 |
Reply
| |
| what exactly is the trinity? is it three in one - father, son holy spirit? i grew up in an adventist home and i am still one however, by boss told me i learnt the wrong thing she belives that was told thatGod sent his son jesus on earth and the spirit came in the form of a dove on him when he was baptised. Am i wrong? |
|
 First
Previous
2-12 of 12
Next
Last
|
|
Reply
| | | From: mae | Sent: 7/14/2007 5:28 AM |
Hi Trin, Like you, I grew up in an Adventist home. Based on the beliefs and teachings of my parents, the Adventist literature I read, (sabbath school lessons and Ellen White writings) and my own reading of Scripture, I pretty much viewed the Godhead as a Trinity comprised of three persons: the Father, the Son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit. There was some confusion, though, I wasn't very clear about the Holy Spirit being a Person, I think I probably viewed Him more as a power than a Person. (I remember praying that Jesus would give my toddler son "his little portion of the Holy Spirit" as though the Spirit was granted according to a person's age and size, or something like that! At that time, I had not really studied much, so had not seen the scriptural references to people being filled with the Holy Spirit even before their birth, while yet in the womb. The prime example of this would be Jesus Himself, and there were others such as John the Baptist). I was also unsure about Jesus, whether He was as much God as was the Father, and was taught He was actually an archangel, Michael by name. That was, (and still is, to my knowledge) common belief amongst Adventists. You ask the question "Am I wrong?" Although Adventists of today now hold an orthodox view of the Trinity (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, three persons, but one God) it was not always so. Our founding fathers and mother were unabashed Anti-trinitarians (Arians, actually) in their view of God. What that means is that they believed Jesus was only a created being, "the highest of angels", and therefore not God. This was Ellen White's view of Jesus for many years. This is well recognized and documented by Adventist scholars and theologans who have access to all of her writings, particularily the unpublished ones which are not readily accessable to the laity. But there are enough statements in her published works to demonstrate that she, her husband, and the other leaders of the early SDA church were confused about the deity of Jesus. (If you wanted to delve into those, it would probably be better to start a separate thread for that. I could give you the quotations I know of, I researched them from the official site of EGW writings). And it is true that if confusion existed in the minds of the founders of our movement, there is bound to be remnants of that same confusion in the membership. That may be why you are questioning whether you are wrong in your beliefs. I mention this, because the evolution from the Arian views of the founders of our church toward the position the denomonation holds today regarding the Trinity was a gradual process that took many years. A graphic example of this can be seen in our official church hymnal. There is a hymn called Holy, Holy, Holy, written by Reginald Heber in 1826. It is found on page 73 of both SDA Church hymnals that I have (my older one was published in 1941, and the newer one published in 1985). The 1941 version reflects the anti-trinitarian beliefs of early SDAs by altering the songwriter's lyrics in the last line of verse one: it reads, "God over all, who rules eternally!" (Now, until we purchased our new hymnal in 1985, I thought those were the real words to that hymn!) However, there was a signifigant change in the new hymnal, in the same line of the same hymn. The words had been changed to read, "God in three persons, blessed Trinity." The reason given for this change, was that church doctrine was no longer out of harmony with the concept of the Trinity, and so could now allow the songwriter's lyrics to appear as they were originally written in 1826. You ask the question "Am I wrong?" If you mean that you do believe in three Persons, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit being one God, I would say to you that you are right to believe that, because it is what Scripture teaches when it is read in context, in its entirety. The passage your boss is referring to probably comes from Luke 3, 21-22. "Now it came about when all the people were baptized, that Jesus also was baptized, and while He was praying, heaven was opened, and the Holy spirit descended upon Him in bodily form like a dove, and a voice came out of heaven, "Thou art My beloved Son, in Thee I am well-pleased". It would appear that perhaps both you and your boss might be correct in what you believe, because both views can be found in Scripture. Blessings to you, Mae |
|
Reply
| |
Trinity is a word invented to try describe the relationship between the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit. What helps me understand that relationship to my satisfaction are the verses in Genesis that describe the creation of man. Ge 1:26 ¶ And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. Ge 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. What I see in these verses is that God, the plural Elohyim, speaks within that plural saying, "let us make man in our image, after our likeness:" When Elohyim is done, man, plural, is created in the image of the plural Elohyim, male and female. Without gettin into a debate on whether or not God has gender or if Genesis 2 is a separate creation or a refinement of detail on the creation of man we can see that God has plurality, if not by the plurality of the word Elohyim, then by the use of the words "us" and "our", and the fact that the image of Elohyim was a common image among those that comprise Elohyim. The bible says that Elohyim is "one"; the bible also says that man and woman would be "one" flesh, Deut 6:4 and Gen 2:24 respectively. The word "one" is the same in both instances. It can denote uniqueness but can also denote unity. When Jesus said, "I and my Father are one." and "he that hath seen me hath seen the Father", He wasn't saying He was the Father, but that they were united and in harmony in purpose and character in such a way that to see the one was as good as seeing the other, to hear one was to hear the other. Jesus prayed on our behalf that we, among ourselves, should enjoy a similar unity as He and His father; John 17:20-22. This will happen as we all are united in God. |
|
Reply
| |
trinity ("tri"-unity) Sort of like "bible" is not in the bible, but thats what we call it. |
|
Reply
| |
The term "trinity" isn't to be found in the Bible - neither is the term, "God the Son". I believe that if we have to invent terms to explain "key doctrine", then we need to re examine that doctrine to see if what we believe is in fact true. Peter said to Jesus, "You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God". That's good enough for me - Jesus, God's Son. Love Linda |
|
Reply
| |
Well it is important in any study, or in conversations about God, to have a "proper understanding" of "Who/ What God is." as far as definitions at least should be concerned. If in our conversations with others speak of "God" in a general term, "god" could be defined as Allah, Adam, a mountain, ect.. But in reference to the God of the Bible, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, He has revealed Himself throughout the bible as both transcendent, (separated) and Immanence (close) to mankind. God has revealed Himself as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit/ Ghost. All 3 are separate persons that are eternally distinct, and yet there is only 1 God. All 3 have been in account for creation, All 3 are said to be “dwelling inside us,�?and all 3 are to be credited for the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ. The Father is not the Son, and the Son is not the Spirit, and yet all are called “God.�?The bible has testified, that God is such, and we for a lack of better terms call it “The Trinity�?(God the Father, The Son, and the Holy Spirit.) The problem occurs is when a finite human being tries to “figure out�?the nature of an infinite God. For us to comprehend/ understand an infinite God, would require us to be God ourselves. But rather, we cannot comprehend such a thing, but can “apprehend�?what the testimony of the bible has made. It is stated, it is communicated, and it our responsibility to either accept or reject the testimony of what God has said about Him. For those who say “the trinity�?is manmade, and I don’t believe ‘that Trinitarian theology�?of there being 1God and HE has revealed Himself as 3 separate persons, eternally distinct, then you have rejected what the bible has communicated about the nature of God. That would not be a “secondary issue�?when one speaks of the God of the bible. The OT and NT both reveal God as the untouchable Father in heaven, a PHYSICAL being on earth, and as the active Spirit that dwells distinctly from the other 2, in us. I would believe that any denial, of what the bible says, “God is�?is saying “I don’t believe what you said, God�?and that’s DANGEROUS ground to be on. Asking question due to not understanding would be one thing, but rejection due to bias or denial, is another. God has said “ask�?and “lets reason,�?but in the end He wants us to believe what He has said. |
|
Reply
| |
Thanks for confirming that for me
God Bless!
>From: "desi56111" <[email protected]>
>Reply-To: "7th Day Adventist Chatroom"
><[email protected]>
>To: "7th Day Adventist Chatroom" <[email protected]>
>Subject: Re: The Trinity
>Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 12:34:28 -0700
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> New Message on 7th Day Adventist Chatroom
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The Trinity
>
>
>
>
> Reply
>
>
>
>
>
> Reply to Sender
> Recommend
>
> Message 6 in Discussion
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From:
> desi56111
>
>
>
>
>
>Well it is important in any study, or in conversations about God, to have a
>"proper understanding" of "Who/ What God is." as far as definitions at
>least should be concerned. If in our conversations with others speak of
>"God" in a general term, "god" could be defined as Allah, Adam, a mountain,
>ect.. But in reference to the God of the Bible, the God of Abraham, Isaac,
>and Jacob, He has revealed Himself throughout the bible as
>both transcendent, (separated) and Immanence (close) to mankind.
>God has revealed Himself as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit/
>Ghost. All 3 are separate persons that are eternally distinct, and yet
>there is only 1 God. All 3 have been in account for creation, All 3 are
>said to be “dwelling inside us,�?and all 3 are to be credited for the
>bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ. The Father is not the Son, and the Son
>is not the Spirit, and yet all are called “God.�?The bible has testified,
>that God is such, and we for a lack of better terms call it “The Trinity�?
>(God the Father, The Son, and the Holy Spirit.)
>The problem occurs is when a finite human being tries to “figure out�?the
>nature of an infinite God. For us to comprehend/ understand an infinite
>God, would require us to be God ourselves. But rather, we cannot comprehend
>such a thing, but can “apprehend�?what the testimony of the bible has made.
>It is stated, it is communicated, and it our responsibility to either
>accept or reject the testimony of what God has said about Him.
>For those who say “the trinity�?is manmade, and I don’t believe ‘that
>Trinitarian theology�?of there being 1God and HE has revealed Himself as 3
>separate persons, eternally distinct, then you have rejected what the bible
>has communicated about the nature of God. That would not be a “secondary
>issue�?when one speaks of the God of the bible. The OT and NT both reveal
>God as the untouchable Father in heaven, a PHYSICAL being on earth, and as
>the active Spirit that dwells distinctly from the other 2, in us. I would
>believe that any denial, of what the bible says, “God is�?is saying “I
>don’t believe what you said, God�?and that’s DANGEROUS ground to be on.
>Asking question due to not understanding would be one thing, but rejection
>due to bias or denial, is another. God has said “ask�?and “lets reason,�?
>but in the end He wants us to believe what He has said.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> View other groups in this category.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> To stop getting this e-mail, or change how often it
>arrives, go to your E-mail Settings.
>
>
> Need help? If you've forgotten your password, please go
>to Passport Member Services.
>
> For other questions or feedback, go to our Contact Us
>page.
>
>
> If you do not want to receive future e-mail from this
>MSN group, or if you received this message by mistake, please click the
>"Remove" link below. On the pre-addressed e-mail message that opens, simply
>click "Send". Your e-mail address will be deleted from this group's mailing
>list.
>
>
> Remove my e-mail address from 7th Day Adventist Chatroom.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
|
|
Reply
| |
Thanks Mae I wasn't aware of the fact that the hymn was altered or the fact
that there was a slight change in the doctrine to some extent it's kind of
confusing too but i don't think my boss is totally right bcuz she don't
believe in the trinity she believes that as it's three different individuals
we should not treat them equally or give them the same kind of respect bcuz
God would get jealous...she's a jehovah witness. But thanks so much for
educating me i never heard of any of the information that u shared with me.
God Bless!
>From: "7th Day Adventist Chatroom" <[email protected]>
>Reply-To: "7th Day Adventist Chatroom"
><[email protected]>
>To: "7th Day Adventist Chatroom" <[email protected]>
>Subject: Re: The Trinity
>Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 21:28:40 -0700
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> New Message on 7th Day Adventist Chatroom
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The Trinity
>
>
>
>
> Reply
>
>
>
>
> Recommend
>
> Message 2 in Discussion
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From:
> mae
>
>
>
>
>
>Hi Trin,
>Like you, I grew up in an Adventist home. Based on the beliefs and
>teachings of my parents, the Adventist literature I read, (sabbath school
>lessons and Ellen White writings) and my own reading of Scripture, I pretty
>much viewed the Godhead as a Trinity comprised of three persons: the
>Father, the Son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit. There was some
>confusion, though, I wasn't very clear about the Holy Spirit being a
>Person, I think I probably viewed Him more as a power than a Person. (I
>remember praying that Jesus would give my toddler son "his little portion
>of the Holy Spirit" as though the Spirit was granted according to a
>person's age and size, or something like that! At that time, I had not
>really studied much, so had not seen the scriptural references to people
>being filled with the Holy Spirit even before their birth, while yet in the
>womb. The prime example of this would be Jesus Himself, and there were
>others such as John the Baptist). I was also unsure about Jesus, whether He
>was as much God as was the Father, and was taught He was actually an
>archangel, Michael by name. That was, (and still is, to my knowledge)
>common belief amongst Adventists.
>You ask the question "Am I wrong?" Although Adventists of today now hold
>an orthodox view of the Trinity (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, three
>persons, but one God) it was not always so. Our founding fathers and mother
>were unabashed Anti-trinitarians (Arians, actually) in their view of God.
>What that means is that they believed Jesus was only a created being, "the
>highest of angels", and therefore not God. This was Ellen White's view of
>Jesus for many years. This is well recognized and documented by Adventist
>scholars and theologans who have access to all of her writings,
>particularily the unpublished ones which are not readily accessable to the
>laity. But there are enough statements in her published works to
>demonstrate that she, her husband, and the other leaders of the early SDA
>church were confused about the deity of Jesus. (If you wanted to delve into
>those, it would probably be better to start a separate thread for that. I
>could give you the quotations I know of, I researched them from the
>official site of EGW writings). And it is true that if confusion existed
>in the minds of the founders of our movement, there is bound to be
>remnants of that same confusion in the membership. That may be why you are
>questioning whether you are wrong in your beliefs.
>I mention this, because the evolution from the Arian views of the founders
>of our church toward the position the denomonation holds today regarding
>the Trinity was a gradual process that took many years. A graphic example
>of this can be seen in our official church hymnal. There is a hymn
> called Holy, Holy, Holy, written by Reginald Heber in 1826. It is found on
>page 73 of both SDA Church hymnals that I have (my older one was published
>in 1941, and the newer one published in 1985). The 1941 version reflects
>the anti-trinitarian beliefs of early SDAs by altering the songwriter's
>lyrics in the last line of verse one: it reads, "God over all, who rules
>eternally!" (Now, until we purchased our new hymnal in 1985, I thought
>those were the real words to that hymn!)
>However, there was a signifigant change in the new hymnal, in the same
>line of the same hymn. The words had been changed to read, "God in three
>persons, blessed Trinity."
>The reason given for this change, was that church doctrine was no longer
>out of harmony with the concept of the Trinity, and so could now allow the
>songwriter's lyrics to appear as they were originally written in 1826.
>You ask the question "Am I wrong?" If you mean that you do believe in three
>Persons, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit being one God, I would say to you
>that you are right to believe that, because it is what Scripture
>teaches when it is read in context, in its entirety.
>The passage your boss is referring to probably comes from Luke 3, 21-22.
>"Now it came about when all the people were baptized, that Jesus also was
>baptized, and while He was praying, heaven was opened, and the Holy spirit
>descended upon Him in bodily form like a dove, and a voice came out of
>heaven, "Thou art My beloved Son, in Thee I am well-pleased".
>It would appear that perhaps both you and your boss might be correct in
>what you believe, because both views can be found in Scripture.
>Blessings to you,
>Mae
>
>
>
>
>
>
> View other groups in this category.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> To stop getting this e-mail, or change how often it
>arrives, go to your E-mail Settings.
>
>
> Need help? If you've forgotten your password, please go
>to Passport Member Services.
>
> For other questions or feedback, go to our Contact Us
>page.
>
>
> If you do not want to receive future e-mail from this
>MSN group, or if you received this message by mistake, please click the
>"Remove" link below. On the pre-addressed e-mail message that opens, simply
>click "Send". Your e-mail address will be deleted from this group's mailing
>list.
>
>
> Remove my e-mail address from 7th Day Adventist Chatroom.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
|
|
Reply
| | | From: mae | Sent: 7/19/2007 12:27 AM |
Hi Trin, If your boss believes that Jesus is a created being and therefore is not God, and must not be prayed to (as do the Jehovah's Witnesses I have known), then I would have to take back what I said earlier about your boss being 'right' in what she believes. I have found they are most adamant about this; that Jesus is not God. They say He is 'just a son'. They also believe He is Michael the archangel, 'one of the chief princes' spoken of in the Bible. They are similar to SDA in this point, because this is one of the SDA beliefs their founding father Charles Taze Russel retained, when he broke fellowship with the Adventists (yes, the Jehovah's Witnesses are an offshoot from SDA) in the early history of the SDA church. From my reading of JW material, it seems that in addition to not believing that Jesus is God, they don't believe the Holy Spirit is a person. Rather, they refer to Him as 'holy spirit', a 'power' that changes hearts. But from scripture we know this is wrong, because Jesus most definitely is God, as is the Holy Spirit, who most definitely is a Person. They, with the Father, form the trinity, the Godhead. Our God, He is One! Mae |
|
Reply
| | | From: mae | Sent: 7/19/2007 1:01 AM |
| The term "trinity" isn't to be found in the Bible - neither is the term, "God the Son". I believe that if we have to invent terms to explain "key doctrine", then we need to re examine that doctrine to see if what we believe is in fact true. Peter said to Jesus, "You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God". That's good enough for me - Jesus, God's Son. Love Linda | Hi DiamantinaJade, I don't believe the term 'trinity' needed to be invented as a means of explaining the Godhead, but people found it helpful in describing the Godhead as scripture presents it: comprised of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Problems arise when we go to the Bible to validate our belief, rather than allowing the Bible to form our beliefs. That's why we can't just take one prooftext and make a case from it alone, while ignoring many others that state the opposite. Yes, Scripture does indeed refer to Jesus as being the Son of God. But it also makes it abundantly clear that He is Himself God: Colossians 2:9 leaves no doubt: "For in Him all the fulness of Deity dwells in bodily form". The term "God the son" is not the only means of stating the truth that Jesus is at the same time the Son of God, and God. This truth is solidly based on enough scriptures, that there can be no doubt. Just as a sampling, read John 1:1-3, and 14. "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being by Him; and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. (vs 14) And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth." So what this passage clearly conveys is the fact that the "Word" existed in the very beginning. It says the Word was 'with' God, but at the same time, "was God". And to leave us in no doubt that this refers to none other than Jesus, verse 14 goes on to say that this same 'Word' "became flesh, and dwelt among us". It's very clear, and leaves us in no doubt that this refers to Jesus. Jesus is the Word, He was with God in the beginning, He was (is) God, and He became flesh and dwelt among us. Blessings, Mae |
|
Reply
| |
Mae, your #2 post now make sense to me, in light of reciently reading of your newest thread. Tradation is high, but the Bible is Higher. |
|
|
First
Previous
2-12 of 12
Next
Last
|
|
Free Forum Hosting
Important Announcement
Return to Bible Discussion