"Jesus Is not the Lord God Almighty" (Ellen White, Lift Him Up, page 253)

[Pavel Mosko]

"There is no one that can explain the Incarnation of Christ, yet He came as a man and lived among men. The Man, Christ Jesus was not the Lord God Almighty, yet Christ and the Father are one. The Deity did not sink under the agonizing torture of Calvary. Yet it is none the less true that God so loved the World that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believeth will not perish but have everlasting life."


quote transcribed from Answering Adventism video, Doug Batchelor Fables #8 "The SDA Church's Closest to the Teachings of Jesus?!"

As the Youtuber says "I have heard their Apologists try to give the defense 'No! No No! She was just differentiating between Jesus and the Father'. Folks, she said her words were barricaded by a "Thus says the Lord." The same author behind those words she claims was the same author behind the Scriptures. The Holy Spirit.

The video host also notes similar excuses like "A slip of the pen" where the same retort also applies.


My commentary

People familiar with Nicene Theology and Heresy will see some Arian and Nestorian potential in the previous quote. Adventism has a lot of this, and it is no wonder why "the Pioneers" eschewed the "pagan philosophy" behind the Theology of the Ancient Church. Such theology and its precise Greek terms and formulations were specifically crafted and engineered to prevent confusion and bad and accidental statements/beliefs about the Godhead, Hypostatic union etc. but by eschewing these things and instead embracing their own language and even trying to explain things in a modern folksy way Adventist's and other similar folks essentially make all the old theological mistakes again as the Ancient Heretics by virtue of trying to reinvent the Wheel but using inferior materials in the effort.



PS - another noteworthy comment from Answering Adventism creator is his observation (as a former 3rd generation Adventist), that official Trinitarianism and other classic theology is not a "Foundational" teaching the way the church other teachings on. This is in agreement with another official statement that I may add if I run across it again that agrees and says that the Church's "Eschatological Message" was where it's priorities were and all other topics like this were on a lower level (This means that stuff like not eating pork, and you shouldn't worship on Sunday are more important than orthodox Trinitarianism and proper Christology). Basically, within a given organization you can have people that are Trinitarians in the common Christian orthodox sense, but also have folks who closely follow "the Pioneers" that are basically Arians or Tri-theists and "it's all good", just as long as everybody follows the Adventist denominational distinctives.

 

[TibiLy]

"There is no one that can explain the Incarnation of Christ, yet He came as a man and lived among men. The Man, Christ Jesus was not the Lord God Almighty, yet Christ and the Father are one. The Deity did not sink under the agonizing torture of Calvary. Yet it is none the less true that God so loved the World that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believeth will not perish but have everlasting life."


quote transcribed from Answering Adventism video, Doug Batchelor Fables #8 "The SDA Church's Closest to the Teachings of Jesus?!"

As the Youtuber says "I have heard their Apologists try to give the defense 'No! No No! She was just differentiating between Jesus and the Father'. Folks, she said her words were barricaded by a "Thus says the Lord." The same author behind those words she claims was the same author behind the Scriptures. The Holy Spirit.

The video host also notes similar excuses like "A slip of the pen" where the same retort also applies.


My commentary

People familiar with Nicene Theology and Heresy will see some Arian and Nestorian potential in the previous quote. Adventism has a lot of this, and it is no wonder why "the Pioneers" eschewed the "pagan philosophy" behind the Theology of the Ancient Church. Such theology and its precise Greek terms and formulations were specifically crafted and engineered to prevent confusion and bad and accidental statements/beliefs about the Godhead, Hypostatic union etc. but by eschewing these things and instead embracing their own language and even trying to explain things in a modern folksy way Adventist's and other similar folks essentially make all the old theological mistakes again as the Ancient Heretics by virtue of trying to reinvent the Wheel but using inferior materials in the effort.



PS - another noteworthy comment from Answering Adventism creator is his observation (as a former 3rd generation Adventist), that official Trinitarianism and other classic theology is not a "Foundational" teaching the way the church other teachings on. This is in agreement with another official statement that I may add if I run across it again that agrees and says that the Church's "Eschatological Message" was where it's priorities were and all other topics like this were on a lower level (This means that stuff like not eating pork, and you shouldn't worship on Sunday are more important than orthodox Trinitarianism and proper Christology). Basically, within a given organization you can have people that are Trinitarians in the common Christian orthodox sense, but also have folks who closely follow "the Pioneers" that are basically Arians or Tri-theists and "it's all good", just as long as everybody follows the Adventist denominational distinctives.

Do you worship Jesus Christ? If so, then why?

 

[pasifika]

Do you worship Jesus Christ? If so, then why?

He is our God..

 

[jacks]

Matthew 22:15-18

 

[Davy]

Jesus is God, even He said so.

John 8:57-58
57 Then said the Jews unto Him, "Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast Thou seen Abraham?"
58 Jesus said unto them, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am."
KJV

The 'I AM THAT I AM' is one of God's sacred names. That is why right after Jesus said that, those Jews tried to stone Him for claiming He is God.

John 14:8-9
8 Philip saith unto Him, "Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us."
9 Jesus saith unto him, "Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known Me, Philip? he that hath seen Me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, 'Shew us the Father?'
KJV

Hebrews 1:3 says that Jesus is the "express image" of The Father's Person.

So no true believer on The Father and His Son Jesus Christ need listen to the babblers who refuse to believe the Deity of Jesus Christ.

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

Jesus is God, even He said so.

John 8:57-58
57 Then said the Jews unto Him, "Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast Thou seen Abraham?"
58 Jesus said unto them, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am."
KJV

The 'I AM THAT I AM' is one of God's sacred names. That is why right after Jesus said that, those Jews tried to stone Him for claiming He is God.

John 14:8-9
8 Philip saith unto Him, "Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us."
9 Jesus saith unto him, "Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known Me, Philip? he that hath seen Me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, 'Shew us the Father?'
KJV

Hebrews 1:3 says that Jesus is the "express image" of The Father's Person.

So no true believer on The Father and His Son Jesus Christ need listen to the babblers who refuse to believe the Deity of Jesus Christ.

To deny it is to be left in ones sins as per Jesus Himself said in John 8:24- unless you believe I AM you will die in your sins !

 

[BobRyan]

"There is no one that can explain the Incarnation of Christ, yet He came as a man and lived among men. The Man, Christ Jesus was not the Lord God Almighty, yet Christ and the Father are one. The Deity did not sink under the agonizing torture of Calvary. Yet it is none the less true that God so loved the World that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believeth will not perish but have everlasting life."

A partial statement - very misleading. Better to have "the rest of the story"

“When Isaiah predicted the birth of Christ he declared, "Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even forever" (Isaiah 9:6, 7).” –MR 7, No. 515.​

​

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God." John 1:1, 2. Christ, the Word, the only begotten of God, was one with the eternal Father--one in nature, in character, in purpose--the only being that could enter into all the counsels and purposes of God. "His name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace."Isaiah 9:6.” –Patriarchs and Prophets. page 35.​

​

“But although Christ's divine glory was for a time veiled and eclipsed by His assuming humanity, yet He did not cease to be God when He became man. The human did not take the place of the divine, nor the divine of the human. This is the mystery of godliness... Christ left His position in the heavenly courts, and came to this earth to live the life of human beings. This sacrifice He made in order to show that Satan's charge against God is false--...There is no one who can explain the mystery of the incarnation of Christ. Yet we know that He came to this earth and lived as a man among men. The man Christ Jesus was not the Lord God Almighty, yet Christ and the Father are one. The Deity did not sink under the agonizing torture of Calvary, yet it is nonetheless true that "God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." -S.D.A Bible Commentary, Vol. 5 (1956). pp. 1129, 1130.​

By only giving snips as we see in the OP -- a misleading impression can be had.

The SDA Position is "One God" Deut 6:4 in "Three Persons" Matt 28:19. Period.

"... He did not cease to be God when He became man"

 

[BobRyan]

"By His humanity, Christ touched humanity; by His divinity, He lays hold upon the throne of God. As the Son of man, He gave us an example of obedience; as the Son of God, He gives us power to obey. It was Christ who from the bush on Mount Horeb spoke to Moses saying, “I AM THAT I AM.... Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.” Exodus 3:14. This was the pledge of Israel’s deliverance. So when He came “in the likeness of men,” He declared Himself the I AM. The Child of Bethlehem, the meek and lowly Saviour, is God “manifest in the flesh.” 1 Timothy 3:16. And to us He says: “I AM the Good Shepherd.” “I AM the living Bread.” “I AM the Way, the Truth, and the Life.” “All power is given unto Me in heaven and in earth.” John 10:11; 6:51; 14:6; Matthew 28:18. I AM the assurance of every promise. I AM; be not afraid. “God with us” is the surety of our deliverance from sin, the assurance of our power to obey the law of heaven." {DA 24.3}


"There were occasions when Jesus stood forth while in human flesh as the Son of God. Divinity flashed through humanity, and was seen by the scoffing priests and rulers. Was it acknowledged? Some acknowledged that He was the Christ, but the larger portion of those who upon these special occasions were forced to see that He was the Son of God, refused to receive Him. Their blindness corresponded to their determined resistance of conviction." {5BC 1129.4}

"When Christ’s indwelling glory flashed forth, it was too intense for His pure and perfect humanity entirely to conceal. The scribes and Pharisees did not speak in acknowledgment of Him, but their enmity and hatred were baffled as His majesty shone forth. The truth, obscured as it was by a veil of humiliation, spoke to every heart with unmistakable evidence. This led to the words of Christ, “Ye know who I am.” Men and devils were compelled, by the shining forth of His glory, to confess, “Truly, this is the Son of God.” Thus God was revealed; thus Christ was glorified" (The Signs of the Times, May 10, 1899). {5BC 1129.5}

My commentary

People familiar with Nicene Theology and Heresy will see some Arian and Nestorian potential in the previous quote.

I guess if you hold the details in the quotes I have provided at a 'sufficient distance' you can get around to that sort of view.

Jesus is God, even He said so.

John 8:57-58
57 Then said the Jews unto Him, "Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast Thou seen Abraham?"
58 Jesus said unto them, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am."
KJV

The 'I AM THAT I AM' is one of God's sacred names. That is why right after Jesus said that, those Jews tried to stone Him for claiming He is God.

John 14:8-9
8 Philip saith unto Him, "Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us."
9 Jesus saith unto him, "Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known Me, Philip? he that hath seen Me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, 'Shew us the Father?'
KJV

Hebrews 1:3 says that Jesus is the "express image" of The Father's Person.

So no true believer on The Father and His Son Jesus Christ need listen to the babblers who refuse to believe the Deity of Jesus Christ.

True - which is why we find quotes as noted in this post to you. Jesus was the incarnate Son of God - the 2nd person of the Godhead. Just as scripture says.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

A partial statement - very misleading. Better to have "the rest of the story"

“When Isaiah predicted the birth of Christ he declared, "Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even forever" (Isaiah 9:6, 7).” –MR 7, No. 515.​

​

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God." John 1:1, 2. Christ, the Word, the only begotten of God, was one with the eternal Father--one in nature, in character, in purpose--the only being that could enter into all the counsels and purposes of God. "His name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace."Isaiah 9:6.” –Patriarchs and Prophets. page 35.​

​

“But although Christ's divine glory was for a time veiled and eclipsed by His assuming humanity, yet He did not cease to be God when He became man. The human did not take the place of the divine, nor the divine of the human. This is the mystery of godliness... Christ left His position in the heavenly courts, and came to this earth to live the life of human beings. This sacrifice He made in order to show that Satan's charge against God is false--...There is no one who can explain the mystery of the incarnation of Christ. Yet we know that He came to this earth and lived as a man among men. The man Christ Jesus was not the Lord God Almighty, yet Christ and the Father are one. The Deity did not sink under the agonizing torture of Calvary, yet it is nonetheless true that "God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." -S.D.A Bible Commentary, Vol. 5 (1956). pp. 1129, 1130.​

By only giving snips as we see in the OP -- a misleading impression can be had.

Yeah, but this still is not true legitimate Nicene Christian theology, nor is it what some Baptists and other non-creedal believers do (unofficially espouse orthodox Trinitarianism while still claiming to be against creeds). The biggest common trick of Adventists is using Christian theological buzzwords but having them be redefined according to their unique Tradition's definitions. When this happens quite often the unsuspecting Christian is usually fooled by this. This is the exact way that Walter Martin was fooled by the leader of the General Conference back in the 50s, when he was in the process of writing "The Kingdom of the Cults".

I find this trick very clever. I however have quite a bit of background in psychology and very aware of things like "Neurolinguistic programming" and other influence approaches from social psychology. Sadly, most Christians are not aware of this stuff and will assume that if someone uses the same buzzwords, they got the same basic world view as they do.


Besides this there are other problems.
1) Namely building on an Anti-Trinitarian foundation. If you follow the early pioneers. Their mind set informs the Adventist position, no matter how much Adventist want to look orthodox by happily adopting Christian buzzwords of Trinity etc. that they originally eschewed and described as "pagan". I can pull out lots of statements showing that James White, and Uriah Smith were Arians and Tri theists. White wasn't originally being raised an Methodist, but she certainly deferred to their position, especially in the old days.


2) Statements describing the Trinity as "Three Worthies", or "3 beings" is Tritheism, or in modern terms Adventist like to use the analogy of 3 members on the same team, "on a winning team" to be exact. The latter is literal historic Arianism and Christianity fought that for centuries! This is something folks would know if they had studied theology before they formulated all this stuff!

There is an easy case to be made of "The Fruit of the Poisoned Tree" as far as my side is concerned. It is like that verse that salt water and fresh water cannot coexist. Or the saying of a former Adventist "That all of Seventh day Adventist theology is down stream from Ellen". (For the more evangelical SDA, that minimize her influence on what they doing their preaching. e.g. Doug Bachelor comes to mind, but still getting acquainted with the different flavors of SDA).


All of the above is reason to impeach what Adventist say on other topics especially concerning topics like the Sabbath and Sunday that are not based on the study of the early church but come from revelations that they obtained after reading the pamphlets of Seventh Day Baptists. Furthermore, doctrines like the Investigative Judgement can ben demonstrated to not be known by Christians of earlier times. And this is bad theologically speaking because a very solid case can be made that this is "another Gospel", "another Christ", that is being preached and that this theology/ message is in fact neo-Gnostic and not "the Faith Once Delivered to the saints".


This is in contrast to other kinds of objections, like when the Torah was found in the days of King Josiah. Or the remnant analogy of the Ark that is also used. One can make a "Devil in the details" argument again those things which I will probably do some day. Not to mention, a scriptural analogy against other excuses towards Adventist failed prophecies. Unfortunately, modern day Charismatics have been making failed prophecies too and making excuses that are similar and sometimes identical to modern day Adventists, so I'm very use to these kinds of claims.


Conclusion
In closing in Christianity in the past you, cannot build on the work of a heretic and at least have it considered to be legitimate (if you want to be accepted by rest of the Christian community). You cannot have something like "The Reformed Church of Simon Magus", where you disagree with some of his formal positions but still see him as an inspiration for your theology, "denominational distinctives" or whatever. If you want to have fellowship, you basically have to repudiate the original heretical founder, and completely scrap your connection to that past. It is pretty much like the words of Jesus regarding a man serving "Two masters". or the passage "How can two walk together unless they be in agreement". So, I say this in explaining why I will never accept SDA as fellow believer not unless they anathematize their past teachings and founders and instead maybe embrace something closer to Messianic Judaism or Hebrew roots Christianity as far as worship is concerned.


But on the other hand, I believe in complete freedom of worship with the one caveat that you are not hurting someone in the process. e.g. like Jihad or human sacrifice. What you do is on your own conscience etc. That is what is best for everybody. The days of official Theocracy are long over and will likely never see the light of day. Meaning the Sunday Law will never be passed and that will be just another failed prophecy on Ellen's part. If however, Hell does freeze over and we get a Theocracy akin to some Dystopia like "A Hand Maid's Tale, Ellen already has you covered. In 1902 she advised the Australian SDA to dedicate the day to "Outreach and the Medical Mission". I would also recommend you use that day for fellowship. If you do you will be doing something close to what most of the Early Christianity did back in the early days only in reverse as far as how you treat the weekend.

 

[BobRyan]

A partial statement - very misleading. Better to have "the rest of the story"

“When Isaiah predicted the birth of Christ he declared, "Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even forever" (Isaiah 9:6, 7).” –MR 7, No. 515.​

​

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God." John 1:1, 2. Christ, the Word, the only begotten of God, was one with the eternal Father--one in nature, in character, in purpose--the only being that could enter into all the counsels and purposes of God. "His name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace."Isaiah 9:6.” –Patriarchs and Prophets. page 35.​

​

“But although Christ's divine glory was for a time veiled and eclipsed by His assuming humanity, yet He did not cease to be God when He became man. The human did not take the place of the divine, nor the divine of the human. This is the mystery of godliness... Christ left His position in the heavenly courts, and came to this earth to live the life of human beings. This sacrifice He made in order to show that Satan's charge against God is false--...There is no one who can explain the mystery of the incarnation of Christ. Yet we know that He came to this earth and lived as a man among men. The man Christ Jesus was not the Lord God Almighty, yet Christ and the Father are one. The Deity did not sink under the agonizing torture of Calvary, yet it is nonetheless true that "God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." -S.D.A Bible Commentary, Vol. 5 (1956). pp. 1129, 1130.​

By only giving snips as we see in the OP -- a misleading impression can be had.

so then "One God" Deut 6:4 in "Three Persons" Matt 28:19

Yeah, but this still is not true legitimate Nicene Christian theology, nor is it what some Baptists and other non-creedal believers do (unofficially espouse orthodox Trinitarianism while still claiming to be against creeds).

Some could claim that as a false accusation against both Baptists and the Nicene Creed to claim that they deny Christ is the I AM of the OT, fully God and so the second person of the Godhead.

The biggest common trick of Adventists is using Christian theological buzzwords

Like "God", "Christ", "One God in Three Persons"??

Is that your idea of "a trick"???

This is the exact way that Walter Martin was fooled by the leader of the General Conference back in the 50s

Martin was not SDA - but he was a scholar that had reviewed a lot more denominations than you appear to have reviewed from your posts. I don't think he missed anything.

Making false accusations is pretty easy - but showing a factual substantive point is much more difficult

I find this trick very clever. I however have quite a bit of background in psychology

You might want to consider more focus on theology in this case.

1) Namely building on an Anti-Trinitarian foundation. If you follow the early pioneers. Their mind set informs the Adventist position, no matter how much Adventist want to look orthodox

Ellen White was raised as a Methodist .. Is this a problem in your mind when you look at history?

White wasn't originally being raised an Methodist, but she certainly deferred to their position, especially in the old days.

She never made any statements against the Methodist position on the Trinity - no ... not ever. So you quote nothing.

All of the above is reason to impeach what Adventist say on other topics

at some point - an actual Bible text should enter into your POV and you should list an actual fact on our doctrinal statements.

False accusations are real easy to make -- you might have learned about that in Psychology. But even outside of psychology we all can see it.

especially concerning topics like the Sabbath and Sunday that are not based on the study of the early church

Is there a single point where your position is based on a study of the actual Bible?? If so why not make a Bible statement for your POV? Why steer so far away from that sort of post???

. Furthermore, doctrines like the Investigative Judgement can ben demonstrated to not be known by Christians of earlier times.

Paul was a Christian of earlier times and Romans 2 is a perfect detailed explanation by Paul of the investigative judgment in vs 4-16. Read it.
Paul does a one verse summary of it in 2 Cor 5:10 -- read it.
Daniel 7 is even earlier than that. Where we see a pre-advent, investigative judgment from vs 9-thru-end-of-chapter.

But this will mean laying the psychology books aside and opening that Bible.

 

[BobRyan]

Jesus is God, even He said so.

True.

as noted here -- #8

 

[Pavel Mosko]

Found a very interesting video that I will be covering talking at length of Adventism's Trinitarianism as well as other unique beliefs.

 

[Davy]

I guess the OP has failed to read in Isaiah about Christ Immanuel...

Isa 9:6
6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
KJV

Jesus Christ is GOD The Son. The book of Hebrews says Jesus is the "express image" of The Father's Person. Even when Christ was born into woman's womb, He was still GOD Immanuel (which means 'God with us' per Matthew 1:23).