Jump to content
Kingdom of Adventistan
Gregory Matthews

SDA Teaching on the Trinity

Recommended Posts

phkrause
23 hours ago, APL said:

Maybe he would do it like in the book of Acts?  Maybe not....

Could you expand on this? Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you find some value to this community, please help out with a few dollars per month.

APL
53 minutes ago, phkrause said:

Could you expand on this? Thanks

Acts 2:38 Then Peter said to them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Acts 2:41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added to them about three thousand souls.

Acts 8:12-13 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. (13) Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done.

Acts 8:16 (For as yet he was fallen on none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)

Acts 10:47-48 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? (48) And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.

Acts 19:3-5 And he said to them, To what then were you baptized? And they said, To John’s baptism. (4) Then said Paul, John truly baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying to 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.

Acts 22:16 And now why tarry you? arise, and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8thdaypriest
On 5/18/2018 at 2:02 AM, The Wanderer said:

OK, this is just me without any quotes or texts or anything. I am trying to figure out here what you mean. Would you agree with the statement that says Jesus was both God and Man and that He overcame in the same way we all have to today? In other words, in your mind, COULD Jesus have exercised His divinity IF He had chosen to during His tenure here on Earth? I am thinking about a few examples where Jesus was obviously not just a Man as in the scene where Judas was approaching Him with the mob and the people were literally stopped in their tracks by Him and the Light He is and was. Jesus, the same yesterday, today, and always? Ill be interested to hear more clarification on that. I can dig up specific passages if needed. :)

I believe the Son of God - actually BECAME a human being.  He emptied Himself of His own divine powers, in order to BECOME a human being. 

As a human being - He no longer possessed (naturally) any divine powers OF HIS OWN.   Any divine power available to Him, was that of His Father.   The commands of Christ - would be fulfilled (through Him) BY His Father.  

Christ did have "authority" to heal, and to command demons, but that authority was "given" to Him BY His Father.  Matthew 28:18 And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth."  Who gave Him the authority?  Answer:  His Father.  

COULD Jesus have exercised His own natural divine power - His divinity - IF He had chosen to?   No.   He had no divine power - except that which flowed through Him, and dwelt in Him - the divine power of His Father. 

COULD Jesus have exercised the authority given to Him?  I believe so - yes.  But to exercise that authority, over God's angels, without His Father's consent, or against His Father's will - would have been rebellion on His part - sin - and He would then have lost both the authority and His eternal life. 

In the Garden at His arrest:

John 18:6 Now when He said to them, "I am He," they drew back and fell to the ground.  

Why could this also, not have been done for Him (through Him) by His Father?   Jesus did say, "The Father who dwells in me does the works." (John 14:10).   Never once did Jesus claim any divine power - of His own - while living as a man on earth.

AFTER He was glorified (by His Father) following His resurrection and ascension,  His divine powers were restored to Him.  His prayer - "Glorify me with the glory I had with you, before the world was" - that prayer was answered fully.   This allowed Jesus glorified to pour out His own spirit presence upon His disciples. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8thdaypriest
11 minutes ago, APL said:

Acts 2:38 Then Peter said to them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Acts 2:41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added to them about three thousand souls.

Acts 8:12-13 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. (13) Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done.

Acts 8:16 (For as yet he was fallen on none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)

Acts 10:47-48 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? (48) And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.

Acts 19:3-5 And he said to them, To what then were you baptized? And they said, To John’s baptism. (4) Then said Paul, John truly baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying to 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.

Acts 22:16 And now why tarry you? arise, and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

Yes.  Every baptism recorded AFTER Christ ascended, was performed "in the name of Jesus Christ".   Either the disciples got Christ's final instructions wrong, or someone has messed with the text (Matthew 28:19).  I believe the latter.  There is no existent manuscript or fragment containing the words of Matthew 28:19, that is pre-Constantine.  One Aramaic manuscript exists.  In that manuscript, the words of Christ are quoted as "baptizing them in my name".   There is a great debate going on among scholars of ancient Biblical manuscripts, over this question. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gustave
On ‎5‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 9:41 AM, The Wanderer said:

Hello Gus, as far as I know, few denominations see it the way the Adventist Church does. However; I would add that this is what I was trying to talk about in another subject area with you here on the forum. We DO HAVE official beliefs, and we DO HAVE differing views within the rank and file on same beliefs; but we do not have a church which allows anyone, leaders or not, to say what our official teachings are. Thats not how our doctrines are or ever were formed. Did you note how Elder Moore stated it?

That doesnt sound like official church belief, except for the fact that he said the church doesnt want to make this a salvational issue...as in people being "lost" if they dont belive it. It would be like saving that people WLL BE SAVED IF they DO believe this doctrine. Only Jesus saves. (John 1:29)  Doctrines do not save us. Only the Person who wrote the doctrine saves us and this is why I appreciate the fundamental belief about Unity In Diversity! I would also say that Moore doesnt appear to be speaking for the church on official capacity. He said "we here at The Signs..."

 

I read Moore's article a couple of times - the rub is that Elder Moore's reasoning while solidly on the side of the Trinitarian Doctrine, in incompatible with Ellen White or the SDA Pioneers. 

The other thing I noticed about what you said: "We do NOT have a church which allow anyone, leaders or not, to say what our official teachings are"

Other than the preposterous act of saying that do you have an "official" statement from your Church that says this? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JoeMo
On 5/19/2018 at 11:37 AM, 8thdaypriest said:

COULD Jesus have exercised His own natural divine power - His divinity - IF He had chosen to?   No.  

I disagree.  Jesus had (and has) a free will - just like we do.  Jesus was fully man and fully God.  He set aside His divinity voluntarily; it was not taken from Him.  He CHOSE to rely on the Father's power.  If He had chosen to use His own power, mankind may well have been doomed for eternity.  The Father chose - by His own free will to be a good and merciful God.  Jesus chose to pay the penalty for man's spiritual crimes.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8thdaypriest

IF Jesus was a "fully divine" being, during His incarnation, then He could not have died.  I know.  Some say that only the human part of Jesus died.  But that would mean an incomplete offering - if ALL of Him did not die.   It would mean that God did not die for our sins. 

IF Jesus was a "fully divine" being during His incarnation, He could not have sinned.  It is impossible for a "fully divine" being - to sin.  Which means that He really was risking nothing.

IF Jesus was a "fully divine" being during His incarnation, then what need to be "glorified"  by His Father.   He could shine and show forth His own glory, without any assistance from His Father. 

Before He incarnated, He was the Son of God.  The Father assisted His Son, to incarnate.  The author of Hebrews says God brought His Son into the world.  So the Son did not perform His own incarnation.  During this process of incarnating, God reduced His own Son to a few strands of DNA in the womb of Mary.  HOW the Father did this - is a mystery.   At this moment the former divine being - Michael, ceased to EXIST, and a new human being emerged in the womb of Mary.  This new human being, was indwelt by God His Father, from the moment of His birth. 

Just my opinion - of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
APL
19 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

This new human being, was indwelt by God His Father, from the moment of His birth. 

From His birth, or from His conception? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8thdaypriest
4 minutes ago, APL said:

From His birth, or from His conception? 

Don't know. 

You have a passage that would indicate which.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
APL
1 hour ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Don't know. 

There are those that claim life does not start until birth, the first breath, ignoring the fact that breath comes to the unborn child by its mother. There are those that claim Christ did not come until that which was in Mary's body was born, and somehow possessed the body, like a separate soul.  There are those that claim Christ resurrected Himself!!!  Your answer is at least honest. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stinsonmarri
On 5/12/2018 at 9:50 PM, 8thdaypriest said:

Jesus also prayed that WE would be ONE with the Father.   That doesn't make US equal with the Father, any more than it made Jesus equal with His Father.

"The HEAD of Christ is God."  (1Cor 11). 

8thdaypriest: If you notice, I said for me! You see it does not matter to me about equality of THE FATHER and SON; what matters to me is THEIR saving GRACE! When I read a word from the Bible that appears to be misunderstood, I check the word out. I realize that the KJV used words that are not understood. I understand that because of this problem, is why there are so many beliefs and all claiming to believe in the same thing but we don't. Why is that- it has to do with words and understanding.

My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to ME: seeing thou hast forgotten the Law of thy ELOHIYM,  I will also forget thy children. Hos 4:6 SACRED KJV

Now, take the word "begotten" in John 3:16; to me it appears to mean that YAHSHUA came from HIS FATHER! So what I do is look up the word in two ways:

1. Interlinear: I go here to see if all the words provided in English are in the original script. Some words are added truly base on the scholars belief and not what the script provides. That take away what was really said regardless of any language. To me that adding to the Bible. Now that is how I study and understand to show myself approval.

2. Lexicon: Now I see the original word and look at the meaning and how it is applied. Is translated or transliterated which these two words need understanding also.

a.      Translation is the process of translating words or text from one language into another. If you process a word; the step that is used might not always be correct, or maybe once, again base on the translator belief. To me this is serious with the word that he chooses correctly the word to what the Hebrew or Greek writer actually meant. This has been a major problem in translating. The Protestant translators used the Catholic Latin Vulgate to translate their work into English! Too me that's a big problem within itself, you are going to translate from what you are protesting against? Briefly the Greek manuscripts themselves had flaws because we now know that the disciples writers also Paul were Hebrews and used this language or it close relation, the Aramaic to spread the Gospel. This is known as a fact due to many of the words used are not Greek expressions. Why is this so important, well that why the Bible saids to study. Which actually mean to research it out. We all have gifts and ones gift concerning what I am providing along with other gifts can be used together to unite the truth with the help of THE HOLY SPIRIT!

b. Transliterate: is simply transferring words of a language exactly to word that means the same in the other language. This is truly better and help in the knowledge of understanding. However, we still must be realistic; languages being confounded and men problem, regardless of their profession are not always neutral base on one's belief system. This factor always come into play and that is why we have all these various Protestants beliefs all claiming to believe the same? Hum! I can get more technical or scholastic with really providing Exegesis or Eschatological terms, but to me simplicity is the best.

On the word "begotten," this makes sense:

Strong's Exhaustive Concordance- “monos:”alone, only, by themselves, to continue to be present to be held, or kept, continually to continue to be.

Thayer's Greek Lexicon-“genos:” same nature.

MICHAEL did not come from HIS FATHER, HE like HIS FATHER always exist, THEY  by THEMSELVES continue to BE PRESENT, this include THE HOLY SPIRIT, who never speaks of HIMSELF. THEY are ALL of the same NATURE and here is the proof:

And ELOHIYM said, Let US make man in OUR IMAGE, after OUR LIKENESS: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So ELOHIYM created man in HIS OWN IMAGE, in THE IMAGE of ELOHIYM created HE him; male and female created he them. SACRED KJV Gen 1: 26, 27 

A creation is never equal to its creator!

This is what equality is clear to me! According to the Etymology Dictionary equality it states:

“Similarity, likeness" (also sometimes with reference to civil rights)!

I would like it be shown in the Bible that HE that always was DIVINE! Humanity was wrap in Divinity! YAHSHUA  prove that:

And after six days, YAHSHUA  took Peter and Jacob, and his brother John, and brought them up into a high mountain privately. And HE was transfigured before them, and His face shone like the sun, and His clothing became white as the light. Mat 17:1, 2 HRB

But Peter and they that were with HIM were heavy with sleep: and when they were awake, they saw HIS GLORY, and the two men that stood with him. Luke 9:32 HRB

Therefore doth MY FATHER Love ME, because I lay down MY LIFE, that I might take it again. John 10:17 KJV

YAHSHUA said to her, I AM the RESURRECTION and THE LIFE. John 11:25 HRB

For HE is THE BRIGHTNESS of HIS GLORY, and THE EXPRESS IMAGE of HIS BEING, and upholding all things by the power of HIS WORD; having made purification of our sins through HIMSELF, HE Sat down on THE RIGHT of THE MAJESTY on HIGH, Heb 1:3 HRB

And when I saw HIM, I fell at HIS FEET, as dead. And HE put HIS RIGHT HAND  on me, Saying to me, Do not fear. I AM THE FIRST and LAST, and THE LIVING ONE; and I became dead; and, behold, I AM LIVING FOREVER and EVER. Amen. And I have the keys of the grave, and of death. Rev 1:17, 18 HRB

YAHSHUA never used HIS POWER, HE relied  on HIS FATHER as we relied on THE HOLY SPIRIT. Through HIM are we able to get to THE SON and THE FATHER. Flashes of DIVINITY was seen as HE threw over those tables in the Sanctuary!!!!!

So my friend in my simple way of thinking I accept THEIR EQUALITY! This is now just my choice that I am presenting to you. However, you as everyone here have a right to choose for yourself!

Happy Sabbath and be bless, also blessing go out to all the mothers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8thdaypriest
21 hours ago, APL said:

There are those that claim life does not start until birth, the first breath, ignoring the fact that breath comes to the unborn child by its mother. There are those that claim Christ did not come until that which was in Mary's body was born, and somehow possessed the body, like a separate soul.  There are those that claim Christ resurrected Himself!!!  Your answer is at least honest. 

I do NOT believe that Christ resurrected Himself.  The NT is clear.  Christ was resurrected BY His Father.

On the question of when life begins:

Exodus 21:22 "If people are fighting and hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman's husband demands and the court allows.   23 But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, (NIV)

The loss of a fetus was not to be regarded as a "serious injury", according to the LORD's instruction.  Rabbinical records tell us that the offender would only be "fined" IF the fetus was male.  Doesn't sound like a fetus was equated with a person already born and breathing.  

Do you see why I have questions? 

Jeremiah 1:5 "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; Before you were born I sanctified you; I ordained you a prophet to the nations."

Some point to this verse to support claims that a life begins at conception, but the verse says "before I formed you in the womb".  To me, that could just as easily mean, before Jeremiah was conceived.   The LORD sees the future, and knows what will be.  I don't think anyone is claiming that Jeremiah was alive, and a person, before he was even conceived. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
APL

I agree with you, that The Father resurrected Christ. As to the unborn, Luke 1:41-42 And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost: (42) And she spoke out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb.

 

What was in both wombs were alive and both significant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8thdaypriest
38 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

I do NOT believe that Christ resurrected Himself.  The NT is clear.  Christ was resurrected BY His Father.

On the question of when life begins:

Exodus 21:22 "If people are fighting and hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman's husband demands and the court allows.   23 But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, (NIV)

The loss of a fetus was not to be regarded as a "serious injury", according to the LORD's instruction.  Rabbinical records tell us that the offender would only be "fined" IF the fetus was male.  Doesn't sound like a fetus was equated with a person already born and breathing.  

Do you see why I have questions? 

Jeremiah 1:5 "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; Before you were born I sanctified you; I ordained you a prophet to the nations."

Some point to this verse to support claims that a life begins at conception, but the verse says "before I formed you in the womb".  To me, that could just as easily mean, before Jeremiah was conceived.   The LORD sees the future, and knows what will be.  I don't think anyone is claiming that Jeremiah was alive, and a person, before he was even conceived. 

My personal view of a developing fetus is like this.  God is creating a person.  Who am I to interfere while God is creating? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8thdaypriest
5 minutes ago, APL said:

I agree with you, that The Father resurrected Christ. As to the unborn, Luke 1:41-42 And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost: (42) And she spoke out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb.

 

What was in both wombs were alive and both significant.

My personal view of a developing fetus is like this.  God is creating a person.  Who am I to interfere while God is creating?  That is my answer to the abortion question. I cannot tell you if the fetus is a person, or a person in process. 

Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.  Doesn't say the "babe" in her womb was filled with the Holy Spirit. Maybe the babe "leapt" in response to what Mary felt as she was filled with the Spirit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
APL
2 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

My personal view of a developing fetus is like this.  God is creating a person.  Who am I to interfere while God is creating? 

Does God cause trisomy-21, Down's Syndrome?  But I digress..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8thdaypriest
1 minute ago, APL said:

Does God cause trisomy-21, Down's Syndrome?  But I digress..

OK - I'll digress.  Genetic defects are caused by defects in our genes - caused mostly by radiation from the sun.  But also by the ongoing process of death, which "all in Adam" experience. 

When massive genetic defects are identified, which guarantee retardation, or a very short, very painful life expectancy - if a developing fetus is so damaged by forces of nature,  that normal life outside the womb, will be impossible, I would not frown on aborting.   Just my opinion.  

I'm also in favor of assisted easy death with dignity,  for those who are terminal, are in severe unmanageable pain, or whose dementia has progressed beyond recognition of significant others, or ability to communicate (assuming the person requested this assistance prior to reaching this point).  We treat our pets better than we treat people.   In my opinion.   Nursing homes make money, keeping human bodies alive in a vegetative state.  And no - I don't believe God would punish me for such.  It's already in my Living Will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
APL

Digression continued: actually there is a more fundamental problem with our genes than the sun, and in fact that problem is why the sun causes damage.  Over half of our DNA is non-original, composed of transposable elements (TE).  See: Transposable Elements.  The Sun causes damage most likely in areas of TEs where there is a higher concentation of T and A base pairs which only have a double covallent bond vs a triple at the G and C pairs in the DNA.  There is even a hypothesis that all disease, including heart disease, cancer, autoimmune and ultimately all aging and death is a results of TEs in the DNA.

As for abortions and assisted suicide, I for one could not participate in them, but cannot judge those that do. I have many friends and colleagues that have participated in these procedures.  I certainly would not want to have a miserable life prolonged by artificial means. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8thdaypriest
On 5/26/2018 at 9:39 PM, APL said:

Digression continued: actually there is a more fundamental problem with our genes than the sun, and in fact that problem is why the sun causes damage.  Over half of our DNA is non-original, composed of transposable elements (TE).  See: Transposable Elements.  The Sun causes damage most likely in areas of TEs where there is a higher concentation of T and A base pairs which only have a double covallent bond vs a triple at the G and C pairs in the DNA.  There is even a hypothesis that all disease, including heart disease, cancer, autoimmune and ultimately all aging and death is a results of TEs in the DNA.

Waaaay over my head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
APL
12 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Waaaay over my head

My point - it is not the sun.  😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×