Excellent series, pastor Kelly. Thank you for giving each sermon. Much needed. The winds of doctrine are blowing at quite a clip in an effort to deceive us. THIS is why we are to study and know for ourselves. Always learning from you - gathering oil. Blessings on you and your family.
I see my need! Father please fill me with the power of your Holy spirit , 🙏 which i always loved and believed and come to know that the Holy spirit is the third person of the Godhead.. praise Father son and holy spirit 🙏
Years ago, I was a member of the Village church. Now I’m a member of the church where this anti-trinitarian movement has its leader. My heart aches as I see the division and where this teaching is leading. Thank you for this powerful three-part series. It is so clear. I pray we can follow Christ and allow the third person of the Godhead to lead us through each day. God bless you in your ministry.
It is contrary to Scripture. Almost any portion of the New Testament we may open which has occasion to speak of the Father and Son, represents them as two distinct persons. The seventeenth chapter of John is alone sufficient to refute the doctrine of the Trinity. Over forty times in that one chapter Christ speaks of his Father as a person distinct from himself. His Father was in heaven and he upon earth. The Father had sent him. Given to him those that believed. He was then to go to the Father. And in this very testimony he shows us in what consists the oneness of the Father and Son. It is the same as the oneness of the members of Christ's church. "That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one." Of one heart and one mind. Of one purpose in all the plan devised for man's salvation. Read the seventeenth chapter of John, and see if it does not completely upset the doctrine of the Trinity. To believe that doctrine, when reading the scripture we must believe that God sent himself into the world, died to reconcile the world to himself, raised himself from the dead, ascended to himself in heaven, pleads before himself in heaven to reconcile the world to himself, and is the only mediator between man and himself. It will not do to substitute the human nature of Christ (according to Trinitarians) as the Mediator; for Clarke says, "Human blood can no more appease God than swine's blood." Com. On 2Sam.xxi,10. We must believe also that in the garden God prayed to himself, if it were possible, to let the cup pass from himself, and a thousand other such absurdities. Read carefully the following texts, comparing them with the idea that Christ is the Omnipotent, Omnipresent, Supreme, and only self-existent God: John xiv,28; xvii,3; iii,16; v,19,26; xi,15; xx,19; viii,50; vi,38; Mark xiii,32; Luke vi,12; xxii,69; xxiv,29; Matt.iii,17; xxvii,46; Gal.iii,20; 1Jno.ii,1; Rev.v,7; Acts xvii,31. Also see Matt.xi,25,27; Luke i,32; xxii,42; John iii,35,36; v,19,21,22,23,25,26; vi,40; viii,35,36; xiv,13; 1Cor.xv,28, &c.? The word Trinity nowhere occurs in the Scriptures. The principal text supposed to teach it is 1John [5]:7, which is an interpolation. Clarke says, "Out of one hundred and thirteen manuscripts, the text is wanting in one hundred and twelve. It occurs in no MS. Before the tenth century. And the first place the text occurs in Greek, is in the Greek translation of the acts of the Council of Lateran, held A. D. 1215." - Com. on John 1. 3. Its origin is pagan and fabulous. Instead of pointing us to scripture for proof of the trinity, we are pointed to the trident of the Persians, with the assertion that "by this they designed to teach the idea of a trinity, and if they had the doctrine of the trinity, they must have received it by tradition from the people of God. But this is all assumed, for it is certain that the Jewish church held to no such doctrine. Says Mr. Summerbell, "A friend of mine who was present in a New York synagogue, asked the Rabbi for an explanation of the word Elohim'. A Trinitarian clergyman who stood by, replied, Why, that has reference to the three persons in the Trinity,' when a Jew stepped forward and said he must not mention that word again, or they would have to compel him to leave the house; for it was not permitted to mention the name of any strange god in the synagogue." * Milman says the idea of the Trident is fabulous. (Hist. Christianity, p.34) This doctrine of the trinity was brought into the church about the same time with image worship, and keeping the day of the sun, and is but Persian doctrine remodelled. It occupied about three hundred years from its introduction to bring the doctrine to what it is now. It was commenced about 325 A. D., and was not completed till 681. See Milman's Gibbon's Rome, vol. iv, p.422. It was adopted in Spain in 589, in England in 596, in Africa in 534. - Gib. vol. iv, pp.114, 345; Milner, vol. i, p.519." (Discussion between Summerbell and Flood on Trinity, p. 38) (J. N. Loughborough, Review & Herald, November 5, 1861, Vol. 18, p. 184, par. 1-11)
This is a major part of the shaking of the church. Those who grieve the Holy Spirit by denying His divinity will be shaken out of the church. We need to pray for them to come back to Biblical truth 🙏🏼
I hope you understand what you are saying child of God. The pioneers denied this trinity doctrine flat out! I don't know if they were shaken out but what is on record is that kellogg the one instrumental in bringing this belief to the church is buried in the section of the freemason today.
POPULAR ARGUMENTS FOR THE TRINITY ADDRESSED The Bible teaches that there are three powers in heaven: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. But it did not say that together, they are the one true God, or that they are co-equal. The concept of God as a Trinity has been prevalent in pagan religions and cultures but entirely absent from the religion of ancient Israel, the apostolic religion and even the religion of later pioneers such as James White, Joseph Bates, J. N. Andrews, J. N. Loughborough, J. H. Waggoner, and others. The Seventh-day Adventist church requires that persons wishing to become members make a vow to believe in "one God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, a unity of three coeternal Persons.” whereas the Bible does not explicitly teach that. The previous vow that persons took prior to 1980 was belief in "God the Father, in His Son Jesus Christ and in the Holy Spirit", which the Bible clearly teaches. The church has not allowed views like those of the pioneers to be expressed in the church and has disfellowshipped or sidelined those who hold similar beliefs as the pioneers on this matter. The church then accuses those very persons whom they forced out of the church and who then operate outside of the church, of causing division or calling people out of the church. Is that fair? Or is it a repeat of Ahab’s accusation against Elijah? A few of the popular arguments for the Trinity are now addressed below. 1. Assertion: SDA pioneers only objected to the Catholic version of the Trinity. Response: The pioneers of Seventh-day Adventism fully understood the doctrine of the Trinity and rejected it as error. Later, some persons such as John Harvey Kellogg and S. N. Haskel spoke favourably of the Trinity but earlier pioneers who Ellen White described as laying the foundations of our faith consistently objected to the Trinity. There is a common definition of the Trinity that is shared by all Trinitarians, whether Catholic or otherwise, even though explained differently by various bodies. This definition as given in the dictionary is that the one God of scripture is three co-equal persons. The SDA Church expresses its trinitarian belief that “There is one God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, a unity of three coeternal Persons.” (SDA Fundamental Beliefs number 2). The definition of who is Catholic, as given in the Edict of Thessalonica expresses the same idea as follows: “let us believe in the one deity of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, in equal majesty and in a holy Trinity. We authorize the followers of this law to assume the title of Catholic Christians; but as for the others, since, in our judgment they are foolish madmen, we decree that they shall be branded with the ignominious name of heretics” (Edict of Thessalonica issued 380 AD). This definition of who is Catholic and who is heretic was used as the basis for persecuting God’s people during the dark ages and continues to define what is considered Christian orthodoxy by the World Council of Churches (WCC). The Basis of the WCC speaks of “one God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.” (Basis of the WCC, adopted by the Third Assembly (New Delhi 1961). The Bible teaches otherwise, as Jesus, in praying, stated that the one true God is His Father - “And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” (John 17:3). 2. Assertion: The Hebrew word for “one” that describes God really means “united”. Response: The Bible says that God is one (echad). The word echad is the first counting number in Hebrew, as with the numeral one. In other places of the Bible God is described using similar words such as “only” (quoted above in Jesus’s prayer), “none else”, “no other”, “He”, “none like me”. The Jews themselves, in whose language the word echad is used to describe God, understood it to mean one individual. The one God (one supreme Being) of the Bible is Jesus’s Father - “For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named” (Eph. 3:14, 15). The Father has no co-equals. He is “the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see” (1 Tim. 6:15, 16). There aren’t three supreme beings, only One. All other beings are subject to Him. Another word that Trinitarians appeal to is Elohim, where God (Elohim) said “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness” (Gen. 1:26). They assume that God (Elohim) is three persons. The Bible does not say that. Ellen White explains, “I saw that when God said to his SON, Let us make man in our image, Satan was jealous of JESUS.” (Ellen G. White, Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 1, pp. 17, 18). God (the Father of Christ) was speaking to His Son only. His Son is “the express image of His person” (Heb. 1:3). Ellen White speaks again explicitly in the following words: “The Sovereign of the universe was not alone in His work of beneficence. He had an associate - a co-worker who could appreciate His purposes”. “Christ, the Word, the only begotten of God, was one with the eternal Father - one in nature, in character, in purpose - the only being that could enter into all the counsels and purposes of God.” (E. G. White, Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 34). 3. Assertion: Jesus is co-equal with the Father Response: Jesus never claimed full equality with God, His Father, at any point in His existence. Before He came to earth, His Father anointed and appointed Him - “Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.” (Heb. 1:9; see also verse 2). While He was on earth, He said “my Father is greater than I” (John 14:28). After sin is finished, He will still be subject to His Father - “And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.” (1 Cor. 15:28). 4. Assertion: The Holy Spirit is co-equal with the Father Response: The Bible does not speak anywhere of a third God-Being who has the image or likeness of God or “the similitude of God.” (James 3:9). There is no denying that the Comforter, the Holy Spirit, sent at Pentecost is a person - only not a God-being to be worshipped. Like the Angel of Revelation 18, the Comforter carries out a work of worldwide extent and is aided by other heavenly beings. Ellen G. White describing the latter rain speaks of a mighty angel from heaven being sent to do this work and further said, "Angels were sent to aid the mighty angel from heaven" (Ellen. G. White, Story of Redemption, p. 399). The language of John 14-16 speaks of someone whom Jesus would ask the Father to send. That Person would not speak of himself but would speak only what He hears and would bring back to the minds of the disciples the things that Jesus would have told them - “he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak” (John 16:13). The three powers of heaven are God, Christ, and angels. There are many such references; for example: “I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things” (1 Tim. 5:21). These are the same ones who were present at the creation - “Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? …. When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?” (Job 38:4-7). Again, “Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne” (Rev.1:4). These seven spirits are later described as “seven lamps of fire” (Rev. 4:5) and as “the seven angels which stood before God” (Rev. 8:2). This is consistent with the Hebrew word ruach and the Greek word pneuma that are translated in the Bible as spirit. These words are also translated spirits, thus indicating that the Holy Spirit need not be seen as one individual being who is omnipresent but many spirit beings representing God everywhere. 5. Assertion: Ellen White led the church into a Trinitarian understanding of God. Response: Ellen White never used the term Trinity to describe God. She spoke of three persons of the godhead, which is consistent with the view expressed here that the Holy Spirit is a person, just not someone co-equal with God or to be worshipped. Regarding Ellen White’s statement that “In Christ is life, original, unborrowed, underived” (Desire of Ages, p. 530), the full statement shows that it is not Jesus Himself that is being described, but rather, life - which Jesus has and is able to impart. Here is the full statement as it was originally published in Signs of the Times: “In Him was life, original, unborrowed, underived. This life is not inherent in man. He can possess it only through Christ.” (The Signs of the Times, April 8, 1897; also Selected Messages, vol. 1, pp. 296, 297). Being described is the nature and quality of this life and not the origin of it. Original - not a pattern or copy, but something genuine, authentic. Unborrowed - does not have to be returned. Underived - not being drawn from a source; He has it in Himself. How He came in possession of it? It was given to Him by His Father. Jesus said: “For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself” (John 5:26). The Trinity denies the most fundamental truth of the gospel that God loved us to the point of giving His only begotten Son to die for us (John 3:16). It was not an eternal God who cannot die, but the literal Son of God who did die and was raised from the dead by His Father (Gal.1:1).
Jesus spoke through the prophet Isaiah about the spirit before time existed, that the decision to send him Jesus the son, was made by God the father and the Spirit. Isaiah 48:16. What are your thoughts on this? What about Acts 5:1-4, Matt 12:31-32 etc.
@@cherylbyfield2501 These are reasonable questions. My responses: The statement, "now the Lord God, and his Spirit, hath sent me" in Isa.48:16 does not indicate that the Lord God and his Spirit are co-equals. There is only one Lord God mentioned there. So, as said before, there is no denying that the Holy Spirit is a person, just not a being to be worshipped nor a co-equal with God. God and His Spirit (or Spirits) work closely, for example, Jesus said: "He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels." (Rev. 3:5). In Acts 5:4, the statement "thou hast not lied unto men but unto God" is not saying that the Holy Spirit is God. Neither is it saying that Ananias did not lie to Peter or that Peter was not a man, but God. It is simply highlighting the fact that there was a higher power whom they represented, similar to the statement, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that receiveth whomsoever I send receiveth me; and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me" (John 13:20. In Matt.12:31-32, It should be noted that Jesus's warning against blaspheming against the Holy Spirit is not implying that the Holy Spirit is more to be revered than Jesus Himself. Jesus went back to heaven and promises to return to this earth to take us to His Father's house in heaven. He left the Holy Spirit to guide us until He returns. If we reject that guidance by blasheming against the the Holy Spirit, there will be nobody to guide us. The situation is similar to what God told the children of Israel in the wilderness - "Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him." (Ex. 23:20, 21). It is simply warning us not to reject the Holy Spirit's guidance. It is not forbidding us seeking to understand who the Holy Spirit is or what the Holy Spirit does.
Can this claim be backed up? Excepting Uriah Smith, "the other founders of the church embraced it [trinity doctrine]. That is not substantiated. The opposite is true. The trail of evidence shows that the pioneers were largely history before the foundation of the trinity was substituted for the 1872 Fundamental principles. Jesus said he would build his church upon a rock (Matthew 16:15-18). Is this the trinity doctrine that Jesus said His Father had revealed to Peter?
Jesus did not say "a" rock, He said "this" rock, meaning, Himself. As for the "trinity" doctrine: It is contrary to Scripture. Almost any portion of the New Testament we may open which has occasion to speak of the Father and Son, represents them as two distinct persons. The seventeenth chapter of John is alone sufficient to refute the doctrine of the Trinity. Over forty times in that one chapter Christ speaks of his Father as a person distinct from himself. His Father was in heaven and he upon earth. The Father had sent him. Given to him those that believed. He was then to go to the Father. And in this very testimony he shows us in what consists the oneness of the Father and Son. It is the same as the oneness of the members of Christ's church. "That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one." Of one heart and one mind. Of one purpose in all the plan devised for man's salvation. Read the seventeenth chapter of John, and see if it does not completely upset the doctrine of the Trinity. To believe that doctrine, when reading the scripture we must believe that God sent himself into the world, died to reconcile the world to himself, raised himself from the dead, ascended to himself in heaven, pleads before himself in heaven to reconcile the world to himself, and is the only mediator between man and himself. It will not do to substitute the human nature of Christ (according to Trinitarians) as the Mediator; for Clarke says, "Human blood can no more appease God than swine's blood." Com. On 2Sam.xxi,10. We must believe also that in the garden God prayed to himself, if it were possible, to let the cup pass from himself, and a thousand other such absurdities. Read carefully the following texts, comparing them with the idea that Christ is the Omnipotent, Omnipresent, Supreme, and only self-existent God: John xiv,28; xvii,3; iii,16; v,19,26; xi,15; xx,19; viii,50; vi,38; Mark xiii,32; Luke vi,12; xxii,69; xxiv,29; Matt.iii,17; xxvii,46; Gal.iii,20; 1Jno.ii,1; Rev.v,7; Acts xvii,31. Also see Matt.xi,25,27; Luke i,32; xxii,42; John iii,35,36; v,19,21,22,23,25,26; vi,40; viii,35,36; xiv,13; 1Cor.xv,28, &c.? The word Trinity nowhere occurs in the Scriptures. The principal text supposed to teach it is 1John [5]:7, which is an interpolation. Clarke says, "Out of one hundred and thirteen manuscripts, the text is wanting in one hundred and twelve. It occurs in no MS. Before the tenth century. And the first place the text occurs in Greek, is in the Greek translation of the acts of the Council of Lateran, held A. D. 1215." - Com. on John 1. 3. Its origin is pagan and fabulous. Instead of pointing us to scripture for proof of the trinity, we are pointed to the trident of the Persians, with the assertion that "by this they designed to teach the idea of a trinity, and if they had the doctrine of the trinity, they must have received it by tradition from the people of God. But this is all assumed, for it is certain that the Jewish church held to no such doctrine. Says Mr. Summerbell, "A friend of mine who was present in a New York synagogue, asked the Rabbi for an explanation of the word Elohim'. A Trinitarian clergyman who stood by, replied, Why, that has reference to the three persons in the Trinity,' when a Jew stepped forward and said he must not mention that word again, or they would have to compel him to leave the house; for it was not permitted to mention the name of any strange god in the synagogue." * Milman says the idea of the Trident is fabulous. (Hist. Christianity, p.34) This doctrine of the trinity was brought into the church about the same time with image worship, and keeping the day of the sun, and is but Persian doctrine remodelled. It occupied about three hundred years from its introduction to bring the doctrine to what it is now. It was commenced about 325 A. D., and was not completed till 681. See Milman's Gibbon's Rome, vol. iv, p.422. It was adopted in Spain in 589, in England in 596, in Africa in 534. - Gib. vol. iv, pp.114, 345; Milner, vol. i, p.519." (Discussion between Summerbell and Flood on Trinity, p. 38) (J. N. Loughborough, Review & Herald, November 5, 1861, Vol. 18, p. 184, par. 1-11)
The pioneers rejected the doctrine of the Trinity. December 7, 1955 Elder L.E. Froom Office Dear Brother Froom: Mrs. Soper calls to our attention the fact that you are seeking information as to the position held by our early workers concerning the Trinity, the personality of the Holy Spirit, and the pre-existence of Christ as this may be revealed in their writings. I think we will have to concede that our early workers were not Trinitarians. I would like to direct you to a thesis prepared by Christie Taylor on the subject of the views of Seventh-day Adventists on the Trinity. I gave some study to this question in assisting Elder Taylor in his work. I believe what he has presented is a fair and correct presentation. Sincerely your brother, Arthur L. White, Secretary Ellen G. White Publications ALW:ro Q. & A. File # 25-0-1 Trinity, belief of early pioneers re. See R & H articles
Why has it taken a SDA Pastor nearly 3 hours to explain something I can do in 2 minutes??? And here it is, simple, the bible speaks, leave Satan out of the remnant church of Christ: It is contrary to Scripture. Almost any portion of the New Testament we may open which has occasion to speak of the Father and Son, represents them as two distinct persons. The seventeenth chapter of John is alone sufficient to refute the doctrine of the Trinity. Over forty times in that one chapter Christ speaks of his Father as a person distinct from himself. His Father was in heaven and he upon earth. The Father had sent him. Given to him those that believed. He was then to go to the Father. And in this very testimony he shows us in what consists the oneness of the Father and Son. It is the same as the oneness of the members of Christ's church. "That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one." Of one heart and one mind. Of one purpose in all the plan devised for man's salvation. Read the seventeenth chapter of John, and see if it does not completely upset the doctrine of the Trinity. To believe that doctrine, when reading the scripture we must believe that God sent himself into the world, died to reconcile the world to himself, raised himself from the dead, ascended to himself in heaven, pleads before himself in heaven to reconcile the world to himself, and is the only mediator between man and himself. It will not do to substitute the human nature of Christ (according to Trinitarians) as the Mediator; for Clarke says, "Human blood can no more appease God than swine's blood." Com. On 2Sam.xxi,10. We must believe also that in the garden God prayed to himself, if it were possible, to let the cup pass from himself, and a thousand other such absurdities. Read carefully the following texts, comparing them with the idea that Christ is the Omnipotent, Omnipresent, Supreme, and only self-existent God: John xiv,28; xvii,3; iii,16; v,19,26; xi,15; xx,19; viii,50; vi,38; Mark xiii,32; Luke vi,12; xxii,69; xxiv,29; Matt.iii,17; xxvii,46; Gal.iii,20; 1Jno.ii,1; Rev.v,7; Acts xvii,31. Also see Matt.xi,25,27; Luke i,32; xxii,42; John iii,35,36; v,19,21,22,23,25,26; vi,40; viii,35,36; xiv,13; 1Cor.xv,28, &c.? The word Trinity nowhere occurs in the Scriptures. The principal text supposed to teach it is 1John [5]:7, which is an interpolation. Clarke says, "Out of one hundred and thirteen manuscripts, the text is wanting in one hundred and twelve. It occurs in no MS. Before the tenth century. And the first place the text occurs in Greek, is in the Greek translation of the acts of the Council of Lateran, held A. D. 1215." - Com. on John 1. 3. Its origin is pagan and fabulous. Instead of pointing us to scripture for proof of the trinity, we are pointed to the trident of the Persians, with the assertion that "by this they designed to teach the idea of a trinity, and if they had the doctrine of the trinity, they must have received it by tradition from the people of God. But this is all assumed, for it is certain that the Jewish church held to no such doctrine. Says Mr. Summerbell, "A friend of mine who was present in a New York synagogue, asked the Rabbi for an explanation of the word Elohim'. A Trinitarian clergyman who stood by, replied, Why, that has reference to the three persons in the Trinity,' when a Jew stepped forward and said he must not mention that word again, or they would have to compel him to leave the house; for it was not permitted to mention the name of any strange god in the synagogue." * Milman says the idea of the Trident is fabulous. (Hist. Christianity, p.34) This doctrine of the trinity was brought into the church about the same time with image worship, and keeping the day of the sun, and is but Persian doctrine remodelled. It occupied about three hundred years from its introduction to bring the doctrine to what it is now. It was commenced about 325 A. D., and was not completed till 681. See Milman's Gibbon's Rome, vol. iv, p.422. It was adopted in Spain in 589, in England in 596, in Africa in 534. - Gib. vol. iv, pp.114, 345; Milner, vol. i, p.519." (Discussion between Summerbell and Flood on Trinity, p. 38) (J. N. Loughborough, Review & Herald, November 5, 1861, Vol. 18, p. 184, par. 1-11)
THE SECOND COMMANDMENT, THE TRINITY, AND THE OMNIPRESENCE OF GOD I always wondered what was so significant about the second Commandment that Rome found it necessary to remove it altogether from the Ten Commandments. But it appears that there is a fundamental truth in that Commandment concerning where God's presence is that is intended to protect us from all forms of false worship.
The second Commandment tells us that we should not bow down before any image. This implies that God is not in any image. Which means that God is not everywhere. The Bible tells us that God is in heaven; and heaven is not everywhere. Heaven is above the earth and that is where we should direct our worship to God, where He is. He knows everything that happens everywhere and can go wherever He pleases but His abode is in heaven where Jesus, our High Priest and intercessor, is presenting our cases to Him. - "Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens" (Heb. 8:1). Furthermore, both the prophets Daniel and John saw God in heaven with the angels gathered around His throne and Jesus being separate and distinct (Dan. 7 and Rev. 4, 5). Daniel said "the Ancient of days did sit" (Dan. 7:9) and "one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days" (Dan. 7:13). John said "one sat on the throne" (Rev. 4:2) who was worshipped as the Creator to whom it was said "Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created" (Rev. 4:11), with Jesus appearing before Him to receive a book and power and authority, as the Lamb who was slain, while the angels sang, "Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever." (Rev. 5:13). God is not everywhere all at once like a vapour while part of Him or an image sits on the throne representing Him. God Himself sits, of whom man was made in His image after His likeness, "made after the similitude of God" (James 3:9). Logically, if God is everywhere, He can be worshipped wherever He is. One could then bow down and worship before a stone, a tree, a person or any object, not as worshipping the object but as worshipping God, since God is in it. That would open the door for the worship of false Gods as no one would be able to tell the difference whether you are worshipping the true God or not.
It would not be consistent to forbid worshipping before an object if God is in the object and one is worshipping, not the object, but God who is in the object. This is evident in the experience of the children of Israel in the wilderness. God appeared to them in a cloud and they were not forbidden to bow before Him in the cloud - "And the LORD said unto Moses, Lo, I come unto thee in a thick cloud" (Ex. 19:9), "And all the people saw the cloudy pillar stand at the tabernacle door: and all the people rose up and worshipped, every man in his tent door" (Ex. 33:10). If God is not in a particular place, say in an image, it means that there is at least one place where He is not. He cannot be everywhere and not everywhere at the same time. The idea that the Holy Spirit is God present everywhere was precisely the argument that Dr. John Harvey Kellogg put forward to justify his pantheistic teachings. And Ellen White told him that he was wrong. Initially, he said that God was in everything. And when God instructed Ellen White to oppose it, he modified it by saying that at the time of his first presentation of the matter in the book "The Living Temple" he did not believe in the Trinity. Because of that, he said he had not given a clear explanation of the matter. He went on to explain that he had now come to believe in the Trinity and could better explain his idea. The new explanation was that it was not God the Father, but God the Holy Ghost who was everywhere and in everything. Ellen White told him that he was wrong. And we can see why. If God the Holy Spirit is everywhere and can be worshipped, it is a doorway to replace worshipping God and Christ in heaven entirely.
Another modified version of Kellogg's idea is that the Holy Spirit is really Christ himself or both God and Christ in an omnipresent form. This is also not correct as it places God and Christ on earth rather than in heaven.
The pioneers of Seventh-day Adventism stated in their Fundamental Principles of faith published in the 1889 Yearbook that God was everywhere present by His representative, the Holy Spirit. At face value, this would suggest that this representative is omnipresent. But it is perhaps more consistent with scripture to say that He is everywhere present by His representatives the holy spirits. Holy spirits are ministering spirits sent from heaven - "And he saith unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Hereafter ye shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man." (John1:51). "Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?" (Heb. 1:14).
This is consistent with the Hebrew word ruach and the Greek word pneuma that are translated in the Bible as spirit. These words are also translated spirits, thus indicating that the Holy Spirit need not be seen as one individual being who is omnipresent but many spirit beings representing God everywhere.
From this perspective, there is no denying that the Comforter, the Holy Spirit, sent at Pentecost is a person - only not a God-being to be worshipped. Like the Angel of Revelation 18 who comes down from heaven with the latter rain - a similar occurrence as that which took place at Pentecost except more extensive - the Comforter would be seen as a messenger sent by Christ from heaven, as stated repeatedly in John 14-16. Ellen G. White describing the latter rain speaks of a mighty angel from heaven being sent to do this work and further said, "Angels were sent to aid the mighty angel from heaven" (Ellen. G. White, Story of Redemption, p. 399). It should be noted that Jesus's warning against blaspheming against the Holy Spirit is not implying that the Holy Spirit is more to be revered than Jesus Himself. Jesus went back to heaven and promises to return to this earth to take us to His Father's house in heaven. He left the Holy Spirit to guide us until He returns. If we reject that guidance by blaspheming against the Holy Spirit, there will be nobody to guide us. The situation is like what God told the children of Israel in the wilderness - "Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him." (Ex. 23:20, 21). It is simply warning us not to reject the Holy Spirit's guidance. It is not forbidding us seeking to understand who the Holy Spirit is or what the Holy Spirit does. So, there we have it. The church has now fully accepted Kellogg's idea. Ellen White said that the initial presentation by Kellogg was the alpha of deadly heresies. She said that the omega would follow shortly afterwards and would be accepted. And it did follow shortly afterwards in Kellogg's modified version, based on his acceptance of the Trinity. And the church has now fully accepted it - that God (the Holy Spirit) is everywhere and should be worshipped. So, based on current practice, Jesus is worshipped, the Holy Spirit is worshipped but the One true God is almost entirely ignored. Jesus, praying to His Father, made it clear who the "only true God" is and identified Himself as the one sent by God - "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." (John 17:3). Nowhere in the Bible is worship given to anyone else except the one seated on the throne who is referred to as "LORD God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come" (Rev.4:8) and to Christ, the Lamb, as it will be in the new earth - "And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it." (Rev. 21:22). God is the Father of Christ. Accordingly, Christ, the Lamb is seen with "an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads" (Rev. 14:1). It is the name of the Lamb's Father that will be written in their foreheads. Whatever one's concept of the Godhead, the term "godhead" is used only three times in the Bible (Acts 17:29, Rom. 1:20 and Col. 2:9) and in none of these places is the expression used to replace the idea of God being a single individual who has a Divine Son who is worshipped alongside Himself. And not even once does the term "godhead" in scripture allude to the worship of anyone else. All worship should be directed to God and Christ in heaven. It is not about where we are when we worship but, like sending a petition to the king of England, we do not send it to Spain or Australia but to him in England where he is. Similarly, Jesus in teaching us how to pray directed that we say, "Our Father which art in heaven".
We should not be praying to nor worshipping anything on earth. We should pray to God in heaven, approaching His throne through Christ, our Mediator, and we should direct our worship to heaven where God is. This is the substance of the second Commandment that Rome has removed.
@ElijahAndMoses Very interesting comment. I had not thought about places where God cannot be. I will need to do some research and thinking on this. Thanks for your comment.
We seem to have no issues with the evil spirit. If someone says the evil spirit we know they are referring to the evil angels/ demons but to suggest that the opposite should be true ie Holy angels is Holy Spirit! That becomes a taboo. I'm still learning this subject but that's my take.
@@revelation1790 Another place that God cannot be: in the heart of an evil person. God is neither invited, nor enters, into such a person, and does not dwell with evil, as if darkness and light could coexist.
I have no issue with there being 3 persons in the Godhead. What does concern me is the prevalence in our denomination of those in positions of influence who deny the literal ontological relationship between Father and Son, claiming it to be metaphorical. Along with this is the ideas being expressed regarding the unity of the members of the Godhead. It is claimed that this unity cannot be disturbed, broken, or divided. How does that affect the death of the Son? Did He die? Was there a real separation within the Godhead further magnifying the depth of sacrifice made by God?
He who had said, “I lay down my life, that I might take it again,” came forth from the grave to life that was in Himself. Humanity died: divinity did not die. In His divinity, Christ possessed the power to break the bonds of death. He declares that He has life in Himself to quicken whom He will.... He is the spring, the fountain, of life. Only He who alone hath immortality, dwelling in light and life, could say, “I have power to lay down my life, and I have power to take it again.” ...66SDA Bible Commentary 5:1113, 1114.
@@harley6394-h3f Jesus said the Father was dwelling in him (John 14:10). Obviously, the Father did not die. God is immortal, and cannot die (1 Timothy 1:17). Jesus died, whereas his God had forsaken him on the cross, leading him to that agonizing cry, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" See John 17:3 and 20:17. The Father is Jesus' God, and our God.
Those texts you provided: How did you intend to interpret them? From the Non-Trinitarian/Anti-Trinitarian perspective? They certainly do not teach that perspective! They only prove the unity of the Godhead in character and purpose. What does it take for Christians who simply reject that the Godhead consists of “three great Worthies, the Powers in heaven” are one God even as that same God created male and female to be joined as one flesh at marriage? Ellen White makes it quite clear that Matthew 28:19 teaches us that the Godhead is made up of three personalities pledged as power from God that we have if we are baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. “Stop your efforts to talk nothingness, things that are of no account at all. God wants us to come to our senses. “When you baptize them, and you see that they are in error in any respect, do you, any one of you that feel that you have a message from God, go to them kindly, and tell them, between them and you alone, where their trouble is, and where their difficulties will come in unless they change the course of their action? This is the work that is to rest upon us. And then what? Why it says, ‘Baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.’ [Verse 19.] Three personalities; and these three personalities are the pledged power from God that His people shall have, if they have been baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Now their is no excuse for souls to be left in ignorance and weakness if they will be gospel believers, if they will carry out these principles, and know that the three great Worthies, the Powers in heaven, are pledged to the church of God that will work in harmony with Christ’s teachings.” Vol. 21, Letters and Manuscripts, Ms 139, 1906. Those of you who teach Non-Tinitarianism/Anti-trinitarianism need to wake up to the simple fact that you should cease from making this the test when the true test is Sabbath-keeping in a time leading up to the application of the mark of the beast which, by the way, is not the teaching of a false trinity such as Roman Catholicism has taught, but that those who keep the papal sabbath, the false sabbath. Seventh-day Adventists do not teach the Roman Catholic doctrine of the false trinity. You are wasting time and resources to spend so much time on that concern. Instead, you should focus upon the present truth that will sanctify us according to Christ’s prayer to make us one with Him and the Father even as they are one.
Isaiah 6-3 "And one cried unto another, and said, Holy, holy, holy, is the LORD of hosts: the whole earth is full of his glory.” Rev 4-8 And the four beasts had each of them six wings about him; and they were full of eyes within: and they rest not day and night, saying, Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come. “Did you catch that? That’s one “holy” for each person of the Godhead!“ You are born unto God, and you stand under the sanction and the power of the three holiest beings in heaven, who are able to keep you from falling. 7MR 267.2 “The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, the three holy dignitaries of heaven, have declared that they will strengthen men to overcome the powers of darkness.”-5 Bible Commentary, 1110. (Manuscript 92,1901).
REVELATION CONFIRMS ONE GOD, ONE MEDIATOR AND HOLY SPIRITS Jesus said: “The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord” (Mark 12:29). The scribe, to whom Jesus spoke, responded, “Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he” (Mark 12:32). To this, the Divine record says, “And when Jesus saw that he answered discreetly, he said unto him, Thou art not far from the kingdom of God.” (Mark 12:34). Jesus considered the scribe’s answer a discreet one. Revelation confirms that God is one person, not three. In vision, John saw that “one sat on the throne. And he that sat was to look upon like a jasper and a sardine stone” (Rev. 4:2, 3). The beings around the throne worship Him, saying “Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.” (Rev. 4:11). He is the Creator. Separate from this Being who is called “Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come” (Rev. 4:8), we see Jesus, as the “Lamb that was slain” (Rev. 5:12). The beings in heaven worship both God and Christ, saying “Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne and unto the Lamb for ever and ever.” (Rev. 5:13). The book of Revelation begins with a declaration of a chain of command: God gave to Christ, Christ gave to His angel, and the angel gave to John - “The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John” (Rev. 1:1). There is no confusion here, and most people seem to understand this. The Revelation continues with greetings being brought to the seven churches from God, Christ and the seven spirits before God’s throne - “Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne; And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead” (Rev. 1:4, 5). This is where some people get confused - they say that it is not really seven spirits but one spirit - the ‘seven-fold’ spirit. But the Revelation is clear that the seven spirits are seven discrete entities, not one entity - “And out of the throne proceeded lightnings and thunderings and voices: and there were seven lamps of fire burning before the throne, which are the seven Spirits of God.” (Rev. 4:5). What are these seven lamps of fire before God’s throne, who can send greetings? They must be living beings! Is there any category of living beings who are described as lamps of fire? Let the scriptures answer - “And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.” (Heb. 1:7); and further, “But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool? Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?” (Heb. 1:14). There ought to be no confusion as to who these seven spirits are, who send greetings. But lest some say that they are still unclear, let the scriptures describe in further detail those who stand before God’s throne - “And when he had opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven about the space of half an hour. And I saw the seven angels which stood before God” (Rev. 8:1, 2). Recall that it is the same scene in which the throne of God is described with seven lamps of fire before it, and the lamb came to Him that sat on the throne, took the book from His hand and started to open the seals of the book. The word of God is clear, for those who will receive it. THE PERSONHOOD OF THE HOLY SPIRIT The big challenge of most Trinitarians and Non-Trinitarians alike is that they fail to accept all that the scriptures say about the Holy Spirit without adding to it. Trinitarians accept that the Holy Spirit is a Person - He speaks, He can be grieved, He is sent, He is separate from Jesus, as seen when Jesus was in the water and the Holy Spirit appeared separately as a dove etc. - all scriptural; but they add to the scriptures by saying that He is co-equal with the Father and should be worshipped - totally unscriptural. Many Non-Trinitarians on the other hand reject all the scriptures that point to the Holy Spirit as someone that Jesus sends in His place to comfort us till He returns - “But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you” (John 15:26); and “but if I depart, I will send him unto you” (John 16:7) etc. and claim that there is no third individual called the Comforter. The Bible and Ellen White are clear that there is a third being, the Comforter, who is sent to dispense spiritual gifts and coordinate the work until Christ returns. The Angel of Revelation 18 will come at the right time to do a similar but more extensive work. Ellen G. White describing the latter rain speaks of a mighty angel from heaven being sent to do this work and further said, "Angels were sent to aid the mighty angel from heaven" (Ellen. G. White, Story of Redemption, p. 399). Much of the confusion on the part of many Non-Trinitarians has to do with the fact that the mind is also called spirit. So, yes, Christ’s spirit (or mind) is in us, meaning that our minds (thoughts) are shaped by His mind through His word that we accept and believe, but this should not be confused with the fact that the Comforter is a separate being sent by Christ - just not a co-equal; and there is only one supreme Being, the Father of Christ, not three.
It is contrary to Scripture. Almost any portion of the New Testament we may open which has occasion to speak of the Father and Son, represents them as two distinct persons. The seventeenth chapter of John is alone sufficient to refute the doctrine of the Trinity. Over forty times in that one chapter Christ speaks of his Father as a person distinct from himself. His Father was in heaven and he upon earth. The Father had sent him. Given to him those that believed. He was then to go to the Father. And in this very testimony he shows us in what consists the oneness of the Father and Son. It is the same as the oneness of the members of Christ's church. "That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one." Of one heart and one mind. Of one purpose in all the plan devised for man's salvation. Read the seventeenth chapter of John, and see if it does not completely upset the doctrine of the Trinity. To believe that doctrine, when reading the scripture we must believe that God sent himself into the world, died to reconcile the world to himself, raised himself from the dead, ascended to himself in heaven, pleads before himself in heaven to reconcile the world to himself, and is the only mediator between man and himself. It will not do to substitute the human nature of Christ (according to Trinitarians) as the Mediator; for Clarke says, "Human blood can no more appease God than swine's blood." Com. On 2Sam.xxi,10. We must believe also that in the garden God prayed to himself, if it were possible, to let the cup pass from himself, and a thousand other such absurdities. Read carefully the following texts, comparing them with the idea that Christ is the Omnipotent, Omnipresent, Supreme, and only self-existent God: John xiv,28; xvii,3; iii,16; v,19,26; xi,15; xx,19; viii,50; vi,38; Mark xiii,32; Luke vi,12; xxii,69; xxiv,29; Matt.iii,17; xxvii,46; Gal.iii,20; 1Jno.ii,1; Rev.v,7; Acts xvii,31. Also see Matt.xi,25,27; Luke i,32; xxii,42; John iii,35,36; v,19,21,22,23,25,26; vi,40; viii,35,36; xiv,13; 1Cor.xv,28, &c.? The word Trinity nowhere occurs in the Scriptures. The principal text supposed to teach it is 1John [5]:7, which is an interpolation. Clarke says, "Out of one hundred and thirteen manuscripts, the text is wanting in one hundred and twelve. It occurs in no MS. Before the tenth century. And the first place the text occurs in Greek, is in the Greek translation of the acts of the Council of Lateran, held A. D. 1215." - Com. on John 1. 3. Its origin is pagan and fabulous. Instead of pointing us to scripture for proof of the trinity, we are pointed to the trident of the Persians, with the assertion that "by this they designed to teach the idea of a trinity, and if they had the doctrine of the trinity, they must have received it by tradition from the people of God. But this is all assumed, for it is certain that the Jewish church held to no such doctrine. Says Mr. Summerbell, "A friend of mine who was present in a New York synagogue, asked the Rabbi for an explanation of the word Elohim'. A Trinitarian clergyman who stood by, replied, Why, that has reference to the three persons in the Trinity,' when a Jew stepped forward and said he must not mention that word again, or they would have to compel him to leave the house; for it was not permitted to mention the name of any strange god in the synagogue." * Milman says the idea of the Trident is fabulous. (Hist. Christianity, p.34) This doctrine of the trinity was brought into the church about the same time with image worship, and keeping the day of the sun, and is but Persian doctrine remodelled. It occupied about three hundred years from its introduction to bring the doctrine to what it is now. It was commenced about 325 A. D., and was not completed till 681. See Milman's Gibbon's Rome, vol. iv, p.422. It was adopted in Spain in 589, in England in 596, in Africa in 534. - Gib. vol. iv, pp.114, 345; Milner, vol. i, p.519." (Discussion between Summerbell and Flood on Trinity, p. 38) (J. N. Loughborough, Review & Herald, November 5, 1861, Vol. 18, p. 184, par. 1-11)
Anti-Trinitarians have substantial similarities to the Roman Catholic Church’s concept of the trinity. They seem to have inherited the Roman Catholic Church’s understanding of God with the Son in subordination to the Father having been begotten in a birthing event deriving his existence from the Father. This similarity is also seen in the procession of the Holy Spirit from both the Father and Son. They would feel at home in the Catholic church. We Adventists have very different beliefs.
Exodus 3:14 KJV And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. Who was the God who spoke those words to Moses, I AM THAT I AM? It was Christ who from the bush on Mount Horeb spoke to Moses saying, “I AM THAT I AM: Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.” This was the pledge of Israel's deliverance. So when He came “in the likeness of men,” He declared Himself the I AM. The Child of Bethlehem, the meek and lowly Saviour, is God “manifest in the flesh.” 1 Timothy 3:16. 42 . FLB 47.5
Another Rhyme... for my SDA brethren. Is Jesus God? Or is Christ God's Son? Is the Begotten a fraud a part of a 3 in One? With Papal applaud his clergy have spun. With wink and a nod God's Son they shun. Light bearer they laud his kingdom they've won. Perversions run roughshod their conscience undone. Their own path so broad for they worship the Sun. Christ on cloud they are awed, falling rocks not outrun. With his sickle and rod, his plagues weigh a ton. Their remorse is flawed Their refuge is none. Fooled serving a metaphor, denying God's only begotten Son.
Pastor Kelly must have misread the Bible: Acts 19:1-7 KJV And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples, [2] He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost. [3] And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism. [4] Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus. [5] When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. [6] And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied. [7] And all the men were about twelve. These twelve were not disciples of Apollos! Apollos was in Corinth when Paul met these men in Ephesus. Note what Ellen White wrote of this encounter: “On his arrival at Ephesus, Paul found twelve brethren, who, like Apollos, had been disciples of John the Baptist, and like him had gained some knowledge of the mission of Christ. They had not the ability of Apollos, but with the same sincerity and faith they were seeking to spread abroad the knowledge they had received. “These brethren knew nothing of the mission of the Holy Spirit. When asked by Paul if they had received the Holy Ghost, they answered, ‘We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.’ ‘Unto what then were ye baptized?’ Paul inquired, and they said, ‘Unto John's baptism.’” Acts of the Apostles, 282. When Paul baptized these twelve men, they were ignorant of the work of the Holy Spirit as the third personality of the Godhead. They also held serious errors as part of their belief system. But they were teachable, and relinquished those errors as they grew in the knowledge and grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and His everlasting gospel. “There is still another lesson for us in the experience of those Jewish converts. When they received baptism at the hand of John they did not fully comprehend the mission of Jesus as the Sin Bearer. They were holding serious errors. But with clearer light, they gladly accepted Christ as their Redeemer, and with this step of advance came a change in their obligations. As they received a purer faith, there was a corresponding change in their life. In token of this change, and as an acknowledgment of their faith in Christ, they were rebaptized in the name of Jesus.” Acts of the Apostles, 285. While Luke only mentions their baptism being in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, I cannot for a moment believe that they weren’t also baptized in the name of the Father and the Holy Spirit as well, according to the command given Christ’s disciples in Matthew 28:19.
The key to understanding Jesus' command in Matthew 28:19 is to look at how the disciples baptized and compare to John 5:43. The disciples knew better than any of us who Jesus was, and who God was. They understood his teachings, having been under his personal tutelage for three and a half years--the best Teacher this world has ever known. They knew that "Jesus" is the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Let those who think to know better than Jesus' own disciples suggest a different name for the Father than this. Let them also explain why Matthew 28:19 does not say "names" (plural) in either English or in Greek.
@@MongRay-n8i , You really have no idea of what you are talking about. Having taken John 5:43 out of context, you attempt to make Jesus the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit as one individual personality-which simply is not true. When Jesus said, “I have come in my Father’s name” He did not intend for you or anyone else to conclude that He is “the Father.” To come in one’s own name is to come in one’s own authority, and to establish one’s own reputation. To come in one’s own reputation is to honor, glorify, and magnify one’s own self. Paul wrote in Philippians 2:6, 7 that Jesus, “being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: but made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men”. When we read John 5:43 in context with the rest of that chapter, Jesus said, “The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things so ever he [the Father] doeth these also doeth the Son likewise.” Here we are to understand that the Father and the Son are two distinct and individual personalities [also, persons]. When we continue to read, “And hath given him authority to execute judgment also” we are to understand that coming in the Father’s name means coming with the Father’s authority. Furthermore, John 17:1 affirms these as two individuals: “Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son; that thy Son also may glorify thee.” Verse 5: “And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.” Now, if you would only believe the truth about the Godhead having three distinct personalities functioning in unity with each other, you would not be causing the testimony of John’s Gospel to contradict the distinction made by Matthew, but would comprehend that the promise of Jesus that the disciples would receive another Comforter as the representative of the Godhead would be the Holy Spirit as the third person/personality representing Christ even as Christ represented the Father. John 14:9, 10 reads: “… he that hath seen me hath seen the Father… Believest thou not that I am IN the Father, and the Father IN me? The words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Fatther that dwelleth IN me, he doeth the works.” The promised Comforter is the third person. In John 14:26 we read, “But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name [the Son’s name because all authority would be given to Christ], he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.” The Holy Ghost is not the Father, but it is the Holy Ghost that will abide in us forever [verse 16, 17]. “At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.” How? Through the medium of the third person of the Godhead. How I wish that all those who claim to believe would actually believe!
@@davidthiele5705 Just two questions: 1) As you read the New Testament, what do you find is the Father's name? 2) Why is "Jesus" the _only_ name given among men whereby we must be saved? Does the Father have no part in our salvation? (See Acts 4:10-12.) Now, this is not a question, but a statement of fact--feel free to rebut it if you have better facts: Ellen White never addresses three "personalities" in the Godhead. She speaks of only two. When one is able to explain why Ellen White references three persons, two personalities, and a one-Being God with respect to Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, then one may have greater confidence that he or she understands the matter correctly.
@@MongRay-n8i, I will first deal with your false conclusion that Ellen White never addresses “three personalities” in the Godhead. “When you baptize them, and you see that they are in error in any respect, do you, any one of you that feel that you have a message from God, go to them kindly, and tell them, between them and you alone, where their trouble is, and where their difficulties will come in unless they change the course of their action? This is the work that is to rest upon us. And then what? Why, it says, ‘Baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.’ [Matthew 28:19.] Three personalities; and these three personalities are the pledged power from God that His people shall have, if they have been baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Now there is no excuse for souls to be left in ignorance and weakness if they will be gospel believers, if they will carry out these principles, and know that the three great Worthies, the Powers in heaven, are pledge to the church of God that will work in harmony with Christ’s teachings.” Vol. 21, Letters and Manuscripts, Ms 139, 1906. Now, to make a distinction between the truth about the Godhead, whether they be referred to as the Trinity, the “heavenly trio”, or as a Triune, the Seventh-Day Adventist movement/denomination does not teach about God the same way as does the Roman Catholic persuasion. Here is what Ellen White wrote for our admonition: “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.’ “All these spiritualistic representations are simply nothingness. They are imperfect, untrue. They weaken and diminish the Majesty which no earthly 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 believers 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-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.” Evangelism, 614, 615. See also Bible Training School, March 1, 1905.
Is this not historic: "“For the benefit of those who may desire to know more particularly the cardinal features of the faith held by this denomination, we shall state that Seventh-day Adventists believe,- 1. In the divine Trinity. This Trinity consists of the eternal Father, a personal, spiritual being, omnipotent, omniscient, infinite in power, wisdom, and love; of the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the eternal Father, through whom all things were created, and through whom the salvation of the redeemed hosts will be accomplished; the Holy Spirit, the third person of the Godhead, the one regenerating agency in the work of redemption.” (F. M. Wilcox, Review and Herald, 9th October 1913,)
@@chrischung2365 That wasn't the view of MANY SDA. It was 'voted' in 1981. Words from FAITHFUL PREACHERS of God's word: th-cam.com/play/PLJIHyAnsG9SPWbrVwkvhrEQspKj73Ezhs.html
@@chrischung2365 F.M. Wilcox was born in 1865. He was not a pioneer of the first 50 years. You can't use one statement to build a doctrine. That is building your house on sand. *-“Christ has given His Spirit as a divine power to overcome all hereditary and cultivated tendencies to evil, and to impress His own character upon His church.” - Desire of Ages, p. 671.2 *-“The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ, which is sent to all men to give them sufficiency, that through His grace we might be complete in Him.” - Letter 11a 1894, to Captain Christiansen, January 2, 1894 *-“The Father gave His Spirit without measure to His Son, and we also may partake of it’s fullness.” - Great Controversy, p.477 *-“Christ gives them the breath of His own Spirit, the life of His own life.” - Ministry of Healing, p.159 *-“The Lord encourages all who seek Him with the whole heart. He gives them His Holy Spirit, the manifestation of His presence and favor. But those who forsake God in order to save their lives will be forsaken by Him. In seeking to save their lives by yielding the truth, they will lose eternal life.” - Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 9, page 230, 1909 *-"I will not leave you comfortless; I will come to you." The divine Spirit that the world's Redeemer promised to send, is the presence and power of God.” - Signs of the Times, November 23, 1891 *-“Christ gave his followers a positive promise that after his ascension he would send them his Spirit.”- Review and Herald, October 26 1897, ‘Words of comfort - No.2 *-“Jesus is waiting to breathe upon all his disciples, and give them the inspiration of his sanctifying spirit, and transfuse the vital influence from himself to his people. He would have them understand that henceforth they cannot serve two masters. Their lives cannot be divided. Christ is to live in his human agents, and work through their faculties, and act through their capabilities. Their will must be submitted to his will, they must act with his spirit, that it may be no more they that live, but Christ that liveth in them. Jesus is seeking to impress upon them the thought that in giving his Holy Spirit he is giving to them the glory which the Father has given him, that he and his people may be one in God.” - Signs of the Times, October 3, 1892, ‘Faith brings light’ *-“The Holy Spirit is Christ's representative, but divested of the personality of humanity, and independent thereof. Cumbered with humanity, Christ could not be in every place personally. Therefore it was for their interest that He should go to the Father, and send the Spirit to be His successor on earth. No one could then have any advantage because of his location or his personal contact with Christ. By the Spirit the Saviour would be accessible to all. In this sense He would be nearer to them than if He had not ascended on high…..The disciples still failed to understand Christ's words in their spiritual sense, and again He explained His meaning. By the Spirit, He said, He would manifest Himself to them." - Desire of Ages, page 669-670, ‘Let not your heart be troubled’ (this is how Jesus is omnipresent which Pastor Kelly denies his ability to be so. He said his humanity encumbers his ability - not TRUE!) *-“All professions of Christianity are but lifeless expressions of faith until Jesus imbues the believer with his spiritual life, which is the Holy Ghost.” - Spirit of Prophecy, Volume 3, page 242, ‘Meeting of the brethren’, 1878 *-“Christ declared that after his ascension, he would send to his church, as his crowning gift, the Comforter, who was to take his place. This Comforter is the Holy Spirit,--the soul of his life, the efficacy of his church, the light and life of the world. With his Spirit Christ sends a reconciling influence and a power that takes away sin. …..The Spirit was given as a regenerating agency, and without this the sacrifice of Christ would have been of no avail. 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 fulness of divine power. It is the Spirit that makes effectual what has been wrought out by the world’s Redeemer. It is by the Spirit that the heart is made pure. Through the Spirit the believer becomes a partaker of the divine nature. Christ has given his Spirit as a divine power to overcome all hereditary and cultivated tendencies to evil, and to impress his own character upon the church." - Review and Herald, May 19, 1904, par. 1-4 ‘The promise of the Spirit’ (this statement is the opposite of what Pastor Kelly declares) *-“The influence of the Holy Spirit is the life of Christ in the soul. We do not now see Christ and speak to Him, but His Holy Spirit is just as near us in one place as another. It works in and through every one who receives Christ. Those who know the indwelling of the Spirit reveal the fruits of the Spirit,-"love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith." - The Bible Echo, June 17, 1901, ‘Words of comfort *-“When God’s people search the Scriptures with a desire to know what is truth, Jesus is present in the person of His representative, the Holy Spirit, reviving the heart of the humble and contrite ones.” - Ms 158 1898, December 7, 1898, The Gift of the Holy Spirit --->these are statements by Ellen G. White. Either she WAS inspired or she WASN'T inspired. If she was ALL of these statements tell you who and what the Holy Spirit is as much as God revealed it to be. I believe she was inspired and these statements are clear as a bell. HUMBLE yourselves. You can't leave your salvation to leaders YOU will stand in judgement on your own. The division in the church is the truth trying to come out and anyone who says it thrown out. You think you do a good work for God by going after people who read the Bible literally. The Bible tells you there is a Father and a Son. That is not metaphorical. It is declared over and over but, you deny what Jesus came to reveal - He has a REAL father and he is truly his son. This is the Great Controversy is that the Father the source of all took in his private counsel only his true, begotten Son and this made Lucifer jealous. The Jealous manifested into total rebellion against God. Either you believe this as an Adventist or reject totally the foundations of this faith.
John 20:28 And Thomas answered and said to Him (Jesus),“My Lord and my God!” What makes this passage powerful evidence for the deity of Christ is that Jesus does not correct Thomas.
In Greek, there is a way for the "and" conjunction to mean "both...and." It is by the addition of "te," as in "te kai." This is not commonly used (some would consider it more poetic), but where it occurs it is clear that the conjunction is copulative and not disjunctive. However, Thomas does not use this copulative form. It is not possible to rule out that the "kai" in Greek, meaning "and," is disjunctive. In fact, it most probably _is_ disjunctive, meaning that the two expressions joined by the "and" are separate, and do not apply to one and the same entity. Thomas is recognizing both his "Lord" and his God, as Jesus teaches in John 14:10. The Bible is clear that "God" and "Lord" are separate entities. Compare these two verses: Mat 22:32 I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living. Rom 14:9 For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living. If Christ were God, then Matthew 22:32 would be falsified by Romans 14:9. Christ cannot be both "Lord" and "God," according to other scriptures, so we must assume that Jesus correctly understood Thomas' exclamation as referencing the two separate entities of Jesus' humanity and the divinity which was dwelling within him. See also 2 Corinthians 5:19.
Why is this series being reposted from 5 years ago? Has there not been growth on this subject, especially with the current climate within our church. I think this warrants to be readdressed and I hope it is done within the church, among the members.
Yes... There has been a growth in the exposure of the buried truth. The denomination sent out a memo to it's ministers to guard the new 1980 doctrine. Hence, the repost. But... Their 'god the spirit' is waging a losing war with God's Spirit. The Spirit of God will triumph over this new 'god the spirit'. Right?
The use of Godhead has been perverted in the church. These are the three times it is used in the Bible and the Concordance along with the meaning of it's use in the Bible. Also Noah Webster's 1828 dictionary definition of Godhead. The laity is not searching for themselves. They're not using Miller's Rules of Interpretation to study the Bible but, rather Louis Were's mysticism version of study which is not how we are to study. Miller's Rules were to be used till the end of time. It would create a unity of belief rather than division. Act 17:29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device. Godhead G2304 (Strong's Concordance) G2304 θεῖος theios thi'-os From G2316; godlike (neuter as noun, divinity): - divine, godhead. Total KJV occurrences: 3 Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Rom 1:19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Rom 1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Rom 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, Rom 1:23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Rom 1:20 Godhead - Godhead;G2305 θειότης theiotēs thi-ot'-ace From G2304; divinity (abstractly): - godhead. Total KJV occurrences: 1 Col 2:6 As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him: Col 2:7 Rooted and built up in him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving. Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. Col 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. Col 2:10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power: Col 2:9 Godhead G2320 θεότης theotēs theh-ot'-ace From G2316; divinity (abstractly): - godhead. Total KJV occurrences: 1 Webster's Dictionary 1828 GOD'HEAD, noun god'hed. 1. Godship; deity; divinity; divine nature or essence; applied to the true God, and to heathen deities. 2. A deity in person; a god or goddess. Ellen G White - The Comforter is called “the Spirit of truth.” His work is to define and maintain the truth. He first dwells in the heart as the Spirit of truth, and thus He becomes the Comforter. There is comfort and peace in the truth, but no real peace or comfort can be found in falsehood. It is through false theories and traditions that Satan gains his power over the mind. By directing men to false standards, he misshapes the character. Through the Scriptures the Holy Spirit speaks to the mind, and impresses truth upon the heart. Thus He exposes error, and expels it from the soul. It is by the Spirit of truth, working through the word of God, that Christ subdues His chosen people to Himself. {Desire of Ages, 671.1, 1898} In describing to His disciples the office work of the Holy Spirit, Jesus sought to inspire them with the joy and hope that inspired His own heart. He rejoiced because of the abundant help He had provided for His church. The Holy Spirit was the highest of all gifts that He could solicit from His Father for the exaltation of His people. The Spirit was given as a regenerating agency, and without this the sacrifice of Christ would have been of no avail. 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 fulness of divine power. It is the Spirit that makes effectual what has been wrought out by the world’s Redeemer. It is by the Spirit that the heart is made pure. Through the Spirit the believer becomes a partaker of the divine nature. Christ has given his Spirit as a divine power to overcome all hereditary and cultivated tendencies to evil, and to impress his own character upon the church. {Desire of Ages, 671.2, 1898} The Spirit was given as a regenerating agency, and without this the sacrifice of Christ would have been of no avail. 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. It is the Spirit that makes effectual what has been wrought out by the world’s Redeemer. It is by the Spirit that the heart is made pure. Through the Spirit the believer becomes a partaker of the divine nature. Christ has given His Spirit as a divine power to overcome all hereditary and cultivated tendencies to evil, and to impress His own character upon His church. {Review and Herald, May 19, 1904, par. 3} During the Jewish economy, the influence of God’s Spirit had been seen in a marked manner, but not in full. For ages prayers had been offered for the fulfilment of God’s promise to impart his Spirit, and not one of these earnest supplications had been forgotten. {Signs of the Times, December 1, 1898, par. 1} Christ determined that when He ascended from this earth He would bestow a gift on those who had believed on Him and those who should believe on Him. What gift could He bestow rich enough to signalize and grace His ascension to the mediatorial throne? It must be worthy of His greatness and His royalty. He determined to give His representative, the third person of the Godhead. This gift could not be excelled. He would give all gifts in one, and therefore the divine Spirit, converting, enlightening, sanctifying, would be His donation. {Signs of the Times, December 1, 1898, par. 2}
Difference between Catholic Trinity and Adventist Godhead. Where the anti-trinitarians make their biggest mistake is to equate the Adventist Godhead with the Roman Catholic trinity. They are very different doctrines. The Adventist church does not believe in the Catholic trinity doctrine and if the anti-trinitarians put away their bias, they will see the difference. Some of the ATs can see the difference but because of their hatred for the mainstream church, refuse to acknowledge that there is a difference. The problem with this approach is that as a consequence , they throw away the baby with the bathwater. The other problem is that by attacking the Godhead they are blaspheming God and committing high treason against heaven, putting their salvation in jeopardy. I understand that some of the anti-trinitarians have bitter feelings towards the church because their new doctrine had not been accepted the way they were hoping and have been ostracised by their former brethren and even family. I have seen the devastation in some of their lives with their ruined relationships and broken marriages which is very sad. Their mistake was to try to evangelise the church in a militant way. They then congregate with other anti-trinitarians and share their bitter feelings with one another and hope that this new camaraderie will make up for what they have lost in the church. Very big mistake! I do know of a small number of anti-trinitarians who keep their beliefs quietly to themselves without making any noise and function normally within the church with their brethren unaware of their different beliefs. Some are honestly mistaken and will accept the truth when it is revealed to them. But to openly oppose the truth when they ought to know better is a serious matter before heaven. There is a difference between the Catholic trinity and the Adventist Godhead doctrine. Please do the right thing and investigate.
The Catholic doctrine of the Trinity is very different from the SDA belief in the Godhead. We believe in 3 co-eternal, co-equal Beings who are one in purpose, thoughts, and plans. Catholics believe that the Son eternally proceeds from the Father and the Holy Spirit is "spirated" from the Father and the Son. EGW never used the word Trinity, it is not in the Bible, and faithful SDAs shouldn't be using it either. If "Trinity" and "Godhead" are interchangeable, use Godhead and quit trying to be acceptable to evangelical churches.
“ For the benefit of those who may desire to know more particularly the cardinal features of the faith held by this denomination, we shall state that Seventh-day Adventists believe,- 1. In the divine Trinity. This Trinity consists of the eternal Father, a personal, spiritual being, omnipotent, omniscient, infinite in power, wisdom, and love; of the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the eternal Father, through whom all things were created, and through whom the salvation of the redeemed hosts will be accomplished; the Holy Spirit, the third person of the Godhead, the one regenerating agency in the work of redemption.” (F. M. Wilcox, Review and Herald, 9th October 1913,)
So much apostasy since the early 1960's. I found these audio videos of a campmeeting with Colin Standish. VERY ENLIGHTENING Colin Standish on the Omega of Apostacy th-cam.com/play/PLJIHyAnsG9SPWbrVwkvhrEQspKj73Ezhs.html
@@chrischung2365 Wilcox apologized for that statement and his beliefs don't LINE up with today's SDA Trinity. They are not one in the same. “There has been through the centuries some very unfortunate and speculative teaching regarding the divine Trinity, and these philosophies have created great divisions in the Christian church.” (F. M. Wilcox, Review and Herald, October 29 1931, ‘Christ is Very God’) - also he is an early adventist but, not a pioneer of the first 50 years that the pillars were NOT to be changed. It's unfortunate that what all this brings is not unity but, accuser of the brethern paving the way to go after people who don't believe exactly the way you do. There was never to be a creed to try people by and disfellowship them but, that is what the Doctrine of the Trinity does. Either you believe that the builder's of this faith were right and led by God or you are standing in the midst of a farce.
![[#2024MAMA] ROSÉ (로제), Bruno Mars - APT. | Mnet 241122 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dgGqD28J6aQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Excellent series, pastor Kelly. Thank you for giving each sermon. Much needed. The winds of doctrine are blowing at quite a clip in an effort to deceive us. THIS is why we are to study and know for ourselves. Always learning from you - gathering oil. Blessings on you and your family.
Amen! Love Pastor Kelly's sermons.
This sermon series is very timely for me and the church. Thank you pastor Kelly
Praise God bless you all
I see my need!
Father please fill me with the power of your Holy spirit , 🙏 which i always loved and believed and come to know that the Holy spirit is the third person of the Godhead.. praise Father son and holy spirit 🙏
Years ago, I was a member of the Village church. Now I’m a member of the church where this anti-trinitarian movement has its leader. My heart aches as I see the division and where this teaching is leading. Thank you for this powerful three-part series. It is so clear. I pray we can follow Christ and allow the third person of the Godhead to lead us through each day. God bless you in your ministry.
It is contrary to Scripture. Almost any portion of the New Testament we may open which has occasion to speak of the Father and Son, represents them as two distinct persons. The seventeenth chapter of John is alone sufficient to refute the doctrine of the Trinity. Over forty times in that one chapter Christ speaks of his Father as a person distinct from himself. His Father was in heaven and he upon earth. The Father had sent him. Given to him those that believed. He was then to go to the Father. And in this very testimony he shows us in what consists the oneness of the Father and Son. It is the same as the oneness of the members of Christ's church. "That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one." Of one heart and one mind. Of one purpose in all the plan devised for man's salvation. Read the seventeenth chapter of John, and see if it does not completely upset the doctrine of the Trinity.
To believe that doctrine, when reading the scripture we must believe that God sent himself into the world, died to reconcile the world to himself, raised himself from the dead, ascended to himself in heaven, pleads before himself in heaven to reconcile the world to himself, and is the only mediator between man and himself. It will not do to substitute the human nature of Christ (according to Trinitarians) as the Mediator; for Clarke says, "Human blood can no more appease God than swine's blood." Com. On 2Sam.xxi,10.
We must believe also that in the garden God prayed to himself, if it were possible, to let the cup pass from himself, and a thousand other such absurdities.
Read carefully the following texts, comparing them with the idea that Christ is the Omnipotent, Omnipresent, Supreme, and only self-existent God: John xiv,28; xvii,3; iii,16; v,19,26; xi,15; xx,19; viii,50; vi,38; Mark xiii,32; Luke vi,12; xxii,69; xxiv,29; Matt.iii,17; xxvii,46; Gal.iii,20; 1Jno.ii,1; Rev.v,7; Acts xvii,31. Also see Matt.xi,25,27; Luke i,32; xxii,42; John iii,35,36; v,19,21,22,23,25,26; vi,40; viii,35,36; xiv,13; 1Cor.xv,28, &c.?
The word Trinity nowhere occurs in the Scriptures. The principal text supposed to teach it is 1John [5]:7, which is an interpolation. Clarke says, "Out of one hundred and thirteen manuscripts, the text is wanting in one hundred and twelve. It occurs in no MS. Before the tenth century. And the first place the text occurs in Greek, is in the Greek translation of the acts of the Council of Lateran, held A. D. 1215." - Com. on John 1.
3. Its origin is pagan and fabulous. Instead of pointing us to scripture for proof of the trinity, we are pointed to the trident of the Persians, with the assertion that "by this they designed to teach the idea of a trinity, and if they had the doctrine of the trinity, they must have received it by tradition from the people of God. But this is all assumed, for it is certain that the Jewish church held to no such doctrine. Says Mr. Summerbell, "A friend of mine who was present in a New York synagogue, asked the Rabbi for an explanation of the word Elohim'. A Trinitarian clergyman who stood by, replied, Why, that has reference to the three persons in the Trinity,' when a Jew stepped forward and said he must not mention that word again, or they would have to compel him to leave the house; for it was not permitted to mention the name of any strange god in the synagogue." * Milman says the idea of the Trident is fabulous. (Hist. Christianity, p.34)
This doctrine of the trinity was brought into the church about the same time with image worship, and keeping the day of the sun, and is but Persian doctrine remodelled. It occupied about three hundred years from its introduction to bring the doctrine to what it is now. It was commenced about 325 A. D., and was not completed till 681. See Milman's Gibbon's Rome, vol. iv, p.422. It was adopted in Spain in 589, in England in 596, in Africa in 534. - Gib. vol. iv, pp.114, 345; Milner, vol. i, p.519." (Discussion between Summerbell and Flood on Trinity, p. 38) (J. N. Loughborough, Review & Herald, November 5, 1861, Vol. 18, p. 184, par. 1-11)
@@bredsfoodsltd1529Thank you for this comment 🙏
Stay where you are. This minister is misguiding his flock. Study the scripture for yourself.
@@bredsfoodsltd1529Amen Hallelujah.
@@elisa4908 I have studied deeply. The three-person Godhead is Biblical.
Amen and amen.
Solemn and sobering message
God bless you pastor Ron.
Pastor Ron Kelly you're my Pastor...
God bless you for rightly dividing the word of truth..
This is a major part of the shaking of the church. Those who grieve the Holy Spirit by denying His divinity will be shaken out of the church. We need to pray for them to come back to Biblical truth 🙏🏼
I hope you understand what you are saying child of God. The pioneers denied this trinity doctrine flat out! I don't know if they were shaken out but what is on record is that kellogg the one instrumental in bringing this belief to the church is buried in the section of the freemason today.
@@kchaparapata
Along with Neal
@@Rosie916Rangi Really? is that true?
I did hear of Froom buried in that 'certain area'.
But I did not hear of others.
POPULAR ARGUMENTS FOR THE TRINITY ADDRESSED
The Bible teaches that there are three powers in heaven: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. But it did not say that together, they are the one true God, or that they are co-equal. The concept of God as a Trinity has been prevalent in pagan religions and cultures but entirely absent from the religion of ancient Israel, the apostolic religion and even the religion of later pioneers such as James White, Joseph Bates, J. N. Andrews, J. N. Loughborough, J. H. Waggoner, and others.
The Seventh-day Adventist church requires that persons wishing to become members make a vow to believe in "one God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, a unity of three coeternal Persons.” whereas the Bible does not explicitly teach that. The previous vow that persons took prior to 1980 was belief in "God the Father, in His Son Jesus Christ and in the Holy Spirit", which the Bible clearly teaches. The church has not allowed views like those of the pioneers to be expressed in the church and has disfellowshipped or sidelined those who hold similar beliefs as the pioneers on this matter. The church then accuses those very persons whom they forced out of the church and who then operate outside of the church, of causing division or calling people out of the church. Is that fair? Or is it a repeat of Ahab’s accusation against Elijah?
A few of the popular arguments for the Trinity are now addressed below.
1. Assertion: SDA pioneers only objected to the Catholic version of the Trinity.
Response: The pioneers of Seventh-day Adventism fully understood the doctrine of the Trinity and rejected it as error. Later, some persons such as John Harvey Kellogg and S. N. Haskel spoke favourably of the Trinity but earlier pioneers who Ellen White described as laying the foundations of our faith consistently objected to the Trinity. There is a common definition of the Trinity that is shared by all Trinitarians, whether Catholic or otherwise, even though explained differently by various bodies. This definition as given in the dictionary is that the one God of scripture is three co-equal persons. The SDA Church expresses its trinitarian belief that “There is one God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, a unity of three coeternal Persons.” (SDA Fundamental Beliefs number 2). The definition of who is Catholic, as given in the Edict of Thessalonica expresses the same idea as follows: “let us believe in the one deity of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, in equal majesty and in a holy Trinity. We authorize the followers of this law to assume the title of Catholic Christians; but as for the others, since, in our judgment they are foolish madmen, we decree that they shall be branded with the ignominious name of heretics” (Edict of Thessalonica issued 380 AD). This definition of who is Catholic and who is heretic was used as the basis for persecuting God’s people during the dark ages and continues to define what is considered Christian orthodoxy by the World Council of Churches (WCC). The Basis of the WCC speaks of “one God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.” (Basis of the WCC, adopted by the Third Assembly (New Delhi 1961). The Bible teaches otherwise, as Jesus, in praying, stated that the one true God is His Father - “And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” (John 17:3).
2. Assertion: The Hebrew word for “one” that describes God really means “united”.
Response: The Bible says that God is one (echad). The word echad is the first counting number in Hebrew, as with the numeral one. In other places of the Bible God is described using similar words such as “only” (quoted above in Jesus’s prayer), “none else”, “no other”, “He”, “none like me”. The Jews themselves, in whose language the word echad is used to describe God, understood it to mean one individual. The one God (one supreme Being) of the Bible is Jesus’s Father - “For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named” (Eph. 3:14, 15). The Father has no co-equals. He is “the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see” (1 Tim. 6:15, 16). There aren’t three supreme beings, only One. All other beings are subject to Him. Another word that Trinitarians appeal to is Elohim, where God (Elohim) said “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness” (Gen. 1:26). They assume that God (Elohim) is three persons. The Bible does not say that. Ellen White explains, “I saw that when God said to his SON, Let us make man in our image, Satan was jealous of JESUS.” (Ellen G. White, Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 1, pp. 17, 18). God (the Father of Christ) was speaking to His Son only. His Son is “the express image of His person” (Heb. 1:3). Ellen White speaks again explicitly in the following words: “The Sovereign of the universe was not alone in His work of beneficence. He had an associate - a co-worker who could appreciate His purposes”. “Christ, the Word, the only begotten of God, was one with the eternal Father - one in nature, in character, in purpose - the only being that could enter into all the counsels and purposes of God.” (E. G. White, Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 34).
3. Assertion: Jesus is co-equal with the Father
Response: Jesus never claimed full equality with God, His Father, at any point in His existence. Before He came to earth, His Father anointed and appointed Him - “Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.” (Heb. 1:9; see also verse 2). While He was on earth, He said “my Father is greater than I” (John 14:28). After sin is finished, He will still be subject to His Father - “And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.” (1 Cor. 15:28).
4. Assertion: The Holy Spirit is co-equal with the Father
Response: The Bible does not speak anywhere of a third God-Being who has the image or likeness of God or “the similitude of God.” (James 3:9). There is no denying that the Comforter, the Holy Spirit, sent at Pentecost is a person - only not a God-being to be worshipped. Like the Angel of Revelation 18, the Comforter carries out a work of worldwide extent and is aided by other heavenly beings. Ellen G. White describing the latter rain speaks of a mighty angel from heaven being sent to do this work and further said, "Angels were sent to aid the mighty angel from heaven" (Ellen. G. White, Story of Redemption, p. 399). The language of John 14-16 speaks of someone whom Jesus would ask the Father to send. That Person would not speak of himself but would speak only what He hears and would bring back to the minds of the disciples the things that Jesus would have told them - “he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak” (John 16:13). The three powers of heaven are God, Christ, and angels. There are many such references; for example: “I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things” (1 Tim. 5:21). These are the same ones who were present at the creation - “Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? …. When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?” (Job 38:4-7). Again, “Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne” (Rev.1:4). These seven spirits are later described as “seven lamps of fire” (Rev. 4:5) and as “the seven angels which stood before God” (Rev. 8:2). This is consistent with the Hebrew word ruach and the Greek word pneuma that are translated in the Bible as spirit. These words are also translated spirits, thus indicating that the Holy Spirit need not be seen as one individual being who is omnipresent but many spirit beings representing God everywhere.
5. Assertion: Ellen White led the church into a Trinitarian understanding of God.
Response: Ellen White never used the term Trinity to describe God. She spoke of three persons of the godhead, which is consistent with the view expressed here that the Holy Spirit is a person, just not someone co-equal with God or to be worshipped. Regarding Ellen White’s statement that “In Christ is life, original, unborrowed, underived” (Desire of Ages, p. 530), the full statement shows that it is not Jesus Himself that is being described, but rather, life - which Jesus has and is able to impart. Here is the full statement as it was originally published in Signs of the Times: “In Him was life, original, unborrowed, underived. This life is not inherent in man. He can possess it only through Christ.” (The Signs of the Times, April 8, 1897; also Selected Messages, vol. 1, pp. 296, 297). Being described is the nature and quality of this life and not the origin of it. Original - not a pattern or copy, but something genuine, authentic. Unborrowed - does not have to be returned. Underived - not being drawn from a source; He has it in Himself. How He came in possession of it? It was given to Him by His Father. Jesus said: “For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself” (John 5:26).
The Trinity denies the most fundamental truth of the gospel that God loved us to the point of giving His only begotten Son to die for us (John 3:16). It was not an eternal God who cannot die, but the literal Son of God who did die and was raised from the dead by His Father (Gal.1:1).
Jesus spoke through the prophet Isaiah about the spirit before time existed, that the decision to send him Jesus the son, was made by God the father and the Spirit. Isaiah 48:16. What are your thoughts on this? What about Acts 5:1-4, Matt 12:31-32 etc.
Quite an answer, thank you.
Then why the controversy?
@@cherylbyfield2501 These are reasonable questions.
My responses:
The statement, "now the Lord God, and his Spirit, hath sent me" in Isa.48:16 does not indicate that the Lord God and his Spirit are co-equals. There is only one Lord God mentioned there. So, as said before, there is no denying that the Holy Spirit is a person, just not a being to be worshipped nor a co-equal with God. God and His Spirit (or Spirits) work closely, for example, Jesus said: "He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels." (Rev. 3:5).
In Acts 5:4, the statement "thou hast not lied unto men but unto God" is not saying that the Holy Spirit is God. Neither is it saying that Ananias did not lie to Peter or that Peter was not a man, but God. It is simply highlighting the fact that there was a higher power whom they represented, similar to the statement, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that receiveth whomsoever I send receiveth me; and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me" (John 13:20.
In Matt.12:31-32, It should be noted that Jesus's warning against blaspheming against the Holy Spirit is not implying that the Holy Spirit is more to be revered than Jesus Himself. Jesus went back to heaven and promises to return to this earth to take us to His Father's house in heaven. He left the Holy Spirit to guide us until He returns. If we reject that guidance by blasheming against the the Holy Spirit, there will be nobody to guide us. The situation is similar to what God told the children of Israel in the wilderness - "Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him." (Ex. 23:20, 21). It is simply warning us not to reject the Holy Spirit's guidance. It is not forbidding us seeking to understand who the Holy Spirit is or what the Holy Spirit does.
@@jasonstych1687 There is a controversy between truth and error. We must clarify and defend the truth.
Can this claim be backed up? Excepting Uriah Smith, "the other founders of the church embraced it [trinity doctrine]. That is not substantiated. The opposite is true. The trail of evidence shows that the pioneers were largely history before the foundation of the trinity was substituted for the 1872 Fundamental principles.
Jesus said he would build his church upon a rock (Matthew 16:15-18). Is this the trinity doctrine that Jesus said His Father had revealed to Peter?
Jesus did not say "a" rock, He said "this" rock, meaning, Himself. As for the "trinity" doctrine: It is contrary to Scripture. Almost any portion of the New Testament we may open which has occasion to speak of the Father and Son, represents them as two distinct persons. The seventeenth chapter of John is alone sufficient to refute the doctrine of the Trinity. Over forty times in that one chapter Christ speaks of his Father as a person distinct from himself. His Father was in heaven and he upon earth. The Father had sent him. Given to him those that believed. He was then to go to the Father. And in this very testimony he shows us in what consists the oneness of the Father and Son. It is the same as the oneness of the members of Christ's church. "That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one." Of one heart and one mind. Of one purpose in all the plan devised for man's salvation. Read the seventeenth chapter of John, and see if it does not completely upset the doctrine of the Trinity.
To believe that doctrine, when reading the scripture we must believe that God sent himself into the world, died to reconcile the world to himself, raised himself from the dead, ascended to himself in heaven, pleads before himself in heaven to reconcile the world to himself, and is the only mediator between man and himself. It will not do to substitute the human nature of Christ (according to Trinitarians) as the Mediator; for Clarke says, "Human blood can no more appease God than swine's blood." Com. On 2Sam.xxi,10.
We must believe also that in the garden God prayed to himself, if it were possible, to let the cup pass from himself, and a thousand other such absurdities.
Read carefully the following texts, comparing them with the idea that Christ is the Omnipotent, Omnipresent, Supreme, and only self-existent God: John xiv,28; xvii,3; iii,16; v,19,26; xi,15; xx,19; viii,50; vi,38; Mark xiii,32; Luke vi,12; xxii,69; xxiv,29; Matt.iii,17; xxvii,46; Gal.iii,20; 1Jno.ii,1; Rev.v,7; Acts xvii,31. Also see Matt.xi,25,27; Luke i,32; xxii,42; John iii,35,36; v,19,21,22,23,25,26; vi,40; viii,35,36; xiv,13; 1Cor.xv,28, &c.?
The word Trinity nowhere occurs in the Scriptures. The principal text supposed to teach it is 1John [5]:7, which is an interpolation. Clarke says, "Out of one hundred and thirteen manuscripts, the text is wanting in one hundred and twelve. It occurs in no MS. Before the tenth century. And the first place the text occurs in Greek, is in the Greek translation of the acts of the Council of Lateran, held A. D. 1215." - Com. on John 1.
3. Its origin is pagan and fabulous. Instead of pointing us to scripture for proof of the trinity, we are pointed to the trident of the Persians, with the assertion that "by this they designed to teach the idea of a trinity, and if they had the doctrine of the trinity, they must have received it by tradition from the people of God. But this is all assumed, for it is certain that the Jewish church held to no such doctrine. Says Mr. Summerbell, "A friend of mine who was present in a New York synagogue, asked the Rabbi for an explanation of the word Elohim'. A Trinitarian clergyman who stood by, replied, Why, that has reference to the three persons in the Trinity,' when a Jew stepped forward and said he must not mention that word again, or they would have to compel him to leave the house; for it was not permitted to mention the name of any strange god in the synagogue." * Milman says the idea of the Trident is fabulous. (Hist. Christianity, p.34)
This doctrine of the trinity was brought into the church about the same time with image worship, and keeping the day of the sun, and is but Persian doctrine remodelled. It occupied about three hundred years from its introduction to bring the doctrine to what it is now. It was commenced about 325 A. D., and was not completed till 681. See Milman's Gibbon's Rome, vol. iv, p.422. It was adopted in Spain in 589, in England in 596, in Africa in 534. - Gib. vol. iv, pp.114, 345; Milner, vol. i, p.519." (Discussion between Summerbell and Flood on Trinity, p. 38) (J. N. Loughborough, Review & Herald, November 5, 1861, Vol. 18, p. 184, par. 1-11)
@@bredsfoodsltd1529Amen!!!!
The pioneers rejected the doctrine of the Trinity.
December 7, 1955
Elder L.E. Froom
Office
Dear Brother Froom:
Mrs. Soper calls to our attention the fact that you are seeking information as to the position held by our early workers concerning the Trinity, the personality of the Holy Spirit, and the pre-existence of Christ as this may be revealed in their writings.
I think we will have to concede that our early workers were not Trinitarians.
I would like to direct you to a thesis prepared by Christie Taylor on the subject of the views of Seventh-day Adventists on the Trinity. I gave some study to this question in assisting Elder Taylor in his work. I believe what he has presented is a fair and correct presentation.
Sincerely your brother,
Arthur L. White, Secretary
Ellen G. White Publications
ALW:ro
Q. & A. File # 25-0-1
Trinity, belief of early pioneers re.
See R & H articles
EXCELLENT SERMON ❤
Shaking is here.
Sealing is a settling into the truth.
"The doctrine of the trinity is true when rightly understood." --Stephen N. Haskell (SDA pioneer), Bible Training School, Feb. 1, 1906
Yes it it @chrischung2365
@chrischung2365 I love it
Pastor Kelly is bless with rightly dividing this word of truth.
This doctrine is truth and the interpretation is truth.
@@elmastewart8677 amen!
Why has it taken a SDA Pastor nearly 3 hours to explain something I can do in 2 minutes??? And here it is, simple, the bible speaks, leave Satan out of the remnant church of Christ: It is contrary to Scripture. Almost any portion of the New Testament we may open which has occasion to speak of the Father and Son, represents them as two distinct persons. The seventeenth chapter of John is alone sufficient to refute the doctrine of the Trinity. Over forty times in that one chapter Christ speaks of his Father as a person distinct from himself. His Father was in heaven and he upon earth. The Father had sent him. Given to him those that believed. He was then to go to the Father. And in this very testimony he shows us in what consists the oneness of the Father and Son. It is the same as the oneness of the members of Christ's church. "That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one." Of one heart and one mind. Of one purpose in all the plan devised for man's salvation. Read the seventeenth chapter of John, and see if it does not completely upset the doctrine of the Trinity.
To believe that doctrine, when reading the scripture we must believe that God sent himself into the world, died to reconcile the world to himself, raised himself from the dead, ascended to himself in heaven, pleads before himself in heaven to reconcile the world to himself, and is the only mediator between man and himself. It will not do to substitute the human nature of Christ (according to Trinitarians) as the Mediator; for Clarke says, "Human blood can no more appease God than swine's blood." Com. On 2Sam.xxi,10.
We must believe also that in the garden God prayed to himself, if it were possible, to let the cup pass from himself, and a thousand other such absurdities.
Read carefully the following texts, comparing them with the idea that Christ is the Omnipotent, Omnipresent, Supreme, and only self-existent God: John xiv,28; xvii,3; iii,16; v,19,26; xi,15; xx,19; viii,50; vi,38; Mark xiii,32; Luke vi,12; xxii,69; xxiv,29; Matt.iii,17; xxvii,46; Gal.iii,20; 1Jno.ii,1; Rev.v,7; Acts xvii,31. Also see Matt.xi,25,27; Luke i,32; xxii,42; John iii,35,36; v,19,21,22,23,25,26; vi,40; viii,35,36; xiv,13; 1Cor.xv,28, &c.?
The word Trinity nowhere occurs in the Scriptures. The principal text supposed to teach it is 1John [5]:7, which is an interpolation. Clarke says, "Out of one hundred and thirteen manuscripts, the text is wanting in one hundred and twelve. It occurs in no MS. Before the tenth century. And the first place the text occurs in Greek, is in the Greek translation of the acts of the Council of Lateran, held A. D. 1215." - Com. on John 1.
3. Its origin is pagan and fabulous. Instead of pointing us to scripture for proof of the trinity, we are pointed to the trident of the Persians, with the assertion that "by this they designed to teach the idea of a trinity, and if they had the doctrine of the trinity, they must have received it by tradition from the people of God. But this is all assumed, for it is certain that the Jewish church held to no such doctrine. Says Mr. Summerbell, "A friend of mine who was present in a New York synagogue, asked the Rabbi for an explanation of the word Elohim'. A Trinitarian clergyman who stood by, replied, Why, that has reference to the three persons in the Trinity,' when a Jew stepped forward and said he must not mention that word again, or they would have to compel him to leave the house; for it was not permitted to mention the name of any strange god in the synagogue." * Milman says the idea of the Trident is fabulous. (Hist. Christianity, p.34)
This doctrine of the trinity was brought into the church about the same time with image worship, and keeping the day of the sun, and is but Persian doctrine remodelled. It occupied about three hundred years from its introduction to bring the doctrine to what it is now. It was commenced about 325 A. D., and was not completed till 681. See Milman's Gibbon's Rome, vol. iv, p.422. It was adopted in Spain in 589, in England in 596, in Africa in 534. - Gib. vol. iv, pp.114, 345; Milner, vol. i, p.519." (Discussion between Summerbell and Flood on Trinity, p. 38) (J. N. Loughborough, Review & Herald, November 5, 1861, Vol. 18, p. 184, par. 1-11)
Amen.
Amen and amen read MS. 40 pat. 13,14 1891
THE SECOND COMMANDMENT, THE TRINITY, AND THE OMNIPRESENCE OF GOD
I always wondered what was so significant about the second Commandment that Rome found it necessary to remove it altogether from the Ten Commandments. But it appears that there is a fundamental truth in that Commandment concerning where God's presence is that is intended to protect us from all forms of false worship.
The second Commandment tells us that we should not bow down before any image. This implies that God is not in any image. Which means that God is not everywhere. The Bible tells us that God is in heaven; and heaven is not everywhere. Heaven is above the earth and that is where we should direct our worship to God, where He is. He knows everything that happens everywhere and can go wherever He pleases but His abode is in heaven where Jesus, our High Priest and intercessor, is presenting our cases to Him. - "Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens" (Heb. 8:1).
Furthermore, both the prophets Daniel and John saw God in heaven with the angels gathered around His throne and Jesus being separate and distinct (Dan. 7 and Rev. 4, 5). Daniel said "the Ancient of days did sit" (Dan. 7:9) and "one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days" (Dan. 7:13). John said "one sat on the throne" (Rev. 4:2) who was worshipped as the Creator to whom it was said "Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created" (Rev. 4:11), with Jesus appearing before Him to receive a book and power and authority, as the Lamb who was slain, while the angels sang, "Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever." (Rev. 5:13).
God is not everywhere all at once like a vapour while part of Him or an image sits on the throne representing Him. God Himself sits, of whom man was made in His image after His likeness, "made after the similitude of God" (James 3:9).
Logically, if God is everywhere, He can be worshipped wherever He is. One could then bow down and worship before a stone, a tree, a person or any object, not as worshipping the object but as worshipping God, since God is in it. That would open the door for the worship of false Gods as no one would be able to tell the difference whether you are worshipping the true God or not.
It would not be consistent to forbid worshipping before an object if God is in the object and one is worshipping, not the object, but God who is in the object. This is evident in the experience of the children of Israel in the wilderness. God appeared to them in a cloud and they were not forbidden to bow before Him in the cloud - "And the LORD said unto Moses, Lo, I come unto thee in a thick cloud" (Ex. 19:9), "And all the people saw the cloudy pillar stand at the tabernacle door: and all the people rose up and worshipped, every man in his tent door" (Ex. 33:10). If God is not in a particular place, say in an image, it means that there is at least one place where He is not. He cannot be everywhere and not everywhere at the same time.
The idea that the Holy Spirit is God present everywhere was precisely the argument that Dr. John Harvey Kellogg put forward to justify his pantheistic teachings. And Ellen White told him that he was wrong. Initially, he said that God was in everything. And when God instructed Ellen White to oppose it, he modified it by saying that at the time of his first presentation of the matter in the book "The Living Temple" he did not believe in the Trinity. Because of that, he said he had not given a clear explanation of the matter. He went on to explain that he had now come to believe in the Trinity and could better explain his idea. The new explanation was that it was not God the Father, but God the Holy Ghost who was everywhere and in everything. Ellen White told him that he was wrong. And we can see why. If God the Holy Spirit is everywhere and can be worshipped, it is a doorway to replace worshipping God and Christ in heaven entirely.
Another modified version of Kellogg's idea is that the Holy Spirit is really Christ himself or both God and Christ in an omnipresent form. This is also not correct as it places God and Christ on earth rather than in heaven.
The pioneers of Seventh-day Adventism stated in their Fundamental Principles of faith published in the 1889 Yearbook that God was everywhere present by His representative, the Holy Spirit. At face value, this would suggest that this representative is omnipresent. But it is perhaps more consistent with scripture to say that He is everywhere present by His representatives the holy spirits. Holy spirits are ministering spirits sent from heaven - "And he saith unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Hereafter ye shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man." (John1:51). "Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?" (Heb. 1:14).
This is consistent with the Hebrew word ruach and the Greek word pneuma that are translated in the Bible as spirit. These words are also translated spirits, thus indicating that the Holy Spirit need not be seen as one individual being who is omnipresent but many spirit beings representing God everywhere.
From this perspective, there is no denying that the Comforter, the Holy Spirit, sent at Pentecost is a person - only not a God-being to be worshipped. Like the Angel of Revelation 18 who comes down from heaven with the latter rain - a similar occurrence as that which took place at Pentecost except more extensive - the Comforter would be seen as a messenger sent by Christ from heaven, as stated repeatedly in John 14-16. Ellen G. White describing the latter rain speaks of a mighty angel from heaven being sent to do this work and further said, "Angels were sent to aid the mighty angel from heaven" (Ellen. G. White, Story of Redemption, p. 399).
It should be noted that Jesus's warning against blaspheming against the Holy Spirit is not implying that the Holy Spirit is more to be revered than Jesus Himself. Jesus went back to heaven and promises to return to this earth to take us to His Father's house in heaven. He left the Holy Spirit to guide us until He returns. If we reject that guidance by blaspheming against the Holy Spirit, there will be nobody to guide us. The situation is like what God told the children of Israel in the wilderness - "Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him." (Ex. 23:20, 21). It is simply warning us not to reject the Holy Spirit's guidance. It is not forbidding us seeking to understand who the Holy Spirit is or what the Holy Spirit does.
So, there we have it. The church has now fully accepted Kellogg's idea. Ellen White said that the initial presentation by Kellogg was the alpha of deadly heresies. She said that the omega would follow shortly afterwards and would be accepted. And it did follow shortly afterwards in Kellogg's modified version, based on his acceptance of the Trinity. And the church has now fully accepted it - that God (the Holy Spirit) is everywhere and should be worshipped. So, based on current practice, Jesus is worshipped, the Holy Spirit is worshipped but the One true God is almost entirely ignored. Jesus, praying to His Father, made it clear who the "only true God" is and identified Himself as the one sent by God - "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." (John 17:3).
Nowhere in the Bible is worship given to anyone else except the one seated on the throne who is referred to as "LORD God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come" (Rev.4:8) and to Christ, the Lamb, as it will be in the new earth - "And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it." (Rev. 21:22). God is the Father of Christ. Accordingly, Christ, the Lamb is seen with "an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads" (Rev. 14:1). It is the name of the Lamb's Father that will be written in their foreheads.
Whatever one's concept of the Godhead, the term "godhead" is used only three times in the Bible (Acts 17:29, Rom. 1:20 and Col. 2:9) and in none of these places is the expression used to replace the idea of God being a single individual who has a Divine Son who is worshipped alongside Himself. And not even once does the term "godhead" in scripture allude to the worship of anyone else.
All worship should be directed to God and Christ in heaven. It is not about where we are when we worship but, like sending a petition to the king of England, we do not send it to Spain or Australia but to him in England where he is. Similarly, Jesus in teaching us how to pray directed that we say, "Our Father which art in heaven".
We should not be praying to nor worshipping anything on earth. We should pray to God in heaven, approaching His throne through Christ, our Mediator, and we should direct our worship to heaven where God is. This is the substance of the second Commandment that Rome has removed.
@ElijahAndMoses Very interesting comment. I had not thought about places where God cannot be.
I will need to do some research and thinking on this. Thanks for your comment.
We seem to have no issues with the evil spirit. If someone says the evil spirit we know they are referring to the evil angels/ demons but to suggest that the opposite should be true ie Holy angels is Holy Spirit! That becomes a taboo. I'm still learning this subject but that's my take.
@@kchaparapata Reasonable point!
@@revelation1790 Thanks for your feedback.
@@revelation1790 Another place that God cannot be: in the heart of an evil person. God is neither invited, nor enters, into such a person, and does not dwell with evil, as if darkness and light could coexist.
Bless you, Pastor Ron 🙏
I have no issue with there being 3 persons in the Godhead. What does concern me is the prevalence in our denomination of those in positions of influence who deny the literal ontological relationship between Father and Son, claiming it to be metaphorical. Along with this is the ideas being expressed regarding the unity of the members of the Godhead. It is claimed that this unity cannot be disturbed, broken, or divided. How does that affect the death of the Son? Did He die? Was there a real separation within the Godhead further magnifying the depth of sacrifice made by God?
He who had said, “I lay down my life, that I might take it again,” came forth from the grave to life that was in Himself. Humanity died: divinity did not die. In His divinity, Christ possessed the power to break the bonds of death. He declares that He has life in Himself to quicken whom He will....
He is the spring, the fountain, of life. Only He who alone hath immortality, dwelling in light and life, could say, “I have power to lay down my life, and I have power to take it again.” ...66SDA Bible Commentary 5:1113, 1114.
@@harley6394-h3f Jesus said the Father was dwelling in him (John 14:10). Obviously, the Father did not die. God is immortal, and cannot die (1 Timothy 1:17). Jesus died, whereas his God had forsaken him on the cross, leading him to that agonizing cry, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" See John 17:3 and 20:17. The Father is Jesus' God, and our God.
Weeping between the porch and the alter
Well Done Pastor Ron, God bless you
AMEN!
Eph. 4: 4-7
1 Cor. 8: 6
Mark 12: 38-34
1 Tim. 2: 5-7
Many more wish you well
Those texts you provided: How did you intend to interpret them? From the Non-Trinitarian/Anti-Trinitarian perspective? They certainly do not teach that perspective! They only prove the unity of the Godhead in character and purpose. What does it take for Christians who simply reject that the Godhead consists of “three great Worthies, the Powers in heaven” are one God even as that same God created male and female to be joined as one flesh at marriage? Ellen White makes it quite clear that Matthew 28:19 teaches us that the Godhead is made up of three personalities pledged as power from God that we have if we are baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.
“Stop your efforts to talk nothingness, things that are of no account at all. God wants us to come to our senses.
“When you baptize them, and you see that they are in error in any respect, do you, any one of you that feel that you have a message from God, go to them kindly, and tell them, between them and you alone, where their trouble is, and where their difficulties will come in unless they change the course of their action? This is the work that is to rest upon us. And then what? Why it says, ‘Baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.’ [Verse 19.] Three personalities; and these three personalities are the pledged power from God that His people shall have, if they have been baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Now their is no excuse for souls to be left in ignorance and weakness if they will be gospel believers, if they will carry out these principles, and know that the three great Worthies, the Powers in heaven, are pledged to the church of God that will work in harmony with Christ’s teachings.” Vol. 21, Letters and Manuscripts, Ms 139, 1906.
Those of you who teach Non-Tinitarianism/Anti-trinitarianism need to wake up to the simple fact that you should cease from making this the test when the true test is Sabbath-keeping in a time leading up to the application of the mark of the beast which, by the way, is not the teaching of a false trinity such as Roman Catholicism has taught, but that those who keep the papal sabbath, the false sabbath. Seventh-day Adventists do not teach the Roman Catholic doctrine of the false trinity. You are wasting time and resources to spend so much time on that concern. Instead, you should focus upon the present truth that will sanctify us according to Christ’s prayer to make us one with Him and the Father even as they are one.
Amen
I feel the question was not answered adequately, I am disappointed to realise?
Isaiah 6-3 "And one cried unto another, and said, Holy, holy, holy, is the LORD of hosts: the whole earth is full of his glory.”
Rev 4-8 And the four beasts had each of them six wings about him; and they were full of eyes within: and they rest not day and night, saying, Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come.
“Did you catch that? That’s one “holy” for each person of the Godhead!“
You are born unto God, and you stand under the sanction and the power of the three holiest beings in heaven, who are able to keep you from falling. 7MR 267.2
“The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, the three holy dignitaries of heaven, have declared that they will strengthen men to overcome the powers of darkness.”-5 Bible Commentary, 1110. (Manuscript 92,1901).
REVELATION CONFIRMS ONE GOD, ONE MEDIATOR AND HOLY SPIRITS
Jesus said: “The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord” (Mark 12:29). The scribe, to whom Jesus spoke, responded, “Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he” (Mark 12:32). To this, the Divine record says, “And when Jesus saw that he answered discreetly, he said unto him, Thou art not far from the kingdom of God.” (Mark 12:34). Jesus considered the scribe’s answer a discreet one. Revelation confirms that God is one person, not three. In vision, John saw that “one sat on the throne. And he that sat was to look upon like a jasper and a sardine stone” (Rev. 4:2, 3). The beings around the throne worship Him, saying “Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.” (Rev. 4:11). He is the Creator. Separate from this Being who is called “Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come” (Rev. 4:8), we see Jesus, as the “Lamb that was slain” (Rev. 5:12). The beings in heaven worship both God and Christ, saying “Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne and unto the Lamb for ever and ever.” (Rev. 5:13).
The book of Revelation begins with a declaration of a chain of command: God gave to Christ, Christ gave to His angel, and the angel gave to John - “The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John” (Rev. 1:1). There is no confusion here, and most people seem to understand this.
The Revelation continues with greetings being brought to the seven churches from God, Christ and the seven spirits before God’s throne - “Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne; And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead” (Rev. 1:4, 5). This is where some people get confused - they say that it is not really seven spirits but one spirit - the ‘seven-fold’ spirit. But the Revelation is clear that the seven spirits are seven discrete entities, not one entity - “And out of the throne proceeded lightnings and thunderings and voices: and there were seven lamps of fire burning before the throne, which are the seven Spirits of God.” (Rev. 4:5).
What are these seven lamps of fire before God’s throne, who can send greetings? They must be living beings! Is there any category of living beings who are described as lamps of fire? Let the scriptures answer - “And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.” (Heb. 1:7); and further, “But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool? Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?” (Heb. 1:14).
There ought to be no confusion as to who these seven spirits are, who send greetings. But lest some say that they are still unclear, let the scriptures describe in further detail those who stand before God’s throne - “And when he had opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven about the space of half an hour. And I saw the seven angels which stood before God” (Rev. 8:1, 2). Recall that it is the same scene in which the throne of God is described with seven lamps of fire before it, and the lamb came to Him that sat on the throne, took the book from His hand and started to open the seals of the book. The word of God is clear, for those who will receive it.
THE PERSONHOOD OF THE HOLY SPIRIT
The big challenge of most Trinitarians and Non-Trinitarians alike is that they fail to accept all that the scriptures say about the Holy Spirit without adding to it. Trinitarians accept that the Holy Spirit is a Person - He speaks, He can be grieved, He is sent, He is separate from Jesus, as seen when Jesus was in the water and the Holy Spirit appeared separately as a dove etc. - all scriptural; but they add to the scriptures by saying that He is co-equal with the Father and should be worshipped - totally unscriptural. Many Non-Trinitarians on the other hand reject all the scriptures that point to the Holy Spirit as someone that Jesus sends in His place to comfort us till He returns - “But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you” (John 15:26); and “but if I depart, I will send him unto you” (John 16:7) etc. and claim that there is no third individual called the Comforter. The Bible and Ellen White are clear that there is a third being, the Comforter, who is sent to dispense spiritual gifts and coordinate the work until Christ returns. The Angel of Revelation 18 will come at the right time to do a similar but more extensive work. Ellen G. White describing the latter rain speaks of a mighty angel from heaven being sent to do this work and further said, "Angels were sent to aid the mighty angel from heaven" (Ellen. G. White, Story of Redemption, p. 399).
Much of the confusion on the part of many Non-Trinitarians has to do with the fact that the mind is also called spirit. So, yes, Christ’s spirit (or mind) is in us, meaning that our minds (thoughts) are shaped by His mind through His word that we accept and believe, but this should not be confused with the fact that the Comforter is a separate being sent by Christ - just not a co-equal; and there is only one supreme Being, the Father of Christ, not three.
This your only complaint?
@@jasonstych1687 Nor sure what you mean by "complaint". We are seeking to understand and represent the scriptures correctly. No error is harmless.
It is contrary to Scripture. Almost any portion of the New Testament we may open which has occasion to speak of the Father and Son, represents them as two distinct persons. The seventeenth chapter of John is alone sufficient to refute the doctrine of the Trinity. Over forty times in that one chapter Christ speaks of his Father as a person distinct from himself. His Father was in heaven and he upon earth. The Father had sent him. Given to him those that believed. He was then to go to the Father. And in this very testimony he shows us in what consists the oneness of the Father and Son. It is the same as the oneness of the members of Christ's church. "That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one." Of one heart and one mind. Of one purpose in all the plan devised for man's salvation. Read the seventeenth chapter of John, and see if it does not completely upset the doctrine of the Trinity.
To believe that doctrine, when reading the scripture we must believe that God sent himself into the world, died to reconcile the world to himself, raised himself from the dead, ascended to himself in heaven, pleads before himself in heaven to reconcile the world to himself, and is the only mediator between man and himself. It will not do to substitute the human nature of Christ (according to Trinitarians) as the Mediator; for Clarke says, "Human blood can no more appease God than swine's blood." Com. On 2Sam.xxi,10.
We must believe also that in the garden God prayed to himself, if it were possible, to let the cup pass from himself, and a thousand other such absurdities.
Read carefully the following texts, comparing them with the idea that Christ is the Omnipotent, Omnipresent, Supreme, and only self-existent God: John xiv,28; xvii,3; iii,16; v,19,26; xi,15; xx,19; viii,50; vi,38; Mark xiii,32; Luke vi,12; xxii,69; xxiv,29; Matt.iii,17; xxvii,46; Gal.iii,20; 1Jno.ii,1; Rev.v,7; Acts xvii,31. Also see Matt.xi,25,27; Luke i,32; xxii,42; John iii,35,36; v,19,21,22,23,25,26; vi,40; viii,35,36; xiv,13; 1Cor.xv,28, &c.?
The word Trinity nowhere occurs in the Scriptures. The principal text supposed to teach it is 1John [5]:7, which is an interpolation. Clarke says, "Out of one hundred and thirteen manuscripts, the text is wanting in one hundred and twelve. It occurs in no MS. Before the tenth century. And the first place the text occurs in Greek, is in the Greek translation of the acts of the Council of Lateran, held A. D. 1215." - Com. on John 1.
3. Its origin is pagan and fabulous. Instead of pointing us to scripture for proof of the trinity, we are pointed to the trident of the Persians, with the assertion that "by this they designed to teach the idea of a trinity, and if they had the doctrine of the trinity, they must have received it by tradition from the people of God. But this is all assumed, for it is certain that the Jewish church held to no such doctrine. Says Mr. Summerbell, "A friend of mine who was present in a New York synagogue, asked the Rabbi for an explanation of the word Elohim'. A Trinitarian clergyman who stood by, replied, Why, that has reference to the three persons in the Trinity,' when a Jew stepped forward and said he must not mention that word again, or they would have to compel him to leave the house; for it was not permitted to mention the name of any strange god in the synagogue." * Milman says the idea of the Trident is fabulous. (Hist. Christianity, p.34)
This doctrine of the trinity was brought into the church about the same time with image worship, and keeping the day of the sun, and is but Persian doctrine remodelled. It occupied about three hundred years from its introduction to bring the doctrine to what it is now. It was commenced about 325 A. D., and was not completed till 681. See Milman's Gibbon's Rome, vol. iv, p.422. It was adopted in Spain in 589, in England in 596, in Africa in 534. - Gib. vol. iv, pp.114, 345; Milner, vol. i, p.519." (Discussion between Summerbell and Flood on Trinity, p. 38) (J. N. Loughborough, Review & Herald, November 5, 1861, Vol. 18, p. 184, par. 1-11)
Anti-Trinitarians have substantial similarities to the Roman Catholic Church’s concept of the trinity. They seem to have inherited the Roman Catholic Church’s understanding of God
with the Son in subordination to the Father having been begotten in a birthing event deriving his existence from the Father. This similarity is also seen in the procession of the Holy Spirit from both the Father and Son.
They would feel at home in the Catholic church.
We Adventists have very different beliefs.
Amen !
Please, I am trying to find part 4 of this series. Where is it? Can someone tell me?
I do not think it has been given yet. It may be given later, today. Happy Sabbath.
Exodus 3:14 KJV
And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.
Who was the God who spoke those words to Moses, I AM THAT I AM?
It was Christ who from the bush on Mount Horeb spoke to Moses saying, “I AM THAT I AM: Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.” This was the pledge of Israel's deliverance. So when He came “in the likeness of men,” He declared Himself the I AM. The Child of Bethlehem, the meek and lowly Saviour, is God “manifest in the flesh.” 1 Timothy 3:16. 42 . FLB 47.5
Another Rhyme...
for my SDA brethren.
Is Jesus God?
Or is Christ God's Son?
Is the Begotten a fraud
a part of a 3 in One?
With Papal applaud
his clergy have spun.
With wink and a nod
God's Son they shun.
Light bearer they laud
his kingdom they've won.
Perversions run roughshod
their conscience undone.
Their own path so broad
for they worship the Sun.
Christ on cloud
they are awed,
falling rocks not outrun.
With his sickle and rod,
his plagues weigh a ton.
Their remorse is flawed
Their refuge is none.
Fooled serving a metaphor,
denying God's only begotten Son.
Pastor Kelly must have misread the Bible:
Acts 19:1-7 KJV
And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples, [2] He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost. [3] And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism. [4] Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus. [5] When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. [6] And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied. [7] And all the men were about twelve.
These twelve were not disciples of Apollos! Apollos was in Corinth when Paul met these men in Ephesus. Note what Ellen White wrote of this encounter:
“On his arrival at Ephesus, Paul found twelve brethren, who, like Apollos, had been disciples of John the Baptist, and like him had gained some knowledge of the mission of Christ. They had not the ability of Apollos, but with the same sincerity and faith they were seeking to spread abroad the knowledge they had received.
“These brethren knew nothing of the mission of the Holy Spirit. When asked by Paul if they had received the Holy Ghost, they answered, ‘We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.’ ‘Unto what then were ye baptized?’ Paul inquired, and they said, ‘Unto John's baptism.’” Acts of the Apostles, 282.
When Paul baptized these twelve men, they were ignorant of the work of the Holy Spirit as the third personality of the Godhead. They also held serious errors as part of their belief system. But they were teachable, and relinquished those errors as they grew in the knowledge and grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and His everlasting gospel.
“There is still another lesson for us in the experience of those Jewish converts. When they received baptism at the hand of John they did not fully comprehend the mission of Jesus as the Sin Bearer. They were holding serious errors. But with clearer light, they gladly accepted Christ as their Redeemer, and with this step of advance came a change in their obligations. As they received a purer faith, there was a corresponding change in their life. In token of this change, and as an acknowledgment of their faith in Christ, they were rebaptized in the name of Jesus.” Acts of the Apostles, 285.
While Luke only mentions their baptism being in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, I cannot for a moment believe that they weren’t also baptized in the name of the Father and the Holy Spirit as well, according to the command given Christ’s disciples in Matthew 28:19.
These were Jews who only believed in God, now in Acts 2:38 were now fully baptized in the name of Father Son and holy Ghost.
The key to understanding Jesus' command in Matthew 28:19 is to look at how the disciples baptized and compare to John 5:43. The disciples knew better than any of us who Jesus was, and who God was. They understood his teachings, having been under his personal tutelage for three and a half years--the best Teacher this world has ever known. They knew that "Jesus" is the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
Let those who think to know better than Jesus' own disciples suggest a different name for the Father than this. Let them also explain why Matthew 28:19 does not say "names" (plural) in either English or in Greek.
@@MongRay-n8i , You really have no idea of what you are talking about. Having taken John 5:43 out of context, you attempt to make Jesus the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit as one individual personality-which simply is not true.
When Jesus said, “I have come in my Father’s name” He did not intend for you or anyone else to conclude that He is “the Father.” To come in one’s own name is to come in one’s own authority, and to establish one’s own reputation. To come in one’s own reputation is to honor, glorify, and magnify one’s own self. Paul wrote in Philippians 2:6, 7 that Jesus, “being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: but made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men”.
When we read John 5:43 in context with the rest of that chapter, Jesus said, “The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things so ever he [the Father] doeth these also doeth the Son likewise.” Here we are to understand that the Father and the Son are two distinct and individual personalities [also, persons]. When we continue to read, “And hath given him authority to execute judgment also” we are to understand that coming in the Father’s name means coming with the Father’s authority. Furthermore, John 17:1 affirms these as two individuals: “Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son; that thy Son also may glorify thee.” Verse 5: “And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.”
Now, if you would only believe the truth about the Godhead having three distinct personalities functioning in unity with each other, you would not be causing the testimony of John’s Gospel to contradict the distinction made by Matthew, but would comprehend that the promise of Jesus that the disciples would receive another Comforter as the representative of the Godhead would be the Holy Spirit as the third person/personality representing Christ even as Christ represented the Father.
John 14:9, 10 reads: “… he that hath seen me hath seen the Father… Believest thou not that I am IN the Father, and the Father IN me? The words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Fatther that dwelleth IN me, he doeth the works.”
The promised Comforter is the third person. In John 14:26 we read, “But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name [the Son’s name because all authority would be given to Christ], he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.” The Holy Ghost is not the Father, but it is the Holy Ghost that will abide in us forever [verse 16, 17]. “At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.” How? Through the medium of the third person of the Godhead.
How I wish that all those who claim to believe would actually believe!
@@davidthiele5705 Just two questions:
1) As you read the New Testament, what do you find is the Father's name?
2) Why is "Jesus" the _only_ name given among men whereby we must be saved? Does the Father have no part in our salvation? (See Acts 4:10-12.)
Now, this is not a question, but a statement of fact--feel free to rebut it if you have better facts: Ellen White never addresses three "personalities" in the Godhead. She speaks of only two.
When one is able to explain why Ellen White references three persons, two personalities, and a one-Being God with respect to Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, then one may have greater confidence that he or she understands the matter correctly.
@@MongRay-n8i, I will first deal with your false conclusion that Ellen White never addresses “three personalities” in the Godhead.
“When you baptize them, and you see that they are in error in any respect, do you, any one of you that feel that you have a message from God, go to them kindly, and tell them, between them and you alone, where their trouble is, and where their difficulties will come in unless they change the course of their action? This is the work that is to rest upon us. And then what? Why, it says, ‘Baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.’ [Matthew 28:19.] Three personalities; and these three personalities are the pledged power from God that His people shall have, if they have been baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Now there is no excuse for souls to be left in ignorance and weakness if they will be gospel believers, if they will carry out these principles, and know that the three great Worthies, the Powers in heaven, are pledge to the church of God that will work in harmony with Christ’s teachings.” Vol. 21, Letters and Manuscripts, Ms 139, 1906.
Now, to make a distinction between the truth about the Godhead, whether they be referred to as the Trinity, the “heavenly trio”, or as a Triune, the Seventh-Day Adventist movement/denomination does not teach about God the same way as does the Roman Catholic persuasion. Here is what Ellen White wrote for our admonition:
“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.’
“All these spiritualistic representations are simply nothingness. They are imperfect, untrue. They weaken and diminish the Majesty which no earthly 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 believers 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-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.” Evangelism, 614, 615. See also Bible Training School, March 1, 1905.
How about historic Adventist? Are we now out of touch?
How about Biblical Adventism?
Is this not historic:
"“For the benefit of those who may desire to know more particularly the cardinal features of the faith held by this denomination, we shall state that Seventh-day Adventists believe,- 1. In the divine Trinity. This Trinity consists of the eternal Father, a personal, spiritual being, omnipotent, omniscient, infinite in power, wisdom, and love; of the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the eternal Father, through whom all things were created, and through whom the salvation of the redeemed hosts will be accomplished; the Holy Spirit, the third person of the Godhead, the one regenerating agency in the work of redemption.” (F. M. Wilcox, Review and Herald, 9th October 1913,)
I am more interested in truth. You should be too.
@@chrischung2365 That wasn't the view of MANY SDA.
It was 'voted' in 1981.
Words from FAITHFUL PREACHERS of God's word:
th-cam.com/play/PLJIHyAnsG9SPWbrVwkvhrEQspKj73Ezhs.html
@@chrischung2365 F.M. Wilcox was born in 1865. He was not a pioneer of the first 50 years. You can't use one statement to build a doctrine. That is building your house on sand.
*-“Christ has given His Spirit as a divine power to overcome all hereditary and cultivated tendencies to evil, and to impress His own character upon His church.” - Desire of Ages, p. 671.2
*-“The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ, which is sent to all men to give them sufficiency, that through His grace we might be complete in Him.” - Letter 11a 1894, to Captain Christiansen, January 2, 1894
*-“The Father gave His Spirit without measure to His Son, and we also may partake of it’s fullness.” - Great Controversy, p.477
*-“Christ gives them the breath of His own Spirit, the life of His own life.” - Ministry of Healing, p.159
*-“The Lord encourages all who seek Him with the whole heart. He gives them His Holy Spirit, the manifestation of His presence and favor. But those who forsake God in order to save their lives will be forsaken by Him. In seeking to save their lives by yielding the truth, they will lose eternal life.” - Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 9, page 230, 1909
*-"I will not leave you comfortless; I will come to you." The divine Spirit that the world's Redeemer promised to send, is the presence and power of God.” - Signs of the Times, November 23, 1891
*-“Christ gave his followers a positive promise that after his ascension he would send them his Spirit.”- Review and Herald, October 26 1897, ‘Words of comfort - No.2
*-“Jesus is waiting to breathe upon all his disciples, and give them the inspiration of his sanctifying spirit, and transfuse the vital influence from himself to his people. He would have them understand that henceforth they cannot serve two masters. Their lives cannot be divided. Christ is to live in his human agents, and work through their faculties, and act through their capabilities. Their will must be submitted to his will, they must act with his spirit, that it may be no more they that live, but Christ that liveth in them. Jesus is seeking to impress upon them the thought that in giving his Holy Spirit he is giving to them the glory which the Father has given him, that he and his people may be one in God.” - Signs of the Times, October 3, 1892, ‘Faith brings light’
*-“The Holy Spirit is Christ's representative, but divested of the personality of humanity, and independent thereof. Cumbered with humanity, Christ could not be in every place personally. Therefore it was for their interest that He should go to the Father, and send the Spirit to be His successor on earth. No one could then have any advantage because of his location or his personal contact with Christ. By the Spirit the Saviour would be accessible to all. In this sense He would be nearer to them than if He had not ascended on high…..The disciples still failed to understand Christ's words in their spiritual sense, and again He explained His meaning. By the Spirit, He said, He would manifest Himself to them." - Desire of Ages, page 669-670, ‘Let not your heart be troubled’ (this is how Jesus is omnipresent which Pastor Kelly denies his ability to be so. He said his humanity encumbers his ability - not TRUE!)
*-“All professions of Christianity are but lifeless expressions of faith until Jesus imbues the believer with his spiritual life, which is the Holy Ghost.” - Spirit of Prophecy, Volume 3, page 242, ‘Meeting of the brethren’, 1878
*-“Christ declared that after his ascension, he would send to his church, as his crowning gift, the Comforter, who was to take his place. This Comforter is the Holy Spirit,--the soul of his life, the efficacy of his church, the light and life of the world. With his Spirit Christ sends a reconciling influence and a power that takes away sin. …..The Spirit was given as a regenerating agency, and without this the sacrifice of Christ would have been of no avail. 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 fulness of divine power. It is the Spirit that makes effectual what has been wrought out by the world’s Redeemer. It is by the Spirit that the heart is made pure. Through the Spirit the believer becomes a partaker of the divine nature. Christ has given his Spirit as a divine power to overcome all hereditary and cultivated tendencies to evil, and to impress his own character upon the church." - Review and Herald, May 19, 1904, par. 1-4 ‘The promise of the Spirit’ (this statement is the opposite of what Pastor Kelly declares)
*-“The influence of the Holy Spirit is the life of Christ in the soul. We do not now see Christ and speak to Him, but His Holy Spirit is just as near us in one place as another. It works in and through every one who receives Christ. Those who know the indwelling of the Spirit reveal the fruits of the Spirit,-"love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith." - The Bible Echo, June 17, 1901, ‘Words of comfort
*-“When God’s people search the Scriptures with a desire to know what is truth, Jesus is present in the person of His representative, the Holy Spirit, reviving the heart of the humble and contrite ones.” - Ms 158 1898, December 7, 1898, The Gift of the Holy Spirit
--->these are statements by Ellen G. White. Either she WAS inspired or she WASN'T inspired. If she was ALL of these statements tell you who and what the Holy Spirit is as much as God revealed it to be. I believe she was inspired and these statements are clear as a bell. HUMBLE yourselves. You can't leave your salvation to leaders YOU will stand in judgement on your own. The division in the church is the truth trying to come out and anyone who says it thrown out. You think you do a good work for God by going after people who read the Bible literally. The Bible tells you there is a Father and a Son. That is not metaphorical. It is declared over and over but, you deny what Jesus came to reveal - He has a REAL father and he is truly his son. This is the Great Controversy is that the Father the source of all took in his private counsel only his true, begotten Son and this made Lucifer jealous. The Jealous manifested into total rebellion against God. Either you believe this as an Adventist or reject totally the foundations of this faith.
John 20:28 And Thomas answered and said to Him (Jesus),“My Lord and my God!”
What makes this passage powerful evidence for the deity of Christ is that Jesus does not correct Thomas.
In Greek, there is a way for the "and" conjunction to mean "both...and." It is by the addition of "te," as in "te kai." This is not commonly used (some would consider it more poetic), but where it occurs it is clear that the conjunction is copulative and not disjunctive. However, Thomas does not use this copulative form. It is not possible to rule out that the "kai" in Greek, meaning "and," is disjunctive. In fact, it most probably _is_ disjunctive, meaning that the two expressions joined by the "and" are separate, and do not apply to one and the same entity.
Thomas is recognizing both his "Lord" and his God, as Jesus teaches in John 14:10. The Bible is clear that "God" and "Lord" are separate entities. Compare these two verses:
Mat 22:32 I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.
Rom 14:9 For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living.
If Christ were God, then Matthew 22:32 would be falsified by Romans 14:9. Christ cannot be both "Lord" and "God," according to other scriptures, so we must assume that Jesus correctly understood Thomas' exclamation as referencing the two separate entities of Jesus' humanity and the divinity which was dwelling within him. See also 2 Corinthians 5:19.
What a waste of time- only the comments have the truth…
Agreed.
Some and many comments share the original truth.
Why is this series being reposted from 5 years ago? Has there not been growth on this subject, especially with the current climate within our church. I think this warrants to be readdressed and I hope it is done within the church, among the members.
Yes...
There has been a growth in the exposure of the buried truth.
The denomination sent out a memo to it's ministers to guard the new 1980 doctrine.
Hence, the repost.
But...
Their 'god the spirit' is waging a losing war with God's Spirit.
The Spirit of God will triumph over this new 'god the spirit'.
Right?
Why even discuss something that isn't in the Bible? On the other hand Godhead is in the bible.
The use of Godhead has been perverted in the church. These are the three times it is used in the Bible and the Concordance along with the meaning of it's use in the Bible. Also Noah Webster's 1828 dictionary definition of Godhead. The laity is not searching for themselves. They're not using Miller's Rules of Interpretation to study the Bible but, rather Louis Were's mysticism version of study which is not how we are to study. Miller's Rules were to be used till the end of time. It would create a unity of belief rather than division.
Act 17:29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.
Godhead G2304 (Strong's Concordance) G2304
θεῖος
theios
thi'-os
From G2316; godlike (neuter as noun, divinity): - divine, godhead.
Total KJV occurrences: 3
Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
Rom 1:19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Rom 1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Rom 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
Rom 1:23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
Rom 1:20 Godhead - Godhead;G2305
θειότης
theiotēs
thi-ot'-ace
From G2304; divinity (abstractly): - godhead.
Total KJV occurrences: 1
Col 2:6 As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him:
Col 2:7 Rooted and built up in him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving.
Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Col 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
Col 2:10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:
Col 2:9 Godhead G2320
θεότης
theotēs
theh-ot'-ace
From G2316; divinity (abstractly): - godhead.
Total KJV occurrences: 1
Webster's Dictionary 1828
GOD'HEAD, noun god'hed.
1. Godship; deity; divinity; divine nature or essence; applied to the true God, and to heathen deities.
2. A deity in person; a god or goddess.
Ellen G White - The Comforter is called “the Spirit of truth.” His work is to define and maintain the truth. He first dwells in the heart as the Spirit of truth, and thus He becomes the Comforter. There is comfort and peace in the truth, but no real peace or comfort can be found in falsehood. It is through false theories and traditions that Satan gains his power over the mind. By directing men to false standards, he misshapes the character. Through the Scriptures the Holy Spirit speaks to the mind, and impresses truth upon the heart. Thus He exposes error, and expels it from the soul. It is by the Spirit of truth, working through the word of God, that Christ subdues His chosen people to Himself. {Desire of Ages, 671.1, 1898}
In describing to His disciples the office work of the Holy Spirit, Jesus sought to inspire them with the joy and hope that inspired His own heart. He rejoiced because of the abundant help He had provided for His church. The Holy Spirit was the highest of all gifts that He could solicit from His Father for the exaltation of His people. The Spirit was given as a regenerating agency, and without this the sacrifice of Christ would have been of no avail. 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 fulness of divine power. It is the Spirit that makes effectual what has been wrought out by the world’s Redeemer. It is by the Spirit that the heart is made pure. Through the Spirit the believer becomes a partaker of the divine nature. Christ has given his Spirit as a divine power to overcome all hereditary and cultivated tendencies to evil, and to impress his own character upon the church. {Desire of Ages, 671.2, 1898}
The Spirit was given as a regenerating agency, and without this the sacrifice of Christ would have been of no avail. 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. It is the Spirit that makes effectual what has been wrought out by the world’s Redeemer. It is by the Spirit that the heart is made pure. Through the Spirit the believer becomes a partaker of the divine nature. Christ has given His Spirit as a divine power to overcome all hereditary and cultivated tendencies to evil, and to impress His own character upon His church. {Review and Herald, May 19, 1904, par. 3}
During the Jewish economy, the influence of God’s Spirit had been seen in a marked manner, but not in full. For ages prayers had been offered for the fulfilment of God’s promise to impart his Spirit, and not one of these earnest supplications had been forgotten. {Signs of the Times, December 1, 1898, par. 1}
Christ determined that when He ascended from this earth He would bestow a gift on those who had believed on Him and those who should believe on Him. What gift could He bestow rich enough to signalize and grace His ascension to the mediatorial throne? It must be worthy of His greatness and His royalty. He determined to give His representative, the third person of the Godhead. This gift could not be excelled. He would give all gifts in one, and therefore the divine Spirit, converting, enlightening, sanctifying, would be His donation. {Signs of the Times, December 1, 1898, par. 2}
Difference between Catholic Trinity and Adventist Godhead.
Where the anti-trinitarians make their biggest mistake is to equate the Adventist Godhead with the Roman Catholic trinity. They are very different doctrines.
The Adventist church does not believe in the Catholic trinity doctrine and if the anti-trinitarians put away their bias, they will see the difference.
Some of the ATs can see the difference but because of their hatred for the mainstream church, refuse to acknowledge that there is a difference. The problem with this approach is that as a consequence , they throw away the baby with the bathwater. The other problem is that by attacking the Godhead they are blaspheming God and committing high treason against heaven, putting their salvation in jeopardy.
I understand that some of the anti-trinitarians have bitter feelings towards the church because their new doctrine had not been accepted the way they were hoping and have been ostracised by their former brethren and even family. I have seen the devastation in some of their lives with their ruined relationships and broken marriages which is very sad.
Their mistake was to try to evangelise the church in a militant way. They then congregate with other anti-trinitarians and share their bitter feelings with one another and hope that this new camaraderie will make up for what they have lost in the church. Very big mistake!
I do know of a small number of anti-trinitarians who keep their beliefs quietly to themselves without making any noise and function normally within the church with their brethren unaware of their different beliefs. Some are honestly mistaken and will accept the truth when it is revealed to them. But to openly oppose the truth when they ought to know better is a serious matter before heaven.
There is a difference between the Catholic trinity and the Adventist Godhead doctrine. Please do the right thing and investigate.
The problem is that AT do not have new doctrine...
It is the sMe as what the pioneers believed and practiced for 50 years...
The Catholic doctrine of the Trinity is very different from the SDA belief in the Godhead. We believe in 3 co-eternal, co-equal Beings who are one in purpose, thoughts, and plans. Catholics believe that the Son eternally proceeds from the Father and the Holy Spirit is "spirated" from the Father and the Son. EGW never used the word Trinity, it is not in the Bible, and faithful SDAs shouldn't be using it either. If "Trinity" and "Godhead" are interchangeable, use Godhead and quit trying to be acceptable to evangelical churches.
Then that is 3 gods
Can't find number 4 in this series
3 is enough !
I asked FINLEY directly
HAVE WE WRITTEN IN ERRORS into our beliefs ? no answer
it was VOTED
“ For the benefit of those who may desire to know more particularly the cardinal features of the faith held by this denomination, we shall state that Seventh-day Adventists believe,- 1. In the divine Trinity. This Trinity consists of the eternal Father, a personal, spiritual being, omnipotent, omniscient, infinite in power, wisdom, and love; of the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the eternal Father, through whom all things were created, and through whom the salvation of the redeemed hosts will be accomplished; the Holy Spirit, the third person of the Godhead, the one regenerating agency in the work of redemption.” (F. M. Wilcox, Review and Herald, 9th October 1913,)
@@chrischung2365I agree, love u, bear on in your spirit the dying of our Lord and savior Jesus christ 🙏
Bless your ❤️ 💙 💜
Amen
Pastor Kelly is right.
So much apostasy since the early 1960's.
I found these audio videos of a campmeeting with Colin Standish.
VERY ENLIGHTENING
Colin Standish on the Omega of Apostacy
th-cam.com/play/PLJIHyAnsG9SPWbrVwkvhrEQspKj73Ezhs.html
@@chrischung2365 Wilcox apologized for that statement and his beliefs don't LINE up with today's SDA Trinity. They are not one in the same. “There has been through the centuries some very unfortunate and speculative teaching regarding the divine Trinity, and these philosophies have created great divisions in the Christian church.” (F. M. Wilcox, Review and Herald, October 29 1931, ‘Christ is Very God’) - also he is an early adventist but, not a pioneer of the first 50 years that the pillars were NOT to be changed.
It's unfortunate that what all this brings is not unity but, accuser of the brethern paving the way to go after people who don't believe exactly the way you do. There was never to be a creed to try people by and disfellowship them but, that is what the Doctrine of the Trinity does. Either you believe that the builder's of this faith were right and led by God or you are standing in the midst of a farce.