When Bible Prophecy Is Certain and Sure

[Challenger]

19 hours ago, Gustave said:

Focus on the concept, the definition of what the SDA Pioneers and Ellen White affirmed - that the Father had every member, organ and part of a perfect man. The term creature Christ was coined by Arius who claimed that Christ was initially a potential Christ - a creature who had been exalted by "God". This creature Christ was capable of mutation (i.e. of sinning). Ellen adopted this teaching of Arius by way of her husband and the other early Adventists. By affirming that Jesus "could have sinned" & "could have been eternally lost" you are heralding the creature christ doctrine of Arius. 

You seem to be more informed than I of early Adventist teachings, and a great dislike for Mrs. White. Prove to me your statement in the first sentence above. 

Too, show me evidence in which early Adventists claim to except the Arius's teaching of creature Christ. 

 

[Gustave]

Quote

Challenger asked me to show proof of: The SDA Pioneers and Ellen White affirmed - that the Father had every member, organ and part of a perfect man

Sure Challenger, here ya go:

"Thus it is declared that God has all the members and parts of a perfect man. This is not said once, no twice, but many times, not in parables an symbols, and figures, but directly and plainly".... RH18780905-V52-11.pdf

Please read that entire article. Ironically DM Canright was the same man who had Ellen White review and revise his article where he (Ellen) rebuked the Trinity Doctrine with great vigor. The above article is hardly a "one-off" either. The Personality [body] of Father God was one of the pillar doctrines of the SDA Church while Ellen White was alive.  

Quote

Challenger said: Too, show me evidence in which early Adventists claim to except the Arius's teaching of creature Christ. 

I don't understand Challenger, YOU'VE been arguing for the creature Christ doctrine of Arius throughout this entire conversation. 

For the sake of clarity please see / read the following: 

Documents from the Council of Nicaea - OER Primary Source Reader for World Civilizations I

In particular:

"In the first place, the impiety and wrongdoing of Arius and his adherents was examined in the presence of our most pious emperor Constantine.  We unanimously decided that his impious opinion should be anathematized, along with all the blasphemous expressions he has uttered, namely that “the Son of God came to be out of nothing,” that “there was a time when he was not,” and even that “the Son of God, because he possessed free will, was capable of both evil and good.” They also call him a creature and a work. The holy Council has anathematized all these ideas, barely able to endure it as we listened to such impious opinions (or rather madnesses) and such blasphemous words".  Fourth Century Christianity » Letter of the Council of Nicaea to the Egyptian Church (CPG 8515)

Arius taught that Christ COULD HAVE SINNED & LOST HIS SALVATION, the exact same thing the SDA Pioneers and Ellen White taught. Given you've been arguing for all of this I'm somewhat perplexed as to you asking me for proof the SDA Church / Ellen White promulgated this stuff. You certainly know they did.  Or, am I missing something?

[Challenger]

15 hours ago, Gustave said:

Sure Challenger, here ya go:

"Thus it is declared that God has all the members and parts of a perfect man. This is not said once, no twice, but many times, not in parables an symbols, and figures, but directly and plainly".... RH18780905-V52-11.pdf

Thanks Gustave for that article, never read it before and read it through several times. Why would you not agreed with Canwrights position, he gave many scriptural evidence that both members of the Godhead, the Father and Jesus exist in the form of man, contrary to the creeds he quoted.  Although the Holy Spirit was not mentioned in his article, we must conclude that He too, exist in the form of a man, since He is the third member of the Godhead, but will forever be invisible to man.  

This understanding must be correct, for Gen. 1:27, states, " So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them..."

If you continue to deny this, do you not make the bible's teaching on this issue misleading?

Edited May 23, 2025 by Challenger
better clarity

[Challenger]

15 hours ago, Gustave said:

 

I don't understand Challenger, YOU'VE been arguing for the creature Christ doctrine of Arius throughout this entire conversation. 

For the sake of clarity please see / read the following: 

Documents from the Council of Nicaea - OER Primary Source Reader for World Civilizations I

In particular:

"In the first place, the impiety and wrongdoing of Arius and his adherents was examined in the presence of our most pious emperor Constantine.  We unanimously decided that his impious opinion should be anathematized, along with all the blasphemous expressions he has uttered, namely that “the Son of God came to be out of nothing,” that “there was a time when he was not,” and even that “the Son of God, because he possessed free will, was capable of both evil and good.” They also call him a creature and a work. The holy Council has anathematized all these ideas, barely able to endure it as we listened to such impious opinions (or rather madnesses) and such blasphemous words".  Fourth Century Christianity » Letter of the Council of Nicaea to the Egyptian Church (CPG 8515)

Arius taught that Christ COULD HAVE SINNED & LOST HIS SALVATION, the exact same thing the SDA Pioneers and Ellen White taught. Given you've been arguing for all of this I'm somewhat perplexed as to you asking me for proof the SDA Church / Ellen White promulgated this stuff. You certainly know they did.  Or, am I missing something?

Thanks for sharing this portion of the document. I believe as I have previously stated, that Christ could have sinned because He had the same UNFALLEN nature that Adam had originally, and we know that Adam sinned, therefore, Christ could have also.

I have no understanding of Arius reasoning. It's possible that we both agree in principle, but for the wrong reason. Why does my reasoning not make sense to you, is it because you don't understand that the Godhead consist of three individual God's?

I have never referred nor do Adventist referrer to Christ as a "creature". We believe He existed from the beginning as did the Father and Holy Spirit. 

The following I assume was a teaching of Arius, “the Son of God came to be out of nothing,” that “there was a time when he was not,”

I understand it as such: The day that Adam sinned, Jesus wanted to save Adam from the sudden death law the Father had imposed on him. (Gen. 2:16,17) The Father explained to Jesus that he would stay the execution of Adam and his offspring temporarily if He [Jesus] would fulfill all that the Father required of Him according to His plan of salvation. So on that day Jesus agreed, and thus was called the Son of God, as well as the Lamb of God, since He was willing to be obedient to the Father as a son is obedient to his father. Therefore, there was a time before Adams fall, when Jesus did not have that title. 

For you to continue to assert that I or Adventists hold to all of those teaching of Arius you have put forth is not true. Agree?

 

 

 

[Gustave]

Quote

Challenger said: 

Thanks Gustave for that article, never read it before and read it through several times. Why would you not agreed with Canwrights position, he gave many scriptural evidence that both members of the Godhead, the Father and Jesus exist in the form of man, contrary to the creeds he quoted. 

You don't understand that right. The Creeds state that "God" is a simple, single substance without body or form. The single UNDIVIIDED substance IS Father, Son & Holy Spirit. 3 Divine Persons in one single undivided substance. No historic Christian teaching suggests that Christ isn't 100% God and 100% man. 

Quote

Challenger said: Although the Holy Spirit was not mentioned in his article, we must conclude that He too, exist in the form of a man, since He is the third member of the Godhead, but will forever be invisible to man

The ONLY Person in the Trinity that exists in the form of a man (since the Incarnation) is Jesus - this is contrary to the 2 or 3 God committee of separate individuals which can continue to exist if one or more of the god's screws up and wins a Charles Darwin award (in your godhead model). 

 

Quote

Challenger said: This understanding must be correct, for Gen. 1:27, states, " So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them..."

That has NEVER been Judaism's understanding nor was it the understanding of the Apostles who trained the early Church Father's. 

Quote

Challenger said: If you continue to deny this, do you not make the bible's teaching on this issue misleading?

I'm not denying that there is ONE God and no other. I'm afraid you're the one doing that. 

Quote

Challenger said: Thanks for sharing this portion of the document. I believe as I have previously stated, that Christ could have sinned because He had the same UNFALLEN nature that Adam had originally, and we know that Adam sinned, therefore, Christ could have also.

Unfortunately, it didn't have the effect I had hoped it would have on you. Adam's humanity wasn't perfectly United to God as was the case of Jesus. Adam did not possess a Divine Nature as Christ possessed. 

Quote

Challenger said: I have no understanding of Arius reasoning. It's possible that we both agree in principle, but for the wrong reason. Why does my reasoning not make sense to you, is it because you don't understand that the Godhead consist of three individual God's?

You certainly do have an understanding of it - you've been articulating it as good or better than Arius. 

Quote

Challenger said: Why does my reasoning not make sense to you, is it because you don't understand that the Godhead consist of three individual God's?

Yeah, I'm a long way from understanding that Sacred Scripture & Sacred Tradition teach 3 individual God's! A mighty long way from that. I do understand that's what Ellen White, to a degree taught. But this is just her reflecting what her Arian / Semi-Arian husband was promulgating. 

Quote

Challenger said: I have never referred nor do Adventist referrer to Christ as a "creature". We believe He existed from the beginning as did the Father and Holy Spirit. 

This is what happens when you pour new alien definitions into established words and meanings. This should help you. 

"But while as the Son he does not possess a co-eternity of past existence with the Father, the beginning
of his existence, as the begotten of the Father, antedates the entire work of creation, in relation to which he stands as joint creator with God. John 1:3; Heb. 1:2. Could not the Father ordain that to such a being worship should be rendered equally with himself, without its being idolatry on the part of the worshiper?" Daniel & The Revelation

"When the two books, " Thoughts on Daniel " and "Thoughts on the Revelation" were published, no
one thought of them as subscription books, or that they would circulate anywhere but among our
own people. Brother King suggested that the two volumes be bound together and sold by subscription another original idea. His plan was adopted, and that admirable book has reached a sale of many
thousands, with a continually increasing sale, bringing more people into the truth than any other subscription book published". GCB Volume 3 No. 12 

Ellen White / Manuscript Releases vol. pg. 63.9
The interest in Daniel and the Revelation is to continue as long as probationary time shall last. God used the author of this book as a channel through which to communicate light to direct minds to the truth. Shall we not appreciate this light, which points us to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, our King? {1MR 63.1}

Why don't you start a thread in Theological Townhall and call it something like "The Bible teaches there are 3 God's" or "Arius was right" - something like that and we can work through some Scripture and see where it all ends up. 

 

[Gregory Matthews]

Some comments on the above discussion:

*  Challenger's belief in a Godhead of three separate, individual Gods is classic Arianism, and is not the official belief of the SDA Church.

*  Gustave's belief that God cannot sin, I agree with.   That is correct.   I have never heard of any SDA claiming that God could sin.  I suppose such could be found.  I simply do not recall such being said.

*  Christ, in His human life was both "fully God" and "fully human."  I do not understand that, but I believe it.  I simply assume that in eternity I will be informed on that issue.  In the meantime, I trust in that which I do not understand.

*  As to the exact human nature of Christ at His birth.  The SDA Church is not united on this issue.  Differences exist.  Obviously only one group is correct, and there is no agreement as to which group is the correct one.

NOTE:  For the purpose of clarity, I will further comment on the above.  Some SDAs teach that at His birth; Christ had the same human nature as did Adam at his creation.  Other SDAs teach that at His birth; Christ had the same human nature as we have when we are born today.  I am not certain that the Catholic position on the doctrine of "original sin" can be read into the thinking of this group of SDAs, but this is well beyond the level of what I want to discuss.

 

[Challenger]

16 hours ago, Gustave said:

You don't understand that right. The Creeds state that "God" is a simple, single substance without body or form. The single UNDIVIIDED substance IS Father, Son & Holy Spirit. 3 Divine Persons in one single undivided substance.

Gustave, I am of the persuasion, that the Bible only is to be our rule of faith, not the Creeds of men.

 

16 hours ago, Gustave said:

The ONLY Person in the Trinity that exists in the form of a man (since the Incarnation) is Jesus -

If as you assert that God is a single UNDIVIDED substance, composed of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, then how is it possible that Christ could separate Himself from this UNDIVIDED substance, and take on the form of man?

 

16 hours ago, Gustave said:

Adam's humanity wasn't perfectly United to God as was the case of Jesus. Adam did not possess a Divine Nature as Christ possessed.

Unlike you statement asserts, I believe that both Adam and Jesus were dealt the same hand, both having Unfallen natures. Adam failed when temped, Jesus did not, all the while He set His Divine Nature aside, while on earth.

But you say, Jesus performed many miracles. Yes, indeed, but were they by His divinity or the Holy Spirit working through Him, as in the cases performed by the disciples?

[Challenger]

7 hours ago, Gregory Matthews said:

Some comments on the above discussion:

*  Challenger's belief in a Godhead of three separate, individual Gods is classic Arianism, and is not the official belief of the SDA Church.

Gregory, your statement above does not align with our (SDA) official beliefs.

"THREE PERSONS IN THE GODHEAD"

"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." (Seventh-day Adventists Answers Questions on Doctrine, pg. 645)

"The first advent of Christ gives us a much clearer insight into the triune God. John's Gospel reveals that the Godhead consists of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, a unity of three co-eternal persons having a unique and mysterious relationship."

"While  the Godhead is not one in person, God is one in purpose, mind, and character. This oneness does not obliterate the distinct personalities of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.  Nor does the separateness of personalities within the Deity destroy the monotheistic thrust of Scripture, that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one God." (Seventh-day Adventists Believe...A Biblical Exposition of 27 Fundamental Doctrines, pg. 23)

What say ye?

 

[Gregory Matthews]

Whar do I say?  Simply this:

In a post you made last Tuesday at 11:59 AM, you said: "I believe in three separate individual Gods,. . .."   That is Arianism, and it is not the teaching of the SDA Church, although I will not challenge you if you were to tell me that some SDAs are Arian in belief.

In the last sentence of your quote in the post above, you said: " . . . the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are one God."

The teaching of the SDA Church today is that there is one God, not the three individual Gods that you mention.  You have distorted the teachings of the SDA Church.

 

[Challenger]

3 hours ago, Challenger said:

2 hours ago, Gregory Matthews said:

The teaching of the SDA Church today is that there is one God, not the three individual Gods that you mention.  You have distorted the teachings of the SDA Church.

 

Not three individual Gods? 

"While  the Godhead is not one in person, God is one in purpose, mind, and character. This oneness does not obliterate the distinct personalities of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.  Nor does the separateness of personalities within the Deity destroy the monotheistic thrust of Scripture, that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one God." (Seventh-day Adventists Believe...A Biblical Exposition of 27 Fundamental Doctrines, pg. 23)

[Gustave]

Quote

Challenger said: Gustave, I am of the persuasion, that the Bible only is to be our rule of faith, not the Creeds of men.

Evidently not, you're marching to the beat of the historical Seventh-day Adventist Church prior to the death of Ellen White. While you may not understand that to be a "creed" it absolutely is. 

Quote

Challenger said: If as you assert that God is a single UNDIVIDED substance, composed of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, then how is it possible that Christ could separate Himself from this UNDIVIDED substance, and take on the form of man?

I'm asserting that God is a single undivided Substance which is Father, Son & Holy Spirit AND that there was NO SEPARATION prior to the Incarnation or after. Christ has never been separated from the Father & Holy Spirit. It's ONE BEING - that's the whole point. 

Quote

Challenger said: Unlike you statement asserts, I believe that both Adam and Jesus were dealt the same hand, both having Unfallen natures. Adam failed when temped, Jesus did not, all the while He set His Divine Nature aside, while on earth.

Yes, I know - the Kenosis Heresy.  Like Arianism this heresy was dealt with at a Church Council (Chalcedon) which explains the Hypostatic Union (which systematizes Scripture). At no point did Christ slough-off the Divine Nature. Remember, Scripture attests that God became man WITHOUT ceasing to be God. I'm not sure how many times I've said that phrase since I've been on this forum but it has been a lot of times. 

Quote

Challenger said: But you say, Jesus performed many miracles. Yes, indeed, but were they by His divinity or the Holy Spirit working through Him, as in the cases performed by the disciples?

 Jesus said He would raise Himself from the dead did He not? A feat somewhat impossible if He sloughed-off His Divine Nature AND "didn't know anything" - i.e. Ellen's 'the dead don't know anything' doctrine. 

 

[Challenger]

14 hours ago, Gregory Matthews said:

The teaching of the SDA Church today is that there is one God, not the three individual Gods that you mention.  You have distorted the teachings of the SDA Church.

 

Gregory, I'm sure you are aware of Amazing Facts ministries, Doug Batchelor its director. Also a renowned speaker, author, and evangelist within the SDA community.

Within his Free Book Library, by Amazing Facts, he has a book titled the Trinity. In in he makes the following statement, " Probably the most widely held Christian view of God is know as the "trinity." ...the Godhead consist of three distinct persons who have existed together from eternity past and are named the ...Each possesses original, underived, and unborrowed life. They are equally God and are one in nature, character, and purpose...one God in a combination of the three distinct persons.

Latter in the book, he speaks to an issue that confuses many. It has to do with the word "ONE." " Simply put, "one" in the bible does not always mean numerical quantity. One can often mean unity. In (Gen. 2:24) "one flesh" does not mean that a married couple melt into one human after they marry, but rather they be united... Jesus prayed that His apostles would be one, that they may be one just as We [Jesus and the Father]are one. (Jh. 17:22,23)

He goes on to say, "Granted, it is a brain exercise to grasp that one God is also, and equally, "They." Like one rope with three strands, the three persons... make up the one God."

 As you can see my views on the Godhead align with those of Doug Batchelor's, It would be impossible for Him to be promoting error on this issue and still be highly esteemed within Adventism. 

 

[Gustave]

Doug Batchelor isn't a Trinitarian Challenger. This is like citing Arius' musings on what God is and pointing at it for confirmation of what you believe. 

[Gregory Matthews]

Challenger:  I do not intend to discuss in this forum Doug Batchelor, his views, and his place in Adventism.  I live close to the Church of which he is a pastor.  He is an authority as to what he believes.  He is an example as to the broad spectra of belief that exists within Adventism.  Without denying this, he is thought to represent some aspects of Adventism, but not other aspects.

Again, I do not wish for an extended discussion of Doug Batchelor.  If he wished to do so, he could post in this forum.  I intend to leave him in peace to conduct his ministry as he wishes to do.  But, if it becomes an extended discussion of him, I will shut it down.    

[Gregory Matthews]

FYI:  Doug Batchelor is the head of an independent ministry that is not formally a part of the Seventh-day Adventist Chruch.  His ministry owns property and employs people who work for it.  This should not be considered a negative.  There are many independent ministries who contribute to the work of God on this Earth.  I personally financially support some.