The Trinity?

[John317]

Then Joh 1:14 and the word was made flesh and dwelt among us,

So again and again Our Father came in Him, God with us.

The word was made flesh and set up His tent among us. But before the Word was made flesh and lived here, the Word existed in heaven, and the Word was face to face with God. In fact, the word was God Himself-- meaning that the Word was as much God as the Father was.

You are right that the Father came in Christ, because Christ was the perfect representation of the Father's being. What the Father was, Christ was.

That is the significance of the last clause of John 1: 1 and of Hebrews 1: 3.

It's why when we see Christ, we see the Father. Christ is just like the Father.

It is somewhat similar to seeing one twin when we see the other.

Or a son might say that when you see him, it's very much like seeing his father.

[John317]

The full quote:

Ellen White also says that Christ had always stood at the right hand of the Father. PP 38

She doesn't teach that the pre-existent Christ had a beginning. On the contrary, she says He was "eternal, self-existent, infinite, omnipotent."

An "infinite, eternal, self-existent" being has no beginning.

The Godhead is "the eternal Godhead," and this eternal Godhead is comprised of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

This being the case, it has always been comprised of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Otherwise it wouldn't be the "eternal Godhead."

The eternal God does not change.

"The Godhead was stirred with pity for the race, and the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit gave Themselves to the working out of the plan of redemption. In order to fully carry out this plan, it was decided that Christ, the only begotten Son of God, should give Himself an offering for sin. What line can measure the depth of this love?" (Counsels On Health, page 222)

Do you agree that Ellen White defines the Godhead as being comprised of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and these three felt pity for humanity and gave Themselves to the working out of the plan of redemption?

[phkrause]

Originally Posted By: Gibs

Then Joh 1:14 and the word was made flesh and dwelt among us,

So again and again Our Father came in Him, God with us.

The word was made flesh and set up His tent among us. But before the Word was made flesh and lived here, the Word existed in heaven, and the Word was face to face with God. In fact, the word was God Himself-- meaning that the Word was as much God as the Father was.

You are right that the Father came in Christ, because Christ was the perfect representation of the Father's being. What the Father was, Christ was.

That is the significance of the last clause of John 1: 1 and of Hebrews 1: 3.

It's why when we see Christ, we see the Father. Christ is just like the Father.

It is somewhat similar to seeing one twin when we see the other.

Or a son might say that when you see him, it's very much like seeing his father.

Once again John, I have to say exactly.

[John317]

Before Bethlehem He was not born, created or formed!

 

Do you see a distinction between being "formed" before Bethlehem and being "begotten" in heaven? If you see a difference, what is it?

In what sense do you understand the pre-existent Christ to have been "begotten" in heaven?

[Gerr]

Gerry, these look more like doctor's reflex hammers.

It seems to be a cut and paste from Moody Bible theologian R.A. Torrey out of Yale

Divinity School(1878). By contrast, our pioneers were Bible students, plain & simple.

There's little sense in basing our theology on the Sunday keepers point of view.

Our pioneers were not the only Bible students. Wm Miller, the Wesleys, Luther, Zwingli, Melanchton, Sir Isaac Newton, and many other believers were great Bible students. I cut Torrey's 55 points because they are truth. Truth is truth whether from SDA or non-SDA. I doubt that all our pioneers had all the truth down pat. Clinging to everything the founders discovered and go no further is exactly the reason the Reformation died out and God had to raise another movement.

[Gerr]

In the beginning of His Way Our Father Possessed, extended, procured of Himself His Redeemer. His thoughts, His Word, His Power and all and to be the the needed Redeemer to come to be needed.

Joh 1:1, The only thing Joh 1:1 don't make clear is that the Word was Possessed of Himself.

Then Joh 1:14 and the word was made flesh and dwelt among us,

So again and again Our Father came in Him, God with us.

Just remember, There is but one God and Father of all!

I do remember very well, that there is one God, but the Bible tells of 3 persons that comprise this one God. I can't make any sense whatsoever in your "possessed, extended, procured" theology.

[o2bwise]

Quote:

In what sense do you understand the pre-existent Christ to have been "begotten" in heaven?

Consider as a hypothesis the idea that Jesus is fully the only begotten Son of God and with that hypothesis:

WHAT WOULD YOU SAY?

[Gibs]

Gerry you state,

"I do remember very well, that there is one God, but the Bible tells of 3 persons that comprise this one God. I can't make any sense whatsoever in your "possessed, extended, procured" theology."

In my book 3 persons would make 3 Gods, but there is but one person and one God.

Joh 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

The Holy Spirit is what God is, not another person or God, but THE God.

Until coming in Mary at Bethlehem, Redeemer was a projection from God the Father Himself.

At Bethlehem another person became in the picture, Jesus Christ the body chosen for Redeemer to dwell in. Yes another person, but still only the one Deity is involved.

The one God and Father of all was in Him reconciling the world unto Himself.

OK, let's think a little about the man Jesus. We cannot consider Him totally human because of the fact His Father is God. By the same token we can't consider Him totally God because his Mother was human.

What makes Him FULLY God at Birth is the fact the fullness of the Godhead The Father CAME in Him. Redeemer of which at that time Heaven was emptied of Him. The Father is the Head you see of Jesus, just as the man is to be the head of the woman.

You see, Redeemer in Heaven came out of God and woman on earth came out of man.

Even though The Father ordained that in Him all fullness of Himself would dwell, He is subserviant to the Father. Same with man and woman. Eguality should be recognized between them and council between them as equals but the man is the head. Hmm, yes she usually gets her way!

The union of the man Jesus the seed of David taking our fallen nature and Deity, the Father's fullness in Him is a mystery to our finite minds. We are in awe!

Yes, a way made that the Highest covered with humanity and we could live in His Presence and He knew us as well as Jesus, yes God with us. And yet He loves us.

He gave all that we might take the WAY He has made and be reconciled again to Himself.

Joh 8:42 Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.

The union of man and Deity is wonderful, that Jesus speaks as one of us yet was fully God in a body. Always full subserviant to His Father.

God the Father humbled Himself and stooped down to be with the lowest. Then Jesus, even with the Fullness of The Father in Him was always very humble.

That thought alone is a real lesson for us.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[ClubV12]

Gibs says,

"In my book 3 persons would make 3 Gods,..."

Brother Gibs, more and more it appears that your not reading the same book I am. Your theology on this issue is the most confusing interpretion of scripture I believe I have ever seen.

[John317]

Our pioneers were not the only Bible students. Wm Miller, the Wesleys, Luther, Zwingli, Melanchton, Sir Isaac Newton, and many other believers were great Bible students. I cut Torrey's 55 points because they are truth. Truth is truth whether from SDA or non-SDA. I doubt that all our pioneers had all the truth down pat. Clinging to everything the founders discovered and go no further is exactly the reason the Reformation died out and God had to raise another movement.

X50

[Gibs]

Well John317, when 3 persons are said to be in the Godhead you are saying God the Father is right. He is the one and only God.

Then you want to say the Holy Spirit is another person in the Godhead. Not true by any stretch of the imagination. Why? Because Jesus Himself told us, "God is a Spirit." Jesus is telling us who and what our Father is and you know, I believe Him!

Jesus Christ is another person but the Deity in Him is the Father in Him. So we find again that God the Father is that one and only God. I know not of any more and Isaiah states the same.

It is trinitarianism that can't explain how there is more than a one person God!

Trinitarianism is what has gotten so many all mixed up.

I've seen that over and over and over on this thread.

Even some of those that know there is no trinity still have a mix a litte of the pounded in false concept of trinity.

There comes a day that the sin problem will not be for all eternity. Then a Redeemer is no longer ever needed. Sin and rebellion will not rise up again.

Then Jesus returns unto the Father the Deity vested in Him. 1 Cor 15:28

Then we will belong to King Jesus as His rightful subjects.

1Jo 3:2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

Yes the Prince of God, our king, still the Son of God! Subject no doubt to God the Father on the order of how the first Adam was.

How can we not love Him with all the heart and soul?

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[John317]

In what sense do you understand the pre-existent Christ to have been "begotten" in heaven?

Originally Posted By: o2bwise

Consider as a hypothesis the idea that Jesus is fully the only begotten Son of God and with that hypothesis:

WHAT WOULD YOU SAY?

I completely agree that Jesus is, as you put it, "fully the only begotten Son of God."

But what is the biblical meaning of those important expressions?

Let's look closely at what "only begotten" means:

"Only begotten" is a translation of the Greek noun, monogenes.

Monos= alone, only, sole, solitary. (Monos is used in John 17: 3, "ONLY true God.")

Genos=kind, sort, species, family, race. (Genos is used in Matt 13: 47, "...some of every KIND.)

The English word "gene" derives from this Greek word.

"Monogenes" signifies "unique" or "one of a kind."

"Begotten," then, is NOT derived from gennao, to "beget," "generate," "give birth to."

So the word monogenes does not refer to God the Father generating Jesus as His literal, semidivine Son. Instead it indicates Jesus' uniqueness as the incarnate Son-- the God/man who has "come to be" an in-fleshed human while retaining His fully divine nature as one "equal with God" the Father (John 5: 18). I think you'll agree with me that there could never be any manifestation in the history of the universe more "unique" than the Creator-God becoming "flesh" (John 1: 14).

There is much evidence in both the Bible and the SOP that this is the true identity of the Messiah.

Luke 2: 11, "For to you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ THE LORD."

Luke 1: 43, "Why is this granted me, that the mother of MY LORD should come to me?"

Ellen White plainly teaches that "it was Christ who from the bush on Mount Horeb spoke to Moses saying 'I AM THAT I AM.... Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.' Exodus 3: 14." DA 24

Please notice that the Bible says it was "God"(v. 14) and "Yahweh"(v.7) who spoke these words to Moses. Therefore it was Christ who declared Himself to be "the Lord God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob" (v. 14).

[John317]

Well John317, when 3 persons are said to be in the Godhead you are saying God the Father is right. He is the one and only God.

There is only One God, and the name of that One God is Yahweh, or Jehovah.

There are not three separate Gods, or gods.

I believe the Bible and Ellen White teach the same thing on this subject.

Do you agree that it was the pre-existent Christ who spoke to Moses at Mt. Horeb and told Him His name was "I AM THAT I AM"?

Originally Posted By: Gibs

Then you want to say the Holy Spirit is another person in the Godhead. Not true by any stretch of the imagination. Why? Because Jesus Himself told us, "God is a Spirit." Jesus is telling us who and what our Father is and you know, I believe Him!

How do you understand Matt 28: 19-- "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit"?

What is "the name" that Jesus refers to?

Also, is Matt 28: 19 saying "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Father"?

[John317]

It is trinitarianism that can't explain how there is more than a one person God!

Where do you understand the Bible to teach that there is only "a one person God"?

Or does the Bible teach, rather, that there is only ONE God?

I see a difference between those two concepts. How do you see it?

[Gibs]

John317, it is really straight out that there is 1,One God and Father of all.

That one God was in Christ Jesus reconciling the world unto Himself.

That 1,One God Jesus tells us is a Spirit, and of course the Holy Spirit as God, Yahweh is the Epitome of Holy.

One is not 2 or three Deities as far as that goes. The solid truth is, the Father, the Holy Spirit and the Son are the one, 1 Deity.

There is no problem recognizing Jesus as another person involved. The union of The Deity and a man child the seed of David made there in the womb of Mary Sister White tells us is beyond finite minds and I have to agree.

Even taking on our fallen nature a union was made with the Highest of ALL and made Him that man could look upon Him and only see another man.

We do know this union had to be made and the Devil overcome by a man having our fallen nature. A victory must be gained that His Merits and White Robe could be imputed to cover our sins. There is no remedy for sin, we are lost without His Covering.

The plan was and still is we may have Christ in us and have the same power to overcome Satan as He did. We have no excuse to continue in sin, I don't care what any teach otherwise. Jesus Christ in us is our only hope of Glory. Only he who overcomes will be in the kingdom!

Re 2:11 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; He that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second death.

All strength is ours when Christ is dwelling within.

Christ in us is the Father in us,

Eph 4:6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[Gerr]

One is not 2 or three Deities as far as that goes. The solid truth is, the Father, the Holy Spirit and the Son are the one, 1 Deity.

If that is not Trinitarian, I don't know what is. You mention three different beings, but by some logic that is beyond my understanding you are just insisting they are one and the same person! This is modalism as I pointed out early on in this thread.

Quote:

There is no problem recognizing Jesus as another person involved. The union of The Deity and a man child the seed of David made there in the womb of Mary Sister White tells us is beyond finite minds and I have to agree.

I believe your statement is unscriptural. The Bible does NOT say deity came down and united with a human seed. John clearly says that the pre-existent Word who was God BECAME flesh. A denial that Jesus the Word did not become flesh is a mark of the antichrist! In fact, Paul makes it a point that Jesus did not cling to His prerogative of being equal with God. He laid that aside. He "emptied Himself, by taking the form of a servant being born in the likeness of men," Phil 2:7.

Do you see that this is OPPOSITE of what you are saying? i.e. a human body became indwelt or had deity united to it?

[epaminondas]

Originally Posted By: Gordon1

God speaks plainly, for the working man. I sent my Son.

He had a Son to send. God is not the author of confusion.

"Those who derided His claim to be the Son of God are speechless now." Great Controversy 643.

All Seventh-day Adventists believe that God sent His one and only Son into the world. There is no disagreement here at all.

And of course we also fully agree with Christ's claim to be the Son of God. In fact, we firmly believe that Christ is "the eternal, self-existent Son of God" and that He has always stood at the right hand of the Father.

We believe, too, that Christ is the Lamb of God. But not literally, right?

The disagreement, then, has to do with what "Son of God" means.

The Bible uses "the son of" and "father" in different ways. For instance, Jesus said that some of the Jews had Satan as their "father." Did Jesus mean this literally?

He also told the same Jews that they were "children" of Satan. See John 8.

What did Jesus mean? In what way were they "children" of Satan?

Do you remember the "sons of the singers" and "the sons of the prophets"? They were not literally the sons of the singers or sons of the prophets, were they?

In those instances, isn't "the sons of"= "of the order of"?

There are many Bible examples of this.

So when we look at "the Son of God" in this way, we see that it means Jesus Christ is "of the order of God," that is, Christ is God. He is equal with God. This is exactly the way the Jews of Christ's time understood it.

Similarly, the title, "Son of man," means "of the order of man." Jesus Christ is both "Son of God" and "Son of man." Those expressions tell us that Christ is both God and man.

They are not intended to tell us how Christ came into existence in heaven.

Rather, they tell us who Christ is and what His unique, loving relationship to God the Father is like.

What this boils down to, is that you're saying "son of" means something like follower in the sense of the relationship between the Father and Jesus. This is a new one. That would explain Jesus maybe not coming into existence, but would make him, well, a follower of the Father, therefore junior or subservient to the Father, like he said he was. It solves one problem for the trinity, but leaves another one untouched.

A quick count shows Jesus is referred to as Son of God about 44 times in the New Testament. Couldn't they just once have used a clearer and, according to you, more accurate term (something like "follower," as you implied) maybe even once?

[epaminondas]

Quote:

John 1:1 tells us about an event that happened in the "beginning". Could the intelligent Doctor tell me exactly when this event took place?

First of all, John 1:1 doesn't say in "the" beginning. "The" is distinctly absent in the original Greek. Therefore it really is "in a beginning." There are/were many beginnings, we don't know which one John was talking about. In any case, time is an attribute of the Universe created at the creation of the Universe. Therefore there is no "before" the creation. Before implies time. Augustine said that to people who asked him what God did before He created the Universe. Therefore, said Augustine, one cannot ask any questions about "before" the creation as there is no such time. Augustine lived about 400AD. Obviously, he was ahead of where many people are today.

It is senseless in speculating what happened "before" the creation. The trinity theory feeds on such senselessness. Never speculate about such things - they don't make sense.

[epaminondas]

Originally Posted By: Gibs

It is trinitarianism that can't explain how there is more than a one person God!

Where do you understand the Bible to teach that there is only "a one person God"?

Or does the Bible teach, rather, that there is only ONE God?

I see a difference between those two concepts. How do you see it?

A composite god would explain the difference you are talking about. But a composite god consisting of three full gods would not be a single god. Inversely, one composite god needs to be composed of three partial gods to be only one god himself. In both cases this composite god would be a fourth entity - the tree composing parts as well as the resulting composite god.

This is really primary school math. It's a valid objection to the trinity. One trinitarians haven't managed to surmount.

[epaminondas]

Gibs says,

"In my book 3 persons would make 3 Gods,..."

Brother Gibs, more and more it appears that your not reading the same book I am. Your theology on this issue is the most confusing interpretion of scripture I believe I have ever seen.

Yes, you're right. Three persons who are all gods would add up to three gods. There's no getting away from this. No amount of hot air can change this fact. I cannot see how one can even try to argue against it.

[Gibs]

Originally Posted By: Gibs

One is not 2 or three Deities as far as that goes. The solid truth is, the Father, the Holy Spirit and the Son are the one, 1 Deity.

If that is not Trinitarian, I don't know what is. You mention three different beings, but by some logic that is beyond my understanding you are just insisting they are one and the same person! This is modalism as I pointed out early on in this thread.

Quote:

There is no problem recognizing Jesus as another person involved. The union of The Deity and a man child the seed of David made there in the womb of Mary Sister White tells us is beyond finite minds and I have to agree.

I believe your statement is unscriptural. The Bible does NOT say deity came down and united with a human seed. John clearly says that the pre-existent Word who was God BECAME flesh. A denial that Jesus the Word did not become flesh is a mark of the antichrist! In fact, Paul makes it a point that Jesus did not cling to His prerogative of being equal with God. He laid that aside. He "emptied Himself, by taking the form of a servant being born in the likeness of men," Phil 2:7.

Do you see that this is OPPOSITE of what you are saying? i.e. a human body became indwelt or had deity united to it?

Gerry, It looks to me like as some have you programmed to believe the Holy Spirit is another God or person. No not true, the following statement from Jesus Himself shoots that down,

Joh 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

And here is another,

Eph 4:6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

And here is another,

Isa 44:8 Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any.

And here is another,

Isa 43:10 Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isa 43:11 I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.

Now you should understand who your Saviour is!

Don't you see the Redeemer is the extension of the Father, the Father was in Christ and 2 Cor 5:19 makes that clear.

Here is where the Father gave of Himself,

Pr 8:22 ¶ The LORD POSSESSED me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old.

God is Spirit and possessed means to extend, procure and it was His Thoughts, His Word that He sent forth. Yes the Father gave of Himself to us in Redeemer.

Remember He told Philip, you've seen me, you've seen the Father.

Yes Christ in you is the Father in you also. The Deity of Christ was and yet is the Fullness of the Father in Him.

Fully the Father in a Body. God the Father with us, Emmanuel!

Jesus was the Body prepared for the Union of the Deity and man with our fallen nature!

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[Ted Oplinger]

Gibs says,

"In my book 3 persons would make 3 Gods,..."

Brother Gibs, more and more it appears that your not reading the same book I am. Your theology on this issue is the most confusing interpretion of scripture I believe I have ever seen.

I think that was borne out dozens of pages ago, by several of us....

Modalism was declared unBiblical before the Arian position was...

Blessings,

[John317]

John317, it is really straight out that there is 1,One God and Father of all.

One is not 2 or three Deities as far as that goes. The solid truth is, the Father, the Holy Spirit and the Son are the one, 1 Deity.

I agree with those statements.

There is only 1 Deity, One God and Father of all.

And the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are the one, 1 Deity.

There are not 2 or three Deities. Definitely NOT.

[Ted Oplinger]

Originally Posted By: Gordon1

...our pioneers were Bible students, plain & simple.

There's little sense in basing our theology on the Sunday keepers point of view.

Yes, our pioneers were Bible students, and if alive today, they would be the first to tell you to study the Bible. They wouldn't tell us to base our beliefs on the writings and beliefs of the Pioneers. That's the same as basing our doctrines on church tradition.

No one is suggesting that you accept beliefs that aren't founded on Scripture.

But are you going to reject studying the Bible's teachings simply because they were believed by Sunday-keepers?

Sunday-keeping Protestants and Catholics teach many truths. We shouldn't base our rejection or acceptance on the basis of who does or does not believe something. The only basis should be whether it is found in the Word of God.

I appreciate your point here.

If I may build upon this...While the point of "going back to the beliefs of the pioneers" has the nostalgic ring to truth, it is not "getting back to the truth".

The point about the pioneers' beliefs is that many of them were not just some form of non-Trinitarian - those believers held to a specific variants to non-Trinitarianism: Arianism. There is nothing truthful about regarding Christ to be a created being.

Furthermore, those non-Trinitarian pioneers also themselves came out of Sunday-keeping churches. Not every Protestant church is Trinitarian in belief - some are distinctly non-Trinitarian, yet bow the knee to Rome's decree the Sabbath commandment refers to Sunday.

Opposing the Trinity on the grounds Rome claims origination of it, is a red herring - just as much as it would be had Arianism been successful in becoming the dominant Christological argument in the 300's AD rather than the Trinity.

Blessings,

[John317]

Three persons who are all gods would add up to three gods. There's no getting away from this. No amount of hot air can change this fact. I cannot see how one can even try to argue against it.

Jesus Christ said, "I and my Father are one."

Jesus also said that He prayed that His disciples would be "one" as He and His Father are "one."

How can two persons be "one" and yet remain two persons?

How can at least 12 disciples (not to mention millions of disciples) be "one" and yet remain many individuals?

Isn't it clear that "one God"-- or one Godhead, 1 Deity-- doesn't mean that there is 1 solitary Person who is God?

The statement that Yahweh alone is God-- or that there is only one God-- means that Yahweh is the only living God in all the universe.

There is only a single, solitary Deity.

That single Deity is composed of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

This is what I understand Matt 28: 19 to teach when it says that believers are to be baptized in "the name" of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. I understand "the name" of these three to be "Yahweh" or "God".

How do we differ here?