| Author | Message | ||
| Cloudwatcher Registered user Username: Cloudwatcher Post Number: 162 Registered: 5-2009 |
Would someone explain to me (or refer me to where it is explained) how Adventism defines/explains the Trinity differently than evangelical Christians do? I know the difference is subtle, but I'm not sure I quite grasp it... the whole concept of the Trinity is hard to grasp on its own, even more when you're trying to wrap your mind around what it isn't.... Has there been a Proclamation article about this? I couldn't find one in the topical index. Thanks in advance for your help. | ||
| Bskillet Registered user Username: Bskillet Post Number: 754 Registered: 8-2008 |
Jeremy has a fantastic website exactly for this purpose: Cult Or Christian | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 11620 Registered: 12-2003  |
Yes--I'd go to Jeremy's website. It's comprehensive, and it also contains audio clips from a wide variety of Adventist pastors referring to the Trinity from their Adventist perspectives. Colleen | ||
| Doc Registered user Username: Doc Post Number: 600 Registered: 2-2003  |
Thanks for bringing up this subject. I have started to read what Jeremy wrote, and I decided to check out what the Hungarian version of the fundamental beliefs says. The SDA site gives a translation of the American church's list, and basically says the same thing - "a unity of three persons". I also checked the Christian Advent Fellowship beliefs - this is the Hungarian breakaway group which runs the popular Bible school here. They have a shorter list of 14 fundamentals, at least that is all they say on their website. They do not mention Ellen White, though they sure believe in her, they are historic Adventists. Anyway, their version's second point is as follows (in translation): 2. The person of God God is our Creator and Sustainer. The universe is his creation and his property, as is our Earth and within it, we humans. "He created the world with his wisdom, stretched out the heavens with his understanding", he called everything into being and life with his mere word and will (Jer. 10:12; Rm. 4.17). Even today, "he upholds all things with the word of his power" (Heb. 1:3). It is good news for us that this powerful God, on whom everything in the universe depends, is morally perfect. "God is love" (Deut. 32:4; 1Jn 4:8). The three divine persons - the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit - are perfectly one in character, purpose and in all their work. They are also identical in divine attributes and in authority. The perfect unity of the three divine persons in and of itself proclaims that God is love. I don't know about you guys, but that sounds even worse to me than the SDA version. Or maybe just clearer on what the real situation is. Adrian | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 3375 Registered: 10-2004  |
"Or maybe just clearer on what the real situation is." Bingo!  Jeremy | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 11634 Registered: 12-2003 |
Indeed, Jeremy is right about this... Colleen | ||
| Cloudwatcher Registered user Username: Cloudwatcher Post Number: 163 Registered: 5-2009 |
So, I read Jeremy's site and I'm still not clear on the differences... I need to study it more. I think I'll have to make a chart or something. | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 3382 Registered: 10-2004 |
Cloudwatcher, The differences may seem subtle, but the main difference is between two positions that are diametrically opposed. We have, at the basic levels: 1. The Christian (Trinitarian) view: One God (one indivisible divine spirit Being without parts), who exists as three distinct (but not separate) persons. 2. The SDA view (Tritheism): Three separate divine Beings (with physical bodies), who are "one" only in purpose, character, love, etc. As with everything else, the SDA position is basically "backwards" from the Christian view, and is a denial of monotheism. It is not one God (one divine being), but is instead a united group of three Gods (three divine beings), the same as the Mormon "Godhead" teaching. Jeremy | ||
| Cloudwatcher Registered user Username: Cloudwatcher Post Number: 165 Registered: 5-2009 |
subtle is an understatement...but I believe that the difference is meaningful and profound...that's why I'm determined to understand it and praying for that understanding. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 11657 Registered: 12-2003 |
Cloudwatcher, I understand. When I first began contemplating these details several years ago, I felt a bit confused at first...but I knew in a deep way that the difference was profound. I've begun to see that Adventism has subtly but persistently shaped this unbiblical view in a variety of ways. One that I had not directly considered as an Adventist but which always colored my thinking is that EGW says Jesus gave up omniscience, omnipotence, and omnipresence as a man. But Jesus was always God...and the God Jesus NEVER gave up those qualities. EGW says he knew what was in men's hearts because the Father and the Holy Spirit told Him. As God, however, He knew because He Was God. And Colossians 1:17-19 discusses how all the fullness of deity dwelt in Him bodily, and that through Him everything was made, and in Him all things hold together. A few years ago Richard came home from his men's Bible study led by Gary Inrig and said, "That text in Colossians? That was true ALWAYS, even while Jesus was in the tomb. Because the job of holding everything together was Jesus' particular role, there has never been a time when all creation did not hold together in Him." That moment was a paradigm shift of huge proportions. I have begun to see that the way Adventism taught Jesus was really un-godlike--except they use the right labels. But those labels have been defined by EGW, and Adventists don't see that their perceptions of the same words Christians use yield completely different ideas. God is faithful; He reveals Himself to us truthfully. Colleen | ||
| Cortney Registered user Username: Cortney Post Number: 182 Registered: 8-2006 |
Jeremy- you did an excellent/thorough job explaining the differences between the Christian Trinity and the Adventist Godhead. I honestly believe Adventist cannot be worshiping the same Jesus we do, mainly due to their unbiblical views on Jesus and the Trinity. EGW focused on Adventists attaining perfect character, like Christ, so it makes perfect sense why they would have a different perception of the Trinity, and a perception of an un-godlike Christ. Their Jesus can't be the Trinitarian Christ we worship, their Jesus had to overcome sin an temptation and give up His omnipotence and Holiness on Earth, just as good Adventist are to overcome sin perfectly, like Jesus. Adventists always say 'Jesus is my example', how especially true for them. An example. My question is how is the Adventist Jesus a sufficient sacrifice for the sins of man? With an Adventist view of Jesus and the Trinity (Godhead) it makes sense why they focus more on works of the Law rather then the simple grace we receive by faith in acceptance of Christ and His perfect/sufficient sacrifice on Calvary. As far as the Holy Spirit, I don't remember that really being a 'focus point' in Adventist discussions, sad considering denial of the Holy Spirit is the worse sin one could ever commit. | ||
| Patallen Registered user Username: Patallen Post Number: 99 Registered: 7-2010  |
It is my strong opinion that the SDA church is in some respects afraid of and/or don't have much use for the Holy Spirit. Adventism is very controlling and if their members knew how powerful the Holy Spirit could be in their everyday lives, HE would free them from the control of the church and thus, false doctrine. Adventism has rules for every aspect of a person's life including the bedroom (married couples aren't suppose to have sex on the Sabbath because they are indulging in their own pleasure). If the Holy Spirit were in control, people wouldn't feel obligated to return a 10% tithe on gross income PLUS all the other offerings they promote to fatten their coffers; people would feel free to worship on any day or all of them; people would feel free to choose what they want to eat and wear or where they can go, etc. If the Holy Spirit were in control, the church would take care of the poor among them instead of robbing them of a tenth of their fixed incomes. As I see it, the function of the Holy Spirit is adverse to what they want the people to do. The people are slaves to corporate leadership, the devil,and judging each other. They are a bunch of cookie-cutter Christians in bondage and don't even realize it. I, too, am studying Jeremy's site regarding the Trinity. Cloudwatcher is right, it's very subtle. I believed the Trinity as being three persons in One with separate functions but not three separate persons. I really didn't know that they had stripped Jesus of His omnipotence but I guess I should have, well I guess I shouldn't have because at the time I was not suspect of their erroneous teachings and deliberate deceit. One of the things I could never reconcile was the statement in the Desire of Ages about Jesus not being able to see beyond the portals of the tomb and He didn't see Himself coming forth from the grace as a victor (paraphrased). How could that be when He foretold His death and resurrection? Well, bottom line, I think they find the Holy Spirit intimidating because the Spirit won't sanction the rules they want the people to follow. It is the work of the Spirit to lead and guide us into all truth and the SDA church wants to claim that function. If I am going to be a slave, I'm going to be a love slave for Christ and Him only! Pat | ||
| Hec Registered user Username: Hec Post Number: 1331 Registered: 3-2009 |
I'm still feel very confused when people, like Cortney, say, " I honestly believe Adventist cannot be worshiping the same Jesus we do, mainly due to their unbiblical views on Jesus and the Trinity." If Jesus is a concept, then, yes, we could be worshiping different Jesus (concepts), but if Jesus is a person (God) then regardless of what concept we have, He is still that person. The blind men in the story of the elephant all had a different concept of the elephant. One thought it was a wall because he was touching the body; another thought it was a rope because he was touching the tail; yet another thought it was a hose because he was touching the trunk. Regardless of the concept the men had, when they referred to the elephant by whatever concept they had, they were still referring to the elephant because there was only one elephant. There is only one Jesus. Regardless of the concept we may have of him, we are worshiping Jesus unless there are more than one, and the Bible say that there is only one God. Hec | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 3388 Registered: 10-2004 |
Hec, Then how do you explain the following verse? "For if one comes and preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted, you bear this beautifully." (2 Corinthians 11:4 NASB.) Jeremy | ||
| Hec Registered user Username: Hec Post Number: 1335 Registered: 3-2009 |
Another Jesus and a different understanding of the one Jesus are two different things. Case history: EGW said that when Jesus moved from the Holy place to the most holy place, Satan went into the Holy Place and was answering the prayers of the so called Christians (the ones who had not accepted the Adventist message). We have criticize her for that, saying that Satan cannot answer the prayers that are made to Jesus. A SDA friend of mine got very ill. All organs shut down. Doctors said that he had hours to live. Hundreds of SDA started a prayer chain and a couple of months later, he is about ready to go back to work. Dr. said, is definitely a miracle because they could not do anything. My question is: The SDA were praying to Jesus (the one you say is another Jesus). Did Jesus answered their prayers or did "that other Jesus" answered their prayers? Or do we team up with the agnostics/atheists and say that he was going to be healed anyways and prayer had nothing to do with it? Hec | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 3390 Registered: 10-2004 |
Hec, You didn't answer my question. What do you think Paul was talking about when he said "one comes and preaches another Jesus"? Jeremy | ||
| Hec Registered user Username: Hec Post Number: 1337 Registered: 3-2009 |
Jeremy, The first sentence of my former post was an attempt to answer your question. Hec | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 3394 Registered: 10-2004 |
Yes, but what do you mean by that? Do you mean that the people Paul was talking about were preaching about a different historical person who was also named "Jesus"? Wouldn't that be a little far-fetched? Jeremy | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 11664 Registered: 12-2003 |
I understand what you are saying, Hec, but I've come to see that I didn't really have a different understanding of the "same" Jesus but I really thought the historical, real Jesus was no long omnipresent, was meeker and milder than the Father, was "less than" the Father, was exalted by the Father, and was a legitimate opponent of Satan. My Adventist Jesus was not Sovereign over all things, including evil. He had to conquer evil in his own life. I was unable to feel love for Jesus; I was actually uncomfortable with saying His name--and I realized that most adult Adventists were uncomfortable talking about "Jesus" but would, if necessary, refer to "Christ". "Jesus" had an insipid, sentimental sound, and it was embarrassing to talk about him. Now, Jesus is HUGE. He is almighty, all-powerful; my "Jesus" as an Adventist did not inspire trust and confidence. He was almost a demi-god. I believed I had the same Jesus; in retrospect, I didn't really know who He was. I believe that He was seeking me, however--and that's why I kept wanting to know who He really was and what was really true. But my own perception of Him was not as I have come to know Him. He wasn't powerful enough to ensure my salvation. Colleen | ||
| 1john2v27nlt Registered user Username: 1john2v27nlt Post Number: 125 Registered: 5-2009 |
I have copied & pasted my post from another thread on finding a new church because the discussion took a turn & my post really belongs here on the trinity. I have not yet visited Jeremy's site on this topic. I have been noting a number of allusions to the trinity in many discussions since I've been reading here at the forum. I have always believed God is ONE - like water, ice, steam are all forms of water. We say God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit - 3 in 1. Whatever that is. How can we totally comprehend it? God has a form that passed before Moses. God referred to His face (Ex 33:20 'But,' he said, 'you cannot see my face, for man shall not see me and live.'), talking with Moses face to face, but He was unseen. Then in Ex 33.23 God said 'Then I will take away my hand, and you shall see my back, but my face shall not be seen.' Sooo, God has a face & a back. Is that a form that could be visibly discerned? There is also this in Ex 24:9 'Then Moses and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and 70 of the elders of Israel went up. 10 And they saw the God of Israel. There was under his feet as it were a pavement of sapphire stone, like the very heaven for clearness. 11And he did not lay his hand on the chief men of the people of Israel, they beheld God, and ate and drank.' ESV The NLT renders vs 11 'And though Israel's leaders saw God, he did not destroy them.' The Bible says God has a face & a back & feet, and was seen by more than 70 whom He did not destroy. And we are told that God is spirit & those who worship Him must worship Him in spirit & in truth. John 4:24 Hec's reference to the blind men & the camel seems somewhat apropos. We are trying to understand what we cannot hardly imagine. I am not at the point yet in my transition to believe my salvation hangs on trinity vs tritheistic. (I want to let all the seminary Phds fight over that one!) As far as my family & friends go, that is far from being the biggest issue in sharing with them in my book. When I shared with strangers on vacation in CO I truly believed that SDAs taught God is TRINITY. And all my life as an SDA I never got that concept otherwise. On the other hand I also remember being taught that Jesus had to go to heaven so He could send the Holy Spirit who could be everywhere at once as Jesus no longer could because He forever was keeping His human body. Hmmm that may be questionable. I concede that someone might bring up the subject & we do need to know the truth. It's just that in my frame of reference this is not a biggie for those of us raised generationally SDA. I may be wrong. J9 |
