3 Gods?

[John317]

Based on what he said in that initial post, it looks like Stan is making observations about people's confusion in regard to the nature of the Godhead. And that is true: many are confused about the relationship between the Father, and Son, and Holy Spirit.

Beyond that, I am not sure what his intention was.

[jasd]

QR frame:

Elohiym/Gd. One, three, or more?

[John317]

The Bible teaches the Trinity: three persons in One Godhead.

Quote:

There is one God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, a unity of three co-eternal Persons. God is immortal, all-powerful, all-knowing, above all, and ever present. He is infinite and beyond human comprehension, yet known through His self-revelation. He is forever worthy of worship, adoration, and service by the whole creation. (Deut. 6:4; Matt. 28:19; 2 Cor. 13:14; Eph. 4:4-6; 1 Peter 1:2; 1 Tim. 1:17; Rev. 14:7.)

Although Ellen White never used the word "Trinity," she wrote that the Son is eternal and His life is "original and unborrowed," and that He is equal with the Father. She also wrote that the Holy Spirit is not a mere influence but is a person.

The Bible supports this.

Col. 1: 16, 17

Heb. 1: 10

Heb. 1: 1-3

2 Peter 1: 1 (NASB; NIV; NKJV, etc.)

Titus 2: 13 (NASB; NKJV; NIV, etc.)

Is. 9: 6

Micah 5:2

John 1: 2,3

John 8: 58

Phil, 2: 7, 8

Matt. 1: 23

John 20: 28

1 Cor. 10: 9

John 12: 42; Is. 6:1

[John317]

As said before, Ellen White never used the term "trinity," but she did refer to the "three living persons of the heavenly trio" (Evangelism, p. 615). She believed in the full deity of Christ, stating that "Christ was God essentially, and in the highest sense. He was with God from all eternity, God over all, blessed forevermore" (Review and Herald, April 5, 1906). She also referred to the Holy Spirit as "the Third Person of the Godhead" (The Desire of Ages, p. 671). Her comments, as collected in Evangelism, pages 613-617, suggest that she believed that the Scriptures taught the existence of three co-eternal divine persons.

Ellen White did teach that the Holy Spirit is not an impersonal force or influence, although several times she used the word "it" when referring to the Holy Spirit. Several statements regarding the personality of the Holy Spirit are collected in Evangelism, pages 616, 617. In 1906, for example, she wrote, "The Holy Spirit has a personality, else He could not bear witness to our spirits and with our spirits that we are the children of God. He must also be a divine person, else He could not search out the secrets which lie hidden in the mind of God. 'For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God'" [1 Corinthians 2:11] (Evangelism, p. 617).

[melvin mccarty]

Is it OT concept versus NT concept?

[jasd]

Heb 11:17 By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,

We know that Isaac was not the only begotten/monogenes. We know Abraham “begat” Ishmael before Isaac was begotten; after which, Abraham ‘begat’ more children.

Jn 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

“only begotten” in the above text is the same transliterated compound from the Greek monogenes – as found in Hebrews 11:17.

The question obtaining would be: how is one justified in not inferring that monogenes is used in the same manner in both texts, ‘one-of-a-kind’ or ‘unique’ notwithstanding? (parallel verses re Jesus Christ, “only begotten”: Jn 1:14,18; 3:18; 1 Jn 4:9)

(Granted, twice in the NT monogenes is translated as only. Having noted that: the LXX translates “lonely” {reinforced aloneness or alone} in Psalms 25:16 – as monogenes.)

Let’s stipulate, for the sake of argument, that “only begotten” carries both the sense of ‘only’ and ‘especialness’ – that still would not repudiate the fact that monogenes re Jesus Christ is comparatively used in Holy Writ relative to the multiple sons begotten by Abraham – and how the term bears upon the examples of its NT use.

Anyway, if the above does not obtain, one asks – was “only begotten” re Jesus Christ have been a particular reference instituted at a time preceding His incarnation, at His birth, or some time thereafter?

And, might “only begotten” simply indicate – the Firstborn, one who inherits... either the double portion in the case of Isaac, or all [things] as concern Jesus Christ? might that not be the commonality between the monogenes of Hebrews 11:17 and its use re Jesus Christ as found in other NT texts? If so, one’s queries are inevitably drawn to the textual use re Isaac, and ponder... Should the preceding obtain,

might not a correlation of “only begotten” lie with the uniqueness differentiating between Jesus Christ and other spirit beings with the attribute – ons of Gd?

[jasd]

>>As said before, Ellen White never used the term "trinity," but she did refer to the "three living persons of the heavenly trio" (Evangelism, p. 615).<<

I recall making the statement that Ellen White was late coming to the ‘truth’ of a Trinity; namely sometime in the 1890s... Having said that,

I find that “Evangelism” was published in 1946. When did Ellen White write the “three living persons ... trio” statement?

>>She believed in the full deity of Christ, stating that "Christ was God essentially, and in the highest sense. He was with God from all eternity, God over all, blessed forevermore" (Review and Herald, April 5, 1906).<< [ed.jasd]

>>She also referred to the Holy Spirit as "the Third Person of the Godhead" (The Desire of Ages, p. 671).<<

The Desire of Ages was published in 1898.

While we’re on the subject and while we’re referencing extraBiblical works: Man’s earliest writings, that is, those of Akkadia and Sumer, inform us that the Great God had two sons, Enki and Enlil. A controversy developed between those two sons – as the father favored the younger and bypassed the expected rights of the elder...

Now mind, I am not, necessarily, one to subscribe to ‘early’ writings. I simply submit the above that those espousing certain beliefs other than the simple exhortation “...save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.” (1 Cor 2:2) – be cognizant of ‘colourizations’ or other, which may tend to ‘manifest’ in a dialogue re Writ.

[John317]

Is it OT concept versus NT concept?

No.

[John317]

JOHN3:17-- >>As said before, Ellen White never used the term "trinity," but she did refer to the "three living persons of the heavenly trio" (Evangelism, p. 615).<<

I recall making the statement that Ellen White was late coming to the ‘truth’ of a Trinity; namely sometime in the 1890s... Having said that,

I find that “Evangelism” was published in 1946. When did Ellen White write the “three living persons ... trio” statement?

The quote in the book, Evangelism, was first made in 1905.

Check out her earlier writings to learn what she believed concerning the Holy Spirit and Jesus Christ. She never made statements that contradict what she said in the 1890s. See especially material in her book, Patriarchs and Prophets as well as the volumes The Spirit of Prophecy.

Have you read these?

[John317]

JOHN3:17-- >>She believed in the full deity of Christ, stating that "Christ was God essentially, and in the highest sense. He was with God from all eternity, God over all, blessed forevermore" (Review and Herald, April 5, 1906).<<

>>She also referred to the Holy Spirit as "the Third Person of the Godhead" (The Desire of Ages, p. 671).<<

Quote:

JASD-- The Desire of Ages was published in 1898.

Yes, true. The Great Controversy was published in 1888, and Patriarchs and Prophets was published in 1890.

It's not important to me when she said what she did about the Holy Spirit. The point I am making is that Ellen White taught that Jesus is fully God and fully man, and she also taught that the Holy Spirit is a person, not an impersonal force or influence. She never taught anything different.

I quoted Ellen White on the Trinity only for those who accept her as a prophet. If people don't believe in her, naturally I wouldn't expect them to consider what she said on the matter to be of any authority.

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:jasd

I recall making the statement that Ellen White was late coming to the ‘truth’ of a Trinity; namely sometime in the 1890s...

So, the early movement was mainly constituted of what? Arians? quasi or otherwise... and, EGW experienced an evolution in her thinking re the Tri-Une Gd-head...

Well and good.

So, when did the .Org become so concretized? so set in their embrace of absolutes? set forth by Arians, no less!?

:-o

What would we say of a posit that the book Revelation may serve equivalently as did Malachi? that is, Malachi began the interTestamental period that ended only with the writing of the Gospels... Is there

another Testament to be canonized sometime after the book of Revelation?

[John317]

JASD-- >>I recall making the statement that Ellen White was late coming to the ‘truth’ of a Trinity; namely sometime in the 1890s...<<

So, the early movement was mainly constituted of what? Arians? quasi or otherwise...

We have to remember that the early Adventists of the 1840s and 50s were drawn together from virtually every denomination. There were Arians as well as Trinitarians. But the main leaders of the Seventh-day Adventists were Arians-- James White, Joseph Bates, John Andrews, Uriah Smith, etc. The understanding of Christ's divine nature was not important in their view during those years. What drew them together was Christ's soon coming, and later it was the Pre-Advent Judgment, the Sabbath and the non-immortality of the wicked. These men seldom wrote or talked about the Trinity. There were some problems between some of the Arians and the Trinitarians during those formative years, and that is one reason they didn't emphasize their views on that topic. There were too many more important issues. Ellen White didn't agree with her husband regarding the divine nature of Christ, but when she was asked about it, she said that there were other questions of greater importance. It wasn't an issue worth causing division and ruining the objective of the church, which was to organize the church around the fundamental pillars of the Adventist faith. The nature of Christ was not one of them.

However, after Ellen White wrote clearly on the Trinity, showing that Jesus is not a created being, and showing that the Holy Spirit is a person and not an influence, then those Arians who had spoken out before now ceased to agitate on the subject.

During the 1890s and into the early 1900s, the church began to change as a result of closer Bible study and the statements in Ellen White's books, particularly the Desire of Ages, Patriarchs and Prophets, and the Great Controversy. It wouldn't be until the 1920s that virtually the entire church accepted the doctrine of the Trinity.

Quote:

and, EGW experienced an evolution in her thinking re the Tri-Une Gd-head...

Well and good.

She never wrote anything that contradicted the doctrine of the Trinity, but no doubt her understanding of the divine nature of Christ grew and developed, as it did in regard to subjects such as health and the great controversy. Some of her views on these things were corrected by her visions.

Quote:

So, when did the .Org become so concretized? so set in their embrace of absolutes? set forth by Arians, no less!?...

You can say Seventh-day Adventists. It's OK to say it.

It happened by the 1920s.

There are some both inside and outside the church who would like to see it return to the Arian beliefs. Not many but some.