The Trinity doctrine

[Ron Amnsn]

Ok. The Signs of the Times quotation does show the position of the publishers in 1912.  These are apparently not the words of EGW, but of the people who answered questions from the public.  Nevertheless it is apparent that the trinity doctrine was still not established as church doctrine three years before the death of EGW.

[Gustave]

1 hour ago, Ron Amnsn said:

Ok. The Signs of the Times quotation does show the position of the publishers in 1912.  These are apparently not the words of EGW, but of the people who answered questions from the public.  Nevertheless it is apparent that the trinity doctrine was still not established as church doctrine three years before the death of EGW.

Three years prior to that is another equally explicit statement.

 

"In the pervious article the chivalrous and romantic story of the birth of the Ottoman empire was traced. In this paper will be shown the rapid and remarkable rise of that people to opulence and power, and also the motive force back of this and all Mohammedan movements.

Perhaps it will be best to take the last feature first. The Turks hold that they are descended from Japheth, the son of Noah. He was the father of three sons. The Turks teach that to his firstborn Aboul-Turk, he gave the sovereignty of Turkestan.

Again: the Turks profess the religion of Mohammed: "The creed of that faith is generally compressed into the well known forumla: "There is no god but God, and Mohammed is his prophet." But there is another and longer form which reads as follow: --

"I believe in God and his angels, and his books, and his prophets, and the last day, and the predestination of good and evil by God, and the resurrection after death. I bear witness to that there is no God but God, and I bear witness that Mohammed is his slave and his prophet."

From the above IT MUST BE PERFECTLY CLEAR that Mohammedanism is very far from being a heathan religion, as some are wont to believe. It teaches belief in God, angels, the prophets, the last day, and the resurrection of the dead. MORE THAN THIS ABOUT ONE HALF OF THE KORAN IS A POLEMIC AGAINST POLYTHESIM AND TRINITARIANISM. In fact the word Allah is an abbreviation of Al-iah, which means the ONE, TRUE, ONLY God". Adventist Review & Herald October 28, 1909

[8thdaypriest]

Jeremiah 23:24 "Who can hide in secret places so that I cannot see them?" declares the LORD. "Do not I fill heaven and earth?" declares the LORD." (NIV)

If the LORD fills heaven and earth, He IS omnipresent. 

Jesus said, "God IS spirit" (John 4:24). 

If by "God", Jesus was referring to His Father, then the Father IS spirit.  He IS the "Holy Spirit".

Because He can also appear in a form, sitting on a throne, does NOT mean that He is limited to that form, or to that place. 

Jesus prayed ONLY to His Father.  In John 17:3 Jesus called His Father, "the only true God". 

Jesus said, "You Father in Me" (Jn 17:21).  Jesus said, "the Father who dwells in Me does the works" (John 14:10).  Rather obviously the "spirit" who indwelt Christ, was His Father - not another divine being.

Jesus told His disciples not to worry what they should say when brought before courts and kings, "for the Holy Spirit will teach you in that very hour what you ought to say" (Luke 12:12).  In the parallel passage, Matthew  quotes Jesus as saying, "For it will be given to you in that hour what you should speak; for it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father who speaks in you." (Matthew 10:20).  Once again, the Spirit IS "the Spirit of your Father", NOT a third divine being. 

The personal pronouns - He, His, Who - apply to the Father, who is a personal being. 

When Jesus prayed [to His FATHER]  "I in them and You in Me" (John 17:23), He was describing HOW we receive the Spirit of God our Father.  The Father dwells IN Jesus, empowering Jesus to dwell IN us.  Jesus is the conduit for the outpouring of God's spirit. 

 

[JoeMo]

Dr. Michael Heiser, in his book "Unseen Realm"  portrays a dual Yahweh - a spiritual form of Yahweh (The Father); and a physical manifestation of Yahweh (the Lord Jesus).  I'm not sure where he is on the HS; he doesn't talk about the spirit much; so I infer that He is not a big Trinitarian.  He also opines that the 24 elders in Revelation are probably not human - that they are part of the "lesser" elohim - the morning stars who sang together at creation who rule over the nations until a glorified humanity takes over that task in the millennium or the 8th day (I'm still in the millennium camp).

"

On what were its footings set,
    or who laid its cornerstone—
⁷ while the morning stars sang together
    and all the angels^[a] shouted for joy?

⁸ “Who shut up the sea behind doors
    when it burst forth from the womb,

Footnotes:

1. Job 38:7 Hebrew the sons of God

[Gustave]

The 'Historic' Seventh-day Adventist theological position has been that the Holy Spirit is NOT a Person...

...The stated reasoning for this position was that the HS 'lacked a body' with bone, flesh & organs.

...The Father ( who the SDA's believed was 'Ultimate God' ) had a body of flesh, even with a rectum.

The archangels ( to include Michael, Lucifer & 'all the other archangels' ) also had bodies of flesh, bone & organs.

This is the meaning of "The Personality Of God" phrase that Ellen & the other SDA Pioneers were so found of saying.

So, in a nutshell the understanding is that God, the archangels & angels were flesh & blood hominids.

 

 

 

[Gustave]

9 hours ago, jackson said:

Here are some of Mrs. White's statements, and their dates, from the SOP on the personage of the Holy Spirit.

Obedience is the first price of eternal life. "But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." This is the work of the Holy Spirit. The Comforter is to reveal himself, not in any specified, precise way that man may mark out, but in the order of God; in unexpected times and ways that will honor his own name. ... 1896  {SpTA06 18.2}

The Power of God in the Third Person.--The prince of the power of evil can only be held in check by the power of God in the third person of the Godhead, the Holy Spirit.--Special Testimonies, Series A, No. 10, p. 37. (1897)  {Ev 617.2}

Personality of the Holy Spirit.--We need to realize that the Holy Spirit, who is as much a person as God is a person, is walking through these grounds.--Manuscript 66, 1899. (From a talk to the students at the Avondale School.)  {Ev 616.5}

The power of evil had been strengthening for centuries, and the submission of man to this satanic captivity was amazing. Sin could be resisted and overcome only through the mighty agency of the third person of the Godhead, who would come with no modified energy, but in the fullness of divine power. RH.1904-05-19.003

There are three living persons of the heavenly trio. In the name of these three powers,--the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, those who receive Christ by living faith are baptized, and these powers will cooperate with the obedient subjects of heaven in their efforts to live the new life in Christ.  Special Testimonies, Series B, No. 7, pp. 62, 63. (1905)  (Ev 615.1)

“It is not essential for us to be able to define just what the Holy Spirit is. Christ tells us that the Spirit is the Comforter, "the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father." It is plainly declared regarding the Holy Spirit that, in His work of guiding men into all truth, "He shall not speak of Himself." John 15:26, 16:13, 52.” (Ellen G. White, ‘Acts of the Apostles’ pages 51-52, 1911)

 

The Pioneers made many statements similar to those you've referenced above...

...Would you also make the claim that the Pioneers supported the Trinity Doctrine?

...We can know for certain Ellen White rejected it because:

She vigorously maintained Christ's existence was conditional on his towing the rope & had he screwed up God Almighty would have annihilated Christ so that it would be as if Christ never existed in the first place.

 

No matter how this view is sliced this is as anti-Trinitarian as it gets...

...Add to it the metric ton of other anti-Trinitarian statements & the message is clear.

...Ellen White wasn't a Trinitarian - not by a long shot.

 

 

[8thdaypriest]

Ellen White transitioned from anti-trinitarian, like her husband James (who called it a "Romish doctrine") to belief in a divine "third person" about the year 1895. This under the influence of Herbert Lacey, a Trinitarian who came into Adventism from the Church of England.  There is no denying the transition.  Her earlier statements credit ONLY the Father and the Son for creation, and redemption. 

I no longer look to Ellen White for personal direction concerning doctrinal beliefs.  For me, it is Sola Scriptura. 

[LifeHiscost]

3 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

 

I no longer look to Ellen White for personal direction concerning doctrinal beliefs.  For me, it is Sola Scriptura. 

   In reviewing our past history, having traveled over every step of advance

to our present standing, I can say, Praise God! As I see what God has wrought, I am filled with astonishment, and with confidence in Christ as leader. We have nothing to fear for the future, except as we shall forget the way the Lord has led us, and His teaching in our past history. {CET 204.1}   

Having accepted the gift of prophecy, very pronounced in the OT prophets, I cannot see God withdrawing the gift in the last days when we need it the more as.....

8Be sober-minded and alert. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour. 9Resist him, standing firm in your faith and in the knowledge that your brothers throughout the world are undergoing the same kinds of suffering.… 1 Peter 5

“Never will I leave you, never will I forsake you.” 6So we say with confidence: “The Lord is my helper; I will not be afraid. What can man do to me?”… Hebrews 13

 

God is Love!~Jesus saves! 

[Kevin H]

James White's anti-Trinitarian views are not as provable as it is for some of his friends. He has a history of being very quiet about it. His friends said that when the discussion came up that his habit was to just shut up and listen too others as they discussed. Then towards the end of his life he wrote a letter reading "I'm starting to find the arguments for the trinity being more convincing than the arguments against it." 

[Gustave]

1 hour ago, Kevin H said:

James White's anti-Trinitarian views are not as provable as it is for some of his friends. He has a history of being very quiet about it. His friends said that when the discussion came up that his habit was to just shut up and listen too others as they discussed. Then towards the end of his life he wrote a letter reading "I'm starting to find the arguments for the trinity being more convincing than the arguments against it." 

That's anecdotal evidence & most who have looked into this issue would agree it's all anecdotal evidence..

 

To your knowledge - was the following ever recanted, anywhere?

"We invite all to compare THE TESTIMONIES of the Holy Spirit THROUGH Mrs. White with the word of God. And in this we do not invite you to compare them with your creed. That is quite another thing. The TRINITARIAN may compare them with his creed, and because THEY DO NOT AGREE WITH IT, CONDEMN them [ the testimonies of Mrs. White ]. James White / The Adventist Review & Sabbath Herald June 13, 1871

June 13, 1871 through to July 16, 1915 is 44 years, 1 month & 3 days - that seems to be a significant amount of time to allow one to produce "direct evidence" of a change of position.

When you add the direct evidence of Ellen's numerous official statements ( which are diametrically opposed to the Doctrine of the Trinity ) a reasonable conclusion would be she took her official position all the way to her deathbed. I'm speaking specifically of Ellen's vigorous teaching as to the peccability of Lucifer & Christ  - compared to the impeccability of God ( The Father ).
 

[Kevin H]

Gustave: I'm sorry but Dr. Gerald Wheeler, while researching his book on James White discovered in his correspondence the ORIGINAL letter he wrote where he wrote "I'm starting to find the arguments for the trinity more convincing than the arguments against it." as well as a study where the church leaders looked for everyone they could who knew Elder White and asked them about James White and the trinity. All but one of them said that he was surprisingly quiet on the topic and would mostly listen when the topic of the trinity was discussed. There was one person who met James White only once, he was a little boy when his family had the White's over for dinner. He said that at that dinner James White talked against the trinity. No one else who knew him could say that. They kept talking about how quiet he was when the topic came up.

[Gustave]

10 hours ago, Kevin H said:

Gustave: I'm sorry but Dr. Gerald Wheeler, while researching his book on James White discovered in his correspondence the ORIGINAL letter he wrote where he wrote "I'm starting to find the arguments for the trinity more convincing than the arguments against it." as well as a study where the church leaders looked for everyone they could who knew Elder White and asked them about James White and the trinity. All but one of them said that he was surprisingly quiet on the topic and would mostly listen when the topic of the trinity was discussed. There was one person who met James White only once, he was a little boy when his family had the White's over for dinner. He said that at that dinner James White talked against the trinity. No one else who knew him could say that. They kept talking about how quiet he was when the topic came up.

Anecdotal,  hearsay.

I base my understanding of what Ellen White & the other SDA's believed at that time from the official statements in their publications - if they changed their position on the Trinity or the "personality" of the Holy Spirit they would have put these 'new positions' in the same publications to counteract what they had said before. That's not what we see however - we see 'little ( anecdotal & hearsay ) stories' - mostly produced well after the death of Ellen. 

 

 

[Ron Amnsn]

11 hours ago, Kevin H said:

Gustave: I'm sorry but Dr. Gerald Wheeler, while researching his book on James White discovered in his correspondence the ORIGINAL letter he wrote where he wrote "I'm starting to find the arguments for the trinity more convincing than the arguments against it." as well as a study where the church leaders looked for everyone they could who knew Elder White and asked them about James White and the trinity. All but one of them said that he was surprisingly quiet on the topic and would mostly listen when the topic of the trinity was discussed. There was one person who met James White only once, he was a little boy when his family had the White's over for dinner. He said that at that dinner James White talked against the trinity. No one else who knew him could say that. They kept talking about how quiet he was when the topic came up.

James White may have been "surprisingly quiet" on the trinity because there are so many aspects of the trinity doctrine, from the nature of Christ to the personality of spirit of YHWH. I certainly respect that. The Bible is also surprisingly quiet on many of those aspects of the trinity that the trinitarians wax eloquent about. If trinitarians were the same in the days of James White as they are now, he was probably wise to remain quiet.  The letter (that you say Dr. Wheeler found) indicates that James White was not a trinitarian prior to that letter.  The change of James White's opinion on the trinity (that may be indicated in the letter) may also have been referring to some other aspect of the trinity issue, such as the nature of Christ, rather than to the separateness or personality of the spirit of YHWH apart from YHWH himself.

It is interesting that you consider anecdotal evidence provided by trinitarians in support of the trinity doctrine to be solid enough evidence to start your post with a belittling "I'm sorry", but you consider anecdotal evidence that might support a non-trinitarian view to be unreliable hearsay.  If Dr. Wheeler had the same bias in his research that you display in your interpretation of his research, then the objectivity of his research is rather questionable.  If you have freely-available sources where we could review the evidence Dr. Wheeler accepted as well as all the evidence that he rejected, it might elevate your anecdotal evidence above the level of mere hearsay.  I long ago lost confidence in "insider information" and unpublished research in support of doctrines that are not taught in the Bible.

[Gustave]

Ellen came from a Methodist theological position / upbringing.

The SDA Church openly criticized the Methodist Creed ( along with the Lutheran, Greek Orthodox, Baptist, etc. ) BECAUSE of those Creeds affirmation of the Trinity.

Ellen ( under the direction of the Holy Spirit - which was understood to be God the Father ) vigorously stated that Christ's continued existence was "conditional". The position of Arius.

All these things are literally saturated in the pages of SDA publications during the time hack of Ellen Whit's life - we see nothing concrete until well after Ellen's death pertaining to Trinity support.

As for the statements in Desire of Ages which some attribute to Ellen's new Trinitarian belief - the very vocal anti-Trinitarian pioneers made those same kinds of statements.

Of course "THE LIFE IN HIM" was original and not borrowed - it was the life of the Father - exactly as the SDA's believed it was.

“In Christ is life, original, unborrowed, underived".

Any anti-Trinitarian at the time this was said would agree with that.

Here:

Review and Herald November 14, 1854
Again, where it is declared, that there are none good except the Father, it cannot be understood that none others are good in a relative sense; for Christ and angels, are good, yea perfect, in their respective sphere; BUT that the Father alone is supremely, or absolutely, good; AND that he alone is immortal in an absolute sense; that he alone is self-existent; and, that, consequently, every other being, however high or low, is absolutely dependent upon him for life; for being. This idea is most emphatically expressed by our Saviour himself; " For as the Father hath life in himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself." John v, 26. This would be singular language for one to use who had life in his essential nature, just as much as the Father. To meet such a view, it should read thus: For as the Father hath life in himself, so hath the Son life in himself If as Trinitarians argue, the Divine nature of the Son hath life in himself (i. e., is self existent) jusl the same, and in as absolute a sense, as the Father, why should he represent himself as actually dependent upon the Father for life ? What propriety in representing the Father as conferring upon him a gift which he had possessed from all eternity ? If it be said that his human nature derived its life from the Father, I would answer, It does not thus read; 01 even if it did, 1 would still urge the impropriety of the human nature of the Son of God representing itself as being absolutely dependent upon the Father for the gift of life

Ellen provides clarification as to how Christ was able to keep this "original and unborrowed" life.

 

Ellen White MS 99,1903 page 3,4
He had infinite power ONLY because He was perfectly obedient to His Father's will

Ellen White
Though Christ humbled Himself to become man, the Godhead was still His own. His Deity could not be lost WHILE He stood faithful and true to His loyalty.

Signs of the Time April 2, 1940
It is VITAL for every Christian TO KNOW that Jesus Christ MIGHT have sinned. The Master was not beyond the clutches of temptation. The Heaven-sent Gift could have been eternally lost and the doom of humanity would have been eternally sealed. Jesus Christ knew the pull of evil. "In that He Himself hath suffered being tempted, He is able to succor them that are tempted."

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Ron Amnsn]

9 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

I think you are on the right track. Some people keep trying to make the quotes match other doctrinal preferences that they may have; but all of the references are pretty clear in asserting the existence of "The Third Person" of the Godhead.

Even if all of the EGW quotes and James White quotes said exactly and explicitly what you wanted them to say about the Holy Spirit, wouldn't you still be obligated to test those teachings by the Bible (see the Fundamental Beliefs of SDA's #18, last part) ?

[8thdaypriest]

I was raised SDA by my mother, and was an avid reader of EGW writings.  When doubts concerning the doctrine of 3 divine "persons" were introduced in our congregation, I was determined to prove SDA doctrine was truth.  I studied the issue of the Trinity doctrine for 4 years before concluding (reluctantly at the time) that there are only TWO divine beings - God our Father, and His Son.  This change in my belief caused my exit from the SDA denomination some 20 years ago.  I was forced out really.  I was no longer allowed to teach my Sabbath School class, and was told to keep silent concerning "controversial" subjects.   I understand the reason for the vitriol.  To question the doctrine of a Trinity, IS to question Ellen White.  Just as this thread has gone from comparing passages of Scripture, to debating what EGW believed and when she believed it. 

My heart was healed - long ago - from the pain of that separation.  I now understand that God our Father DID indeed give HIS only begotten son. 

 

[Gregory Matthews]

The Bible, as commonly understood in the Protestant tradition, which includes both the Old Testament and the New Testament constitute the supreme, authorative written revelation of God for us here on earth.  This has been both the teaching of the SDA Church in the past as well as the teaching of Ellen White.

The primary reason that God gave EGW to this church was to guide it as it developed into the denomination that it is today.  It was NOT to be a source of revelation that supplanted the Bible.

If one finds that EGW and the Bible contradict each other on a subject on which both speak, the Bible is to be accepted as truth.

[phkrause]

6 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

I was raised SDA by my mother, and was an avid reader of EGW writings.  When doubts concerning the doctrine of 3 divine "persons" were introduced in our congregation, I was determined to prove SDA doctrine was truth.  I studied the issue of the Trinity doctrine for 4 years before concluding (reluctantly at the time) that there are only TWO divine beings - God our Father, and His Son.  This change in my belief caused my exit from the SDA denomination some 20 years ago.  I was forced out really.  I was no longer allowed to teach my Sabbath School class, and was told to keep silent concerning "controversial" subjects.   I understand the reason for the vitriol.  To question the doctrine of a Trinity, IS to question Ellen White.  Just as this thread has gone from comparing passages of Scripture, to debating what EGW believed and when she believed it.

And I know quite a few that have studied and now believe the other way. Are they wrong? and you right? or the other way, there right and your wrong?? Absolutely not!! We all will believe what we believe. "All" as far as I can see, at least from what I've read here on this forum, have studied and come up with believing one way or the other. Does that make one or the other wrong or right?? Once again, No!! Some seem to make this a either or situation. I personally have no problem with the Trinity belief!! There's absolutely no reason not too! What would be the downside????? Nothing from what I've read anywhere.

[phkrause]

7 hours ago, Ron Amnsn said:

Even if all of the EGW quotes and James White quotes said exactly and explicitly what you wanted them to say about the Holy Spirit, wouldn't you still be obligated to test those teachings by the Bible (see the Fundamental Beliefs of SDA's #18, last part) ?

He obviously has!!!!! Just because you see it one way, doesn't mean he doesn't see it the opposite way as you!!!!!

[phkrause]

And by the way, don't you think that EGW also studied?? or did she just decide to make it all up?????

[Gustave]

3 hours ago, Gregory Matthews said:

The Bible, as commonly understood in the Protestant tradition, which includes both the Old Testament and the New Testament constitute the supreme, authorative written revelation of God for us here on earth.  This has been both the teaching of the SDA Church in the past as well as the teaching of Ellen White.

The primary reason that God gave EGW to this church was to guide it as it developed into the denomination that it is today.  It was NOT to be a source of revelation that supplanted the Bible.

If one finds that EGW and the Bible contradict each other on a subject on which both speak, the Bible is to be accepted as truth.

Would you consider the following?

James White ( Ellen's husband )
"We invite all to compare THE TESTIMONIES of the Holy Spirit THROUGH Mrs. White with the word of God. And in this we do not invite you to compare them with your creed. That is quite another thing. The TRINITARIAN may compare them with his creed, and because THEY DO NOT AGREE WITH IT, CONDEMN them [ the testimonies of Mrs. White ]. The Adventist Review & Sabbath Herald June 13, 1871

 

The people on either side of the 'Personality of the HS' would agree, I believe, that James White was against the idea. James White ( an avid anti-Trinitarian ) is actually claiming that Ellen was a sock puppet for God. In James White's view the HS was an extension of the Father Himself so when he invites all to compare:

"the testimonies OF THE HOLY SPIRIT THROUGH Mrs. White"

That's exactly what he meant - these were NOT Ellen's testimonies, they were God's - that came 'THROUGH' Ellen - like a sock puppet directly reflects the wishes of the puppet master.

 

What follows is Ellen's understanding of this special 'gift'.

 

Ellen White
The Bible is written by inspired men, but it is not God's mode of thought and expression. It is that of humanity. God, as a writer, is not represented. Men will often say such an expression is not like God. But God has not put Himself in words, in logic, in rhetoric, on trial in the Bible. The writers of the Bible were God's penmen, NOT His pen." (Selected Messages, Vol. 1, Chapter One "The Inspiration of the Prophetic Writers")

Ellen states that while the Bible writers were inspired - it WASN'T God's mode of thought & Expression - God was NOT represented.

Ellen, with great velocity maintains that unlike the Bible writers SHE was God's pen - essentially the sock puppet of God.

Ellen White
Before I stand on my feet, I have no thought of speaking as plainly as I do. But the Spirit of God rests upon me with power, and I CANNOT but speak the words GIVEN me. I dare not withhold one word of the testimony.... I speak the words GIVEN ME by a higher power than human power, and I CANNOT, if I would, recall [retract] one sentence” (1MR 28).

 

Ellen White
As soon as I take my pen in hand, I am not in darkness as to what to write. It is as plain and clear as a voice speaking to me, ‘I will instruct thee and teach thee in the way which thou shalt go’” (2MR 319).


Ellen White
There are those who say, ‘Someone MANIPULATES her writings.’ I acknowledge the charge. It is One who is mighty in counsel, One who presents before ME the condition of things” (1MR 30).

Ellen White
In ancient times God spoke through the mouths of prophets and apostles. In these days he speaks to them by the Testimonies of his Spirit" (Testimonies, Vol. 4, p. 148; Vol. 5., p. 661)


Ellen White
Review & Herald Jan 26,1905
The word given me is, 'You are faithfully to reprove those who would mar the faith of the people of God. Write out the things which I shall give you, that they may stand as a witness to the truth till the end of time.' I said, 'If any of the citizens of Battle Creek wish to know what Mrs. White believes and teaches, let them read her published books. My labors would be naught should I preach another gospel. That which I have written is what the Lord has bidden me write. I have not been instructed to change that which I have sent out

Ellen White
If you lessen the confidence of God's people in the testimonies he has sent them, you are rebelling against God as certainly as were Korah, Dathan and Abirum" (Testimonies, Vol. 5, p. 66).

Ellen White
Early in my youth I was asked several times, Are you a prophet? I have ever responded, I am the Lord's messenger. I know that many have called me a prophet, but I have made no claim to this title. My Saviour declared me to be his messenger. 'Your work,' he instructed me, 'is to bear my word. ... It is not you that speaketh: it is the Lord that giveth the messages of warning and reproof. Never deviate from the truth under any circumstances . Give the light I shall give you. The messages for these last days shall be written in books, and shall stand immortalized, to testify against those who have once rejoiced in the light, but who have been led to give it up because of the seductive influences of evil.' Why have I not claimed to be a prophet?--Because in these days many who boldly claim that they are prophets are a reproach to the cause of Christ; AND because my work includes much more than the word 'prophet' signifies." (Review and Herald, July 26, 1907)

 

The above isn't exhaustive - it's just representative of the direct evidence that maintains the Holy Spirit was understood by both the Pioneers & Ellen White to be a force or extension of the hominid flesh God, God the Father.

 

 

[Ron Amnsn]

58 minutes ago, phkrause said:

He obviously has!!!!! Just because you see it one way, doesn't mean he doesn't see it the opposite way as you!!!!!

This sounds good in theory, but doesn't seem to actually happen in practice. 

As you probably know, I've asked several times here on CA for anyone to show how they do such testing, or point us to an SDA publication that teaches the laity how to do such testing, and to share some EGW passages that passed the test along with some passages that were inconclusive and some passages that failed and why.  No response so far.  I understand the reluctance to list the passages that fail because some SDA's wouldn't know how to deal with those.  But there are many passages where a test would necessarily come out inconclusive because they go beyond what is written in Scripture.  If a person hasn't found dozens of these, I strongly suspect that they don't test at all and/or don't know how to test something by Scripture.

[Ron Amnsn]

6 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

If you have questions about Ellen G White; then you should ask them. My post was not addressing that.

My question was not about Ellen G White, but rather about whether SDA's actually follow the standards published in the Fundamental Beliefs of SDAs.

[Ron Amnsn]

1 hour ago, phkrause said:

I personally have no problem with the Trinity belief!! There's absolutely no reason not too! What would be the downside????? Nothing from what I've read anywhere.

The downside is that the trinity doctrine is a major obstacle to reaching Jews with the Gospel.  If we were to teach the same Gospel that Paul taught, we would be teaching the Gospel to the Jew first.  In order to do that we'd need a Gospel that agreed with Scripture.  As it is commonly taught, the trinity doctrine contradicts the Word of God recorded in the Law of Moses, so Jews who are faithful to God's Word reject it, as they should.  That wasn't the case with the Gospel that the apostle Paul taught, so the trinity doctrine is evidently a different gospel.

[phkrause]

19 minutes ago, Ron Amnsn said:

The downside is that the trinity doctrine is a major obstacle to reaching Jews with the Gospel.  If we were to teach the same Gospel that Paul taught, we would be teaching the Gospel to the Jew first.  In order to do that we'd need a Gospel that agreed with Scripture.  As it is commonly taught, the trinity doctrine contradicts the Word of God recorded in the Law of Moses, so Jews who are faithful to God's Word reject it, as they should.  That wasn't the case with the Gospel that the apostle Paul taught, so the trinity doctrine is evidently a different gospel.

I'm a Jew! I have excepted it!!!!!! So what if other Jews don't except the trinity! As I've said, its neither here or there. We have a number of Jewish Adventist pastors and they work with Jews. They don't seem to put the emphasis on the trinity as do you and a few others, they put it on Jesus, who by the way also is a problem for Jews!!!!! So for you to emphasize that the trinity is a problem for Jews is pretty small to us compared to "Jesus." Jesus is a much bigger deal to Jews than the trinity will ever be! Period!!