The Trinity doctrine

[APL]

On 11/5/2016 at 10:31 AM, Gail said:

It might also help to define what the Spirit is as opposed to what it is not.

In Romans 8:9 seems to speak of the Spirit of God as also the Spirit of Christ.

EGW - Published in 1911:

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; John 16:13. {AA 51.3}

 

The nature of the Holy Spirit is a mystery. Men cannot explain it, because the Lord has not revealed it to them. Men having fanciful views may bring together passages of Scripture and put a human construction on them, but the acceptance of these views will not strengthen the church. Regarding such mysteries, which are too deep for human understanding, silence is golden. {AA 52.1}

[Gail]

1 hour ago, APL said:

EGW - Published in 1911:

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; John 16:13. {AA 51.3}

 

The nature of the Holy Spirit is a mystery. Men cannot explain it, because the Lord has not revealed it to them. Men having fanciful views may bring together passages of Scripture and put a human construction on them, but the acceptance of these views will not strengthen the church. Regarding such mysteries, which are too deep for human understanding, silence is golden. {AA 52.1}

I have thought this, too, that our ideas are too small, that we are trying to make him into something we can grasp in our brains

[Ron Amnsn]

16 hours ago, Kevin H said:

I'm sorry but the ancient Jews recognized a union between a oneness and a Threeness of God.  Until 135 AD when Christianity and Judaism became two different religions instead of a sub group of Judaism. In the process the  both groups gave up what they believed prior to 135 AD.  Jews changed their views to emphasize the oneness and the Christians took the Threeness. But prior to 135 AD there was an understanding that held both together.

I have seen Jewish sources that speak of multiple emanations of Adonai -- the burning bush, the man Abraham bargained with about Sodom, the voice from Mt. Sinai, the Shekinah glory, the seven spirits of God, etc.  I've not yet seen a Jewish source that limits the emanations of Adonai to precisely three.

You seem to expect us to contentedly accept your assertions without any citing any sources and without any evidence to back up your claims.  That suggests that you also would have been content to accept those same "facts" from somewhere without seeing any real evidence and without examining the sources.  Can we do better than that?  After all, a person could support any cherished non-Scriptural doctrine with unsubstantiated assertions as you have done.

Which ancient Jews are you talking about?  What are your sources of information?  Where could I examine the source documents that might support your assertions?  There seem to be a lot of Jewish scholars today that are somehow ignorant of the knowledge that you claim to have of ancient Jews.

Are all Jewish sources to be treated as equal?  We know from the Bible that there were Jews and Israelites that freely mixed paganism with the worship of God.  And we also know from history that there were Christians who anachronistically projected their man-made doctrines back into earlier centuries in an attempt to give those doctrines validity.  How can we verify that your assertions are not based on such sources?

[Ron Amnsn]

15 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

How should we describe our beliefs..for eg. If you had to do it in just 3 sentences how would you say what would u say?

I would use God's Word:
Mark 12:29  "The most important is, ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one."  (Jesus quoted from Deut. 6:4)
John 10:30  "I and the Father are one.”   (If Jesus had believed in the trinity, this would have been a good place for him to say, "I and the Father are two-thirds of a trinity".)

[Enabled]

Quote

 

EGW - Published in 1911:

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; John 16:13. {AA 51.3}

 

The nature of the Holy Spirit is a mystery. Men cannot explain it, because the Lord has not revealed it to them. Men having fanciful views may bring together passages of Scripture and put a human construction on them, but the acceptance of these views will not strengthen the church. Regarding such mysteries, which are too deep for human understanding, silence is golden. {AA 52.1}

I believe we should be more particular about our choice of quotes to be used when looking at the persons of divinity, the  above quotes often come up around the current topic yet they are about the nature of the Holy Spirit not the person of the Spirit. If we would only accept what the word says about the spirit and rightly apply the meanings of the terms scripture and SOP use we would find less confusion on the topic and in these two quotes in particular.

I believe that the SDA fellowship has lost a lot and that it has not benefited the church to define the nature of God as a triune three person something when these quotes warned that would not benefit the church. The first quote is clear, it is the comforter and proceeds from the Father, the same words we have of Christ. It doesn't say it proceeds from the Godhead but from the Father. If it was another person (god) it would not be a mystery that men cannot explain. How it comes to us and what it is in essence it to difficult for us to understand that is plain to see. We risk being categorized with the Mormons and a triune or tri-theistic deity. Worse now than in E. G. Whites day we are back with the other daughters of the harlot and desire to be accepted as serving the same God as the papacy. The papacy is happy with the SDA church espousing one God three persons now all they have to do is get us to accept their calendar with the seventh day being Sunday and we are good to go, no persecution no problem.

[Kevin H]

7 hours ago, Ron Amnsn said:

  (If Jesus had believed in the trinity, this would have been a good place for him to say, "I and the Father are two-thirds of a trinity".)

Except that a comment like that would make the Holy Spirit a revelation to our objective like God the Father and God the Son is. The Holy Spirit is God revealing God's self to our subjective and needs to remain in this sphere.

[Kevin H]

8 hours ago, Ron Amnsn said:

I have seen Jewish sources that speak of multiple emanations of Adonai -- the burning bush, the man Abraham bargained with about Sodom, the voice from Mt. Sinai, the Shekinah glory, the seven spirits of God, etc.  I've not yet seen a Jewish source that limits the emanations of Adonai to precisely three.

You seem to expect us to contentedly accept your assertions without any citing any sources and without any evidence to back up your claims.  That suggests that you also would have been content to accept those same "facts" from somewhere without seeing any real evidence and without examining the sources.  Can we do better than that?  After all, a person could support any cherished non-Scriptural doctrine with unsubstantiated assertions as you have done.

Which ancient Jews are you talking about?  What are your sources of information?  Where could I examine the source documents that might support your assertions?  There seem to be a lot of Jewish scholars today that are somehow ignorant of the knowledge that you claim to have of ancient Jews.

Are all Jewish sources to be treated as equal?  We know from the Bible that there were Jews and Israelites that freely mixed paganism with the worship of God.  And we also know from history that there were Christians who anachronistically projected their man-made doctrines back into earlier centuries in an attempt to give those doctrines validity.  How can we verify that your assertions are not based on such sources?

http://www.biblicalresources.net/product.cfm?product=37  http://www.biblicalresources.net/product.cfm?product=32  http://www.biblicalresources.net/product.cfm?product=55 http://www.biblicalresources.net/product.cfm?product=73 Dr. Jim Fleming's lecture on "Lest we forget: a history of anti-Jewishness and the church."  https://www.amazon.com/God-Old-Inside-World-Bible/dp/0743235851 College Seventh-day Adventist church, South Lancaster MA Old Testament Studies- John W. Wood, see especially tape 1 and 2 but brought up several times with in the series. Village Church, South Lancaster, MA -John W. Wood, studies in the Great Controversy.  Atlantic Union College, Gift of Prophecy class, spring semester 1984. I have it in a 5 DVD set and while touched on a few times, study especially on DVD #4. The Original Sanctuary and the Atonement, 1981 Biblical Research Committee in the 3 chapters "The Mighty Opposites: The Atonement in the writings of Ellen G. White" parts 1 and 2 and "We must all appear: The Investigative Judgment in the writings of Ellen G. White."  http://www.adventistbookcenter.com/ellen-white-under-fire-identifying-the-mistakes-of-her-critics.html Other useful sources that can help you understand the material better: https://www.amazon.com/Hebrew-Thought-Compared-Greek-Thorleif/dp/0393005348 and https://www.amazon.com/Before-Philosophy-Intellectual-Adventure-Ancient/dp/014020198X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1478501772&sr=1-1&keywords=before+philosophy

[Kevin H]

16 hours ago, Enabled said:

So Kevin why do men have such a desire to place a philisophical construct on a simple thus saith the Lord?

Because this is the very heart of the work of Satan. Studies in Mrs. White point out that she sees Satan as having 3 deceptions. Each deception is against a member of the Trinity. Everything he does is to shake loose the hold on the trinity. Satan does not need to convince all of us to become atheists, if he can weaken our understanding of the trinity he has inroads to getting us

[Enabled]

Quote

 Kevin H said this:  Because this is the very heart of the work of Satan. Studies in Mrs. White point out that she sees Satan as having 3 deceptions. Each deception is against a member of the Trinity. Everything he does is to shake loose the hold on the trinity. Satan does not need to convince all of us to become atheists, if he can weaken our understanding of the trinity he has inroads to getting us

Quote

Let People Know Our Position.--Our policy is, Do not make prominent the objectionable features of our faith, which strike most decidedly against the practices and customs of the people, until the Lord shall give the people a fair chance to know that we are believers in Christ, that we do believe in the divinity of Christ, and in His pre-existence.--Testimonies to Ministers, p. 253. (1895)

Quote

While God's Word speaks of the humanity of Christ when upon this earth, it also speaks decidedly regarding His pre-existence. The Word existed as a divine being, even as the eternal Son of God, in union and oneness with His Father. From everlasting He was the Mediator of the covenant, the one in whom all nations of the earth, both Jews and Gentiles, if they accepted Him, were to be blessed. "The Word was with God, and the Word was God." Before men or angels were created, the Word was with God, and was God.--Review and Herald, April 5, 1906.

Now I will ask you to provide some evidence from SOP that EG White conscously advanced a three prong defense of a Trinity that she never once spoke accept that in this when Kellog presented it in "the living temple" she called it pantheism. Consider and please comment on the two quotes provided above and and the one below, that her view and the belief in Adventism in her day was not arien based on her words in the first "do not make prominent".

Quote

Angels were expelled from heaven because they would not work in harmony with God. They fell from their high estate because they wanted to be exalted. They had come to exalt themselves, and they forgot that their beauty of person and of character came from the Lord Jesus. This fact the [fallen] angels would obscure, that Christ was the only begotten Son of God, and they came to consider that they were not to consult Christ.  {TDG 128.1}

Letter 42, April 29, 1910, to Elder D. A. Parsons, a minister in southern California (quoted in the morning watch commentary,  "This Day With God - p.128)

Please note the date in the above, E G White still believed in the literal begottenness of Christ the foundation of his son-ship in 1910. Remember to believe in the literal son-ship even today raises the catholic cry against Arias even in our midst.

She brings to light the efforts of the fallen angels to deny the Father Son relation-ship that we are reminded here existed before the creation of all things began. Not ceated as the angels were nor begotten of a created being such as we are but born of the Father before time began, son of the eternal source God without end. The very beginning of the controversy between God and Satan began on this point in the heavens as Lucifer denied the Sonship of the Son of God and his eminence. I agree EG defended the personhood of the Father and the Son, and the personality of the holy spirit. Yet she forbade that we should attempt to define the nature of the holy spirit as it would not benifit the church to do so.

Your thoughts

 

[debbym]

i see man in the beginning in full communion with God.  after sin the glory and knowledge of that experience was still fresh in Adam's mind.  he was keenly aware of what he had lost.  i imagine his hungering and thirsting for God was very great.  I imagine Adam grasping every blessing earnestly and taking hold of every communion with God by faith tho quench his longing for the presence of God he could now only enjoy by faith.  Eden still glowed at the entrance,  the angel was still standing there wielding heavenly fire people could go and witness it.  The creation was still not so far from God.  the oral tradition was strong.

over the millennia the darkness over man has been deepening from the light shining so strong in those days.  And the revelation of God has been growing brighter to meet the increasing darkness and deeper and deeper misapprehension of God.  It seems as this permitted development of evil is deepening  it is being met by a increasingly powerful display of the Character of God.  God's plan and the timing of each revelation of God by the Power of the Holy Spirit is perfect, and meeting the needs of fallen man struggling in the grasp of sin.

The Holy Spirit has been laboring in every heart from the moment Adam fell.  The Old testament is filled with references to the Holy Spirit.  In Psalms 51 David prays, Take not thy Holy Spirit from me, cast me not away from your presence.  The ongoing tension between a purely unselfish and powerful and gracious God, and the small selfish and ugly mean spirited humanity has no rest.  God is not willing for anyone to perish, he is working to save every soul possible in spite of themselves.  When the Spirit comes He will reveal sin, and reveal Christ because Christ has returned to heaven, and reveal the judgement of God again sin because the leader of the rebellion against God has been fully exposed, and judged and cast out.

It was by faith Jesus walked as a human being, constantly maintained and empowered by the work of the Holy Spirit that made His Father known to Him, and was the source of every victory and revelation of God's mercy in acts of Love towards man, and profound worship of God.  God wants us to know the love expressed and held towards Jesus is the same Love he holds us in.   By the same Spirit that empowered Jesus he Speaks the creation power of God in us to recreate us, and transform us, and inspire us.

We are human and fallen, we struggle to comprehend God.  He had made himself known and will increasingly make himself known that we may be filled and preserved and empowered by this Holy Spirit again as Adam was and even more so. From the last of John 17.  We do not know what we shall be, but we know when he appears we shall be like him.

[JoeMo]

On ‎11‎/‎5‎/‎2016 at 9:19 AM, 8thdaypriest said:

JWs teach that Jesus Christ is NOT DIVINE and should NOT be worshiped.   

I don't know if this is universally true among JWs any more.  I had a study with a JW a while back  and pointed out several places where Jesus was worshipped while here on earth.  I then showed him where an angel warned John not to worship him.  I asked if he worshipped Jesus, and he said "Yes".  I asked him why; and he responded that if Jesus accepted the worship, then it must be okay to worship him.  Maybe this guy was a "rogue" JW; just like us "twinitarians" might be considered by some to be rogue SDAs.

[Gregory Matthews]

For an interesting comments on the issue of whether or not JWS worship Jesus, see:

http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/worship-jesus.php

http://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=10&article=1481

 

[Gail]

18 hours ago, Ron Amnsn said:

I would use God's Word:
Mark 12:29  "The most important is, ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one."  (Jesus quoted from Deut. 6:4)
John 10:30  "I and the Father are one.”   (If Jesus had believed in the trinity, this would have been a good place for him to say, "I and the Father are two-thirds of a trinity".)

Okay, let's go back to the shema as Ron has quoted.

The Lord our God (Elohim, plural) is one Lord.  Why can't we leave it as is, strange and wonderful and unfathomable as it is to our mortal minds?

[8thdaypriest]

On 11/5/2016 at 0:23 PM, Kevin H said:

I will have to explain this later, but these quotes deal into the importance of the trinity. If we do not hold all 3 aspects together in tension we pick one aspect of the trinity as "God" as "God in total" We are turning the infinite God who steps into the finite world into one limited finite aspect. It can become idolatry. Here in the Western world we tend to worship God of Power and make God the Father God. In the Eastern Religions they tend to worship God working with our subjective existential experience, the Holy Spirit.  

So - if I'm not born into Eastern culture, or if I'm not educated in the metaphysical, then I cannot understand my Bible.  I cannot accept it - just as it reads. 

The LORD certainly knew that "Western" culture and mindset was coming.  Don't you think He would leave the Bible in such a way, that it could be understood by anyone - from any culture?

 

[8thdaypriest]

Why is it that SDAs must be convinced by statements from Ellen White? 

"It is the Father who 'so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting live.'  'Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named.'  The family is named after the Father (Eph. 3:14-15).  Those who enter the heavenly mansions will have the name of the Father and the name of the city of God written in their foreheads."  Review and Herald July 19, 1892 pr.7

"The Ancient of Days is God the Father.  . . . It is He, the source of all being, and the fountain of all law, that is to preside in the judgment."  Great Controversy pg 479 (1888)

"He clothed His divinity with humanity that man might be reconciled to the Father and brought back to His law."  Manuscript Releases Vol.3, pg 103 pr.2 (1886)

"The Son of God was next in authority to the Great Lawgiver."  RH December 17, 1872, Spirit of Prophecy Vol.2, pg9

"We honor both the Father and the Son when we talk about the law.  The Father gave us the law, and the Son died to magnify it and make it honorable." (MS 5, 1885)

 

"He taught man to address the Supreme Ruler of the universe by the new name -- 'Our Father.'"  RH Sept 11, 1894; Fundamental of Christian Education pg.309

"The mighty Maker of the world--the omnipotent Ruler of the universe, was our Father!" RH Feb 20, 1866, pr11
 

[8thdaypriest]

Christ was BEGOTTEN from God the Father BEFORE he incarnated into the womb of Mary.  He was already the SON of God the Father before He took human nature and form.

"The Great Creator assembled the heavenly host,  that he might in the presence of all the angels confer special honor upon his Son.  The Son was seated on the throne with the Father, and the heavenly throng of holy angels was gathered around them.  The Father then make known that it was ordained by himself that Christ should be equal with himself' so that wherever was the presence of his Son, it was as his own presence.  His word was to be obeyed as readily as the word of the Father.  His son he had invested with authority to command the heavenly host.  Especially was he to work in union with himself in the anticipated creation of the earth and every living thing that should exist upon it.  His son would carry out his will and his purposes, but do nothing of himself alone.  The Father's will would be fulfilled in him."  Signs of the Times, January 9, 1879  pr.2

Mrs White quoted Proverbs 8:22-30 in whole or in part, in many places, always saying it was spoken by the pre-incarnate Christ. 
Signs of the Time Aug 29, 1900;  Selected Messages Book 1, pg247;  Review and Herald April 5, 1906, Patriarchs and Prophets pg 34; 

Jesus said, "I came forth from the Father and have come into the world" (John 16:27).

"I came forth from You; and they have believed that You sent Me"  (John 17:8).

[8thdaypriest]

"The greatness of god is to us incomprehensible.  'The Lord's throne is in  heaven' (Ps 11:4) yet by His Spirit He is everywhere present.  He has an intimate knowledge of, and a personal interest in  all the works of His hand."  Education pg 132 (1903). 

She does not say, "by the Spirit He is everywhere present".  She says "by His spirit".   God our Father is OMNIPRESENT.  There is no need for a third divine being. 

The Spirit IS the spirit of God the Father. 

"The FATHER gave his Spirit without measure to his Son, and we also may partake of its fullness."  (Great Controversy pg.477)

"For this reason I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, from whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named, that He would grant you, according to the riches of His glory, to be strengthened with might through His Spirit in the inner man, that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith" (Ephesians 3:14). 

"The Father and the Son alone are to be exalted" (Youth's Instructor July 7, 1898 pr.2). 

When you sing "Praise Father, Son, and Holy Ghost"  - you are not in accord with Scripture.   I change it to "Praise Father and Son for the holy ghost"  It fits with the cadence. 

[Kevin H]

8 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

So - if I'm not born into Eastern culture, or if I'm not educated in the metaphysical, then I cannot understand my Bible.  I cannot accept it - just as it reads. 

The LORD certainly knew that "Western" culture and mindset was coming.  Don't you think He would leave the Bible in such a way, that it could be understood by anyone - from any culture?

 

We are westerners. We don't need to be educated in the metaphysical because our whole culture from birth educates us in the metaphysical, which is different from Eastern culture. For example, take a second and think about the question "What is a cup." Odds are you are thinking about some sort of container that may or may not have a handle.  You might even think of a particular material that a cup very near and dear to you is made out of. But did you have to go to school to be able to think in this way? Did you have to take a course in college on "What is a cup?" So why do you ask if we have to have a special study in it to be able to understand the Bible?

What I'm saying is that because we naturally and unconsciously want to do with God what we just did with the cup and what we naturally do to anything else you can name. The problem is that God is too big to do this with. When we get to heaven, and see Jesus and the Father and if there was a way see the Holy Spirit, and we think "Wow, this is God" we will drop dead for committing the sin of idolatry, because the trinity is not God in God's self, like seeing a cup and realizing that this is a cup. The trinity are only the three ways the infinite God reveals God's self to us but like trying to fit the whole ocean into a thimble. How much more idolatry is it to pick only one aspect of the trinity and make it "God"? The only thing that we have to learn is an awareness of the problem.

[Enabled]

I would agree with you as one of my friends who has now passed continued to study with me for years and he was a lifer and well respected in the JW community. He accepted the diety of Christ based on the evidence of scripture. I found that his personal views of biblical doctrine were closer to my own and the Advent faith than any of my friends in any other denomination. We had our difference but Trinity, state of the dead, the 144,000 were not amongst them. He saw that the witness of a Christ like life was important above all else and was willing to be found wrong on his tenants of faith so long as you could show him in a KJV version of the scriptures a clearly stated point and did not have to do a jig to get it across, if you know what I mean. Definetly not universally true, have had others walk away if I prayed in the name of Jesus. 

11 hours ago, JoeMo said:

I don't know if this is universally true among JWs any more.  I had a study with a JW a while back  and pointed out several places where Jesus was worshipped while here on earth.  I then showed him where an angel warned John not to worship him.  I asked if he worshipped Jesus, and he said "Yes".  I asked him why; and he responded that if Jesus accepted the worship, then it must be okay to worship him.  Maybe this guy was a "rogue" JW; just like us "twinitarians" might be considered by some to be rogue SDAs.

 

[Ron Amnsn]

23 hours ago, Kevin H said:

Except that a comment like that would make the Holy Spirit a revelation to our objective like God the Father and God the Son is. The Holy Spirit is God revealing God's self to our subjective and needs to remain in this sphere.

I'm not sure I understand what you are saying here, Kevin,  because it seems to contradict what you are saying in other posts in this thread.  Here you seem to be saying that Jesus had a good reason to not mention that a trinity exists and to not define the Holy Spirit.  Yet in other posts you seem to be saying that it is necessary for us to believe that a trinity exists as defined by humans and that it is necessary for us to define the Holy Spirit as a "person" -- a definition that we process objectively as if we could analyze the Holy Spirit and put it into a definition of our own liking; and that if we don't believe these "approved" [non-Scriptural] definitions we are somehow aiding Satan's attacks on the trinity.

[Ron Amnsn]

23 hours ago, Kevin H said:

http://www.biblicalresources.net/product.cfm?product=37  http://www.biblicalresources.net/product.cfm?product=32  http://www.biblicalresources.net/product.cfm?product=55 http://www.biblicalresources.net/product.cfm?product=73 Dr. Jim Fleming's lecture on "Lest we forget: a history of anti-Jewishness and the church."  https://www.amazon.com/God-Old-Inside-World-Bible/dp/0743235851 College Seventh-day Adventist church, South Lancaster MA Old Testament Studies- John W. Wood, see especially tape 1 and 2 but brought up several times with in the series. Village Church, South Lancaster, MA -John W. Wood, studies in the Great Controversy.  Atlantic Union College, Gift of Prophecy class, spring semester 1984. I have it in a 5 DVD set and while touched on a few times, study especially on DVD #4. The Original Sanctuary and the Atonement, 1981 Biblical Research Committee in the 3 chapters "The Mighty Opposites: The Atonement in the writings of Ellen G. White" parts 1 and 2 and "We must all appear: The Investigative Judgment in the writings of Ellen G. White."  http://www.adventistbookcenter.com/ellen-white-under-fire-identifying-the-mistakes-of-her-critics.html Other useful sources that can help you understand the material better: https://www.amazon.com/Hebrew-Thought-Compared-Greek-Thorleif/dp/0393005348 and https://www.amazon.com/Before-Philosophy-Intellectual-Adventure-Ancient/dp/014020198X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1478501772&sr=1-1&keywords=before+philosophy

The book on Hebrew Thought compared to Greek Thought was recommended to me by someone else this past weekend. I have ordered it.

The rest of your answer seems to be an admission that there isn't really an ancient Jewish source to support your assertion that "the ancient Jews recognized a union between a oneness and a Threeness of God."  Which of the publications that you referenced are written by ancient Jews?  If there are ancient Jewish sources that actually say what you claim, it is rather doubtful that those ancient source documents or inscriptions would be available only in the private collections of the gentlemen you mention.  I'm not asking for scholarly opinions about what the ancient Jews believed -- I want to see what the ancient Jews wrote themselves.  Scholars who believe in the trinity doctrine tend to interpret most anything as evidence for the trinity because they desperately need evidence that can't be found in the Bible.  I want to know which ancient documents or inscriptions the scholars got their evidence from, or which passages from the Mishna (or other text) they are interpreting in a way that supports your assertion.  I may already have access to the source documents. If so, why should I buy another book just to find out that your scholars are projecting their own beliefs onto the ancient Jews?

[Gregory Matthews]

Wanderer, I will not argue with  what you said about my comment about the JWs.  As I said, my cited websites are interesting.

 

[8thdaypriest]

On 11/6/2016 at 10:27 AM, jackson said:

{Ev 614.1}  Positive Truth Versus Spiritualistic Representations. --I am instructed to say, The sentiments of those who are searching for advanced scientific ideas are not to be trusted. Such representations as the following are made: "The Father is as the light invisible: the Son is as the light embodied; the Spirit is the light shed abroad." "The Father is like the dew, invisible vapor; the Son is like the dew gathered in beauteous form; the Spirit is like the dew fallen to the seat of life." Another representation: "The Father is like the invisible vapor; the Son is like the leaden cloud; the Spirit is rain fallen and working in refreshing power."

 

 

{Ev 614.2}  All these spiritualistic representations are simply nothingness. They are imperfect, untrue. They weaken and diminish the Majesty which no earthy likeness can be compared to. God cannot be compared with the things His hands have made. These are mere earthly things, suffering under the curse of God because of the sins of man. The Father cannot be described by the things of earth. The Father is all the fullness of the Godhead bodily, and is invisible to mortal sight.    

 

 

     The Son is all the fullness of the Godhead manifested. The Word of God declares Him to be "the express image of His person." "God so loved the world, that He gave His only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life." Here is shown the personality of the Father. The Comforter that Christ promised to send after He ascended to heaven, is the Spirit in all the fullness of the Godhead, making manifest the power of divine grace to all who receive and believe in Christ as a personal Saviour. There are three living persons of the heavenly trio; in the name of these three great powers --the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit--{Ev 615.1}  those who receive Christ by living faith are baptized, and these powers will co-operate 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)

 

 

Check out the DATES of quotations from EGW. 

The "three living persons of the heavenly trio" appeared AFTER 1896.  That is when statements supporting a tri-fold God began to appear in her published writings.  Desire of Ages was published in 1898.  In that book - for the first time, the Spirit was called "the third person of the Godhead".  For 50 years Ellen White's writing supported ONLY God our Father, and the LORD Jesus Christ..   While at Australia, Mrs White's underwriter Marion Davis attended camp meeting lectures by Elder Herbert C. Lacey, on the "Personality of the Holy Spirit".  Lacey was staunchly Trinitarian, having come into Adventism from the Church of England.  He made it his mission to bring a trifold understanding of God, into Adventism.  He succeeded.  In a letter to Elder Froom, he stated that the words "third person of the Godhead" were HIS WORDS - given to Marion Davis, who had come to him for help in writing Desire of Ages. I have a copy of his letter to Froom. 

There is no denying that Mrs White's writings changed concerning the nature of God.  Her husband James White called the Trinity a "Romish doctrine".    The reason for the change is unclear.  She does not say that God gave her any special instruction concerning this.  And why would the LORD wait 50 years to clarify his people's understanding concerning His own nature?  It is possible that she was taken in by Lacey and Davis.   It is possible that Marion Davis inserted questionable statements into her writings, and she did not catch them - being advanced in years.  And it is possible - as some say - that Mrs White "grew in her understanding" of the nature of God.  

For 50 years Mrs White called the Spirit "it".  After 1900, the publishers scrubbed the "it" for "He" and "His".  I don't understand how the publishers could CHANGE the words of a "prophet".

The obvious change in her statements - after 50 years as the recognized prophet, and the manipulation by the publishers - is WHY I stick with Bible only. 

[Gregory Matthews]

Wanderer:  I did not mean to imply anything negative.  Just my attempt to say that we had agreement that my comment was interesting, without getting into the rest of your comment as I was uncertain as to exactly what that part of your comment meant.

 

[Enabled]

7 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

The Lord waits for 50 years because His ways are not our ways. (Isa 55:8).  The publishers in this case did no "manipulation" they were just doing what we would do when we learn new points of truth.

Let me get this do you mean its OK to change anothers writings and you are good with that. I don't remember her granting the Trustess permission to change her writing, only to publish them. To publish under her name if the words are not hers would be a lie. This wrankles of the same they did with Uriah Smiths Daniel and Revelation in the 1948 and subsequent editions. Sounds to me like we can't trust anything we read as being authentic if it comes from our own presses. 

So Wanderer are you saying present Truth trumps historical writing. We are not talking translation or interpretation here only printing historical volumes. Do we change the writings of other hisorical works because they don't agree with the current groups understanding of the past? Sounds like Walter and Barnhouse may have effected more than our current fundmental beliefs.  Forgive me if I missunderstood your words, I seem to be hearing what appears to be your view more often.