The Trinity?

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo

Refusal to acknowledge the fact of MICRO-evolution illustrates very well what happened to the Reformation and why it was necessary for God to raise another movement.

I'm not talking about evolution of the SDA movement. I'm talking about the evolution of man, as in Darwin! A very large portion of the church believes that stuff now, to some degree or another. Some say the split is right down the middle. I know you don't get out much in them hills up there, but.. )

And I am talking about biological micro-evolution. It is a fact.

[epaminondas]

Quote:

So you see Gibs, Jesus was already the only begotten, darling Son. Before the plan of salvation was even agreed on.

You can get that short and sweet from the Bible:

Quote:

ACV: John 17:5. And now, Father, glorify thou me with thyself with the glory that I had with thee before the world was.

and

Quote:

ACV: John 17:24. Father, whom thou gave to me, I desire that where I am, they also may be with me, so that they may see my glory that thou have given me, because thou loved me before the foundation of the world.

That really ends the matter. Forget about "begotten," it's not necessary.

[Gibs]

There was no ONLY BEGOTTEN Son of our God untill Bethlehem. ONLY means no other.

Any other statements you can find have to be misnomers.

Yes Our Father had sent out of Himself in the Beginning His Redeemer but was of His own Substance and not a son.

That Redeemer then was put in Mary's babe and Heaven was emptied of Him. Jesus Christ the son of Mary and the ONLY BEGOTTEN Son of God.

Reason alone will open the eyes to see the truth of this.

Our Redeemer is Yahweh our Heavenly Father as Redeemer who was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself. Not another God but the one and only True God there is!

His ONLY BEGOTTEN SON had to be of woman of men for the simple reason He would have to overcome Satan as a man and not as a God. The scripture is very clear He walked this earth as a man and not God whom was in Him in all fullness.

He did just that, and it satisfied Satan that He worked only as one of us with Christ in us. He did not overcome as God, but as a man. He made it so we can do the same and dear folks, we do not have any excuse to do so!

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.

[joeb]

Truth is an absolute and always will be. His Word is Truth and never changes.

Jas 1:17 Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.

Heb 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

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.

You're absolutely right, Gibs. Truth never changes. But then, neither you nor I are truth. We might know some truths, but we are not truth.

Something for you to remember is that your reading of truth, and truth, may very well be wildly at variance. IOW's neither you nor I are infallible.

[Guest]

And I am talking about biological micro-evolution. It is a fact.

So are you saying that you no longer believe the Genesis account of creation?

[Guest]

You're absolutely right, Gibs. Truth never changes. But then, neither you nor I are truth. We might know some truths, but we are not truth.

Something for you to remember is that your reading of truth, and truth, may very well be wildly at variance. IOW's neither you nor I are infallible.

Amen, brother Joe!

[Guest]

Quote:

So you see Gibs, Jesus was already the only begotten, darling Son. Before the plan of salvation was even agreed on.

You can get that short and sweet from the Bible:

Quote:

ACV: John 17:5. And now, Father, glorify thou me with thyself with the glory that I had with thee before the world was.

and

Quote:

ACV: John 17:24. Father, whom thou gave to me, I desire that where I am, they also may be with me, so that they may see my glory that thou have given me, because thou loved me before the foundation of the world.

That really ends the matter. Forget about "begotten," it's not necessary.

I like that. I've seen those texts before, but forgot about them. Thanks!

[joeb]

Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo

And I am talking about biological micro-evolution. It is a fact.

So are you saying that you no longer believe the Genesis account of creation?

I don't think that's what micro-evolution is about. It's about change within species, if I remember correctly.

[Guest]

There was no ONLY BEGOTTEN Son of our God untill Bethlehem. ONLY means no other.

Any other statements you can find have to be misnomers.

Gibs, are you saying that you reject the light given to Ellen White on this, or that these plain statements are somehow misnomers, or taken out of context or something?

Because she is pretty plain and straight forward about it. It's hard to say that these statements are being mis-read.

It was decreed in the councils of God that the only-begotten Son of God must leave His high command in heaven, and clothe His divinity with humanity, and come to the world. {4BC 1153.5}

Three times He was shut in by the glorious light about the Father, and the third time He came from the Father we could see His person. His countenance was calm, free from all perplexity and trouble, and shone with a loveliness which words cannot describe. He then made known to the angelic choir that a way of escape had been made for lost man; that He had been pleading with His Father, and had obtained permission to give His own life as a ransom for the race, to bear their sins, and take the sentence of death upon Himself, thus opening a way whereby they might, through the merits of His blood, find pardon for past transgressions, and by obedience be brought back to the garden from which they were driven. Then they could again have access to the glorious, immortal fruit of the tree of life to which they had now forfeited all right.

Then joy, inexpressible joy, filled heaven, and the heavenly choir sang a song of praise and adoration. They touched their harps and sang a note higher than they had done before, because of the great mercy and condescension of God in yielding up His dearly Beloved to die for a race of rebels. Then praise and adoration was poured forth for the self-denial and sacrifice of Jesus, in consenting to leave the bosom of His Father, and choosing a life of suffering and anguish, and an ignominious death, that He might give life to others.

Said the angel, "Think ye that the Father yielded up His dearly beloved Son without a struggle? No, no." It was even a struggle with the God of heaven, whether to let guilty man perish, or to give His darling Son to die for them. {EW 126, 127}

Sorrow filled heaven as it was realized that man was lost and that the world which God had created was to be filled with mortals doomed to misery, sickness, and death, and that there was no way of escape for the offender. The whole family of Adam must die. I then saw the lovely Jesus and beheld an expression of sympathy and sorrow upon His countenance. Soon I saw Him approach the exceeding bright light which enshrouded the Father. Said my accompanying angel, "He is in close converse with His Father." The anxiety of the angels seemed to be intense while Jesus was communing with His Father. {EW 126}

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo

And I am talking about biological micro-evolution. It is a fact.

So are you saying that you no longer believe the Genesis account of creation?

You may want to check out what micro-evolution is. And no, I don't believe that man descended from a monkey.

[epaminondas]

Quote:

You're absolutely right, Gibs. Truth never changes. But then, neither you nor I are truth. We might know some truths, but we are not truth

You're getting warm, but you're not there yet.

The first problem is the nature of truth. This is going to be too long. I'll just state some facts, not all.

Truth is:

• a finely qualified, declarative statement evaluating to fact
• never changes -- see the need to be finely qualified

An example: the window surround (in the second bedroom of our house situated at x, y, and z, at this time, Tuesday, 8 April, 2013 at 10H39) is painted white.

The statement above is a truth. Everything between the braces () is qualification. That statement will always be true, even if the window surround is later painted a different colour or the house, the town, the state, Australia or the World ceases to exist.

The next problem is to find out what is fact. That's another story.

In 1959 someone delivered a speech entitled something like "the two worlds." He was a writer with a science background, so he often came into contact with both the artsy types and scientists. He started to notice the vast divide between the world where people have to build only on evidence based knowledge (scientists and all disciplines based on science) or court disaster, and the world where people speculated endlessly, not caring much about factual reality. You will know what I'm talking about, the humanities, philosophy, psychology (Freud and his cronies speculated endlessly and had their pet theories), theology, law, and many others. When I was at university we called all the courses leading to qualifications in the speculative fields, slack courses. Rich farmers sent their daughters to university to find a husband. These daughters did BA - majoring in psychology, sociology, drama, art appreciation or something like that. It was called BA Husband Hunting. It left a lot of time for a rich social life and required an application in triplicate to fail.

Getting it wrong in these Hot Air fields have no consequences. Therefore there is no such thing as getting it wrong. In these fields expressions like "everyone has his own truth" have arisen. Jesus asked what was the hardest, to say "your sins are forgiven or take up your bed and walk." Clearly, anyone can say "your sins are forgiven." Nothing happens and nobody can tell if what the speaker said, really happened. But say "take up your bed and walk" and the man on the bed remains paralysed, that they can see. The speaker will be the laughing stock of the town. Jesus put his money where his mouth was and said "take up your bed and walk." And the man took up his bed and walked.

This is the problem with most of this thread - people speculating endlessly and not taking cognizance of Biblical facts (plain statements taken at face value because that is clearly what they mean) and taking as facts supporting a certain position Biblical statements which they distort to give them another meaning, or Biblical statements which can have more than one meaning and they treat these if they can mean only one thing - these should be discarded.

An emotionally based platitude like, "We might know some truths, but we are not truth," is not evidence. This thread, and much of theology, is thick with platitudes.

Learn,

• the nature of evidence
• how to test evidence
• how to use evidence to arrive at a truth which is not directly observable - the colour of the window surround is directly observable - on this rests experimentation
• how to falsify a position by destroying one of its essential attribute values - like all members of the trinity are of equal standing - destroy just this one attribute (standing) value (equal), and the trinity falls

The trinity is quickly and easily falsifiable.

[Gibs]

Originally Posted By: Gibs

There was no ONLY BEGOTTEN Son of our God untill Bethlehem. ONLY means no other.

Any other statements you can find have to be misnomers.

Gibs, are you saying that you reject the light given to Ellen White on this, or that these plain statements are somehow misnomers, or taken out of context or something?

Because she is pretty plain and straight forward about it. It's hard to say that these statements are being mis-read.

It was decreed in the councils of God that the only-begotten Son of God must leave His high command in heaven, and clothe His divinity with humanity, and come to the world. {4BC 1153.5}

Three times He was shut in by the glorious light about the Father, and the third time He came from the Father we could see His person. His countenance was calm, free from all perplexity and trouble, and shone with a loveliness which words cannot describe. He then made known to the angelic choir that a way of escape had been made for lost man; that He had been pleading with His Father, and had obtained permission to give His own life as a ransom for the race, to bear their sins, and take the sentence of death upon Himself, thus opening a way whereby they might, through the merits of His blood, find pardon for past transgressions, and by obedience be brought back to the garden from which they were driven. Then they could again have access to the glorious, immortal fruit of the tree of life to which they had now forfeited all right.

Then joy, inexpressible joy, filled heaven, and the heavenly choir sang a song of praise and adoration. They touched their harps and sang a note higher than they had done before, because of the great mercy and condescension of God in yielding up His dearly Beloved to die for a race of rebels. Then praise and adoration was poured forth for the self-denial and sacrifice of Jesus, in consenting to leave the bosom of His Father, and choosing a life of suffering and anguish, and an ignominious death, that He might give life to others.

Said the angel, "Think ye that the Father yielded up His dearly beloved Son without a struggle? No, no." It was even a struggle with the God of heaven, whether to let guilty man perish, or to give His darling Son to die for them. {EW 126, 127}

Sorrow filled heaven as it was realized that man was lost and that the world which God had created was to be filled with mortals doomed to misery, sickness, and death, and that there was no way of escape for the offender. The whole family of Adam must die. I then saw the lovely Jesus and beheld an expression of sympathy and sorrow upon His countenance. Soon I saw Him approach the exceeding bright light which enshrouded the Father. Said my accompanying angel, "He is in close converse with His Father." The anxiety of the angels seemed to be intense while Jesus was communing with His Father. {EW 126}

What I am saying is, I cannot accept no ones word over the Word of God.

Our Father in Heaven for sure did not have a Son in Heaven ages before His mother was even born!

ONLY MEANS but one! We must realize the Redeemer had to be one of us and yet the Son of God. He had to be one of us and overcome from where we have to! He could not be the Son of Man until man came on the scene and then latter to fall in sin.

There would be no need for the Son to be born of woman until after man would succumb to sin.

So in reality Our Father gave of Himself and He also Gave His Only Begotten Son that we might be Redeemed.

Yahweh the Father was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself! 2 Cor 5:19, and yes it is stated that His fullness was in Him.

And to Philip, He stated, You have seen the Father. So a son was not dwelling in a son!

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.

[Guest]

What I am saying is, I cannot accept no ones word over the Word of God.

Our Father in Heaven for sure did not have a Son in Heaven ages before His mother was even born!

[phkrause]

So who did the Father love before the foundation of the world? Was this only self love? Because that certainly is NOT the way it reads.

Excellent post Richard, and also like I've asked on a number of occasions of those that don't believe that the Father and Son were before creation, who were talking to each other when one said to the other, "Let us make man in our image?" And also, who was Lucifer jealous of? Another angel? I don't think so!! Again great posts.

[Gibs]

Of course He communicated and had love for the Redeemer sent forth from Himself and of which Jesus stated,

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.

Did you know that Jesus of whom the Father dwelt in fully stated He loved the Father,

Joh 14:31 But that the world may know that I love the Father; and as the Father gave me commandment, even so I do. Arise, let us go hence.

Also the one Lucifer was jealoue of would have to have been the Redeemer whom it was given to create all the visible things and the hosts. Lucifer wanted to be the equal of. He felt slighted!

No trinity folks, none can make 1,to be 3, it will not figure.

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.

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.

[epaminondas]

Quote:

You must think that God's ways have to be like our ways. The Bible clearly says they are not.

...

So who did the Father love before the foundation of the world? Was this only self love? Because that certainly is NOT the way it reads.

About the first quote before the ellipsis (...), that does not mean anything that defies logic can be laid at God's door, like the trinity. God founded His Universe on His logic. Humans have found that God's logic can be described in mathematical terms - they discovered God's mathematics. Long before humans discovered that the three corners of a triangle, when put against each other, become a straight line, it had been so. And the trinity fails miserably when it comes to mathematics.

For the second part of the quote, the Universe is one of God's creations. The Earth did not arise instantaneously with the Universe in the form we know it today. The Bible says it was an empty, watery mass. The creation story in the Bible is concerned with the Earth and its contents. Other things are only mentioned as they affect the Earth. God may have created either "when" there was no Universe or between the creation of the Universe and His work on the planet Earth, or both. Whatever the case, that does not make anything or being created in those "times" god. There is absolutely no necessity that any being created before Earth needs to be god. Think about the angels. If anyone thinks it is necessary, find it for me in the Bible. Otherwise your thoughts on this is baseless speculation.

[epaminondas]

Quote:

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.

Very few people in their right minds would see this as meaning that Jesus and God were one being who divided into two. They will see this as that God sent Jesus, i.e. God commands even Jesus and Jesus obeys.

Quote:

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.

This is very straight forward: the One speaking here is the only God.

[John317]

Yes for sure ALL the visible creation was put in His [Christ's--ed.] hands I've stated many times and He is the creator of ALL the Hosts, hense his name before Bethlehem, Yahweh of Hosts, Isa 44:6.

Again you ALL, there is but one God and one person who is God, His name is Yahweh King of Israel.

Jesus always addressed Him as His God.

Sure, Jesus the man did address the Father as His God, but before the incarnation, there is no evidence that the pre-existent Christ addressed the Father as His God.

Remember, Jesus is now and forever the God-man, the Father is literally Jesus' "daddy," and as such the Father is indeed His God, but this was never true of the eternal, self-existent Son. From all eternity, Christ was God Himself, equal with the Father.

[John317]

So who did the Father love before the foundation of the world? Was this only self love? Because that certainly is NOT the way it reads.

These verses correspond perfectly with the EGW statements I showed you.

"God is love."

God does not have love; He "is" love. God's most basic characteristic is love. His whole Being is that of agape/love.

But how could this be if God was ever a single, sole, solitary being?

Therefore-- since God is love-- it necessarily follows that God must always have loved and been loved from all eternity.

So when it says God gave His only beloved Son for the salvation of the world, it's talking about His giving the only One whom He loved from all eternity. That's a long time to love Someone.

Whether Christ was a literal Son or not is irrelevant as far as the Father's love for Him is concerned. His love for Christ was not based on Christ's origins, but on the fact that the Father and Son had been in intimate, loving relationship for eternity. Their relationship was like that of Father and Son. The Son perfectly reflected the glory of the Father in ways that are similar to how human sons reflect the character of their father. When Christ became human forever, the Father lost His only beloved Son. The Father will never again have that Son who was in the form of God.

[John317]

There was no ONLY BEGOTTEN Son of our God untill Bethlehem. ONLY means no other.

Any other statements you can find have to be misnomers. ....

Our Father in Heaven for sure did not have a Son in Heaven ages before His mother was even born!

The answer is that Christ was "Son of God" in a different sense before the Incarnation than He was AFTER the Incarnation.

Secondly, "begotten" in reference to the eternal, self-existent Son of God doesn't have anything to do with his "origins." It doesn't refer to begetting or birth. "Begotten" has to do with the uniqueness of Christ's relationship with the Father. It also has to do with the fact that Christ is the "heir" of God through whom we inherit everything that belongs to Christ.

[John317]

Here's a link to one of the best discussions I've ever seen on the Godhead/Trinity issues:

http://eslmission.truth-is-life.org/docs...t%20Babylon.pdf

The author thoroughly examines and answers just about every question or objection that anyone has ever brought up against the concept of the "Trinity." He gives answers based on both the Bible and the Spirit of prophecy.

[Ted Oplinger]

Originally Posted By: RLH

So who did the Father love before the foundation of the world? Was this only self love? Because that certainly is NOT the way it reads.

These verses correspond perfectly with the EGW statements I showed you.

"God is love."

God does not have love; He "is" love. God's most basic characteristic is love. His whole Being is that of agape/love.

But how could this be if God was ever a single, sole, solitary being?

Therefore-- since God is love-- it necessarily follows that God must always have loved and been loved from all eternity.

So when it says God gave His only beloved Son for the salvation of the world, it's talking about His giving the only One whom He loved from all eternity. That's a long time to love Someone.

Whether Christ was a literal Son or not is irrelevant as far as the Father's love for Him is concerned. His love for Christ was not based on Christ's origins, but on the fact that the Father and Son had been in intimate, loving relationship for eternity. Their relationship was like that of Father and Son. The Son perfectly reflected the glory of the Father in ways that are similar to how human sons reflect the character of their father. When Christ became human forever, the Father lost His only beloved Son. The Father will never again have that Son who was in the form of God.

Yes - God IS love. Selfless agape love.

It is the root and motivation for everything God is, says, and does. It is a love that cannot be demonstrated and made manifest from a solitary being. It is that love which explains why both Father and Son are both YHWH Elohim, why they speak, act, and move as one.

It is that love which explains why the Father would GIVE His only-begotten Son to the human race - apparently losing Him forever...but receiving His Son back when the plan of salvation was brought to fruition, as Jesus brought back with Him an entire race that had to be joined back to YHWH Elohim to live.

It is that love which moved the mind of Jesus in Philippians 2:3 - 6. A love which would never think of being God as an ambition, or as something to wield over people, yet proved its divinity many times over. Christ always called Father God, because that is precisely what agape love does, emptied of self. He would direct all attention to the Father; yet, when worshiped by men, He never refused it. When pressed on His identity, He did not lie as to who and what He was.

Christ did this, because that is what divine Love does. Rather than demonstrate He was lacking in Divinity, He demonstrated by divine Love He was of the same substance as the Father.

Stepping into the body prepared for Him, Christ laid everything aside - because His love for the Father and for man could do no less. He was willing to be consider less than Deity by the unenlightened, even to the usage of his own words, that Father might be glorified the more. Divine agape could do no less than this for Father, and for the salvation of mankind.

It is a love mankind will spend eternity studying.

Blessings,

[Ted Oplinger]

Here's a link to one of the best discussions I've ever seen on the Godhead/Trinity issues:

http://eslmission.truth-is-life.org/docs...t%20Babylon.pdf

The author thoroughly examines and answers just about every question or objection that anyone has ever brought up against the concept of the "Trinity." He gives answers based on both the Bible and the Spirit of prophecy.

Thanks, John, for sharing this.

Blessings,

[ClubV12]

That is a very nice link John317, I have scanned, read it to some degree, but this is worthy of a close read.

I especially like the authors initial approach. One of humility and recognition of the great task before him. A solemnity in even approaching the subject matter. As I've said many times, I think he recognizes he is about to enter Holy ground on this subject. Proceed with all due reverance and respect!

[Gibs]

If he had the truth of the matter of the trinity he could have proved it in one page, but his endless programing proves he is way off. A whiz at SNLP. When any one goes way up and around robin hoods barn to tell or prove something, best just walk away.

You see just a few verses proves the opposite!

You see Yahweh the Father was in Jesus Christ reconciling the world unto Himself and that didn't happen until Bethlehem.

Before that there was no other God formed created or born. Besides the Redeemer had to be a man as he had to overcome as one of us and from where we are. Not as God!

Battle on, but you need to know your Redeemer is the Father in Jesus Christ Born of woman.

Emmanuel, means God with us, Yahweh the Father is the one and only God surely you must

concede.

Then you must remember a time comes when Yahweh our Father is all in all again! 2 Cor 15:24-28

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.