J H Kellogg & God's Nature

[GHansen]

Anyone interested in the history of the Godhead doctrine in Adventism might want to consider Leroy Froom's "Movement of Destiny". The connection between the development of the Godhead doctrine and the 1888 Message was something of which I was unaware. Froom traces the introduction of Arianism into Adventism through various individuals as well as the path to "Orthodoxy" i.e., the full deity of Christ. He further relates why the Deity of Christ was an essential part of the 1888 message of righteousness by faith.

Movement Of Destiny | Adventist Digital Library

 

[ReturntoDar]

One thing we must ever be clear on, and we are NOT! Christ, is the express image of His Father. Christ is eternal, in that time is irrelevant to His Father and to Himself. No beginning, no end, this fact obliterates the concept of time.

Having said all of the above, one very important fact remains: Jesus is the literal Son of God. All things, ALL things, came from the Father. His Son, the Holy Spirit, the angels, all the created intelligences inhabiting the vastness of space. ALL THINGS.

Yet, Jesus is eternal. It is the attempts of man, which continue in our Church today, to "figure this out" that has directly led to a denial that Jesus is the Son of God. By human reasoning, this is impossible. HOW can Jesus be the literal Son of God and yet be eternal? And so humans conclude, incorrectly, and to the devastation of their soul, Christ cannot be the Son of God. Few, very few, realize just how devastating this is. A direct denial of the bible and the spirit of prophecy. Why? Because "it does not compute", and we "must" reject it.

The Jews also rejected that Christ was the Son of God. Their reasoning, though different from modern times, has the same end result. The bible is lying. Ellen White is lying. It is impossible for Jesus to be the literal Son of God. Laodicea,,, has no clue how devastating this is.

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. Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me; or else believe me for the very works’ sake.” {ST August 20, 1894, par. 7}

[ReturntoDar]

“When I read in the Bible of how many refused to believe that Christ was the Son of God, sadness fills my heart. We read that even His own brethren {modern SDA must be included} refused to believe in Him.” (Letter 398, 1906, par. 2, Dec. 26)

[Gustave]

On 11/22/2022 at 5:32 PM, GHansen said:

Lot of questions about this matter can be cleared up by defining "personality" as Webster did in his 1828 dictionary:

"Personality: That which constitutes an individual a distinct person." In the context of the times, i.e., Kellogg's "Living Temple", which spiritualized the nature of God, EGW contended for the distinct individuality/personhood of the Godhead. That's why everything in Adventism hung on that doctrine. It signified the actual individuality of the persons of the Godhead, opposing Kellogg's spiritualizing of God's nature. Reading Kellogg's comments, they remind me of the Chinese concept of Qi, an impersonal life force which  actuates human beings, as opposed to a personal God. EGW was arguing for a personal God, intelligently involved in the life of his children.

[My opinion today, as a hobbyist]

 

Judaism has always held that God has NO BODY, is incorporeal - Christianity has consistently maintained the same thing, excepting Adventist groups, Mormonism and perhaps proponents of Ancient Alien theory. "Personality of God" was incredibly well defined theologically by the Adventist's leaving zero doubt as to its meaning. 

If "Letter 253" attributed to Ellen White is legitimate I'd say it's more than reasonable to conclude Kellogg's departure from the SDA Church was directly related to his adoption of the Trinity Doctrine. In Ellen White's teaching Father God was a "BEING", Michael the archangel was a "BEING", Lucifer was a "BEING" - all hominids with flesh. 

The Trinity Doctrine teaches that God is ONE BEING that is pure Spirit and within this one Spirit Being there are 3 Persons. Thus whatever it is that's God (the Substance for lack of a better word) is ONE. Its NOT that there are three Persons each made out of the same substance so that it could be said each person represents a third of God but each person is fully God - that's the mystery. 

Ellen White taught that Christ could have sinned, lost His Salvation and if that would have happened The Father would have eternally smote Christ so that it would be as if Christ never existed. One doesn't need to have a degree in theology to affirm that this is incompatible with the Doctrine of the Trinity. 

By the way I just love your tag GHansen! I'm gonna steal it! 

 

[My opinion today, as a hobbyist]

[GHansen]

8 hours ago, Gustave said:

If "Letter 253" attributed to Ellen White is legitimate I'd say it's more than reasonable to conclude Kellogg's departure from the SDA Church was directly related to his adoption of the Trinity Doctrine.

You might say that but very few, if any, real SDA scholars or even hobbyists would agree.

[ReturntoDar]

I put little stock in the opinions of supposed "SDA scholars". The evidence is clear and convincing, Kellogg was promoting a concept of god who was not a literal being. To him, god was a concept, a theory. This is fundamentally Trinitairian. God by committee, impersonal, without body, an idea, a theory. A god present in the flowers, the trees, the atmosphere but without form. This totally destroys the personality and nature of the Father of Christ and His Son. This is precisely what the prophet was counseling against, the very dangerous ideas of Kellogg.

[Gustave]

Quote

GHansen said; I put little stock in the opinions of supposed "SDA scholars". The evidence is clear and convincing, Kellogg was promoting a concept of god who was not a literal being.

Exactly, and that was what the problem was. In SDA Theology Father God was a literal separate flesh hominid BEING that was APART from the Son and along comes Kellogg who turned his back on SDA teaching and started to claim that "GOD" was spirit in keeping with traditional / historical Christianity. 

"He taught that God was a rewarder of the righteous, and a punisher of the transgressor. HE WAS NOT AN INTANGABLE SPIRIT....." Ellen White, Signs of the Times, April 25, 1878, Volume 3, Number 16.

Ellen made this statement during the same time she edited / revised what was possibly the most militant anti-trinitarian article ever produced by a Seventh Day Adventist printing press and even more salient than that is less than two years after Ellen made her remarks about how God is not an intangible we find Kellog militantly arguing against the Trinity for the SDA Church in the Sabbath Hearld in a 5-part debate with non-Adventist. 

"Our reviewer then goes on at some length to show that according to our view the death of Christ was but a human sacrifice, and finally concludes, "Hence the Doctor's theory claims that the essence of God, the Supreme Being, who created and upholds all things from the beginning, was made into corruptible flesh, was killed by men," etc. The above statement is entirely correct, with a slight addition; the insertion of the words, " does not " just before the word " claim "
will make the statement correct. As it stands, it is as wide a departure from the truth as it can be. The only grounds upon which our reviewer could be justified in making such a statement would be the supposition on his part that we believe in the doctrine of the trinity; but he very well knows, from positions taken and arguments used in previous articles, that we do not agree with him on this subject any better than on that of the nature of the soul. We believe in but one Deity, God, who is a unity, not a compound 'being. We think the Bible as well as common sense sustains this view. Says Eld. W., "'His trinitarianism ' seems to shackle him much." We repel the charge of " trinitarianism " without the slightest hesitation. We do not believe in a triune God, as before remarked. And we will not, as did our reviewer in a former article, leave the reader in doubt as to our position on this point. We are utterly at a loss to comprehend how our reviewer could have blundered so strangely as to suppose us to share in so gross an error as we believe the orthodox doctrine of the trinity to be. Thus are we able by a word to burst the " shackles " with which he seeks to bind us.

In other words, in 1880 Kellogg (himself a militant anti-Trinitarian) thought it preposterous that anyone with half a brain could make the mistake of thinking or claiming Seventh Day Adventists were Trinitarian. 

The point is that Kellogg later changed his mind and became to believe in the Trinity and this was what Ellen White had such a beef about for in so doing Kellogg had DESTROYED THE PERSONALITY OF GOD - a Pillar Doctrine of SDA's that affirmed God had a hominid flesh body with members organs and parts. 

As Kellogg said in his debate with the Trinitarian - SDA's didn't believe in a Triune God / compound "BEING" - SDA's believed in a Unity. 

In Greek Mythology the God's hold a council and are united in belief and all vote one way - this is the Unity Kellogg and Ellen White describe how God is ONE. 

Again, this is totally incompatible with the Doctrine of the Trinity. 

 

 

 

[Gustave]

4 hours ago, GHansen said:

You might say that but very few, if any, real SDA scholars or even hobbyists would agree.

Not long ago I became aware of the guy who does the below video and was frankly stunned that he reached the same conclusion I did only in a much easier way. I came to this conclusion the hard way by reading everything I could find in the archives about the personality of God and Kellogg defending himself that he wasn't a pantheist. 

I was unaware of Letter 253 and came to my conclusions without it but after becoming aware of Letter 253 I'm not sure how anyone could argue that the guy below wasn't spot on with his conclusions about Ellen specifically rebuking Kellogg for his new Trinitarian belief.  

I would be interested in where you believe this guy is off base. I could easily change my mind about Letter 253 if I was given a reason to. 

 

[ReturntoDar]

https://m.egwwritings.org/fr/book/9980.1 Letter from EGW to Kellogg.

Letter 253, 1903, November 20. In its entirety. Posted on the EGW writings, a very reliable source.

[ReturntoDar]

Here is a link to the website for the above video posted by Gustave ("Ellen White Responds to Kellogg").

https://judgmenthour.org/video-gallery/

Lots of good info, many videos.

[Gustave]

1 hour ago, ReturntoDar said:

Here is a link to the website for the above video posted by Gustave ("Ellen White Responds to Kellogg").

https://judgmenthour.org/video-gallery/

Lots of good info, many videos.

The info is nicely packaged and very slick, however, this man is an anti-Trinitarian and therefore peddling heresy. The guy is basically harvesting low information SDA's to leave their Church and adopt what he claims is the truth. I agree with the guy that Ellen White was not a Trinitarian but I didnt' need him or Ellen's Letter 253 to know this. 

[GHansen]

Perhaps I should be and will become; however, presently, the doctrine of the "trinity" does not interest me. I understand that there are three dimensions to God--Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. These 3 elements are represented by Christ, in whom all the fullness of the Godhead dwells. He is the express image of God [whatever that might mean]. In Daniel 7 the three aspects of God are represented by the Ancient of Days, Son of Man, and the River of Fire. In Revelation 4&5, we see One sitting on a throne, a Lamb, and 7 spirits of God. People may be baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit or the Lord Jesus. The Lord Jesus subsumes the Father and the Holy Spirit. There are other points brought out in Scripture but they don't change God's nature. That's about all I need to know.

As for Kellogg, the trinity and pantheism, whatever his beliefs were or might have been, he was a great man, certainly among, if not the greatest, physician of his day.

[Gustave]

2 hours ago, GHansen said:

Perhaps I should be and will become; however, presently, the doctrine of the "trinity" does not interest me. I understand that there are three dimensions to God--Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. These 3 elements are represented by Christ, in whom all the fullness of the Godhead dwells. He is the express image of God [whatever that might mean]. In Daniel 7 the three aspects of God are represented by the Ancient of Days, Son of Man, and the River of Fire. In Revelation 4&5, we see One sitting on a throne, a Lamb, and 7 spirits of God. People may be baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit or the Lord Jesus. The Lord Jesus subsumes the Father and the Holy Spirit. There are other points brought out in Scripture but they don't change God's nature. That's about all I need to know.

As for Kellogg, the trinity and pantheism, whatever his beliefs were or might have been, he was a great man, certainly among, if not the greatest, physician of his day.

You acknowledge and respect the mystery - I think that's the main thing we are called to do - recognize the great mystery and treat each person as if they were ourself. 

[ReturntoDar]

"Ellen White was not a Trinitarian." Kellogg was. I stand with the prophet. God is not a mystery, He is "the Father of Christ. Christ is the Son of God", states the prophet. The Bible says: “Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?” 1 John 5:5

Jews: denied Christ was the Son of God. Kellogg: denied Christ was the Son of God. SDA: deny Christ is the Son of God.

Simple, no mystery here. God, is the Father of Christ. He brought forth His Son before time began, states Ellen White. Christ had no beginning, in terms of "time". He is eternal, His age cannot be measured nor can the Father.

Those who deny Jesus is the Son of God are steeped in Laodicean error. The result is, they don't even know it!

"Then will be opened before him the course of the great conflict that had its birth before time began..." Education, 304 (1903). {LDE 302.1} The Father of Christ, and His Son, are eternal, distinct, individuals. Christ, is the express image (exact, in every detail) of His Father. If you know the Son, then you know the Father, said Jesus. No mystery here. "Mystery" is something the devil introduces.

[Gustave]

Quote

ReturntoDar said: Ellen White was not a Trinitarian." Kellogg was. I stand with the prophet. God is not a mystery, He is "the Father of Christ. Christ is the Son of God", states the prophet. The Bible says: “Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?” 1 John 5:5

The Bible also says that Jesus claimed that Isaiah 35 referred to Him - and Isaiah 35 is explicit that it would be God Himself that WOULD come and WOULD save. Christ is "GOD HIMSELF" in the Person of the Son. 

Ellen White was subservient to her Husband, this is why immediately after leaving a Trinitarian Methodist Church she was able to produce torrents of anti-Trinitarian teachings and visions - because James White liked it that way and Ellen accommodated by really throwing her back into it. 

SDA historians, who are very much faithful to the Church have admitted Generations of SDA's went to their graves believing heresy. Other SDA historians today claim that the SDA Pioneers today wouldn't be able to join the Church today because they couldn't agree with the fundamental beliefs - I'm not sure I'd buy that one but I can certainly say that officially today the SDA Church says the Trinity is a fundamental belief of the Church even though the Trinity is so loosely defined so as to provide shelter for the anti-Trinitarians within the Church.

The question I have for anyone who knows is this,

Are the official fundamental beliefs of the SDA Church today AKA as "The Pillars" of the SDA Faith / Church or are these two things two different things??? 

 

 

 

[ReturntoDar]

The "pillars" of SDA belief sustained the work, the principles, the beliefs for 50 years. These are the Fundamental PRINCIPLES. It was only after Ellen White's death that designs to change those principles came into play. Specifically, the issue over who is God began to develop in the 1930's. It was in 1980 that the, now called "Fundamental Beliefs" were finally changed. FB #2 to be precise. For the first time the official position of the church changed from: God is the Father of Christ to Christ IS God, and so is His Son and so is His the FATHERS Holy Spirit (which Jesus shares). Thus, the new design was "three gods". But that created another problem! The Bible is clear, there is ONE God. What to do?

This one god is a combination of the three gods. And this became known as a MYSTERY! This mysterious fourth god, with no personality, no individuality, this was god by committee. A mysterious concept indeed! Step 2. Gather up a large number of Bible verses to support this man made theory. These I have closely studied, they miss the mark by a wide range. Many of them are completely irrelvent in making the case for a "fourth god" (called the "one").

Step 3. And this is the REAL problem. Now take this Fundamental Belief #2 and make it a test of fellowship! By which members are denied, or removed, from leadership positions. Pastors are outright fired. Elders, etc. are removed from office. In some foreign countries members are disfellowshipped.

The pioneers were clear, Ellen White was clear the "PRINCIPLES" should NEVER be used as a test of fellowship. ONLY the clear, concise testimony of the Bible itself can be used for such. Which takes us back to the number 1 problem: that Bible declares Jesus in the Son of God. Ellen White tells us Jesus was to Son of God BEFORE the world was created.

Jesus. being the express image of His Father has no problem being called by His Fathers names, even "God". I too cary my fathers name, but I am not my father.

This is a very serious issue, the Trinity has Catholicism writtten all over it, though we deny it. We call it a "mystery" to confues the issue.

[Gustave]

6 hours ago, ReturntoDar said:

The "pillars" of SDA belief sustained the work, the principles, the beliefs for 50 years. These are the Fundamental PRINCIPLES. It was only after Ellen White's death that designs to change those principles came into play. Specifically, the issue over who is God began to develop in the 1930's. It was in 1980 that the, now called "Fundamental Beliefs" were finally changed. FB #2 to be precise. For the first time the official position of the church changed from: God is the Father of Christ to Christ IS God, and so is His Son and so is His the FATHERS Holy Spirit (which Jesus shares). Thus, the new design was "three gods". But that created another problem! The Bible is clear, there is ONE God. What to do?

This one god is a combination of the three gods. And this became known as a MYSTERY! This mysterious fourth god, with no personality, no individuality, this was god by committee. A mysterious concept indeed! Step 2. Gather up a large number of Bible verses to support this man made theory. These I have closely studied, they miss the mark by a wide range. Many of them are completely irrelvent in making the case for a "fourth god" (called the "one").

Step 3. And this is the REAL problem. Now take this Fundamental Belief #2 and make it a test of fellowship! By which members are denied, or removed, from leadership positions. Pastors are outright fired. Elders, etc. are removed from office. In some foreign countries members are disfellowshipped.

The pioneers were clear, Ellen White was clear the "PRINCIPLES" should NEVER be used as a test of fellowship. ONLY the clear, concise testimony of the Bible itself can be used for such. Which takes us back to the number 1 problem: that Bible declares Jesus in the Son of God. Ellen White tells us Jesus was to Son of God BEFORE the world was created.

Jesus. being the express image of His Father has no problem being called by His Fathers names, even "God". I too cary my fathers name, but I am not my father.

This is a very serious issue, the Trinity has Catholicism writtten all over it, though we deny it. We call it a "mystery" to confues the issue.

 

You've demonstrated you still don't know what the Trinity isn't (i.e. a combination of 3 god's).

You've got nothing to worry about as the current SDA Church doesn't accept the Orthodox Trinity - it's been re-defined so that God is understood to be one like a husband and wife are understood to be one - or as Ellen put it as Christ and His Apostles are one in the same way that God and Christ is one. I assure you, this ISN'T the Trinity. 

[ReturntoDar]

SDA god since 1980: a committee of three. The "one" God is thus a concept, not literal, no personality. This is how SDA define the biblical "one god" (small g). The Bible is clear, there is ONE true God. Ellen White is clear, God is the Father of Christ. Christ is clear, His Father is God. The false Trinity doctrine destroys the personality of the Father of Christ. I know exactly what the Trinity is. There is virtually no difference between apostate Christianity trinity, Catholic tand SDA trinity. Those who continue to express they "are not the same" are sadly mistaken.

FB#2 God the Father. God the Son. God the Holy Spirit.

Fundamental PRINCIPLES that Ellen White endorsed: God the Father, His representative the Holy Spirit. Jesus, God's Son. Three distince personalities, ONE God from whom ALL things came.

There is no "mystery" here, that is the devils trick to get people to accept that which is illogical and cannot be explained. It is taking something simple and shrouding it in mystery and confusion.

[ReturntoDar]

The God Head, is NOT God. "We are favorably situated, we can make use of every opportunity to know the one true God, and Jesus Christ whom He hath sent. The delusive snares of Satan we do not need to experience." {Lt12-1893.}

[Gustave]

1 hour ago, ReturntoDar said:

SDA god since 1980: a committee of three. The "one" God is thus a concept, not literal, no personality. This is how SDA define the biblical "one god" (small g). The Bible is clear, there is ONE true God. Ellen White is clear, God is the Father of Christ. Christ is clear, His Father is God. The false Trinity doctrine destroys the personality of the Father of Christ. I know exactly what the Trinity is. There is virtually no difference between apostate Christianity trinity, Catholic tand SDA trinity. Those who continue to express they "are not the same" are sadly mistaken.

FB#2 God the Father. God the Son. God the Holy Spirit.

Fundamental PRINCIPLES that Ellen White endorsed: God the Father, His representative the Holy Spirit. Jesus, God's Son. Three distince personalities, ONE God from whom ALL things came.

There is no "mystery" here, that is the devils trick to get people to accept that which is illogical and cannot be explained. It is taking something simple and shrouding it in mystery and confusion.

it looks like you agree with me which makes me wonder what you're beef with the organized SDA Church is? 

ReturntoDar, with your help I think I can identify exactly what the issue is - if you can answer just a couple of questions for me.

 

Question 1: 

Could the one God you believe in and that you claim Ellen White believed in through a moment of weakness commit a sin? 

Question 2:

Could the one God you believe in and that you claim Ellen White believed in eternally cease to exist for any reason or a combination of reasons? 

 

[ReturntoDar]

It is clear that God cannot lie, therefore, He cannot sin. Since Jesus is the "express image" of His Father this would be true of Himself as well. What would have become of the man/God Jesus when upon earth had He sinned? In other words, when Jesus took upon Himself the nature of man, He could have indeed sinned.

The conundrum is just this, and it has been this since AD 400 or so. HOW can Jesus BE God when the bible says there is only one true God. Isaiah lists a number of names for Jesus, one of which is "the everlasting Father"! Jesus is not a lesser God, He IS God (the express image of His Father, in every conceivable way). He comes to us in the name of His Father. He and His Father are "one". Typically here we would then explain this as one in spirit, goals, etc. But I submit, it is deeper than that. Two distinct personalities, one the Father, the other the Son, yet they share something that goes deeper than just atributes, goals, ideas, thoughts. They are one, in a deeper way than just "spirit". If there is any mystery here, this is it! And I will not speculate on what this means beyond the surface of "one in spirit".

The Father is clearly the "One" TRUE God. So who is Jesus, who is also God? Well, He is God's Son. Now that is clear enough, there is no "mystery" here. We understand perfectly what a Father and Son means. How that works with divinity, we cannot penetrate that veil, nor should we try.

Take a look at the Fundamental Principles from Ellen Whites time. They nailed it. FP#1. God has a representative, His Holy Spirit. FP#2, God has a Son, Jesus. God, through His Son, created all things. Who did the creating? Jesus, being the "express image" of His Father, He had the power to "speak, and it stood fast".

"Let us make man in our own image". Who is speaking in this verse? I believe this is the Father. Who did the actual creation of Adam? That was Jesus. The Father and the Son are "one", in a deeper way than humans can grasp, yet they are two distinct personalities.

There are NOT "three gods" as FB#2 clearly states. THAT is a serious mistake made in 1980. One the prophet never suggested or implied, in spite of attempts to put "words in her mouth". This concept of god by committee cannot be sustained by scripture or by the Bible. It is an assumption. EGW, "We ought not guess at anything".

The REAL problem: we have taken the Fundmental Principles, now "Beliefs" and turned them into a "creed". We have then taken the creed as a "test of fellowship" and punished, even removed, those who do not agree with this Church creed. Ellen White and all the pioneers were very clear on this: We must NEVER have a CREED. In 1980, that is exactly what SDA's did in an official capacity. FB#2 MUST be edited to reflect truth, as it is in the bible, and the bible only.

[Gustave]

19 minutes ago, ReturntoDar said:

It is clear that God cannot lie, therefore, He cannot sin. Since Jesus is the "express image" of His Father this would be true of Himself as well. What would have become of the man/God Jesus when upon earth had He sinned? In other words, when Jesus took upon Himself the nature of man, He could have indeed sinned.

The conundrum is just this, and it has been this since AD 400 or so. HOW can Jesus BE God when the bible says there is only one true God. Isaiah lists a number of names for Jesus, one of which is "the everlasting Father"! Jesus is not a lesser God, He IS God (the express image of His Father, in every conceivable way). He comes to us in the name of His Father. He and His Father are "one". Typically here we would then explain this as one in spirit, goals, etc. But I submit, it is deeper than that. Two distinct personalities, one the Father, the other the Son, yet they share something that goes deeper than just atributes, goals, ideas, thoughts. They are one, in a deeper way than just "spirit". If there is any mystery here, this is it! And I will not speculate on what this means beyond the surface of "one in spirit".

The Father is clearly the "One" TRUE God. So who is Jesus, who is also God? Well, He is God's Son. Now that is clear enough, there is no "mystery" here. We understand perfectly what a Father and Son means. How that works with divinity, we cannot penetrate that veil, nor should we try.

Take a look at the Fundamental Principles from Ellen Whites time. They nailed it. FP#1. God has a representative, His Holy Spirit. FP#2, God has a Son, Jesus. God, through His Son, created all things. Who did the creating? Jesus, being the "express image" of His Father, He had the power to "speak, and it stood fast".

"Let us make man in our own image". Who is speaking in this verse? I believe this is the Father. Who did the actual creation of Adam? That was Jesus. The Father and the Son are "one", in a deeper way than humans can grasp, yet they are two distinct personalities.

There are NOT "three gods" as FB#2 clearly states. THAT is a serious mistake made in 1980. One the prophet never suggested or implied, in spite of attempts to put "words in her mouth". This concept of god by committee cannot be sustained by scripture or by the Bible. It is an assumption. EGW, "We ought not guess at anything".

The REAL problem: we have taken the Fundmental Principles, now "Beliefs" and turned them into a "creed". We have then taken the creed as a "test of fellowship" and punished, even removed, those who do not agree with this Church creed. Ellen White and all the pioneers were very clear on this: We must NEVER have a CREED. In 1980, that is exactly what SDA's did in an official capacity. FB#2 MUST be edited to reflect truth, as it is in the bible, and the bible only.

Thank you, I really appreciate your thoughtful answer ReturntoDar. 

Give me a few days and I'll attempt to provide you with some answers worthy of your questions. 

 

 

[ReturntoDar]

Maybe this will help bring some clarity to the issue.

Our scholars have phrased the heavenly trio in our Fundamental Beliefs as: God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit.

They removed the phrase Son of God and replaced it with the phrase God the Son (in 1980). This phrase is never used in the Bible or in the Spirit of Prophecy. Nor will you it find in our 28 Fundamental Beliefs. The biblical phrase is Son of God.

Ellen White on the issue of "time", which is the major conundrum in figuring out how Jesus can be a Son, and yet eternal. As quoted earlier, the prophet tells us when "time" began: when sin entered. In the same comment she tells us when "time" shall cease: when the sin problem is totally eradicated. In this case, "time" as it relates to milleniums of centuries past or future. Time is irrelevant to divinity who have no beginning and no end. No one was counting "time" in such terms before sin entered. No one will count in such terms (milleniums of centuries) when time ends.

Weekly Sabbath? New moon? Special events? I think so. But in terms of milleniums and centuries? No one is counting... Thus was the case when God and His Son decided to begin the creation of the heavens, the angels, planets. Until Satan was not consulted over the last planet to be created, earth. He got an "attitude" and THAT is WHEN "sin and time" began! Before that? Only "eternity", without beginning, without end.

[GHansen]

Anyone know what the term "express image" [of his person] means?

[B/W Photodude]

1 hour ago, GHansen said:

Anyone know what the term "express image" [of his person] means?

While the following link is to a non-Adventist site, they do seem to take on the question of "express image" quite well. However, they make several points that I would take issue with.

https://www.theonenessofgod.org/hrf_faq/hebrews-13-the-express-image-2/