Jump to content
Kingdom of Adventistan
The Wanderer

Yet Another Prophecy Thread

Recommended Posts

The Wanderer
7 hours ago, Lone Ranger said:

If one reads the entire page, you will find that several entries REFUTE this viewpoint, stating that ekklesia DOES NOT derive from the Celtic "kirk"

In fact, the Greek ekklesia pre-dates the Celtic Kirk by a substantial margin.

Those who yap away about only their preferred pronouncement of church, and their "private interpretation" thereof, actually have no idea what Church is to Jesus or His people.

Quote

But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth. " (1 Tim 3:15)

ek-klay-see'-ah
From a compound of G1537 and a derivative of G2564; a calling out, that is, (concretely) a popular meeting, especially a religious congregation (Jewish synagogue, or Christian community of members on earth or saints in heaven or both): - assembly, church. Total KJV occurrences: 115

"Church" has NOTHING to do with a building; and we can know this by confirming the context with other scripture:

Quote

to our beloved Apphia, and Archippus our fellowsoldier, and to the church in thy house: (Phm 1:2)

"Where two or three are gathered together IN MY NAME" I am there. Jesus makes a point of calling it "church" wherever His people are gathered.

Stinsons ridiculous debating about this is completely unwelcome in this topic which is about "the everlasting gospel," and how it is revealed in prophecy.

 

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.

The Wanderer

I think this will be my last post until the new year. Duty calls elsewhere for now. But I wanted to share these thoughts before I go:

Prophetic Voice

Quote

Her prophets have smeared whitewash for them, seeing false visions and divining lies for them, saying, 'Thus says the Lord GOD,' when the LORD has not spoken. (Ezekiel 22:28)

The Bible is clear on the fact that there are and always will be "false prophets," as we see here in Ezekiel 22:28, many prophets employed all their ingenuity to varnish over the crimes of the civil authorities (the antecedent to them), to palliate their offences, and to conceal their faults, while they were like ravening wolves, and took bribes to shed innocent blood. By these means they shared the dishonest gains with the princes, or availed themselves of their authority to gratify their avarice or revenge. Ezekiel 22:25, *Ezekiel 13:10-16, Isa 30:10, Jer 8:10-11, 1 Cor 3:11-15.

Jesus, also made a special point of warning us against false prophets when He talked about "the time of the end." In fact; Jesus warned not only about "false prophets," but also included "false Messiahs" in His warnings:

Quote

For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. (Mat 24:24)

Going by scripture; we see that "even the very elect" run the risk of being decieved by "signs," "wonders," "false Messiahs," "false prophets" (Mat 24:24) and in Mark 13:32 we read a step further and see how that "the very elect" are "SEDUCED" by all these things: Jesus clearly says that the very PURPOSE of these "signs" and "wonders" is/will be to "seduce," IF POSSIBLE, "the very elect"

One of the major purposes of the "wonders" is possibly the massive gentrification crimes that societies everywhere are now assaulted with: its been going on for a long time and will be especially prominent as the end time draws closer. It is very interesting that scripture uses the word "seduce" in relation to something happening with "the elect!"

Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. (Ezekiel 16:49)

And Jesus does say that "Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded;
But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all. Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed. " (Luke 17: 28-30)

John The Revelator foresaw this exact time when: "...their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified." (Rev 11:8)

Now, with this brief preview as noted above; we can see that OT & NT are completely united in their message about the "time of the end;" and last day events and how these will simply be both a repeat, and a MAGNIFICATION of past history reflecting on all of these things entailed in prophecy. Now, we are ready to actually examine more closely, (in the intended context) about what is going to take place; and with these short, simple basics, we do not even need to name names, or groups, or races, or religions, or even countries. THIS is what will be going on; inded has already started to happen, and can be traced all the way back to the beginning of recorded time:

The Message of the Three Angels

It is NOT "the messages" of the three angels; for THE message is a unified whole; as in one, or THE message. The Third Angels Message fully embraces both the second and the first angel's message, and the three run concurrently, as a whole. Consider the following picture to illustrate the point.

Quote

Rev 14:6  And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,
Rev 14:7  Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.
Rev 14:8  And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication.
Rev 14:9  And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,
Rev 14:10  The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:
Rev 14:11  And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.
Rev 14:12  Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.
Rev 14:13  And I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Write, Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth: Yea, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours; and their works do follow them.

One thing we can notice here is how most commentators and other interested parties in the giving of The Three Angel's Message, usually end it at verse 12. But Rev 14:13 is also a very essential portion of this astounding message! In the NIV it reads:

 Then I heard a voice from heaven say, "Write this: Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on."
 
 "Yes," says the Spirit, "they will rest from their labor, for their deeds will follow them." Here, on this very point, The Holy Spirit "SPEAKS EXPRESSLY" (1 Tim 4:1), about people who "die in The Lord." This is not an optional portion of the Three Angel's Message! Its not an aside; its not "doctrine;" its not "the state of the dead;" it IS the state of the living; and WHO God is to them! It is essential to our salvation that in following Jesus; we reflect on the Bible Fact that our deeds will "follow" us. No matter what happens to us; THAT will happen too! We will reap what we sow. "Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap".(Gal 6:7) We don't actually even need to know any more than this regarding "The Three Angel's Message!" Away with all those ridiculous "predictions" and "straight testimony" hub bubs. The "straight testimony" has nothing to do with "time-setting," or with "warnings" or with any of the shouted out hee haws of the internet; for the only testimony that will carry any weight during "the time of trouble" we are entering upon is YOUR personal testimony, and who God is to you. (1 John 1:1-3)
 
Three words are all thats needed to portray "The Three Angel's Message." "Love one another." And that is the very thing that all DIVISION is opposed to and that almost everyone is refusing to do. But when Jesus called it "a new commandment of love;" He didnt mean it literally; for He meant it quite graphically, as in it was "new" to people who have never done that before. No. I dont mean, they have never loved their family or friends. Everybody does that. But we are refusing this message when it comes to others in not just our church; but all other churches or religions. "Love one another." No one wants to do that!

Amongst other important points associated with "the everlasting gospel," it is essential to recognize that with all the self-appointed "prophetic messages" and the crack-pot videos coming out in affirmation of religious insanity; they have it all backwards! The false prophets are all focused upon the behavior of others, and never themselves; yet as we have just seen; it is specifically and decidedly our own behavior and actions, and even thoughts, that we need to police more closely!

"Jesus lives today, and we can rejoice in a whole Saviour. It was a whole Saviour that died on Calvary's cross; a whole sacrifice that was made for us; and it is our privilege to accept and enjoy a whole and free salvation. Do not let us compare ourselves with others. A true and living Pattern is given us, which is perfect. Let us look away from all others, and imitate that Pattern. "He that gathereth not with me, scattereth abroad." O let us gather with Christ, and imitate his lovely example and character. God requires the whole heart. He has purchased it. It is his property. Withhold not from Christ that which belongs to him. Are our affections divided? Let them be so no more. Let our words and actions tell for God. We are seeking for glory, honor, immortality, eternal life. What a glorious hope is ours! Salvation is what we must have. Life, spiritual life, pray for it, wrestle for it. It is our privilege to enjoy it. We cannot glorify God with a dead faith. I have made my mark high for heaven and eternal life."  {2SG 216.1}

In a future post I will focus more closely on the Three Angel's Message; and I believe that with a little searching and review, we can discover, or rediscover the beauty and the assurance in this message.

What a precious truth, that the only One who can give peace to the weary, sin-sick soul, is the originator of the very law the sinner has violated. All power in Heaven and on earth is given to Christ, and while his soul was made a sacrifice for sin, he will accept the humble penitent, and give him rest and peace. He knows the enormity of man's guilt and for this reason he came to earth to open a way whereby men may be released from the bondage of sin, and obtain power to obey the law of God. Thus may we become a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a peculiar people, to show forth the praises of Him who hath called us out of darkness into his marvelous light.  {ST, March 3, 1881 par. 5} 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stinsonmarri
On 12/1/2018 at 1:11 PM, Lone Ranger said:

Here is the link to the page on which this is found:

http://grahamhancock.com/phorum/read.php?4,762067,762067

If one reads the entire page, you will find that several entries REFUTE this viewpoint, stating that ekklesia DOES NOT derive from the Celtic "kirk"

In fact, the Greek ekklesia pre-dates the Celtic Kirk by a substantial margin.

I first would like to thank you for checking out sources online as I have requested for everything that I present. To provide a humble answer back, if you notice that was a forum and Milo does not understand history or linguistic which is my specialty. I am a Biblical Historian and research is what I truly do carefully. So what I first provided was main line; let me present some detail references that you may want to check out!

Church (n.): Old English cirice, circe "place of assemblage set aside for Christian worship; the body of Christian believers, Christians collectively; ecclesiastical authority or power," from Proto-Germanic *kirika (source also of Old Saxon kirika, Old Norse kirkja, Old Frisian zerke, Middle Dutch kerke, Dutch kerk, Old High German kirihha, German Kirche).

This is probably [see extensive note in OED] borrowed via an unrecorded Gothic word from Greek kyriake (oikia), kyriakon doma "the Lord's (house)," from kyrios "ruler, lord," from PIE root *keue- "to swell" ("swollen," hence "strong, powerful").

Greek kyriakon (adj.) "of the Lord" was used of houses of Christian worship since c.300, especially in the East, though it was less common in this sense than ἐκκλησία (ekklēsia, "congregation") or βασιλική (basilikē, "royal thing"). An example of the direct Greek-to-Germanic transmission of many Christian words, via the Goths; probably it was used by West Germanic people in their pre-Christian period.

The word also was picked up by the Slavic tongues, probably via Germanic (Old Church Slavonic criky, Russian cerkov). Finnish kirkko, Estonian kirrik are from Scandinavian. Romance and Celtic languages use variants of Latin ecclesia (such as French église, 11c.). ETYMONLINE

 The Origins of Old English

Old English is one of the Germanic groups of Indo-European languages. It was spoken, and written, in England before about 1100AD. It is sometimes referred to as Anglo-Saxon.

There were four distinct dialects of Old English: Northumbrian, Mercia, Kentish and West-Saxon. This is known through differences in spelling. After 900 AD West-Saxon became widely used as a standard written language, and is sometimes referred to as 'Classic West-Saxon'.

Two stages of the West-Saxon dialect can be distinguished - early West Saxon (eWS), which is the language of the time of King Alfred (c. 900), and late West Saxon (lWS), which is seen in the works of Ælfric (c. 1000). The most important difference is that in eWS ie and īe appear in lWS texts as y and ŷ (for example, eWS fierdbecomes fyrd in lWS). Another is that ea may be spelt e in lWS (for example, eWS scēap becomes scēp in lWS).

Latin influence on Old English during the Insular period is divided into two periods: early settlement (450-600), and post-Christian (650+). Among early loans, during the pagan period, are: Old English; Latin.

Later, with the introduction of Christianity, many more words were introduced. Most of these are of a "technical" nature and are concerned with Christianity and its institutions.

A few of these words like cirice "church", and bisceop "bishop" may have been in use before Christianisation.

Celtic

There are about 12 secure Celtic loans in OE; most of these are from Brythonic (P) Celtic - the dialect group spoken by the larger number of British inhabitants.

A very small number came from Goidelic (q) Celtic, and are associated with the church (apparently borrowed from Irish missionaries). Another word apparently borrowed from Irish missionaries is cros(s) which only appears in place names. The usual OE is rōd. www.jebbo.co.uk/learn-oe/origins.htm Further Reading Old English: a historical linguistic companion

 Those of you who have been in "church" or have "gone to church" for any length of time have probably heard that the origin of the word "church" is from the Greek word ekklasia written in English ecclesia which would translate into English as called out, an assembly, or collection. This may be the definition of the word ecclesia, but the English word "church" does not come from this Greek word. Webster says the English word "church" comes from the Greek word kuriakon meaning "the Lord's" or "the Lord's house or belonging". Sounds plausible, doesn't it? This is what the seminary students are taught when they enter into the halls or walls of christendom as they study to become "heads of the churches." To most of you, this explanation would probably suffice, but I am a nosy type, and I like to dig. Looking into Young's Concordance, I discovered this word kuriakon is not in the Greek text of our Bibles. Strange that the Creator of the Universe would name his body on earth kuriakon and then not use the word in His Holy Word. Something did not smell right, know what I mean?

I am in touch with many people who spend much time doing word studies, and play around with what has been called "etymology", that is the study of word origins. I also read much material from different authors who have traced many of our "church" words to pagan mythology, especially Greek, Roman, Babylonian, and German or Teutonic mythology. Most of you are not aware of the fact that English is really a part of the German language. As a matter of fact, about 90% of the words in the King James Bible are German in origin. The English peoples are also called Anglo-Saxons. The Webster's Dictionary says under Anglo-Saxon "A member of the nation created by the consolidation of Low German tribes that invaded England in the 5th and 6th centuries, together with native and Danish elements, which continued as the ruling power of England until the Norman Conquest." Their language dominated England. Even the name England reflects this. I point this out so that you are aware of how German or Norse mythology has much to do with many of our English words.

Now Webster says that the root of this word "church" is a Saxon word "circe, or circ, or cyric." Those of you who are versed in Greek mythology or in the Greek language should begin to be raising your eyebrows. This information is so embarrassing that Webster did what he could to hide this in his first edition, but later editions made it easy to uncover. In the Original Webster's under the word "circ" are the simple words "see circus." Who says our Father doesn't have a sense of humor? But it gets more interesting than that! The first entry as to the etymological meaning and origin of the church is "circe." Now for those who are versed in Greek, this connection is so obvious and embarrassing that Webster did not put this noun in his dictionary, but he did put the adjective which is "Circean" I cannot prove it, but I think this omission was intentional. Under "Circean" we find the following definition: "adjective; Pertaining to Circe, the fabled daughter of Sol and Perseis, who was supposed to possess great knowledge of magic and venomous herbs, by which she was able to charm and fascinate." Later editions of Webster's finally had the courage to enter the noun under which we find more information: "Circe noun [L., fr. Gr. Kirke.] In the Odyssey, an island sorceress who turned her victims by magic into beasts but was thwarted by Odysseus with the herb moly given him by Hermes-Circean, circaean adj…" Gary Amirault

 Coverdale Bible (1535) - used "congregation"

Matthew Bible (1537) - used "congregation"

The Great Bible (1539) - used "congregation"

Bishop's Bible (1568) - used "congregation"

 "The derivation of the word 'church' is uncertain. It is found in the Teutonic and Slavonic languages and answers to the derivatives of ekklesia, which are naturally found in the romance languages and by foreign importation elsewhere. The word is generally said to be derived from the Greek kyriakos, meaning the lord's house. But the derivation has been too hastily assumed. It is probably associated with the Scottish kirk, the Latin circus/circulous, the Greek klukos, because the congregations were gathered in circles." Smith's Bible Dictionary 1884, p. 452

 "Of or for a lord or master (speaking of a secular lord). Assumed to be original of the Teutonic kirk, kirche, or church, but how this Greek name came to be adopted by the northern nations rather than the Roman name or Greek name ekklesia has not been satisfactorily explained." Lidellan's Scott's Greek English Lexicon

 "The etymology of this word is generally assumed to be from the Greek, Kuriou oikos (house of God); but this is most improbable, as the word existed in all the Celtic dialects long before the introduction of Greek. No doubt the word means "a circle." The places of worship among the German and Celtic nations were always circular. (Welsh, cyrch, French, cirque; Scotch, kirk; Greek, kirk-os, etc.) Compare Anglo-Saxon circe, a church, with circol, a circle." Ebenezer Cobham Brewers Dictionary of Phrase and Fable of 1898

Even them will I bring to MY HOLY Mountain, and make them joyful in MY House of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon MINE altar; for MINE House shall be called an House of prayer for all people. Isa 56:7 

I only gave you the Tyndale Bible because his Bible was the first Bible there were others and I am sorry I did not add them! I just want you to know that the circle was used in ancient pagan religions. It is more deeper then most think, paganism is not barbaric it is highly sophisticated. Most do not know that the pyramids have a circle on top of each of them and they are in alignment with all of the ancient temples around the world. The temples in India have a stupa (known in Sanskrit as pradakśina or pradakshinaṇā), which is a circle. The circle movement comes from the knowledge of the stars. This knowledge we call astronomy and constellation is used by the naval observatory (who put it to good use, which the Bible does call them for signs ), is given by our CREATOR. These signs in the stars of for navigation and for future events for the end time. Remember the Babylonians came to Hezekiah when the sun move 10 degrees back. They were highly educated in the stars and did not go to any nation but only to Israel. They knew then and during the time of Nebuchadnezzar who YAHWEH IS, THE ELOHIM that does not dwell with flesh!

But Satan uses the star systems also call astrology, comos, zodiac and he knows how to manipulate human being. We are not dealing just with each other but a powerful angel that once stood before THE PRESENCE of THE MOST HIGH! Paganism was brought in by the enemy who planted seeds also and wheat and tares are growing together. If you look at when the word started to be us instead of community or congregation around 300 A. D. all of the apostles and disciples were decease. Please don't take my word continue to check out the sources along with yours!

Blessings!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lone Ranger

Thank you for your clarification. I did read it.

I think we are being distracted by this "church" thing and its etymology etc. etc.

The two points I am emphasizing are:

  1. Jesus used a word translated and intended to refer to "church."
  2. As you correctly pointed out, the web page in question is a forum and contains, (as again correctly pointed out),  varying degrees of knowledge and scholarship (Much like this forum). The point I make is that not everyone agrees with the etymology/conclusions.

I acknowledge your point of view while at the same time disagreeing with it, and I suggest we let it go at that. For myself, respectfully I will not respond to any other posts regarding this matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stinsonmarri
On 12/1/2018 at 9:19 PM, The Wanderer said:

The Bible is clear on the fact that there are and always will be "false prophets," as we see here in Ezekiel 22:28, many prophets employed all their ingenuity to varnish over the crimes of the civil authorities (the antecedent to them), to palliate their offences, and to conceal their faults, while they were like ravening wolves, and took bribes to shed innocent blood. By these means they shared the dishonest gains with the princes, or availed themselves of their authority to gratify their avarice or revenge. Ezekiel 22:25, *Ezekiel 13:10-16, Isa 30:10, Jer 8:10-11, 1 Cor 3:11-15.

I never claim to be a prophet, but I do claim to stand for truth. The Bible says straight and narrow is the path and only a few will follow therein. Broad is the other path and many follow that path. I not looking for glory or bonus points. What I only ask is do what the Bible ask prove all thing and hold on to those things which are true. Those who point fingers, be careful what is point back to you. I have never ever put down anyone because I disagree with your views or presentation. Why the hostility? If you feel what is presented is wrong, out of love show me. I can apologize and many of know that I have when I have done something wrong. If you claim to be a part of the Kingdom the stand firm and prove it with love and grace. I continually grow daily that why I stop being even negative about Trump. It get nowhere but harsh words and every attacking other. If you feel that I am wrong then pray for me please and do what the Bible says:

Son of man, I have made thee a watchman unto the house of IsraEL: therefore hear the word at MY MOUTH, and give them warning from ME. When I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand. Yet if thou warn the wicked and he turn not from his wickedness, nor from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul. Again, When a righteous man doth turn from his righteousness, and commit iniquity, and I lay a stumblingblock before him, he shall die: because thou hast not given him warning, he shall die in his sin, and his righteousness which he hath done shall not be remembered; but his blood will I require at thine hand. Nevertheless if thou warn the righteous man, that the righteous sin not, and he doth not sin, he shall surely live, because he is warned; also thou hast delivered thy soul. Eze 3:17- 21

If I am not providing truth or false doctrine just show me!

I leave you with EGW:

I asked the meaning of the shaking I had seen and was shown that it would be caused by the straight Testimony called forth by the counsel of THE TRUE WITNESS to the Laodiceans. This will have its effect upon the heart of the receiver, and will lead him to exalt the standard and pour forth the straight truth. Some will not bear this straight Testimony. They will rise up against it, and this is what will cause a shaking among God’s people.

I saw that the Testimony of THE TRUE WITNESS has not been half heeded. The solemn Testimony upon which the destiny of the church hangs has been lightly esteemed, if not entirely disregarded. This Testimony must work deep repentance; all who truly receive it will obey it and be purified. EW p. 270

If what I have presented is false may YAHWEH take my life, because I do not want to be a stumbling block to anyone!

Pray for me!🙏  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stinsonmarri
On ‎12‎/‎1‎/‎2018 at 6:13 PM, The Wanderer said:

"Where two or three are gathered together IN MY NAME" I am there. Jesus makes a point of calling it "church" wherever His people are gathered.

Stinsons ridiculous debating about this is completely unwelcome in this topic which is about "the everlasting gospel," and how it is revealed in prophecy.

THE SPIRIT of PROPHECY is revealing the truth according to the Bible. I only provided the facts!

And the next Sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the WORD of ELOHIYM. Act 13:44 

And on the Sabbath we went out of the city by a river side, where prayer was wont to be made; and we sat down, and spake unto the women which resorted thither. Act 16:13 

That's your assembly of gathering together!

Be bless Wanderer!

[REMINDER:  When you quote a text that is not worded like the more common translations of the Bible, please give the translation that you are using.  In Acts 13:44, the more common translations use the word "God" and do not use the word "ELOHIYM."   --GM]  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lone Ranger
On ‎11‎/‎28‎/‎2018 at 10:35 PM, stinsonmarri said:

EGW believed in THE FATHER and THE SON, I believe in THREE INDIVIDUAL BEINGS base on the Bible.

 

On ‎11‎/‎29‎/‎2018 at 10:54 AM, Lone Ranger said:

How is this stated belief NOT trinitarian? It has THREE (3) beings. So you are in fact Trinitarian, though you claim not to be...?

Stinsonmarri, could you please clarify your position on the Godhead and understanding of the "trinity" since you claim to be non-trinitarian, yet believe in three beings?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
On 11/27/2018 at 12:18 PM, The Wanderer said:

Because said fanatics are so stuck on using only "spirit of prophecy," I am choosing to begin with a brief quote from those writings; and the intention here will be to show a number of ways that the concept embodied therein, is indeed a major portion of the gospel message as contained in Scripture.

Quote

There is a time of trouble coming to the people of God, but we are not to keep that constantly before the people, and rein them up to have a time of trouble beforehand. There is to be a shaking among God’s people; but this is not the present truth to carry to the churches; it will be the result of refusing the truth presented. {CTr 363.5}

Let us examine now; what exactly is it that is being, and will be "refused?" I dont expect anyone to use EGW writings if they do not want to. Your thoughts are whats important here. I dont profess to have all the answers, or to be an expert; which btw there is no such thing, when it comes to the scripture's message and gospel. I really only have one answer to this subject; and that answer is Jesus:

Quote

he who prophesies speaks to [people] for building up, and exhortation, and comfort. (1 Cor 14:3)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stinsonmarri
21 hours ago, Lone Ranger said:

 

Stinsonmarri, could you please clarify your position on the Godhead and understanding of the "trinity" since you claim to be non-trinitarian, yet believe in three beings?

Yes I will be glad to. First of all why say godhead, to me that does not make sense and very disrespectful to THE ALMIGHTY ONES. I hope you would allow me to break down godhead starting with the word trinity. In order to truly understand why the word trinity does not mean three beings is the word itself. The word is tri-nity is explained very simply:

The term “trinity” is not found in the Scriptures per se, but the idea certainly is there. The word derives from the Latin, trinus, which means “three-fold.” In the Christian vocabulary, the idea is that of “three” divine Persons who function as an absolute unity. This is not related to polytheism (many gods), as with the divergent, antagonistic “gods” of ancient paganism. Rather the concept is that of three distinct personalities, each fully shares the identical Divine nature (i.e., the sum of those distinguishing, essential, and permanent traits by which a Being may be defined as Deity). What About the Terms “Godhead” And “Trinity”? By Wayne Jackson; CHRISTIAN COURIER

The Trinity: There is one God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, a unity of three co-eternal Persons. SDA Statement of Belief

If you notice the word persons and personalities are stated and a being. I have said the word person mean human beings and personalities also mean human traits or nature. How do we equate THE ALMIGHTY ONES like us, isn’t that backward and unholy? The word theios is the Greek word and it does not mean godhead it means divine. The Greek manuscript word should be rendered 'DIVINITY' or 'MAJESTY.' Many Bible scholars and translators have realized that the 'godhead' does not convey clear meaning.

2304 theíos (an adjective, derived from 2316 /theós, "God") – divine, manifesting the characteristics of God's nature.

2304 /theíos ("divine nature") ties God's essence to His self-manifestation, permitting all people to know Him by observing His attributes.

So again it comes back to the Verse that says:

Hear, O Israel: YAHWEH our ELOHIYM YAHWEH is ONE: Deut 6:4  WOY

Now let’s be very clear the word is was place there and let me show you.

Deut 6:4  Hear,H8085 O Israel:H3478 The LORDH3068 our GodH430 is oneH259 LORD:H3068 

Now Mark 12:29 and Gal 3:20 the Greek word “esti” is used and Strong states the following:

Third person singular present indicative of G1510; he (she or it) is; also (with neuter plural) they are:

So the question is how do we know? Well the Bible said that man cannot look up the FACE of the FATHER with sin.

And HE Said, Thou canst not see MY FACE: for there shall no man see ME, and live. Ex 33:20 KJV

So here are the facts in the same chapter Verse 18 Moses asked to see HIS GLORY. Was this THE FATHER, no it was not it WAS THE SON. Since Human Beings sinned THE FATHER did not commune with us but through THE SON who is also call an ANGEL or MESSENGER! Ex 23:20-24 Now in Ex 24:9-11, Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of IsraEL;  they all saw ELOHIYM, (the plural form is used but if you dig and check out Hub.com lexicon) iT states:

Original Word: אֱלוֹהַּ

Part of Speech: Noun Masculine

Transliteration: ELOAH

Phonetic Spelling: ((shortened) >eloahh {el-o'-ah)

It will also provide (ELOHEI) which is the original Paleo Hebrew word that was transliterated to ELOAH; and this word is singular. Just like Ex 3:15. This month our SS Lesson is about unity and we seem to understand that with everything but with THE THREE ALMIGHTY ONES who are UNITED that is what the word “echad,” mean. We forget we were once made in THEIR RESEMBLANCE and LIKENESS which means THEIR CHARACTER and NATURE. Gen 1:26 We lost THEIR CHARACTER and NATURE when we sinned! But by beholding we can become change and so those save will lose this corrupt body Paul said! THEY are not human beings we are and we have personalities not THEM! People are fooled a lot because they do not understand translation or transliteration and they need a Lexicon that will give you the original Hebrew word and the actual translation. They claim is that THE TITLE ELOHIYM uses a singular verb makes it appear that there is one being with three co-persons is error and does not make sense. THEY ARE SPIRIT BEINGS and the Bible says so! YAHSHUA was given a flesh body but HE WAS ONE OF THE ELOHIYM’S. John 1:1, 14; 5:43 Hebrew 1:2, 3 states that HE SITS down beside HIS FATHER and HE made the worlds! It is HE coming in HIS FATHER’S NAME that Abraham and Jacob both saw. Abraham saw HIM and the angels who look like men, Jacob saw HIM as THE ARCHANGEL MICHAEL!

Conclusion: Throughout the Bible THE FATHER is also acknowledge as THE MOST HIGH. THE SON is known as MICHAEL THE ARCHANGEL, YAHSHUA, THE CREATOR and IMMANUEL. THE HOLY SPIRIT is THE ANIMATED ONE, THE COMFORTER HE along with YAHSHUA created the earth. YAHSHUA SPOKE and HE brought everything to existence. YAHSHUA created human beings HIMSELF and breathe into LIFE! That why Paul said this:

Because that which may be known of ELOHIYM is manifest in them; for ELOHIYM hath showed it unto them. 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 MAJESTY; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew ELOHIYM, they esteemed HIM not as ELOHIYM, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the magnificence of the uncorruptible ELOHIYM into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Rom 1:19-23  WOY

 This is referring to YAHSHUA, THE SON and  just so you know the Greek these are declension of the noun "God" in the Greek language:

Nominative theos God singular theoi Gods plural

Genitive theou of God singular theon of Gods plural

The Text above used theos, theou and theon!  Proof is read Rev 1:1 Where it provides both THE FATHER and SON providing THE SPIRIT OF PROPHECY!

You think why we all need to know this because the Bible say HIS people are lost due to the lack of knowledge. It is true because we check out the source on everything we need from ourselves cars, houses, phones, computers even who we will marry but  not who created us as we should! THREE SPIRIT BEINGS ALL worked together in creating the heavens and the earth. It was not a tri or a third of each one which is the godhead and trinity!

Blessings!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lone Ranger
16 hours ago, stinsonmarri said:

First of all why say godhead, to me that does not make sense and very disrespectful to THE ALMIGHTY ONES

The term "Godhead" is a respectful term used with respect across the board by theologians and laity of all denominations. I neither intend nor perceive disrespect in the term. It may not be completely accurate, but none of our descriptions of God are.

16 hours ago, stinsonmarri said:

 The Trinity: There is one God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, a unity of three co-eternal Persons. SDA Statement of Belief

If you notice the word persons and personalities are stated and a being. I have said the word person mean human beings and personalities also mean human traits or nature. How do we equate THE ALMIGHTY ONES like us, isn’t that backward and unholy?

No doctrine of the trinity equates the members of the Godhead to human beings. I have never heard this view before and as far as I know it is unique to you. There are variations in understanding of the nature and essence of the beings, but NOBODY interprets them to be humans. So you should really divest yourself of this misunderstanding and seek an accurate view of the meaning of "trinity."

At this point you enter a long and rambling exposition that is difficult to follow, has no point, and lacks the support you think you have.

16 hours ago, stinsonmarri said:

The word theios is the Greek word and it does not mean godhead it means divine.

We are aware of this definition. TMK no one confuses these two meanings.

 

16 hours ago, stinsonmarri said:

This month our SS Lesson is about unity and we seem to understand that with everything but with THE THREE ALMIGHTY ONES who are UNITED that is what the word “echad,” mean. We forget we were once made in THEIR RESEMBLANCE and LIKENESS which means THEIR CHARACTER and NATURE.

16 hours ago, stinsonmarri said:

THREE SPIRIT BEINGS ALL worked together in creating the heavens and the earth. It was not a tri or a third of each one which is the godhead and trinity!

16 hours ago, stinsonmarri said:

Conclusion: Throughout the Bible THE FATHER is also acknowledge as THE MOST HIGH. THE SON is known as MICHAEL THE ARCHANGEL, YAHSHUA, THE CREATOR and IMMANUEL. THE HOLY SPIRIT is THE ANIMATED ONE, THE COMFORTER HE along with YAHSHUA created the earth. YAHSHUA SPOKE and HE brought everything to existence. YAHSHUA created human beings HIMSELF and breathe into LIFE!

These are Trinitarian statements. If these statements characterize your belief, you are trinitarian.

I think the problem here is that you have an incorrect view of what "trinity" and "trinitarian" means.

Previously you asked that if you were wrong, please show you.  I do not claim perfection in any sphere, but I will say that your understanding of the concept of trinity is certainly not mine, nor that of anyone I know or have read, and seems to be deeply flawed and based on misunderstandings.

I suggest you seek an accurate view of what is meant by "trinity."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stinsonmarri
2 hours ago, Lone Ranger said:

The term "Godhead" is a respectful term used with respect across the board by theologians and laity of all denominations. I neither intend nor perceive disrespect in the term. It may not be completely accurate, but none of our descriptions of God are.

Lone Ranger are you listening to the words that you wrote: "The term "Godhead" is a respectful term used with respect across the board by theologians and laity of all denominations." That show in your answer that we are not peculiar we now are a part of the ones we claim break the Commandments! I live in the rural area of Georgia not far from Atlanta. These people we have witness to here have return back where they came. I attend an SDA Church here that we build ourselves and the conferences join into the sisterhood. This is a dark county and the reason is these people are Baptist, Methodist and Pentecostal and they all yes all attend each other church. Each church meets two Sundays out of the month.The Sunday their church is not open they go to the other the churches, plus they are all family. We have church every Sabbath and we baptize quite a few. But just like what you said they continue to return to their home church or the other ones constantly and the relatives and friends pull them back home. 

This why I know people in the SDA use EGW writings to suit their cause and not for what she stood for to take the Bible! The Bible said to the Law and the Testimony (which is THE SPIRIT OF PROPHECY), if they don't speak according to this WORD, there is no light in them. EGW backs up the Bible: 

 The Lord often works where we least expect HIM; HE surprises us by revealing HIS POWER through instruments of HIS OWN choice, while HE passes by the men to whom we have looked as those through whom light should come. God desires us to receive the truth upon its own merits--because it is truth.

The Bible must not be interpreted to suit the ideas of men, however long they may have held these ideas to be true. We are not to accept the opinion of commentators as THE VOICE of God; they were erring mortals like ourselves. God has given reasoning powers to us as well as to them. We should make the Bible its own expositor. TM 105

2 hours ago, Lone Ranger said:

No doctrine of the trinity equates the members of the Godhead to human beings. I have never heard this view before and as far as I know it is unique to you. There are variations in understanding of the nature and essence of the beings, but NOBODY interprets them to be humans. So you should really divest yourself of this misunderstanding and seek an accurate view of the meaning of "trinity."

At this point you enter a long and rambling exposition that is difficult to follow, has no point, and lacks the support you think you have.

You said: "No doctrine of the trinity equates the members of the Godhead to human beings."

This is what the mainstream SDA believes:

Three persons: God the Father, a spiritual being; Jesus Christ – very God, a being  of same nature and essence as the Father; Holy Spirit – the great regenerating power.

246 The Latin tradition of the Creed confesses that the Spirit "proceeds from the Father and the Son (filioque)". The Council of Florence in 1438 explains: "The Holy Spirit is eternally from Father and Son; He has his nature and subsistence at once (simul) from the Father and the Son. He proceeds eternally from both as from one principle and through one spiration. . . . And, since the Father has through generation given to the only-begotten Son everything that belongs to the Father, except being Father, the Son has also eternally from the Father, from whom he is eternally born, that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son."75

253 The Trinity is One. We do not confess three Gods, but one God in three persons, the "consubstantial Trinity".83 The divine persons do not share the one divinity among themselves but each of them is God whole and entire: "The Father is that which the Son is, the Son that which the Father is, the Father and the Son that which the Holy Spirit is, i.e. by nature one God."84 In the words of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), "Each of the persons is that supreme reality, viz., the divine substance, essence or nature."85 Catechism of the Catholic Church - The Father

The SDA Church is saying the same thing that mix it up a little different. Here is what person original mean and he has not change:

Person (n.) early 13c., from Old French persone "human being, anyone, person" (12c., Modern French personne) and directly from Latin persona "human being, person, personage; a part in a drama, assumed character," originally "a mask, a false face," such as those of wood or clay worn by the actors in later Roman theater. OED offers the general 19c. explanation of persona as "related to" Latin personare "to sound through" (i.e. the mask as something spoken through and perhaps amplifying the voice), "but the long o makes a difficulty ...." Klein and Barnhart say it is possibly borrowed from Etruscan phersu "mask." Klein goes on to say this is ultimately of Greek origin and compares Persephone. Etymology Online Dictionary

The SDA Church is following Catholic beliefs but the only difference is claiming to keep the Sabbath and most don't even do that here in USA! Many of them go to all you eat restaurants on the Sabbath, pastors included. I saw with my own eyes about 20 years ago at the officers meeting, I was an officer. I lived in Atlanta then. The President of our conference was giving out checks and those Pastors were taking them on the Sabbath. This was one of the final straws of things that made me search the Scriptures for myself. I went to Oakwood with many of the conference presidents and saw many gradual changes. I confess, I was guilty too, until something happen here at my conference and I knew all the ministers and they knew me! I return to college and then went and lived in Israel and my life begin to unravel and change! I return home and begin to listen to THE HOLY SPIRIT! Believe me I was no saint! However by beholding I begin to change and I had to unlearn to learn through THE HOLY SPIRIT. Again I ask you how own earth can we call THEM person and then you explain by breaking it down with does "a being  of same nature and essence and Holy Spirit – the great regenerating power," means because it makes no sense to me??? What is co-persons is THE HOLY SPIRIT is from THE FATHER and THE SON (which is confusing be it make it look like THE SON was created), I don't know it's all mix up and confusing?????

I will respond to the rest but just let start with this if it is alright with you? I am not going anywhere, I am here to be open to truth!

Blessings!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lone Ranger

Point #1. I am NOT, and have never presented myself as, a Seventh-day Adventist.

  • Whatever the SDA church is doing or not doing is not my business, same as the Catholics, the Baptists, the Methodists, the Muslims, the Buddhists, or whoever.
  • My beliefs and/or theology do not always align with (some of) SDA's stated beliefs.
  • I believe God's true Church is not a particular denomination, but is made up of believers in all denominations AND religions. It is those who accept the sacrifice of Jesus Christ by Faith, and seek to live their lives by God's leading.
  • My current position is Emergent/Post-Evangelical (ish)

Point # 2. At this point I am forced to wonder about your grasp of basic English.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
1 hour ago, stinsonmarri said:

This is what the mainstream SDA believes:

Three persons: God the Father, a spiritual being; Jesus Christ – very God, a being  of same nature and essence as the Father; Holy Spirit – the great regenerating power.

246 The Latin tradition of the Creed confesses that the Spirit "proceeds from the Father and the Son (filioque)". The Council of Florence in 1438 explains: "The Holy Spirit is eternally from Father and Son; He has his nature and subsistence at once (simul) from the Father and the Son. He proceeds eternally from both as from one principle and through one spiration. . . . And, since the Father has through generation given to the only-begotten Son everything that belongs to the Father, except being Father, the Son has also eternally from the Father, from whom he is eternally born, that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son."75

253 The Trinity is One. We do not confess three Gods, but one God in three persons, the "consubstantial Trinity".83 The divine persons do not share the one divinity among themselves but each of them is God whole and entire: "The Father is that which the Son is, the Son that which the Father is, the Father and the Son that which the Holy Spirit is, i.e. by nature one God."84 In the words of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), "Each of the persons is that supreme reality, viz., the divine substance, essence or nature."85 Catechism of the Catholic Church - The Father

The SDA Church is saying the same thing that mix it up a little different

Your posting is a constant barrage of mis-characterizing Seventh-day Adventists and other forum members; not to mention all the incessant lecturing until you have gotten so far away from the OP that no one even knows what this topic is about. Will you please have some respect, and quit hiding under your blanket of alleged "truth" to constantly interfere with valid topics that people actually do want to discuss. Adventist official belief on the Trinity is this:

Quote

God the eternal Spirit was active with the Father and the Son in Creation, incarnation, and redemption. He inspired the writers of Scripture. He filled Christ's life with power. He draws and convicts human beings; and those who respond He renews and transforms into the image of God. Sent by the Father and the Son to be always with His children, He extends spiritual gifts to the church, empowers it to bear witness to Christ, and in harmony with the Scriptures leads it into all truth. -God the Holy Spirit, Fundamental Belief 5

ALL can note here; not a word in the official statement regarding "Person"  making it very obvious that you have no idea what you are talking about. Please get back to the OP and stop your nonsense! Nobody cares a hill of beans what you say when you talk like this to us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stinsonmarri
5 hours ago, Lone Ranger said:

Point #1. I am NOT, and have never presented myself as, a Seventh-day Adventist.

  • Whatever the SDA church is doing or not doing is not my business, same as the Catholics, the Baptists, the Methodists, the Muslims, the Buddhists, or whoever.
  • My beliefs and/or theology do not always align with (some of) SDA's stated beliefs.
  • I believe God's true Church is not a particular denomination, but is made up of believers in all denominations AND religions. It is those who accept the sacrifice of Jesus Christ by Faith, and seek to live their lives by God's leading.
  • My current position is Emergent/Post-Evangelical (ish)

Point # 2. At this point I am forced to wonder about your grasp of basic English.

I apologize because I thought you were SDA, so please forgive me.  You stated; "I believe God's true Church is not a particular denomination, but is made up of believers in all denominations AND religions. It is those who accept the sacrifice of Jesus Christ by Faith, and seek to live their lives by God's leading." Well I do agree about no one church is true. That is what I was claim earlier when I reference the church. I never wrote that the word church was a sin. I presented how it originated and folks took it wrong. My point the Bible said the women's seed is not a church. All religions I differ with you because they don't accept the belief in YAHSHUA! What I do believe is that people from all religions in all the world will hear the truth and they make up the great multitude that will accept YAHSHUA. I still stand up and say I do not believe in the trinity. THEY ARE not persons but SUPREME ALMIGHTY SPIRIT BEINGS. THEY ALL existed from the beginning THEY ARE INDIVIDUAL BEINGS separate from EACH OTHER. THEY ARE ALMIGHTY which is what ELOHIYM means. THE THREE INDIVIDUAL BEINGS have GLORY and POWERs separately. THEY work TOGETHER as a UNIT which is what the Paleo Hebrew word "echad," means. Adam and the woman were "echad," and they were individual persons or human beings. The same principle starts with THE THREE ALMIGHTY ONES. I do not believe in monotheism which is where this all comes from. THE FATHER IS ELOAH, THE SON IS ELOAH, THE HOLY SPIRIT IS ELOAH and ALL THREE ARE ELOHIYM which is plural for ELOAH!

In closing, I have to remember that everyone that comes on this forum is not Adventist. When topics are made they are basically for SDA if you notice. But that's not an excuse it's asking you to understand!

Blessing and Happy Sabbath!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gregory Matthews

In a previous post Stinsonmarri commented on the statement of SDA belief that says that the Godhead consists of three co-eternal Persons. In that statement below she comments to the effect that the use of  the word "persons" connotes a being with the image, form, human traits and personality as we see in a human being today.  She correctly rejects this view of God.  In no sense would  this be a Biblical picture of God. 

What she fails to understand, is that the SDA Church, regardless of its use of the word "persons" does not believe that it describes God in the manner that she suggests.  Rather, the actual understanding of the SDA Church is that as that word is used in relationship to "God, it has a meaning that can not be understood by us today who can only understand it in terms of our limited experience a humans.

It is for this reason, that I use the term "personal being" as I believe that it is a better term to use even though it is also limited in meaning and does not accurately describe God. 

Quote

If you notice the word persons and personalities are stated and a being. I have said the word person mean human beings and personalities also mean human traits or nature. How do we equate THE ALMIGHTY ONES like us, isn’t that backward and unholy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lone Ranger
13 hours ago, stinsonmarri said:

I apologize because I thought you were SDA, so please forgive me.

To be fair I must state that I was born and raised in a strictly conservative SDA home, went to SDA schools, and worked for the church for many years on several continents.

However, a few years ago I left the church because of the rampant, institutionalised hypocrisy, corruption, and abuse, not to mention a sharp variance in theology as my personal studying lead me to views contra to stated and practiced SDA perspectives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gustave
2 hours ago, Gregory Matthews said:

In a previous post Stinsonmarri commented on the statement of SDA belief that says that the Godhead consists of three co-eternal Persons. In that statement below she comments to the effect that the use of  the word "persons" connotes a being with the image, form, human traits and personality as we see in a human being today.  She correctly rejects this view of God.  In no sense would  this be a Biblical picture of God. 

What she fails to understand, is that the SDA Church, regardless of its use of the word "persons" does not believe that it describes God in the manner that she suggests.  Rather, the actual understanding of the SDA Church is that as that word is used in relationship to "God, it has a meaning that can not be understood by us today who can only understand it in terms of our limited experience a humans.

It is for this reason, that I use the term "personal being" as I believe that it is a better term to use even though it is also limited in meaning and does not accurately describe God. 

 

I think Stintonmarri ( & I could be wrong here ) is a historic Adventist and may references the denominations periodicals that were circulating while Ellen White was alive.

Like this:

"IF the Scriptures state in positive terms that God is a person it will not answer for us to draw an inference from the text that says God is Spirit that has  no body. We will now present a few texts which prove that God IS A PERSON". http://documents.adventistarchives.org/Periodicals/RH/RH18550918-V07-06.pdf

Ellen clarifies what the above meaning is:

They are one in purpose, in mind, in character, but not in personIt is thus that God and Christ are one.”  - Ellen White, Testimonies for the Church, vol. 8, p. 269.4

She is saying Christ is ONE with the Father ONLY & in the SAME WAY that Christ was ONE with His disciples. In other words are the Disciples, God

Stinsonmarri, correct me IF I'm wrong here. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lone Ranger
3 hours ago, Gregory Matthews said:

It is for this reason, that I use the term "personal being" as I believe that it is a better term to use even though it is also limited in meaning and does not accurately describe God

Gregory, do you  know of any variations in trinity understanding that align with stinsonmarii's belief that they are humans?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lone Ranger
19 minutes ago, Gustave said:

Lone Ranger, is she saying / implying that the 3 powers are humans? I missed something evidently.

As I understand her, she rejects the "Trinity Doctrine" because of the use of the term "person" which she interprets as "human." See quote below as sample of her understanding:

On ‎12‎/‎6‎/‎2018 at 3:28 PM, stinsonmarri said:

If you notice the word persons and personalities are stated and a being. I have said the word person mean human beings and personalities also mean human traits or nature. How do we equate THE ALMIGHTY ONES like us, isn’t that backward and unholy?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gustave
5 minutes ago, Lone Ranger said:

As I understand her, she rejects the "Trinity Doctrine" because of the use of the term "person" which she interprets as "human." See quote below as sample of her understanding:

 

Well, I see what you mean  there however she appears to be repudiating Ellen White because Ellen absolutely argued (acted as an apologist) for the Pioneers who said God was "a Person" who had a "personality" that was in hominid form with flesh, bone, organs and members. Perhaps I've misunderstood Stinsonmarrie in the past - I've always thought she was devotee of Ellen White and everything she wrote? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gregory Matthews

Stinsonmarri follows her own track, which we should all do, as long as we believe that the track we are following is the track tha the Holy Spirt is leading us.   As I understand her, she does not believe that Ellen White was without error.  I believe that she believes EGW to have some error.

I believe that Stinsonmarri writes in a manner that can be confusing and that some people can misunderstand her.  At other times she is quite clear as to what she is saying.  But, I believe that it is possible to misunderstand her and what she is actually saying.

I understood the passage that I quoted from her to be saying that God has a form, image and probably much more that we as humans have.   On  that basis, I responded to her.  Perhaps I was wrong as to how I understood her?

 

NOTE:  I have major disagreements with some of what Stinsonmarri writes.  This includes areas in which she comments on ancient languages, to include the Biblical languages.  I am not saying that she is wrong in everything that she writes.  But, I see her  as writing with clarity in those areas and therefore do not often jump in and disagree with her.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stinsonmarri
4 hours ago, Gustave said:

I think Stintonmarri ( & I could be wrong here ) is a historic Adventist and may references the denominations periodicals that were circulating while Ellen White was alive.

Like this:

"IF the Scriptures state in positive terms that God is a person it will not answer for us to draw an inference from the text that says God is Spirit that has  no body. We will now present a few texts which prove that God IS A PERSON". http://documents.adventistarchives.org/Periodicals/RH/RH18550918-V07-06.pdf

Ellen clarifies what the above meaning is:

They are one in purpose, in mind, in character, but not in personIt is thus that God and Christ are one.”  - Ellen White, Testimonies for the Church, vol. 8, p. 269.4

She is saying Christ is ONE with the Father ONLY & in the SAME WAY that Christ was ONE with His disciples. In other words are the Disciples, God

Stinsonmarri, correct me IF I'm wrong here. 

First of all I would like to thank everyone to try and understand where I am coming from. That makes me feel respected and that you all know that I truly want to love and give reference to THE ALMIGHTY ONES. I also want to make it very clear that I believe in EGW visions are true, but not all of her writings at she said herself, she is not infallible only THE ALMIGHTY ONE ARE!  I also respect Pastory Matthew but it amazes me as human beings that we can carelessly select words that historical have one meaning and chooses it doctrinal to satisfied our views. Men in the Bible has done this and YAHWEH has withstood them! Yes, Gustave that quote from EGW too me is on point.  What we fail to understand that the pioneers, all of them did not understand it all but they knew one thing, the churches they all left was wrong about the trinity!!!!! Why use the word, why say person. Just because they still was holding on to error, they were babes struggling to get a better understanding of THE HOLINESS of THE ALMIGHTY ONE. Do we today not understand that Moses had to take his sandals at the burning bush, he was standing on was HOLY GROUND!!!! I am a historic Adventist that starts with Gen 3:15 that's is the original advent promise that YAHSHUA would come twice, first to died and to redeem us back to THE FATHER. We lost the communion with THE FATHER and it is right before our eyes if we all allow THE HOLY SPIRIT to show us!

Follow my presentation please:

And a day came when the sons of ELOHIYM came to present themselves before YAHWEH. And Satan also came among them. And YAHWEH said to Satan, from where have you come? And Satan answered YAHWEH and said, from going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it. Job 1:6, 7

Lone Ranger as in old SDA, we all know these are other created beings who came to present themselves before YAHWEH THE FATHER. I hope we all agree. Now THE NAME YAHWEH is mention again but THE NAME comes from "HAVAH," which means "I AM or SELF EXISTING,"shows this IS THE SON! We know Satan could not pass through the Gates of Heaven when he and his angels were expel. The point I am making is THE SON had to redeem us back so that we would be able to stand before THE FATHER. Then THE HOLY SPIRIT commission was to assist us in cleaning up our lives so we can receive what was lost by our original perfect parents. That lost was the robe of RIGHTEOUSNESS that was given in the Garden of Eden. We lost perfection! Now too me it shows how we change and use words to degrade THEM! Yes, at one time we not only were made to look exactly like them, nose, hair, mouth, legs, feet ect. But we were created with THEIR CHARACTER and NATURE! Today we take on the Greek ideology just like the pharisees, but only worst. We use theology, exegesis and other Greek term use for Greek mythology characters to relate to THE FATHER, THE MOST HIGH, THE SON and THE HOLY SPIRIT without a thought of who we are truly dealing with. I tremble in fear as did the children of Israel when THEY appear TOGETHER at Sinai! When the people heard:

And on the third day, it being morning, it happened: There were thunders and lightnings, and a heavy cloud on the mountain, and the sound of a ram's horn, very strong! And all the people in the camp trembled. And Moses caused the people to go up from the camp to meet The Elohim. And they took their stand at the lower part of the mountain. And the mountain of Sinai was smoking, all of it, because YAHWEH came down on it in fire. And its smoke went up like the smoke of a furnace; and the mountain quaked exceedingly. And it happened while the sound of the ram's horn was sounding, and becoming very strong, Moses spoke. And The Elohim answered him with THUNDER.* And YAHWEH came down on the mountain of Sinai, to the top of the mountain; and YAHWEH called Moses to the top of the mountain, and Moses went up. And YAHWEH said to Moses, Go down, warn the people lest they break through to see YAHWEH, and many of them fall. And also the priests, those approaching YAHWEH, let them sanctify themselves that YAHWEH not burst forth among them. And Moses said to YAHWEH, The people are not able to come up to the mountain of Sinai. For YOU WARNED us, saying, Set limits to the mountain and SANCTIFY itAnd YAHWEH said to him, Come, go down. And you come up, and Aaron with you. And let not the priests and the people break through to come up to YAHWEH, lest He burst forth among them. And Moses went down to the people and spoke to them. Ex 19:16-25 HRB *HUB BIBLE LEXICON 

Now if you continue to read start from Ex 20:18-21 and Deut 5:22-31 this let me know how HOLY THESE AMIGHTY BEINGS ARE! To me we need to tread softly and choose careful what we say and how to present THEM!!!! THEY ARE ONE  in PURPOSE, in MIND, and in CHARACTER!!!

But THEY ARE NOT in or a person, a human being, not even YAHSHUA! The flesh died and it cannot enter into Heaven! THEY ARE ALL SPIRIT BEINGS! EGW wrote it as best as she could at that time. I just want all to know what else EGW saw and said at a critical moment and it has been overlooked:

 The light of Heaven then rested upon me, and I was soon lost to earthly things. My accompanying angel presented before me some of the errors of those present, and also the truth in contrast with their errors. These discordant views, which they claimed were in harmony with the Scriptures, were only according to their opinion of Bible teaching; and I was bidden to tell them that they should yield their errors, and unite upon the truths of the third angel’s message. LS of EGW PDF p. 89 (book p. 112)

To me, the SDA church as a whole do not take seriously the visions of EGW. Here she states that the accompanying angel only present to her some of the errors that happen on that Sabbath but not all! It appear to me that they were not fully ready to understand everything at that time, we are! I maybe wrong but this is why Lone Ranger has left. We cannot must not confuse people! Words are important and not to be slung around as we please. Bad is good and good is bad now. Calling women female dogs like it is great! The words that come out of our mouth even between us is outrageous and then to relate words and meaning with THE ALMIGHTY ONE is troubling. Do you think I like to stand out here alone? Do you think it is easy to hear how Wanderer an SDA belittling me and calling me out my name without striking back! It's different with Photodude because he has other issues that plagues him as well. But those who should know and then claim interpretation, when the Bible says there is no private interpretation what should I do? I am a historian and our trade is to present the facts and evidence that we find. Do you wonder why those who learn the English language claim it is confusing because we say one thing and mean another! We have these treasures that were giving to us and Wanderer started this thread stating: "Because said fanatics are so stuck on using only "spirit of prophecy." To me when we give misleading and confuse concept then Satan take these confusions and here we go.

EGW herself had to constantly battle with this until she died. Some thinking her words equate to the Command of YAHWEH or that she believed in the trinity or she said women can't wear pants and on and on! Then we pass by what she specifically said about stop reading her writing until we read and understand the Bible then we can understand her counsel or warning she was given. She was shown what was already given in the Bible but to warn us we have half heed it or not at all!

Pastor Matthew stated this about me: 

I believe that Stinsonmarri writes in a manner that can be confusing and that some people can misunderstand her.  If I am confusing anyone on this forum please provide it to me so I can make it clear. I cannot state that the SDA is confusing if I am!

At other times she is quite clear as to what she is saying.  Thank you for those things I present that you understand because that has always been my goal!

But, I believe that it is possible to misunderstand her and what she is actually saying. Now Pastor I'm confused on this one?

I understood the passage that I quoted from her to be saying that God has a form, image and probably much more that we as humans have.   On  that basis, I responded to her.  Perhaps I was wrong as to how I understood her? To be respectful, yes you were because we were made to look like THEM and not the other way around. All I can say to you all is I am a sinner saved by grace and standing in awe before THE HOLY ALMIGHTY ONES.

In closing I remember we were told this lie that sticks and stones can hurt you but words don't! Word can get people to kill themselves, it did with Judas and with children today! I wish I could truly express what I feel inside so that you all would know I care not only for me but for each and everyone of you. I don't want anyone of us to be lost! I agonized in trying to make it clear how I feel and yet somehow I mess up! When you are call to present the message you say no! Why? Because you do not want to be laugh at, hurt and belittle but you must obey! That is all I can say. Thanks I truly feel that you all love THE MOST HIGH TOO!

Happy Sabbath and be bless!🙏

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gustave

Is there anyway you could shorten what you're saying? Given the specific nature of the question I think I'm getting lost in the weeds with your lengthy reply. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stinsonmarri
3 hours ago, Gregory Matthews said:

NOTE:  I have major disagreements with some of what Stinsonmarri writes.  This includes areas in which she comments on ancient languages, to include the Biblical languages.  I am not saying that she is wrong in everything that she writes.  But, I see her  as writing with clarity in those areas and therefore do not often jump in and disagree with her.

Respectfully Pastor Matthew I use Biblehub lexicon a lot so when you disagree with me, you disagree with how I was taught in college. Theologians do not study linguistic and etymology. Even though I did not specialize in these tools of the trade, I took classes in understanding and learning what they do. It is so important to understand this as I Bible historian. I was shock to learn that ministers today only learn Greek and not Hebrew. I always thought you did! Biblehub lexicon is one of the best online and you can see how scholars play with translations and transliteration. You know you and I have debated this a lot. When Biblical scholars can come and play with words base on belief instead of evidence and facts I have a problem! People souls are on the line! and in Ezekiel YAHWEH State that priest had profane HIM saying things HE has not Spoken and put no difference between the HOLY and the unholy!

Blessings!

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

×