind.
Grunion :"Is there not any SDA's on this forum that are willing to claim they are Trinitarian all the while asserting that part of God could have eternally died off leaving only the two remaining Beings?
Rob: "First off "Mr Dog, Mrs Dog and Puppy are all canine kind, that is one being. But there are three personalities of canine, or three persons of canine. Scripture says when you marry the personalities become unified as one.
Lev 18:8 for instance, a Wifes nakedness is the Father's nakedness, the torah equates them as the same.
If Jesus-YHWH had sinned, His Divinity could not die off as you claim, Nor do I see each member of the Divine Family as separate beings, they are separate persons, each with unique personalities of love, but not separate beings.
EGW never describes "three beings" however she does describe "three persons" or "three personalities"
so you made an error in your statement.
There are no EGW comments on what would have happened if Jesus-YHWH had broken faith.
First you need to understand what breaking faith means as a process.
1) This is why Jesus and the HS and the Father all live by faith in each other, so that breaking faith, is possible within the Godhead
If one lived all alone in one's own divine power, this is a pagan deity view, we have than three independent deities, polytheism - false view of ELohiym power in heaven.
But it is not like this :
They all have faith in each other and live by supporting each other.
This makes breaking off support, breaking faith, something even Divinity can do but would never choose to do.
When the angels sinned and broke faith in the Father, 1/6 angels repented and the Father took them back.
Not necessary for sin-offering for their missing. Have you considered that?
Why would Jesus have used his own power? to overcome a human carpenter mistake? to overcome sleep?
to make stones into bread being hungry? Such use of power is selfish and presumption. A sin.
2) Some say Jesus prayed so long to His Father that His entire day was planned and made provisions for so that by faith Jesus needed only repeat what was already told the night before. Wow we could only dream for a communion level such as this? My point is how much do you understand fervent prayer and fasting for the faith process?
3) It is my two pennies when the Father and the HS and the Son all left the Son to "die" on the Cross for "sin-offering"
the entire Elohiym Power was in agony - not just the Son. It is my understanding had Jesus failed in perfect faith, the entire Elohiym Power would have imploded taking all infinity with it !!
4) This kind of experience will be experienced by the 144,000 who live "imputed divine lives" without direct Divine imparted power, for a enough days to prove to the Opposer that divinity can be imparted to humans who continue to live without sinning. Should a single human fail, it would prove the entire process of salvation does not impute divinity by faith.
And God would be proved a lie and a fake !
You need to understand genuine faith and how the process functions.
Mrs White defines genuine faith as "to appropriate to yourself by faith the precious promises in the Word of God"
That means the Divine Powers become imputed to you - and you live in Divine Powers. - not selfishly but in humility.
You question is exactly the same as the question the 144,000 face - would any of them sealed for glory - break faith?
The answer is no. Satan will try to tempt them - but He fails - and God is true.
The same process and question you ask about Jesus.
Once you know how faith works as a process and what faith is, you will never break faith.
Shalom my friend
Last edited:
Again, that's as anti-Trinitarian as it gets Rob. Mormons have the identical understanding as you do yet Mormons are very upfront about their church being NON-Trinitarian. I'm perplexed as to why Seventh-day Adventists don't adopt the Mormon position of honesty in this area.
A female dog is a separate dog from a male dog and both of those are separate dogs from the puppy they had - Yes, these are all DOG'S (that's a plural) and that's my point. In the SDA rubric The Father, The Son & The Holy Spirit are God's but because they are united in mission, love and character they are considered ONE - like a married couple who had several kids is considered a Family.
Perhaps it would be better to have Ellen White explain this rubric.
Look of the mechanics of this. The Unity that Christ and His Apostles had did not destroy Christ's separate body of flesh nor did it destroy the disciples' separate bodies of flesh yet in this analogy they were one. The distinction you fail to make here that I'm certain was INTENTIONALLY made by Ellen White is that Christ was no more "God" than the Apostles were Christ. Spend two minutes thinking about this Rob and it will jump right out of the Ellen White quote and pinch you hard.
In a pack of Dog's one or more can get run over by a car, in a Family, sickness or death can cause one or more members to die, in the SDA version of the Trinity one or possibly more members of the Godhead could eternally cease to exist because each member of the Godhead is A PART OR PORTION OF GOD - just like in the movie Clash of the Titans where Greek God's could be killed off leaving other God's behind. In that movie Hades and Zeus become united in mission and purpose to defeat the Titan Kronos, the Sabbath God.
As Ellen described it there were three "powers" (not one power) and one of these "powers" could have eternally ceased to exist by sinning leaving two powers to manage the Galaxy - thereby imperiling heaven. You could come up with 100 different ways to explain this to a Lutheran, Baptist or Methodist and they would look express horror and shock. Why, because it's NOT Trinitarianism.
This man who provided his testimony to the Sabbath Herald is repudiating the Methodist Churches Article of Faith on the Trinity - something the Seventh-day Adventists had been doing for decades.
So there is no mistake here is the Methodist Trinity Doctrine:
Methodist:
Article I — Of Faith in the Holy Trinity
"There is but one living and true God, everlasting, without body or parts, of infinite power, wisdom, and goodness; the maker and preserver of all things, both visible and invisible. And in unity of this Godhead there are three persons, of one substance, power, and eternity—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost".
Here is the Seventh-day Adventist beef with the above.
Ellen White claimed that Lucifer the archangel became jealous of Christ because Lucifer wanted to "be LIKE God". And after the Son of God was turned into an archangel and given the name "Michael" (which SDA's claims means 'one who is LIKE God' Lucifer became enraged. Let's say you were at the County fair and someone sold you a chicken strip and then you noticed a small sign that said it was actually snake! You go up to the counter and start complaining to the man who sold it to you and he said "it's LIKE chicken".
If you wouldn't be satisfied with that answer should you expect me to be when you use the same rubric on God?
rob
Active member
Grunion selects a message:
Ellen White
The unity that exists between Christ and His disciples does not destroy the personality of either. They are one in purpose, in mind, in character, but not in person. It is thus that God and Christ are one. {8T 269.4}
Look of the mechanics of this. The Unity that Christ and His Apostles had did not destroy Christ's separate body of flesh nor did it destroy the disciples' separate bodies of flesh yet in this analogy they were one. The distinction you fail to make here that I'm certain was INTENTIONALLY made by Ellen White is that Christ was no more "God" than the Apostles were Christ. Spend two minutes thinking about this Rob and it will jump right out of the Ellen White quote and pinch you hard.
Rob: If I asked you how does the Bible tell you how to read inspiration, across 2 chapters even, where would you go to learn, because you are not doing this my friend, you are picking inspiration out in small contexts and twisting major themes.
EGW: "This unity is expressed also in the seventeenth chapter of John, in the prayer of Christ for His disciples: “Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on Me through their word; that they all may be one; as Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be one in Us: that the world may believe that Thou hast sent Me. And the glory which Thou gavest Me I have given them; that they may be one, even as We are one: I in them, and Thou in Me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that Thou hast sent Me, and hast loved them, as Thou hast loved Me.” John 17:20-23. {CCh 76.6}
Wonderful statement! The unity that exists between Christ and His disciples does not destroy the personality of either. They are one in purpose, in mind, in character, but not in person. It is thus that God and Christ are one.... {CCh 76.7}
Grunion are you presenting the idea that Jesus Christ divine nature and his deity is only gifted by the Father to His Son through faith? or through a begotten process?
I would like you, like Mr Canright ( who did not explain the Son) to explain to us how you view Jesus-YHWH?
The context is referring to the “support process” (I imagine you like most SDA do not understand that “amanah” means “support” not “faith” )
When you “support” a Divine Being, that power and mission becomes unified in you, in your character and mission - by beholding Divine Power you are changed - you become a light - a little Jesus yourself (laymen term) . It is not talking about Divinity and the origin of Divinity - or the way Divinity can be transferred to other creatures. Some mysteries are hard - can you gift “immortality” to a creature? I dunno. Only God is immortal.
You state: "Again, that's as anti-Trinitarian as it gets Rob. Mormons have the identical understanding as you do yet Mormons are very upfront about their church being NON-Trinitarian. I'm perplexed as to why Seventh-day Adventists don't adopt the Mormon position of honesty in this area.”
Rob: Yes Mormons I think see Elohiym power as a Father, Mother and Child like entities.
I differ in this because “ab” originally broadly means “Provider” not Father.
The Most High is our “Provider” showing “provider love” ahab.
The Shadday is our Responder showing “responding love” ahabah.
The Shadday administrates the Grand Medium (HS) so the properties of Provider love can be modified so dysfunction can exist without destroying it. Hence this function exists only while a fallen universe with earth in it exists in this state.
The Son shows Collective love, and can thus function as a provider and a responder.
These views are not Mormon nor SDA as I believe, but founded in EGW and the Bible if you read the Ancient Hebrew carefully and use the Hebrew English translator (EGW) to confirm your Bible studies.
Let me show you with one EGW that the Father and the HS are Divine Parents
(16) EGW: “The heavenly Parent is more willing to give the Holy Spirit to them that ask Him than earthly parents are to give good gifts to their children. {YRP 284.3} More: https://spiritualsprings.proboards.com/thread/144/god-best-defined-family
Sadly the SDA see the Father and the HS and Christ all as a “he” whatever that means, is false.
Grunion: "In a pack of Dog's one or more can get run over by a car, in a Family, sickness or death can cause one or more members to die, in the SDA version of the Trinity one or possibly more members of the Godhead could eternally cease to exist because each member of the Godhead is A PART OR PORTION OF GOD
Rob: Again my friend No. My two pennies is I see the Godhead as a battery, with a cathode anode and electrolyte , all with different functions and properties of love, that REQUIRE the eternal support of each other in order to get a flow of love to function as all. Thus the Divine Family cannot “cease” or “fail” or “dissolve” as you claim. However we risk disparaging GOD by thinking too much of this - one cannot define or explain how love functions, there are three primary modes of love, that are interdependent on each other. God is like a community power, and without this arrangement God would cease to exist. Hence the demonstration of muwth muwth separation was only for a few hours in time.
Grunion posts:
Ellen White, GCB Dec 1, 1895
Remember that Christ risked all; "tempted like as we are," he staked EVEN his own eternal existence upon the issue of the conflict. Heaven itself was imperiled for our redemption.
As Ellen described it there were three "powers" (not one power) and one of these "powers" could have eternally ceased to exist by sinning leaving two powers to manage the Galaxy - thereby imperiling heaven. You could come up with 100 different ways to explain this to a Lutheran, Baptist or Methodist and they would look express horror and shock. Why, because it's NOT Trinitarianism.
Rob: Yes, in my two pennies the entire Divinity Power House would cease.
Grunion: "Ellen White claimed that Lucifer the archangel became jealous of Christ because Lucifer wanted to "be LIKE God".
Rob: “ Yes but Lucifer was already like the Most High, functioning as the creature provider.
But he wasn’t happy - Lucifer wanted to replace Jesus as a provider.
The second moral law is about God as Your provider and as you receive you provide for others. Sadly most function as their own provider and selfishly consider nobody else. Their own providing become to them an idol.
Your function as a provider comes to you by faith in Your Provider.
But Lucifer wanted to achieve provider status without asking for it, he wanted it naturally. Is this even possible?
Question: Before sin ever occurred was Jesus-YHWH able to provide power without having to ask all the time by faith in His Father? I dunno - it leads to an interesting question.
Is support the only proper way to get power?
Was Lucifer asking for something that is technically possible but would be a sin?
My feeling is such a quest is not possible? All powers flow by support only - no member of Divinity can be his own island.
Lucifer was asking of the Most High an impossible thing, without invoking dysfunction.
When the Most High created this angel with "inherent natural ability to be a provider", and thus self empowered powers was born, Lucifer used this power to empower others, bringing nearly half of the angels into rebellion, but later 1/6 repented making 1/3 of angel fell with their provider empowering them with self based power.
This power function causes one to self destruct, so cannot function for long, and thus not possible - even though the Most High does this for Lucifer - he only uses such power for spoiling.
Humans receive this self based power by faith in Satan, without asking for it, so this makes having faith in another power , near impossible to do. However if you ask, God can do impossible things easily.
It leads to the question - if you know faith in support, would you even break faith, the answer is no. This is why sin never rises a second time. Shalom
Ellen White
The unity that exists between Christ and His disciples does not destroy the personality of either. They are one in purpose, in mind, in character, but not in person. It is thus that God and Christ are one. {8T 269.4}
Look of the mechanics of this. The Unity that Christ and His Apostles had did not destroy Christ's separate body of flesh nor did it destroy the disciples' separate bodies of flesh yet in this analogy they were one. The distinction you fail to make here that I'm certain was INTENTIONALLY made by Ellen White is that Christ was no more "God" than the Apostles were Christ. Spend two minutes thinking about this Rob and it will jump right out of the Ellen White quote and pinch you hard.
Rob: If I asked you how does the Bible tell you how to read inspiration, across 2 chapters even, where would you go to learn, because you are not doing this my friend, you are picking inspiration out in small contexts and twisting major themes.
EGW: "This unity is expressed also in the seventeenth chapter of John, in the prayer of Christ for His disciples: “Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on Me through their word; that they all may be one; as Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be one in Us: that the world may believe that Thou hast sent Me. And the glory which Thou gavest Me I have given them; that they may be one, even as We are one: I in them, and Thou in Me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that Thou hast sent Me, and hast loved them, as Thou hast loved Me.” John 17:20-23. {CCh 76.6}
Wonderful statement! The unity that exists between Christ and His disciples does not destroy the personality of either. They are one in purpose, in mind, in character, but not in person. It is thus that God and Christ are one.... {CCh 76.7}
Grunion are you presenting the idea that Jesus Christ divine nature and his deity is only gifted by the Father to His Son through faith? or through a begotten process?
I would like you, like Mr Canright ( who did not explain the Son) to explain to us how you view Jesus-YHWH?
The context is referring to the “support process” (I imagine you like most SDA do not understand that “amanah” means “support” not “faith” )
When you “support” a Divine Being, that power and mission becomes unified in you, in your character and mission - by beholding Divine Power you are changed - you become a light - a little Jesus yourself (laymen term) . It is not talking about Divinity and the origin of Divinity - or the way Divinity can be transferred to other creatures. Some mysteries are hard - can you gift “immortality” to a creature? I dunno. Only God is immortal.
You state: "Again, that's as anti-Trinitarian as it gets Rob. Mormons have the identical understanding as you do yet Mormons are very upfront about their church being NON-Trinitarian. I'm perplexed as to why Seventh-day Adventists don't adopt the Mormon position of honesty in this area.”
Rob: Yes Mormons I think see Elohiym power as a Father, Mother and Child like entities.
I differ in this because “ab” originally broadly means “Provider” not Father.
The Most High is our “Provider” showing “provider love” ahab.
The Shadday is our Responder showing “responding love” ahabah.
The Shadday administrates the Grand Medium (HS) so the properties of Provider love can be modified so dysfunction can exist without destroying it. Hence this function exists only while a fallen universe with earth in it exists in this state.
The Son shows Collective love, and can thus function as a provider and a responder.
These views are not Mormon nor SDA as I believe, but founded in EGW and the Bible if you read the Ancient Hebrew carefully and use the Hebrew English translator (EGW) to confirm your Bible studies.
Let me show you with one EGW that the Father and the HS are Divine Parents
(16) EGW: “The heavenly Parent is more willing to give the Holy Spirit to them that ask Him than earthly parents are to give good gifts to their children. {YRP 284.3} More: https://spiritualsprings.proboards.com/thread/144/god-best-defined-family
Sadly the SDA see the Father and the HS and Christ all as a “he” whatever that means, is false.
Grunion: "In a pack of Dog's one or more can get run over by a car, in a Family, sickness or death can cause one or more members to die, in the SDA version of the Trinity one or possibly more members of the Godhead could eternally cease to exist because each member of the Godhead is A PART OR PORTION OF GOD
Rob: Again my friend No. My two pennies is I see the Godhead as a battery, with a cathode anode and electrolyte , all with different functions and properties of love, that REQUIRE the eternal support of each other in order to get a flow of love to function as all. Thus the Divine Family cannot “cease” or “fail” or “dissolve” as you claim. However we risk disparaging GOD by thinking too much of this - one cannot define or explain how love functions, there are three primary modes of love, that are interdependent on each other. God is like a community power, and without this arrangement God would cease to exist. Hence the demonstration of muwth muwth separation was only for a few hours in time.
Grunion posts:
Ellen White, GCB Dec 1, 1895
Remember that Christ risked all; "tempted like as we are," he staked EVEN his own eternal existence upon the issue of the conflict. Heaven itself was imperiled for our redemption.
As Ellen described it there were three "powers" (not one power) and one of these "powers" could have eternally ceased to exist by sinning leaving two powers to manage the Galaxy - thereby imperiling heaven. You could come up with 100 different ways to explain this to a Lutheran, Baptist or Methodist and they would look express horror and shock. Why, because it's NOT Trinitarianism.
Rob: Yes, in my two pennies the entire Divinity Power House would cease.
Grunion: "Ellen White claimed that Lucifer the archangel became jealous of Christ because Lucifer wanted to "be LIKE God".
Rob: “ Yes but Lucifer was already like the Most High, functioning as the creature provider.
But he wasn’t happy - Lucifer wanted to replace Jesus as a provider.
The second moral law is about God as Your provider and as you receive you provide for others. Sadly most function as their own provider and selfishly consider nobody else. Their own providing become to them an idol.
Your function as a provider comes to you by faith in Your Provider.
But Lucifer wanted to achieve provider status without asking for it, he wanted it naturally. Is this even possible?
Question: Before sin ever occurred was Jesus-YHWH able to provide power without having to ask all the time by faith in His Father? I dunno - it leads to an interesting question.
Is support the only proper way to get power?
Was Lucifer asking for something that is technically possible but would be a sin?
My feeling is such a quest is not possible? All powers flow by support only - no member of Divinity can be his own island.
Lucifer was asking of the Most High an impossible thing, without invoking dysfunction.
When the Most High created this angel with "inherent natural ability to be a provider", and thus self empowered powers was born, Lucifer used this power to empower others, bringing nearly half of the angels into rebellion, but later 1/6 repented making 1/3 of angel fell with their provider empowering them with self based power.
This power function causes one to self destruct, so cannot function for long, and thus not possible - even though the Most High does this for Lucifer - he only uses such power for spoiling.
Humans receive this self based power by faith in Satan, without asking for it, so this makes having faith in another power , near impossible to do. However if you ask, God can do impossible things easily.
It leads to the question - if you know faith in support, would you even break faith, the answer is no. This is why sin never rises a second time. Shalom
Rob, and any other SDA interested / reading this thread.
When asked about the potentiality of God eternally ceasing to exist due to a fault in Character the prevailing wisdom of the SDA Church is well articulated by Rob.
I applaud Rob for being honest about this - it generally takes much longer to get this direct of an honest admission from someone who truly believes Ellen White exhibited the spirit of prophecy.
At this point I'll remind the readers of this thread of what, according to the Apostle Paul, IS THE GOSPEL OF CHRIST.
That's very clear - the Gospel of Christ is that it was not possible that He could fail because the Scriptures, long prior to His coming, explicitly said, HE WOULD NOT FAIL.
This conversation at least produced a powerful reality check - i.e. the lengths some will go to validate their "prophet" - even to the point that "the entire Divinity powerhouse would cease" if what God said couldn't happen DID HAPPEN. I'll gracefully bow out of the conversation given it would be pointless to further discuss these things with individuals who believe that God is "conditional".
When asked about the potentiality of God eternally ceasing to exist due to a fault in Character the prevailing wisdom of the SDA Church is well articulated by Rob.
I applaud Rob for being honest about this - it generally takes much longer to get this direct of an honest admission from someone who truly believes Ellen White exhibited the spirit of prophecy.
At this point I'll remind the readers of this thread of what, according to the Apostle Paul, IS THE GOSPEL OF CHRIST.
That's very clear - the Gospel of Christ is that it was not possible that He could fail because the Scriptures, long prior to His coming, explicitly said, HE WOULD NOT FAIL.
This conversation at least produced a powerful reality check - i.e. the lengths some will go to validate their "prophet" - even to the point that "the entire Divinity powerhouse would cease" if what God said couldn't happen DID HAPPEN. I'll gracefully bow out of the conversation given it would be pointless to further discuss these things with individuals who believe that God is "conditional".
Chief
Chief of Sinners.
First of all, I do not agree with the pizza analogy on the nature of God. God is self existing from eternity to eternity. Christ (The Word) was with God and was God from the beginning. The Spirit was hovering over the waters from the beginning. None of them created.
If you really want the position of the institution on this matter, use the official channels as provided. I am not sure you will be able to get the kind of engagement we have on this platform. I do hope, however, that those authorised to speak for the institution will see these conversations and lend a voice.
Three questions for you @Grunion
This is a sweeping statement. SDA Church is an institution and I believe @rob can confirm that he is not speaking for the institution, but for his faith as an individual. I too, do not speak for the institution but present the my faith according to the evidence.
If you really want the position of the institution on this matter, use the official channels as provided. I am not sure you will be able to get the kind of engagement we have on this platform. I do hope, however, that those authorised to speak for the institution will see these conversations and lend a voice.
Three questions for you @Grunion
- What is your view of God the Father, Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit? How do you understand Oneness of God?
- What is your view of the nature of Christ?
- What do you have to say about the incarnation of Christ?
rob
Active member
Well said Chief, I affirm my own two pennies, as the Chief said.
Grunion you say the Scriptures say otherwise....that Jesus never failed - never broke faith - Hmm?
OK so why did the Devil tempt him relentlessly all his 3 1/2 years as a Preacher? Was the Devil stupid?
Eph 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
1Pe 1:20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,
These verses speak that the Father knows future infinity before it happens, hundreds of years before you enter infinity, God knows the exact billions of missings and transgressions you will make before you are even born.
The other verse says Everything about Jesus - who is a part of future infinity - was also revealed to Him by the Father, they went through every minute detail, millions of years before Lucifer even sinned.
You are disparaging God by saying God cannot fail, because the Scriptures say God cannot fail, even though He walked through present infinity He already read He didn't fail. And I would imagine the reason why Infinity God did not fail in breaking faith is because there is no point in breaking faith once you know what ALL things. If there is no alternative to living and to living in His love, than why break faith?
Sadly the angel, a mere creature thought there might be a reason for free will, and thought to himself maybe the Father is holding back something that naturally exists? This is why the Devil promotes naturalism (evolution) as a religion so much. But while free will exists, the Father holds nothing back. If the Father is not empowering your life, you will cease to exist. There is no alternative plan apart from God the Father.
I suppose the Devil was hoping if the Son broke faith, than the Devil's dysfunctional kingdom would last for eternity with Jesus empowering life in it. But this idea is a myth. It is my two pennies the entire Godhead Power would cease to exist. Why else does EGW term Jesus salvation work an infinite sacrifice? I was bothered by that phase every since I read it aged 17 and every since wondered how much it cost the Father , Holy Spirit and the Son who put up with sin and dysfunction in our universe. We will ponder such mysteries for all eternity, and I can assure you God risked everything in showing the Opposer to be false. Including the possibility of breaking faith.
The books in heaven know (two penny imagination) that person x does 1 trillion 678 billion 594 thousand 342 hundred and 231 times sins recorded in the books including all sins he might have done should the environment he lived in changed, and all the known and unknown sins by person x.
Question: Could person x have sinned one more? Was He capable of one more sin? Or does the records in the books written a billion years before He was born, say that the human god relationship says the man could not fail every again and thus his free will to sin was removed. Ponder that question Grunion - There are deep mysteries that are written about every single human - even with free will - God already knows it. (Personally I have been bothered by this thought as it makes you wonder why do faith, if God knows all your doings; before hand - it makes living dull ? Dunno? Somethings it is best to live by faith and not bother with hard questions.)
[Another thought, if a frog living in a well liked the dark, the cosy small world of the well, but never bothered to explore the bigger world above, he would be doomed to remain in his small world - it is better to explore - than hermit]
{ Like Alice looking into the Looking Glass - should I enter and go or stay at home and be safe? Messing around with extremes of free will was a stupid thing Lucifer did. Something we have to learn also. }
Shalom
Grunion you say the Scriptures say otherwise....that Jesus never failed - never broke faith - Hmm?
OK so why did the Devil tempt him relentlessly all his 3 1/2 years as a Preacher? Was the Devil stupid?
Eph 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
1Pe 1:20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,
These verses speak that the Father knows future infinity before it happens, hundreds of years before you enter infinity, God knows the exact billions of missings and transgressions you will make before you are even born.
The other verse says Everything about Jesus - who is a part of future infinity - was also revealed to Him by the Father, they went through every minute detail, millions of years before Lucifer even sinned.
You are disparaging God by saying God cannot fail, because the Scriptures say God cannot fail, even though He walked through present infinity He already read He didn't fail. And I would imagine the reason why Infinity God did not fail in breaking faith is because there is no point in breaking faith once you know what ALL things. If there is no alternative to living and to living in His love, than why break faith?
Sadly the angel, a mere creature thought there might be a reason for free will, and thought to himself maybe the Father is holding back something that naturally exists? This is why the Devil promotes naturalism (evolution) as a religion so much. But while free will exists, the Father holds nothing back. If the Father is not empowering your life, you will cease to exist. There is no alternative plan apart from God the Father.
I suppose the Devil was hoping if the Son broke faith, than the Devil's dysfunctional kingdom would last for eternity with Jesus empowering life in it. But this idea is a myth. It is my two pennies the entire Godhead Power would cease to exist. Why else does EGW term Jesus salvation work an infinite sacrifice? I was bothered by that phase every since I read it aged 17 and every since wondered how much it cost the Father , Holy Spirit and the Son who put up with sin and dysfunction in our universe. We will ponder such mysteries for all eternity, and I can assure you God risked everything in showing the Opposer to be false. Including the possibility of breaking faith.
The books in heaven know (two penny imagination) that person x does 1 trillion 678 billion 594 thousand 342 hundred and 231 times sins recorded in the books including all sins he might have done should the environment he lived in changed, and all the known and unknown sins by person x.
Question: Could person x have sinned one more? Was He capable of one more sin? Or does the records in the books written a billion years before He was born, say that the human god relationship says the man could not fail every again and thus his free will to sin was removed. Ponder that question Grunion - There are deep mysteries that are written about every single human - even with free will - God already knows it. (Personally I have been bothered by this thought as it makes you wonder why do faith, if God knows all your doings; before hand - it makes living dull ? Dunno? Somethings it is best to live by faith and not bother with hard questions.)
[Another thought, if a frog living in a well liked the dark, the cosy small world of the well, but never bothered to explore the bigger world above, he would be doomed to remain in his small world - it is better to explore - than hermit]
{ Like Alice looking into the Looking Glass - should I enter and go or stay at home and be safe? Messing around with extremes of free will was a stupid thing Lucifer did. Something we have to learn also. }
Shalom
Last edited:
Chief
Chief of Sinners.
I would apply the same logic in John 1:48 here. Jesus saw Nathanael under the sycamore tree before Philip called him, even though Nathanael did not see Him there.
John 4:24 indicates that God is Spirit. Hebrews 1:3 says that Christ is the express image of the invisible God. Christ lived on this earth, dwelt among people, ate with people, made stories and friends (Lazarus was His friend).
What is the contention? Again, I would love to hear your response the the three questions
I believe in One God without body and parts, this One God is a single, simple, Spiritual Substance and within this Substance there eternally exist three Persons, God the Father, God the Son & God the Holy Spirit. There is One Mind, One Power, etc. There is not three separate persons all made out of same stuff so that if one had an accident or was killed off there would still be others. My belief is that if the Son didn't exist you wouldn't have the Father or the Holy Spirit either. The Father is in Jesus and Jesus is in the Father in the unity of the Holy Spirit. It's ONE SUBSTANCE. The mystery is obviously how all that is able to work - every Christological heresy throughout history is due to people trying to "remove the mystery" - this Arius & Ellen White did.
My view is that Christ had / has two natures since the Incarnation. A Divine Nature & a human nature that were NOT blended such as Ellen White gloated. The two Natures were united perfectly THUS, as the Scriptures teach, God became man without ceasing to be God. As such I believe that God Almighty Himself (Father, Son & Holy Spirit) came to save us and that the act itself and more importantly THE OUTCOME was not "conditional" because Scripture SCREAMS that God is not Conditional.
Here is Ellen White doing it:
Martin Luther, John Calvin and John Wesley would have projectile vomited had they lived to see Ellen White boast that the two natures of Christ were "BLENDED".
God became man without ceasing to be God - simple Apostolic teaching which Scripture says is the foundation and most important part of the Gospel.
Before we go much further do you agree with Rob that if Jesus would have succumbed to sin that the Godhead would have "ruptured" and that heaven itself would have been in real danger? Please answer this question Chief.
rob
Active member
Interesting read Grunion, now I have some questions for other SDA people like Chief, LeRoy and yourself.
Why does the SDA Church call the HS a "he" and what do they mean by terming the HS a "he"? ( I have never had this answer answered formally by any Pastor or Authority or Person)
Hosea 4:19 The wind (Holy Spirit) hath bound her up in her wings, and they shall be ashamed because of their sacrifices. (KJV)
Why wasn't this change ratified by a General Conference session? It just came in after 1981, hijacking our doctrines? ( Seems to me the Masons have taken over some of our leadership?)
Why doesn't the Church see, as our Bible pioneers did, that the HS is feminine ?
Why doesn't the Church see Elohiym Power is a Divine Family ? Rather we use "trinity" and follow traditions and precepts of men, which is an abomination according to the Scripture?
Happy Sabbath everyone.
Why does the SDA Church call the HS a "he" and what do they mean by terming the HS a "he"? ( I have never had this answer answered formally by any Pastor or Authority or Person)
Hosea 4:19 The wind (Holy Spirit) hath bound her up in her wings, and they shall be ashamed because of their sacrifices. (KJV)
Why wasn't this change ratified by a General Conference session? It just came in after 1981, hijacking our doctrines? ( Seems to me the Masons have taken over some of our leadership?)
Why doesn't the Church see, as our Bible pioneers did, that the HS is feminine ?
Why doesn't the Church see Elohiym Power is a Divine Family ? Rather we use "trinity" and follow traditions and precepts of men, which is an abomination according to the Scripture?
Happy Sabbath everyone.
Last edited:
rob
Active member
I will post one reply on this theme from a local Pastor of mine : We however did not discuss the question - Pastors do not like you discussing matters - so here is the monologue emailed to me:-
"Now, regarding the Holy Spirit, the reason I refer to Him as a “He” is because that is what 98% of the gendered language around him in the Bible does. In some instances, the language is feminine, as you pointed out, but 98% is masculine. It is the same for God the Father and God the Son as well. Whilst most verses in scripture use the masculine pronouns for the Father and the Son, there are a minority that use feminine pronouns. God is said to give birth in the book of Job and portrays Himself as a mother in Isaiah. Jesus described the Father as being like a woman in search of a lost coin in Luke 15 (and Himself as a "mother hen" in Matthew 23:37).
In the end, whatever our theological explanation, the fact is that God used exclusively masculine terms to refer to Himself and almost exclusively masculine terminology even in metaphor. (And the passage you referenced in regards to the femininity of the Holy Spirit is a metaphor, not literal also).
Through the Bible He taught us how to speak of Him, and it was in masculine relational terms. So, while the Holy Spirit is neither male nor female in His essence, He is properly referred to in the masculine by virtue of His relation to creation and biblical revelation. There is absolutely no biblical basis for viewing the Holy Spirit as the “female” member of the Trinity. And if we do, we open ourselves up to the pagan tri-theism of the ancient Egyptians. They believed in a tri-theistic godhead of Horus (father), Isis (mother), and Set (son). The godhead of the Bible is very different to that pagan satanic copy.
There are some errors published in this email:
1) The error that the majority of verses dictate truth and the minority of verses can be ignored.
2) That poetry literals and parallels can be ignored when poetry is used - half of Scripture is poetry - and the SDA have problems reading poetry properly.
3) The Devil creates dysfunctional counterfeit of truth which causes people to steer clear of that presentation - so truth cannot be fathomed properly. Any truth in a counterfeit is thus ignored .
Shalom
"Now, regarding the Holy Spirit, the reason I refer to Him as a “He” is because that is what 98% of the gendered language around him in the Bible does. In some instances, the language is feminine, as you pointed out, but 98% is masculine. It is the same for God the Father and God the Son as well. Whilst most verses in scripture use the masculine pronouns for the Father and the Son, there are a minority that use feminine pronouns. God is said to give birth in the book of Job and portrays Himself as a mother in Isaiah. Jesus described the Father as being like a woman in search of a lost coin in Luke 15 (and Himself as a "mother hen" in Matthew 23:37).
In the end, whatever our theological explanation, the fact is that God used exclusively masculine terms to refer to Himself and almost exclusively masculine terminology even in metaphor. (And the passage you referenced in regards to the femininity of the Holy Spirit is a metaphor, not literal also).
Through the Bible He taught us how to speak of Him, and it was in masculine relational terms. So, while the Holy Spirit is neither male nor female in His essence, He is properly referred to in the masculine by virtue of His relation to creation and biblical revelation. There is absolutely no biblical basis for viewing the Holy Spirit as the “female” member of the Trinity. And if we do, we open ourselves up to the pagan tri-theism of the ancient Egyptians. They believed in a tri-theistic godhead of Horus (father), Isis (mother), and Set (son). The godhead of the Bible is very different to that pagan satanic copy.
There are some errors published in this email:
1) The error that the majority of verses dictate truth and the minority of verses can be ignored.
2) That poetry literals and parallels can be ignored when poetry is used - half of Scripture is poetry - and the SDA have problems reading poetry properly.
3) The Devil creates dysfunctional counterfeit of truth which causes people to steer clear of that presentation - so truth cannot be fathomed properly. Any truth in a counterfeit is thus ignored .
Shalom
rob
Active member
Why did you ask about Jesus nature in a SDA context than, using EGW quotes so well? What is your view of EGW?
I see her messages as a Hebrew English translation, she helps me understand Hebrew words in English correctly.
Like Faith "Emanah" means "support" not some mental assent as the world thinks/
Can I ask what assembly you associate with? I have been a SDA since I was 17 yrs old as my Mum was, a second generation Adventist. Shalom
I see her messages as a Hebrew English translation, she helps me understand Hebrew words in English correctly.
Like Faith "Emanah" means "support" not some mental assent as the world thinks/
Can I ask what assembly you associate with? I have been a SDA since I was 17 yrs old as my Mum was, a second generation Adventist. Shalom
I asked my questions in an SDA / Ellen White context because the SDA Church isn't Trinitarian and I'm interested in pinpointing why so many SDA's will initially deny this but end up making the identical profession of faith that you did (i.e. that God is conditional). I want to determine why SDA's will say they have never heard of the Personality of God Doctrine (which was used to be a hammer against the Trinity), will say that they never heard of the creature christ doctrine yet once shown the Ellen White quotes will aggressively defend it. All this is of interest to me.
You've already established that you believe God is conditional and to be fair I've found this to be very common among historic or devout Seventh-day Adventists. You were honest about this and I won't grind on you about it - it's just I've found it something that's not passable for either of us to find agreement on.
As I said in my initial post I'm Catholic.
rob
Active member
What do you mean by saying God is conditional? Never heard of the term?
So if you are Catholic you believe in Evolution, which goes against the Bible?
I battled with a Catholic over this subject for months (dozens of posts daily) to very deep peer review journal level and he stopped posting because he could not argue why God would use evolution in his Creation process. He doesn't. Robert Gantry for instance says the granite rocks were formed in milli seconds of time. Our understanding of the DNA is currently pathetic, there are at least two program codes embedded in the one strand. Imagine C++ and Delphi embedded in the same Binary Code - unheard of - and beyond the ability of our best computer programmers !
You also believe the Father, Son and HS are the same substance of Divinity, THEREFORE there is no unique nature to God the Father, God the Son and God the HS. Hence they are all "he". But the Bible does not support this idea.
One question I would like to ask Catholic trinity people is why the Church has changed it's doctrine on trinity over the last 50 years - their view of trinity was once like a starfish with three arms of expression, now its more like three persons somehow all interconnected. I get the impression the public face has changed but the private face has never changed?
One thing that I find difficult in Catholic trinity is their aspect of faith. A Father expression and a Son expression are NOT really supporting each other by faith, hence Faith does not work in a Catholic trinity. So this is a problem. Faith requires a flow of power from one entity to the other entity. Why would this be necessary if both entities are the same in essence and power?
Nor does Catholic trinity understand love as a Lover and a Beloved. Yet while these terms come from a Catholic website, it does not explain how this works. They do not view the HS as the Beloved person.
Consider this verse:
Lu 1:32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:
Notice Jesus-YHWH and the function of the YHWH-Elohiym shall give Jesus-YHWH the throne of his father David.
Also note the term "highest" describes the "YHWH-Elohiym" as the Most High Father.
Lu 1:34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?
Mary asks how can she be with child if she has never had sex with a gender male?
Lu 1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee,
and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee:
therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee
shall be called the Son of God.
Notice there are TWO persons of Elohiym that come over Mary, as the normal understanding of the "born" process requires
This makes the TWO persons of ELohiym as "heavenly parents" ?
The term "overshadow" tells us that TWO persons of GOD are required. You cannot make a shadow from one object, which is a light source, you require another second object to block that light source making a shadow. So this word stops scholars in the claim that this is a poetry parallel that this refers to collectively God as a whole - because it does NOT.
In this picture the "lampstand" is the Father
the Dove is the HS
The Yellow area is the overshadow affect
There are two shadows one can make - light grey and dark grey.
Now does the Catholic trinity model see heaven parents? Not that I know of?
The SDA does not see GOD as heavenly parents either because we are hoodwinked into supporting Catholic trinity? not sure? and we do not support the Bible fully or EGW properly in her view of Elohiym power.
I will allow you to respond to my queries. Shalom
So if you are Catholic you believe in Evolution, which goes against the Bible?
I battled with a Catholic over this subject for months (dozens of posts daily) to very deep peer review journal level and he stopped posting because he could not argue why God would use evolution in his Creation process. He doesn't. Robert Gantry for instance says the granite rocks were formed in milli seconds of time. Our understanding of the DNA is currently pathetic, there are at least two program codes embedded in the one strand. Imagine C++ and Delphi embedded in the same Binary Code - unheard of - and beyond the ability of our best computer programmers !
You also believe the Father, Son and HS are the same substance of Divinity, THEREFORE there is no unique nature to God the Father, God the Son and God the HS. Hence they are all "he". But the Bible does not support this idea.
One question I would like to ask Catholic trinity people is why the Church has changed it's doctrine on trinity over the last 50 years - their view of trinity was once like a starfish with three arms of expression, now its more like three persons somehow all interconnected. I get the impression the public face has changed but the private face has never changed?
One thing that I find difficult in Catholic trinity is their aspect of faith. A Father expression and a Son expression are NOT really supporting each other by faith, hence Faith does not work in a Catholic trinity. So this is a problem. Faith requires a flow of power from one entity to the other entity. Why would this be necessary if both entities are the same in essence and power?
Nor does Catholic trinity understand love as a Lover and a Beloved. Yet while these terms come from a Catholic website, it does not explain how this works. They do not view the HS as the Beloved person.
Consider this verse:
Lu 1:32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:
Notice Jesus-YHWH and the function of the YHWH-Elohiym shall give Jesus-YHWH the throne of his father David.
Also note the term "highest" describes the "YHWH-Elohiym" as the Most High Father.
Lu 1:34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?
Mary asks how can she be with child if she has never had sex with a gender male?
Lu 1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee,
and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee:
therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee
shall be called the Son of God.
Notice there are TWO persons of Elohiym that come over Mary, as the normal understanding of the "born" process requires
This makes the TWO persons of ELohiym as "heavenly parents" ?
The term "overshadow" tells us that TWO persons of GOD are required. You cannot make a shadow from one object, which is a light source, you require another second object to block that light source making a shadow. So this word stops scholars in the claim that this is a poetry parallel that this refers to collectively God as a whole - because it does NOT.
the Dove is the HS
The Yellow area is the overshadow affect
There are two shadows one can make - light grey and dark grey.
Now does the Catholic trinity model see heaven parents? Not that I know of?
The SDA does not see GOD as heavenly parents either because we are hoodwinked into supporting Catholic trinity? not sure? and we do not support the Bible fully or EGW properly in her view of Elohiym power.
I will allow you to respond to my queries. Shalom