| Author |
Message |
Jrt
Registered user
Username: Jrt
Post Number: 596
Registered: 10-2008
| | Posted on Monday, June 08, 2009 - 6:54 pm: |     |
Jeremy,
Thank you for your further post. And your links.
I just read them.
This one sentence that you bolded - just strikes me as SO heretical! It is almost scarey!
It is true that the Council of Nicaea and the Council of Constantinople did make declarations that we must now reject because they disagree with Scripture.
This thoroughly amazes me.
Jeremy ... I may go to email - but I have some thoughts running through my mind ... I'm going to take a few days to pray about it ... but I may email you about something that is whirling around in my mind. It may be helpful for further clarification.
It is late tonight - so I don't think I can dig through adequately the syllabus again ... I will also try to pull up my notes from the class too, and see if there is more stuff.
I SO appreciate your research and thoughts! This is so affirming as Colleen said that as an Adventist I really did have a different understanding of God and it was not Biblical or evangelical.
Thanks,
Keri |
Jeremy
Registered user
Username: Jeremy
Post Number: 2788
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Monday, June 08, 2009 - 7:45 pm: | |
Thanks so much for all the encouragement, everyone. I also appreciate your solid defenses of the faith on the CARM forums, Rick. I agree about the "pre-Trinitarian" comment.
I emailed Matt Slick about the website, and also included some links to some of the previous discussions on CARM about the SDA "Trinity" (although some of those might be deleted since they are "pruning" the old threads).
Jeremy
(Message edited by jeremy on June 08, 2009) |
Jeremy
Registered user
Username: Jeremy
Post Number: 2789
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Monday, June 08, 2009 - 7:54 pm: | |
Also, the same professor who made the "pre-Trinitarian" commment (John Reeve) also made the following comments during the panel discussion at the end of the 2006 ATS "Trinity Symposium":
quote:[John W. Reeve] "Let me take these questions. I have two questions in my hands that are history questions, and they're both essentially the same question. I will read them both out, and then answer them together. 'If the Trinity was not made clear until 381 A.D., what happened to Trinitarian orthodoxy before 381 A.D.?' The simple question--I mean the simple answer to that is there was none, before 381 A.D., there really was none, as far as Trinitarian orthodoxy. It was up for grabs. Orthodoxy means that it's been defined. It was not defined until then. What happened to the beliefs? Well, if you're trying to suggest that the disciples had a wonderful understanding of Father, Son, and Spirit, as being three distinct persons and one--in one--I believe that that did exist, in the mind of Christ, in the mind of the disciples, etc. I think that Paul had that concept. Was it communicated clearly and worked out systematically? No. I do not think that Paul set out to make sure that the readers of his letters were understanding a systematized Trinity. So there was no orthodox Trinity doctrine until 381, and then, I think even before 381, it starts getting messed up. I really like Nazianzus's five theological orations in many ways. They are the five definitive orations that both got him to be the chair--uh, the bishop of Constantinople, which made him the chair of the Council of Constantinople in 381, but in those five theological orations are the seeds of the falling apart, in my opinion, of the orthodox understanding of the Trinity. There are the seeds of the subordinationism that Augustine filled out in the eternal procession, and the eternal generation. So, even before 381, the thing starts to fall apart, from my perspective, because they go beyond the Scripture, and the revelations of Scripture. So, 'What do you mean by orthodoxy?,' is the question I would send back.
[...] "The second part of that question: 'Origen's Trinity was not satisfactory, you said (meaning me). Who held the true Trinitarian view between 100 A.D. and 381 A.D.?' And the simple answer there, is: nobody that I know of."
http://atsjats.org/site/1/podcast/06_Trinity_Participants_Panel_Discussion.mp3
Jeremy |
Jeremy
Registered user
Username: Jeremy
Post Number: 3018
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 16, 2009 - 10:10 pm: | |
Hey guys,
I just wanted to let you know about a few updates on my site.
I've added page numbers to the main page at http://www.cultorchristian.com/ to make it more convenient, especially to reference something or to keep track of where you are at when reading through it. (The page numbers correspond to the page numbers when printing the webpage in the Firefox browser.)
I've also added a page collecting some of the quotes from SDA scholars which admit that Adventism teaches a different "Trinity" doctrine than orthodox Christianity: http://www.cultorchristian.com/sdaadmissions.html
I also added a page (awhile back) with a collection of some helpful Christian quotes on the Trinity: http://www.cultorchristian.com/christiantrinity.html
I've also added a PDF version of the main page, which can be found here: http://www.cultorchristian.com/sdatrinity.pdf (However, not all of the links will work in the PDF version, and neither will the automatic RefTagger Bible reference software.)
I've also published the main page on Scribd, here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/19443559/Does-Seventhday-Adventism-Teach-the-Trinity
Jeremy |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 10411
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, September 17, 2009 - 5:01 pm: | |
Good work, Jeremy!
Colleen |
Raven
Registered user
Username: Raven
Post Number: 1076
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Friday, September 18, 2009 - 7:49 pm: | |
In Jeremy's sdaadmissions link above, this quote jumped out at me:
quote:We do not accept the traditional Platonic dualistic worldview and metaphysics that were foundational to the church fathers' theology of the Trinity, one of these being the concept of the immortality of the soul." (From an article by Denis Fortin, Professor of Theology and Dean of the Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary (at Andrews University), entitled "God, the Trinity, and Adventism: An Introduction to the Issues," published in the Spring 2006 Journal of the Adventist Theological Society
The doctrine of the Trinity is describing the nature of God, not the nature of people. And yet it sounds like this quote is saying SDAs reject the traditional understanding of the Trinity because it is incompatible with the SDA understanding of the soul. That sounds like SDAs don't believe God is Spirit. I know EGW speaks of God the Father having a physical body, but is there any evidence the current official SDA position denies God is Spirit, or that they currently teach God has a physcial body?
I just don't see that the immortality of the person's soul has anything to do with the concept of the Trinity. It should be possible for an SDA to believe God is Spirit, but people don't have a soul that continues beyond death--are those two ideas really that closely tied together that you have to have both or neither? |
Jeremy
Registered user
Username: Jeremy
Post Number: 3026
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Friday, September 18, 2009 - 10:28 pm: | |
Raven,
I would say that they are connected in the sense that a materialist philosophy would exclude both. And in Adventism in particular, both the denials that God is a spirit and that humans have spirits are part of their foundational theology. It sounds like Denis Fortin is saying that Christians came up with the idea that God is one spirit being due to their belief that humans have spirits...or something like that.
And yes, the SDAs still teach currently that God has a body. I have a section about it on my website here, which contains quotes both from EGW and from current Adventism. There are also quite a few other quotes, in the main section of my site, which also include references to God having a body, including from Denis Fortin's article (starting on page 95 of my main page) and Jerry Moon's article (starting at page 74 on my main page).
Jeremy
(Message edited by Jeremy on September 18, 2009) |
Raven
Registered user
Username: Raven
Post Number: 1077
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, September 19, 2009 - 9:28 am: | |
Thanks, Jeremy - amazing quotes! It's beyond me how the SDA church is not in most cult lists; they really should be considered in the same category as the Mormons. |
Skeeter
Registered user
Username: Skeeter
Post Number: 335
Registered: 12-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, September 19, 2009 - 9:52 am: | |
As SDA I always heard that God has a physical body because of the Genesis creation
"Let us make man in our own image".
Now I hear that God is purely spirit and does not have a "physical" body.
So.. why is it not possible that it could be both ?
Can He have a physical body and also be spirit ?
Otherwise how can we be made in "His image" ?
Is that "image" only the spiritual portion of us ?
God is God and as such personally I think it is VERY possible that He has both a physical body that can be seen and touched ( body, head, arms , legs, fingers, toes) and ALSO be spirit.
With God all things are possible and I dont think we should limit God by saying He is comprised of ONLY Spirit..
If we upon the ressurrection of our earthly bodies are to be changed to be like His..."raised incorruptable" and we are told that we will know our loved ones in Heaven, we will be able to recognize each other... why ressurrect our earthly bodies if we are not to live in them in Heaven +/or the new earth ?
After Jesus ressurrected He was (in my understanding of it) BOTH Spiritual AND physical. People could SEE Him and recognize Him, they walked and talked and ate with Him, TOUCHED Him,, and yet He made appearances seemingly out of nowhere into and out of groups of people.
Since He was the "firstfruits" of the ressurrection process... it is just my feeling (and of course I may be mistaken) but it for some reason just seems to make sense to believe that we will be BOTH spiritual and physical like Jesus was when He was ressurrected.
Is there anything in the Bible to tell us that He upon going back to Heaven became purely Spirit and no longer has a physical body ?
Since Jesus IS God, as is the Father and the Holy Spirit.. is it really too far fetched to believe that THEY as God are made up of BOTH physical AND spiritual essence ? |
Jeremy
Registered user
Username: Jeremy
Post Number: 3027
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, September 19, 2009 - 2:23 pm: | |
Skeeter,
When it says in Genesis 1 that God created man in His image, it uses the Hebrew word bara (which is the word used for creating out of nothing). This refers to man's spirit. In Genesis 2, when it speaks of how God "formed" man out of dust (speaking of man's body), the Hebrew word yatsar is used. God is spirit (John 4:24), and it is our spirit that is made in His image.
quote:So.. why is it not possible that it could be both ?
Can He have a physical body and also be spirit ?
That is exactly the argument that the Mormons use. They say that God could be a spirit and yet have a body. But this argument has always been rejected by orthodox Christianity, including in the historical creeds and confessions of the Church. God does not have a body or parts.
Humans have a spirit. We are physical-spiritual beings. But John 4:24 says that God is a Spirit--or more literally, "God is spirit." That is His essence/substance/nature. That is "what" He is. He is spirit. He is an infinite and pure Spirit. And Jesus very clearly says in Luke 24:39 that, "a spirit does not have flesh and bones."
As far as our resurrection bodies, yes, of course we will live in them in heaven and the new earth!
Regarding Jesus' human body, yes He will forever be fully human and have a human body. But that is completely different than saying that He has a "divine" body. God does not have a body by nature. That is totally different than Him condescending to become a human to redeem us.
One reason why this issue is so important is because if you say that Jesus and the Father (and also the Holy Spirit) each have their own separate bodies, then that necessitates a belief in polytheism (two or more separate, physical, divine beings). This is the foundational problem in Adventism which necessitated their belief in polytheism--originally in the form of bitheism (two gods) and now tritheism (three gods). But, according to the Bible, God is one spirit being.
Also, another problem would be, if God is physical, what happened to Jesus "divine" body at the Incarnation when He became a human with a human body?
Jeremy
(Message edited by Jeremy on September 19, 2009) |
Skeeter
Registered user
Username: Skeeter
Post Number: 340
Registered: 12-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, September 19, 2009 - 4:21 pm: | |
Jeremy, Ok, I am still confused because you said :
"Regarding Jesus' human body, yes He will forever be fully human and have a human body. But that is completely different than saying that He has a "divine" body. God does not have a body by nature. That is totally different than Him condescending to become a human to redeem us. "
Jesus is God, and He "will be forever fully human and have a human body". I understand that He is both fully human AND fully God.... and He did not before coming here have a human body, but Jesus took on our human form so he could come to redeem us,, right ?
But if He will forever have a human body.. then doesnt that physically (not spiritually) separate Him from the Father and the HS?
If not, how could it not if He has a human form, but God the Father and the HS are both purely spirit ?
You are most probably right, but I am having a hard time understanding it.
Francie |
Dennis
Registered user
Username: Dennis
Post Number: 1803
Registered: 4-2000
| | Posted on Saturday, September 19, 2009 - 8:42 pm: | |
The Gospel of John was written to persuade people to believe in Jesus. When the Word became flesh, the Incarnation, this indicates that the Infinite became finite, the Eternal was conformed to time, the invisible became visible, the supernatural One reduced Himself to natural. We are "born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor the will of man, but of God" (John 1:13 ESV). To God alone belongs the glory!
Dennis Fischer |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 10418
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 19, 2009 - 11:23 pm: | |
Francie, Jesus is a singular miracle. The fact of His incarnation is astonishing because He never stopped being God—being pure spirit—yet He took on human flesh for our sakes. Think about it—He will always be different from us: fully God, eternal, almighty, sovereign, King of Kings and Lord of Lords—but for our sake he has taken on a human body. He is the One Mediator between God and men (1 Timothy 2:5). He is the One Mediator because He is both God and man. We can't understand how, but that is the miracle that saves us. Jesus fully represents God and fully represents man because He is both.
The fact that He has a body does not separate Him from the Father and the Spirit. He is fully God. Moreover, because of His incarnation, He gives us a completely new heritage when we place our faith in Him. He gives us birth by the Holy Spirit. The omnipotent, infinite God literally indwells our still-mortal bodies. We are adopted by God and transferred into His family and kingdom (Romans 8:14-16; Col 1:13).
Jesus prayed before His crucifixion that we would be one as He and the Father are one In John 17:20-21 He prays, "I do not ask on behalf of these alone, but for those also who believe in Me through their word; that they may all be one; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me."
God is without limits. No mere physical creation can separate God from anything. Only our sin separates us from God—and God Himself became our sin so that we might become the righteousness of God (2 Cor 5:21).
Jesus' body did not separate Him in any way from God the Father or the Spirit. Moreover, His incarnation, death, and resurrection has made it possible for us to be reunited with God eternally.
When we understand that we have literal, immaterial spirits that actually know God, it helps us understand that Jesus' body can't separate Him from the Trinity. Our spirits are not merely life forces. They are the essence of ourselves (read 2 Cor 5:1-10). Our spirits are what are born dead in sin and come to life when God awakens us and calls us to faith. God's Spirit indwells us and brings our spirits to life, and we come to know God intimately.
1 Cor 1 and 2 explain that spiritual things are spiritually discerned, and it is only when we have the Holy Spirit that we understand God's truths. But when we do have God's Spirit, we literally "have the mind of Christ" (1 Cor 2:16).
Bodies are not antagonistic toward spirits. On the contrary, we are body and spirit, and Jesus has taken a body for the purpose of representing and identifying with us. He is God who took on flesh; we are humans who have been brought to life with the same life that raised Jesus from the dead (see Romans 8).
We have been made one with Him in Christ, and Jesus and the Father and the Holy Spirit are indivisible—while concurrently distinct Persons. It's a mystery that has not been fully revealed—but we live by faith, not sight.
Colleen |
Christo
Registered user
Username: Christo
Post Number: 159
Registered: 2-2008
| | Posted on Saturday, September 19, 2009 - 11:27 pm: | |
I saw a bumper sticker the other day that said " We are not humans having a spiritual experience, but we are spirit having a human experience."
Its so easy to get distracted by our human experience walking in the flesh, and forget to walk in the spirit.
Chris |
Skeeter
Registered user
Username: Skeeter
Post Number: 343
Registered: 12-2007
| | Posted on Sunday, September 20, 2009 - 3:11 pm: | |
Thank you Colleen :-)
I'm a little slow sometimes... but I'm getting there.:-)
Christo, I like that bumper sticker !
Sounds like another good T shirt idea... :-) |
Pegg
Registered user
Username: Pegg
Post Number: 398
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, September 20, 2009 - 5:08 pm: | |
Skeeter - This link is a study of what it means that we are created in the image of God. It does not speak to your question of the substance of God, but I think you'll enjoy it.
Pegg |
|
