Ellen White & the Trinity

[LifeHiscost]

Very good definition.  The only tiny element you might want to accentuate is to state that the three ropes are distinct from one another, useable on their own.  The three persons in the Godhead have each a distinct function. 

1. The Son is charged with Justification. 
2. The Holy Spirit is deals with Sanctification
3. The Father is in charge of the compliance to the Law

In their functions they each perform their specialty on their own.

 

That way, it is clear that their personality is distinct, concurrent and independent.

 

Dennis .

And why is it necessary for me to know that when God is the Father, God is the Son, God is the Holy Spirit, and God is One. While it is true Their responsibilities are significantly "seemingly allotted" (for want of  better words), except where it is made very clear by definite Divine counsel, such as how we are to pray (our Father Which art in heaven), They are equal and never need question each other as to the advisability of what, where or when they will be doing something.

Part of that Divine protocol seems way beyond our feeble efforts to fathom and seems less than useful to exert effort on, especially when the children of God find it so difficult to fulfill what is easy to understand, like  Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel and then shall the end come?

 

I'm of the opinion that They have a working relationship that does not want to be independent of each other, unlike much of fallen humanity who listen to the accuser of the brethren for their orders.

 Just asking.

 

God is Love! Jesus saves!

[Guest DennisKean]

And why is it necessary for me to know that when God is the Father, God is the Son, God is the Holy Spirit, and God is One. While it is true Their responsibilities are significantly "seemingly allotted" (for want of  better words), except where it is made very clear by definite Divine counsel, such as how we are to pray (our Father Which art in heaven), They are equal and never need question each other as to the advisability of what, where or when they will be doing something.

Part of that Divine protocol seems way beyond our feeble efforts to fathom and seems less than useful to exert effort on, especially when the children of God find it so difficult to fulfill what is easy to understand, like  Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel and then shall the end come?

 

I'm of the opinion that They have a working relationship that does not want to be independent of each other, unlike much of fallen humanity who listen to the accuser of the brethren for their orders.

 Just asking.

 

God is Love! Jesus saves!

 

That's an easy one. 

 

Joh_16:23 ... Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give it you.

Joh_16:24  Hitherto have ye asked nothing in my name: ask, and ye shall receive, that your joy may be full.

 

This is a directive to understand whom to ask and in whose name.  But for that you have to understand why you are asking one in the other's name.  I did not invent this, but it is clear that the Savior expects you to know the distinctions, from the above. 

 

Put another way, I guess that we can be synical about it and say, "look I sent that Email, God!  You figure out how to route it."  But it seems like God intends for us to know the various functions of His family members.  Our family is made in the image of God.  And because of that there are corresponding functions useful in the human families as well. 

 

 

Dennis

[Guest DennisKean]

And why is it necessary for me to know that when God is the Father, God is the Son, God is the Holy Spirit, and God is One. While it is true Their responsibilities are significantly "seemingly allotted" (for want of  better words), except where it is made very clear by definite Divine counsel, such as how we are to pray (our Father Which art in heaven), They are equal and never need question each other as to the advisability of what, where or when they will be doing something.

Part of that Divine protocol seems way beyond our feeble efforts to fathom and seems less than useful to exert effort on, especially when the children of God find it so difficult to fulfill what is easy to understand, like  Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel and then shall the end come?

 

I'm of the opinion that They have a working relationship that does not want to be independent of each other, unlike much of fallen humanity who listen to the accuser of the brethren for their orders.

 Just asking.

 

God is Love! Jesus saves!

 

LifeHiscost,

 

Here are two instances of directing people to ask the Father for the Holy Spirit too.  And that seems to require from us to know the function of the Holy Spirit:

 

Zec_10:1  Ask ye of the LORD rain in the time of the latter rain; so the LORD shall make bright clouds, and give them showers of rain, to every one grass in the field.

 

And in the NT we find

 

Luk_11:13  If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?

 

We ask the Father forgiveness in the name of the Savior, realizing that He is there for our forgiveness.

 

Likewise, we ask the Father for the Holy Spirit in order to change our character flaws.

 

To me it seems that God wants us to know the distinctions ...  What do you think?

 

 

Dennis

[Guest DennisKean]

Gregory,

Triunity is a Roman Catholic doctrine.  Triunity implies one essence with three expressions.  EGW meant what she said that there are three distinct members in the Godhead.  

 

As regards those who refer to the expression "Israel, YAHWEH your Gods are one" the objections of the monotheists is that God meant to say that He is just one God, while other pagan imagined gods are many.  That idea has aged and faded away.  What God was trying to say with the word "One" was that in the Three members of the Godhead there is unity.  Pagan gods all have different doctrines and one god requires this kind of worship, while the other one is at cross purpose with him.  The disunity betrays that the pagan gods are human inventions and humans design their gods as per their own wishes.  With our God unity is so well settled that God calls His team as being one.  It is the same expression as God's idea of marriage.  A man and a woman become one.  We know that they are still two distinct persons, but marriage is meant for them to seek unity in purpose as God has with His own.

The distraction, which monotheists have been harassing the Trinitarians with, is irrelevant.  It bears no weight on the subject in this light.

 

Dennis

[LifeHiscost]

 

Thank you for your answers. Your biblical texts were well fitted for the answer. However you'll probably notice my underlining  of the word "independent" in earlier post . Since we are made in the image of God as well as referred to as becoming one as God is One, so man becomes dependent upon woman as she returns the favor, both exchanging love (filial) with each other, receiving the gift of Love by the power of the Spirit for enabling the marriage to maintain with wholeness.

 

God is Love! Jesus saves!

 

 

[8thdaypriest]

Christ referred to God as “the Father.”  The New Testament writers  refer to “God our Father” many, many times, but no Bible writer, ever referred to Christ as  “God the Son,” or to the Holy Spirit as “God the Holy Spirit.”  Christ is divine (John 1:1-3).  He is a divine being because He was begotten from the Father who is divine.

 

The Son of God was to be worshiped by angels (Heb. 1:6) and by men (Phil. 2:10).  The Father of course, is called “God our Father” (Rom. 1:7,  1Co. 1:3,  2Co. 1:2,  Eph. 1:2, Phi. 1:2,  Col. 1:2, 1Th. 1:1,  2Th. 1:1,  2Th. 1:2,  1Ti. 1:2,  Phm. 1:3).


THE HOLY SPIRIT IS NOT WORSHIPED

I have found no command in Scripture that we are to exalt, glorify, give thanks to, pray to, or in any other way “worship” the Holy Spirit.  There is no account of any created being offering worship to the Holy Spirit by name.  We are to worship the Father “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23).

 

The song with the words "praise Father, Son and Holy Ghost" is NOT Biblical.   There is NOT one passage saying that we are to praise the Holy Ghost. 
 
        Revelation 5:13  “And every creature which is in heaven and on the earth . . . I heard saying, ‘Blessing and honor and glory and power be to Him who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb, forever and ever!’”
     
In the New Testament Scriptures, two divine beings are worshiped - the Father and the Son.

 

"Our Father which art in Heaven,

Hallowed be Thy name,

Thy Kingdom come.

Thy will be done in earth, as it is in Heaven.

...

Thine is the power, and the glory forever"   (Matthew Cpt 6)

 

I just don't get it, how this prayer can be turned into a prayer to three Beings. 
 

Christ referred to God as “the Father.”  The New Testament writers  refer to “God our Father” many, many times, but no Bible writer, ever referred to Christ as  “God the Son,” or to the Holy Spirit as “God the Holy Spirit.”   ("God our Father" :  Rom. 1:7,  1Co. 1:3,  2Co. 1:2,  Eph. 1:2, Phi. 1:2,  Col. 1:2, 1Th. 1:1,  2Th. 1:1,  2Th. 1:2,  1Ti. 1:2,  Phm. 1:3)

 

Christ is divine (John 1:1-3).  He is a divine being because He was begotten from the Father who is divine. The Son of God was to be worshiped by angels (Heb. 1:6) and by men (Phil. 2:10), but He is subordinate to God His Father.  The Son has always been subordinate, and He always will be subordinate.  "The head of Christ is God" (I Cor. 11:3).

 

There is NO command that we worship the Spirit. 

 

Respectfully,

Rachel Cory

Prophecy Viewpoint

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

 

 

 "The head of Christ is God" (I Cor. 11:3)

 

well, now, *that's* interesting!

[8thdaypriest]

I'll be gone for the next week. 

Rachel

[Kevin H]

What I find useful is what I learned in my classes at Atlantic Union College, and from Methodist Archaeologist Dr. Jim Fleming, who was a professor at Hebrew University in Jerusalem. He had a study center called "The Jerusalem Center for Biblical Studies" Currently he is in LaGrange Georgia. And also a point by his name slips my mind now, I'm thinking it is something like Gibson. He's a fairly young guy but who has become a popular speaker in our church and on the radio. He has a few books out.

 

Anyway at AUC we were taught that we have to start out with God being infinite: Outside of time and space, the creator of time and space.

 

We are creatures, inside of time and space. And our minds are unable to grasp the infinite. If God was only infinite that God would be too big for us to comprehend and we would end up being atheists due to our inability to comprehend and relate to God. Now that would end up killing us because life comes from our relationship with God. Therefore God is not only infinite but also finite. He has had self revelations of himself inside of time and space. Now God did not wake up one day and decided "I'll be inside of time and space as well" but God has always been outside and inside of time and space.  

 

Now we are created beings with life borrowed from God and our only survival is to maintain that relationship with God. Well wouldn't that be good to know? Don't we need to know that God is so much greater than us, all powerful, and our dependence on him for existence. That he created the universe? This is what we call "God the Father" and appears in the Old Testament as Elohim, the unapproachable light, the deep darkness.

 

However if all we saw as God was this great awesome power, it would be overwhelming and scare us to death. Knowing this aspect of God is essential but insufficient.

 

We need to also know that he is our dear friend. One of us who we can relate to. A good old Joe. So we have God also revealing himself to the angles as another angel. To Abraham and Joshua and others as another man. [ As Rabbi Kugel points out in his powerful book "The God of Old" there are several accounts in the Bible about the appearance of the angel of the Lord who turns out to be the Lord] To the beings on other planets he probably appeared as one of them. Now if this was the only manifestation of God we had, we could say that this old Joe is a nice guy but what makes what he has to say any more important than my thoughts and ideas. Thus again we find this manifestation of God necessary but insufficient.

 

We need both the manifestation of power and glory as well as the one of us and friendship. However while both are needed and needed together, even the two are insufficient. Because we are both objective and subjective. A story was then told about a lawyer conference where the key note speaker was shot in front of everyone while giving his speech. The police came, took depositions from all the eye witnesses and the lawyers were all part of the crime scene and investigation. The next night as they came together they were shocked to find a new keynote speaker, the one who they saw shot the night before. It turned out it was a very staged event to show the lawyers the differences in eye witness accounts that they were a part of.

 

The above two manifestations of God are both objective. We are objective and subjective. Thus God also needed to be manifested by working with our subjective experience and guide us in life. If we only had the subjective: Well much of the eastern religions deal with just the subjective aspect of God. What objective guidance do we have between what is God working in our minds and our own thoughts and ideas? Once at a place where new agers visited one of the visitors carved his initials into a rock. When arrested for defacing the site his defense was "the god in the rock told me he wanted me to carve his initials on it." We have the current debate on the ordination of women in the church. Some feel that the Holy Spirit is leading them one way, others feel that the Holy Spirit is leading them another way.  

 

We need to have all three and all 3 together. The objective evidence of God as power and God as friend, as well as God leading our minds as we look at the objective evidence.

 

If we don't hold all 3 together, then we are idolaters placing God in just a small box. We tend to worship one or the other aspects as the whole. The Holy Spirit lead us when questioning the trinity, we came to where we were just focusing on God the Father as God. God the father represents law, and so we were preaching the law the law the law until we were as dry as the hills of Gilboah. The Jehovah Witness continue in this trend and they are a church where the members are to be subject to the higher authority and be very uniform. People with strong personalities who like to lord it over people have tended to lead the ideas in the church today that the trinity is not correct. The Buddhists focus only on the Holy Spirit. They have a lot of good but also are in danger of problems because they don't look at the objective factors of God the Father and God the son as revealed in scripture.

 

But even if we saw all 3 members of the trinity at once, we need to remember that this is only how God is manifesting to us and that God transcends time and space and is so much bigger.   

[Kevin H]

As for Fleming, he pictures it as that the trinity is implied in the Old Testament. One of his co-workers at Hebrew University was a Rabbi who was the world's leading authority on second temple Judaism. Fleming says that this Rabbi taught that the trinity was designed by second temple Jews to explain the eastern ideas of the Old Testament to western thinking minds after Alexander conquered and spread Greek thought.

 

He pictures it as a mountain with a cloud covering the top. Since we can not see beyond the cloud, we relate to what is beyond the cloud through the geography of what is under the cloud. That the trinity are 3 different geographic aspects that have us understand the mountain as a whole, like 3 ridges that lead up.  

 

He says that the problem with his analogy is that in a mountain what is above the cloud is smaller than what we see of the mountain below the cloud, but with God what is above the cloud is infinite and can only be described as Holy, Holy, Holy and our focus is how we relate to what is revealed below the cloud, with God as power, friend and guide.

 

Fleming said that the doctrine of the trinity split with the church synagogue split in 135 AD with Christians eventually focusing on the 3 ness and Jews on the oneness, but both views are half of what was believed by Jews and Christians prior to 135 AD.

[Kevin H]

What Gibson, or what ever his name is, pointed out is that the Bible says that God is love. For that to happen you need at least 3. If there is only one God can be lovinging, but has nothing to love and could show that he is loving if he made things to love, but he would be loving, not love. For there to be two they would only be wrapped around their own self absorption and they may be loving, and create things to love but they would still be only loving, not love. To have love you need a minimum of 3. a love that can reach out in different directions. This way before God created creatures to love, he was still love and we can say that God is love. 

[Guest DennisKean]

Christ referred to God as “the Father.”  The New Testament writers  refer to “God our Father” many, many times, but no Bible writer, ever referred to Christ as  “God the Son,” or to the Holy Spirit as “God the Holy Spirit.”  Christ is divine (John 1:1-3).  He is a divine being because He was begotten from the Father who is divine.

 

The Son of God was to be worshiped by angels (Heb. 1:6) and by men (Phil. 2:10).  The Father of course, is called “God our Father” (Rom. 1:7,  1Co. 1:3,  2Co. 1:2,  Eph. 1:2, Phi. 1:2,  Col. 1:2, 1Th. 1:1,  2Th. 1:1,  2Th. 1:2,  1Ti. 1:2,  Phm. 1:3).

THE HOLY SPIRIT IS NOT WORSHIPED

I have found no command in Scripture that we are to exalt, glorify, give thanks to, pray to, or in any other way “worship” the Holy Spirit.  There is no account of any created being offering worship to the Holy Spirit by name.  We are to worship the Father “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23).

 

The song with the words "praise Father, Son and Holy Ghost" is NOT Biblical.   There is NOT one passage saying that we are to praise the Holy Ghost. 

 

        Revelation 5:13  “And every creature which is in heaven and on the earth . . . I heard saying, ‘Blessing and honor and glory and power be to Him who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb, forever and ever!’”

     

In the New Testament Scriptures, two divine beings are worshiped - the Father and the Son.

 

"Our Father which art in Heaven,

Hallowed be Thy name,

Thy Kingdom come.

Thy will be done in earth, as it is in Heaven.

...

Thine is the power, and the glory forever"   (Matthew Cpt 6)

 

I just don't get it, how this prayer can be turned into a prayer to three Beings. 

 

Christ referred to God as “the Father.”  The New Testament writers  refer to “God our Father” many, many times, but no Bible writer, ever referred to Christ as  “God the Son,” or to the Holy Spirit as “God the Holy Spirit.”   ("God our Father" :  Rom. 1:7,  1Co. 1:3,  2Co. 1:2,  Eph. 1:2, Phi. 1:2,  Col. 1:2, 1Th. 1:1,  2Th. 1:1,  2Th. 1:2,  1Ti. 1:2,  Phm. 1:3)

 

Christ is divine (John 1:1-3).  He is a divine being because He was begotten from the Father who is divine. The Son of God was to be worshiped by angels (Heb. 1:6) and by men (Phil. 2:10), but He is subordinate to God His Father.  The Son has always been subordinate, and He always will be subordinate.  "The head of Christ is God" (I Cor. 11:3).

 

There is NO command that we worship the Spirit. 

 

Respectfully,

Rachel Cory

Prophecy Viewpoint

 

8thDayPriest,

 

The solution to that quandry is that we are not asked to pray to the Savior either.  The Savior sends us to the Father. The Father is the central figure to whom we offer player, mentioning the Savior's name.  The reason that the Savior seems to have so much more content than the Holy Spirit is because the Savior was revealed to us when He came to be tested. Until then, the Jewish nation had one God (as far as they knew) and they did not quite know what to make of Moses not being able to see God, nevertheless being able to talk to God face to face.  David may have been aware of both the Savior and the HS, but I am not sure about the rest of the populace. That suddenly became clear when we met the Savior.  And the Holy Spirit's time to be met by God's people is near.  The Prophecies talk about that via many prophets. 

 

Here is one of many: 

 

Zec_10:1  Ask ye of the LORD rain in the time of the latter rain; so the LORD shall make bright clouds, and give them showers of rain, to every one grass in the field.

 

That time is coming and people will get a much clearer picture about the Holy Spirit.  The millennium is the time when the Holy Spirit will be poored out on God's people.  Then we will know all three persons of the Godhead. 

 

Now, the objection that "Rain" is not clear enough to ascertain that the being discussed is the HS, may seem valid.  However, the Savior is spoken of as "The Arm of the LORD", which is no less moot.  From Adam to the time when the Savior was mentioned as the Messiah and sought for by Israel, lots of time transpired.  And so it is today.  The Holy Spirit has been introduced by the Savior and over the last 2 millennia our knowledge has grown.  Today, we see many overlooked details and we are becoming aware of their significance.  With a little patience we will soon meet the HS...

 

Cheers,

 

 

Dennis

[Guest DennisKean]

 

Thank you for your answers. Your biblical texts were well fitted for the answer. However you'll probably notice my underlining  of the word "independent" in earlier post . Since we are made in the image of God as well as referred to as becoming one as God is One, so man becomes dependent upon woman as she returns the favor, both exchanging love (filial) with each other, receiving the gift of Love by the power of the Spirit for enabling the marriage to maintain with wholeness.

 

God is Love! Jesus saves!

 

 

 

 

LifeHiscost,

 

Independence of Essence does not necessarily imply total lack of codependence.  Humans depend on one another if for no other reason but company.   So, I think that we are on the same page.  What do you think?

 

 

Dennis

[Guest DennisKean]

What Gibson, or what ever his name is, pointed out is that the Bible says that God is love. For that to happen you need at least 3. If there is only one God can be lovinging, but has nothing to love and could show that he is loving if he made things to love, but he would be loving, not love. For there to be two they would only be wrapped around their own self absorption and they may be loving, and create things to love but they would still be only loving, not love. To have love you need a minimum of 3. a love that can reach out in different directions. This way before God created creatures to love, he was still love and we can say that God is love. 

 

Very curious syllogism.  Very appealing...

 

Dennis

[Kevin H]

I hope you found the other two views useful as well

[Kevin H]

The person for the 3rd view is Ty Gibson!

[Guest DennisKean]

What I find useful is what I learned in my classes at Atlantic Union College, and from Methodist Archaeologist Dr. Jim Fleming, who was a professor at Hebrew University in Jerusalem. He had a study center called "The Jerusalem Center for Biblical Studies" Currently he is in LaGrange Georgia. And also a point by his name slips my mind now, I'm thinking it is something like Gibson. He's a fairly young guy but who has become a popular speaker in our church and on the radio. He has a few books out.

 

Anyway at AUC we were taught that we have to start out with God being infinite: Outside of time and space, the creator of time and space.

 

We are creatures, inside of time and space. And our minds are unable to grasp the infinite. If God was only infinite that God would be too big for us to comprehend and we would end up being atheists due to our inability to comprehend and relate to God. Now that would end up killing us because life comes from our relationship with God. Therefore God is not only infinite but also finite. He has had self revelations of himself inside of time and space. Now God did not wake up one day and decided "I'll be inside of time and space as well" but God has always been outside and inside of time and space.  

 

Now we are created beings with life borrowed from God and our only survival is to maintain that relationship with God. Well wouldn't that be good to know? Don't we need to know that God is so much greater than us, all powerful, and our dependence on him for existence. That he created the universe? This is what we call "God the Father" and appears in the Old Testament as Elohim, the unapproachable light, the deep darkness.

 

However if all we saw as God was this great awesome power, it would be overwhelming and scare us to death. Knowing this aspect of God is essential but insufficient.

 

We need to also know that he is our dear friend. One of us who we can relate to. A good old Joe. So we have God also revealing himself to the angles as another angel. To Abraham and Joshua and others as another man. [ As Rabbi Kugel points out in his powerful book "The God of Old" there are several accounts in the Bible about the appearance of the angel of the Lord who turns out to be the Lord] To the beings on other planets he probably appeared as one of them. Now if this was the only manifestation of God we had, we could say that this old Joe is a nice guy but what makes what he has to say any more important than my thoughts and ideas. Thus again we find this manifestation of God necessary but insufficient.

 

We need both the manifestation of power and glory as well as the one of us and friendship. However while both are needed and needed together, even the two are insufficient. Because we are both objective and subjective. A story was then told about a lawyer conference where the key note speaker was shot in front of everyone while giving his speech. The police came, took depositions from all the eye witnesses and the lawyers were all part of the crime scene and investigation. The next night as they came together they were shocked to find a new keynote speaker, the one who they saw shot the night before. It turned out it was a very staged event to show the lawyers the differences in eye witness accounts that they were a part of.

 

The above two manifestations of God are both objective. We are objective and subjective. Thus God also needed to be manifested by working with our subjective experience and guide us in life. If we only had the subjective: Well much of the eastern religions deal with just the subjective aspect of God. What objective guidance do we have between what is God working in our minds and our own thoughts and ideas? Once at a place where new agers visited one of the visitors carved his initials into a rock. When arrested for defacing the site his defense was "the god in the rock told me he wanted me to carve his initials on it." We have the current debate on the ordination of women in the church. Some feel that the Holy Spirit is leading them one way, others feel that the Holy Spirit is leading them another way.  

 

We need to have all three and all 3 together. The objective evidence of God as power and God as friend, as well as God leading our minds as we look at the objective evidence.

 

If we don't hold all 3 together, then we are idolaters placing God in just a small box. We tend to worship one or the other aspects as the whole. The Holy Spirit lead us when questioning the trinity, we came to where we were just focusing on God the Father as God. God the father represents law, and so we were preaching the law the law the law until we were as dry as the hills of Gilboah. The Jehovah Witness continue in this trend and they are a church where the members are to be subject to the higher authority and be very uniform. People with strong personalities who like to lord it over people have tended to lead the ideas in the church today that the trinity is not correct. The Buddhists focus only on the Holy Spirit. They have a lot of good but also are in danger of problems because they don't look at the objective factors of God the Father and God the son as revealed in scripture.

 

But even if we saw all 3 members of the trinity at once, we need to remember that this is only how God is manifesting to us and that God transcends time and space and is so much bigger.   

 

I liked many points you made here, Kevin.  Some ingredients in your syllogism, like infinity, might work against your effort, but it has some interesting ingredients.  Let me introduce a question to you and it is only a test question.  It does not necessarily reflect on what I believe.  What if God was not infinite?  Could you still love and respect Him? 

 

Some people get worried when asked this question.  So let me notch it down a bit to test the pitch of the strings.  What if God was an individual in the flesh just as we are?  Would you value Him as much as you did when you imagined him surrounded with omnipotence, omnipresence and omnisience?

 

As a side interest, on the mathematical platform, infinity is under fire.  If there is such a thing as infinity, it is well beyond definition and it would appear that it is not likely that infinity really can be represented by any structure in our universe...  not even distance or subdivisions of distance. 

 

Enjoyed reading your comments.

 

 

Dennis

[LifeHiscost]

LifeHiscost,

 

Independence of Essence does not necessarily imply total lack of codependence.  Humans depend on one another if for no other reason but company.   So, I think that we are on the same page.  What do you think?

 

 

Dennis

I think were in the same book. Maybe not on the same page because according to this;

 

es·sence

ˈesəns/

noun

noun: essence

the intrinsic nature or indispensable quality of something, especially something abstract, that determines its character.

 

I'm of the opinion that all three Persons of the God head have the same essence (character)  while taking different responsibilities . I'm sure trying to explain God, other than defining man as made in His image, is over my head. I'm satisfied that most of humanity, if not all, tries to explain God's intrinsic value from a human standpoint and largely demeans Him, except for those who carry the gospel and by the aid of the Holy Spirit manage to help others realize the depth of His (Their) love for them, whatever their personal experience in life and wherever they are at this point.

 

"........for God so loved the World....  John 3:16

 

God is Love! Jesus saves!

. 

[Guest DennisKean]

 

I think were in the same book. Maybe not on the same page because according to this;

 

es·sence

ˈesəns/

noun

noun: essence

the intrinsic nature or indispensable quality of something, especially something abstract, that determines its character.

 

I'm of the opinion that all three Persons of the God head have the same essence (character)  while taking different responsibilities . I'm sure trying to explain God, other than defining man as made in His image, is over my head. I'm satisfied that most of humanity, if not all, tries to explain God's intrinsic value from a human standpoint and largely demeans Him, except for those who carry the gospel and by the aid of the Holy Spirit manage to help others realize the depth of His (Their) love for them, whatever their personal experience in life and wherever they are at this point.

 

"........for God so loved the World....  John 3:16

 

God is Love! Jesus saves!

. 

 

 

Oops...   err...  yeah...  Your comment on the essence does not seem to essence out enough characteristic detail to make a point here.  There is such a thing as a personality character and there is such a thing as a characteristic signature of something used as a point of distinction.  Those two uses, of the word "Character", are distinct from one another and at the very least vague in their comparative application.  I think that rather than reveal what you are thinking, you have successfully hidden it. 

 

Three perfect characters does not translate to being one entity.  They are all three perfect, yet distinct.  Having the same loving, perfect character does not resolve or coalesce the trio. Can you see that?   If I am wrong about that, then we can all be gods.  Here is why I say that.

 

Luk_6:40  The disciple is not above his master: but every one that is perfect shall be as his master.

 

Perfect reason to become a Budhist and do some soul merging.  Right? 

 

But you really believe in TriUnity, I suspect.  And if I am correct, try to find another way of stating it.  You successfuly flew under my radar...  ha ha ha.  I have to make a few adjustments or buy a low flying object radar.

 

Regards, my friend...

 

 

Dennis

[Guest DennisKean]

I hope you found the other two views useful as well

 

I may not endorse every detail of what you say, Kevin, but I sure like you!  It is nice to hear people who think beyond the obvious.  And, yes, you make good points. 

 

Answer my questions though.  Your point was that we needed to have three enumerated elements which you prescribe as necessary for a healthy belief in God.  Admittedly, it is a very interesting subject, to me and your reasoning did not fall on deaf ears.  Look up the questions in my reply to you.  I would like you to expand your idea so I can grasp your perspective correctly.

 

Regards,

Dennis Kean

[LifeHiscost]

Three perfect characters does not translate to being one entity.  They are all three perfect, yet distinct.  Having the same loving, perfect character does not resolve or coalesce the trio. Can you see that?   If I am wrong about that, then we can all be gods.  Here is why I say that.

 

Luk_6:40  The disciple is not above his master: but every one that is perfect shall be as his master.

 

Perfect reason to become a Budhist and do some soul merging.  Right? 

 

But you really believe in TriUnity, I suspect.  And if I am correct, try to find another way of stating it.  You successfuly flew under my radar...  ha ha ha.  I have to make a few adjustments or buy a low flying object radar.

 

Regards, my friend...

 

 

Dennis

Thanks for your answer, brother. When one stops to think of us, you and I and all others choosing to follow Jesus are known as the body of Christ, which lends something to the understanding of our position in Jesus.

 

…9Jesus said to him, "Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how can you say, 'Show us the Father '? 10"Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father is in Me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on My own initiative, but the Father abiding in Me does His works. 11"Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me; otherwise believe because of the works themselves.…John 14

 

I don't think that instruction is given or referred to by any other religion for the relationship with who would be called their master or god.

Since we are fallen human beings we don't give the example perfectly, nor even close in my eyes, however when things get tight, those motivated by the Holy Spirit reveal a far different behavior than those who have no relationship to Jesus, which I have to admit, I sometimes give a very poor example, which is why I'm so grateful for the instruction that we are to trust in the righteousness of Jesus for our hope.

 

God is Love! Jesus saves!

[Guest DennisKean]

Thanks for your answer, brother. When one stops to think of us, you and I and all others choosing to follow Jesus are known as the body of Christ, which lends something to the understanding of our position in Jesus.

 

…9Jesus said to him, "Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how can you say, 'Show us the Father '? 10"Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father is in Me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on My own initiative, but the Father abiding in Me does His works. 11"Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me; otherwise believe because of the works themselves.…John 14

 

I don't think that instruction is given or referred to by any other religion for the relationship with who would be called their master or god.

Since we are fallen human beings we don't give the example perfectly, nor even close in my eyes, however when things get tight, those motivated by the Holy Spirit reveal a far different behavior than those who have no relationship to Jesus, which I have to admit, I sometimes give a very poor example, which is why I'm so grateful for the instruction that we are to trust in the righteousness of Jesus for our hope.

 

God is Love! Jesus saves!

 

LifeHiscost,

 

While I appreciate the analogies of the Savior I do not borrow ideas from pagan customs to define Christ's thoughts and relatioonship with His Father and His creation.  One of those analogies which Christians often borrow from the pagan world is referred to as "Soul Merging".  It is exactly what it says.  Devotees believe that the ultimate goal of a human being is to reach their Nirvana and merge into the mind of God.  I view that philosophy as dangerous, when applied in the myriad ways it pops up in the Christian explanations/rathionalizations.  There is no mention of Nirvana among Christians, but the theory is the same.

 

God does not seek to soul merge with His children.  Yet Christians have all sorts of explanations about God and people which are improperly visualized.  Lately they try to imply ideas about the relationship between Father, Son and the HS which advance that very idea.  Triunity is of that origin.

 

We need to be cognizant of this and steer clear of it.  In the relationship between man and God the principal function of this theory is to solve the problem of sin by osmosis.  But osmosis discharges the sinner from his responsibility for sin, not sin itself.  Man is not asked to make an effort.  That invites man to become a floating log in the river.  Evangelicals preach that there is nothing we can do to be saved.   Really?  What about repentance?  And how do we change?  Their answer is "A la force", which is the same as osmosis.  God will give your brain some plastic surgery and you will be better.  So, how do we change?  With soul merging the distinction of where one mind ends and the other one begins is blurred.  Consequently, such relationships do not allow a man to stand in front of a judge in a trial.  Yet there are Christians who see no problems with that.

 

And if we apply this in the case of the Godhead, we have a serious confusion on our hands.  Who is the Father, who is the Son.  Why have multiple expressions to begin with?  It is easy to concoct an imaginary scenario, but impossible to defend the viability or reason for its existence.  The cop out answer is that we cannot know why God chooses to have these ghostly expressions, as if we are so dumb that we cannot catch on to the ruse, for what else could this simplistic rationale be?  The worse part is the triunists fail to recognize the embarrassment of this kind of ploy.  They are thrilled to discuss this never realizing that it is empty of value.  The only value it can claim is to discharge the Trinitarian view, nothing more.  That is not a good enough Raison d'etre!

 

Here is an angle which is so often used.  Claiming that the Savior promises to send His own Spirit to His people because He cannot be with them. So, He returns to them and is counted as present with them on Pentecost  through His own Spirit which is there in His own very presence.  And that is exactly this idea of diffusing the spirit with soul merging.

 

My question is this.  Why say "I cannot be with you" to begin with, if this is the adequate interpretation of what transpired???  What about saying "Go to Jerusalem and and wait...  I'LL BE RIGHT BACK!"  Wouldn't that be more honest?  This is not a criticism against God.  I say this because this rationale/interpretation of what transpared is improperly understood and concocted by simplistic minds who cannot give a good reason other than "That is God's idea".  It is not.  It is their idea.

 

On another front,... Is the Father inside the soul of the Son, as is so often implied by the Savior's comment "Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father is in Me"?  Well, we could say that the Father has brought Him up, taught the Savior the truths and raised Him in His own likeness.  We can also say that they love one another and their love for one another brings about their unity and similitude.  When you see one, you see the other as well because they are both perfect. All that fits inside the idea of a BEGOTTEN SON or a Son whom the Father loves and is loved by Him.  Anything beyond that is dangerous territory for me.  To assert that the real God hides behind 3 expressions means that there is really no Son of God.  There is no real Father or HS.  There is someone hiding behind multiple expressions, however.  But that appears rather suspicious.  And left without a good reason to explain this ploy, the reason cannot be anything far from theatrics. 

 

Anti-Trinitary rationales lead into confusion which stems from this idea of souls having the capacity to merge into one another.  Soul Merging is of pagan origin and it is never a good idea to bring pagan ideas into Christian epxplanations of doctrines, realities and counsel.  I have made an effort to become familiar with this pagan inanity specifically because I recognized a problem in the Christian backyard.  I do not recommend it for people who are not grounded in Adventist ideas.  Soul Merging is seductive, misleading and spiced with so many rationalizations that it could be made to fit any and every argument a rational Christian can bring up.  EGW recognized around 1893 that the Holy Spirit must be a third member of the Godhead else her own former explanations would lead right down Kellogg's avenue.  The endgame of Kellogg's idea is nothing less than Soul Merging...  Diffusion of spirits.  From then on, she modified her explanations and began to talk about the 3rd person entity being distinct.  In the afteryears, EGW made some of the most remarkable comments on this subject.  She defined the action of the Holy Spirit to disentangle man and the Holy Spirit from a questionable interconnection.

 

Holy Spirit Does Not Take Place of Will. -- The Spirit of God does not propose to do our part, either in the willing or the doing. This is the work of the human agent in cooperating with the divine agencies. As soon as we incline our will to harmonize with God's will, the grace of Christ stands to cooperate with the human agent; but it will not be the substitute to do our work independent of our resolving and decidedly acting. Therefore it is not the abundance of light, and evidence piled upon evidence, that will convert the soul it is only the human agent accepting the light, arousing the energies of the will, realizing and acknowledging that which he knows is righteousness and truth, and thus cooperating with the heavenly ministrations appointed to God in the saving of the soul. Lt. 135, 1898.

 

This was a revolutionary idea for that day.  A good sector of people leaned on the idea that it is God who wills and does in you whatever He wills.  Therefore, they could go about their business and let God do His thing.  But if man is not involved with the exercise of his own will, EGW said that such a man is without help.  God will not do and will for him. 

 

Another latter progression, of EGW, was to recognize the distinction of Christ's function of Justification and the Holy Spirit's function of Sanctification.  She wrote:

 

Christ, our Mediator, and the Holy Spirit are constantly interceding in man's behalf, but the Spirit pleads not for us as does Christ who presents His blood, shed from the foundation of the world; the Spirit works upon our hearts, drawing out prayers and penitence, praise and thanksgiving.

--Manuscript 50, 1900 (SDA Bible Commentary, vol. 6, on Rom. 8:26, 34).

 

These tenets preempted the upcoming Soul Merging ideas, which would shortly impact Christianity with full force.  These were revolutionary ideas.  Her former ideas, which were clearly anti-trinitarian finally took focus on the great truths and SDAs received vaccinations against future diseases to come.  EGW made many mistakes, but God used her.  Her contribution was not in vain.

 

Cheers,

 

 

Dennis

[Guest DennisKean]

I hope you found the other two views useful as well

 

Wow, Kevin, the silence was so loud that I had to put in some swimming earplugs.  Are you okay?  The question was a little tough or uncomfortable?  Or is it that this forum is just a very friendly place?? 

 

 

Dennis

[Guest DennisKean]

Wow, Kevin, the silence was so loud that I had to put in some swimming earplugs.  Are you okay?  The question was a little tough or uncomfortable?  Or is it that this forum is just a very friendly place?? 

 

 

Dennis

 

I hope you found the other two views useful as well

 

I have an easier question for you, Kevin.  How can I UnRegister on this forum?  It seems that there is no way to unregister. 

 

 

Dennis

[Kevin H]

Sorry, just have not had the chance to answer, been working over time...

 

As for your "What if God was not infinite" question, I'm sorry but my understanding of the Bible, especially from the time of Isaiah on, does not even make that question a possibility.