Leaderboard

I'm not real impressed with the video. There's some misinformation that's being given. (for example, "Wicca" is *not* a synonym for "witchcraft") The claim that the triune pagan gods are cause to discredit the idea of the Christian Trinity is, in my opinion, inane. The idea that anything that has pagan origins — holidays, worship, or anything in daily life — is a reason to throw up our hands and recede from reality, is poppycock. We worship on the Sabbath, Saturday or the pagan day of Saturn. the whole idea of "pastoring" and of giving sermons is of a pagan (Roman and Greek) origin... should we now dismiss the whole population of ministers and pastors and go back to the original Christian assemblage of worship, where everyone is a participant rather than a spectator?

Of course not. The problem with your arguments is that you do not enough see that it is only one God when we get outside of time and space, but the 3 beings of the trinity are just 3 simultaneous self revelations of that one God, just as if you had a glass of water that represents time and space and you are outside of time and space and put 3 fingers in the water. You are guilty as to what I said earlier about us trying to define God metaphysically, instead of leaving the metaphysical be simply "Holy, Holy, Holy" and that this "Holy, Holy, Holy" manifests him/her self to us in relationship through the trinity, two objective and one subjective manifestation.

Our path to heaven is a lifelong journey. We will all meet circumstances in our lives where we are tempted to abandon God. We are all sinners - dare I say willful sinners - and deserve eternal death. Looking at the glass as half full, I believe that a partial surrender in better than no surrender at all. As we begin to turn our lives over to God and open our eyes to the many mercies and grace he provides for us, we may surrender more; and the cycle repeats. Our salvation is based on our relationship with our Savior and our response to Him in that relationship. That relationship grows and matures with time; and our degree of surrender is proportional to the depth of that relationship - not our strict compliance with every tenet of the Law. Does that theology make me a "wolf"?

Lori: You are clearly correct as to a standard meaning for the term. My concern and response was related to how you used it. You were clear is stating that it was the you tube video that was based on the work of Alexander Hislop that was the source for your belief that the Trinity doctrine was not salvational. You then suggested that we watch the video. To start off, I have a problem with any suggestion that ones doctrinal belief should be based upon a source other than the Bible. In addition, when that suggested source is as faulty as is Hislop, I am much more opposed to that idea. If you had told us that that based upon your understanding of the Bible, you do not believe that the Trinity doctrine is salvational I would have agreed that at least you were suggesting a proper standard for determining such a belief. But, I cannot agree that Hislop should ever be a standard to determine what is salvational. That is exactly what you did when you said:

Whether or not they have malicious intent seems to be a moot point in that day....because the very next words of Christ are "And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you; depart from me, ye that work iniquity." That will be a horrifying revelation to so many, and it will be too late. How important it is to make SURE now, in this last bit of time remaining, that we are believing every word that proceeds from the mouth of God. Many of us are inadvertently taking the traditions of men in place of the word of God. "A partial surrender to truth gives Satan free opportunity to work. Until the soul-temple is fully surrendered to God, it is the stronghold of the enemy. This influence is leading souls away from the grand old waymarks into false paths. When the mind becomes confused, when right is considered unessential, and error is called truth, it is almost impossible to make these deceived souls see that it is the adversary who has confused their senses and polluted the soul-temple. A tissue of lies is placed where truth, and truth alone, should be. The word of God is a dead letter to them, and the Saviour’s love is unknown.” RH November 28, 1899

Lori, the fact that a Trinity existed in some early pagan religions does not prove that Christianity got it from that source. I will remind you that baptism existed in non-Christian religions well before in became a Christian practice. Hislop is an interesting historian. But, as you probably knew and did not tell us, he would almost be considered ancient. He is not correct in everything that he said/wrote.

Wanderer said below: I have a strong history of attempting to bring people together who seemingly were locked into two opposing positions which could not be reconciled. I did this for 18 years as an Army chaplain in issues related to religious issues and for nine years as a VA Chaplain on a multitude of issues which were not religious. Sometimes in the VA, I had to work formally. But, in both the VA and in the Army in working informally I would proceed as follows: 1) I would attempt to determine the core issues that each side had, on which neither could compromise. 2) If both sides had the same core issue, I had a problem and probably could not resolve the issue. However, if each side did not have the same core issue the opportunity existed for me to bring them together. 3) In the later case I would work to bring the two sides together in a manner that each got the core issue which was not the core for the other side. This would often include reaching a common understanding of the issues. 4) Unfortunately the issue of female ordination in the SDA denomination is so structured that I question whether or not the two sides can come into a common agreement. Yes, in the context as I have stated it above, I believe that there is a resolution. But, as I see it, the two sides are not prepared to accept it and therefore that common agreement remains elusive. NOTE: I have been formally trained by the Office of Personnel Management in Mediation. What I have stated above constitutes a vital part of Mediation.

Wanderer, you are correct in referencing the multitude of sites that have sprung up and are not denominational. My post was centered in the denominational sites, which is why I used the word "denomination." I also included in my reference denominational leaders who I believe have made an important contribution to the discussion. These have included, in my consideration, documents produced by our various educational institutions and by administrative levels below that of the General Conference. In addition I included certain retired denominational leaders. I justified this due to the fact that certain denominational leaders are considered to continue to have a leadership role even after they leave their position. E.G. Former General Conference Presidents continue to have an advisory role after they leave office as it states in the GC Constitution & By-laws. By the way, I may read material that I consider to be biased and one-sided because experientially I have often learned something from doing so. E.G. While I remain a creationist, I read and have books in my library that present a different view of life on this planet.

The view that came out of the massive studies of this issue following the 2010 General conference was that neither the Bible nor EGW prohibited nor required that women be ordained. From this perspective, the issue becomes a policy issue rather than a biblical issue.

As there are hundreds of pages that support opposing views, it should be clear that "hundreds of pages" does not imply correctness. There are opposing views so obviously every view can not be correct. However those hundreds of pages does demonstrate (mean) something of importance and value: 1) It demonstrates the submission to Biblical teaching by people on both sides of the questions. This is in marked contrast to those who summarily dismiss the opposing side with a comment that the other side is not committed to submission to Biblical teachings. This is important. 2) Regardless of the position that one finally takes, it provides a wealth of material that should assist one who wants to do in-depth study of the issues involved. 3) It clearly demonstrates the investment that the SDA denomination has made in time, which is money, emotional energy and effort, and finds which went to administrative expenses that the denomination has expended on this issue. 4) By placing major downloads of material on the Internet for all to see, and material which supports each side, it demonstrated the denomination commitment to making such material available for members to study and come to their own conclusion. Folks let us not devalue and summarily dismiss the material that the denomination has placed on the Internet for our review, study and understanding.

Personally I don't believe, believing in a trinity is a salvation issue! But than again it can be! I myself do believe in the Trinity! I see no reason not to, and on the other hand, probably no reason to believe. One of the reason's I do believe in a Trinity, and its my weakest reason! Where do the numbers 777 and 666 come from? or maybe why do we have those numbers? One thing I've heard , and this comes from a number of theologians that I know. The 777 stands for the Holy Trinity, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit! The 666 would stands for the unholy trinity, Satan or the Dragon, the Beast, and the false prophet. I can buy that! What would be a good reason not to believe in the Trinity?? Does it hurt someone to believe? Will it keep us out of the Kingdom???? Anyway, that's my thought's on the matter.

With oodles of ketchup!

What we need are some hungry dragons!!!

The Bible speaks of the Holy Spirit as being "of God", meaning that it belongs to, or is from, God. This does not mean that it is a third separate divine being, but that it is God's Spirit. What would you think of me if I said "Hi, my name is Lori. ALSO, I'd like you to meet my spirit, here she is, standing right beside me." Or if I said "My friend has a very joyful spirit!" or "that person's spirit is terribly grieved right now." Both statements are true, and it would also be true to speak of those friends THEMSELVES as being joyful or grieved. We experience those emotions in our spirits, but that doesn't mean that we, and additionally another individual called "our spirit", are experiencing those emotions. 1 Corinthians 2:11: "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." And 1 Corinthians 2:10 "But God hath revealed them unto us by His Spirit; for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God." 1 Corinthians 2:16 "For 'who hath known the mind (Spirit) of the Lord, that he may instruct Him? BUT WE HAVE THE MIND OF CHRIST." Jesus was explaining to His disciples in John 14 that He would be leaving them soon. He told them that "I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever, even the Spirit of truth [who did He say was the way, TRUTH, and life?], whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him, BUT YE KNOW HIM, FOR HE DWELLETH WITH YOU [who was dwelling with the disciples right then?], and SHALL BE IN YOU. I WILL NOT LEAVE YOU COMFORTLESS; I WILL COME TO YOU." "Christ was the spirit of truth. The world will not listen to His pleadings. They would not accept Him as their guide. They could not discern unseen things; spiritual things were unknown to them. But His disciples [context = us, here and now] see in Him the Way, the Truth, and the Life. And they shall have HIS abiding presence. They shall have an experimental knowledge of the only true God and of Jesus Christ whom He hath sent." EGW, The Southern Review, October 25, 1898. Jesus went on to explain that they, His disciples, would be able to see (by faith) and experience His presence, but the world wouldn't. They understood that He was speaking about Himself and not another person, because Judas (not Iscariot) asked for clarification: "Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world? Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words; and my Father will love him, and WE (the Father and the Son) will come and make our abode with him." John 14:22, 23 That is why John the beloved wrote in 1 John 1:3 "...and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son." That is why Jesus said, in His wonderful prayer to His Father right before Gethsemane: "And this is life eternal, that they might know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent." John 17:3

It is so interesting to see what Paul understood was the Spirit of God when he quoted Isaiah 40:13 "who hath directed the Spirit of the Lord, or being His counselor hath taught Him?” In Romans 11:34 he quoted it like this: "who hath known the MIND of the Lord, or who hath been His counselor?" and in 1 Corinthians 2:16 he quoted it like this: "For who hath known the MIND of the Lord, that he may instruct Him?" and then he goes on to say "but we have the mind of Christ." That is the same as saying "but we have the Holy Spirit." That is because in 1 Corinthians 15:45 Paul tells us that Jesus, "the last Adam, was made a quickening Spirit." and in 2 Corinthians 3:15 Paul tells us "now the Lord" (referring to Jesus Himself, as evidenced by the context of the previous verses) "IS THAT SPIRIT." It truly IS “Christ in you, the hope of glory!” “We want the Holy Spirit, which is Jesus Christ.” From Letter 66-1894 (April 10, 1894) par. 18 (written to Elder Prescott) In giving His commission to His followers, Christ did not tell them they would be left alone. He assured them that He would be near them. He spoke of HIS Omnipresence in a special way. Go to all nations, He said. Go, to the farthest portion of the habitable globe, but know that MY presence will be there. Labor in faith and confidence, for the time will never come when I shall forsake you.” (Manuscript 138, 1897) - EGW JEHOVAH, OUR FATHER, AND HIS SON JESUS CHRIST ARE ALONE TO BE EXALTED. The knowledge of God is eternal life to those who receive it (John 17:3). His holy banner is to stand elevated above all the greatness of the greatest men, above all the honor and glory of the world.” {Ms11-1898 (June 29, 1898) par. 11} - EGW “If ye love me, keep my commandments. And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, even the Spirit of truth, (which is Christ formed within the hope of glory,) whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not: but ye know him, for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. I will not leave you comfortless; I will come to you.”” {Ms24-1898 (February 22, 1898) par. 21} - EGW *comment in parenthesis was in original statement. "Christ is to be known by the blessed name of Comforter.” {Ms7-1902 (January 26, 1902) par. 10} - EGW "Christ comes as a Comforter to all who believe. He invites your confidence. He says, “Abide in me.” Surely we may trust in our loving Saviour.” Letter 103-1898 (November 21, 1898) par. 14