Questions for SDA?

DarkGreenMind · Jul 22, 2007

maco said:
Since you made this comment I can ask you this question without being stoned or excommunicated.

How do you understand the Godhead?

My view on the Deity (I prefer this term) is the same or very similar to what the early SDA church believed. I alreday described their position briefly in my previous post.

The most essential truth is that God is one person only - God the Father. If God was three persons, than no one could have a personal relationship with God, because a Deity that is "one divine essence eternally existing in three persons" is not a person at all ! It was Greek speculative philosophy that made theologians think that the Deity is "divine substance", a "something", and not someone. If God is not absolutely one in being in person, then he is not a being and person at all. The orthodox Trinity is a not a person, but essence or substance. According to a modern Protestant concept (which is the present SDA Godhead doctrine) the Deity is a group of self-existing individuals who are in full agreement, and this is almost the same as three Gods in full agreement.
The Bible never says that Christians have to believe in a tripersonal God, who is a "substance" or a "group" ("community", "society", etc.).

The second significant truth is the position of Jesus Christ as the Mediator. He is neither God Most High, nor "a mere man". He is the only-begotten Son of God and this makes him unique. He was the first being to came into existence before all ages and God the Father created the universe through him. The Son of God was made flesh in order to live a sinless human life and to die for mankind's sins. "Made flesh" does not mean that he "combined his divine nature with human nature", but that his whole being was made human. He lived a sinless life trough his self-denial and obedience to his God and Father. Only a fully human being can be tempted, tortured, killed and resurrected - God can't be tempted, can't be tortured, can't be put to death. Only a perfect human being can be a perfect example for human beings.

Christ has all authority in heaven and earth, but he received all he has from his God and Father.

Those who defend the 'orthodox' trinitarian view claim that such a view denies Christ's divinity (Deity, Godhead, whatever term you prefer), but I cannot agree with them. The Deity of Jesus Christ is God the Father, who was in the man Jesus Christ. I would like to add that possessing "divine nature" does not make anyone equal to God Almighty, since we humans too"might be partakers of the divine nature" (2 Petter 1:4, KJV).

Jesus Christ has a God and his God is his Father, the only true God, the Most High. Other beings (angels, humans, pagan deities) can be termed 'god' only in a relative, limited sense. No one who has a God is absolute Deity. God the Father is the God of gods. God the Father is the God of Jesus, as we can see in the New Testament:

Matthew 27:46
Mark 15:34
John 20:17
Revelation 3:2
Revelation 3:12

I don't think that the spirit of the Father (or the spirit of the Son) is a third God-person, as the Trinity doctrine says. God anointed his Christ with His holy spirit. If we consider the trinitarian view, we would conclude that God anointed God with God. This is really nonsensical in my opinion. The spirit of holiness is a gift, not a God-person.

I think that Protestants inherited the Trinity doctrine and the 'double nature of Christ' doctrine from Roman Catholicism and accept these dogmas without examining them at all. Most Protestants does not understand the Trinity doctrine, and their attempts to define and defend this teaching often lead them in great self-contradictions. They are either trying to harmonize the Trinity with the Bible (changing the original Trinity doctrine), or the Bible with the Trinity doctrine (by altering the words of Scripture in translation and their meaning). The so called "Church fathers", who defined the Trinity in the 4th century, were philosophers; the greatest product of their philosophical work was the Trinity doctrine. There are no such speculative philosophers today. So if you want to be really orthodox in your Godhead doctrine, please read those ancient authors (Athanasius, Gregory of Nyssa, etc.) before creating a new version of the Trinity doctrine. But when Protestants defend the church councils that formulated the Trinity and the double nature of Christ dogmas, they are actually accepting the foundations of Catholicism. The "sola scriptura" of Reformation principle is in fact rejected by what "orthodox" Protestantism teaches about God and Christ, accepting the man-made dogmas of Catholicism. And let me quote James White, the early SDA leader:

As fundamental errors, we might class with this counterfeit sabbath other errors which Protestants have brought away from the Catholic church, such as sprinkling for baptism, the trinity, the consciousness of the dead and eternal life in misery. The mass who have held these fundamental errors, have doubtless done it ignorantly; but can it be supposed that the church of Christ will carry along with her these errors till the judgment scenes burst upon the world? We think not. (James White, September 12, 1854, Review & Herald, vol. 6, no. 5, page 36, par. 8)

I believe in enlightened faith, not just "blind faith". Blind faith is far better than infidelity, but it is just an initial stage of religiousness. God gives spiritual light to those who seek Him. I don't think that the Trinity doctrine is simply 'illogical' and 'contrary to reason', as a Rationalist would say; I would rather say that it is contrary to true faith, existentially untrue, contrary to actuality. A Deity that is not a person, but a "they" ("divine trio") or "it" ("divine substance"), is not the living God of the Holy Scripture, and not someone that a human being could communicate or have a personal relationship with !

JonMiller · Jul 23, 2007

You don't read much science fiction, do you?

I don't expect God to be something that can be easily defined in human terms. While things in speculative fiction obviously have, they are a lot more strange then ideas that people generally run into during every day life...

While I would not be at all surprised to find the traditional trinity doctrine wrong, I think it is likely that your view is too simple.

And it is well known that early adventism was semi-arian.

JM

icedtea · Jul 23, 2007

I have an odd question. We visited an adventist church last month (enjoyed it).
Afterwards, there was a meal. I talked a bit with the pastor, and he said something about the '27 essential truths.' I said I thought there were 28, cause I saw it posted here.
he gave this weird smile, like Oh boy.
Whats up with that?

smooze · Jul 23, 2007

why wouldn't the battlestar galactica find alternative fuel sourses. The Rare fuel they use seems to be hard to aquire and Yes this is important if they want to defeat the silons.

Jon0388g · Jul 23, 2007

DarkGreenMind said:
My view on the Deity (I prefer this term) is the same or very similar to what the early SDA church believed.

Do you therefore disagree with the veiws Ellen White maintained on the Divinty of Christ?

"From the days of eternity, the Lord Jesus Christ was one with the Father." Desire of Ages, 19

"In Christ is life original, unborrowed, underived...The divinity of Christ is the believer's assurance of eternal life." Desire of Ages, 530

"The Saviour came forth from the grave by the life that was in Himself." Desire of Ages, 785

The most essential truth is that God is one person only - God the Father. If God was three persons, than no one could have a personal relationship with God, because a Deity that is "one divine essence eternally existing in three persons" is not a person at all !

"Sin could be resisted and overcome only through the mighty agency of the Third Person of the Godhead." Desire of Ages, 671

It seems as though Ellen White's traditional view supported the doctrine of Trinity.

And let me quote James White, the early SDA leader:

As fundamental errors, we might class with this counterfeit sabbath other errors which Protestants have brought away from the Catholic church, such as sprinkling for baptism, the trinity, the consciousness of the dead and eternal life in misery. The mass who have held these fundamental errors, have doubtless done it ignorantly; but can it be supposed that the church of Christ will carry along with her these errors till the judgment scenes burst upon the world? We think not. (James White, September 12, 1854, Review & Herald, vol. 6, no. 5, page 36, par. 8)

Jerry Moon says of EGW:

"Her writings about the Godhead show a clear progression, not primarily from anti to protrinitarianism, but from relative ambiguity to greater specificity. Some of her early statements are capable of various interpretations, but her later statements, 1898-1906, are explicit to the point of being dogmatic."

"The Comforter that Christ promised to send after He ascended to heaven, is the Spirit in all the fulness of the Godhead.....There are three living persons of the heavenly trio; in the name of these three great powers -- the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit -- those who receive Christ by living faith are baptised, and these powers will cooperate with the obedient subjects of heaven in their efforts to live the new life in Christ." Special Testimonies, B07 (1905) p63

Jon

Adventist Dissident · Jul 23, 2007

HowardDean said:
I have an odd question. We visited an adventist church last month (enjoyed it).
Afterwards, there was a meal. I talked a bit with the pastor, and he said something about the '27 essential truths.' I said I thought there were 28, cause I saw it posted here.
he gave this weird smile, like Oh boy.
Whats up with that?

for a long time there were 27 fundamental beliefs recently they have added 1 more. people still refer to them as the 27 even there are 28. The term 27 fundamental beliefs can also refer to the core beliefs regardless of the number. Some people are just slow to change.

woobadooba · Jul 23, 2007

HowardDean said:
I have an odd question. We visited an adventist church last month (enjoyed it).
Afterwards, there was a meal. I talked a bit with the pastor, and he said something about the '27 essential truths.' I said I thought there were 28, cause I saw it posted here.
he gave this weird smile, like Oh boy.
Whats up with that?

Here it is: New Earth
"On the new earth, in which righteousness dwells, God will provide an eternal home for the redeemed and a perfect environment for everlasting life, love, joy, and learning in His presence. For here God Himself will dwell with His people, and suffering and death will have passed away. The great controversy will be ended, and sin will be no more. All things, animate and inanimate, will declare that God is love; and He shall reign forever. Amen. (2 Peter 3:13; Isa. 35; 65:17-25; Matt. 5:5; Rev. 21:1-7; 22:1-5; 11:15.)"

Perhaps you should ask him why he responded in that way. I would like to know what he meant by that too.

RC_NewProtestants · Jul 23, 2007

HowardDean said:
I have an odd question. We visited an adventist church last month (enjoyed it).
Afterwards, there was a meal. I talked a bit with the pastor, and he said something about the '27 essential truths.' I said I thought there were 28, cause I saw it posted here.
he gave this weird smile, like Oh boy.
Whats up with that?

A couple years ago a new fundamental belief was proposed and after some debate was passed;
http://news.adventist.org/specials/2005/gcsession/other_documents/fundamentabeliefproposal.html

A report on the process and debate is found at:
http://www.atoday.com/6.0.html?&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=32&tx_ttnews[backPid]=1&cHash=fe30f06a3a

Adventist Dissident · Jul 23, 2007

You are assuming that having the gift of prophecy equals being a prophet. I don't make that assumption

. Like DAH. you can't be a prophet with out the spirit of prophecy they are one and the same. Look at the how far you will stoop to protect your position.

RC_NewProtestants · Jul 23, 2007

You are assuming that having the gift of prophecy equals being a prophet. I don't make that assumption

Well actually no I don't make that assumption but it is pointless to argue what I think versus what DJ thinks I think. He is always the authority even over my own knowledge of myself. Actually the gift of prophecy can occur to anyone. We have examples where Caiaphas in his position as high Priest gave an accurate prophecy of Jesus even though Caiaphas was attempting to kill Jesus.

There is a difference, what Ellen White is saying is that this is her calling to be the messenger of the Lord, it is her office which is the same thing as the office of prophets recorded in the Old Testament.

woobadooba · Jul 23, 2007

RC_NewProtestants said:
Well actually no I don't make that assumption but it is pointless to argue what I think versus what DJ thinks I think. He is always the authority even over my own knowledge of myself. Actually the gift of prophecy can occur to anyone. We have examples where Caiaphas in his position as high Priest gave an accurate prophecy of Jesus even though Caiaphas was attempting to kill Jesus.

There is a difference, what Ellen White is saying is that this is her calling to be the messenger of the Lord, it is her office which is the same thing as the office of prophets recorded in the Old Testament.

Having the gift of prophecy and prophesying are not necessarily the same thing, though.

To have the gift of prophecy one must operate within the office of the prophetic. In other words, it's a full-time job. Of course, this doesn't mean that everything a prophet says has been given to him by God( a prophet doesn't lose his freedom to be opinionated at times--just look at Jonah). There is more to being a prophet than just speaking words of inspiration. A prophet is one that has been called to a high position of leadership within the body of Christ.

However, to prophesy is to speak under inspiration for but a moment in time. One doesn't have to be a leader within the body of Christ to do this.

smooze · Jul 23, 2007

do you guys ever answer a question without turning it into a who knows egW best contest. OOOH so many different views and opinions im stickig to good old fashioned rattlesnake wrangling Praise JESUS OUCH he bite meeeeeeeeeeeeee heheehe get my message? OOr am i that ritalin fueled hyper kid bouncing off the walls starving for attention look at me look at me [pong][move][/move][/pong]

mommy2irishtwins · Jul 23, 2007

Not sure if I'm even starting in the right place. I'm looking for information on The Church of the Advent...Are SDA the same thing? If Not can ya point me in the right direction please?!

RC_NewProtestants · Jul 23, 2007

Woob does that mean that someone with the gift of tongues has a lifetime function of one speaking in an otherwise unknown language?

Yea I don't buy it.

woobadooba · Jul 23, 2007

RC_NewProtestants said:
Woob does that mean that someone with the gift of tongues has a lifetime function of one speaking in an otherwise unknown language?

Yea I don't buy it.

I suppose it would all depend on what you mean by 'gift of tongues'. Some would consider those who are gifted in learning multiple languages and speaking them fluently to have the gift of tongues. I know one such person. He can speak 6 different languages fluently.

Of course, then there is the gift of tongues that happens within the context of speaking a language that is unknown to the person that is speaking it. This, of course, occurs at the moment, without that person having had any training in the language spoken.

What it really comes down to here is that we should be able to identify the role of each gift, and the degree to which the people that have such gifts serve in the body of Christ. It seems to me that some gifts serve to fulfill a greater purpose than others in that they engender a greater sense of responsibility to those who are gifted with them, to bring God's people into connection with His higher purpose for mankind.

In any case, I think your question is a good one.

DarkGreenMind · Jul 24, 2007

Jon0388g said:
[/size]

Do you therefore disagree with the veiws Ellen White maintained on the Divinty of Christ?

"From the days of eternity, the Lord Jesus Christ was one with the Father." Desire of Ages, 19

"In Christ is life original, unborrowed, underived...The divinity of Christ is the believer's assurance of eternal life." Desire of Ages, 530

"The Saviour came forth from the grave by the life that was in Himself." Desire of Ages, 785

"Sin could be resisted and overcome only through the mighty agency of the Third Person of the Godhead." Desire of Ages, 671

It seems as though Ellen White's traditional view supported the doctrine of Trinity.

[/color][/size][/font]

Jerry Moon says of EGW:

"Her writings about the Godhead show a clear progression, not primarily from anti to protrinitarianism, but from relative ambiguity to greater specificity. Some of her early statements are capable of various interpretations, but her later statements, 1898-1906, are explicit to the point of being dogmatic."

"The Comforter that Christ promised to send after He ascended to heaven, is the Spirit in all the fulness of the Godhead.....There are three living persons of the heavenly trio; in the name of these three great powers -- the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit -- those who receive Christ by living faith are baptised, and these powers will cooperate with the obedient subjects of heaven in their efforts to live the new life in Christ." Special Testimonies, B07 (1905) p63

Jon

Ellen White was for the first fifty years (1844-1895) decidedly non-Trinitarian, especially with her clear statements that "Christ Jesus was not the Lord God Almighty" (Lift Him Up, p.235). If she somehow "changed her mind" later, I would prefer the original doctrine of the SDA church and of Ellen White herself. It is noteworthy that her trinitarian statements occured after the death of her husband, who was clearly anti-trinitarian. I think that she was influenced by others in her "three divine beings" statements.

The expression "from the days of eternity... one with the Father" is not a trinitarian statement at all. Other Adventist writers (who opposed the Trinity) used the same language.

If the statement that "in Christ is life original, unborrowed, underived" is taken literally to mean that Christ is a self-existing being, fully independent from God the Father, it is a false statment that contradicts the Bible:

For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself (John 5:26)

The life Christ has, was given to him by his Father, who is also his God. This means that Christ was not self-existing as God the Father is. ...

There already had been such a "progression" in the history of Christianity - from proper monotheism to the Trinity doctrine in the 4th century. I don't beleieve in such a "progression".

There are many statemants in Ellen White writings that contradict the Trinity doctrine (both orthodox trinity and the modern SDA version).

Here are statements that contradict the concept of a tripersonal Deity.

1.There is no "3rd divine Being (Person)" and no Trinity (or "trio"):

The Comforter is not a 3rd person, but the Son of God himself:

Cumbered with humanity Christ could not be in every place personally; therefore it was altogether for their advantage that He should leave them to go to His Father and send the Holy Spirit to be His successor on earth. The Holy Spirit is Himself, divested of the personality of humanity and independent thereof. He would represent Himself as present in all places by His Holy Spirit as the Omnipresent. (Manuscript Release, vol. 14, p. 23)

The only being who was one with God lived the law in humanity, descended to the lowly life of a common laborer, and toiled at the carpenters bench with his earthly parent. (Ellen White, The Signs of the Times, October 14, 1897 par. 3)

The Father and the Son alone are to be exalted. (Ellen White, The Youths Instructor, July 7, 1898)

Christ, the Word, the only begotten of God, was one with the eternal Fatherone in nature, in character, in purposethe only being that could enter into all the counsels and purposes of God. (Ellen White, Patriarchs and Prophets, page 34)

God and Christ are one (=united) in purpose, not one in "essence" ("substance") !

2.There was no Trinity (or "trio") in creation.

Concerning the "us" statements about man's creation, Ellen White wrote the same what early Christian authors declared and what all SDA pioneers believed - that God was talking to His Son, and not God talking to two persons who are God(s) too:

And now God said to His Son, Let us make man in our image. (Ellen White, The Spirit of Prophecy, vol. 1, pages 24, 25)

3.The Father and the Son were not equal in authority.

The Son of God was next in authority to the great Lawgiver. He knew that His life alone could be sufficient to ransom fallen man. (Ellen White, Spirit of Prophecy, vol. 2, page 9, also in Lift Him Up, page 24)

His Son He had invested with authority to command the heavenly host." (E.G. White, the Story of Redemption, p.13.)

The statements above strongly contadict the Trinity doctrine.

- According to the Trinity doctrine, the Son is not the Holy Spirit; Ellen White stated that the Holy Spirit as the Comforter is Christ Himself.

- According to the Trinity doctrine there are three beings that made the plan of salvation; Ellen white declared that Christ was the only being who could enter into all the counsels and puroposes of God.

- According to the Trinity doctrine the Father and the Son are fully "co-equal" in power and authority; Ellen White stated the opposite, that the Son was second in authority and that God the Father invested him with this authority.

So it seems that Ellen White's writings contain clearly self-contradictory statements on the Deity question. Here we have a dilemma. But there is no need to accept the later position and to reject the original one, since the founders of the SDA church were all anti-trinitarians. The original position of the church on the Godhead (as well as its christology) was more consistent and was among the distinctive doctrines that made Adventism closer to original Christianity and clean of the central Catholic dogmas, borrowed in Protestantism.

Trinitarian dogma requires such a christology that makes Christ's temptations, suffering, death and resurrection only apparent but not actual - God could not be tempted, could not suffer physical pain, could not die. This affects the whole doctrine of salvation.

The original SDA position about God and Christ is more consistent, it is in complete harmony with the other doctrines of the church (soul's mortality, importance of obedience to God's law, Christ role as a Mediator in heaven).

brimac · Jul 24, 2007

DJconklin asked:

1st: welcome to our forum! One question for you: which seminary? I went to the seminary at Andrews University in Berrien Spirngs, MI.

I went to Ozark Christian College in Joplin, MO.

brimac · Jul 24, 2007

Can someone post a list of the 28 fundamental beliefs?

icedtea · Jul 24, 2007

I would like to know that, myself.
Howard, a trinitarian.

woobadooba · Jul 24, 2007

The list of our official beliefs can be found here: http://www.christianforums.com/t2180221-official-seventh-day-adventist-fundamental-beliefs.html

Questions for SDA?

DarkGreenMind

Guest

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Contributor

Veteran

Senior Veteran

Legend

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Legend

Contributor

mommy2irishtwins

Guest

Senior Veteran

Legend

DarkGreenMind

Guest

Contributor

Contributor

Well-Known Member

Legend

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency