God knows the end from the beginning....or does He?

[Pythons]

Not like that. God the Father, Son, and Spirit are separate Entities, but all equally God. One in purpose. One in thought. One in...well everything. But not joined to a single "substance" from which they came forth.

Of course they are separate - what makes them One is that they co-equally possess the ONE Divine Substance that is God...
...God never "came forth" -God is simply Eternal as in God has always been there.
...We can't understand that with our finite minds but Sacred Scripture says it's so.

 

[Stryder06]

Of course they are separate - what makes them One is that they co-equally possess the ONE Divine Substance that is God...
...God never "came forth" -God is simply Eternal as in God has always been there.
...We can't understand that with our finite minds but Sacred Scripture says it's so.

I think we believe the same thing, but it's that "substance" part that I think will continue to divide us.

 

[Pythons]

I think we believe the same thing, but it's that "substance" part that I think will continue to divide us.

Ellen White said that Christ was one His disciples in the same way He was one with God....
...The disciples are not God - the disciples do not possess the Divine Nature.
Could you say after knowing that - that God and the disciples are one.
...And it is in "that way" Christ and God are one?

 

[Stryder06]

Ellen White said that Christ was one His disciples in the same way He was one with God....
...The disciples are not God - the disciples do not possess the Divine Nature.
Could you say after knowing that - that God and the disciples are one.
...And it is in "that way" Christ and God are one?

Do you always have to find some occassion to bring up EGW? The bible is plain in itself in regards to what God says about being "one". He prayed that the disciples would be one as He and the Father are One. At Babal, God said the people were one like He was One.

The idea of being "one" in the bible has little to do with substance, and much to do with purpose.

 

[Pythons]

Do you always have to find some occassion to bring up EGW? The bible is plain in itself in regards to what God says about being "one". He prayed that the disciples would be one as He and the Father are One. At Babal, God said the people were one like He was One.

The idea of being "one" in the bible has little to do with substance, and much to do with purpose.

God is either one is Substance or He is one in purpose....
...I understand what you are saying about Jesus praying the disciples would be one.
...Like He and the Father were one.

If you included the "Substance" then we wouldn't be having a problem with understanding each other...
...As it stands it appears you have more than one God - if you believe Jesus is God in the same way the Father & Holy Spirit is God.
...And THAT was does not include Substance.

 

[Stryder06]

God is either one is Substance or He is one in purpose....
...I understand what you are saying about Jesus praying the disciples would be one.
...Like He and the Father were one.

If you included the "Substance" then we wouldn't be having a problem with understanding each other...
...As it stands it appears you have more than one God - if you believe Jesus is God in the same way the Father & Holy Spirit is God.
...And THAT was does not include Substance.

Nope. I don't believe in more than One God. I think the problem is that there is a misapplication of the word "one". You need the idea of a single "substance" being shared so that your idea of what it means to be "one" can jell with what God says. I never saw it like that. God is One because He says He is. I'm just anxious to get to Heaven so He can flush it all out for me there, because let's be honest, the idea of a single "substance" is no where found in scripture. That, I'm assuming, spawns from your tradition, which, along with many other things, could be totally wrong.

Let me say it like this. We think of a singularity when we think of one. What if God never thought of it like that? Does He not say that a man and his wife would become "one flesh"? In short, our idea of "one" could be totally off, thus a substance shared, is not necessary, just a better understanding of what God meant when He said He is One.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

Nope. I don't believe in more than One God. I think the problem is that there is a misapplication of the word "one". You need the idea of a single "substance" being shared so that your idea of what it means to be "one" can jell with what God says. I never saw it like that. God is One because He says He is. I'm just anxious to get to Heaven so He can flush it all out for me there, because let's be honest, the idea of a single "substance" is no where found in scripture. That, I'm assuming, spawns from your tradition, which, along with many other things, could be totally wrong.

Let me say it like this. We think of a singularity when we think of one. What if God never thought of it like that? Does He not say that a man and his wife would become "one flesh"? In short, our idea of "one" could be totally off, thus a substance shared, is not necessary, just a better understanding of what God meant when He said He is One.

I was going to use the illustration of the husband and wife as well... my wife and I aren't the same substance but we are one as a family... each being an individual in the family but with a common purpose.

Can you, Pythons, as Stryder said, give us Biblical evidence of this substance. How can Jesus say that He can do nothing of Himself except what the Father wills if they are indeed the same entity?

 

[Pythons]

Stryder / E.C.R.

Nope. I don't believe in more than One God. I think the problem is that there is a misapplication of the word "one".

Hmmm, please, don't take this the wrong way but I would like to know...
...If you believe the following statements reflect what I've been saying about Adventism.
...Or if they reflect your understanding of "one God".

Ellen White, Review & Herald, Sept 4,1900
As a member of the human family he was mortal, but as a God he was the fountain of life to the world.

Ellen White, Signs of the Times august 1900
He assures us that there never was a time when He was not in close fellowship with "the Eternal God". He to whose voice the Jews were then listening had been WITH God as one brought up with Him.


Ellen White, Great Controversy 1888, 493.1
Christ the word, the only begotten of God, was one with the Eternal Father....The ONLY being in all the universe that could enter into all the counsels and purposes of God

If God is "one" ONLY in the sense that separate beings are in agreement as to what needs to happen ( E.C.R. & his wife )...
...And Chist was the ONLY "being" in all the universe who could enter into all the counsels and purposes of "God".
...In what way would the Holy Spirit be "ONE" with God and Christ?
...And be unable to enter into all the Counsels that Christ and God held?

I've read the historic SDA promulgations about "the Personality of God"...
...And know it means God the Father is a "Person", with form, members and parts comprised of "flesh".
...So yes - I understand that they mean separate "being".

I'm trying to understand this rubric.

 

[Pythons]

Can you, Pythons, as Stryder said, give us Biblical evidence of this substance. How can Jesus say that He can do nothing of Himself except what the Father wills if they are indeed the same entity?

Obviously my Faith Tradition speaking here in answer to your question...
...I'll do my best to articulate what I understand of this.

We ( humanoids ) are a finite creation of an infinite "God" - therefore due to our limited intelligence compared to God...
...We cannot know what it is that God is made of, unlike how we investigate things in nature.
...And identify / classify them by the periodic table of elements.

This is why the word "Substance" is used - simply because we don't know...
...And if we make it to heaven it's more than likely we still won't know because after all, God is God.
...So, "Substance" is our admission that God is beyond our ability to classify.

Sacred Scripture & Sacred Tradition instructs us that God is 'One'...
...Yet there are Three separate Persons identified as 'God'.

Hebrew word for "one" = Echad / H259

1) one (number)
a) one (number)

I believe the "unicity" of the Divine Nature is established in the Sacred Scriptures...
...Of which the following would be examples.

Mark 12,29
And Jesus answered him: The first commandment of all is, Hear, O Israel: the Lord thy God is one God.

1 Cor 8,4
But as for the meats that are sacrificed to idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is no God but one

Eph 4,6
One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in us all.

1 Tim 2,3
For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour

The unicity of the Divine Nature is established if the Three Divine Persons subsist "IN" one Single Nature...
...And this is what we see in the Trinitarian Symbol for Christian Baptism.

Matthew 28,19
Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the NAME [ in nomine ] of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

The Sacred Authors also discourse on the mutual co-inherence or perichoresis of the Divine Persons.

John 10,38
But if I do, though you will not believe me, believe the works: that you may know and believe that the Father is in me, and I in the Father

John 14,9
Jesus saith to him: Have I been so long a time with you; and have you not known me? Philip, he that seeth me seeth the Father also. How sayest thou, Shew us the Father?

John 17,10
And all my things are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them

Jesus Himself affirmed His Divine Nature with that of the Father.

John 10,30
I and the Father are one.

Please understand that this is only a tiny fraction of the "proofs"....
...I want to make sure you see where we are coming from prior to continuing.

 

[Stryder06]

Stryder / E.C.R.




Hmmm, please, don't take this the wrong way but I would like to know...
...If you believe the following statements reflect what I've been saying about Adventism.
...Or if they reflect your understanding of "one God".

Ellen White, Review & Herald, Sept 4,1900
As a member of the human family he was mortal, but as a God he was the fountain of life to the world.

Ellen White, Signs of the Times august 1900
He assures us that there never was a time when He was not in close fellowship with "the Eternal God". He to whose voice the Jews were then listening had been WITH God as one brought up with Him.


Ellen White, Great Controversy 1888, 493.1
Christ the word, the only begotten of God, was one with the Eternal Father....The ONLY being in all the universe that could enter into all the counsels and purposes of God

If God is "one" ONLY in the sense that separate beings are in agreement as to what needs to happen ( E.C.R. & his wife )...
...And Chist was the ONLY "being" in all the universe who could enter into all the counsels and purposes of "God".
...In what way would the Holy Spirit be "ONE" with God and Christ?
...And be unable to enter into all the Counsels that Christ and God held?

Sorry, but I'm not understanding your question here, or seeing what you're trying to point out by those quotes from EGW.

 

[Pythons]

Sorry, but I'm not understanding your question here, or seeing what you're trying to point out by those quotes from EGW.

In Adventist theology when the word "Personality" is used in conjunction with God....
...It specifically & only means that God the Father & God the Son have bodies of "flesh".


In Historic Christianity the Three members of the Trinity are "IN GOD"......
...Or said another way Father, Son & Holy Spirit co-equally possess the ONE Substance which is God.
...I.E. God is ONE.

To the Adventist Pioneers & Ellen White the Father ONLY was the self - existent, immortal One...
...Only the Father was "God" in the ultimate sense & that is why we can find the degree of SDA apologetics.
...In the area of the "Personality of God" that we do within the life of Ellen White.

Today if I talked about "the Personality of Stryder" everyone would assume...
...That I was speaking about if you were nice or not ( i.e. Stryder has a nice personality ).
...This is NOT the meaning the SDA's had - Personality ONLY meant actual person. i.e. the members and tactile parts - the Flesh.

"Being" = Personality = Hominid Body of flesh.

God ( the Father ) was a "Being", a "Personality".

Christ was a "Being", a "Personality".

Christ was the ONLY Being in all the Universe who could attend all the Counsels of the Father.....
.....Thus the Holy Spirit wasn't a "Being" ( body made of flesh ) according to the SDA's.

 

[Stryder06]

In Adventist theology when the word "Personality" is used in conjunction with God....
...It specifically & only means that God the Father & God the Son have bodies of "flesh".

Incorrect. If that's what Adventist believed, it would be what I believed. I don't believe that.

In Historic Christianity the Three members of the Trinity are "IN GOD"......
...Or said another way Father, Son & Holy Spirit co-equally possess the ONE Substance which is God.
...I.E. God is ONE.

As established, this is based on your tradition, unless you can show me a scripture that speaks about substance.

To the Adventist Pioneers & Ellen White the Father ONLY was the self - existent, immortal One...
...Only the Father was "God" in the ultimate sense & that is why we can find the degree of SDA apologetics.
...In the area of the "Personality of God" that we do within the life of Ellen White.

Today if I talked about "the Personality of Stryder" everyone would assume...
...That I was speaking about if you were nice or not ( i.e. Stryder has a nice personality ).
...This is NOT the meaning the SDA's had - Personality ONLY meant actual person. i.e. the members and tactile parts - the Flesh.

"Being" = Personality = Hominide Body of flesh.

God ( the Father ) was a "Being", a "Personality".

Christ was a "Being", a "Personality".

Christ was the ONLY Being in all the Universe who could attend all the Counsels of the Father.....
.....Thus the Holy Spirit wasn't a "Being" ( body made of flesh ) according to the SDA's.

What the pioneers might have thought doesn't change what I currently believe. God moves people from grace to grace and from light to light. I haven't read anything from Sr White where she said the Father had a body of flesh, nor that Christ was not fully God.

That said, what does any of this have to do with you saying that Christ didn't have the freedom of choice like we do?

 

[Laureate]

It's not so simply cut and dry i.e., (from personal experience I speak):

When a person's heart, faith and spirit is pure enough to be able to stand in the presence of our Creator, he is like Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego, one who is able to not be consumed by The Consuming Fire that our Maker is purported to be.

Once an indivdual gets that close to our Maker his Salvation is secured, yet he is sent back (as if it were), for the sake of those whose salvation is not yet secured; What I mean by sent back is, our spirit must be relatively down toned or it will be too intense, and overwhelming for those who are not yet able to stand in the presence of such a great light.

Any body, and everybody who grows in the body of Christ experiences this anomally when we are made to empathize with another, suddenly you find yourself walking (as if it were) in someone elses shoes, and then you snap out of it;

It's peculiar, for if you don't know any better, in some cases you may feel like you have back sliden, and quickly attempt to ask for forgiveness, yet you would be cut off by the Holy spirit, who would comfort you in your heart with scripture and commentary.

The purpose of empathy is, to better understand what our beloved brother or sister is going through: Christ/the word was made flesh so that (among other things) he could empathize, with us Mankind, and walk a mile in our shoes; mind you he came not to empathize with just one of us, but all of us collectably, therefore his spirit would have to fluctuate/adjust per case and scenario to personally experience the full relativity of what it is like to be a so called man.

I therefore postulate, that Yeshua did not come to be tested as a man, but to better understand what it physically feels like to be a man, which would include experiencing temptation;

Yet if I were to place a plate of disgusting things before you, and tried to convince you it was otherwise, would you forget that it is disgusting, and eat it, the lie with the meal? I think not, yet mankind eats the disgusting thing because he does not know, or he does not believe, Yeshua did not have the luxury of our ignorance or infidelity, give praise!

 

[Pythons]

Incorrect. If that's what Adventist believed, it would be what I believed. I don't believe that.

It's not incorrect - I've established the Doctrine directly from your own archives...
...I've been looking for months now in official SDA sources for a repudiation & there is nothing there.
...It appears that they simply ceased "talking about it" around 1930 -32.
...I even found a direct admission they stoped talking about it in the R&H.


Granted, it's not something NOW that the SDA church openly promulgates.

As established, this is based on your tradition, unless you can show me a scripture that speaks about substance.

Knowing what the Hebrew and Greek word for ONE allows for.....
...If it's NOT Substance than what would it be?
...You realize that the actual Council uses the word "Substance", right?

What the pioneers might have thought doesn't change what I currently believe. God moves people from grace to grace and from light to light. I haven't read anything from Sr White where she said the Father had a body of flesh, nor that Christ was not fully God.

That said, what does any of this have to do with you saying that Christ didn't have the freedom of choice like we do?

Yes, however true doctrine never "mutates" from one teaching to something totally different.....
...True doctrine can "develop" but it never mutates.

Why couldn't Chist have sinned?

Because according to Scripture "God" CAN'T sin - it would be impossible for God to deny Himself....
...And Christ Eternally, co-equally possesses the Substance which is God.
...As much as the Father & Holy Spirit possess the Substance.

There are ZERO holes in the armor of God...
...In a universe of change God is the ONLY sure thing.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

It's not incorrect - I've established the Doctrine directly from your own archives...
...I've been looking for months now in official SDA sources for a repudiation & there is nothing there.
...It appears that they simply ceased "talking about it" around 1930 -32.
...I even found a direct admission they stoped talking about it in the R&H.

Very odd that you would spend so much time researching our beliefs unless you are worried about what we teach...

 

[Pythons]

Very odd that you would spend so much time researching our beliefs unless you are worried about what we teach...

I believe that "the Trinity" is the single most important Doctrine of the Christian Religion....
...On that One Doctrine everything else hangs - it is the Litmus test.

Yes, I'm worried about the SDA Church when it teaches that Christ could have sinned & Eternally lost His Salvation....
...I'm also worried about the SDA Church when it teaches that if Christ sinned then "God" would have annihilated Christ, Eternally.
...What "Christian" member of ANY Denomination other than SDA, JW, WWCOG or Christadelphian wouldn't be worried?

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

I believe that "the Trinity" is the single most important Doctrine of the Christian Religion....
...On that One Doctrine everything else hangs - it is the Litmus test.

Yes, I'm worried about the SDA Church when it teaches that Christ could have sinned & Eternally lost His Salvation....
...I'm also worried about the SDA Church when it teaches that if Christ sinned then "God" would have annihilated Christ, Eternally.
...What "Christian" member of ANY Denomination other than SDA, JW, WWCOG or Christadelphian wouldn't be worried?

Personally, I believe the gospel of Christ is the most important, but that's just me.

How does our belief affect you? Are you here to steer us from our path of destruction, as you see it?

Do you expend the same effort of research and discussion in the JW, WWCOG or Christadelphian rooms? (I assume there are rooms for each) What is it particularly that fascinates you about Adventists?

Whenever the enemy of truth (not you necessarily but your church and the one behind it) is focused on us as a denomination, I consider that an affirmation that we are on the right path...

 

[JohnMarsten]

Whenever the enemy of truth (not you necessarily but your church and the one behind it) is focused on us as a denomination, I consider that an affirmation that we are on the right path...

this statement is used by everyone as a confirmation that they are on the right path... If I were in your shoes I wouldnt wanna depend on the critisizm of other people to know that I am on the right path...

 

[Stryder06]

It's not incorrect - I've established the Doctrine directly from your own archives...
...I've been looking for months now in official SDA sources for a repudiation & there is nothing there.
...It appears that they simply ceased "talking about it" around 1930 -32.
...I even found a direct admission they stoped talking about it in the R&H.

Ever think that they stopped talking about it because they found out they were wrong? You've established what a few people, who came from other denominations and joined the movement believed. You've made inferences from what Ellen White said, but have provided nothing compelling as far as I'm concerned.

Granted, it's not something NOW that the SDA church openly promulgates.

Not something we teach. Go figure.

Knowing what the Hebrew and Greek word for ONE allows for.....
...If it's NOT Substance than what would it be?
...You realize that the actual Council uses the word "Substance", right?

Do you actually believe there's any word we have in our vocabulary that adequately explains any aspect of God? One is the best we have, so it's what He used to describe Himself. Context associated with the word however, shows it isn't a singularity that is being described, but unity.

Reminds me of phrase from the movie drumline - "One Band. One Sound".

Yes, however true doctrine never "mutates" from one teaching to something totally different.....
...True doctrine can "develop" but it never mutates.

Develop? If it's wrong it needs to change. Simple as that.

Why couldn't Chist have sinned?

Because according to Scripture "God" CAN'T sin - it would be impossible for God to deny Himself....
...And Christ Eternally, co-equally possesses the Substance which is God.
...As much as the Father & Holy Spirit possess the Substance.

There are ZERO holes in the armor of God...
...In a universe of change God is the ONLY sure thing.

Yeah, I don't see us making much progress on this with your "substance" understanding in the way. You keep dressing your statements up in fancy clothes, but the same choice-less child lies underneath.

 

[Laureate]

It's not incorrect - I've established the Doctrine directly from your own archives...
...I've been looking for months now in official SDA sources for a repudiation & there is nothing there.
...It appears that they simply ceased "talking about it" around 1930 -32.
...I even found a direct admission they stoped talking about it in the R&H.


Granted, it's not something NOW that the SDA church openly promulgates.




Knowing what the Hebrew and Greek word for ONE allows for.....
...If it's NOT Substance than what would it be?
...You realize that the actual Council uses the word "Substance", right?




Yes, however true doctrine never "mutates" from one teaching to something totally different.....
...True doctrine can "develop" but it never mutates.

Why couldn't Chist have sinned?

Because according to Scripture "God" CAN'T sin - it would be impossible for God to deny Himself....
...And Christ Eternally, co-equally possesses the Substance which is God.
...As much as the Father & Holy Spirit possess the Substance.

There are ZERO holes in the armor of God...
...In a universe of change God is the ONLY sure thing.

If it helps any, concerning the 'one' concept, and how it may pertain to both the Unity and Substance of our heavenly father, consider isaiah 45:6 where our heavenly father says of himself, 'I am YHWH (lit., existence) and there is nothing else beside me': please confir with a lexicon/dictionary this not an interpretation, but a legitamate translation, all opinions aside. Peace!