RE: Father, Son & Holy Ghost....3 gods.

[Gustave]

It is certainly true that the early pioneers all denounced, what some called the “dark Catholic doctrine” (the Trinity) of God being one substance indivisible, with three “heads” or “forms”. The Bible clearly teaches a unity in the Godhead, but distinct Persons. So does the Trinity. It is true they saw the Catholic “Trinity” as a “three headed heathen monstrosity”, yet Adventism today teaches “One God, the Father” who cannot be known, accepted, served or worshipped without the Son and Spirit being equally accepted, served or worshipped (the “Three Living Persons of the Heavenly Trio”, said E.G. White). True, it may ‘boggle’ the mind but no detractor can explain away that reality.

This is simply a massive, incorrect understanding of the Trinity Doctrine...

...As well as just what the SDA Pioneers and Ellen White were so vocal in rebuking.

...In their understanding ONLY the Father was Eternal God in the ultimate sense.

We cleared all this up in the Nicene Creed thread ( ya know the one with 50,000 plus hits on )...

...The Key word here is "PERSONALITY" and NOT what it means according to the dictionary.

...It's what it meant to each and every Seventh-day Adventist.

I noted that the apologetic material posted by Reddogs contrasts the different meanings....

...That can be meant when someone says "God", i.e. God the Father, God the Son & God the Holy Spirit.

...And how Ellen White uses the word in such a way to demonstrate her belief in the Trinity.

...This is absoultely false.

The Trinity Doctrine requires that there is ONE "God" , a Singular Divine Substance...

...Without body or parts - Eternal, Almighty, Infinite Spirit.

...The Three distinct Persons of the Trinity equally possess this Substance.

Therefore "IN GOD" are Three distinct "Persons" - co-eternal, co-owners within what is the One God...

...The Father isn't God because He's the Father - it's because The Father possess the identical Divine Substance.

...As equally as God The Son & God The Holy Spirit possess it.

Ellen White & her religious contempories categorically rejected this...

...Examples following.

Seventh-Day Adventist Review and Herald, 1878

God is a real person, having a body, and local habitation. Man is in his image.

The God of the Bible is not a mere principle, an essence, but HE is a real, personal being, having a body, form, shape, local habitation, a throne, etc. But let us listen first to what the creeds say of him. The Methodist Discipline, in its articles of religion, Art. 1, says:—There is but one living and true God, Everlasting, without body or parts." The articles of faith of the Episcopal Church are even worse. Art. 1 says:— There is but one living and true God, Everlasting, without body, parts, or passions," Other creeds go still further, and say that he is without center or circumfer- In all candor, I submit that such a description of God annihilates him entirely.

Not one of the creeds publically rebuked by the SDA's above teach that God the Father isn't distinct....

...The mentioned creeds ALL are talking about the One Divine Substance in which the 3 Person's subsist.

...This is Trinity 101 & exactly WHAT Ellen White was against.

To All Seventh-day Adventists, when Ellen White was alive it was explicit...

...The "God" was a literal Personality, a "Being" with a body like a man.

...Complete with eyes, ears, nose ( to smell the sacrifice ) digestive organs, etc.

...God was a "PERSON" with a specific dwelling place.

In the 1923 report of the SDA Education Dept for Asia...

...It is openly admitted that the SDA educators badly needed religious instruction books.

...That did NOT teach against the SDA Personality of God Doctrine.

...Because EVERY Christian Denomination accepts the Trinity as True Doctrine.

...The SDA's had much trouble in this area - they needed their own books!

Report of the Educational Department of the

Southern Asia Division, April 15, 1923

INDEED this has been a great problem to US ever since WE opened schools in various sections of the field. I dare say that WE are the only Christian body

who are so much confronted with THIS difficulty, not

only in India but all over the world, since we have

very definite and important reasons for establishing

our own schosls. As soon as our schools are opened the first difficulty we meet is what to put into the hands of our,

children, in their mother tongue, as they progress in

its study. There are many "Readers" produced by

the C. L. S and by Indian educators. In our school

at Prakasapuram, we have used many kinds, but we

prefer the latest publications of the C, L. S. to all the

previous ones. In the former C. L. S. Beaders we have come across certain anti-Scriptural expressions here and there ON THE PERSONALITY OF GOD, immortality of the soul, and the fate of the wicked. In such cases we used to draw tMok lines over those expressions in the books for the lower classes and not assign them for lessons. But in the classes where students have little knowledge of the truth, we leave such points to be discussed, and take that occasion to teach

them the truth concerning those topics mentioned in

the Readers

The Nicene Creed for Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Christians...

...Do not teach or even remotely imply that God is a non-entity.

...The Catholic and Orthodox Christians maintain three distinct Persons in ONE GOD.

...I know this because I am one.

In addition to that the specific Article of Faith pertaining to how God is ONE...

...For the Methodist, Lutheran, Baptist and EVER other Christian religion.

...Agrees that how God is ONE in number is the Substance.

To the Adventists this was an impossibity simply because Christ ( a separate Being ) could have been Eternally annihilated by "God" ( a separate Being ) if Christ would have sinned.

Youth Instructor 1905

To deny the personality of God is the most

arrant unbelief. It is well-nigh blasphemy. It

demolishes at a stroke the divinity of God. and

virtually abolishes the Deity. It overthrows the

foundation of the Christian religion, by substituting

the pagan notion of a god who is everywhere

equally present, working through nature,

dwelling in plants and animals, for the God of

Christianity, who has his [ SEPARATE PERSONALITY ] abode in heaven. The God of the Bible dwells in heaven, has a real

throne, surrounded with an innumerable host of

real angels, who are sent forth as messengers

throughout his endless universe. Of this there

is abundance of Bible testimony. Let us study

carefully a few texts:" And the Father himself, which hath sent me. hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard

his voice at any tme, nor seen his shape." John

5 : 37- These words of Jesus state as truly that

the Father has shape as that he has a voice. It

would be as sensible to deny the one as the other.

And that which has shape must be material, and

be in some particular place more than another.

The same thing is stated in Phil. 2:5, 6. "Let

this mind be in you. which was also in Christ

Jesus: who, being in the form of God. thought

it not robbery to be equal with God." This scripture

tells us that God [ SEPARATE PERSONALITY ] has a form, and that Christ bore the image of his Father.

Because Christ Incarnated had eyes, nose, mouth and digestive system...

...And the Bible said if someone saw Christ they saw the Father.

...The SDA's concluded that the Father had to have a PERSONALITY, a Being with a Body.

...With all the same organs the Incarnated Christ had.

This affirmation by SDA's is such a massive departure from the Doctrine of the Trinity....

...I'm frankly shocked that SDA's boldly claim "look here, see we believe in the Trinity".

...I mean COME ON!

[Kevin H]

The problem is that most of us have too narrow of a mindset. We do not think about the distinction between the infinite and the finite. We tend to have a very big, but still finite god.

There is the relim of the infinite and the relim of time and space. The infinite relim we can relize exists but we have to admit that it is beyond our comprehensen.

In the relim of the infinite there is only one God, A God that we cannot begin to comprehend. Therefore God has revealed Godself inside of time and space as well. The trinity is no more than 3 individuals inside of time and space which is a manifestation of three aspects of the infinite God that we need to know, which one or two alone are necessary but insufficient, and are the specific attacks of the three deceptions of Satan in the Great Controversy, and the very center of Mrs. White's theology.

[Gustave]

The problem is that most of us have too narrow of a mindset. We do not think about the distinction between the infinite and the finite. We tend to have a very big, but still finite god.

[Kevin H]

But it still was not tested if God, as a creature, could deny himself and fail to execute and complete his own purpose. Was God all he claimed to be was the issue. If Jesus did not die the entire universe would have died, not just fallen man.

[Gustave]

But it still was not tested if God, as a creature, could deny himself and fail to execute and complete his own purpose.

[Kevin H]

Remember Jesus was the God-Man, as much God as if he was not man and as much man as if he was not God.

[Gustave]

Remember Jesus was the God-Man, as much God as if he was not man and as much man as if he was not God.

That's my point - both Natures united perfectly into the Person Jesus Christ...

...United, not mixed or blended as Arius insisted they were.

[Gustave]

The question is in what way was Christ "God"...

...What I'm saying is the Pioneers & Ellen White already have answered that question.

Ellen White Early Writings 54.2

I saw a throne, and on it sat the Father and the Son. I gazed on Jesus' countenance and admired His lovely person. The Father's PERSON I could not behold, for a cloud of glorious light covered Him. I asked Jesus if His Father had a form like Himself. He said He had, but I could not behold it, for said He, "If you should once behold the glory of His PERSON, you would cease to exist.

Ellen said she witnessed Lucifer prior to and after his sin.....

...She clearly said He had FLESH & Jesus fit right in with the OTHER archangels so He also had FLESH.

...In keeping with the teachings of the SDA Pioneers.

Ellen White, Adventist Review and Herald, March 8 1906

He who denies the personality of God AND of his Son Jesus Christ, is denying God AND Christ. " If that which ye have heard from the beginning shall remain in you, ye also shall continue in the Son, and in the Father." If you continue to believe and obey the truths you FIRST embraced REGARDING the personality of the Father and the Son, you will be joined together with him in love.

Ellen White, along with every other Methodist who joined the SDA Church had to reject their Trinitarianism....

...And EMBRACE the "Personality of God" Doctrine promulgated by the SDA Pioneers.

Seventh-day Adventist Signs of the Times April 22, 1875

What is'God? He is a personal, organized intelligence,' possessing both body and' parts! He is in the form of man. "What is Jesus Christ ? He is the Son of God, and is like his Father, being " the brightness of his Father's glory, and the express image of-his person." He is a personal intelligence, with .body, parts, and passions ; possessing immortal FLESH and immortal bones.

To claim God was ONE and within God were the Three Persons of the Trinity...

....Was Pantheism according to the SDA Pioneers - I've collected scores of them ( the Pioneers ) saying just that.

The attempt by SDA apologists to classify Kellogg as teaching Pantheism is dishonest...

...As there is a straight line of documentation within Official SDA teaching.

...That explicitly states belief in the Trinity IS PANTHEISM.

[Nic Samojluk]

Can someone tell me why Ellen White avoided the use of the "Trinity" term?

Can someone also tell me why we baptize in the threefold name when all the other references to baptism in the New Testament do not use said formula?

[Lysimachus]

Can someone tell me why Ellen White avoided the use of the "Trinity" term?

Can someone also tell me why we baptize in the threefold name when all the other references to baptism in the New Testament do not use said formula?

Not worth my time worrying about all of this. These are just silly distractions from the "big picture" of the great controversy between good and evil. Silly things like this (including Gustuve's above posts) is what Satan uses men to distract men's minds and make them think that because of these minor issues, this is what disqualifies Ellen White as a prophet of God.

I could care less about these arguments. They aren't worth it.

[phkrause]

Can someone also tell me why we baptize in the threefold name when all the other references to baptism in the New Testament do not use said formula?

So what does this verse mean?????

Matthew 28:19 Therefore, go and make people from all nations into talmidim, immersing them into the reality of the Father, the Son and the Ruach HaKodesh,

That seems to be telling me why we do!!!!!!

[Gustave]

Originally Posted By: Nic Samojluk

Can someone tell me why Ellen White avoided the use of the "Trinity" term?

Can someone also tell me why we baptize in the threefold name when all the other references to baptism in the New Testament do not use said formula?

Not worth my time worrying about all of this. These are just silly distractions from the "big picture" of the great controversy between good and evil. Silly things like this (including Gustuve's above posts) is what Satan uses men to distract men's minds and make them think that because of these minor issues, this is what disqualifies Ellen White as a prophet of God.

I could care less about these arguments. They aren't worth it.

Ellen White avoided using the word Trinity because she was anti-Trinitarian...

An individual can't claim belief in a doctrine while at the same time.

...Making feverish affirmations that are the Antithesis of that same doctrine.

[Kevin H]

Ellen White avoided using the word Trinity because she was anti-Trinitarian...

An individual can't claim belief in a doctrine while at the same time.

...Making feverish affirmations that are the Antithesis of that same doctrine.

Then why did people accuse her of apostisy for becoming a trinitarian when she was alive (yes I read things with that accusation in the White Estate vault) and why did Elder Andresen go to visit her to find out if she did indeed become a trinitarian and when he left she had convinced him to be a trinitarian?

[doug yowell]

Ellen White avoided using the word Trinity because she was anti-Trinitarian...

An individual can't claim belief in a doctrine while at the same time.

...Making feverish affirmations that are the Antithesis of that same doctrine.

So now that we know what she didn't believe, what exactly did she teach about the nature of God?

[Gustave]

Originally Posted By: Gustave

Ellen White avoided using the word Trinity because she was anti-Trinitarian...

An individual can't claim belief in a doctrine while at the same time.

...Making feverish affirmations that are the Antithesis of that same doctrine.

Then why did people accuse her of apostisy for becoming a trinitarian when she was alive (yes I read things with that accusation in the White Estate vault) and why did Elder Andresen go to visit her to find out if she did indeed become a trinitarian and when he left she had convinced him to be a trinitarian?

No one could accuse Ellen White of being a Trinitarian...

...When she publically taught "God" would have seen to Chrits's eternal annihilation.

..."IF" Christ WOULD have sinned.

One could pour a new alien meaning into the established word Trinity...

...Then make all kinds of arguments about how it's violated.

[Kevin H]

You are making assumptions and ignoring the evidence. You did not answer the visit by Elder Andresen.

[Nic Samojluk]

Lysimachus wrote:

“Not worth my time worrying about all of this. These are just silly distractions from the "big picture" of the great controversy between good and evil. Silly things like this (including Gustuve's above posts) is what Satan uses men to distract men's minds and make them think that because of these minor issues, this is what disqualifies Ellen White as a prophet of God. I could care less about these arguments. They aren't worth it.”

What is silly for you is important for others. There is nothing silly about what we find in the Bible. The Holy Spirit is the one who inspired holy men to record what we find in Scripture. In my study of the Bible I discovered that all the references to baptism do not use the threefold formula but state that the believers were baptized in the name of Jesus or the name of the Lord. If you want the precise biblical texts I can provide them.

Is it safe to build a doctrine on a single passage of Scripture? Historical sources like the Britannica tell us that the Trinitarian formula for baptism was a late development in the Christian Church and Eusebius of Caesarea had the habit of citing Matthew 25:19 with a single formula instead of the Trinitarian one. He also wrote that his investigation revealed that the three names in said biblical passage were not in the original manuscripts.

I believe that Ellen White avoided the use of the “Trinity” term perhaps for this reason.

[mac]

What about these verses then?

Jam 2:19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.

Rom 3:30 Seeing [it is] one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith.

Jhn 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.

Jhn 20:29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed [are] they that have not seen, and [yet] have believed.

The trinity is no more than 3 individuals inside of time and space which is a manifestation of three aspects of the infinite God that we need to know...

Mat 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?

Jesus was totally separated from God. If He was just one aspect of God then what would be the significance of such act? Wouldn't this reduce it to mere theater?

[Kevin H]

Of course not, it is non less than God himself bearing our sins. Jesus, being God and Man was killed by the sepperation from the Father and the Holy Spirit, however all three members bore our sins and suffered under sin

[John317]

The Trinity Doctrine requires that there is ONE "God" , a Singular Divine Substance...

...Without body or parts - Eternal, Almighty, Infinite Spirit.

...The Three distinct Persons of the Trinity equally possess this Substance.

The Bible (not creeds or the Catholic Church) determines what the Godhead, or Trinity, is. The Bible doesn't teach that God is without body or parts. The Bible definitely speaks of God as having a form and a body. Christ is God, and He certainly has body and parts. He is still a human being and always will be a human in a glorified body. The Holy Spirit, of course, does not have a body or a material form. SDAs do believe, however, that the Three distinct Persons of the Trinity equally possess the same substance or essence.

[John317]

Gustave, you keep bringing up creeds as if they determine truth. Creeds mean nothing to the SDA church and are absolutely without authority. The protestant Bible alone is our authority for doctrine. Ellen White's writings themselves are judged by the Bible.

[John317]

...Is it safe to build a doctrine on a single passage of Scripture? Historical sources like the Britannica tell us that the Trinitarian formula for baptism was a late development in the Christian Church and Eusebius of Caesarea had the habit of citing Matthew 25:19 with a single formula instead of the Trinitarian one. He also wrote that his investigation revealed that the three names in said biblical passage were not in the original manuscripts.

The doctrine of the Trinity (as SDAs believe and teach it) is not built on a single passage of Scripture. You could take out Matt. 28: 19 and the doctrine would still stand on the basis of valid Bible evidence. However, I disagree with you about whether it is a legitimate part of the Bible. Eusebius is not our authority for whether the Bible contains certain verses. You apparently object to building a doctrine on a single passage, yet you evidently want us to build our view of Matt. 28: 19 on the word of Eusebius. We have to go by the manuscript evidence, and all of the ancient manuscripts of the end of Matthew's Gospel contain Matt. 28: 19. But if you want to depend on Eusebius of Caesarea, be my guest.

Originally Posted By: Nic Samojluk

I believe that Ellen White avoided the use of the “Trinity” term perhaps for this reason.

The evidence is that Ellen White avoided the use fo the word, Trinity, because it carries a lot of baggage and must be carefully defined in order to avoid misunderstanding. That is one reason SDAs don't accept creeds, because they contain truth mixed with error. Another reason Ellen White avoided the term is that its use would only have contributed to division and argument within the SDA church, and that is exactly what Ellen White was trying to avoid.

Ellen White instead used the words "heavenly trio" and "the great Threefold power in heaven," etc. What is a trio? It's three closely associated persons. That's an essential part of the Trinity. Trio= three= Trinity.

[John317]

Originally Posted By: Kevin H

... why did people accuse [Ellen White] of apostisy for becoming a trinitarian when she was alive (yes I read things with that accusation in the White Estate vault) and why did Elder Andresen go to visit her to find out if she did indeed become a trinitarian and when he left she had convinced him to be a trinitarian?

No one could accuse Ellen White of being a Trinitarian...

...When she publically taught "God" would have seen to Chrits's eternal annihilation.

..."IF" Christ WOULD have sinned.

You are absolutely correct here, Kevin H. Andreasen became a convinced Trinitarian as a result of his visit to Ellen White about 1910. Before his visit with her, he was non-Trinitarian. After his visit with her, he studied the Bible and found that it supports what she wrote.

What Ellen White taught about the possibility of Christ sinning doesn't negate the fact that Ellen White's theology is in agreement with the SDA Church's view of the Godhead.

Does it agree with the creeds or with the Roman Catholic view of the Trinity? No, of course not. But that is neither here nor there; we must allow God's Word, the Bible, to define the Godhead.

[John317]

Remember Jesus was the God-Man, as much God as if he was not man and as much man as if he was not God.

Very well put, Kevin. I like that.

[John317]

...

Ellen White avoided using the word Trinity because she was anti-Trinitarian...

An individual can't claim belief in a doctrine while at the same time.

...Making feverish affirmations that are the Antithesis of that same doctrine.

:

Gustave, no anti-Trinitarian makes statements such as the following:

1) There are three living persons in the heavenly trio.

2) Christ is Jehovah Immanuel. (Mount of Blessings, 34)

3) The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are "the great Threefold power" in heaven. (Ms. 11, 1901.)

4) Says the Godhead is "the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit" and they gave Themselves to the planning and working out of the plan of redemption. (Counsels on Health, 222.)

5) Christ is the eternal, self-existent Son of God. (Ev 615)

6) The Holy Spirit is a divine person and has a personality. (Ev 616-617)

7) The Holy Spirit is "the Third Person of the Godhead." (She calls the Godhead "the Eternal Godhead.")

8) The Holy Spirit is one of Three living persons of the eternal Godhead who felt pity for the human race and planned together with the Father and Christ how to save mankind. CH 222

9)Christ was equal with God, infinite and omnipotent. Ev. 615

10) "It was Christ who from the bush on Mt. Horeb spoke to Moses saying, I AM THAT I AM." (Notice the Bible there refers to Christ as "Elohim," "Yahweh," and as "the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob."

I could make a list of literally hundreds of such clear statements from the pen of Ellen G. White, all showing that she was most certainly not anti-Trinity.

What she was, however, was opposed to many of the false teaching that are part of the Trinity doctrine as taught by some of the mainline Christian Churches. But because she opposed certain aspects of the Trinity doctrine as these groups expressed it doesn't mean she was anti-Trinitarian per se. That would be the case only if the sole Trinitarian belief is that which is believed and taught by the Roman Catholic Church and some of the other churches.