| Author | Message | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 2885 Registered: 12-2003  |
Belva, The SDA church didn't have an official doctrinal statement that declared the Trinity until the early 1940's The current statement, which is even clearer, was written in 1980. According to George Knight's comments in the reprinted version of Questions on Doctrine (Knight is an SDA historian), there is a growing movement within the church to return to non-trinitarian views. This backlash is because of Ellen whose early publications (and later ones as well) did not declare the divinity of Jesus and even called him an angel. The early Adventists were decidely non-Trinitarian. True-blue, reactionary SDAs are tending to go backward toward those views. Interestingly, the Clear Word has many places where Blanco edited out clear references to Jesus' divinity and stressed his humanity. Verle Streifling wrote an articel about it in Proclamation a few years ago. Colleen | ||
| Loneviking Registered user Username: Loneviking Post Number: 377 Registered: 7-2000 |
Wasn't an entire copy of the book of Isaih found among the Dead Sea Scrolls? A 2000 year old copy that is virtually identical with the book we have today? How could Christians have written that copy? | ||
| Leigh Registered user Username: Leigh Post Number: 48 Registered: 2-2003 |
Yes! From EVIDENCE THAT DEMANDS A VERDICT pg. 58 by Josh McDowell: "The oldest complete Hebrew MSS (handwritten copies of Scripture)we possessed were from 900 AD on. How could we be sure of their accurate transmission since the time of Christ in 32 AD? Thanks to archaeolgy and the Dead Sea Scrolls, we now know. One of the scrolls found was a complete MS (handwritten copy of Scripture) of the Hebrew text of Isaiah. It is dated by paleographers around 125 BC. This MS is more than 1,000 years older than any MS we previously possessed. The impact of this discovery is the exactness of the Isaiah scroll (125 BC) with the Massoretic text of Isaiah (916 AD) 1,000 years later. This demonstrates the unusual accuracy of the copyists of the Scriture over a thousand- year period." | ||
| Freeatlast Registered user Username: Freeatlast Post Number: 442 Registered: 5-2002 |
Fragments of every book of the Bible were found, with the exception of Ruth or Esther (I forget which). | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 2889 Registered: 12-2003 |
I frankly have no idea how they explain the Dead Sea scrolls. Perhaps the rabbinical mishnah is "more reliable" to them than archaeology...I guess I can understand how a whole theology could become dependent upon extra-Biblical material...! Colleen | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 735 Registered: 7-2004 |
Thank you for affirming this information about Isaiah. In January my Bible Study Class will be embarking on an in-depth study of this marvelous book. We will be at it for five months, which hardly gives us enough time given the meatiness of the book, but we are all looking forward to this study. | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 736 Registered: 7-2004 |
Thank you for affirming this information about Isaiah. In January my Bible Study Class will be embarking on an in-depth study of this marvelous book. We will be at it for five months, which hardly gives us enough time given the meatiness of the book, but we are all looking forward to this study. | ||
| Lisa_boyldavis Registered user Username: Lisa_boyldavis Post Number: 95 Registered: 3-2005 |
I believe the reason SDA's are so venerable to false doctrines today is because nearly ALL of my friends and most of my family inside the church will clearly contradict different "suggestions" or "thus says the Lord's" from EGW, explaining away why it's ok to not wear dresses at certain lengths, eat certain things, etc... Since she's placed on an equal ground with the Bible there seems to be an almost reckless handling of the Scriptures as a result. Rather than seeing her as a false prophet, they put the Holy Scriptures in a dangerous position. The Bible says "Faith comes from hearing, and hearing FROM THE WORD OF GOD". People can nit pick the Bible if they want, but there is power in God's word, and I put my faith in Jesus Christ who upheld the validity of the Scripture. I will never do anything to put His Word in Harms way, because it's my faith that will be harmed, and faith for me is LIFE. I will not follow blindly, but will let the Holy Spirit teach me how to search the Scriptures to speak articulately regarding it's truths. I've also been in an SDA environment recently. We also attended our old church which is seen as being "progressive".. jewelry, etc... We couldn't help noticing how it really felt like the REBEL bunch... a large group of baby-booming rebels... close, yes! friendly, yes! bitter and rebellious, definitely! Then I go to my church, EVERY TIME THE PASTOR TALKS ABOUT THE CUP OF COMMUNION AS BEING THE CUP OF THE NEW COVENANT, I CRY. I think to myself, I'm past the deep emotion of gratitude for this freedom, but cry every time I hear those words anyway. I hope we never stop praying for our SDA loved ones' freedom in Christ. They'd not know what hit them if they were ever set free. God Bless their souls. Lisa | ||
| Lynne Registered user Username: Lynne Post Number: 75 Registered: 10-2005 |
Lisa - Yeah, you are right. I don't know what has hit me, I've been set free. My daughter said today, mommy, why are you running. I said I'm not, I'm just walking fast, I just FEEL GOOD! I haven't felt free for a long, long time. I was depressed and walked slow and snapped a lot at everyone with more frequency a couple of months ago. Keep praying. Praise God! | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 737 Registered: 7-2004 |
Dear Lynne, How beautifully you have described the sense of lightness that accompanies being set free of false doctrine and actually becoming acquainted with the liberating aspects of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Dance, sing, cry, laugh, and celebrate. In all of that you are praising God because we praise and worship Him when we are fully who and what we were created to be. Freedom is a very important thing to God. He risked the monster called sin being set loose when He declared freedom to be that important. He also prepared a failsafe for all of us who ended up being born into sin because of the abuse of freedom. It has been a joy to watch your blossom open up since it has been exposed to the sunshine of Grace. | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 1986 Registered: 3-2004  |
Lynne, Praise God for the change in you. Children say things as they see them and your daughter sees you as a Mom with more energy and tells you. Praise God for your freedom in Him. Thank you God for the changes you have made in Lynne and that you will continue to make in her. You are always awesome. Diana | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 2892 Registered: 12-2003 |
Lynne, Praise God! How wonderful to feel alive and light. You really are a new person. God is so faithful! Lisa, I understand that crying at communion. I still cry at certain comments similar to that one. I've also pondered that I'm way past that new, deep emotion of surprise and gratitude, but somehow that deep response hasn't stopped. I am realizing that it's not primarily emotional; it's spiritual. The part of me that knows Jesus deeply feels the mystery and the miracle of His death and resurrection. Becucase of Him, my spirit is alive. My spirit can actually praise Him because He has made me alive! He is actually in me--how amazing is that?! Praise God! Colleen | ||
| Lisa_boyldavis Registered user Username: Lisa_boyldavis Post Number: 100 Registered: 3-2005 |
Bondage is so heavy. Freedom is so light and alive. I know the difference. I've felt both. Praise The Lord of Creation, He has given you light feet. Praise the Father of freedom and of flight. You have passions to conquer, you have places to be. Praise the Father of movement, praise the God of happy feet! Praise the Father of Movement, Praise the God of Happy Feet! A little praise song God gave me to send your way. Lisa | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 1012 Registered: 10-2004  |
Belva, Those who are denying the truth about who Jesus is and who God is are simply following EGW and her various heretical statements regarding Jesus and the Godhead. And yes, SDAs from the beginning believed, and many still to this day believe, that Jesus was literally "begotten" from the Father at some point and that He is not eternal. In fact, up until 1980, the official SDA statement of beliefs did not state that Jesus or the Holy Spirit were eternal, and especially implied that Jesus was NOT eternal! Until 1980, their official statement read:
Notice that the Father is referred to as "Eternal," but not Jesus or the Holy Spirit. In fact, Jesus is called "the Son of the Eternal Father," implying that He Himself is NOT eternal! But contrast this with the Word of God, which never calls God the Father "the Eternal Father" but DOES call Jesus "the Eternal Father" (Isaiah 9:6)! Also notice that the Father is described as a separate "Being," not just a distinct person. And only the Father is said to be omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient, and "infinite in wisdom and love"! Also, while the Holy Spirit is called "the third person of the Godhead," He is also referred to as a "power." This was the heretical stance of the SDA cult until 1980, and many SDAs today hold various heretical beliefs about the Godhead, and many want the cult to return to its unBiblical roots regarding Jesus Christ and the Godhead. Jeremy | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 754 Registered: 7-2004 |
Thanks, Jeremy. I seem to recall shades of these various statements in my prior Adventist education and experiences. Jesus wasn't referred to as "The Son" until he assumed human incarnation. I remember the emphasis that was placed on Jesus' statement that he had to go away so that the Comforter could come, almost as though Jesus and the Holy Spirit cannot inhabit the same room at the same time. Like Clark Kent and Superman, are they supposed to be one and the same individual? If that is true then how was the Holy Spirit able to descend upon Jesus in Dove-form at His baptism? I'm not trying to be cute, but I remember being in second and third grade, or something like that, and having these types of confused thoughts. I had another teacher who was clear about the three person Godhead but there was still the image of three distinctly different beings. To tell you the truth, no matter how much I read about the Trinity it is still difficult for me to comprehend. I know that I am a three-dimensional being, so all of my understanding is based on a three-dimensional universe. I also know that God has infinite dimension, making him extremely difficult for a finite being to wrap their mind around, so I take the relationship of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit to each other through faith. I have for decades accepted that they, all three, are fully omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient -- and eternal. That reminds me of another thing. Doesn't Ellen White teach that when Jesus took on human incarnation he gave up omnipresence? That is why the Holy Spirit, Comforter, had to come to be with Christ's church. Where in scripture is there support for the notion that Jesus has been trapped in a human body for the remainder of eternity? Does anyone else recall that being a part of the SDA belief system regarding Jesus? Belva | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 755 Registered: 7-2004 |
One more thing, the person that I referred to as Mr. ICRABL in a previous post made it clear that he did not believe that any OT references, such as the one you referred to in Is. 9:6, could have possibly been about Jesus because they were all Yahweh references. In his opinion all Yahweh references are about God the Father only. | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 1008 Registered: 3-2005 |
Jeremy, It is great to see you back! Could you please give me the reference of where I could find that incredible statement about the trinity before 1980. I am really interested in this. I know about the 1940 hymnal, but that doctrinal statement is interesting. Stan | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 1013 Registered: 10-2004 |
Belva, I don't know if EGW says it, but I know I was also taught the heresy that Jesus is not omnipresent. The Bible teaches that He is omnipresent, but it also teaches that He is still (and always will be) human with a human body (I found 1 Timothy 2:5 and Colossians 2:9, among others, referenced at carm.org). Stan, That statement was written in 1931 by the editor of the Review and Herald, F.M. Wilcox, and it was the official, General Conference-endorsed, Adventist statement of belief from 1946 to 1980. You can find that quote online at http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/trinity/moon/moon-trinity1.htm#*note71 It is taken from: "Fundamental Beliefs of Seventh-day Adventists," Seventh-day Adventist Year Book, (1931), 377. The link above says that this Godhead statement was part of the first SDA fundamental beliefs statement to be officially voted by a GC session, which was in effect from 1946 until 1980, when they revised their fundamental beliefs. What I don't understand is why people, before 1980, such as Walter Martin, did not label the SDA church a cult, when they had this heretical official statement on the Godhead even! Jeremy (Message edited by Jeremy on November 15, 2005) | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 1050 Registered: 7-2003  |
Wow! The SDA statement on the Godhead in effect from '46-'80 is really an impressive piece of word-smithing. If I really put my mind to crafting a statement that could sound orthodox while at the same time accommodating heterodox views (including Arianism), I don't think I could do a better job than this. This is so carefully worded that, on the surface, it could be accepted by a cult watcher like Dr. Martin while at the same time being embraced by a Jehovah's Witness. Wow, that's not an easy linguistic feat to pull off. As a writer, my hatís off to F.M. Wilcox who crafted this sleight of pen. This level of literary obfuscation doesn't come easily. Chris | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 2927 Registered: 12-2003 |
I agree, Chris. The toying with words and definitions has been so interwoven into the fabric of Adventism that it's almost impossible to tease out the truth unless one is immersed in the church. I listened to a podcast by John Piper today when I walked with Rocky. (It amazes me how certain subjects seem to "just come up" in various venues at the same time.) He was talking about the 4th century church father Athanasius and how he persisted in calling a church council to hammer out the eternal deity of Jesus at a time when most of the church held Arian beliefs. What really amazed me were some quotes he read from Athanasius's book in which he described the conversations they had with the Arians as they tried to distinguish between their beliefs and orthodoxy. For example, they would ask the Arians if they believed something--such as Jesus' eternal existence. They would whisper among themselves and then use a Bible text out of context to such as one (I can't remember the reference) that stated that those who are created in Christ are "always". By this text they internally validated that since those who are "in Christ" are "eternal", they could affirm that Jesus was also "eternal" since He, they believed, was also created as humans were. They would finish their whispering among themselves and then affirm the question: Jesus was eternal. Athanasius concluded that people must explain/define Biblical terms with consistent meanings in order to keep doctrines orthodox. Unless the words clearly mean something consistent, he argued, people would use the words of the Bible to "prove" heresy. Oh, my goodness--it felt like de ja vu! A fourth century church father was dealing with the same problem in fighting Arianism that we deal with when we encounter Adventist apologetics! Truly, there is no new thing under the sun...including the GREAT frustration with such blatant deception and obfuscation (I love that word; it sounds like what it is!) Colleen |
