teresaq.

Thank you for the information that you gave on the word Jehovah. No matter what the explanation of the word Jehovah is it is interesting that Gen 19:24 seems to apply the name to two different individuals.

The word “one” applied to Adam and Eve in Gen 2 is the same word that is applied to the oneness of God in Deuteronomy 6:4, ’echad. The significance is that Adam and Eve can be seen as separate individuals and be seen as “one” at the same time. It is therefore possible to see that Deut.6 could be speaking of God being seen as "one" but not negating the individuality of the three beings who are divine.

Thankyou John317. Interesting thoughts.
I've not read the book "A Fork in the Road", but I am sure it would be most interesting.
And no, I am not familiar with the 14MR p.23 quote you've referred to. I've just had a look at it though, and some other quotes that carry the same thought.

But to me it is looking like the thought applies to the Holy Spirit "Himself" rather than to Christ "Himself".

That same thought also appears in DA (and in other places) as,

"The Holy Spirit is Christ's representative, but divested of the personality of humanity, and independent thereof. Cumbered with humanity, Christ could not be in every place personally. Therefore it was for their interest that He should go to the Father, and send the Spirit to be His successor on earth..." (DA 669.2)

It seems unfortunate to me that the 14MRp.23 quote is used the way it is by those who want to believe in a Duality rather than a Trinity.

Thanks again for the thoughts.

Regards,
Stewart.

Thinking it might be worth quoting the 14MR reference slightly extended.

"Cumbered with humanity, Christ could not be in every place personally; therefore it was altogether for their advantage that He should leave them, go to His father, and send the Holy Spirit to be His successor on earth. The Holy Spirit is Himself divested of the personality of humanity and independent thereof. He would represent Himself as present in all places by His Holy Spirit, as the Omnipresent. "But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in My name, He shall (although unseen by you), [THIS PHRASE WAS ADDED BY ELLEN WHITE.] teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you" [John 14:26]. "Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will come not unto you; but if I depart, I will send Him unto you" [John 16:7]." {14MR 23.3}

_____________

Stewart

Yes, you're right. I thought that was at least a possible explanation also. The DA quote is very similar but it omits the sentence, "The Holy Spirit is Himself divested of the personality of humanity and independent thereof."

Tomorrow I'm going to the White Estate for another reason. but while there, I will ask the director there what his understanding is of that sentence.

Here is the quote in its full context:



It's interesting that in the very next sentence, Ellen White wrote, "He would represent Himself as present in all places by His Holy Spirit, as the Omnipresent."

I take this to mean that "He [Christ] would represent Himself [Christ] as present in all place by His [Christ's] Holy Spirit, as [i.e., who is] the Omnipresent."

This makes clear that she is not saying the Holy Spirit is Christ, but rather that Christ is present in all places by the Holy Spirit, who is Omnipresent.

Another important point is that the previous paragraph begins with the sentence, "Although our Lord ascended from earth to heaven, the Holy Spirit was appointed as His representative among men." Then Mrs. White quotes John 14: 15-18.

That sentence seems clearly to indicate that Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit are two different, distinct Persons.

How could Jesus Christ and the Spirit be the same Person and yet it be said that the Holy Spirit is Christ's representative?

A "representative" is an agent of someone else. A representative is never one and the same as the Person it is representing. That would make absolutely no sense at all. Therefore it seems to me utterly impossible that Jesus Christ is the same Person as the Holy Spirit.

What do you think?

John317, I agree with your reasoning, especially the thought about a representative being the agent of someone, rather than another mainfestation of the person....

Very clear, thankyou.

Stewart

This post is being dated within Adamah Republic© on the Seventh Day of the week and on the First day of Unleavened Bread, that is on Aviv 15, within the 5929± year after the beginning recorded in Genesis One and within the 2025th year after the beginning recorded in Luke 1:26-33 [April 11 in the 2009th year after the beginning of the reign of Caesar Tiberius]




























Names are Words. Words have Meaning.
Names are not mere Appellations!
Especially Not in the Word of God…



I find this topic a most interesting and very valuable line of discussion…

Yet, there are some very fundamental and obvious flaws in the above line of reasoning. Or so it appears to me.




The Trinity defined

First of all, let’s rid ourselves of the false concept that the Trinity is a reference to the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit of the Bible. It is not! The Trinity is a reference to a most unholy family; the father of which was named Tammuz and who is referenced in Ezekiel 8:14; the son of which was Baccus, the god of the wine bibbers; and the mother of which was Semiramis, who married her son Baccus after Tammuz died. This Trinity is most assuredly not the God of the Holy Writ though it is no doubt the god of a great many people upon this planet. (Cf also The Formulation of the Doctrine of the Trinity - by Lynnford Beachy.)







Jesus is not synonymous with God


Jesus makes a clear distinction between Himself and God.






Jesus and Christ are two different words


Jesus and Christ are not two interchangeable appellations pointing always to one and the same thing.




Jesus


The appellation Jesus is the Greek translation of the Hebrew Yeshua or Yehoshua. The best and most comprehensive meaning of the Hebrew word Yeshua that I am aware of is the definition provided by Jesus Himself:



Each of the four elements “I am,” “way,” “truth,” and “life” may be discovered in the roots of the name Yehoshua.

The name Jesus is the appellation used for the Man in the New Testament who called Himself the Son of Man, or per Shem Tov’s Hebrew Matthew: The Son of Adam.




Christ


Although the term Christ is appropriately applied to the living man called Jesus, it is a great mistake to use it as an appellation to be used exclusively and interchangeably with the appellation Jesus. Christ is not correctly used as a surname or even as a title.

The word Christ is the common Greek translation of the Hebrew word Messiah. Per Obadiah 1:21 there are more than one Messiah:




The meaning of the word Messiah has to do with being anointed, that is, having one’s head rubbed in with the oil used for bringing light (cf. Strong’s H3467, H4899, and H4886.) Thus more than anything else the word Christ should remind us of the rays of light, provided anyone and each one among us, from the God of Truth and Light and whose name is “I am what I am” and “I shall be what I shall be.”




The Family of God consists of more than three persons

As identified in Genesis 1:27, the foundation of each family is a man and a woman united in covenant. The fruit of such a family will by and by increase the number of persons in the family by the addition of sons and daughters.



The family as such is a concept visible to the minds eye but not as such to our physical eye. Likewise the Holy Spirit is a concept visible only to the minds eye as such. Yet, the Holy Spirit is indeed a person, i.e. a representative of the Family of God or even of any family characterized by that which the Word of God teaches us that God, i.e. Yahweh Elohim, is. Indeed, any One member of a true family of God may be imbued with the Holy Spirit such that the Holy Spirit my be said to be personified through such a One. Yeshua is a perfect example and object lesson for each of us to learn from and apply each in our lives.

Yeshua is not the only Son of God. Nor is He the only first born or first begotten Son of God. Think about the instructions in the Torah re the sacrifices that first open the wombs of their mothers. There were many more than one such sacrifices, were there not? Indeed, Israel, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham was called by the Lord “Israel is my son, even my firstborn:”




Thus, the implication is that each of us are called to be firstborn Sons and Daughters of God. These are not to be used or understood as mere titles or appellations, for if that is all they are, they are not what they may seem to be. The essential thing is that they are descriptive characteristics associated with all the key characteristics of true Sons and Daughters of God, and in contradistinction to such characteristics as are represented by the imperfections of a status quo, non-improving, being. The latter being being represented in Revelation by the numbers 600, 60, and 6, or 666, i.e. missing the most important Oneness of God, the Source and Creator of all.




The Word of John chapter One

The word ‘word,’ i.e. the Greek ‘logos,’ is not to be considered yet another synonym for Jesus or Christ. The word ‘word’ is a distinct and separate word and is to be used and understood as such. The fact that John 1:14 makes clear that “the Word…,” i.e. the blue print designed and transformed into reality by the Great Potter, i.e. by God the Creator, “became flesh and dwelt among us…” is not by far the same as saying that “Jesus became flesh and dwelt among us…” That is very different indeed and is representing nothing but the accumulated errors of thought of the theological hierarchies of the Roman Catholic Church, their predecessors and associates. Let’s disassociate ourselves from all such errors and teachings step by little step and precept upon precept! The sooner the better for all of us… and for coming generations!!!





These concepts and these words as used by Ellen White

It has been my experience that the concepts being explained within this post are consistent with the writings of Ellen White as well as with the teaching and usage within the Scriptures. Yet, because of my initial preconceived ideas it took me quite some time before these things eventually became clear in my mind. No doubt most, if not all, of the readers of this post will have to go through a period of adjustment and re-think before the reality and truth of the above will be accepted and recognized as true.

Hopefully the above will be perceived as valuable thoughts worthy of serious consideration at least by some…




Happy First Day of Unleavened Bread and Happy Seventh-day Sabbath,

Tree of Life©

the Trinity has always existed and always will be "I am in the Father and He is in Me" as well "I send you a helper" the Spirit of God was withdrawn at the fall of man as well a veil was on our eyes from spiritual things.People in Christ's day weren't aware of these as they were taken away when Adam and Eve fell.As well Christ is talking to His Father in Genisis "let us make man in our own image" proves Christ was there in the begining with God.The trinity is made clear in the new tesiment.As well we see the fortelling of Gods sacrifice through Isaac ad his son.

I believe in this doctrine from the Bible

If we are more properly a "progressive movement towards infinite truth"
(than a static church that camps HERE)
shall we not allow for each of us some wiggle room?
Shall we not then also allow God HIS prerogative?

Believing one or the other has some exclusive truth....
excluding all other (tainted, limited, divisive) human logic
(constrained by semantics, lexical difficulties, personal bias),
etc, ad nauseum...
precludes that the I AM God has, can, and will reveal Himself as He deems.
That transcendent God, with no need for chronos and fully kairos, no need for either time,
nor limited by one space, or thing (or any dimension)
surely far outpaces our ability to describe Him in our thoughts...words...or theology.

Shall we argue that God is only a burning bush?
A smoldering pot?
An earthquake?
A whirlwind?
A still small voice?
A helpless baby born to an unwed virgin?
An angry scientist, destroying His failed experiment?
A jealous God with an eternal frying pan?
A magician who grants wishes asked in the "secret" way?

I trust that God is beneficent Father,
able to manifest Himself appropriately.
I believe He will bring those who seek truth,
who love His commands (think ROYAL command)
and exhibit the undying faith OF Jesus
to the place HE needs us to be.

Was it CS Lewis quoted as saying that many argue factious contentions....
and too few agree on incontrovertible truth?

Can we trust that God's grace, love, and mercy is unbounded by human reasoning and ability?
Just as is His essence, nature, character and righteousness are.

I mere trust, believe, and stake my life on THAT promise,
promise of new land, of greater love, of redemption, recreation...

hope this simplistic view helps...i've wondered why the argument over the "personhood" status of the HS....and have sadly, seen it it divide many.

Jesus leaving words...."I will NOT leave you orphans...I will send you the Comforter"

I have often said that God is not limited to a "Trinity". It pains me that someone even dreamed up that term. Thanks for your input, HeartSeeker.