Walter Veith

[stinsonmarri]

7 hours ago, Gustave said:

 

Stinsonmarri,

The ancient Greeks, Romans and other cultures BELIEVED their God's were flesh hominids that ate meals, had sex, urinated and so on. These "Gods" of ancient cultures HAD MEMBERS & PARTS. I think Gregory's point & most certainly the point I've been making for a long time on this forum is that;

"The Personality of God" Doctrine promulgated by the SDA Pioneers and Ellen White wasn't like the Pagan Greek concept - IT WAS THE PAGAN GREEK CONCEPT. I'm not saying that being confused on something like this is the end of the world or anything - I'm just saying when a group of uneducated folks get together and start talking about the Bible they will reach different conclusions than a group of educated individuals who are competent in the ancient languages the Bible's books were composed in. 

 

Gustave: You are very quick to call people uneducated because they do think the way you think. It is possible that you are the uneducated because you feel that you know more then others base on your belief system. This system teaches that a man like the Greeks deities you speak about, now become a linanage of gods! Gods that die and do not have any power, none whatsoever. You kiss and give him money, put him in a basilica and that gives him power? Not one have heal, have stop the wind or the waves, yet they suppose to be like your Jesus, and also what you think the father is. The strange thing YAHSHUA was raised from the dead, but none of your so gods have yet. Now, he suppose to change times and YAHWEH'S Laws, but can't control or have power over nature. Strange, sounds just like the Greek deities and all of the other ones too!

Now, the ancient people included others in their hall of pagan deities just you include Mary and all these saints who are in heaven. Now, the Bible does not speak of any that, but we are suppose to accept these powerless men. Now, that my friend is interested. People are just suppose to all die and go to your heaven of stay in this purgatory unless you pay. Your belief is supposed  to let some living family member to buy their family out. Then there go to this place called hell (now intelligent man like you knows that this word means grave and it is the English version of the Greek word hades)

The false personalities of ELOHIYM  that the pioneers understood came from their belief in the trinity that was first taught by the Nicene Degree. Wait a minute, isn't that what you believe in? The Adventist Pioneer stop believing in the trinity. They still accepted the personalities which again come from the ancient deities, especially the Greeks. They acted jus like people, they ate drink, lied, had all types of illicit sex, they stab each other in the back. In other words they carry on like flesh beings.

Those who think they are intelligent, thinking they can understand and decipher other languages; yet today they cannot decipher the Elamites who were Semitic. Yet, this is really confusing from the great intelligent ones today who recognized that the Asian language and the Afrikan language are tied together! Then they took the Shem speaking people that is the only one these intelligent people use today! They say today, that the word Semitic and  everyone who accept their logic, that this does not mean what it says now! Now it mean different cultures of people. Really! Who are those culture all Afrikan people and all the Semitic people were suppose to speak this language. However, none of the Hebrews/Chaldeans, the Assyrians, some of the original Arabs of Shem have a major language. These intelligent people stuck them under the Afro-Asians language and these Afrikans people, more than the semitic cultural happen to speak this language. Yet, only Abraham came to Canaan! However, the Phoenicians are historically shown that they created the symbol of alphabets and words that others adopted. Wow, what's really going on?

Finally, it is strange that the ancients knew  the truth about ELOHIYM; so, their deities could eat and drink just like the flesh beings. They understood more about the TRUE Heavenly BEINGS then man today. These beings walk the earth more then! They knew what Satan look like! The Assyrians saw his eagle side, Nimrod's Babylon saw the lion side and the Chaldeans followed the same religious belief and priesthood. Notice all of these animals had wings! The Afrikans saw his main face, the cherub known as the ox face. That is why Baal of the Canaanites and Minotaurs of the Philistine who lived on Crete all worshipped a bull or ox; including the Egyptians.

Please stop trying to base Adventist to a false concept that Catholicism adapted that follow man back into time. Check out how the intellect thinks today with sketchy conclusions:

Recent studies of the evolution of religion have revealed the cognitive underpinnings of belief in supernatural agents, the role of ritual in promoting cooperation, and the contribution of morally punishing high gods to the growth and stabilization of human society. The universality of religion across human society points to a deep evolutionary past. However, specific traits of nascent religiosity, and the sequence in which they emerged, have remained unknown. Here we reconstruct the evolution of religious beliefs and behaviors in early modern humans using a global sample of hunter-gatherers and seven traits describing hunter-gatherer religiosity: animism, belief in an afterlife, shamanism, ancestor worship, high gods, and worship of ancestors or high gods who are active in human affairs. We reconstruct ancestral character states using a time-calibrated supertree based on published phylogenetic trees and linguistic classification and then test for correlated evolution between the characters and for the direction of cultural change. Results indicate that the oldest trait of religion, present in the most recent common ancestor of present-day hunter-gatherers, was animism, in agreement with long-standing beliefs about the fundamental role of this trait. Belief in an afterlife emerged, followed by shamanism and ancestor worship. Ancestor spirits or high gods who are active in human affairs were absent in early humans, suggesting a deep history for the egalitarian nature of hunter-gatherer societies. There is a significant positive relationship between most characters investigated, but the trait “high gods” stands apart, suggesting that belief in a single creator deity can emerge in a society regardless of other aspects of its religion. Hunter-Gatherers and the Origins of Religion- NCBI - NIH

These intelligent beings have led men to believe in animism that has us to emerge into believing an afterlife by shamanism another word for witch doctors or priest. But who are these intelligent beings who think they know but really don't know!

Happy Sabbath and Blessings!

[Gregory Matthews]

Balderdash.

 

[stinsonmarri]

On 5/6/2021 at 9:14 PM, phkrause said:

What's wrong with God having a personality?? I find no problem here!!

I don't my friend! Phkrause the Bible tell us that also!

For MY THOUGHTS are not your thoughts, neither are your ways MY WAYS, SAITH YAHWEH. For as the Heavens are higher than the earth, so are MY WAYS Higher than your ways, and MY THOUGHTS than your thoughts. Isa 55:8, 9  

Thought and ways we have are our personality traits of fallen flesh beings. Do we think to compare ourselves equal to THEM. How on earth can we compare ourselves to THEM? Now, we sound just like Satan:

 All they shall speak and say unto thee, Art thou also become weak as we? art thou become like unto us? How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into Heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of EL I will sit also upon the Mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:  I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like THE MOST HIGH. Isa 14:12-14  

 

On 5/6/2021 at 9:14 PM, phkrause said:

Again what's wrong with God or Christ having a personality?? Obviously Christ was here living on earth and had a personality!!

THE MESSIAH BODY was perfect, HE had the body that the Adams first had. HE became THE SECOND ADAM. HE never had you and I personality, never! If HE did HE would become us, we are to become like HIM. We need to stop making sinful personalities in Heaven. Our thoughts and ways will be destroyed because of sin. We are doing what the ancient were doing acting the same way we do with sin. The Greek gods had the personality of human beings. They did evil things just like we do. I hope you see that Phkrause. YAHSHUA never did those things; HE DID the opposite of our personality traits!

Happy Sabbath and Blessings!

[stinsonmarri]

On 5/6/2021 at 10:06 PM, Gregory Matthews said:

Stinsommarri:   Most of what you have posted in response to Gustave and I has no  relationship to what either of us has posted.

You clearly do not understand what has been said.

 

Kindly sir, that is your opinion and you contradict yourself. Earlier you said that what I provided was good but you felt how I said it remember?

7 hours ago, Gregory Matthews said:

Stinsonmarri, while you have commented on Greek philosophy and religion, you have said nothing that causes me to think that you understand the ancient, pagan, Greek religion.

Well I am sorry sir, but I stated to you the same before but you stated I did  not have a degree. I said I did and sadly you disputed that is was not in my profile until I showed it was. Can I make anyone believe what I know about the ancient pagan Greek religion, no! But, I can stand between ELOHIYM and you, HE KNOWS! HE was there when I studied the Greeks, religion and philosophy.  I give an account to HIM and not man. My records and grades are a proof and that all that matters to me. I am sorry you feel that way, but that's life!

Blessing and Happy Sabbath!

PS: The Greeks adopted the Egyptians, Persian sand the Hebrews religions and others together. Maybe you should if you don't mind me telling you to check out the dollar bill and the Masonic belief today. I hope that helps.

[stinsonmarri]

45 minutes ago, Gregory Matthews said:

Balderdash.

 

Then please pray for me! I will pray for you!

Happy Sabbath and Blessings!

[Gregory Matthews]

Stinsonmarri:

*  You certainly do mix things up.  Yes, I have stated that you provide some very good stuff that is well worthy of consideration.  That is true and I repeat that.  But, you also provide stuff that is   neither true nor worthy of consideration.  Your comment about islands floating in water is an example if such.   No person is ever totally correct.  You are not totally correct.  You are not totally wrong.  You are a mixture of truth and error.  So, no, I have not contradicted myself.

*  I have never said that you do not have a college degree.  Your statement that I have said that you do not is simply false.  I have said that you present yourself in a manner that people question whether or not you have a degree.  That is true, I get questions about whether or not you have a degree.  In one sense you are your own worst enemy.

 

[Gustave]

13 hours ago, stinsonmarri said:

The false personalities of ELOHIYM  that the pioneers understood came from their belief in the trinity that was first taught by the Nicene Degree. Wait a minute, isn't that what you believe in? The Adventist Pioneer stop believing in the trinity.

They still accepted the personalities which again come from the ancient deities, especially the Greeks. They acted jus like people, they ate drink, lied, had all types of illicit sex, they stab each other in the back. In other words they carry on like flesh beings.

Please stop trying to base Adventist to a false concept that Catholicism adapted that follow man back into time. Check out how the intellect thinks today with sketchy conclusions:

Recent studies of the evolution of religion have revealed the cognitive underpinnings of belief in supernatural agents, the role of ritual in promoting cooperation, and the contribution of morally punishing high gods to the growth and stabilization of human society. The universality of religion across human society points to a deep evolutionary past. However, specific traits of nascent religiosity, and the sequence in which they emerged, have remained unknown. Here we reconstruct the evolution of religious beliefs and behaviors in early modern humans using a global sample of hunter-gatherers and seven traits describing hunter-gatherer religiosity: animism, belief in an afterlife, shamanism, ancestor worship, high gods, and worship of ancestors or high gods who are active in human affairs. We reconstruct ancestral character states using a time-calibrated supertree based on published phylogenetic trees and linguistic classification and then test for correlated evolution between the characters and for the direction of cultural change. Results indicate that the oldest trait of religion, present in the most recent common ancestor of present-day hunter-gatherers, was animism, in agreement with long-standing beliefs about the fundamental role of this trait. Belief in an afterlife emerged, followed by shamanism and ancestor worship. Ancestor spirits or high gods who are active in human affairs were absent in early humans, suggesting a deep history for the egalitarian nature of hunter-gatherer societies. There is a significant positive relationship between most characters investigated, but the trait “high gods” stands apart, suggesting that belief in a single creator deity can emerge in a society regardless of other aspects of its religion. Hunter-Gatherers and the Origins of Religion- NCBI - NIH

These intelligent beings have led men to believe in animism that has us to emerge into believing an afterlife by shamanism another word for witch doctors or priest. But who are these intelligent beings who think they know but really don't know!

Happy Sabbath and Blessings!

 

You cite articles written by individuals who are Darwinian evolutionists and who attribute a belief in the afterlife to the evolution of society itself. In other words you cite an article that suggests the Old Testament writers, such as the book of Job, believed that the soul survived in some way after death was attributed to evolutionary process and not supernatural revelation. 

I don't mean to be harsh here but you should accept some constructive advise from Gregory, slow down and make sure that you comprehend what it is that your reading. One thing that would be helpful is if you could tailor your answers so that they would be relevant to the questions you were asked. Many times the answers you provide holds no relevance to the question you are asked. 

 

[B/W Photodude]

On 5/7/2021 at 3:25 PM, Gustave said:

The similarity I was focusing in on was the anthropomorphic view the Greeks had with their God's. Zeus was a hominid flesh god with a nose to smell the incense and an appetite.  

Not particularly responding to this post but the whole topic of the discussion of what God is. It is a useless discussion yielding not much more than arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. There are verses in scripture referencing how unable to define God we are. The main one I was looking for escapes me now, but this one helps, "But now, O Lord, thou art our father; we are the clay, and thou our potter; and we all are the work of thy hand." Isaiah 64:8

My cat (see pic!) will sit and watch me do many things but never seems to understand anything I do. But I would believe he understands what I am doing much more than vain humans can really understand anything about God beyond what He has revealed to us. With a trillion galaxies in the universe with hundreds of millions of stars in each one, down to the tiniest particles of an atom (even that God particle physicists have been chasing!), God is aware of all and maintains them perfect function, except where humans interrupt in a destructive manner. Every unconscious breath we take is God working thru us to maintain our life. Then we try to even understand God living in each of us as our bodies are temples. So, I do not even try to understand God beyond what He has chosen to reveal to us and that is only HIs character. To believe we can do more is only vanity!

We can never by searching find out God. He does not lay open His plans to prying, inquisitive minds. We must not attempt to lift with presumptuous hand the curtain behind which He veils His majesty. The apostle exclaims, “How unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!” It is a proof of His mercy that there is the hiding of His power, that He is enshrouded in the awful clouds of mystery and obscurity; for to lift the curtain that conceals the Divine Presence is death. No mortal mind can penetrate the secrecy in which the Mighty One dwells and works. We can comprehend no more of His dealings with us and the motives that actuate Him than He sees fit to reveal. He orders everything in righteousness, and we are not to be dissatisfied and distrustful, but to bow in reverent submission. He will reveal to us as much of His purposes as it is for our good to know; and beyond that we must trust the hand that is omnipotent, the heart that is full of love (The Review and Herald, April 7, 1885). 

[Gustave]

34 minutes ago, B/W Photodude said:

Not particularly responding to this post but the whole topic of the discussion of what God is. It is a useless discussion yielding not much more than arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. There are verses in scripture referencing how unable to define God we are. The main one I was looking for escapes me now, but this one helps, "But now, O Lord, thou art our father; we are the clay, and thou our potter; and we all are the work of thy hand." Isaiah 64:8

My cat (see pic!) will sit and watch me do many things but never seems to understand anything I do. But I would believe he understands what I am doing much more than vain humans can really understand anything about God beyond what He has revealed to us. With a trillion galaxies in the universe with hundreds of millions of stars in each one, down to the tiniest particles of an atom (even that God particle physicists have been chasing!), God is aware of all and maintains them perfect function, except where humans interrupt in a destructive manner. Every unconscious breath we take is God working thru us to maintain our life. Then we try to even understand God living in each of us as our bodies are temples. So, I do not even try to understand God beyond what He has chosen to reveal to us and that is only HIs character. To believe we can do more is only vanity!

We can never by searching find out God. He does not lay open His plans to prying, inquisitive minds. We must not attempt to lift with presumptuous hand the curtain behind which He veils His majesty. The apostle exclaims, “How unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!” It is a proof of His mercy that there is the hiding of His power, that He is enshrouded in the awful clouds of mystery and obscurity; for to lift the curtain that conceals the Divine Presence is death. No mortal mind can penetrate the secrecy in which the Mighty One dwells and works. We can comprehend no more of His dealings with us and the motives that actuate Him than He sees fit to reveal. He orders everything in righteousness, and we are not to be dissatisfied and distrustful, but to bow in reverent submission. He will reveal to us as much of His purposes as it is for our good to know; and beyond that we must trust the hand that is omnipotent, the heart that is full of love (The Review and Herald, April 7, 1885). 

 

I own a book called,  "The Christian Faith In The Doctrinal Documents Of the Catholic Church".

On page 135 one paragraph reads:

"The theological concepts and terminology used in these documents became more and more technical at at times somewhat involved. This could hardly be avoided in view of the depth of the mystery which they had to convey. It should, however, be borne in mind that the subtlety in reasoning was never meant to rationalize the divine mystery but to preserve its integrity against all rationalistic simplifications. ALL Trinitarian heresies are such simplifications which, if they were allowed to prevail, would ultimately nullify the mystery."

In the matter of the Trinity we can observe how the Latter-day Saints offer simplifications thereby nullifying the mystery. 

"Although the three members of the Godhead are distinct personages, their Godhead is "one" in that all three are united in their thoughts, actions, and purpose, with each having a fulness of knowledge, truth, and power. Each is a God. This does not imply a mystical union of substance or personality. Joseph Smith taught: Many men say there is one God; the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are only one God. I say that is a strange God anyhow-three in one, and one in three! It is a curious organization anyhow. "Father, I pray not for the world, but I pray for those that thou hast given me…that they may be one as we are."…I want to read the text to you myself-"I am agreed with the Father and the Father is agreed with me, and we are agreed as one." The Greek shows that it should be agreed. "Father, I pray for them which thou hast given me out of the world,…that they all may be agreed," and all come to dwell in unity [TPJS, p. 372; cf. John 17:9-11, 20-21; also cf. WJS, p. 380].

The unity prayed for in John 17 provides a model for the LDS understanding of the unity of the Godhead-one that is achieved among distinct individuals by unity of purpose, through faith, and by divine will and action. Joseph Smith taught that the Godhead was united by an "everlasting covenant [that] was made between [these] three personages before the organization of this earth" relevant to their administration to its inhabitants (TPJS, p. 190). The prime purpose of the Godhead and of all those united with them is "to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man" (Moses 1:39; Hinckley, p. 49-51).Godhead - The Encyclopedia of Mormonism (byu.edu)"

 

Thus, Mormon's openly state:

"If by ‘the doctrine of the Trinity’ one means the New Testament teaching that there is a Father, a Son, and a Holy Ghost, all three of whom are fully divine, then Latter-day Saints believe in the doctrine of the Trinity. It is as simple as that. The Latter-day  Saints’ first article of faith, written by Joseph Smith in 1842, states, “We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost……However, if by ‘the doctrine of the Trinity’ one means the doctrine formulated by the councils of Nicaea and Chalcedon and elaborated upon by subsequent theologians and councils–that God is three coequal persons in one substance or essence–then Latter-day Saints do not believe it.[iii]”

Articles of Faith (lightplanet.com)

So, the Mormon's believe that the Father is a PERSONAGE (has a Body) & is a "Being", the Mormons also believe that Jesus is PERSONAGE (has a body) & is a "Being" & that the 3 "Beings" (Father, Son & Holy Spirit) are ONE in the same sense that Christ and His Disciples are one. 

Therein they have nullified the mystery. 

Ellen White said the exact same thing right down to quoting the exact same verse Joseph Smith quoted. 

How can seventh-day Adventists make the claim that the Mormon's don't believe in the Trinity? Or is this something SDA's don't do? 

 

[B/W Photodude]

28 minutes ago, Gustave said:

Ellen White said the exact same thing right down to quoting the exact same verse Joseph Smith quoted. 

I am quite sure than EGW has quoted many texts that members of other churches have quoted.

28 minutes ago, Gustave said:

How can seventh-day Adventists make the claim that the Mormon's don't believe in the Trinity? Or is this something SDA's don't do? 

I do not recall any particular Adventist claims regarding Mormons and the Trinity. 

Whatever the Mormons believe regarding the Trinity, they have one flaw in their beliefs as noted in one of their sayings:

As God is, man shall be.

As man is, God once was.

Or sometimes written:

"As man is, God once was;
as God is, man may be."

God was once just a man!
Man can become God!

https://bible.ca/mor-adam-god.htm

What about your Trinity Doctrine when the first man becomes God?

[stinsonmarri]

9 hours ago, Gregory Matthews said:

Stinsonmarri:

*  You certainly do mix things up.  Yes, I have stated that you provide some very good stuff that is well worthy of consideration.  That is true and I repeat that.  But, you also provide stuff that is   neither true nor worthy of consideration.  You comment about islands floating in water is an example if such.   No person is ever totally correct.  You are not totally correct.  You are not totally wrong.  You are a mixture of truth and error.  So, no, I have not contradicted myself.

*  I have never said that you do not have a college degree.  Your statement that I have said that you do not is simply false.  I have said that you present yourself in a manner that people question whether or not you have a degree.  That is true, I get questions about whether or not you have a degree.  In one sense you are your own worst enemy.

 

Wells that sad to say the least. I really do want to be an enemy to myself, especially to sin. Maybe I will continue to fight self and overcome! I will say this one thing and I will let it go. I know I kept saying it was in my profile and you say it wasn't and you wrote me about it and I kindly showed you. You know what you said after then HE disappeared. I know the Bible said HE Sat down on a Throne on THE RIGHT SIDE of HIS FATHER! I read that HE too the Book out of HIS FATHER'S RIGHT HAND. The Bible says very clearly THEY HAVE WAYS that we do not have. I read that when YAHSHUA Ate with the disciples, HE Lifted HIS HANDS the nails marks were in HIS HAND. HE Told the disciples that drink the wine only when we come into the Kingdom of Heaven and HE Will eat with us at the Welcome Table.

You see, I do not accept any thing that the Greeks come up with that we accept and believed. See I do not accept or believe in the Greek concept of theology, exegetical, anthropomorphism, that YAHWEH'S Love is agape( it much higher that Greeks or flesh being period can conceive.), hermeneutical thoughts, hypostasis, hypostatic concepts. In other words I do not accept Greek that Biblical scholars use to explain the Bible, the world and most of THE ALMIGHTY ONES. I accept the Bible and the Hebrew and Greek languages in their simple meaning form. If you and others accept it that is your right and your choice. Please do not question my judgement if I refuse to believe or accept it. When I comment it is based on understanding Daniel Chapters 7 and 8 was not what the king dream in Chapter 2. Daniel saw what John saw, but the book the Bible said until the time when THEY would reveal in to John. But Daniel was told it would be reveal in the latter days. Yes, EGW understood just before she die the truth. She wrote it down and pleaded with Adventist in Testimony To Ministers. The Chapter is: 3—The Holy Scriptures: How Shall We Search the Scriptures? Inside this Chapter is The Study of the Books of Daniel and the Revelation. She realize that is was not understood in her day and she was revealed the truth about these two books are really one. Daniel and John fit together like a glove and those who study them together will understand. Please read what she said, it is prophetic. Only those who will put away the Greek's false idealism and open to YAHWEH'S REALISM will grasp the truth of what she wrote:

The light that Daniel received from God was given especially for these last days. The visions he saw by the banks of Ulai and the Hiddekel the great rivers of Shinar, are now in process of fulfillment, and all the events foretold will soon come to pass.
Consider the circumstances  of  the Jewish   nation when the prophecies of Daniel were given.
Let us give  more time to the study of the Bible.   We do not understand the word as  we should.  The book of Revelation  opens with an injunction  to us to understand the instruction  that it contains. “Blessed  is he that readeth,  and they that hear the words of this prophecy,”  God declares,  “and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.” When we as a people understand what this book means to us, there will be seen among us a great revival. We do not understand fully the lessons that it teaches, notwithstanding the injunction  given us to search and study it.
In the past teachers have declared  Daniel and the Revelation to In the past teachers have declared  Daniel and the Revelation to
be sealed books, and the people have turned  from them.  The veil whose  apparent mystery  has kept many from lifting it, God’s own hand has  withdrawn from these  portions of His word. The very name “Revelation” contradicts the statement that it is a sealed  book. “Revelation” means that something of importance is revealed. The truths of this book are addressed to those living in these last days. We are standing with the veil removed in THE HOLY PLACE of sacred things. We are not to stand without. We are to enter, not with careless, irreverent thoughts, not with impetuous footsteps, but with reverence and godly fear.  We are nearing the time when the prophecies of the book of Revelation are to be fulfilled....
When the books of Daniel and Revelation  are better understood, believers will have an entirely different religious experience. They will be given such glimpses of the open gates of Heaven that heart and mind will be impressed with the character that all must develop in order to realize the blessedness which  is to be the reward of the pure in heart.....
Those who eat the flesh and drink the blood of the Son of God will bring from the books of Daniel and Revelation  truth that is inspired by the Holy Spirit. They will start into action forces that cannot be repressed. The lips of children will be opened to 
proclaim the mysteries that have been hidden from the minds of men.
We are standing on the threshold of great and solemn events. Many of the prophecies are about to be fulfilled in quick succession.  Every element of power is about to be set to work.  Past history will  be repeated; old controversies will arouse to new life, and peril will beset God’s people on every side.  Intensity is taking hold of the human family. It is permeating everything upon the earth....
Study Revelation in connection with Daniel, for history will  be repeated....  We, with all our religious  advantages, ought to know far more today than we do know.
Angels desire to look into the truths that are revealed to the people who with contrite hearts are searching the word of God and praying for greater lengths and breadth and depths and heights of the knowledge which HE alone can give.

As we near the close of this world’s history, the prophecies relating to the last days especially demand our study. The last book of the New Testament Scriptures is full of truth that we need to understand. Satan has blinded the minds of many so that they have been glad of any excuse for not making the Revelation their study. But Christ through His servant John has here declared what shall be in the last days; and He says, “Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written herein.”

Happy Sabbath with Blessings!

P.S. You are right pastor I don't want to understand the Greek!

[stinsonmarri]

6 hours ago, Gustave said:

You cite articles written by individuals who are Darwinian evolutionists and who attribute a belief in the afterlife to the evolution of society itself. In other words you cite an article that suggests the Old Testament writers, such as the book of Job, believed that the soul survived in some way after death was attributed to evolutionary process and not supernatural revelation. 

I don't mean to be harsh here but you should accept some constructive advise from Gregory, slow down and make sure that you comprehend what it is that your reading. One thing that would be helpful is if you could tailor your answers so that they would be relevant to the questions you were asked. Many times the answers you provide holds no relevance to the question you are asked. 

Well your belief is centered all around those beliefs:

Today, the Church supports theistic evolution(ism), also known as evolutionary creation, although Catholics are free not to believe in any part of evolutionary theory. ... They teach the fact that evolution occurs and the modern evolutionary synthesis, which is the scientific theory that explains how evolution proceeds. Evolution and the Catholic Church - Wikipedia

The Catholic Church teaches “theistic evolution”, a stand that accepts evolution as a scientific theory and sees no reason why God could not have used a natural evolutionary process in the forming of the human species. Vatican says it does not owe Darwin an apology | New Scientist

Yesterday, Pope Francis, the head of the Roman Catholic Church, said that Darwinian evolution is real, and so is the Big Bang, according to the Telegraph. Elsewhere in his speech to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, the Pope said: “When we read about Creation in Genesis, we run the risk of imagining God was a magician, with a magic wand able to do everything. But that is not so,” Francis said.

He added: “He created human beings and let them develop according to the internal laws that he gave to each one so they would reach their fulfilment. SMARTNEWS

I respect Pastor Matthew and the advice he has given me. But, I can read for myself. The Bible did not tell me to accept what any pastor says. Even the Bereans did not accept what Paul said. They studied for themselves. They saw what Paul said was so and there never as a book, condemning them for disobedience. When I study all the way in school I graduated to the next grade. I took what the teacher said, they all said now go back and study to see what I am teaching you is correct. When it wasn't many of us spoke and disagreed. 

Why would the Bible state to search if it want any of us to take the word of certain persons. I do not want anyone to take my word either. I have even asked you, when come up with things I have not read in the Bible for you to show it. You haven't and then when I present to you the meaning of words that Bible scholars claim it to be so and it makes no sense I must accept them? We sir, I don't! I have even explain why I don't IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE!

When anyone cannot give line upon line, here a little and there a little. I don't agree because I follow the Bible guidelines. Why say you believe in the book and having to gather other sources to explain what it means. 

 Because that which may be known of ELOHIYM is manifest in them; for ELOHIYM hath showed it unto them. For the INVISIBLE THINGS of HIM from the Creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even HIS ETERNAL POWER and MAJESTY; so that they are without excuse: Rom 1:19, 20  

That is very clear to mean and every thing that grows around me, show proof of what is written above. That's what teaches me!

Happy Sabbath and Blessings to THE MOST HIGH!!!!

[Gustave]

1 hour ago, B/W Photodude said:

I am quite sure than EGW has quoted many texts that members of other churches have quoted.

I do not recall any particular Adventist claims regarding Mormons and the Trinity. 

Whatever the Mormons believe regarding the Trinity, they have one flaw in their beliefs as noted in one of their sayings:

As God is, man shall be.

As man is, God once was.

Or sometimes written:

"As man is, God once was;
as God is, man may be."

God was once just a man!
Man can become God!

https://bible.ca/mor-adam-god.htm

What about your Trinity Doctrine when the first man becomes God?

Ellen White: As a member of the human family he was mortal, but as a God he was the fountain of life to the world. Review and Herald Sept 4,1900

 

It doesn't cause you pause that in the matter of the Trinity Doctrine the only other Churches that S.D. Adventists are in agreement with as to HOW God is one are non-Trinitarian Churches? I understand that the SDA Church is a big tent system and that is quite attractive, frankly! However, it seems odd that the SDA Church defines the Oneness of God identically to Mormons, Christadelphians, JW's, etc. 

God became man by the Incarnation - God became man without ceasing to be God. 

[Gustave]

1 hour ago, stinsonmarri said:

Well your belief is centered all around those beliefs:

Today, the Church supports theistic evolution(ism), also known as evolutionary creation, although Catholics are free not to believe in any part of evolutionary theory. ... They teach the fact that evolution occurs and the modern evolutionary synthesis, which is the scientific theory that explains how evolution proceeds. Evolution and the Catholic Church - Wikipedia

The Catholic Church teaches “theistic evolution”, a stand that accepts evolution as a scientific theory and sees no reason why God could not have used a natural evolutionary process in the forming of the human species. Vatican says it does not owe Darwin an apology | New Scientist

Yesterday, Pope Francis, the head of the Roman Catholic Church, said that Darwinian evolution is real, and so is the Big Bang, according to the Telegraph. Elsewhere in his speech to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, the Pope said: “When we read about Creation in Genesis, we run the risk of imagining God was a magician, with a magic wand able to do everything. But that is not so,” Francis said.

He added: “He created human beings and let them develop according to the internal laws that he gave to each one so they would reach their fulfilment. SMARTNEWS

I respect Pastor Matthew and the advice he has given me. But, I can read for myself. The Bible did not tell me to accept what any pastor says. Even the Bereans did not accept what Paul said. They studied for themselves. They saw what Paul said was so and there never as a book, condemning them for disobedience. When I study all the way in school I graduated to the next grade. I took what the teacher said, they all said now go back and study to see what I am teaching you is correct. When it wasn't many of us spoke and disagreed. 

Why would the Bible state to search if it want any of us to take the word of certain persons. I do not want anyone to take my word either. I have even asked you, when come up with things I have not read in the Bible for you to show it. You haven't and then when I present to you the meaning of words that Bible scholars claim it to be so and it makes no sense I must accept them? We sir, I don't! I have even explain why I don't IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE!

When anyone cannot give line upon line, here a little and there a little. I don't agree because I follow the Bible guidelines. Why say you believe in the book and having to gather other sources to explain what it means. 

 Because that which may be known of ELOHIYM is manifest in them; for ELOHIYM hath showed it unto them. For the INVISIBLE THINGS of HIM from the Creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even HIS ETERNAL POWER and MAJESTY; so that they are without excuse: Rom 1:19, 20  

That is very clear to mean and every thing that grows around me, show proof of what is written above. That's what teaches me!

Happy Sabbath and Blessings to THE MOST HIGH!!!!

 

This is another example of you not understanding the position of the Church. I don't as of yet know if this is due to educational level, reading comprehension or something else. 

The Catholic Church has infallibly defined that the Universe and specifically this world and everything contained in it (both material and spiritual) have been produced (created) OUT OF NOTHING by God. The Catholic Church rejects atheistic evolution. If you knew how to research something you'd have known this. 

Using ancient Hebrew words can be fun and dandy and all of that - ascribing some type of magical weight to them is little more than fantasy role playing (like dungeons & dragons). 

A higher education, more than anything, teaches someone HOW TO THINK far more than it does what to think.  I see you often copy-N-past scholarly materials and in the last case the authors you cite equally discredit our beliefs thereby your source invalidates the weight you gave it. 

 

[stinsonmarri]

12 hours ago, Gustave said:

 

This is another example of you not understanding the position of the Church. I don't as of yet know if this is due to educational level, reading comprehension or something else. 

The Catholic Church has infallibly defined that the Universe and specifically this world and everything contained in it (both material and spiritual) have been produced (created) OUT OF NOTHING by God. The Catholic Church rejects atheistic evolution. If you knew how to research something you'd have known this. 

Using ancient Hebrew words can be fun and dandy and all of that - ascribing some type of magical weight to them is little more than fantasy role playing (like dungeons & dragons). 

A higher education, more than anything, teaches someone HOW TO THINK far more than it does what to think.  I see you often copy-N-past scholarly materials and in the last case the authors you cite equally discredit our beliefs thereby your source invalidates the weight you gave it. 

 

I don't need to accept position of any church that does not accept the obedience of THE MOST! That's the problem with you church and mine. You think you are above YAHWEH, you are not. You cannot give Scriptures to your way of thinking. Satan felt the same and lost his position out of Heaven. His angels are in prison and they cannot roam. Just like when YAHSHUA cast out the legions in one man. They beg to stay on earth and to go into the pigs. A herd of pig could not come near the corrupted mind of one man. They instantly ran off the cliff and killed themselves. 

To cover up the truth in Luke, the translators confusing the mind, used the English word "deep." The actual word was the bottomless pit! This word let you know that where these angels prison is have no bottom. That's somewhere out in space which is dark like a pit! They were not kicked into earth, the Greek word does not just mean earth. The earth wasn't even made yet. The Greek word mean all worlds that have landmass and soil. (That also would include Heaven)  

Now, EGW was able to see that. You don't believe but she wrote it and if you would understand Greek words, you would know! Funny from a person who do know Greek! People should read their Bible and see that only Satan is talked about and moving around. Then they would understand John the Revelator when says in Rev 20 that the angel with the key to the bottomless pit now lock Satan in the same prison his angels were lock down. They only move when YAHSHUA, their CREATOR  allow them to come only to earth! Soon Satan will be locked down for a 1,000 years. Those who want to read the truth, go to SP vol. 1 and read the first chapter then after the Chapter about creating the earth it picks back up about Satan after he was kicked out and where he and his angels were kicked out close by to Heaven. She will also tell you that earth had not been made yet when he was kicked out. You will also see that Satan requested a meeting with MICHAEL! That's YAHSHUA WARRIOR NAME in Heaven!  Don't take my word, read it for yourself!

Blessings!

[Gregory Matthews]

TRUE:

God became man by the Incarnation - God became man without ceasing to be God. 

[Gustave]

Quote

 

Quote

 

 

[Gregory Matthews]

Gustave:  Your citation of an article written by EGW and printed in the September 4, 1900 edition of the Review & Herald is accurate, as a one-sentence quotation.

I do not challenge you as to your comments to the effect that EGW and other early SDA leaders were in error as to their understanding of the nature of the Godhead.  But, your reference fails to meet the standards of scholarly rigor.  It is a single sentence that is taken out of context.  The paragraph that it comes from was not dealing with the nature of the Godhead/Trinity.  Your reference is an example of the so-called "proof texting" that SDAs have often been accused of doing.  This example fails to meet the scholarly standards that you often demonstrate.

For those who want to see the entire article, it may be referenced at:  The Review and Herald — Ellen G. White Writings (egwwritings.org)

Thel following is the 5th paragraph that contains your quote:

Contrast this with the riches of glory, the wealth of praise pouring forth from immortal tongues, the millions of rich voices in the universe of God in anthems of adoration. But he humbled himself, and took mortality upon him. As a member of the human family, he was mortal; but as a God, he was the fountain of life to the world. He could, in his divine person, ever have withstood the advances of death, and refused to come under its dominion; but he voluntarily laid down his life, that in so doing he might give life and bring immortality to light. He bore the sins of the world, and endured the penalty, which rolled like a mountain upon his divine soul. He yielded up his life a sacrifice, that man should not eternally die. He died, not through being compelled to die, but by his own free will. This was humility. The whole treasure of heaven was poured out in one gift to save fallen man. He brought into his human nature all the lifegiving energies that human beings will need and must receive.

NOTE:  I underlined the above sentence.

 

 

 

[Gustave]

46 minutes ago, Gregory Matthews said:

Gustave:  Your citation of an article written by EGW and printed in the September 4, 1900 edition of the Review & Herald is accurate, as a one-sentence quotation.

I do not challenge you as to your comments to the effect that EGW and other early SDA leaders were in error as to their understanding of the nature of the Godhead.  But, your reference fails to meet the standards of scholarly rigor.  It is a single sentence that is taken out of context.  The paragraph that it comes from was not dealing with the nature of the Godhead/Trinity.  Your reference is an example of the so-called "proof texting" that SDAs have often been accused of doing.  This example fails to meet the scholarly standards that you often demonstrate.

For those who want to see the entire article, it may be referenced at:  The Review and Herald — Ellen G. White Writings (egwwritings.org)

Thel following is the 5th paragraph that contains your quote:

 

 

NOTE:  I underlined the above sentence.

 

 

 

 

If you take all the statements pertaining to "The Personality of God" found in Ellen White's writings (her books and articles in the Church papers) and place them next to the statements made by the SDA Pioneers when they discuss "The Personality of God" you're left with an inescapable fact - the Personality of God Doctrine of the SDA Church while Ellen White was alive was absolutely incompatible with the Doctrine of the Trinity. This isn't even something a person would have to deduce as it's bluntly stated, over and over again. 

The primary beef Adventists had with the Trinity was that it taught that not only was The Father ONE simple spiritual substance without a body, members or parts it included The Son & The Holy Spirit as co-equally in possession of this ONE Substance which is properly called God. Thus, because the Trinity Doctrine affirmed what made the distinct and separate Persons "God" was bodiless the Doctrine was said to "DESTROY THE PERSONALITY (Flesh body, members parts) of the Father. 

I don't think anyone could find a member of any Adventist Church (Jehovah's Witnesses, SDA's, Christadelphians, WWCOG 7th day or any offshoots) that would speculate that it would have been possible for The Father to eternally cease to exist so that it could be said that "PART" of the Godhead could be eternally lost. Perhaps I'm wrong but I've never heard acceptance of this hypothetical - instead I've been told its blasphemous to even think this way. 

After Ellen White died the Personality of God Doctrine started to disappear from the Sabbath Herald, the Sabbath School Quarterly and other periodicals the Church had authority over and but the basic concept was still there in the way things were worded - such as Jesus was "PART" of the Godhead like there was a Rhubarb pie that was cut into thirds and Jesus was licensed to possess one third of it. 

Ellen White
Though Christ humbled Himself to become man, the Godhead was still His own. His Deity could not be lost WHILE He stood faithful and true to His loyalty (see: ST18990510-V25-19.pdf (adventistarchives.org) page 2 center column

If Christ didn't remain faithful to His loyalty (God) Christ could loose His Deity thereby "impearling heaven" . 

Ellen White, GCB Dec 1, 1895
Remember that Christ risked all; "tempted like as we are," he staked EVEN his own eternal existence upon the issue of the conflict. Heaven itself was imperiled for our redemption.

Ellen White, SM book 1, page 256
Could Satan in the least particular have tempted Christ to sin, he would have bruised the Saviour's head. As it was, he could only touch His heel. Had the head of Christ been touched, the hope of the human race would have perished. Divine wrath would have come upon Christ as it came upon Adam. Christ and the church would have been without hope.”

It's difficult for me to reconcile the above statements with the affirmation that "God became man without ceasing to be God". It is possible to reconcile those statements with an affirmation that only the Father is really God in the strict sense. This appears to have been the concept. 

“The Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of the Father, is truly God in infinity, but not in personality.” (Ellen G. White, Manuscript 116, Dec. 19, 1905, ‘An Entire Consecration’, see also The Upward Look, page 367)

What makes the Father God isn't that He is the Father, it's that He is inside or fully possesses the one Substance in the exact same way as does the Son & the Holy Spirit. The Nature or Substance which is God isn't one Rhubarb Pie that's been divvied up so that there is three pies with each Person holding their own individual Rhubarb Pie because that equates to "3 Beings". 

Person = WHO you are

Being = WHAT you are. 

Persons = 3

Being = 1 Spiritual Substance

If Jesus could have "Lost His Deity" than one can't say God became Man without ceasing to be God BECAUSE God can't loose His Deity because the Father, Son & Holy Spirit ARE DEITY. 

I watched an SDA Trinity Symposium quite a while ago where three SDA theologians agreed that SDA's had a tendency to succumb to Tritheism without even realizing it. I'll try to find this video where they say this and post it. In any event if the Father CAN'T loose His Deity than neither could the Son or the Holy Spirit. 

Ellen's statement in the the Sabbath Herald about how Jesus was "a God" Vs. Jesus being God did appear to dovetail with all the statements made by SDA's up to and past the death of Ellen White. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Gregory Matthews]

Gustave.  I do not disagree with your basic statement to the effect that the early SDA leaders, including EGW, were in error as to the nature of the Godhead and its members.

However, an in-depth study of those early leaders demonstrates differences of opinion.  IOW, they were not united in every aspect of their belief as to the nature of God and the Trinity.  In short, it can be demonstrated that individually there were differences of opinion as to how they disagreed.  This is not a major issue with you.  You are correct there was major error in those early beliefs.

I have posted in the past as to some of the differences and provided specific names regarding who believed what.  Right now, I do not have the time to go back and repost that material.

 

[stinsonmarri]

8 hours ago, Gustave said:

 

If you take all the statements pertaining to "The Personality of God" found in Ellen White's writings (her books and articles in the Church papers) and place them next to the statements made by the SDA Pioneers when they discuss "The Personality of God" you're left with an inescapable fact - the Personality of God Doctrine of the SDA Church while Ellen White was alive was absolutely incompatible with the Doctrine of the Trinity. This isn't even something a person would have to deduce as it's bluntly stated, over and over again. 

The primary beef Adventists had with the Trinity was that it taught that not only was The Father ONE simple spiritual substance without a body, members or parts it included The Son & The Holy Spirit as co-equally in possession of this ONE Substance which is properly called God. Thus, because the Trinity Doctrine affirmed what made the distinct and separate Persons "God" was bodiless the Doctrine was said to "DESTROY THE PERSONALITY (Flesh body, members parts) of the Father. 

I don't think anyone could find a member of any Adventist Church (Jehovah's Witnesses, SDA's, Christadelphians, WWCOG 7th day or any offshoots) that would speculate that it would have been possible for The Father to eternally cease to exist so that it could be said that "PART" of the Godhead could be eternally lost. Perhaps I'm wrong but I've never heard acceptance of this hypothetical - instead I've been told its blasphemous to even think this way. 

After Ellen White died the Personality of God Doctrine started to disappear from the Sabbath Herald, the Sabbath School Quarterly and other periodicals the Church had authority over and but the basic concept was still there in the way things were worded - such as Jesus was "PART" of the Godhead like there was a Rhubarb pie that was cut into thirds and Jesus was licensed to possess one third of it. 

Ellen White
Though Christ humbled Himself to become man, the Godhead was still His own. His Deity could not be lost WHILE He stood faithful and true to His loyalty (see: ST18990510-V25-19.pdf (adventistarchives.org) page 2 center column

If Christ didn't remain faithful to His loyalty (God) Christ could loose His Deity thereby "impearling heaven" . 

Ellen White, GCB Dec 1, 1895
Remember that Christ risked all; "tempted like as we are," he staked EVEN his own eternal existence upon the issue of the conflict. Heaven itself was imperiled for our redemption.

Ellen White, SM book 1, page 256
Could Satan in the least particular have tempted Christ to sin, he would have bruised the Saviour's head. As it was, he could only touch His heel. Had the head of Christ been touched, the hope of the human race would have perished. Divine wrath would have come upon Christ as it came upon Adam. Christ and the church would have been without hope.”

It's difficult for me to reconcile the above statements with the affirmation that "God became man without ceasing to be God". It is possible to reconcile those statements with an affirmation that only the Father is really God in the strict sense. This appears to have been the concept. 

“The Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of the Father, is truly God in infinity, but not in personality.” (Ellen G. White, Manuscript 116, Dec. 19, 1905, ‘An Entire Consecration’, see also The Upward Look, page 367)

What makes the Father God isn't that He is the Father, it's that He is inside or fully possesses the one Substance in the exact same way as does the Son & the Holy Spirit. The Nature or Substance which is God isn't one Rhubarb Pie that's been divvied up so that there is three pies with each Person holding their own individual Rhubarb Pie because that equates to "3 Beings". 

Person = WHO you are

Being = WHAT you are. 

Persons = 3

Being = 1 Spiritual Substance

If Jesus could have "Lost His Deity" than one can't say God became Man without ceasing to be God BECAUSE God can't loose His Deity because the Father, Son & Holy Spirit ARE DEITY. 

I watched an SDA Trinity Symposium quite a while ago where three SDA theologians agreed that SDA's had a tendency to succumb to Tritheism without even realizing it. I'll try to find this video where they say this and post it. In any event if the Father CAN'T loose His Deity than neither could the Son or the Holy Spirit. 

Ellen's statement in the the Sabbath Herald about how Jesus was "a God" Vs. Jesus being God did appear to dovetail with all the statements made by SDA's up to and past the death of Ellen White. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gustave: This is where Pastor Matthew, whom I respect and I disagree. These pioneers, most of them were old men. Sis White was a young lady. When THE HOLY SPIRIT showed Edison his vision they started to understand more than most today. These people were trench in the trinity doctrine and they were closer to the knowledge of Catholicism then those today. They knew and understood about the trinity and Catholicism. They knew and understood how this belief had entrench the Protestant faiths that they all left. Now, these are the people that YAHSHUA sent HIS faithful angel to speak with them and show them visions and dreams. 

You do not understand what happen during the 1888 message. YAHSHUA sent two men that had the truth, but was weak themselves just like HIS disciples. When the SDA group rejected this message they changed. What they were shone was correct because it was given by ONE of THE ALMIGHTY ONES. That was not error because YAHSHUA would have told them or rebuke them if the trinity was true. It was not and EGW is not alive to defend that she never changed and accept the trinity. This was not so and many know it. Froom and others waited until she died to create Evangelism and taking man of what she wrote out of context as did those who did the same thing to the Bible centuries before.

Now, many who do not accept the trinity and other false views that have creep into the church to compromise with the Evangelical world and many of their great well known Bible Scholars. As I told you before that words were changed. 

Act 2:32  ThisG5126 JesusG2424 (hath) GodG2316 raised up,G450 whereofG3739 weG2249 allG3956 areG2070 witnesses.G3144

All they need to do was to put hath in between YAHSHUA and THE WORD ELOHIYM and make it appear something totally different. "Hath," was not in the Greek language here! It should have said "This YAHSHUA ELOHIM raised up (in the Greek G450 is stand up or raise [up] the primary preposition or adverb that goes along with the Greek grammar. Hath was added!) whereof we all are witness."

Now, you will not accept this because you have been taught to take what the Pope say over the Bible. This Pope many of you are not happy with because he accepts a lot of the other popes  codone in the past! It is all about one word place that was not spoken to throw everything off. Why would disciples go against the WORDS of YAHSHUA, HIMSELF?  They wouldn't!

I stand to provide the facts and many will not like or accept it. But again, I say that is their choice and I stand for mine. I am just giving my comment like the Bible says to reason together.

Blessings!

[Gustave]

 

 

Quote

Gustave: This is where Pastor Matthew, whom I respect and I disagree. These pioneers, most of them were old men. Sis White was a young lady. When THE HOLY SPIRIT showed Edison his vision they started to understand more than most today. These people were trench in the trinity doctrine and they were closer to the knowledge of Catholicism then those today. They knew and understood about the trinity and Catholicism. They knew and understood how this belief had entrench the Protestant faiths that they all left. Now, these are the people that YAHSHUA sent HIS faithful angel to speak with them and show them visions and dreams.

 

My understanding of the history is different than yours in that my understanding is that the vast majority of people who were entrenched in the Trinity Doctrine LEFT the Millerite movement after William Miller admitted he was in grave error about knowing the timing of the 2nd Coming of Jesus and urged everyone to return to their Churches. 

As a Methodist Ellen White would have been educated as to the Trinity Doctrine but Ellen and her Family were kicked out of the Methodist Church over disciplinary issues and therefore DIDN'T have the option of returning to their [Methodist] Church. There were a large number of "Christian Connexion" adherents that joined the Miller movement and these folks were militantly anti-Trinitarian Arians that also believed in conditional immortality - THIS is what was left after William Miller disbanded his group (Arians that didn't believe Jesus was God like the Father was God) AND like the Mormons, believed that God had a flesh body with members and parts. 

The Christian Connexion formed AFTER multiple groups of uneducated people realized that they were coming up with the same ideas that other groups of uneducated people were coming up with and so they united in communion with each other - that's why they were called "Connexion" - this was the bulk of "the remnant" of the Millerite movement after Miller pulled the plug. 

This remnant group of "Adventists" soon started to squabble over distinctive doctrines and while they were united that Jesus wasn't Eternal God THAT wasn't enough to keep them together - the remnant started to splinter into sub groups of Adventists (Christadelphian Adventists, Armstrong Adventists, Seventh-day Adventists & so on). 

As Gregory and other knowledgeable individuals have said - there were some fairly serious mistakes made by well intentioned people. The headline here is that the Millerite remnant WAS ARIAN. And as history attests: 

 

Now, you will not accept this because you have been taught to take what the Pope say over the Bible. This Pope many of you are not happy with because he accepts a lot of the other popes  codone in the past! It is all about one word place that was not spoken to throw everything off. Why would disciples go against the WORDS of YAHSHUA, HIMSELF?  They wouldn't!

I hold the Bible in high esteem because I believe it's a "Catholic Book" produced by the Catholic Church. Think about it Stinsonmarri, it was the Catholic Church that decided WHAT Books should be in the Bible and the way they tested which Books should be in the Bible was confirming IF what was in those Books agreed with the Sacred Tradition that was passed down IN THE CHURCH. It's a fact that "THE CHURCH" existed before the Bible and the Sacred Faith was intended to be "taught". I've thus far resisted posting this truth but something about the way your post was worded compelled me to share the truth with you about this. If you believe a bunch of Trinitarians, after diligent Bible study and some prophetic utterances from Ellen White rejected the Trinity in favor for what the early Adventists were teaching about the Personality of God you are as sore of a need of some history lessons and you are of a proper Catechesis. 

In all honesty I do appreciate some of the discussions and exchanges we have here on the forum and respect your willingness to step out onto the ledge so to speak! 

 

 

 

 

 

[Gregory Matthews]

There is much that is the subject of debate by SDA scholars related to the early days of the developing SDA denomination.  This debate includes:

*  The actual Arian beliefs of our early leaders, to include the range of belief that existed among those people.

*  The actual beliefs of Ellen White, and the extent to which they changed over time and prior to her death.

*   To a lessor extent aspects of the beliefs of William Miller.

I consider the following book to be of great value in considering aspects of the issues that are a part of SDA history.  It does not address every issue.  It does not cover all aspects of issues that it does address:

Paul Petersen & Rob McIVer, Editors.  Biblical & Theological Studies on the Trinity, Avondale Academic Press, 2014, 251 pages.

It contains 13 chapters, written by 12 scholars.  It is divided into three sections:

*  A Biblical section.   This discusses biblical aspects of the teaching of the Trinitey.  It addresses the 4th gospel,  the meaning of monogenes, Romans 9:5, Paul's concept in 1 Cor. 15, and firstborn in Col. 1:15.

*  A historical and theological section:  This section includes a postmodern perspective, the common Christian understanding, the Alexandrian understanding, issues pertaining to the Holy spirit, and an Islamic understanding.

* A study of the SDA perspective from a historical and theological perspective.  This includes early Restorationism in Adventism, and the emergence of a Trinitarian perspective, further study of Adventism and the doctrine of the Trinity and John Harvey Kellogg and the Godhead.

NOTE:  Currently, Amazon has one is stock for $25.

 

 

 

 

[Gustave]

On 5/3/2021 at 5:20 PM, phkrause said:

Where does she actually say that? Because if that statement above is your proof, than you have a problem Gustave!!

Hi phkrause, here ya go?

As we have already established and agreed - Ellen White didn't didn't come up with any Doctrines for the SDA Church. The SDA Pioneers other than Ellen came up with them and when needed Ellen White confirmed the teaching via her Charism. That Father God had "members and parts" (to include every bone and organ Adam had). I'm going to ask that you look these up in the archives and read them in context so as to prevent the idea I'm taking anything out of context. You can glance through these and glean the words you seek such as members & parts, nose, fingers, toes, feet, organs, eyelids, Nostrils that actually smell the sacrifice, eardrums, etc. 

Sabbath Herald, March 6, 1855 -Trinity Doctrine destroys the Personality of Father.

Sabbath Herald, March 7, 1854 - Seventh Day Sabbath Not Abolished - proves Father has a body.

Sabbath Herald, September 18, 1855 - is the soul immortal? 

June 18, 1867,  Jesus Christ the Son of God -Jesus is a like a twin of Father.

Sabbath Herald, June 25, 1867 God is a Person & Heaven is a place.

Sabbath Herald, August 29, 1878 The Personality of God.

Sabbath Herald, October 8, 1903 - The Personality of God S.N. Haskell. 

Sabbath Herald, March 8, 1906 - A God of knowledge by whom actions are weighed - By Ellen G. White.

"He who denies The Personality of God [doctrine] denies God and Christ."

Signs Of The Times, 1910 February 8, V37-06 Rejecting Personality of God is Pantheism.

Signs Of The Times, September, 1938-0705-V65-26 Denial of the Personality of God is Pantheism.

The above isn't exhaustive, its just representative of what the SDA Church leadership were teaching. Ellen White documented multiple visions whereas she was shown Father had a body and additionally wrote multiple affirmations that Father had a body and that man bore the same body. 

 "Man was to bear God's image, both in outward resemblance and in character. Christ alone is 'the express image' (Hebrews 1:3) of the Father; but man was formed in the likeness of God." (Patriarchs and Prophets, page 45, paragraph 2.)

 

"I had often been shown the lovely Jesus, that he is a person. I had asked him if his Father was a person, and had a form like himself. Said Jesus, 'I am in the express image of my Father's person.' I had often seen that the spiritual view took away the glory of heaven, and that in many minds the throne of David, and the lovely person of Jesus had been burned up by the fire of spiritual interpretation." (Ellen G. White, Life Sketches of James White and Ellen G. White (1888 edition), page 230, paragraph 3. Italics in original.)

 

"The word and works of Christ testified to a divine power which accomplishes miraculous results, of a future, eternal life exalted above the finite life, of God as a Father to the children of men, watchful of their true interests, and guarding them. He taught that God was a rewarder of the righteous, and a punisher of the transgressor. He was not an intangible spirit, but a living ruler of the universe. This gracious Father was constantly working for the good of man, and mindful of all that concerns him. The very hairs of his head are numbered. Not even a sparrow falls to the ground without the notice of the Heavenly Father, and man is more valuable than many sparrows. [...]" (The Spirit of Prophecy, Volume Three, page 47, paragraph 1.)

Do you accept these citations as "proof"? 

 

 

[Gustave]

29 minutes ago, Gregory Matthews said:

There is much that is the subject of debate by SDA scholars related to the early days of the developing SDA denomination.  This debate includes:

*  The actual Arian beliefs of our early leaders, to include the range of belief that existed among those people.

*  The actual beliefs of Ellen White, and the extent to which they changed over time and prior to her death.

*   To a lessor extent aspects of the beliefs of William Miller.

I consider the following book to be of great value in considering aspects of the issues that are a part of SDA history.  It does not address every issue.  It does not cover all aspects of issues that it does address:

Paul Petersen & Rob McIVer, Editors.  Biblical & Theological Studies on the Trinity, Avondale Academic Press, 2014, 251 pages.

It contains 13 chapters, written by 12 scholars.  It is divided into three sections:

*  A Biblical section.   This discusses biblical aspects of the teaching of the Trinitey.  It addresses the 4th gospel,  the meaning of monogenes, Romans 9:5, Paul's concept in 1 Cor. 15, and firstborn in Col. 1:15.

*  A historical and theological section:  This section includes a postmodern perspective, the common Christian understanding, the Alexandrian understanding, issues pertaining to the Holy spirit, and an Islamic understanding.

* A study of the SDA perspective from a historical and theological perspective.  This includes early Restorationism in Adventism, and the emergence of a Trinitarian perspective, further study of Adventism and the doctrine of the Trinity and John Harvey Kellogg and the Godhead.

NOTE:  Currently, Amazon has one is stock for $25.

 

 

 

 

I'll snag that book!  Thanks for the info.