Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
The thread starts to go into meltdown around post #85. Trinity rejection. I'm convinced the Trad SDA do not believe Jesus is God the same way God is God. There is no other way as zero Trad Adventists came to straighten out RND after he dared them to. This tells me they are not Trinitarian despite what the General Conference says.
http://christianforums.com/t6896321&page=9
Pythons, it's an incorrect generalization that Trad SDA's don't believe that Jesus is God the same way the Father is God, or that they reject the Trininty. My fellow Adventists are like Jews when it comes to the Trinity- "Two Jews=three opinions."The thread starts to go into meltdown around post #85. Trinity rejection. I'm convinced the Trad SDA do not believe Jesus is God the same way God is God. There is no other way as zero Trad Adventists came to straighten out RND after he dared them to. This tells me they are not Trinitarian despite what the General Conference says.
http://christianforums.com/t6896321&page=9
I have noticed that in the old forum also. Many TSDA's would not speak up if they disagreed with a vocal TSDA. It is therefore easy to see how someone can get the wrong idea and make generalizations. But that is not really the fault of the person who sees no one correct or counter an opinion, it was a failing of those TSDA's on the forum.Pythons, it's an incorrect generalization that Trad SDA's don't believe that Jesus is God the same way the Father is God, or that they reject the Trininty. My fellow Adventists are like Jews when it comes to the Trinity- "Two Jews=three opinions."
I once heard a Roman Catholic theologian say something about the Trinity that I think is right on. He said that it is a mystery, and we human beings are too limited to fully comprehend it. I agree with Stormy. Most of us are reticent to debate the specifics where there's enough information.
The other reason nobody came to RND's defense is that some of his arguments were off base. RND's opinions shouldn't be taken as official SDA doctrine- he was on thin ice trying to prove his private point of view. I PM'd RND and told him to drop it, but he didn't listen to me.
Pythons, it's an incorrect generalization that Trad SDA's don't believe that Jesus is God the same way the Father is God, or that they reject the Trininty. My fellow Adventists are like Jews when it comes to the Trinity- "Two Jews=three opinions."
I once heard a Roman Catholic theologian say something about the Trinity that I think is right on. He said that it is a mystery, and we human beings are too limited to fully comprehend it. I agree with Stormy. Most of us are reticent to debate the specifics where there's enough information.
The other reason nobody came to RND's defense is that some of his arguments were off base. RND's opinions shouldn't be taken as official SDA doctrine- he was on thin ice trying to prove his private point of view. I PM'd RND and told him to drop it, but he didn't listen to me.
I like to think of the trinity as the forms of water: ice, liquid water, and steam. If you have an encounter with any of these forms, you're really still talking about water.
If I have overstepped my bounds by this contribution to the conversation, just PM me and I'll gladly delete this. I don't want to step on any toes!
Just reading some of that thread now. Wow, I can't believe how clumsy RND sounds here.
It would have accomplished more if you had done so publicly but you did not want to take the legs out from under a fellow Trad. Again we see how the interests of the group tends to trump any effort at seeking better understanding. (Note I did not refer to truth. The less we speak of having the truth the better for all.)I PM'd RND and told him to drop it, but he didn't listen to me.
Tell it like it is, Brother.It would have accomplished more if you had done so publicly but you did not want to take the legs out from under a fellow Trad. Again we see how the interests of the group tends to trump any effort at seeking better understanding. (Note I did not refer to truth. The less we speak of having the truth the better for all.)
do you have something from Amazing facts to back up your perception. I don't necessarily doubt it but find it hard to believe they will say anything flat out that would lead one to your impression.I wish I could have viewed it this way. To me it seemed he was very certain. It was a combination of some very early heritical views in the first few hundred years of Christianity. I'm willing to bet he purchased some DVD's from the Amazing Discoveries website. Those folks there flat out say the Trinity is the wine of Babylon.
If Christ is less then the Catholic Trinity claims He is then it taints how one views sin and Salvation. I mean no offense here when I say this but after looking at it I feel the old school type SDA's built their system of belief on Prophecy instead of starting with the basics. The logic I used with RND is Catholicism 101 Scripture and logic it wasn't some type of high end theology.
A person can't wake up one day and determine they are going to be a plumber and start at the level of a professional, it's graduated steps because if there is a simple step missed it will always cause problems down the road.
do you have something from Amazing facts to back up your perception. I don't necessarily doubt it but find it hard to believe they will say anything flat out that would lead one to your impression.
RC_NP said:The most common view in Adventism is that which Mankin gave. Three individuals working toward the same goal or united by their love for each other. I view that as Tri-theism. It is certainly against the Early churches conferences which said they were the same substance Their was a big debate about one word and a difference of one letter which in effect meant they were of like substance vs. the same substance. The Shema sort of makes it a necessity that it is the same substance and that was the conferences decision.
but then the problem of orthodoxy becomes we accept something and we don't know why so in many Christians the Trinity because they say 3 persons becomes a unity of purpose rather then a unity of their very substance.
RC_NP said:I think understanding the Godhead will help in all other understanding of God I don't think it is at all a salvation issue or even an essential. Just recently Neal Morse who now does Christian music is not classed as a Christian music section because he is semi-arian or arian in his views. The guy is clearly Christian in my view. But because he does not fit the orthodoxy Christianity Today had to define him by their orthodoxy. Our problem is that for many Christians we don't take the time to reason out our philosophy of religion instead simply accept creeds or church traditions. In the worse cases people just say forget reason and go by faith. Faith then becomes what you already believe or someone tells you to believe.
You can email them, ask them if they used to have a discussion board and if they remember a poster named pythons who had a lengthy discussion on Church Authority and another discussion on the Trinity. They sell a DVD about how the Trinity is the wine of Babylon and many of their arguments were visible in RND's posts.
Even faster, just email them and ask if the Trinity is Biblical. I'm sure you will get a fast answer.
Y
I think I know what you mean. Ellen White claimed that Satan was next to Christ (both were arch-angels) and because Jesus was promoted Satan got really mad. Trinitarian reasoning follows that God is One therefore God is of one Substance and because arch-angels could not be of the same substance as God then they would or could not be God no matter how "like unto" God they are.
RC_NP said:Not quite right, EGW thought Jesus pre-incarnate was deity however the pre-incarnate Jesus appeared to be an angel, Michael the Archangel so that then it appeared that God was promoting Jesus as Michael unfairly at least to Satan. It is based upon the idea that angels needed to see God like humans needed to see God, in their own form. Kind of a continuation of the whole Michael story, with the how and why's added but the how and why's caused all the trouble and solved nothing because there is no reason to think that angels cannot experience God first hand and the status of Michael caused Satan to be jealous. So it is really a whole bunch of mythology about Michael and Satan and other angels.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?