Author |
Message |
Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy
Post Number: 2772 Registered: 10-2004
| Posted on Monday, June 01, 2009 - 12:59 pm: | |
Well, my website is finally done! Here is the link: www.CultOrChristian.com I certainly don't expect anyone to read it all in one sitting! The content is in the hundreds of pages, depending on format. (The webpage can be printed on as "little" as 163 pages). Despite the length, I decided to keep the main study all on one page, at least for now. Just be forewarned that the page may take a while to load, especially on a dial-up connection, as it is over 1 MB in size. I don't feel that I'm a very good writer or that it is necessarily well-written, in general. It doesn't have flashy design. It is quite lengthy and it gets a bit repetitive at times. But I will say this: it does prove, once and for all, that the Seventh-day Adventist Church does not teach the Trinity! Here are just several samples of some of the most shocking quotes (the actual sources for the quotes can be found on my site):
quote:From an official PowerPoints (ages 10-14) SDA quarterly in 2008: "The us He is referring to is what we call the Godhead: the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit. Three Persons in one. And even though they work as a unit, they also have specific roles. It's like a shoe company. Each employee does a specific job: one makes the shoe soles, another makes the upper parts, another puts the parts together, another sells the shoes to shoe stores, but all are needed to make up the company. And they have one purpose—to work together to sell shoes. "In the same way, the Godhead works together to guide us as we live and work and study with family, friends, and one another." From a leading SDA scholar: "We noted that there are several OT texts indicating a plurality in God, as one God addresses another God." From the book The Trinity by three SDA scholars: "We could illustrate Wallace's point this way: My wife and I have been spouses since 'the beginning' of our marriage. We share the very same essence of 'married humanity' (I have dubbed it 'human spousehood') while maintaining our personal distinction as male and female and husband and wife. While we are different in our gender and spousal roles, we still share the same essential 'human spousehood.' Thus the following illustrative paraphrase of John 1:1: 'In the beginning of our marriage the woman [my wife, the human spouse] was with the man [me, the husband, the human spouse] and the woman [my wife] was of the same 'human spousehood' essence as the man [me, the husband].'" From the official NAD curriculum standards for SDA schools, in a brief overview of Grade 2 "Bible": "Godhead as creators" From the same document: "Understand that the God family — 'God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit' - work in perfect unity, yet are separate and unique beings" From a book by SDA scholar Dr. Arnold V. Wallenkampf: "God is a trinity. He is made up of three persons: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. GOD is the divine family name. As we as individuals belong to a certain family and carry a family name, so God has a family name. This name is GOD. As we as individuals in our respective families have individual or personal names, in addition to our family name, so each person in the Godhead, the Trinity, has an individual name. These are the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. "Although God is made up of Three Persons, we say that God is one, and we call ourselves monotheists. We feel justified in doing this because the three persons in the Godhead are one in purpose, thought, will, plans and intentions. [...] "Moses in speaking of God says 'our God.' In this text 'our God' could more correctly be translated by the plural 'our Gods.'" From an SDA theology professor: "There should be no doubt from a close study of the book of Revelation that God is a single, united family, working as a team for the administration of the universe and the salvation of this fallen race." From another SDA theology professor: "In fact, so accepted is the belief that God is creator that not all find it necessary to mention His name when talking about things created. [...] "A slight problem arises with those New Testament texts that appear to deviate from the First Testament passages and attribute creation to the pre-existent Christ, who is a separate entity from God the Father (John 1:3; Col 1:16; Heb 1:2). The problem is bridged when it is recognized that nowhere is Christ referred to as the Creator. John, Paul, and Hebrews all state that the world was made 'through' (dia) the Logos/Son. This highlights the pre-existent Son as a sort of middle-man in the process. Hebrews is irrefutably clear that God is the chief actor in creation (Heb 1:1f). The pre-human Son appears to be a part of a Divine creation team that God repeatedly addresses with the hortatory command, 'Let us . . .' This is the same team God addresses in Genesis 3:22 when He implies that Adam would gain Divine status if he were to eat from the tree of life. In some mysterious way, the pre-existent Divine Son had an intermediary role in the creation process, but God is the ultimate Creator. [...] "'Let us make man in our image . . . (and) likeness . . .' (Gen 1:26-27). On the sixth day of creation, God led the creation team in the creation of humans who were to be made in the divine image. It is commonly accepted that image and likeness refer more to the spiritual image of the Divine council than to any physical manifestation." From a couple of Doug Batchelor's radio program transcripts: "...you can find three distinct Individuals outlined in the Bible. [...] when Jesus was baptized is a good example where you can see they're three separate Entities." "So it's like water. You know water can be ice, water can be steam and water can be liquid. It's one thing, but it's three different forms. Well that's actually not a good illustration because God is three separate people." From Amazing Facts speaker Dennis Priebe: "If we want to defend the truth that there are three persons with the family name of God, it might be better to use the Biblical name Godhead, as Ellen White consistently did. [...] These are three gifts from three individual beings. [...] The Father even had to explain to angels the difference between Christ and Lucifer, since both had similar functions. If this could be misunderstood in heaven, it is easy to see why we have problems understanding the Godhead." From SDA scholar and seminary professor Dr. Jerry Moon: "In her earliest writings she differed from some aspects of traditional trinitarianism and in her latest writings she still strongly opposed some aspects of the traditional doctrine of the Trinity. (4) It appears, therefore, that the trinitarian teaching of Ellen White's later writings is not the same doctrine that the early Adventists rejected.11 Rather, her writings describe two contrasting forms of trinitarian belief, one of which she always opposed, and another that she eventually endorsed." From another SDA scholar: "What James and the other men were opposed to, we are just as opposed to as they were. Now, their solution to that, at that time, they didn't see any solution by retaining the Trinity concept, and getting rid of its distortions. But, in reality, we have been faithful to their commitment, and I know of nothing that they were objecting to, in objecting to Trinitarianism, that we have not also objected to." (Quotes taken from: http://www.cultorchristian.com/)
And no, I am not making any of these quotes up! Hehe. (To see more details/context/sources/ for these quotes, check out my website.) That last quote is just the most incredible admission I've ever seen that the SDA Church is anti-Trinitarian! In His service, Jeremy J. Graham Webmaster, CultOrChristian.com Email: contact@cultorchristian.com |
Seekinglight Registered user Username: Seekinglight
Post Number: 187 Registered: 3-2009
| Posted on Monday, June 01, 2009 - 1:14 pm: | |
Thank you, Jeremy and thank You, Jesus! I pray that many, many people will be educated and blessed by this site. Heading there now... |
Esther Registered user Username: Esther
Post Number: 491 Registered: 5-2004
| Posted on Monday, June 01, 2009 - 2:24 pm: | |
Jeremy... I headed to your sight to check out all your hard work...and all I can say is WOW! I don't know how you managed to pull all of that together. It's an enourmous collection of material and thought I only made it probably a few pages through it, seeing some of the quotes there all together was really powerful. I know that God will use all the hours you've poured into this site. |
River Registered user Username: River
Post Number: 4913 Registered: 9-2006
| Posted on Monday, June 01, 2009 - 4:33 pm: | |
Jere, I headed over there and it is extensive! Lot of good stuff that I can plow through, I just got off work and was too tired to read much, but I aim to spend considerable time there. Thanks for the extensive web site and thanks for sharing all your hard work. River |
Indy4now Registered user Username: Indy4now
Post Number: 533 Registered: 2-2008
| Posted on Monday, June 01, 2009 - 7:17 pm: | |
wow Jeremy!! ... I can't wait to dive into this. I have a hard time wrapping my mind around the "Trinity." (probably because of being brainwashed with EGW's view of the Trinity) I briefly read the paragraph where you wrote about their 1st fundamental belief. I also find a problem with their use of the word "co-eternal". Why not just use the word "eternal"? "Co-eternal" further separates the Godhead in their belief. ~vivian |
Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 9922 Registered: 12-2003
| Posted on Monday, June 01, 2009 - 9:20 pm: | |
Jeremy, this is fabulous! Having all these resources at one site emphasizes powerfully that we're not just "crazy" or misguided; Adventism absolutely is not Trinitarian. They can use whatever words they want to use in their public statements; internally, they teach and explain a concept that is three gods. It's exactly how I understood the Trinity--and no matter how people argue to the contrary, their Fundamental Belief statement does not tell the actual, internal truth. They believe in three beings who are separate and different. Thank you, thank you, Jeremy! Praying for you, Colleen |
Dennis Registered user Username: Dennis
Post Number: 1693 Registered: 4-2000
| Posted on Tuesday, June 02, 2009 - 8:56 am: | |
Jeremy, Excellent research! I highly applaud your efforts as being well done. As a former Methodist, Ellen White actually give up Trinitarianism in preference to her husband's Arianism. Dennis Fischer |
Jrt Registered user Username: Jrt
Post Number: 570 Registered: 10-2008
| Posted on Tuesday, June 02, 2009 - 10:20 am: | |
Ditto to what everyone else has said. Jeremy what you have put together is so comprehensive and so accurate - There is no way the denomination can refute what they teach internally. Great job! Keri |
Psalm107v2 Registered user Username: Psalm107v2
Post Number: 275 Registered: 10-2008
| Posted on Tuesday, June 02, 2009 - 3:44 pm: | |
Jeremy, Excellent A while back I ran into a group of former SDAs who left the church because they did not believe in the Trinity. I witnessed to them the same way I would a JW but. I stumbled across this fellow on youtube who has the title "Antitrinitarian" and bases his beliefs on the so-called SOP. He outright says EGW was not a trinitarian and goes point by point as to how she was not. I'm sure there are many common EGW passages that your website may have but for reference sake here is the link to one portion of this fellow's use of EGW's antitrinitarian statements http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QG_U5uX43-s Enoch |
8thday Registered user Username: 8thday
Post Number: 953 Registered: 11-2007
| Posted on Wednesday, June 03, 2009 - 7:51 am: | |
We met a woman in the Hebrew Roots who left Adventism because she had rejected the Trinity through her own "study". So odd how you can reject something you think someone is teaching and it's not even what they are saying. That really makes my brain hurt. AWESOME resource Jeremy! Thank you so much for your hard hard work and I hope you are richly blessed for this sacrifice of your time and energy for the truth. I know it will bless many people!! Sondra |
Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy
Post Number: 2773 Registered: 10-2004
| Posted on Wednesday, June 03, 2009 - 11:26 am: | |
Hi everyone, Thanks for all your feedback! Here is a great statement that I came across the other day from the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith:
quote:Chapter 2: Of God and of the Holy Trinity 1. The Lord our God is but one only living and true God; whose subsistence is in and of himself, infinite in being and perfection; whose essence cannot be comprehended by any but himself; a most pure spirit, invisible, without body, parts, or passions, who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; who is immutable, immense, eternal, incomprehensible, almighty, every way infinite, most holy, most wise, most free, most absolute; working all things according to the counsel of his own immutable and most righteous will for his own glory; most loving, gracious, merciful, long-suffering, abundant in goodness and truth, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin; the rewarder of them that diligently seek him, and withal most just and terrible in his judgments, hating all sin, and who will by no means clear the guilty. ( 1 Corinthians 8:4, 6; Deuteronomy 6:4; Jeremiah 10:10; Isaiah 48:12; Exodus 3:14; John 4:24; 1 Timothy 1:17; Deuteronomy 4:15, 16; Malachi 3:6; 1 Kings 8:27; Jeremiah 23:23; Psalms 90:2; Genesis 17:1; Isaiah 6:3; Psalms 115:3; Isaiah 46:10; Proverbs 16:4; Romans 11:36; Exodus 34:6, 7; Hebrews 11:6; Nehemiah 9:32, 33; Psalms 5:5, 6; Exodus 34:7; Nahum 1:2, 3 ) 2. God, having all life, glory, goodness, blessedness, in and of himself, is alone in and unto himself all-sufficient, not standing in need of any creature which he hath made, nor deriving any glory from them, but only manifesting his own glory in, by, unto, and upon them; he is the alone fountain of all being, of whom, through whom, and to whom are all things, and he hath most sovereign dominion over all creatures, to do by them, for them, or upon them, whatsoever himself pleaseth; in his sight all things are open and manifest, his knowledge is infinite, infallible, and independent upon the creature, so as nothing is to him contingent or uncertain; he is most holy in all his counsels, in all his works, and in all his commands; to him is due from angels and men, whatsoever worship, service, or obedience, as creatures they owe unto the Creator, and whatever he is further pleased to require of them. ( John 5:26; Psalms 148:13; Psalms 119:68; Job 22:2, 3; Romans 11:34-36; Daniel 4:25, 34, 35; Hebrews 4:13; Ezekiel 11:5; Acts 15:18; Psalms 145:17; Revelation 5:12-14 ) 3. In this divine and infinite Being there are three subsistences, the Father, the Word or Son, and Holy Spirit, of one substance, power, and eternity, each having the whole divine essence, yet the essence undivided: the Father is of none, neither begotten nor proceeding; the Son is eternally begotten of the Father; the Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son; all infinite, without beginning, therefore but one God, who is not to be divided in nature and being, but distinguished by several peculiar relative properties and personal relations; which doctrine of the Trinity is the foundation of all our communion with God, and comfortable dependence on him. ( 1 John 5:7; Matthew 28:19; 2 Corinthians 13:14; Exodus 3:14; John 14:11; 1 Corinthians 8:6; John 1:14,18; John 15:26; Galatians 4:6 )
There is simply no comparision between this wonderful doctrine and the teaching of Adventism! Also, I wanted to post a couple of quotes from Christian scholars that might be helpful, with regard to the Trinity. This first one is a quote that I found online from Systematic Theology by Louis Berkhof (Reformed systematic theologian):
quote:"There is in the Divine Being but one indivisible essence. God is one in His essential being, or constitutional nature... In this one divine being there are three Persons or individual subsistences, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit... To denote these distinctions in the Godhead, Greek writers generally employed the term "hupostasis, while Latin authors used the term persona... The schoolmen employed the word subsistentia. The variety of the terms used points to the fact that their inadequacy was always felt. It is generally admitted that the word "person" is but an imperfect expression of the idea. In common parlance it denotes a separate rational and moral individual, possessed of self consciousness, and conscious of his identify amid all changes. Experience teaches that where you have a person, you also have a distinct individual essence. Every person is a distinct and separate individual, in whom human nature is individualized. But in God there are no three individuals alongside of and separate from, one another, but only personal self distinctions within the Divine essence which is not only generically, but also numerically one. Consequently many preferred to speak of three hypostaces in God, three different modes, not of manifestation, as Sabellius taught, but of existence or subsistence. Thus Calvin says: "By person, then, I mean a subsistence in the Divine essence..."
And here is a quote from Alister McGrath's Christian Theology: An Introduction, on Google Books, which says it is "one of the most widely used textbooks in Christian theology."
quote:"The three persons of the Trinity are distinct, yet not divided (distincti non divisi), different yet not separate or independent of each other (discreti non separati)."
Also, here is a quote from the official website of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod:
quote:"The Christian Church confesses that there is one God, not three; that there are three distinct Persons in the Godhead, and that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God. One God, three Persons. "The Persons are distinct but not separate: God is One and undivided. There are not three 'parts' of God or a 'threefold' God. God is triune--three Persons in one God--not 'triplex' (made up of three gods). [...]" --http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1518&cuTopic_topicID=399&cuItem_itemID=22530
Jeremy |
Raven Registered user Username: Raven
Post Number: 1017 Registered: 7-2004
| Posted on Wednesday, June 03, 2009 - 6:25 pm: | |
Wow - that's an impressive, thorough statement on the Trinity from the Baptists, and solidly rooted in Biblical teaching! Now why can't the SDA's be as thorough? They use the excuse that it's too much of a mystery to even try. But if they did, it would be so obvious (and stated all in one place) how unorthodox it is. Great website, Jeremy - thanks for your hard work on it! |
Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 9935 Registered: 12-2003
| Posted on Wednesday, June 03, 2009 - 9:27 pm: | |
Ditto Raven! Those are great quotes, Jeremy. You do amazing research. Colleen |
Gcfrankie Registered user Username: Gcfrankie
Post Number: 461 Registered: 1-2007
| Posted on Thursday, June 04, 2009 - 9:42 am: | |
Great website Jeremy. I have not had a chance to read it all. It is so nice to have everything in one place and showing the horrible teachings of egw and the church who foster these beliefs on their members and new people. Gail |
Hec Registered user Username: Hec
Post Number: 234 Registered: 3-2009
| Posted on Thursday, June 04, 2009 - 12:50 pm: | |
1=1+1+1 One God=three persons. Distinct yet not divided. Distinct but not divided. One and undivided. Different, yet not separate or independent. Is it like a schizophrenic person? (no irreverence intended, just trying to understand how there are three in one.) The Baptist statement seems to prioritize the "Divine Being"
quote:the Father is of none, neither begotten nor proceeding; the Son is eternally begotten of the Father; the Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son; all infinite, without beginning, therefore but one God, who is not to be divided in nature and being, but distinguished by several peculiar relative properties and personal relations;
Like this:
- Father is of none, neither begotten nor proceeding.
- the Son is eternally begotten of the Father.
- the Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son
Even though it makes a gigantic effort to say that they are the same in every aspect, it still seems to be prioritizing the "three". Hec |
Helovesme2 Registered user Username: Helovesme2
Post Number: 2030 Registered: 8-2004
| Posted on Thursday, June 04, 2009 - 12:59 pm: | |
That 'formula' sounds distinctly like what is stated in the Athanasian Creed where the early church was trying to pin down what the Trinity is. The specific section is this: quote:# The Father is made of none, neither created nor begotten. # The Son is of the Father alone; not made nor created, but begotten. # The Holy Spirit is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.
(Message edited by helovesme2 on June 04, 2009) |
Stix Registered user Username: Stix
Post Number: 10 Registered: 5-2008
| Posted on Friday, June 05, 2009 - 6:53 am: | |
What is a good definition of the word "begotten" since this is not a common word? I presume "proceeding" to mean "comes from". Is that reasonable? How could something "proceed" from me without using any of my creative abilities? This all seems to be a giant word puzzle of some kind. Why can't I simply believe in God without all of this over analysis? |
Helovesme2 Registered user Username: Helovesme2
Post Number: 2031 Registered: 8-2004
| Posted on Friday, June 05, 2009 - 8:27 am: | |
On the word begotten: “Only Begotten” in the Greek is 'monogenus'. Mono means 'one' and genus means 'species' or 'type' or 'kind'. It is worth noting that the word is monogenus, not monogenesis (which would mean came from one source, rather than of a unique kind). So far as I've been able to understand, just as God never had a beginning, Jesus (God the Son) never had a beginning. He was always there 'from eternity' not somehow 'created or made' back in eternity. There is a whole series on the Trinity back the posts here done, I think, by Chris, that give a thorough grounding in what the Bible says 'only-begotten' among other things. Perhaps someone will come along and link to it. As to the second part of your post: We were taught that our logic (or our careful perception/reception of the truth) was going to keep us from being deceived. That probably has something to do with why it is tempting to over analyze things: we hope by analysis to avoid missing the truth. The problem with trusting our logic to the exclusion of other sources of knowledge is that logic is that logic can be tricked just as readily (and, some will argue, more readily) than our intuition. It seems that Satan himself can appear as an angel of light, and can, at least for short periods, seem to convince us "logic and feeling' that his way is right (though even then, God does not leave us without a way of escape). This is why our trust can't be in ourselves. I don't know about you, but when I realized that even my best efforts had not kept me from wrong ideas about all sorts of things, I felt pretty scared and vulnerable. It was then at a friend gave me some sound advice: God is not out to trick you. Ask Him to clear away the deceptions and half-truths, and to reveal Himself to you. He will not give you a serpent or a stone when you ask for bread. He delights to give good gifts to you even more than you delight to give good things to your children. Put your identity, your beliefs, your everything in His hands (yes, it is a kind of death), and trust Him to give you 'everything that pertains to life and godiliness.' I can testify that He will do 'more than you could ask or think.' Some questions He will answer so thoroughly you'll wonder why you didn't see it before. Other questions will fade into insignificance when you, in getting a glimpse of Reality, see that they are about as sensical as asking what shape yellow is. What's really cool is that He doesn't wait for you to 'get it right' before accepting you. He's got no 'gentleman's pride' that requires you to address him only certain ways. Instead He's crossed the abyss, come down to the depths where each of us are, and is waiting with open arms for our willingness to trust Him to carry us up to the heights. Blessings, Mary |
Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy
Post Number: 2774 Registered: 10-2004
| Posted on Friday, June 05, 2009 - 11:31 am: | |
Stix, The Nicene Creed says:
quote:"We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one Being with the Father."
The Son is not created or "made." He is the eternal God of the universe who has life in Himself. The fact that He is "begotten" of the Father is something which is "eternal"--meaning in eternity/"timelessness," outside of time, space, or matter. God is one eternal, indivisible Spirit. There never was a time when the Son was not. For more on this, see here and here. Jeremy (Message edited by jeremy on June 05, 2009) |
Bobalou Registered user Username: Bobalou
Post Number: 58 Registered: 2-2005
| Posted on Friday, June 05, 2009 - 2:07 pm: | |
I guess I must have had my head in the sand when I was an Adventist. I have not read any of the explanations by SDAs for the Trinity that Jeremy found. I have always believed the same as the Baptist Confession and most traditional Christian teaching on the Godhead. What did you all believe when you were Adventists? To say the least, I am little confused, Bob |
|