Adventist BEASTwatch

[BlessedMan]

49 minutes ago, stinsonmarri said:

I also deny that Ellen White ever accept the trinity.

1/ The Eternal Dignitaries of the Trinity.--The eternal heavenly dignitaries--God, and Christ, and the Holy Spirit--arming them [the disciples] with more than mortal energy, . . . would advance with them to the work and convince the world of sin.--Manuscript 145, 1901.  {Ev 616.4}

2/ Personality of the Holy Spirit.--We need to realize that the Holy Spirit, who is as much a person as God is a person, is walking through these grounds.--Manuscript 66, 1899. (From a talk to the students at the Avondale School.)  {Ev 616.5}      

3/ The Holy Spirit is a person, for He beareth witness with our spirits that we are the children of God. When this witness is borne, it carries with it its own evidence. At such times we believe and are sure that we are the children of God. {Ev 616.6}      

4/ The Holy Spirit has a personality, else He could not bear witness to our spirits and with our spirits that we are the children of God. He must also be a divine person, else He could not search out the secrets which lie hidden in the mind of God. "For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God."--Manuscript 20, 1906.  {Ev 617.1}      

5/ The Power of God in the Third Person.--The prince of the power of evil can only be held in check by the power of God in the third person of the Godhead, the Holy Spirit.--Special Testimonies, Series A, No. 10, p. 37. (1897)  {Ev 617.2}     

6/ In Co-operation With the Three Highest Powers.-- We are to co-operate with the three highest powers in heaven,--the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, --and these powers will work through us, making us workers together with God.--Special Testimonies, Series B, No. 7, p. 51. (1905)  {Ev 617.3}

[stinsonmarri]

8 hours ago, BlessedMan said:

1/ The Eternal Dignitaries of the Trinity.--The eternal heavenly dignitaries--God, and Christ, and the Holy Spirit--arming them [the disciples] with more than mortal energy, . . . would advance with them to the work and convince the world of sin.--Manuscript 145, 1901.  {Ev 616.4}

2/ Personality of the Holy Spirit.--We need to realize that the Holy Spirit, who is as much a person as God is a person, is walking through these grounds.--Manuscript 66, 1899. (From a talk to the students at the Avondale School.)  {Ev 616.5}      

3/ The Holy Spirit is a person, for He beareth witness with our spirits that we are the children of God. When this witness is borne, it carries with it its own evidence. At such times we believe and are sure that we are the children of God. {Ev 616.6}      

4/ The Holy Spirit has a personality, else He could not bear witness to our spirits and with our spirits that we are the children of God. He must also be a divine person, else He could not search out the secrets which lie hidden in the mind of God. "For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God."--Manuscript 20, 1906.  {Ev 617.1}      

5/ The Power of God in the Third Person.--The prince of the power of evil can only be held in check by the power of God in the third person of the Godhead, the Holy Spirit.--Special Testimonies, Series A, No. 10, p. 37. (1897)  {Ev 617.2}     

6/ In Co-operation With the Three Highest Powers.-- We are to co-operate with the three highest powers in heaven,--the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, --and these powers will work through us, making us workers together with God.--Special Testimonies, Series B, No. 7, p. 51. (1905)  {Ev 617.3}

That is NOT the writings of EGW this comes from Leroy Froom and it was taking out of context. Did you know he is bury in George Washington Cemetery in the area where the Masonic people are buried!

"A new order of things has COME INTO the ministry. There is a desire to pattern after other churches and simplicity and humility are almost unknown. The young ministers seek to be original, and to introduce new ideas and new plans for labor. Some open revival meetings, and by this means call large numbers into the church. But when the excitement is over, where are the converted ones? Repentance and confession of sin are not seen. The sinner is entreated to believe in Christ and accept Him, without regard to his past life of sin and rebellion. The heart is not broken. There is no contrition of soul. The supposed converted ones have not fallen upon the Rock, Christ Jesus." E.G. White, Selected Messages, vol. 2, pp. 18, 19

Leroy Froom among others: A.G. Daniells, W.W. Prescott and F.M. Wilcox was doing exactly what EGW stated above!  Yes, there are mixed stories about Froom and his connection to the Catholic church. But like someone else in Washington he was open about what he did. This comes from his own words, so Adventist are denying the truth when the enemy reveals it himself!

“May I here make a frank personal confession? When, back between 1926 and 1928, I was asked by our leaders to give a series of studies on the Holy Spirit, covering the North American union ministerial institutes of 1928, I found that, aside from priceless leads found in the Spirit of Prophecy, there was practically nothing in our literature setting forth a sound Biblical exposition in this tremendous field of study. There were no previous path-finding books on the question in our literature. I was compelled to search out a score of valuable books written by men outside of our faith—those previously noted—for initial clues and suggestions, and to open up beckoning vistas to intensive personal study. Having these, I went on from there. But they were decided early helps. And scores, if not hundreds, could confirm the same sobering conviction that some of these other men frequently had a deeper insight into the spiritual things of God than many of our own men then had on the Holy Spirit and the triumphant life. It was still a largely obscure theme.” (If you have the book, you can read it for yourself). - MOVEMENT OF DESTINY. p. 322

Froom then came up with the book called Evangelism and stated this:

The Eternal Dignitaries of the Trinity—“The eternal heavenly dignitaries—God, and Christ, and the Holy Spirit—arming them [the disciples] with more than mortal energy, ... would advance with them to the work and convince the world of sin.”—Manuscript 145, 1901. {Ev 616.4}

First of all the subject title with the trinity was not EGW but added by the SDA Estate! The Manuscript is not 145, 1901 but Manuscript 130, 1901!

“There are three living persons of the heavenly trio; in the name of these three great powers - the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit - those who receive Christ by living faith are baptized.” — (Ellen G. White, Special Testimonies, Series B, No. 7, pp. 62, 63, 1905) — Evangelism p. 615.1

The writing you see above is not the original handwriting that EGW wrote herself. Here is actually and notice the insertion she use in her original hand writing. 

EGW like most writer's did in her day, borrowed from others. She borrowed from a Trinitarian named W. Boardman  EGW then changed certain words based on her faith against the belief in the trinity. She inserted “the” and  change the word “persons” to “personalities.”

Here is another statement Froom wrote in a letter:

“May I state that my book, The Coming of the Comforter was the result of a series of studies that I gave in 1927-28, to ministerial institutes throughout North America. You cannot imagine how I was pummeled by some of the old timers because I pressed on the personality of the Holy Spirit as the Third Person of the Godhead. Some men denied that –still deny it. But the book has come to be generally accepted as standard.” - Letter of LeRoy Froom to Otto H. Christensen, Oct 27, 1960

EGW thoughts on THE HOLY SPIRIT:

“The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ,” — (E.G. White, 14 Manuscript Releases, p. 84)

“The Holy Spirit is the Comforter, in Christ's name. He personifies Christ, yet is a distinct personality.” — (E.G. White, Manuscript Releases Volume 20 MR No. 1487)

“Christ has given his Spirit as a divine power.” — (E.G. White, Review and Herald, November 19, 1908

This letter she writes prove without a doubt that she did not include THE HOLY SPIRIT as a person or even part of a trinity:

The nature of the Holy Spirit is a mystery not clearly revealed, and you will never be able to explain it to others because the Lord has not revealed it to you.

It is not essential for you to know and be able to define just what the Holy Spirit is. Christ tells us that the Holy Spirit is the Comforter, and the Comforter is the Holy Ghost, “the Spirit of truth, which the Father shall send in My name.” “I will pray the Father, and He shall give you another Comforter, that He may abide with you forever; even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth Him not, neither knoweth Him: but ye know Him, for He dwelleth with you, and shall be in you” [John 14:16, 17]. This refers to the omnipresence of the Spirit of Christ, called the Comforter.

There are many mysteries which I do not seek to understand or to explain; they are too high for me, and too high for you. 14 MR 179 (Written to Brother Chapman from Petoskey, Michigan, June 11, 1891.)

“The nature of the Holy Spirit is a mystery. Men cannot explain it, because the Lord has not revealed it to them. Men having fanciful views may bring together passages of Scripture and put a human construction on them, but the acceptance of these views will not strengthen the church. Regarding such mysteries, which are too deep for human understanding, silence is golden.”  {AA 52.1}

In conclusion; EGW did not truly understand who or what THE HOLY SPIRIT IS! She was not given any visions on HIM! The superstitions of the time which has been carried over calling HIM a ghost, was not the time for understanding. Yes, the Bible is clear that HE IS A BEING but never a person. We need to understand clearly that we were made from dirt, molded and fashion to look like THEM and to act like them. Satan had THEIR FORM, a spirit body and we both had THEIR CHARACTER when both were created. But, Satan did not have THEIR EXACT FEATURES we do at one time!  That is why we have subtitle like Matthews, Stinson, Green etc. and THEIR SUBTITLE IS ELOHIYM! Male flesh beings name their first born after them and we call them junior's! Well, YAHWEH is both THE FATHER and HIS SON NAME! THE HOLY SPIRIT is NOT HIS SON! EGW is correct a lot about THE HOLY SPIRIT is a mystery also THE TREE OF LIFE! When you read Gen 1:1 it is clear the English word "of" was place between THE SPIRIT ELOHIYM base on the Biblical writers thoughts! Every where you see in the Old Testament the word of between SPIRIT ELOHIYM it is not in there! Psa 51:11 is an example in the OT that the word thy was put in and it should be THE HOLY SPIRIT! Luke 11:13 is amazing they use the and the word HIM is correctly used! Eph 1:13 the words with that is not in the Greek! Eph 4:30 is exactly correct and the word the is in the Greek! These are just a few example. 

Froom came out with the book Evangelism after EGW died! All of the above men knew her before she died and she knew exactly what would take place and she wrote it and she was right!

Happy Sabbath!

[BlessedMan]

31 minutes ago, stinsonmarri said:

That is NOT the writings of EGW this comes from Leroy Froom and it was taking out of context.

Thats a matter of opinion; and not well demonstrated by your profuse comment. What I quoted does come from EGW whether or not you approve. It really is that simple. I have all the books you mentioned above and seems to me I am not the one quoting out of context. While EGW did at times comment that The Holy Spirit is a mystery not easily understood, she never once denied the many things about Him that were/are understood. She did NOT once profess to "understand" The Holy Spirit, rather, she wrote about what scripture says about HIM. THAT IS the context, which you have stated above "doesn't matter."

There is so much written in scripture about The Holy Spirit, one does not really need EGW to know what God has told us about Him. But it remains disappointing to see people who want to twist her writings and ministry into something they NEVER were.

SCRIPTURAL DESIGNATIONS FOR THE HOLY SPIRIT

[Gustave]

Hi Stinsonmarri & PKrause, 

Both of you posted confused emoji's to my statement that I didn't believe that The Father was a flesh, bone & organ hominid but that Ellen did. 

Hopefully this will alleviate some or all of the confusion. 

Luke 24, 39:  Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

John 4, 24: God is spirit, and those and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.  

The SDA's contemporary with Ellen White as well as Ellen White rebuked the Methodist Church (and other Churches ) specifically over their Creeds because regardless of the Creed they all affirmed that God was spirit and without body or parts. Affirmation that God was without body or parts was an affront to the SDA teaching that God (understood to be the Father only) DID HAVE A BODY and that the begotten Son of God pre-Incarnation ALSO had a body. 

Sabbath Herald, November 1, 1877:  "It would be a hard matter to explain the mystery of the trinity as held by Trinitarians; because the doctrine is contrary to common sense and the Bible. It teaches ,that God has no body, parts, or passions that he is in no' place in particular, but is universally diffused throughout the universe, a mere essence, without form or shape. See the Methodist Discipline, the Episcopal Articles of Faith, and- others". 

What Mr. Canright is above saying is the direct opposite from below - which is & has been the historic position of Apostolic Christianity. 

 

As you will notice the SDA position explained by Canright also radically differs from Apostolic Christianity in the question of "passions".  For anyone interested in why Apostolic Christianity takes the position it does in THIS area of Theology I would strongly recommend the book " DOES GOD SUFFER" by Thomas G. Weinandy. 

Or, if you don't want to read theological book which goes through the Scriptures showing God is Impassible you can watch the 3 minute video below. 

I take it seriously if someone tells me that they are confused by a post I've made - it means I've not done a good enough job explaining my position. I hope things are now clearer. 

 

[BlessedMan]

56 minutes ago, stinsonmarri said:

That is NOT the writings of EGW this comes from Leroy Froom and it was taking out of context. Did you know he is bury in George Washington Cemetery in the area where the Masonic people are buried!

This really proves nothing at all!

The book Evangelism, was written cooperatively by a number of authors, not just LE Froom. Some of which I quoted from above, was compiled and written in 1946 to highlight a number of key points from EGW writings in a useful and practical way for anyone who wanted to be involved in evangelism. Its all EGW writings, compiled into a more readable from but great efforts have been made to ensure people could look up where in the original writings it was quoted from. A source credit appears at the close of each excerpt, and as a further aid to the reader, there is given the date of writing, in cases of the manuscript quotations, or the date of first publication in the case of other reference. A knowledge of the time of the utterance sometimes serves as a helpful guide to the application of the counsel, for our work must be conducted under changing conditions. And although in some instances it may not be possible to employ in minute detail methods or ideas advocated in earlier years, yet the basic principles enunciated or illustrated in these earlier counsels will today be a guide to safe and fruitful methods and doctrinal conclusions. Principle is changeless, though its application may call for an adjustment and adaptation to meet present conditions. While you have claimed my quotes from EGW as NOT from her, the fact remains that your conclusion there is wrong. Here are some examples of how the references are cited, with both dates, and publications the quotes came from. In my mind there is no reason to suppose that your quotes are "better" than mine. It really is a matter of context. Some people, I have noticed seem to lose their way and get embroiled in "word studies" proffering themselves to be "experts" at "interpretation" thereof, but IMO the very opposite is usually true; and the CONTEXT gets missed. But you are saying the context isnt needed?:

With the Father at Sinai.--When they [Israel] came to Sinai, He took occasion to refresh their minds in regard to His requirements. Christ and the Father, standing side by side upon the mount, with solemn majesty proclaimed the Ten Commandments.--Historical Sketches, p. 231. (1866)  {Ev 616.3}  
     
The Eternal Dignitaries of the Trinity.--The eternal heavenly dignitaries--God, and Christ, and the Holy Spirit--arming them [the disciples] with more than mortal energy, . . . would advance with them to the work and convince the world of sin.--Manuscript 145, 1901.  {Ev 616.4}  
     
Personality of the Holy Spirit.--We need to realize that the Holy Spirit, who is as much a person as God is a person, is walking through these grounds.--Manuscript 66, 1899. (From a talk to the students at the Avondale School.)  {Ev 616.5}  
     
The Holy Spirit is a person, for He beareth witness with our spirits that we are the children of God. When this witness is borne, it carries with it its own evidence. At such times we believe and are sure that we are the children of God.  {Ev 616.6}  

The Holy Spirit has a personality, else He could not bear witness to our spirits and with our spirits that we are the children of God. He must also be a divine person, else He could not search out the secrets which lie hidden in the mind of God. "For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God."--Manuscript 20, 1906.  {Ev 617.1}

The Power of God in the Third Person.--The prince of the power of evil can only be held in check by the power of God in the third person of the Godhead, the Holy Spirit.--Special Testimonies, Series A, No. 10, p. 37. (1897)  {Ev 617.2}  

In Co-operation With the Three Highest Powers.-- We are to co-operate with the three highest powers in heaven,--the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, --and these powers will work through us, making us workers together with God.--Special Testimonies, Series B, No. 7, p. 51. (1905)  {Ev 617.3}

The things highlighted in red are showing the original place of each citation. There is nothing stopping you from examining the original sources and "proving" where each of the passages I quoted are definitively "wrong." Or that EGW did not "really" say that.

Edited June 13, 2020 by BlessedMan

[JoeMo]

I haven't gone through this entire thread; so excuse me if I'm off-base.  God is beyond our understanding; and His ways are far beyond our ways.  It's obvious that the pre-incarnate Christ  and certain angels had the ability to put on flesh; hence parts. Does that mean that spirit beings also have "parts"? I don't know and I don't care.in my own little mental construct, God the Father is pure spirit; hence He is the spiritual manifestation of God.  His appearance would be such an assault on our 5 senses that we would die.  The gospels affirm that no one has seen the Father except His Son.  Jesus, or God the Son, is the physical manifestation of God. It is He who walked with Adam and Eve, and spoke to Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, and Joshua.  It was He who gave Moses the 10 Commandments. It was He who died on the cross for us because His "parts" were so badly damaged.

IMHO, both the Father and Son are also interdimensional. He is not stuck in three physical dimensions; and a prisoner of time and space.  There is at least one spiritual dimension that we mere humans are incapable of experiencing unless God opens the "gate" or our "spiritual eyes" for us.

[BlessedMan]

4 hours ago, Gustave said:

I take it seriously if someone tells me that they are confused by a post I've made - it means I've not done a good enough job explaining my position.

something I have always appreciated about you. ?

[BlessedMan]

4 hours ago, Gustave said:

As you will notice the SDA position explained by Canright

I actually try not to notice that too much.

[stinsonmarri]

5 hours ago, BlessedMan said:

Thats a matter of opinion; and not well demonstrated by your profuse comment. What I quoted does come from EGW whether or not you approve. It really is that simple. I have all the books you mentioned above and seems to me I am not the one quoting out of context. While EGW did at times comment that The Holy Spirit is a mystery not easily understood, she never once denied the many things about Him that were/are understood. She did NOT once profess to "understand" The Holy Spirit, rather, she wrote about what scripture says about HIM. THAT IS the context, which you have stated above "doesn't matter."

There is so much written in scripture about The Holy Spirit, one does not really need EGW to know what God has told us about Him. But it remains disappointing to see people who want to twist her writings and ministry into something they NEVER were.

SCRIPTURAL DESIGNATIONS FOR THE HOLY SPIRIT

Funny that you make that statement but I do not see any reference to the Scriptures. Where are they? I never said that THE HOLY SPIRIT was not mention by THE FATHER or THE SON, THEY did! My point was simple and you provide by the Light In The Clouds.net who this person does not identify who he is. Who quotes the Hebrew correct but not with the comma. Then he does the exact thing I said put an of when the Hebrews does not have the word of! The he uses an erroneous name for YAHWEH-Jehovah 

There are a few ways that the Old Testament text refers to the Almighty God. First, the title of “God” (in Hebrew: Elohiym),  is given (Genesis 1:1). Another title, “LORD” (Hebrew: Adonai) is popularly used throughout the Old Testament. Finally, the name, not title, given to God: YHWH, commonly pronounced as Yahweh. But wait! What about that ancient word “Jehovah?” Where does it fall in line with the above? Honestly, it doesn’t. In fact, the ancient word “Jehovah” isn’t really all that ancient at all, but is a product of a series of mistakes made by men throughout the years. The word “Jehovah” as we see it today, is not even as old as the original King James Version! Can you believe it? The Encyclopedia Britannica calls the word “Jehovah” an “artificial name,” and a Hebrew professor of Tel Aviv University, Anson F. Rainey, calls it a “ghost word.”

The result is a new word, a word that looks similar to the word “Jehovah.” The rest of the story lands upon the English language. When transliterating this artificial word “Yehowah,” English translators saw it fit to change the “Y” to an “I.” Once the letter “v” was invented, words with “w” that people thought should sound more like a “v” were changed. Thus, “Iehowah” became “Iehovah.” This is how the name of God looked when the King James Version was first published in 1611, if you have the first publication, you will see this word “Iehovah” (see Exodus 6:3). It wasn’t until later that century that the letter “J” was fully introduced to English, and the King James Version was revised, choosing to changed the “I” to a “J.” And finally, the word “Jehovah” is fully formed. http://southsidecoc.org/2014/10/the-origin-of-the-name-jehovah/

 

Frequently the term is simply “the Spirit,” or “the Spirit of the Lord,” or “the Spirit of God,” or “the Spirit of Jesus Christ” (Matthew 3:16; Luke 4:18; John 14:17; Acts 5:9; Phil 1:19). Light In The Clouds.net

theG3588 SpiritG4151 of GodG2316 Matt 3:16;   The SpiritG4151 of the LordG2962 Luke 4:18;  Even theG3588 SpiritG4151 of truth;G225 John 14:17

I could go on with all of the Scriptures and it proves as I stated words added and THE SPIRIT ELOHIYM is correct and not of!

I did a research on Froom and I don't give opinions, I present evidence, there is a difference!

Blessings!

[stinsonmarri]

6 hours ago, BlessedMan said:

This really proves nothing at all!

The book Evangelism, was written cooperatively by a number of authors, not just LE Froom. Some of which I quoted from above, was compiled and written in 1946 to highlight a number of key points from EGW writings in a useful and practical way for anyone who wanted to be involved in evangelism. Its all EGW writings, compiled into a more readable from but great efforts have been made to ensure people could look up where in the original writings it was quoted from. A source credit appears at the close of each excerpt, and as a further aid to the reader, there is given the date of writing, in cases of the manuscript quotations, or the date of first publication in the case of other reference. A knowledge of the time of the utterance sometimes serves as a helpful guide to the application of the counsel, for our work must be conducted under changing conditions. And although in some instances it may not be possible to employ in minute detail methods or ideas advocated in earlier years, yet the basic principles enunciated or illustrated in these earlier counsels will today be a guide to safe and fruitful methods and doctrinal conclusions. Principle is changeless, though its application may call for an adjustment and adaptation to meet present conditions. While you have claimed my quotes from EGW as NOT from her, the fact remains that your conclusion there is wrong. Here are some examples of how the references are cited, with both dates, and publications the quotes came from. In my mind there is no reason to suppose that your quotes are "better" than mine. It really is a matter of context. Some people, I have noticed seem to lose their way and get embroiled in "word studies" proffering themselves to be "experts" at "interpretation" thereof, but IMO the very opposite is usually true; and the CONTEXT gets missed. But you are saying the context isnt needed?:

With the Father at Sinai.--When they [Israel] came to Sinai, He took occasion to refresh their minds in regard to His requirements. Christ and the Father, standing side by side upon the mount, with solemn majesty proclaimed the Ten Commandments.--Historical Sketches, p. 231. (1866)  {Ev 616.3}  
     
The Eternal Dignitaries of the Trinity.--The eternal heavenly dignitaries--God, and Christ, and the Holy Spirit--arming them [the disciples] with more than mortal energy, . . . would advance with them to the work and convince the world of sin.--Manuscript 145, 1901.  {Ev 616.4}  
     
Personality of the Holy Spirit.--We need to realize that the Holy Spirit, who is as much a person as God is a person, is walking through these grounds.--Manuscript 66, 1899. (From a talk to the students at the Avondale School.)  {Ev 616.5}  
     
The Holy Spirit is a person, for He beareth witness with our spirits that we are the children of God. When this witness is borne, it carries with it its own evidence. At such times we believe and are sure that we are the children of God.  {Ev 616.6}  

The Holy Spirit has a personality, else He could not bear witness to our spirits and with our spirits that we are the children of God. He must also be a divine person, else He could not search out the secrets which lie hidden in the mind of God. "For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God."--Manuscript 20, 1906.  {Ev 617.1}

The Power of God in the Third Person.--The prince of the power of evil can only be held in check by the power of God in the third person of the Godhead, the Holy Spirit.--Special Testimonies, Series A, No. 10, p. 37. (1897)  {Ev 617.2}  

In Co-operation With the Three Highest Powers.-- We are to co-operate with the three highest powers in heaven,--the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, --and these powers will work through us, making us workers together with God.--Special Testimonies, Series B, No. 7, p. 51. (1905)  {Ev 617.3}

The things highlighted in red are showing the original place of each citation. There is nothing stopping you from examining the original sources and "proving" where each of the passages I quoted are definitively "wrong." Or that EGW did not "really" say that.

First,  find  the Manuscript 145, 1901. When you do this is what it says:

Ms 145, 1901: “Sunday, the 24th, was a rainy day…”Extract from Ms 130, 1901. Ellen G. White Writings

Secondly: Evangelism is a book Le Roy Froom help to compile in the 1940's. Please forgive I did not make that clear because he was the mainly was the one asked to do a series of studies on THE HOLY SPIRIT and his reference in the book dealt with 615 to 617 mainly on the trinity aspect and he work and wrote other pages. He was the historian and main composer so you can choose believe the evidence or the fairy tales. That is on you! Again I say to anyone show me the difference and I will stand up and apologize, I have no problem of doing that!

Blessings!

6 hours ago, JoeMo said:

I haven't gone through this entire thread; so excuse me if I'm off-base.  God is beyond our understanding; and His ways are far beyond our ways.  It's obvious that the pre-incarnate Christ  and certain angels had the ability to put on flesh; hence parts. Does that mean that spirit beings also have "parts"? I don't know and I don't care.in my own little mental construct, God the Father is pure spirit; hence He is the spiritual manifestation of God.  His appearance would be such an assault on our 5 senses that we would die.  The gospels affirm that no one has seen the Father except His Son.  Jesus, or God the Son, is the physical manifestation of God. It is He who walked with Adam and Eve, and spoke to Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, and Joshua.  It was He who gave Moses the 10 Commandments. It was He who died on the cross for us because His "parts" were so badly damaged.

IMHO, both the Father and Son are also interdimensional. He is not stuck in three physical dimensions; and a prisoner of time and space.  There is at least one spiritual dimension that we mere humans are incapable of experiencing unless God opens the "gate" or our "spiritual eyes" for us.

Joe: I want to speak on your last paragraph first. Where, when did you ever hear anything about THE ALMIGHTY ONES being in some interdimesional, I never even heard of this word! Secondly what on earth do you mean stuck in three physical dimensional as prisoner of time and space? The prophet eyes were open by YAHWEH especially Ezekiel, Daniel and John and not one of them ever mention any thing of what you are stating! We need to quote what is it in the Bible as it was originally written. We also need to stop second guessing THE ALMIGHTY BEINGS. Then you stated that; "Jesus, or God the Son, is the physical manifestation of God." I would love to actual read YAHSHUA STATING HE IS THE manifestation of HIS FATHER when HE according to the Bible is siting down on HIS RIGHT SIDE. He also took THE BOOK of LIFE out of HIS HAND! Notice that is found in the Bible Heb 1:2 and Rev 5:7. Now I would love you to explain what is a pure spirit because the Bible did not say any thing like that at all! Now, I do agree that THE ALMIGHTY ONES WAYS and THOUGHT we are not capable to know unless THEY tell us. This monotheistic concept of oneness have got two group of SDA disputing! I can't for the life of me see how anyone can stand up and get married. What in the vows?  Don't you all married folks say the same thing that Mr. Adam said to Mrs. Adam we have become one flesh. Do you see Mrs. Adam become manifest to be Mr. Adam? Something so simple Satan has make it so complex to those who claim to know truth. It just baffle me! THE ALMIGHTY have a UNION, THEY work TOGETHER! 

Then we try to take THEIR BODIES or FORM that is called a spirit just like the angels are called spirits  and we go unreal! How is that? You nor I do not know what spirit body is made of! We only know that we are made from dirt! You see you and don't agree about the sons of ELOHIYM! I understand them to be beings that EGW saw from others planet. We don't know what they are made from either! To tell you the truth we don't actually know what the sun is from and how the other planet are gaseous and for what reason! We have been to Saturn and those rings of ice are still there and THEY know how to create it that way. Look at mars, what truly is matter or a nova or even a so call black hole we do not know. These scientist just speculates on what the see through a large microscope. We cannot fathom anything that why YAHWEH told Job:

Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. Where is the way where light dwelleth? and as for darkness, where is the place thereof. Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?  Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season? or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons?  Knowest thou the Laws of Heaven? canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth?   Canst thou lift up thy voice to the clouds, that abundance of waters may cover thee? Canst thou send lightnings, that they may go, and say unto thee, Here we are? Job 38:4, 19, 31-35

I see nothing at all about interdimesional or three physical dimensional as prisoner of time and space! What YAHWEH ask Job is what we see and already know on earth and in space but actually cannot explain! Glad to see you these days! How are you and the family doing fine I hope!

Be Blessed!

 

[BlessedMan]

2 hours ago, stinsonmarri said:

Funny that you make that statement but I do not see any reference to the Scriptures. Where are they

We were, I thought, talking about EGW and what she believed.

41 minutes ago, stinsonmarri said:

Secondly: Evangelism is a book Le Roy Froom help to compile in the 1940's. Please forgive I did not make that clear because he was the mainly was the one asked to do a series of studies on THE HOLY SPIRIT and his reference in the book dealt with 615 to 617 mainly on the trinity aspect

That would be his book Coming Of The Comforter, which by the way is a very good book.

This comment in your post does reflect a lack of historical and functional knowledge regarding the Adventist Church, and how some of the books they use were written. What I am about to post is not intended to change your mind on anything, it is simply to enlighten other interested readers here:

How the Book Evangelism Was Prepared

[Top of Document]

Since the death of Ellen White in 1915, how have compilations been prepared? The book Evangelism provides a case study.

In August 1944, representatives from the Ministerial Association of the General Conference asked the White Estate whether there was enough specific counsel on evangelism to create a volume that would give guidance in the work of evangelism. If there was sufficient material, they hoped that these counsels could be brought together and published as a single volume.

As Arthur White, at that time director of the White Estate, scanned the files, he found ample material that could be drawn together for a book of counsels on evangelism. On September 10, 1944, the Board of Trustees took the following action:

    "Voted: That, in harmony with the recommendation of the Ministerial Association Advisory Council, we authorize the compilation of a manuscript, 'Counsels to Evangelists and Bible Instructors,' the work to be done by a committee of five, appointed by the chair. The committee named as follows: A. L. White, W. H. Branson, R. A. Anderson, Miss Louise Kleuser, J. L. Shuler."--White Estate Board Minutes, Sept. 10, 1944.

As the committee members planned their work, they decided that the new volume would serve best if it were complete in its coverage, using both published and unpublished sources. This would include some repetition of articles already published.

Arthur White and Louise Kleuser were named as a working team to prepare the manuscript. The plan they followed called for bringing together every item that had a bearing on the subject. Then with all the Ellen White statements before them, they organized the material and developed the manuscript. This plan minimized the influence of the compilers, allowing Mrs. White's thoughts and emphases to come through clearly in the finished work.

As Elder White and Miss Kleuser made the selections, it was easy to see where Ellen White placed the emphasis, and the general outline of the subject matter fell naturally into about 22 general divisions. In cases where there were two or more statements covering the same point, the strongest or most complete was chosen and the other laid aside. Because there could be no change in Ellen White's words, which made up the text, the items were drawn together by using side headings highlighting the main point. Side headings and subtitles are almost always supplied by the compiler, and this is generally understood.

At one point during preparation of the manuscript, Elder White sought counsel on using italics to emphasize certain parts of the manuscript. The ensuing Board action read:

    "Voted: That the Trustees feel that it would be out of place to use italics to emphasize certain parts of the manuscript, and might appear to take on the form of private interpretation."--White Estate Board Minutes, July 2, 1945.

The question arose as to whether the compilers should be named in the Foreword. It was pointed out that it had always been policy not to name those participating in the work of compilation but to keep the focus on the author of the materials. The Trustees signed the Foreword, based on the following action:

    "Voted: That the Foreword to the Evangelism manuscript be signed by the Trustees, and that we request the Secretary to draft a statement for consideration."--Ibid.

The reports of the nine readers of the manuscript dealt mostly with the wording of side headings, and a few additional Ellen White statements were suggested that were thought to strengthen the manuscript.

The book Evangelism was on the market about 18 months after the decision to prepare the book. It has served as a guide and inspiration to those engaged in evangelistic ministries. Each item carries its source reference, thus enabling anyone to check for context and integrity of use.

It is the primary concern of those in the White Estate that all compilations be fully representative and as free as possible from any bias of the compiler. The compiler does not leave out statements that may differ from his personal opinion. Private opinions must have no weight in selecting materials. The compilation must fully and correctly represent the position, teachings, and emphasis of Ellen White. SOURCE

My Note: It is important in determining what a belief or practice actually is to get the information from the original source.  The book Movement of Destiny is a good resource as well, as long as one does not merely quote snippets out of context, which I can see has happened above. The evidence I have enclosed above is from the original source, and clearly shows Froom was far from being the only one who compiled the book Evangelism from which I quoted. I wont be commenting any more on this matter here as it has gotten well away from the OP.

Edited June 14, 2020 by BlessedMan

[JoeMo]

On 6/13/2020 at 8:56 PM, stinsonmarri said:

Where, when did you ever hear anything about THE ALMIGHTY ONES being in some interdimesional, I never even heard of this word!

Interdimensional simply means that God can travel between dimensions (like from our third dimension to His 4th or 5th dimension).

 

On 6/13/2020 at 1:10 PM, JoeMo said:

IMHO, ...

In case you didn't know it, "IMHO" means "in my humble OPINION"  An opinion is not a doctrinal statement; it is a mental construct to help me visualize one way God might get around the universe and how He knows what will happen in the future.  He's been there!

As far as being prisoners of time and space, it's obvious to me that almost every human being who has ever lived can move (1) forwards or backwards; (2) left or right; or (3) up and down.  Unless by divine intervention, your average human cannot move through time (the 4th dimension) or hyperspace (a dimension hight that the 4th). I would think this concept is intuitively obvious; we don't need divine revelation to tell us that.

Is it just in your nature to counter whatever others say for the sake of argument?  I stopped actively posting here a while back because I got sick of the arguing.  I come here for constructive discussion and fellowship.  I'll get active here again when I see that.

This has ceased to be a safe place to discuss "different" ideas.  There are other Christian forums out there where people do like to discuss reasonable alternative interpretations to difficult or vague concepts in scripture without condemning others' ideas.

Maybe this forum has regressed back to being a forum exclusively for SDA's?