Members phkrause Posted July 25, 2023 Members Share Posted July 25, 2023 by White Horse Media (this is a 5 part series) The Trinity Controversy: Part 1 https://www.youtube.com/watch? The Trinity Controversy: Part 2 https://www.youtube.com/watch? The Trinity Controversy: Part 3 https://www.youtube.com/watch? The Trinity Controversy: Part 4 https://www.youtube.com/watch? The Trinity Controversy: Part 5 https://www.youtube.com/watch? Quote phkrause By the decree enforcing the institution of the papacy in violation of the law of God, our nation will disconnect herself fully from righteousness. When Protestantism shall stretch her hand across the gulf to grasp the hand of the Roman power, when she shall reach over the abyss to clasp hands with spiritualism, when, under the influence of this threefold union, our country shall repudiate every principle of its Constitution as a Protestant and republican government, and shall make provision for the propagation of papal falsehoods and delusions, then we may know that the time has come for the marvelous working of Satan and that the end is near. {5T 451.1} Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rahab Posted July 25, 2023 Share Posted July 25, 2023 Thanks phkrause 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gustave Posted July 27, 2023 Share Posted July 27, 2023 It didn't take very long for Mr. Wohlberg to state that the Father has a body with parts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanseng Posted August 28, 2023 Share Posted August 28, 2023 It's important to emphasize that the Father is a spiritual being, not comprised of flesh and blood. Jesus plainly said "A spirit hath not flesh and bones" (Lk 24:39). God is a spirit. Not having flesh and bones does not preclude the Father from having a human like form. Revelation 5:1,7 mention the right hand of him that sitteth upon the throne. The Ancient of Days has a hair and head (Dan. 7:9). None of these human like features describing the Father detract from his majesty or deity. Since the Scripture says man was in the image of God, it would be expected that there would be similarities. An image is something that looks like what it represents. It is not of the same substance. That's exactly the case when comparing man with God. The appearance is the same or similar. The substance is not. Kevin H and phkrause 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gustave Posted November 28, 2023 Share Posted November 28, 2023 On 8/28/2023 at 1:47 AM, Hanseng said: It's important to emphasize that the Father is a spiritual being, not comprised of flesh and blood. Jesus plainly said "A spirit hath not flesh and bones" (Lk 24:39). God is a spirit. Not having flesh and bones does not preclude the Father from having a human like form. Revelation 5:1,7 mention the right hand of him that sitteth upon the throne. The Ancient of Days has a hair and head (Dan. 7:9). None of these human like features describing the Father detract from his majesty or deity. Since the Scripture says man was in the image of God, it would be expected that there would be similarities. An image is something that looks like what it represents. It is not of the same substance. That's exactly the case when comparing man with God. The appearance is the same or similar. The substance is not. That's a Johnny come lately (and alien) meaning to Judaism and Historic Christianity has always understood. Being made in the image and likeness of God has nothing to do with us looking similar to God and has everything to do with man [albeit imperfectly] reflecting his Creator's attributes and characteristics. I'll readily admit that Mormon and SDA teaching affirm that Image in this context means we look like God, right down to every member and part of the human body. I differ from this understanding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8thdaypriest Posted December 10, 2023 Share Posted December 10, 2023 Is this thread for all aspects of the Trinity Controversy? Wow! There are so many parts. I personally do not believe there are three divine persons/beings who together make up "God." I worship God our Father, and I worship His Son. I do NOT worship the Holy Spirit AS a third divine person/being. As to a "form," Jesus said, "God is spirit." (John 4) Paul wrote, "One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all." (KJV) If God the Father is "through all" and "in all," that makes Him spirit. Paul said that "the last Adam was made a life-giving spirit." The "last Adam" is Christ Jesus. So, Jesus was made a spirit. That does not preclude His having a form. Angels are "spirits sent forth." Yet they can also have forms, within this dimension. God can exist in a "form," while at the same time He exists as "spirit" (without form, and invisible to human eyes). I don't see the giant problem. Quote 8thdaypriest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gustave Posted December 16, 2023 Share Posted December 16, 2023 On 12/10/2023 at 11:05 AM, 8thdaypriest said: Is this thread for all aspects of the Trinity Controversy? Wow! There are so many parts. I personally do not believe there are three divine persons/beings who together make up "God." I worship God our Father, and I worship His Son. I do NOT worship the Holy Spirit AS a third divine person/being. As to a "form," Jesus said, "God is spirit." (John 4) Paul wrote, "One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all." (KJV) If God the Father is "through all" and "in all," that makes Him spirit. Paul said that "the last Adam was made a life-giving spirit." The "last Adam" is Christ Jesus. So, Jesus was made a spirit. That does not preclude His having a form. Angels are "spirits sent forth." Yet they can also have forms, within this dimension. God can exist in a "form," while at the same time He exists as "spirit" (without form, and invisible to human eyes). I don't see the giant problem. Trinitarianism = 1 Divine Being who is Father, Son & Holy Spirit, a single Spiritual Being. Ellen White taught that one "BEING" of the Godhead could have, might have, eternally ceased to exist: "It was possible for one of the God-head to be lost, and eternally lost - and IF that had happened, and it WAS possible to happen, "God, the Father", would still have remained as the One and only absolute and living God, reigning supreme over all the unfallen worlds, but with all the human race blotted out of existence on this earth." This is such a radical departure from the Trinity Doctrine its unbecoming for one to say they are Trinitarian and affirm the above. Granted, there indeed may be some SDA's who categorically reject what Ellen White taught in this area but I'm thinking they are few in number. I've found the same affirmation as to the body and "parts" of God the Father in the book Seventh-day Adventists believe 27 or 28 fundamentals of belief. Yes, God can materialize or generate any form God Chooses but because God is Father, Son & Holy Spirit Jesus could no more eternally cease to exist than the Father or Holy Spirit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8thdaypriest Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 The REASON that God "beget" a second divine being (the "Son") was BECAUSE He could not 1. become a man 2. and die (literally, truly, really, absolutely DIE) Not half die as in the Ellen White statement, "His humanity died. Divinity did not die." If that were the case, then Christ was not a complete sacrifice. Only his human shell died, while He continued to live. 3. while at the same time upholding all things. There had to be TWO of Him. One to die. The Other to keep the universe going. And so the "Son" was "begotten." Quote 8thdaypriest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8thdaypriest Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 Gustave, I'm happy to debate the Trinity doctrine with you. I realize that this doctrine is mainstream in Christian denominations. I know they call anyone who does not subscribe to that doctrine "a cult," but that is just a dirty word they throw at those who hold to beliefs that differ from their orthodoxy. I do not believe the Bible teaches that our God is a Trinity (as you define Trinity). Quote 8thdaypriest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gustave Posted January 6 Share Posted January 6 4 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said: Gustave, I'm happy to debate the Trinity doctrine with you. I realize that this doctrine is mainstream in Christian denominations. I know they call anyone who does not subscribe to that doctrine "a cult," but that is just a dirty word they throw at those who hold to beliefs that differ from their orthodoxy. I do not believe the Bible teaches that our God is a Trinity (as you define Trinity). While I may not understand the nuances of your beliefs, I'm absolutely aware you are not a Trinitarian. Throughout Scripture we find many examples of individuals walking away from God's established religious authority. These individuals may have believed in their heart they were right but Sacred Scripture paints them to be heretics. In the end God is the judge and I can no more condemn you to hell than you could condemn me. We can pray for each other however phkrause 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8thdaypriest Posted January 6 Share Posted January 6 You believe "God" (Yehovah) is THREE. I believe Yehovah is TWO. (Father and Son) Yes. We can pray for each other. In the following passage, Yehovah, the "King of Israel" AND a second being/person - "Yehovah of Hosts," BOTH TOGETHER say ""Besides Me there is no God." BOTH are God. This agrees with John 1:1-3, where "the Word was with God and was God." Isaiah 44:6 “Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel, And his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: ‘I am the First and I am the Last; Besides Me there is no God.’” (NKJ) Revelation 22:13 [Jesus speaking] “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last.” (NKJ) Isaiah 54:5 “For your Maker is your husband, The LORD of hosts is His name; And your Redeemer is the Holy One of Israel; He is called the God of the whole earth.” (NKJ) Most everyone understands that the "husband" of Israel was, and is, the Son of God. In Isa 54:5, this "husband" is called "the God of the whole earth." I believe this earth was legally estranged from God the Father, because Adam and Eve broke the very first spoken law. The Son of God, stepped in to that void, to preserve life on earth and to communicate the will of the Father to mankind, until the opportune time for Him to incarnate. He embraced mankind (who were "doomed to destruction" because of their sin.) Taking that "curse" upon Himself, He won the right to heal those who desired a reconciliation with BOTH the Father and Himself. At the end of Revelation, "God and the Lamb are the Temple" of the New Jerusalem. TWO divine persons. Quote 8thdaypriest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gustave Posted January 11 Share Posted January 11 The part you seem to be missing here is that your belief requires affirmation that "GOD" is a synonym of family, or committee, or board of directors defaulting into a situation where God can be any number of Beings - exactly like a family can be 3, 4, 5 or 10 beings (just like a committee ). Christ screws up and messes the bed (Sins and ceases to exist like Arians gloat was possible) and it's no big deal because the Father is still around . That's not God, that's something else. If the Son didn't exist the Father wouldn't either, nor would the Holy Spirit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.