Is the Church Babylon?

[Naomi]

[Gibs]

Truth is our continual searching and sorting and unless we have His Spirit in us we will not be succesful at sorting the gold from what might appear as gold.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[Overaged]

Truth is our continual searching and sorting and unless we have His Spirit in us we will not be succesful at sorting the gold from what might appear as gold.

False Teachers to be Shunned

When men arise, claiming to have a message from God, but instead of warring against principalities and powers, and the rulers of the darkness of this world, they form a hollow square, and turn the weapons of warfare against the church militant, be afraid of them. They do not bear the divine credentials. God has not given them any such burden of labor. They would tear down that which God would restore by the Laodicean message.

He wounds only that He may heal, not cause to perish. The Lord lays upon no man a message that will discourage and dishearten the church. He reproves, He rebukes, He chastens; but it is only that He may restore and approve at last.

How glad my heart was made by the report from the General Conference that many hearts were softened and subdued, that many made humble confessions, and cleared away from the door of the heart the rubbish that was keeping the Saviour out. How glad I was to know that many welcomed Jesus in as an abiding guest. How is it that these pamphlets denouncing the Seventh-day Adventist Church as Babylon [sEE APPENDIX.] were scattered abroad everywhere, at the very time when that church was receiving the outpouring of the Spirit of God?

How is it that men can be so deceived as to imagine that the loud cry consists in calling the people of God out from the fellowship of a church that is enjoying a season of refreshing? Oh, may these deceived souls come into the current, and receive the blessing, and be endued with power from on high. {TM 22.2}

Unity in Faith and Doctrine

My husband, with Elders Joseph Bates, Stephen Pierce, Hiram Edson, and others who were keen, noble, and true, was among those who, after the passing of the time in 1844, searched for the truth as for hidden treasure. {TM 24.3}

We would come together burdened in soul, praying that we might be one in faith and doctrine; for we knew that Christ is not divided. One point at a time was made the subject of investigation. The Scriptures were opened with a sense of awe. Often we fasted, that we might be better fitted to understand the truth.

25

After earnest prayer, if any point was not understood it was discussed, and each one expressed his opinion freely; then we would again bow in prayer, and earnest supplications went up to heaven that God would help us to see eye to eye, that we might be one as Christ and the Father are one. Many tears were shed. {TM 24.4}

We spent many hours in this way. Sometimes the entire night was spent in solemn investigation of the Scriptures, that we might understand the truth for our time. On some occasions the Spirit of God would come upon me, and difficult portions were made clear through God's appointed way, and then there was perfect harmony. We were all of one mind and one spirit. {TM 25.1}

We sought most earnestly that the Scriptures should not be wrested to suit any man's opinions. We tried to make our differences as slight as possible by not dwelling on points that were of minor importance, upon which there were varying opinions. But the burden of every soul was to bring about a condition among the brethren which would answer the prayer of Christ that His disciples might be one as He and the Father are one. {TM 25.2}

Sometimes one or two of the brethren would stubbornly set themselves against the view presented, and would act out the natural feelings of the heart; but when this disposition appeared, we suspended our investigations and adjourned our meeting, that each one might have an opportunity to go to God in prayer and, without conversation with others, study the point of difference, asking light from heaven. With expressions of friendliness we parted, to meet again as soon as possible for further investigation. At times the power of God came upon us in a marked manner, and when clear light revealed the points of truth, we would weep and rejoice together. We loved Jesus; we loved one another. {TM 25.3}

Our numbers gradually increased. The seed that was sown was watered of God, and He gave the increase. At first we assembled for worship, and presented the truth to those who would come to hear, in private houses, in large kitchens, in barns, in groves, and in schoolhouses; but it was not long before we were able to build humble houses of worship. {TM 26.1}

[Overaged]

Yes, Scion I too must agree, the Trinity Doctrine that came in is just another example of the falling further away. It is totally unscriptural and has no grounds to believed. It is only a well "oiled" deception.

Where has the discerment for the Truth of things gotten to in the church today? It too has fallen by the wayside and little is it cared for.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

A Dream About Value of Teamwork

While at Healdsburg I dreamed [of] seeing several span of horses harnessed to machinery which they were to draw. My husband stood looking on to see if the harness was of sufficient strength to hold in making the required effort. The horses started drawing the load. {1SAT 1.1}

Two horses from the number rushed out of their places and began to tug at the load, but could not start it one inch because they did not work in unison with the other horses. These looked back and seemed to think that the moving of the load depended upon them. They went first [to] one side and then [to] another, and became nervous and broke loose from the other horses and jumped in ahead of them all. In the act they were, they thought, taking the load when they were not stirring it. If these horses had kept their places they might have drawn their part of the load and been of important service, but when they rushed in ahead of the leading horses they were not drawing the load and were in the way, hindering the other horses from working. {1SAT 1.2}

I thought my husband struck these horses sharply with the whip. One turned to him, and said, "Don't strike so hard; you cut deep. We had zeal to start this load and we thought no one could start it but us. We see we have not moved it, but hindered its moving, but a check was all we needed, not to be cut on like balky horses. We will fall back on our traces and draw with the rest." {1SAT 1.3}

I awoke, and fell asleep the same night, and dreamed that my husband was trying to right matters in the church at Battle Creek. There was difficulty. There were two or three that thought they had wisdom to bring the church into good working order. They wished to rearrange the church, and then they said it would be free. These men and women had a machine of their own to work, but the machine of each was united with a larger machine. Every one must keep his or her hand employed on his or her own machine, and then the larger machinery worked beautifully and every revolution of the great wheel was exact and harmonious. If any neglected this machine which was connected with the great machinery, every revolution of the large wheel made a disagreeable noise which disturbed not only the building it was in, but the building across the road jarred and shook. {1SAT 1.4}

I saw two in particular leave their machines and [they] were watching the large wheel in the great machinery and were seeking to correct the great wheel, to have it more harmoniously and regularly. Instead of helping the difficulty, the machinery made a more disagreeable noise. I thought if all would stand by their own machines and diligently and faithfully do their own work correctly, there would be no trouble with the large machinery. But the noise of the large machine called the attention of several from their work. This difficulty was now to be settled. All wanted to know why the large machine ran so heavily, the wheel groaning at every revolution. {1SAT 2.1}

My husband spoke very decidedly and sharply. Said he, "You who left your own machine to correct the large wheel were out of your place. Had you kept by your own machines and worked them correctly, the large machine would have been all right." I thought my husband spoke very earnestly and reproved those who left their own work to attend to that which was not their work. Those that had been the most to blame said, "Do not be so severe. We thought we were carrying out your express directions in doing as we have done. But all we needed was a word and we would see our error. We thought everything was going to pieces, therefore left the very work we should have done, to save such a calamity, and sought to correct the large machinery, and so we made things very much worse.--Ms. 1, 1873. (MR 900.14). {1SAT 2.2}

[Gibs]

OV,

Ya went into a tangent there and did not come back on the trinity. Historic SDA's ya know should not be trinitarians. That came in after 1950 or do you think that is new light. Well I can tell you now it is not new light from the Bible.

You can't dispell even one verse such as,

Isa 43:10 Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

neither shall there be after me.

[Overaged]

OV,

Ya went into a tangent there and did not come back on the trinity. Historic SDA's ya know should not be trinitarians. That came in after 1950 or do you think that is new light. Well I can tell you now it is not new light from the Bible.

You can't dispell even one verse such as,

Isa 43:10 Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

You are on the tangent - this topic is about whether or not the Adventist Church is "Babylon" or not. My post addressed that directly. Your post does not.

The gems of truth become dimmed in our possession unless we are increasing in love for the truth, and practicing that faith which works by love and purifieth the soul. The gems of truth grow lusterless to the receiver unless put to a practical use. Hearts must be softened and subdued by the Spirit of God, receiving the truth in the soil of an humble, contrite heart. Isaiah 57:15-19. They will be active, and willing to be refined, longing to be purified and ennobled by the truth. And thus they show its power upon human minds by what it accomplishes for the receiver. If the teachers of the truth think their own ways are perfect and, begin to criticize the messenger the Lord sends, be sure you will reap that which you have sown. You will reap the fruit born of your criticism. {1SAT 157.2}

[John317]

..The Trinity Doctrine that came in is just another example of the falling further away. It is totally unscriptural and has no grounds to believed. It is only a well "oiled" deception.

... Historic SDA's ya know should not be trinitarians. That came in after 1950 or do you think that is new light. Well I can tell you now it is not new light from the Bible.

It isn't true that the Trinity doctrine is further evidence that the SDA Church has "fallen away."

The truth about the Bible's teachings on the Trinity was new light for the young Seventh-day Adventist Church of the late 19th century. The co-founders of the SDA Church, Joseph Bates and James White, as well as many others, rejected the false teachings found in many concepts of the Trinity in the popular churches. If they had accepted the false teachings at that time, the church wouldn't have been prepared later to accept the truth about the Trinity.

The true, biblical Trinity doctrine came into the SDA Church long before 1950. In fact, by 1950 most SDAs were already Trinitarians. (The documentary evidence for this is found in a number of books and articles on the topic. One article is called "Thoughts On the Deity and the Humanity of Christ," by Robert W. Olson. It's WDF #1475 at the EGW Estate, Loma Linda Branch Office.)

As far back as 1913, two years before Ellen White's death, the editor of the Review and Herald, F.M. Wilcox, wrote an article in which he said the SDA Church believes in the Trinity.

Afterwards, not only did Ellen White make no denial of Wilcox's statement, but she actually appointed Wilcox to the original board of directors of the Ellen G. White Estate. Clearly, Ellen White wouldn't have made that decision if she believed Wilcox was leading the SDA Church into false doctrines.

The writings of Ellen White between 1888 and 1913 on the Godhead show that she agrees with the church's view of the Trinity. Our church's view of the Trinity is not the same as those found in the Catholic Church or in the Methodist Church. The SDA understanding is based on the Bible rather than on Greek philosophy and the creeds.

I don't see anything in the Fundamental Beliefs #2-5 which contradict anything in either the Bible or in the Spirit of prophecy.

Originally Posted By: Gibs

You can't dispell even one verse such as,

Isa 43:10 Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43: 10 is just one of the verses in the Bible that shows us that Christ is a part of the eternal Godhead. It was the pre-incarnate Christ who appeared to Moses at the burning bush in Exodus 3 and called Himself "I AM WHO I AM." Christ identified Himself as "the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob." Exodus 3 calls Him "God (Elohim)," "Lord (Yahweh)," and "the Lord God (Yahweh Elohim)." All Three Persons of the Godhead are Lord and God. The eternal Godhead hasn't changed. Ellen White calls them "the great Threefold power of heaven." Manuscript 11, 1901 (Vol. 6 SDA BC, page 1075)

[Stan]

Nice presentation John317

[phkrause]

Excellent post John. I guess some believe that your born believing in the trinity or not!

[John317]

Hello John,

You wrote:

Quote:

This means you've allowed what you consider to be false doctrines to shake you out of the church. That is what Ellen White said would happen to many people when she warned us against "the shaking."

Actually, "the shaking" applies only to the Church that is following God's commandments and teaching His doctrines. The Church does not remain "the Church" if it has separated from Christ.

Hi there, Scion,

I don't see convincing evidence that the SDA Church has separated from Christ. I see some people's claims and accusations but claims are not evidence. For instance, it is sometimes claimed that the SDA church is "fallen" because it accepts the doctrine of the Trinity. They claim that this doctrine is not found in Scripture and that Ellen White was either anti- or non-Trinitarian. However, there's abundant evidence that the Trinity doctrine is indeed a biblical doctrine and that Ellen White's writings support the view of the Trinity which the modern SDA Church holds today. (Evidence of this has been posted numerous times on ClubAdventist.)

Originally Posted By: Scion

On this thread, we have seen evidence of teachings different from those which God inspired at the beginning of the movement.

Have you posted proof or strong evidence that the SDA Church in 1863 had all the truth and did not believe in any errors?

There's no evidence that God inspired the SDA Church to reject the biblical doctrine of the Trinity. In the 1860s, our leaders were still changing their beliefs regarding the Godhead/Trinity. For instance, James White didn't have the same views as those held by Uriah Smith and J.H. Waggoner. Smith and Waggoner believed that Christ had been created. Smith even spoke in the early years of "evolution" taking place within the Godhead.

No consensus existed about the Godhead among the early SDAs. There was at least one Trinitarian pastor in the early SDA church, and he wasn't told by the leadership that he had to change his views.

James White wrote in the R&H that the Trinity doctrine wasn't a test of either fellowship or of Christian character. In those early years, there were more important things than whether everyone agreed on the details about the Godhead. There was a church to build around the foundational pillars of our faith. Anti-Trinitarianism was not one of those pillars.

[Gibs]

God did make it very clear that there is but one God and that He is that one God.

It was the Father that was in Christ, Christ wasn't another God.

The Holy Spirit is that one and only God, Jesus said so and I think we can trust His Word.

Joh 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

2Co 5:19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.

Joh 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

Then comes the time when Jesus who proceeded and came forth from the Father when it is fully accomplished what He was sent forth to do Returns to the Father His Vestment in Him that once again the Father may be all in all again, Read,

1Co 15:24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.

1Co 15:25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.

1Co 15:26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.

1Co 15:27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith, all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him.

1Co 15:28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.[/u]

Then you have this statement by Jesus,

Re 22:13 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

Question here now is, how many firsts can we have? Answer, JUST ONE!

That is your proof it is the Father that is in Christ rconciling the world unto Himself.

There is but one Deity, The Father, who vested Himself into a Redeemer for us. EGW says He gave Himself.

Joh 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

Joh 14:11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.

The Jews well understand it from the verse known to them as the "Shema", the proclamation!

Remember, LORD in caps. in the KJV is YAHWEH OR YHWH,

De 6:4 ¶ Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[John317]

God did make it very clear that there is but one God and that He is that one God.

It was the Father that was in Christ, Christ wasn't another God.

The Holy Spirit is that one and only God, Jesus said so and I think we can trust His Word.

Joh 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

....De 6:4 ¶ Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:

The Seventh-day Adventist Church agrees that there is but one God. We don't worship three gods or Gods.

You're also right that Christ is not "another God." He is a different person than the Father, but Christ is the same God-- the same Yahweh-- as the Father. The Bible refers to Christ as "God" as well as "Yahweh," and it also says that no God was made before Yahweh, nor none after Him. Therefore, since Christ is "God," He has always existed with the Father. In fact, that's the very message of John 1: 1. The last clause of that verse is translated by the New English Bible, "And what God was the Word was." Hebrews 1: 3 teaches the same thing.

Deut. 6: 4 says that "our God is one Lord." "Our Elohim is one Yahweh." "Elohim" is plural. "One" is the word "echad." It is not the mathematical 1, but the "one" of plurality. It's the same word that's used in Genesis 2: 24 where it speaks of two people being "one [echad] flesh."

John 4: 24 is best translated, "God is spirit" or "God is Spirit." It isn't saying that God is one spirit among many other spirits. It's saying that as to His essence God is spirit, in contrast to humans who are material, physical beings.

Deut. 6: 4 is also translated, "our God is Yahweh alone." (See the Jewish Publication Society's translation, the NRSV, and the New Jerusalem Bible.)

[John317]

Then you have this statement by Jesus,

Re 22:13 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

Question here now is, how many firsts can we have? Answer, JUST ONE!

Good point. I agree. There is only one God, one Yahweh.

Jesus said in Rev. 22: 13 what Yahweh says in Isaiah 41: 4:

Isaiah 41:4

Who has performed and done this,

calling the generations from the beginning?

I, the Lord, am the first,

and with the last, I am He.

It is also what the "Almighty" says in Rev. 1: 8--

Rev. 1:8

I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.

Compare this with the words of Jesus in Rev. 22: 13:

Rev. 22:13

I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

Jehovah's Witness see the clear implication of a comparison of those verses and therefore they believe these can't be the words of Jesus but must be the words of Jehovah. What they don't realize is that Jesus Christ is Jehovah. Jehovah is the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. That is why Jesus commands us to teach and baptize in the NAME of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Jehovah (or God, if you will) is the NAME under whose authority the church is to teach and baptize.

[Naomi]

Excellent John 317

[Gibs]

There was a time in the begining before Creation that the following took place,

Joh 8:42 Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.

Then it was delegated to Him, Yahweh of Hosts ( His name before Bethlehem" ) did all the creation making most things visible. He created all the Hosts, Angels, us and etc.

The creation was from things not seen but were on hand and our eyes are not opened to see all yet, Spirit beings for example.

It is apparant that Yahweh King of Israel extended Himself to be also Yahweh of Hosts.

How so? Because we see when it is done what he Yahweh, now Saviour has completed all He is sent forth to do He returns to His Father the Deity vested in Him.

Again read these verses carfull as the last one reveals the secret.

You will see that Yahweh/Jesus Saviour is in full reign of things until He has subdued all things,

1Co 15:24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.

1Co 15:25 For he must reign,[/u] till he hath put all enemies under his feet.

1Co 15:26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.

1Co 15:27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith, all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him.

1Co 15:28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

That makes it clear now that the need of the Father having a Redeemer is over and He will then be "all in all" once more.

Jesus will be our King and the Prince of the Father, His Only Son. We are His subjects as He has Redeemed us, and first even we are His by creation.

Willing Subjects that will always eternally be of His Will as our will has become forever His Will.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[Gibs]

OV,

I don't know that any on the forum is calling the church "Babylon", I do not, I do say she has become a structure.

Your comment,

You are on the tangent - this topic is about whether or not the Adventist Church is "Babylon" or not. My post addressed that directly. Your post does not.

The topic I think wore out on the Babylon subject and got off into Trinity which I just happen to like to address. Just as I suppose you like to address the Babylon Issue.

So those who want to have the thread to do just that, it matters not to me, I've addressed both issues and the Babylon issue to me is mute.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[Overaged]

OV,

I don't know that any on the forum is calling the church "Babylon", I do not,

[Scion]

Hi John,

I am not sure what you would even accept as "proof or strong evidence" that the Pioneers did NOT believe in any errors. To be sure, unless YOU and I agreed what "truth" was, that would be impossible. It's sort of an easy-out to say, "Here's my position. Now prove me wrong." That doesn't actually advance the discussion. What we can do, however, is discuss the changes that are on record, and this I am willing to do.

I would say that the pioneer Adventist position on matters such as the Trinity were closer to what is stated (not what some people imply) in the Bible, and the modern position is different.

Now, because of that, I believe that the position held by the Pioneers was the correct one. We are dealing with religion here, not hard science, and therefore I cannot provide empirical "proof" of even the things on which we agree. But, if I begin with the position that the pioneers were correct (which, again, I believe is a safer bet than relying on that held by modern Adventism) then I must, of necessity, reject any changes MADE to it without "proof or strong evidence" that the SDA Church was led to reject it.

In other words, we have a movement that began under the inspiration of God - I trust we can begin with that common premise. We then have changes that were made to it over the years. Let me ask you a question: if we both begin with the premise that the Adventist movement is God-inspired, where does the burden of proof lie when deciding whether or not to accept altered doctrine?

In my view, you are saying something like, "I will believe the Bible as soon as someone proves it to me." For me, the Bible is the standard of faith - and the burden of proof would be on atheists and agnostics to DISprove it, since the status quo (for me) is believe. It's the same thing here: We have strong evidence that the early pioneers were almost universally anti-Trinitarian. Modern Adventism is almost universally Trinitarian. Where does the burden of proof lie? Or are we supposed to blindly accept any change made to our foundational doctrines? Other, larger organizations have gotten into deep trouble by accepting that mindset.

On the main topic of this thread, I stand by my earlier statement regarding the status of the Church:

1) Ellen White states the Church would become a "sister to fallen Babylon."

2) She gives steps that must be taken to avoid this condition.

3) Those steps were not taken.

4) Prophecy is fulfilled.

5) A woman and her sister, in prophecy, suffer a similar fate. (e.g., Ezekiel 23)

I'm not seeing any way around this clear progression; it is the way God has dealt with the Church in every generation. The only difference is that now it is happening to what many consider "my Church," and so the very idea is inconceivable. I have actually had someone say that to me in just those words. I was speaking to her on the phone, and I went over why there was a calling-out from Judaism, then Roman Catholicism, then Sunday-keeping Protestantism. At every stage, she agreed. Then, when I showed the exact parallel in Adventism, she said, "No, I don't agree with that." I said, "Do you see how the exact same factors came into play, and the response was the same?"

She replied, "Yes, I see that."

I said, "So what's different with the SDA Church?"

She said, "It's my Church, and I can't accept that about it."

Be careful, my friends... and know that the arguments you have advanced in order to deny the truth are those advanced by those in even the most unBiblical and doctrinally flawed organizations in the world. Loyalty is a virtue, to be sure, but like faith it can become a curse if it is blindly given, and blindly maintained.

[Overaged]

Hi John,

I am not sure what you would even accept as "proof or strong evidence" that the Pioneers did NOT believe in any errors. To be sure, unless YOU and I agreed what "truth" was, that would be impossible. It's sort of an easy-out to say, "Here's my position. Now prove me wrong." That doesn't actually advance the discussion. What we can do, however, is discuss the changes that are on record, and this I am willing to do.

I would say that the pioneer Adventist position on matters such as the Trinity were closer to what is stated (not what some people imply) in the Bible, and the modern position is different.

Now, because of that, I believe that the position held by the Pioneers was the correct one. We are dealing with religion here, not hard science, and therefore I cannot provide empirical "proof" of even the things on which we agree. But, if I begin with the position that the pioneers were correct (which, again, I believe is a safer bet than relying on that held by modern Adventism) then I must, of necessity, reject any changes MADE to it without "proof or strong evidence" that the SDA Church was led to reject it.

You claim , with a fairly long and fancy explanation, how you should be able to say what you want, without proof, but that John 317 must, because of his position, provide proof? Thats an interesting approach - sort of gives us a clue what we are really dealing with here.

If you say 'the early pioneers" held views that were more correct that today's views, then you must give references for what you are saying. Why? Because not all of the pioneers held the same views. So we need to know exactly what you are talking about here. I suspect you are pointing at the Arian views held by some of Adventist pioneers. Of course, if you are, then you are making the classic mistake of saying: "If these ones are like this, then the whole church must be." Nothing could be further from the truth; because the official position of the church has not been, is not always, the same as individual people within the church, including our leaders.

[Naomi]

[Guest DennisKean]

Quote:

Then you have this statement by Jesus,

Re 22:13 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

Question here now is, how many firsts can we have? Answer, JUST ONE!

That is your proof it is the Father that is in Christ rconciling the world unto Himself.

Gibs,

When the savior was resurrected he spoke to the disciples and said:

Quote:

• 18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

  19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

The reason the Savior deferred to His Father was not because He was not a member of the Godhead. It was because He gave up power in order to solve the issue of sin by the Spirit of God, not by power.

Quote:

Zec_4:6 Then he answered and spake unto me, saying, This is the word of the LORD unto Zerubbabel, saying, Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, saith the LORD of hosts.

If the Father is God only, how could ALL POWER in earth and heaven be given to the Son? It makes no sense. Power was restored to the Son of God. And the Savior is God because He is the only begotten son of the Father. If He was not a member of the family of God, then He would be nothing more than what we are. For we all are the sons of God! But He is referred to as "THE ONLY BEGOTTEN SON OF GOD"

And most importantly, if the Savior was not God. then God would not have saved man. It would have been a man who saved us!!! It might as well have been Gabriel. But such an act, though grand for Gabriel would be meaningless to bring salvation of man. The Sacrifice of the Savior was a sacrifice of God the very Almighty God. Lucifer was known to be a murderer from the beginning. But the infamy of his character was that he did not hesitate to kill his own God to advance his cause.

To preach that the Savior is not God is to discredit the plan of Salvation, my friend. It is to insult God from the highest honor He has shown toward His creation. God came to die in order to save man. You do not realize what you are saying, dear friend. This is one of the harshest position one could take to slander God and His marvelous character of love.

Finally, here is the clearest reason to recognize the Savior as God! The Bible says that He is God!

Quote:

6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

The Savior has a Father and our direct Father outside of the GrandFather God (whom we call Father) is the Savior. He is our immediate Father because He created us!!! The Bible is a precision instrument when you read it carefully. The only limitation is the Hebrew language. Grandfathers were referred to as Fathers.

Dennis Kean

[Gibs]

If there were more than one God there would be immediate war.

Isa 43:10 Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isa 43:11 I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.

Isa 43:12 I have declared, and have saved, and I have shewed, when there was no strange god among you: therefore ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, that I am God.

Isa 43:13 Yea, before the day was I am he; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand: I will work, and who shall let it?

2Co 5:19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.

Mt 1:23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

Yes the one and only one TRUE God, YHWH.

Joh 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

The Trinity doctrine is a cobbling of men by the great apostate church.

Historic or any another SDA should touch it as it is false.

1 John 5:7 is correct when taken without a twist put on it.

1Jo 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[John317]

If there were more than one God there would be immediate war.

Isa 43:10 Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

....Yes the one and only one TRUE God, YHWH.

Do you mean that if there were more than one Person in the eternal Godhead, there would be immediate war? Why?

There is perfect, unselfish love between the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. They are not at war.

Isaiah 43: 10 is right, of course: there was never any god [or God] formed either before or after Jehovah. Jehovah is the only true God.

Christ is Jehovah just as the Father and the Holy Spirit are Jehovah. The eternal Godhead consists of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. God is One.

[John317]

[Gibs]

The thing of it is John there is but the one Deity and I don't care how many persons you reckon to be in the Godhead, it was the Father that was in Christ and the Holy Spirit is what God is. Jesus Himself said so.

Joh 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

The Deity, the Father in Him was covered with humanity. He was not another God but THE GOD was in Him the one and only TRUE GOD.

Jesus was the Body prepared for that indwelling. Jesus was one of us and at the same time the Son of God.

When this thing is done that Jesus is sent to do He returns the Deity vested in Him that the Father will be all in all again, 1 Cor. 15:28, I've posted that several times but trinitarians won't reckon with only what they care to see.

I'm telling you all there is and never was but the one and only God and never was there any more and never will there be.

Your three persons in the Godhead like 1 John 5:7 says are one and truly and really one or yes there would be immediate war.

The trinity doctrine you all hold to is an invention of the apostated church of which the daughters all come out of.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.