The Adventist perspective on the Godhead (or Trinity)

[Israfel]

[size:11pt]Hello all again,

I think we are all aware by now that some of us will carry grudges against others no matter what but, I would like to remind you all that the goal of this thread and I believe of the Forum is, not trying to prove whose right or wrong but to come to a better understanding of truth.

Having said this, I would like to point out a few scriptures from the Old Testament, the Authoritative Power over us all, that shows who, and what comprises the HS in the Godhead.

Please do not jump to conclusion if you don't see Jesus, the Son in there yet. I am trying to keep it short though it is already a little too long.

Thanks for bearing patiently.

[color:#000099]

The Spirit in the OT

Please analize these quotes and think of these three things: 1) Who/what is the H.S.? and 2) Why is it called a It in Num. 11:17? 3) How does the HS and our spirit comparable?

1. Genesis 1:2

And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

Genesis 6:3

And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

2. Genesis 41:8

And it came to pass in the morning that his spirit was troubled; and he sent and called for all the magicians of Egypt, and all the wise men thereof: and Pharaoh told them his dream; but there was none that could interpret them unto Pharaoh.

3. Genesis 41:38

And Pharaoh said unto his servants, Can we find such a one as this is, a man in whom the Spirit of God is?

Genesis 45:27

And they told him all the words of Joseph, which he had said unto them: and when he saw the wagons which Joseph had sent to carry him, the spirit of Jacob their father revived:

4. Exodus 6:9

And Moses spake so unto the children of Israel: but they hearkened not unto Moses for anguish of spirit, and for cruel bondage.

5. Exodus 28:3

And thou shalt speak unto all that are wise hearted, whom I have filled with the spirit of wisdom, that they may make Aaron's garments to consecrate him, that he may minister unto me in the priest's office.

Exodus 31:3

And I have filled him with the spirit of God, in wisdom, and in understanding, and in knowledge, and in all manner of workmanship,

Exodus 35:21

And they came, every one whose heart stirred him up, and every one whom his spirit made willing, and they brought the LORD's offering to the work of the tabernacle of the congregation, and for all his service, and for the holy garments.

Exodus 35:31

And he hath filled him with the spirit of God, in wisdom, in understanding, and in knowledge, and in all manner of workmanship;

Leviticus 19:31

Regard not them that have familiar spirits, neither seek after wizards, to be defiled by them: I am the LORD your God.

Leviticus 20:6

And the soul that turneth after such as have familiar spirits, and after wizards, to go a whoring after them, I will even set my face against that soul, and will cut him off from among his people.

Leviticus 20:27

A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them.

Numbers 5:14

And the spirit of jealousy come upon him, and he be jealous of his wife, and she be defiled: or if the spirit of jealousy come upon him, and he be jealous of his wife, and she be not defiled:

Numbers 5:30

Or when the spirit of jealousy cometh upon him, and he be jealous over his wife, and shall set the woman before the LORD, and the priest shall execute upon her all this law.

3. ****Numbers 11:17

And I will come down and talk with thee there: and I will take of the spirit which is upon thee, and will put it upon them; and they shall bear the burden of the people with thee, that thou bear it not thyself alone.

Numbers 11:25

And the LORD came down in a cloud, and spake unto him, and took of the spirit that was upon him, and gave it unto the seventy elders: and it came to pass, that, when the spirit rested upon them, they prophesied, and did not cease.

4. Numbers 11:26

But there remained two of the men in the camp, the name of the one was Eldad, and the name of the other Medad: and the spirit rested upon them; and they were of them that were written, but went not out unto the tabernacle: and they prophesied in the camp.

5. Numbers 11:29

And Moses said unto him, Enviest thou for my sake? would God that all the LORD'S people were prophets, and that the LORD would put his spirit upon them!

6. Numbers 14:24

But my servant Caleb, because he had another spirit with him, and hath followed me fully, him will I bring into the land whereinto he went; and his seed shall possess it.

7. Numbers 16:22

And they fell upon their faces, and said, O God, the God of the spirits of all flesh, shall one man sin, and wilt thou be wroth with all the congregation?

Numbers 24:2

And Balaam lifted up his eyes, and he saw Israel abiding in his tents according to their tribes; and the spirit of God came upon him.

8. Numbers 27:16

Let the LORD, the God of the spirits of all flesh, set a man over the congregation,

9. Numbers 27:18

And the LORD said unto Moses, Take thee Joshua the son of Nun, a man in whom is the spirit, and lay thine hand upon him;

Deuteronomy 2:30

But Sihon king of Heshbon would not let us pass by him: for the LORD thy God hardened his spirit, and made his heart obstinate, that he might deliver him into thy hand, as appeareth this day.

[Israfel]

The above is part 1 of three.

Thanks

[miz3]

Gustav,

pastorchick actually believes that Ellen White is totally inspired and he also states that he, pastorchick, is the second version of Ellen White. As such he states that they both are inerrant in regard to truth along with Scripture.

The fact that Ellen white makes statements that are trinitarian as well as not opposing the pioneer's Arianism does not bother pastorchick.

pastorchick's agenda is to take on and to hurt the SDA Church.

I will have no part of that in spite of the fact that SDA have some definite issues in regard to their theology and their views of inspiration.

[Sonny]

All these claims....Just go to the Bible...it's complicated enough. Each man must answer to his conscience - not some other person's understanding.

[Gustave]

Thanks for the info miz3, is this information posted somewhere I can view it?

...I have found no statements made by Ellen White that could be considered Trinitarian.

...I determined this by simply reading the SDA publications during Ellen's time which say the same things Ellen White did.

...And no one would even dare suggest the likes of U. Smith, etc were Trinitarian.

I'm not sure if it's the same person but years ago I initiated a debate with a Pastor Mcgill or something to that effect....

....On the creation sda website and discussed Church Authority and the Trinity.

....It didn't turn out very well for the CSDA's and the forum was pulled.

If Pastor Chick is affirming Ellen White rejected the Trinity I would say he is certainly right about that....

....I don't think the SDA church needs any help hurting itself, they do a fine job of that themselves.

There is certainly some good things the SDA's do such as their outstanding medical facilities, many schools and helping with the poor....

....However like you, I agree that their theology is an absolute train-wreck.

....Many years ago I got fed up with the Mark of the Beast teaching and rolled my sleves up and started to study.

....I'm happy to met them on the theological field of battle now.

OSU - Discussion Forum.....

...Closed - Over Trinity issue.

Amazing Discoveries Discussion Forum...

...Closed - Over Trinity issue.

CSDA Discussion forum.....

...Closed - over Church Authority debate.

Another popular Forum ground to an almost halt...

...Not closed - over Trinity issue.

I'm not the only person working on this project and I'm fairly sure.....

...Thing's will be changing with SDA theology sooner than later.

...I'm just glad to be able to help out by doing my small part.

[Jody]

Hello Gustave,

"This is the same old Arianism published in the SDA church paper."

"Originally Posted By: Review and Herald, Oct 3, 1854

the Father only is self-existent; i. e., hath life (eternal life) in himself; and he has given his Son to have life in himself; that he should give it to them that are his at his coming. Compare John v, 26, with 1 John v, 9-12. "For as the Father hath life in himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself."

For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; - Jhn 5:26 KJV

He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son. - 1JN 5:10 KJV

And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. - 1JN 5:11 KJV

He that hath the Son hath life; [and] he that hath not the Son of God hath not life. - 1JN 5:12 KJV

I do not know whether this is Arianism or not but the bible says plainly that the Father "hath given to the Son to hath life in himself"

[miz3]

Gustave,

I am not as conversant an authority on Ellen White that you are. I do believe that she does state that the Holy Spirit is a Divine Personality. On that basis I made my bold statement that later in her life she was at least moving toward being a trinitarian. If I am wrong on this point I will stand corrected.

I cannot be sure but your description seems to fit that your debate with a pastor McGill and the CSDA are the same pastorchick and CSDA we read about here on this thread.

I don't remember where my questions were that exposed pastorchick for what he is. I will try and find them and let you know. I am not asserting pastorchick is wrong on everything but I do believe he is espousing cultish traits. I also believe his fight with the SDA Church is based on his bitterness that SDA didn't buy his Doctrinal changes.

I also know that pastorchick and his flock believe they have overcome all known sin?????

I wish I could have a private discussion with you on the Mark of the Beast sometime but that is not practical here. I do know that Ellen White has said some extremely harsh things in the Great Controversy. Growing up SDA I have heard both from the pew, the pulpit, from the centers of leadership the views of Roman Catholicism that are very in line with Ellen White's harshest statements.

I am sure you and I would not agree on everything but you are a very well stated individual and I respect your thinking.

[Gustave]

Hello Gustave,

"This is the same old Arianism published in the SDA church paper."

"Originally Posted By: Review and Herald, Oct 3, 1854

the Father only is self-existent; i. e., hath life (eternal life) in himself; and he has given his Son to have life in himself; that he should give it to them that are his at his coming. Compare John v, 26, with 1 John v, 9-12. "For as the Father hath life in himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself."

For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; - Jhn 5:26 KJV

He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son. - 1JN 5:10 KJV

And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. - 1JN 5:11 KJV

He that hath the Son hath life; [and] he that hath not the Son of God hath not life. - 1JN 5:12 KJV

I do not know whether this is Arianism or not but the bible says plainly that the Father "hath given to the Son to hath life in himself"

[miz3]

Gustave,

I found my exchange with pastorchick that you asked about:

The thread is:

The 1896 Sabbath School Lesson -- What changed?

This thread is here on the theology forum. I think this thread is still on the first page of the theology forum.

[Gustave]

Gustave,

I found my exchange with pastorchick that you asked about:

The thread is:

The 1896 Sabbath School Lesson -- What changed?

This thread is here on the theology forum. I think this thread is still on the first page of the theology forum.

Thanks miz3!

[Gustave]

Gustave,

I am not as conversant an authority on Ellen White that you are. I do believe that she does state that the Holy Spirit is a Divine Personality. On that basis I made my bold statement that later in her life she was at least moving toward being a trinitarian. If I am wrong on this point I will stand corrected.

[Pastor_Chick]

[...]

I'm not sure if it's the same person but years ago I initiated a debate with a Pastor Mcgill or something to that effect....

....On the creation sda website and discussed Church Authority and the Trinity.

....It didn't turn out very well for the CSDA's and the forum was pulled.

If Pastor Chick is affirming Ellen White rejected the Trinity I would say he is certainly right about that....

....I don't think the SDA church needs any help hurting itself, they do a fine job of that themselves.

[...]

CSDA Discussion forum.....

...Closed - over Church Authority debate.

[...]

Gustave,

I recall you. I did not remember you by name, but that was in 1996-97. I was going to ask you about that, but you have beat me to it.

Now, for the record, I see your statements about the CSDA "Forum" as being exaggerated. At the time we encountered you, we were new to the Internet and had no real "forum" as such.

What I would say is that you made the same claims to us that you have been making here on this forum. You have become a little more "civil" in your approach, and thanks to God for that.

What came of our dialogue was this. You said unequivocally that IF the SDAs were to follow Ellen G. White's counsel, they would have to become CSDA. (paraphrased) I might even have the actual statement archived somewhere. You also made it known that you considered BOTH the SDAs and the CSDAs to be "heretics." I think you are on the same page today. Please do not make claims that our "forum" was "closed" or "pulled" because things did not "go so well" for us. Your approach was not "civil." You demonstrated no "Christian graces." That was what "did not go well."

Now, I am NOT "offended" at your personal position on our views. You may call me a false prophet, heretic, blasphemer, or whatever your heart desires, and that does not have power over me. Enjoy yourself. BUT, when you feel like you are ready to "vomit," please take that somewhere else. That becomes a bit offensive.

Thank you for being diplomatic for the most part now. You may have trouble winning any SDA believers over to your side, though many are virtually "7th day Catholics" already.

Few are likely to change boats in the middle of the stream even if they were to hold doctrines identically with the CSDA. It takes a "special person" to make the CSDA covenant of righteousness. They must deny "self" completely in order to make that step.

[Gustave]

Gustave,

I recall you. I did not remember you by name, but that was in 1996-97. I was going to ask you about that, but you have beat me to it.

Now, for the record, I see your statements about the CSDA "Forum" as being exaggerated. At the time we encountered you, we were new to the Internet and had no real "forum" as such.

There we go! From some of the statements I remember getting at the forum I was sure....

....I made an impact.

Was there a poster there who went by "Gus"?

...I'll be on a bit later to continue my answer.

[Gustave]

What I would say is that you made the same claims to us that you have been making here on this forum. You have become a little more "civil" in your approach, and thanks to God for that.

[Pastor_Chick]

Gus,

If nothing else, you make my presence on this forum more viable. If the truth were known, neither you nor I would be welcome here, but since their policies are on the liberal side, we are allowed (for now). The question might be which of us is the bigger "troubler" in their minds.

My motives are not to "trouble" anyone. My doctrine teaches that these SDAs are going to be lost if they do not repent and reform. In that vein, I am working as their intercessor to save them from the calamity they do not see coming. Yes, I realize the majority will stone me for a good work.

Your doctrine might allow them a place in Heaven -- not sure?

What I would appreciate is a little more respect for the threads' subject matter. I have entered into this dialogue with you as a "courtesy" more than anything, but I shall cease from here on.

If you wish to start a thread about "Pastor Chick and his heresies" or some equivalent, that would be an ideal place to talk about personalities, doctrinal differences, and the like. I do not think the OP appreciates our deviation in the least. Thank you also for being "diplomatic."

[Israfel]

[size:14pt][size:11pt]Sonny,

Were you referring to my bible quotes above? If yes, I haven't put any of my own interpretations on them at all. I actually thought that you would give the HS the opportunity to interpret them to you if you are willing and open.

God help the sincere in heart according to His devising!

[Israfel]

Gustave I would not reply to your thread but I think you might benefit from this reply, I hope and pray

I quoted from 2 Corinthians 13,1

"Behold, this is the third time I am coming to you: In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word stand".....

And your response to that, was that I am putting my own interpretation to it. The Word of God, Yahweh of Hosts, tells us that we should not accuse or judge a matter without having support for what we are saying and you call that wrong? So if someone comes and tells you that "your wife has committed adultery against you", {extreme example}, you would just take their words without question?

(...)

[Israfel]

Next Gustave you said:

"Given the mechanics of how theology works we can remove that specific text... Why?

...From providing any authoritative vetting on either of our positions.

...Simply because three Unitarians or Heaven's Gate cult members would satisfy. Who are those, why this hypocritical way of speaking?

...The "three rule" rubric.

...And my guess is that you by yourself would NOT agree three Mormons were right." By myself?, what do you mean "by yourself would NOT agree...?"

(...)

[Gustave]

Gustave I would not reply to your thread but I think you might benefit from this reply, I hope and pray

I quoted from 2 Corinthians 13,1

"Behold, this is the third time I am coming to you: In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word stand".....

And your response to that, was that I am putting my own interpretation to it. The Word of God, Yahweh of Hosts, tells us that we should not accuse or judge a matter without having support for what we are saying and you call that wrong? So if someone comes and tells you that "your wife has committed adultery against you", {extreme example}, you would just take their words without question?

[miz3]

Extremely good points Gustave!

You might not agree but in my view the three witnesses or two witnesses if you prefer would be:

1. Father, Son, and Holy Ghost!

For the two group:

1. Father, and the Son!

You can't get better witnesses than that in my book!

[Gustave]

Extremely good points Gustave!

You might not agree but in my view the three witnesses or two witnesses if you prefer would be:

1. Father, Son, and Holy Ghost!

For the two group:

1. Father, and the Son!

You can't get better witnesses than that in my book!

Can't argue against your point of there being no better witnesses....

...Than the Trinity!

...Amen miz3.

[Israfel]

You said:

""The Bible" explicitly educates the reader that Authoritative Councils...

...Can and do produce Authoritative Doctrines.

...According to Acts, Chapter 15."

According to Acts 15, what?

According to Acts Ch.15:

vs 1-5 Circumcision of No Value After the Cross.--[Titus 1:9-11, 13, 14(Romans 2:24-29; Galatians 5:6; Ephesians 2:14-16; Colossians 2:14-17; Titus 1:9-11).

vs 4-29 Only One Gospel.--There is no such contrast as is often claimed to exist between the Old and the New Testament, the law of God and the gospel of Christ, the requirements of the Jewish and those of the Christian dispensation.

And further... Christ's Blood Avails for Us as for Israel.

(SDA BC Vol.6)

You said:

"The source of Authority for my Faith comes from the Sacred Scriptures...

...Interpreted correctly from the living source of Sacred Tradition."

Now let me ask, according to the Holy Scriptures, who is Babylon that persecuted the Saints of the Most High from the first Century? Rev. 14:8

"And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication."

Now I do not wish to attack you personally, so please do not be offended. The individuals of a church have nothing to do with the leaders that did or do evil, however, when they learn of what "they" have done, it is their duty to stand out and come out, thus Rev. 14:8 is the call for today to get out of every corrupt organizations that once were pure but have united with the government of their time and persecuted the pure saints.

Is this a call worthy of your attention?

[ClubV12]

"...but have united with the government of their time and persecuted the pure saints."

Easy to say and easy to misinterpret. Uniting with the Government on something like a National Sunday Law is clear enough. But short of very clear event you have a lot of groups that come up with a lot of reasons to disassociate itself from the Government, a church group, a school, a place of employment or whatever. Often that reasoning is based on a spiritual motivation and employees bible verses or books writen on the subject or a strong spiritual leader, etc. etc. Plenty of apparently good reasons to "go it alone" or with your own little group. It's kind of like a "survivalist" attitude.

Not all these groups are wrong, or even misled, it's just difficult to figure the why's and how come's and often the reason and logic just isn't air tight. Edson White was in a similiar bind when he started the work in the South, without the blessing of the General Conference. In his case, he was right, but's it's a tricky thing ignoring the "counsel of the brethren", even when their wrong! The division it brings to the "church" may well cause more damage than it's worth. Ellen White puts a VERY high emphasis on staying united, above just about all other things. She even told her husband, James White, at one point, to keep his ideas to himself. And she KNEW HE WAS RIGHT in his thinking, but the division that would have caused was to great to ignore.

"Is this call worthy of your attention?"

Well, that is the question, isn't it? The answer is, let every man be persauded in his own heart.

[Israfel]

Amen for that last comment of yours ClubV12.

"let every man be persauded in his own heart." By the HS of God of course!

I will to respond to you in time. And please correct my statement, it should read:

"Is this call worthy of your attention?

Thanks

[Gustave]

According to Acts 15, what?

According to Acts Ch.15:

vs 1-5 Circumcision of No Value After the Cross.--[Titus 1:9-11, 13, 14(Romans 2:24-29; Galatians 5:6; Ephesians 2:14-16; Colossians 2:14-17; Titus 1:9-11).

vs 4-29 Only One Gospel.--There is no such contrast as is often claimed to exist between the Old and the New Testament, the law of God and the gospel of Christ, the requirements of the Jewish and those of the Christian dispensation.

And further... Christ's Blood Avails for Us as for Israel.

(SDA BC Vol.6)