Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - Maritime 2nd Advent Christian Believers OnLine Forums Consisting Mainly of Both Members & Friends of the SDA (Seventh-day Adventist) Church

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/10/06 04:29 AM

GRW,
A point of clarification. The 28FB do not describe the Father as a God, Son as a God, and Holy Spirit as a God. They are described as God, i.e. persons of the Godhead. The Bible does not propose that each person of the Godhead is a God independent of the other two persons. LK

Posted By: Daryl

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/10/06 04:44 AM

Pastor Larry,

What do you mean by "independent"???

Posted By: Dr.Glenn

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/10/06 04:53 PM

Dear Larry:
Then, why is there a separate fundamental belief number for each God. See fundamental beliefs 3, 4 and 5. As I read it, "God the Father" is different than "God the Son" or "God the Holy Spirit". and "God the Son" is different than "God the Father" or "God the Holy Spirit" and "God the Holy Spirit" is different than "God the Father" or "God the Son". Is this how you read?

Posted By: Dr.Glenn

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/10/06 04:58 PM

Today's lesson gives Matthew 3:17 which states: "the Spirit of God descending like a dove".
Is this the "Spirit" of "God the Father? or "God the Son?or "God the Holy Spirit"? or of "the unity of three co-eternal persons"?

Posted By: Dr.Glenn

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/10/06 05:19 PM

Larry:
Jesus is our example. He lived a life without sin. When he was here on earth, who did he worship? "God the Father"? or himself as "God the Son"? or "God the Holy Spirit"? or "a unity of three co-eternal persons" as his God? Who did he say his God is? See John 20:17 ans Revelation 3:12.Who is the "God" of our Lord Jesus Christ? See Ephesians 1:3 and 1:17; 1 Peter 1:3; and 2 Corinthians 11:31.

Posted By: Rosangela

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/10/06 07:04 PM

Dr. Glenn,

There is a separate fundamental belief for each Person of the Godhead.
It is correct to say that you individually are one flesh, and that your spouse individually is one flesh, and it is correct to say that you both, as a couple, are one flesh. In the same way, each of the members of the Godhead is called God, individually, and the three Persons are, as a trio, also called God.
What determines if the word God applies to one of the individual Members or to the trio is the context.

Posted By: Larry Kirkpatrick

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/11/06 10:41 AM

Daryl,
I mean that we understand there to be one God, not three. There are three persons in the one God. If these were three independent beings, then we would have three Gods--tritheism. We are monotheists and believe in one God.

Seventh-day Adventism is captive to God's revelation. Whatever is revealed in inspired writings we must accept. All the pieces we might like to have are not always given. For example, for thousands of years, Christian apologists would have preferred to have more material in Genesis chapter one. But instead of trying to prove God's existence, the Bible simply begins with the assertion of His existence. The infinite God does not bow before His creatures and beg them to believe His proofs of His existence; He states His existence and moves on with His agenda.

We accept the basic teaching of monotheism, that there is one God, and we accept the basic teaching that there are three persons in this one God. Why? Because these are indisputable Bible facts. Captive to Scripture, we must accept its teachings. This makes us Seventh-day Adventists. This is our fundamental method. We hold these teachings on the basis of the inspired writings.

Posted By: Tom

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/11/06 06:01 PM

Quote:

If these were three independent beings, then we would have three Gods--tritheism.

Is there some inspired statement to this effect? Or is this just your reasoning? I'm not being contentious here (it's very difficult in written conversation to make clear one's intention, without non-vocal clues). I know it will come accross that way, but it's not intended. I'm wanting to know, because I'm not sure I agree, but if you're aware of some inspired statement saying as much, that would certainly have an impact.

It seems to me that the Father and the Son, to pick just two persons, are two independent beings. I don't see how we could assert otherwise. It's obvious Christ was an independent being while here on earth. Otherwise He couldn't have sinned. Did His becoming mortal cause Him to become an independent being? This seems difficult to me to assert. I'm curious as to your thinking in your remark.

Quote:

The infinite God does not bow before His creatures and beg them to believe His proofs of His existence; He states His existence and moves on with His agenda.

This reminds me of the Wizard in the Wizard of Oz. God's agends is our agenda, or, more accurately, God's agenda is us. God is agape. His agenda is the welfare of His creatures. The whole Great Controversy is over whether or not God is selfish and arbitrary. He's not.

If God withheld any information from us, it is as you said either because we couldn't understand it or it was not essential. God did not withhold it on a whim. I'm not saying you are asserting this, as you're not, but I found this particular phrase to be a bit arbitrary sounding. Hope you don't mind my commenting on this.

Posted By: Daryl

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/11/06 09:42 PM

Sounds like we need to define independent. If the word independent means each going their own way contrary to the will of the other, than I agree with Pastor Larry.

I have been looking at the Godhead in the way I look at the truly Christian family. I see the truly Christian family as husband and wife, two separate beings (persons), as consisting of one family. I see the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit as three separate beings (persons), as consisting of one God. As far as the word independent goes in this sense, I see the husband and the wife dependent on each other in order to truly exist as a one family. In the same sense, I see the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit also dependent on each other in order to truly exist as the one God.

Am I making any sense here?

Posted By: Larry Kirkpatrick

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/12/06 09:12 AM

Well, I did not mean that God was arbitrary. I meant that sometimes in His divine wisdom he offers explanation, and other times, the explanation is either not offered or will be offered later, but in the meantime He addresses that which He knows we need more than fine print we would prefer to have.

As far as independent goes, I do believe they have independent persons, but not that their--I will use this word for the lack of an immediate alternative--essence--if God is one in that respect, cannot mean total independence at that level. In some respect then, I understand that al lthree persons of the Godhead are connected together as one essence. The incarnation of Christ may have worked differently in some way. I am not here to throw a lot of assertions concerning these details, only offering a quick response. LK

Posted By: Tom

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/12/06 04:52 PM

Ok. So what was leading you against wanting to say that the Godhead is comprised of three independent beings is that to you this would imply that all three persons of the Godhead were not connected together as one essence. You weren't wanting to imply that the different persons did not have independent wills.

Got it (I think).

Posted By: Dr.Glenn

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/12/06 05:31 PM

Dear Larry:
When Jesus (our example) was here on earth, did he worship one essence or unity of 3 persons (one of which was himself) or did he worship only his Father, the only true God?

Posted By: Rosangela

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/12/06 06:20 PM

Dr. Glenn,

Pardon my jumping in. It is true that Jesus was our example, but you shouldn't take this too far, for He was more than an example. For instance, He quoted the text "You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve", but He Himself accepted worship. What does this fact reveal about Him?

Posted By: Daryl

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/12/06 10:48 PM

A very interesting observation, Rosangela.

Posted By: Larry Kirkpatrick

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/13/06 08:40 AM

GRW,
Of course, you accepted the Seventh-day Adventist position as being biblically correct before you were baptized. What then has led you to change your views since that time, or do I misread you? Also, do I correctly understand that you are presently a member of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

Posted By: Colin

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/13/06 06:18 PM

But Pastor Larry, membership doesn't start nor does it continue based on a full agreement with the trinity doctrine, unless a firm line is taken. It appears persistent sharing of differing views with local members is the only way to be put under discipline after efforts to change that stance are made.

For all that, our church founders could not hold membership today, with our current teachings: Biblically correct today, are we?

Posted By: Larry Kirkpatrick

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/14/06 05:35 AM

Colin,
New membership in the church in 2006 is predicated on acceptance of the current set of Fundamental Beliefs, a present conversion experience with the Holy Spirit inside, adherance to what we call church standards, and affirmation via the baptismal vow of 13 points. Upholding these has been my practice as a minister since I began in the ministry in 1994. In my understanding, this is the minimum expected by the world church. By the grace of God I have seen a consistent successful ministry and a steady train of baptisms. I invest considerable energy in baptismal preparation. It makes for a stronger Christian experience for the candidate and a stronger church.

It is beside the point to compare church membership a century ago with church membership today in terms of doctrine. The world church from time to time adjusts its understanding and its statement of beliefs. No one can know for certain, given all the variables, whether a church leader who lived a century ago, in light of the development of the church's thought, would refuse to accept the current statement of beliefs, or view them as satisfactory. We are responsible for our interaction with the light currently available to us.

Nor is my intention to assert the perfection of the current statement. I believe it could be improved but that it is satisfactory.

My intent is not to challenge one's church membership, but to seek to understand what changed from that time to the present.

I have never liked the word "Trinity" and prefer the word "Godhead." FWIW the current baptismal vow requires affirmation of this statement:

"1. Do you believe there is one God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, a
unity of three coeternal Persons?" LK

Posted By: DenBorg

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/14/06 05:50 AM

Quote:

Dear Larry:
Then, why is there a separate fundamental belief number for each God. See fundamental beliefs 3, 4 and 5. As I read it, "God the Father" is different than "God the Son" or "God the Holy Spirit". and "God the Son" is different than "God the Father" or "God the Holy Spirit" and "God the Holy Spirit" is different than "God the Father" or "God the Son". Is this how you read?

Dr Glenn:

Larry's point of clarification was not to say that God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit are the same person, but to say that they are one God.

We do not worship many gods, as do the heathen (the sun god, the moon god, etc). We worship one God, revealed in three Persons who are eternally distinct.

Your original comment, whether intentionally or mistakenly, called each member of the Godhead a different god from the other two. It was this point that Larry was commenting on, not the fact they are different Persons in the same Godhead.

There is a distinction between different members of the Godhead and different gods. The fact that They are distinct Persons does not make them distinct gods.

Does that help?

Posted By: Dr.Glenn

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/14/06 04:14 PM

Dear Roseangela:
You are right. We are to worship him that created the earth. See Rev. 14:7. God (the Father) created all things by Jesus Christ. See Ephesians 3:9 and John 1:3. However, in worshiping Jesus it is to be done to the glory of God the Father. We are not to worship Jesus if it cannot be done to the glory of God the Father. See Philippians 2:10,11.

Posted By: Dr.Glenn

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/14/06 05:43 PM

Quote:

GRW,
Of course, you accepted the Seventh-day Adventist position as being biblically correct before you were baptized. What then has led you to change your views since that time, or do I misread you? Also, do I correctly understand that you are presently a member of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

Dear Larry:
Yes, I am a baptized member of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. But, I was baptised before the 1980 Dallas General Conference Sesson. The current statement of beliefs was adopted in 1980. Until about 5 years ago, I accepted the trinity doctrine and did not question it because the Bible mentioned three: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Matt. 28:19. 5 years ago, I became acquainted with a person who showed me the errors in the trinity doctrine.
I do believe in the pillars of our faith which are: the ten commandments including the fourth commandment; the three angels messages; the sanctuary message; the literal and visible second coming; and the state of the dead.
The first angel's message says: Fear God, and give glory to him: for the hour of his judgment is come; and worship him that made heaven and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of water. I believe that the "God" described here is the Father only. The person who made the heaven and earth is the Son. Our worship is to be done to the glory of God the Father. See Philippians 2:10 and 11.
You state that you are a minister of the gospel. Have you read this: "Our ministers must be very careful not to enter into controversy in regard to the personality of God. This is a subject that they are not to touch. It is a mystery, and the enemy will surely lead astray those who enter into it. We know that Christ came in person to reveal God to the world. God is a person and Christ is a person. Christ is spoken of in the Word as "the brightness of His Father's glory, and the express image of His person."
The trinity doctrine that some ministers advocate is that Christ was not a person and was not "the brightness of His Father's glory, and the express image of His person" before he was born of Mary in Bethleham. I believe this is false doctrine. The trinity doctrine that some ministers advocate is that who are to worship and exalt "God the Holy Spirit". I find no verse in the Bible where it says that we are to worship "God the Holy Spirit". E.G. White wrote: "The Father and the Son alone are to be exalted." See Youth Instructor, 7 July 1898, page 2.
As I understand from extensive reading, the pioneers, including E.G. White, believed that there was one God, the Father, who is, a personal, spiritual being, the creator of all things, omnipotent, omniscient, and eternal, infinite in wisdom, holiness, justice, goodness, truth, and mercy; unchangeable, and everywhere present by his representative, the Holy Spirit. And, one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Eternal Father, the one by whom God, the Father, created all things. There is a Holy Spirit who is the representative of God the Father. E.G. White talks about the "Agency of the holy spirit" and the Holy Spirit as a "representative", but never talks the Holy Spirit as "God the Holy Spirit" and I have found absolutely no statement where she says that we are to pray to "God the Holy Spirit" or to worship "God the Holy Spirit".
Larry if you can give me one Bible verse that says that I am to worship or pray to "God the Holy Spirit", I will change what I now believe to be the truth.
In regard to the sanctuary message. It is the Father who sits on the mercy seat in the Most Holy Place. Our mediator, Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father, does not sit on the mercy seat since he is our high priest. I believe we have only one mediator between us and God, the Father. The trinity doctrine teaches we have one mediator between us and the triune God (God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit). If our mediator is "God the Son" in regard to the sanctuary message, then we really do not have a mediator since we can go directly to "God the Son". If "God the Holy Spirit" is our mediator, in regard to the sanctuary message, we really do not have a mediator because we can go directly to what the trinity doctrine advocates call "God the Holy Spirit". The Holy Spirit lives inside of us and if it is "God the Holy Spirit" inside of us, then we do not need a mediator to have access to this god.
The errors in the trinity doctrine come from the "mother of harlots" who teaches that we have several mediators, including the spirits of dead saints, to have access to God and that the Church of Jesus Christ is built upon the principle that Peter is the first pope and the revelation of truth comes to us through the pope.
Jesus Christ, the Son of God the Father, taught us the principle that truth comes to us from the Father which is in heaven and who is not flesh and blood. See Matthew 16:17. Truth comes to us from the Father which is in heaven. The Father has a "spirit" which is part of the Father and which belongs to the Father. Truth is revealed to us from this "spirit". On this principle (rock), Jesus Christ built his church.

Posted By: Rosangela

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/14/06 06:18 PM

Dr. Glenn:

The problem is that the text says, “You shall worship the Lord your God, and him only shall you serve”.

The word “only”, Gr. monos, means

1) alone (without a companion), forsaken, destitute of help, alone, only, merely

Was Jesus wrong in using the word “only”?

Posted By: Tom

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/14/06 06:22 PM

Dr. Glenn, I agree with much of what you write. I have a couple of questions. First of all, Rosangela cited the following from the other thread:

Quote:

"‘The Spirit also helpeth our infirmities;’ and the Spirit, being God, knoweth the mind of God." {ST, October 3, 1892}.

I agree that we are not told to exalt the Holy Spirit, but my understanding of this is that this is not because He is not God, but because it is God's nature not to exalt Himself. The Father exalts the Son, and the Son exalts the Father. The Spirit exalts both, especially the Son since Christ's incarnation (or so it seems to me).

I really had trouble understanding this:

Quote:

In regard to the sanctuary message. It is the Father who sits on the mercy seat in the Most Holy Place. Our mediator, Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father, does not sit on the mercy seat since he is our high priest. I believe we have only one mediator between us and God, the Father. The trinity doctrine teaches we have one mediator between us and the triune God (God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit). If our mediator is "God the Son" in regard to the sanctuary message, then we really do not have a mediator since we can go directly to "God the Son". If "God the Holy Spirit" is our mediator, in regard to the sanctuary message, we really do not have a mediator because we can go directly to what the trinity doctrine advocates call "God the Holy Spirit". The Holy Spirit lives inside of us and if it is "God the Holy Spirit" inside of us, then we do not need a mediator to have access to this god.

Jesus Christ is our mediator in the sense that He reveals God to us. No man has seen God at any time. The One who knew Him best, at the Father's side, has shown us what He is like.

Jesus said, "At that day ye shall ask in my name: and I say not unto you, that I will pray the Father for you:
For the Father himself loveth you." (John 16:26, 27)

Jesus taught that we can go directly to the Father, because the Father Himself loves us. Our need for a Mediator stems from our unbelief.

A lot of what you wrote in the paragraph cited above seems founded on mysticism. For example, the Holy Spirit does not literally live inside of us; He illuminates our minds so we can understand the things of God.

The problem of our access to God has nothing to do with anything imposed upon us by God, but has to do with our sin and unbelief.

Posted By: Larry Kirkpatrick

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/14/06 07:35 PM

Glenn,
Thank you for your very straightforward and fair answer. There is much in your present belief that I cannot agree with but I appreciate the straightforward response.

1. The difference between the previous statement (1931) and 1980 on this point is limited.

2. It is true that on occasion when the statement of belief changes as in 1980 and in 2005 everyone who entered under the previous statement has not directly agreed to the newest statement. In such cases it is good to allow a certain latitude so that pre and post folk are viewed as full members of the community.

3. I have no burden to urge you to pray to the Holy Spirit or even to Jesus. Jesus taught that we are to pray to the Father.

4. It remains true that Jesus taught equivalent honor of Father and Son (John 5:21-23), while Paul joins in affirming equality (John 17:5; Philippians 2:6). Also, that Jesus accepted worship of Himself (John 20:28).

5. I am not clear what your position is. It seems to be that the Holy Spirit is not a distinct, separate person, and that Jesus is not fully God in the sense that the Father is God? Please correct me if I am mistaken of your present views.

6. Observant Jews reject Jesus as Messiah in connection with their expectation which is of a non-divine Messiah. They think that calling Jesus God is idolatry. I think we will find that either we must uphold Jesus as fully God or else hold to the Jewish viewpoint, but that intermediate positions will be found to be untenable; e.g. Jesus is not God Jr. or a seperate being from God or a shade less than God (as the JW's have it, God the Father is God Almighty, Jesus only God not-almighty). My understanding is that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit all have always existed and have life in themselves original, unborrowed, and underived. They constitute one God yet exist as three distinct persons.

7. I have observed that others who have changed their viewpoint on these points have eventually lost faith in the inspiration of the writings of Ellen G. White. I am curious where you presently stand on that point. I wonder too whether you could share what is the situation of the person who shared this new understanding with you. Is he still a member of the church? Does he still accept the inspiration of EGW?

8. One further question. How has this situation impacted your relationship with others in your church? LK

Posted By: Dr.Glenn

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/15/06 04:41 PM

Quote:

Dr. Glenn:

The problem is that the text says, “You shall worship the Lord your God, and him only shall you serve”.

The word “only”, Gr. monos, means

1) alone (without a companion), forsaken, destitute of help, alone, only, merely

Was Jesus wrong in using the word “only”?

No he was not. It depends on who He was referring to as "the Lord thy God". It surely could mean his Father. Look at other texts such as John 17:3 and John 20:17.

Posted By: Dr.Glenn

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/15/06 07:17 PM

Dear Larry:
Thank you for you much appreciated response.
You state: "I am not sure what your position is. It seems to be that the Holy Spirit is not a distinct, separate person, and that Jesus is not fully God in the sense that the Father is God?"

You also state: "I have observed that others who have changed their viewpoint on these points have eventually lost faith in the inspiration of the writings of Ellen G. White. I am curious where you presently stand on this point. I wonder too whether you could share what is the situation of the person who shared this understanding with you. Is he still a member of the church? Does he still accept the inspiration of EGW?"

You also state: "One further question. How has this situation impacted your relationship with others in your church?"

First, of all I have full confidence in the inspiration of EGW. In 1975, when attending College in Keene, Texas, I attended campmeeting there. Ben Roden of the Branch Davidians or Shephard Rod came. He was trying to pursuade me to keep all the feast days of the old testament. But, one thing I noted is that he selectively quoted EGW. He didn't put much confidence in the statements of EGW that conflicted with his doctrinal theory. I have found a similar thread among some who have tried to pursuade me to accept every point in regard to the trinity doctrine such as: "Jesus Christ was 100% God as the Father is God and he is 100% human as we are human" and Jesus Christ was not the literal divine SON before he was born of Mary. The persons who are trying to pursuade me on this point have no Bible text to provide, but only EGW statements and then only those EGW statements that agree with their theory and they reject the other EGW statements.
EGW said: "The Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of the Father, is truly God in infinity, but not in personality." (if He is not God in personality how can he be 100% God in the sense the Father is God?)
EGW said: "Avoid every question in relation to the humanity of Christ which is liable to be misunderstood. Truth lies close to the track of presumption......The incarnation of Christ has ever been, and will ever remain a mystery. That which is revealed, is for us and for our children, but let every human being be warned from the ground of making Christ altogether human, such as one of ourselves; for it cannot be..." See 5BC 1128-1130. (I have limited space here. you need to read the full context). If Jesus Christ is not "altogether human" and I believe in the inspiration of EGW, then how can I adopt the teaching that he was 100% human when EGW said that he was not 100% (altogether) human?
You state: "My understanding is that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit have always existed and have life in themselves original, unborrowed, and underived."
Jesus said: "For as the Father hath life in himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself." John 5:26. The "original, unborrowed,and underived life" was given to the Son from his Father. Larry, do you accept this teaching?
I can find no statement in regard to whether or not the Holy Spirit has life "original, unborrowed, and underived". If he is not a separate being or person than that of the Father then he would have the same "original, unborrowed, and underived" as the Father because they cannot be separated just like my head cannot be separated from the rest of my body and then call either the head or the rest of the body as being a human being.
If he is a separate being and separate person than that of the Father, I can't answer that question because I do not have any Bible verse or EGW statement to base my belief upon.
In regard to the divinity of Christ, I am not of the observant Jews who think that calling Jesus God is idolatry. The Father called his Son "God" (see Hebrew 1:8). Is the Father involved in idolatry? certainly not.
I certainly believe in the divinty of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, but not in the same way that some trinity doctrine advocates do. They believe that there were three divine beings and each acted a role [but really are not who they say they are]- one acted the Father, one of the Son, and one of the Holy Spirit. They do not believe that Jesus Christ was the literal begotten Son of God before he was born of Mary in Bethlehem. I believe that Jesus Christ is divine because he is the literal Son of the Father -yesterday, today and he is the "express image of his Father's person" -yesterday, today, and forevermore. I believe that this was also the position of EGW under inspiration. See the comments of EGW on Daniel 3:25. 4BC1170. See also 1SM226-227.
You state: "I am not clear what your position is. It seems to be that the Holy Spirit is not a distinct separate person...."
Well, I am still trying to form a clear opinion on this. The statments in John chapters 14 to 16 made by Jesus himself seem to indicate that the Holy Spirit is a separate person who proceeds from the Father. But then the statement of Jesus himself in Matthew 16:17 indicates that it is the Father himself who directly reveals truth to the believer. The Holy Spirit is not mentioned as a separate person. In John 4:21-24, Jesus seems to indicate that God is a Spirit and they that worship him must worship him inspirit and in truth. He talks about worshiping the Father, not the Holy Spirit. He does not mention the Holy Spirit as being a separate being or person that that of the Father.
Anyway, I do not believe that the belief one way or the other is important for salvation. Jesus himself said: "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." To obtain eternal life, I only need to know the Father, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom he has sent.
You ask: "I wonder too whether you could share what is the situation of the person who shared this new understanding with you." I will not give the name of the person. This person is an advocate of the teachings of Jones and Waggoner, but they carry those teaching to their apostacy from the SDA truths. As a historical point, Jones and Waggoner (who presented the Christ our Righteousness message in 1888) later in life rejected the sanctuary message and rejected the teaching on the investigative judgment. The person who introduced me to the new understanding regarding the trinity doctrine errors is now teaching that Jones and Waggonner later in life were correct and it is error to teach the investigative judgment and the sanctuary message and also teaching that EGW was in error.
Just because Jones and Waggoner later in life rejected the investigative judgment and the sanctuary message, does not mean that the message they brough in 1888 is not the truth. The same is for the new understanding this person brought to me regarding the errors in the trinity doctrine. I cannot say that this new understanding is not truth. In fact, the person who taught the person who introduced me to the new understanding still believes in the full inspiration of EGW and rejects the teachings of Jones and Waggonner later in life when they rejected the sanctuary and investigative judgment. He still teaches all the pillars of the SDA truths.
You ask: "How has this situation impacted your relationship with others in your church?"
I do not force my new understanding upon any other church member. Some members of my church have agreed with my new understanding. Others recognize that my understanding is different than their understanding and do not let this bother them. It has not caused anyone to seek removing my name from the church books.
I hope this has been helpful.

Posted By: Rosangela

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/16/06 03:35 PM

Dr. Glenn,

Quote:

No he was not. It depends on who He was referring to as "the Lord thy God". It surely could mean his Father. Look at other texts such as John 17:3 and John 20:17.

Exactly. It depends on who He was referring to as "the Lord thy God". If He was referring only to God the Father, He would be contradicting Himself, since He accepted worship. Therefore, "the Lord thy God" here cannot mean just the Father, but must necessarily refer to the three members of the Godhead.

Quote:

EGW said: "The Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of the Father, is truly God in infinity, but not in personality." (if He is not God in personality how can he be 100% God in the sense the Father is God?)

That’s the problem. If Christ is not 100% God in the sense the Father is God, how can He be "God essentially, and in the highest sense" (RH, April 5, 1906)? How can He be "co-equal with God" (RH, June 28, 1892)? You cannot believe in co-equality and at the same time believe that the Son is not 100% God in the sense that the Father is God (which implies the superiority of the Father).

My understanding of the phrase that Christ is “truly God in infinity but not in personality” is that Christ possesses the infinity of God (the Father) but is not the same person as God. What is your understanding of the phrase?

Quote:

If Jesus Christ is not "altogether human" and I believe in the inspiration of EGW, then how can I adopt the teaching that he was 100% human when EGW said that he was not 100% (altogether) human?

We must consider the context, otherwise we will certainly make Ellen White contradict herself.
She wrote:

“Had he not been fully human, Christ could not have been our substitute” (ST, June 17, 1897).

What does she mean then by saying that Christ was not altogether human? The context provides the answer:

“Be careful, exceedingly careful as to how you dwell upon the human nature of Christ. Do not set Him before the people as a man with the propensities of sin. ... Never, in any way, leave the slightest impression upon human minds that a taint of, or inclination to, corruption rested upon Christ, or that He in any way yielded to corruption. ... That which is revealed, is for us and for our children, but let every human being be warned from the ground of making Christ altogether human, such an one as ourselves; for it cannot be.”--The SDA Bible Commentary, vol. 5, pp. 1128, 1129. {7ABC 448.2}

He was fully human in every sense except in the sense of having the propensities of sin, like the rest of humans.

Quote:

Jesus said: "For as the Father hath life in himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself." John 5:26.

Repeating what I have said in the past, John 5:26 says that God gave – or allowed - Christ to have life in Himself. But the context makes clear that in this text Christ was speaking of His mission as the Messiah, not of His pre-incarnate state _ He explicitly uses the words Son of Man:

"For, as the Father hath life in himself, so He gave also to the Son to have life in himself, and authority He gave him also to do judgment, because he is Son of Man" (John 5:25, 26, YLT).

John 5:26 means that Christ was the only human being who had eternal life in Himself, because He was the divine-human Messiah.

Quote:

The "original, unborrowed, and underived life" was given to the Son from his Father.

If it had been given, it wouldn’t be original, nor unborrowed, nor underived. “Original”, “unborrowed” and “underived” are three words which mean the same thing – “not received from any source”.

Posted By: Darius

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/16/06 08:38 PM

I wish the editor had not inserted his view that science and logic are opposed to theological thought.

Posted By: Darius

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/16/06 08:39 PM

Dr. Glenn, where do you get the idea from that God doles out His gifts based on what you believe?

Posted By: Dr.Glenn

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/16/06 08:53 PM

Quote:

Dr. Glenn, where do you get the idea from that God doles out His gifts based on what you believe?

Dear Dr. Darius:
EGW said: "In Him was life, original, unborrowed, underived. This life is not inherent in man. He can possess it only through Christ. He cannot earn it; it is given him as a free gift if he will believe in Christ as His personal Saviour."
Dr. Darius: Do you believe in Christ as your personal Saviour?

Posted By: bethybug

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/16/06 09:23 PM

I have been reading these posts with GREAT interest! I do take the position that Dr Glenn takes from what I see. I have a couple of comments. The questions that were posed to Dr. Glenn were puzzleing to me at first and I thought about them a great deal. I want to answer those also. I was baptized in 1964. The beliefs have been changed and I do not agree with the statements of the Trinity and Triune God. Mal. 3:6 says "I am the Lord and I change not." We are counseled by Ellen White to have no creeds. SG3p29. It is man in the wording of our creed who is incorrect. We are like sheep and blindly follow...well, most of us. The early church was in unity about the foundations of our belief. They spent nights in prayer and fasting to reach this point. We do not do that now...and we are in a mess. The person who pointed this out to me has left the organized church but is witnessing as a Seventh day Adventist and has his own home church. He is not accepted by the local Adventists because he speaks out about the truth...therefore he is persecuted when he does. 2 Timothy 3:12 says "All that live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution." If we are getting along too well with people who are not teaching the truth what does that say about us? Should we not be speaking out more? Are these Sabbath school quarterlies telling the truth? What if we did really speak out? Would we be asked to leave? Is that persecution? If the church is really your family...I would say it is. If it does not matter to you..then you won't speak out. I never thought this to be such an issue until now. I believe from 1 Cor 10-12 that the Holy Spirit is God's spirit that He sends to us from Himself. (v.11) For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? EVEN SO the things of God knoweth no man, but the spirit of God.
Romans 8:9,11 tells me that God's spirit (He is the one who raised Jesus from the dead) dwells in me and gives me
life. Rev 3:20 "Behold I stand at the door and knock (what door? the door to my heart)If any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him and will sup with him and he with me." Why would He do that? This is why the spirit HAS to be in us. For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ till we all come in the UNITY OF THE FAITH, and the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a PERFECT MAN, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ. Eph 4: 12,13.

Posted By: Darius

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/16/06 11:02 PM

Dr. Glenn, you did not answer my question. Where did you get the idea that what you believes influences God in the way He doles out His gifts? The EGW quote is non-responsive as is your question to me. BTW, I am certain you know that EGW had to be pursuaded to adopt this view of Christ. She did not always believe that.

Posted By: Dr.Glenn

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/17/06 03:12 AM

Quote:

Dr. Glenn, you did not answer my question. Where did you get the idea that what you believes influences God in the way He doles out His gifts? The EGW quote is non-responsive as is your question to me. BTW, I am certain you know that EGW had to be pursuaded to adopt this view of Christ. She did not always believe that.

Dr. Darius:
I do not understand your question. Are you asking where I got the idea that what I believe influences God to give me gifts?
Well, Jesus told of two men that went up into the temple to pray. One had the belief that he was right with God because he fasted twice a week, he gave tithes of all he possessed and he believed that he was not like others who were extortioners, unjust, and adulterers. The other man knew his condition that he was a terrible sinner and asked God to have mercy on him.
Dr. Darius I know my condition that I am a sinner, but I am trying to be a Berean and study daily the Word of God. We are on the verge of Jesus' second coming. In regard to this day, Jesus said: "Take heed that no man deceive you." Matthew 24:4.
Dr. Darius do you know your true condition and are you daily studying the Word of God so that no man might deceive you?

Posted By: Darius

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/17/06 03:03 PM

Dr. Glenn, may I suggest that you apply your academic skills to your theology? Your belief does not follow from the text you quoted.

Unless you have some reward to offer me it may be good to cease asking me these personal questions you tack on to the end of your responses.

Posted By: Rosangela

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/17/06 11:07 PM

Quote:

Roseangela: You state: "must necessarily refer to the three members of the Godhead." Are you exalting or worshiping the Holy Spirit? Is there a Bible text that commands you to do this? EGWsaid: "The Father and the Son alone are to be exalted." See Youth Instructor, 7 July 1898.

Dr. Glenn, again I insist in the context. Ellen White said that the Father and the Son alone are to be exalted, because she is making a contrast with “the greatest and most learned men of the age, who know not God, nor Jesus Christ whom he has sent.” Because the verse alluded to refers to these two persons, she also refers only to them. But this does not mean the Holy Spirit is to be excluded.

Now, if the phrase “Lord thy God” doesn’t refer exclusively to God the Father, it obviously refers to the Godhead, and the Godhead is composed of three (not two) persons, powers, members, worthies or dignitaries:

“The three powers of the Godhead, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, are pledged to be their strength and their efficiency in their new life in Christ Jesus.” {AUCR, October 7, 1907 par. 9}

“Have you become a new being in Christ Jesus? Then cooperate with the three great powers of heaven who are working in your behalf” (MS 11, 1901). {7BC 908.11}

“When you gave yourself to Christ, you made a pledge in the presence of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit,--the three great personal Dignitaries of heaven.” {SD 351.3}

“The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, the three holy dignitaries of heaven, have declared that they will strengthen men to overcome the powers of darkness.” (MS 92, 1901). {5BC 1110.8}

The eternal covenant is the covenant of these three persons:

“The Godhead was stirred with pity for the race, and the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit gave themselves to the working out of the plan of redemption.”--Counsels on Health, p. 222. {7ABC 442.1}

“What a salvation is revealed in the covenant by which God promised to be our Father, His only-begotten Son our Redeemer, and the Holy Spirit our Comforter, Counselor, and Sanctifier! Upon no lower ground than this is it safe for us to place our feet.” {HP 137.5}

“Our sanctification is the work of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. It is the fulfillment of the covenant God has made with those who bind themselves up with Him, to stand with Him, His Son, and His Spirit in holy fellowship. Have you been born again? Have you become a new being in Christ Jesus? Then cooperate with the three great powers of heaven who are working in your behalf” (MS 11, 1901). {7BC 908.11}

So, answering your question, yes, I exalt the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, because I was baptized in the name of these three persons, and without any of them my salvation would never be possible.

Quote:

Roseangela: Jesus Christ the only begotten Son repeatedly talks about the superiority of His Father. See John 5:19, John 5:26, John 14:28, John 17:2, Revelation 1:1. In John 20:17 and Revelation 3:12 he refers to His Father as "My God" thus recognizing superiority.

What’s the reason for Jesus’ insistence on His submission to His Father? It was because He became man’s representative, and as such He must do what man should have done from the beginning – instead of trying to exalt himself to become like God, man should have been subject to God.

“In Christ there was a subjection of the human to the divine. He clothed his divinity with humanity, and placed his own person under obedience to divinity. Satan had tempted Adam and Eve to believe that they should be as gods. Christ requires that humanity shall obey divinity. In his humanity, Christ was obedient to all his Father's commandments.” {RH, November 9, 1897 par. 10}

Quote:

The Son was exalted to be equal to "God the Father". EGW said: "Our great Exemplar was exalted to be equal with God." See 2T 426.

Ellen White speaks of two occasions when Christ was exalted to be equal with God. First, at the beginning of Lucifer’s rebellion (PP 37), and then at Christ’s ascension. But she is clear that before Christ was exalted to be equal with God in the presence of the angels, He was already equal with God. This was done just to dispel any doubt that could be raised in the minds of the angels through Satan’s lies.

Quote:

Roseangela: I do not believe the word "allowed" has the same meaning as the word "given". I believe it changes the meaning.

Dr. Glenn, the Greek word is didomi, which means: give; grant, allow, permit; place, put; appoint; establish; give out; pay; produce, yield, cause; entrust; bring (offerings); inflict (punishment).

Please note that the text is not speaking of giving something to someone, but of giving to someone to have something. So the obvious meaning is to grant, allow, permit. And the reason is given in the following verse: “For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself, and has given him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of man.”

Quote:

Roseangela: If you believe that "original, unborrowed, and underived life" cannot be given, then you are going to miss out on the greatest gift Jesus Christ, your Saviour, wants to give you.

Please notice what the text you quoted says: "This life is not inherent in man. He can possess it only through Christ."

"And this is the testimony, that God gave us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He who has the Son has life" (1 John 5:11, 12).

It is inherent in Christ, not in us. That’s why it is underived in Christ, not in us, since we receive it from Him. What you receive is derived from a source, so it cannot be underived.

“We derive immortality from God by receiving the life of Christ, for in Christ dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily” (ST, June 17, 1897).

Posted By: Daryl

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 12:19 AM

Rosangela,

You have expressed my very thoughts about Christ's submission to the Father in his humanity as that was His role as man's representative. That's why Christ also referred to Himself as the Son of man, not only as the son of God.

I also appreciate the quotes you provided.

I also agree with you about the importance of the context of the quotes Dr. Glenn posted here.

We should all be careful of the context of any quotes we post anywhere.

Posted By: Tom

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 02:24 AM

Quote:

Dr. Glenn, may I suggest that you apply your academic skills to your theology? Your belief does not follow from the text you quoted.

It seemed to me to follow. God gifts freely to all, but how we respond determines to what extent God can continue to bestow of gifts. Not because of any lack on God's part, of course, but simply because our unbelief limits our capacity to receive the gifts. Our unbelief does not make of no effect the faithfulness of God, but it does have an impact on our own ability to receive gifts. God will give us gifts as fast as we are willing and able to receive them, according to our abilities to make use of them.

Posted By: Tom

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 02:29 AM

Quote:

Dr. Glenn, again I insist in the context. Ellen White said that the Father and the Son alone are to be exalted, because she is making a contrast with “the greatest and most learned men of the age, who know not God, nor Jesus Christ whom he has sent.” Because the verse alluded to refers to these two persons, she also refers only to them. But this does not mean the Holy Spirit is to be excluded.

I've noticed this same logic, or lack of logic, apears to me to be applied by others who hold to the view being suggested in other contexts as well, such as Patriarchs and Prophets. It is suggested that because Ellen White spoke of only God and Jesus Christ in the context of the creation, that the Holy Spirit was not there. But if one takes into account all of the inspired counsel on the subject, her intent is seen.

When making an argument from silence, one must take into account all of the relevant material. An argument from silence may be a valid argument, but all source material needs to be considered.

For example, nowhere does the Bible speak of the Sabbath being changed to Sunday. This is a valid argument from silence because all the source material agrees.

Posted By: Dr.Glenn

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 06:06 AM

Dear Roseangela:
In regard "The Father and the Son alone are to be exalted.", please read the complete article entitled "July 7, 1898 God's Word Our Study Book. No. 2" and read my answer to Tom below.
In regard to "superiority", read the complete chapter of First Corinthians 15 and particularly verse 28 which says: "And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all."

The issue of "superiority" goes to the fact that those who hold to the trinity doctrine don't believe that Jesus Christ is the literal Son of God in his divine person, but is only the literal Son of God in his human person. I believe that Jesus Christ is the literal Son of God in his divine person and in his human person and that in his divine person and in his human person he keeps the fifth commandment and honors his Father and recognizes his superiority.

In regard to "In him was life, original, unborrowed, underived. This life is not inherent in man. He can possess it only through Christ. He cannot earn it; it is given him as a free gift if he will believe in Christ as His personal Saviour.", you claimed that "original, unborrowed, and underived life" cannot be given because otherwise it would not be "underived". I made the point that you were wrong because it is given to the person as a free gift if he will believe in Christ as His personal Saviour.

Posted By: Rosangela

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 04:09 PM

Daryl,

The reason for Christ’s submission to the Father is indeed very important for the understanding of Christ’s subordinative passages in the Bible.

Thank you also to you and Tom for your comments on the importance of both the immediate and the global context in order to understand a passage. This applies both to the Bible and to the EGW writings.

Posted By: Colin

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 04:25 PM

Originally posted by Dr. Glenn

Quote:

The issue of "superiority" goes to the fact that those who hold to the trinity doctrine don't believe that Jesus Christ is the literal Son of God in his divine person, but is only the literal Son of God in his human person. I believe that Jesus Christ is the literal Son of God in his divine person and in his human person and that in his divine person and in his human person he keeps the fifth commandment and honors his Father and recognizes his superiority.

Thank you for this comment, Dr Glenn: it's a useful perspective which I hadn't thought of before.

Posted By: Rosangela

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 04:31 PM

Dr. Glenn,

You said,

Quote:

She contrasted the "brightest example the world has yet seen" to the "greatest and most learned men of the age, who know not God, nor Jesus Christ whom he has sent". What she is really saying is don't go the the "greatest and most learned men of the age, who know not God, nor Jesus Christ whom he has sent" to get wisdom, but rather follow the example of Jesus who increased in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man. The phrase "who know not God, nor Jesus Christ whom he has sent" could refer to John 17:3. "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou has sent". She then makes the point that the Father and the Son alone are to be exalted.

I think I said the same thing you are saying, although the conclusion was different. Here are my words:

“Ellen White said that the Father and the Son alone are to be exalted, because she is making a contrast with ‘the greatest and most learned men of the age, who know not God, nor Jesus Christ whom he has sent.’ Because the verse alluded to [as you said, John 17:3] refers to these two persons, she also refers only to them. But this does not mean the Holy Spirit is to be excluded.”

Quote:

I believe that if she wanted to include the Holy Spirit or someone else besides the Father and the Son she would not have used the word "alone."

The fact that she uses the word “alone” or “only” does not mean she is excluding the other persons of the Godhead, but that she is emphasizing that particular person or persons within that particular context:

“Christ only has immortality.” {RH, July 10, 1900 par. 15}

“Only He who alone hath immortality, dwelling in light and life, should say, ‘I have power to lay it {my life} down, and I have power to take it again’ (John 10:18).” {1SM 301.2}

“Christ alone can transform the character.” {OHC 228.2}.

“The Spirit of God alone can make and keep men pure." {ST, November 5, 1894 par. 8}

Quote:

In regard to "superiority", read the complete chapter of First Corinthians 15 and particularly verse 28 which says: "And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all."

1 Cor. 15 should be considered in its eschatological context – when the plan of redemption will reach its final fulfillment. In the beginning God subjected all things to Adam (Ps. 8:6), but he rebelled against God. As sin in this world originated with the insubordination of the first Adam against God, sin must end with the act of the second Adam subordinating Himself to God. When all things are again subject to the second Adam (1 Cor. 15:28), He will subject Himself to God, as the first Adam should have done. Then the plan of redemption and Christ’s mission will be fulfilled. Sin began with the first Adam’s act of insubordination, and sin will end with the last Adam’s act of subordination.
However, this act is symbolical. Christ and God have always reigned jointly, and after sin is eradicated the Bible presents their throne as a joint throne (Rev. 22:3).

Quote:

you claimed that "original, unborrowed, and underived life" cannot be given because otherwise it would not be "underived".

What I claimed is that the underived life is underived in the Giver, but not in the recipient. A life which is received from another source cannot be called underived.

Posted By: Rosangela

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 04:41 PM

Quote:

The issue of "superiority" goes to the fact that those who hold to the trinity doctrine don't believe that Jesus Christ is the literal Son of God in his divine person, but is only the literal Son of God in his human person. I believe that Jesus Christ is the literal Son of God in his divine person and in his human person and that in his divine person and in his human person he keeps the fifth commandment and honors his Father and recognizes his superiority.

In His humanity, Christ obeyed both His human parents and His divine Father. In His divinity, Christ has no beginning and, therefore, no literal Father:

"Without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God" (Hebrews 7:3).

Posted By: Darius

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 05:15 PM

Quote:

It seemed to me to follow.

Any thing can follow from another if the journey is arduous enough. That B follows A does not mean that B follows directly from A. I maintain that there is nothing in the passages Dr. Glenn provided to suggest that God doles out his blessings to those who believe in them or, I might add, that one can by believing receive blessings he would not otherwise have received.

Posted By: Colin

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 05:21 PM

Quote:

What I claimed is that the underived life is underived in the Giver, but not in the recipient. A life which is received from another source cannot be called underived.

Just on this point right now, Christ's divine life is the life of deity, ie. of the Godhead, which deity he has from his Father (as Dr. Glenn elucidated just now): since there is only one Godhead, the Son's divine life is not from another source than the one Godhead and so is underived and original in the Godhead which the Son as begotten of God, who is God in person. EGW was merely enunciating Christ's possession of the Godhead, not his unbegottenness as God - a begottenness she wrote of 'too' many times.

The Nicene Creed uses words like "God of God" as well as "begotten". Formally 'we' have neither today, and attempt to avoid tritheism with the three heavenly Powers being divine by their common purpose rather than common nature - which had already been excluded with 'our' rejection of ontologicl links...Nicea wasn't very far wrong at all, only possibly the objectionable ongoing eternal generation of the Son. Despite our pioneers' antitrinitarian stance, they agreed with Nicea on all other points of wording.

Posted By: Colin

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 05:43 PM

Rosangela

Quote:

1 Cor. 15 should be considered in its eschatological context

While we are drifting into philosophy here, the theological implications are fundamental to monotheism, of course.

Your point here was dealt with ably by a non-Adventist scholar where he wrote that any position happening to and received by Christ by his Father in the story of redemption is based on that position having been true before sin entered the universe. Christ's exaltation after his ascension cannot exclude its occurence as mentioned in P&P ch.1, where it is both clarified for the heavenly host and pronounced in their presence. Given Prov 8's citation in that same context, Heb 1 is based on eternal realities somewhat repeated after Christ's ascension but predating God's creation and Christ's incarnation.

Posted By: Tom

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 08:12 PM

Darius, Dr. Glenn quoted a passage where one walked away justified, and the other did not. The parable explains why this was the case. The Publican desired forgiveness, while the Pharisee did not, because he did not believe he needed it. That one received blessings because of his beliefs while another did not seems to be evident. How is it you are not seeing this to logically follow?

Posted By: Darius

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 08:44 PM

Tom, the Pharisee was not seeking justification. He did not believe he needed justification. You are misinterpreting the text itself.

Posted By: Tom

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 08:59 PM

It's making the very point Dr. Glenn was making. The pharisee wasn't seeking justification, and hence didn't receive it, because of what he believed (i.e., that he didn't need justification). Therefore what we believe has an impact on the blessings we receive, which was Dr. Glenn's point.

Posted By: Darius

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 09:14 PM

Where there is will there is bound to be a way.

Posted By: Tom

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/19/06 12:00 AM

Whether the pharisee was willing was not the issue. The issue was the logic from Dr. Glenn's post, which you claimed was unsound. It wasn't, as per my previous post.

Posted By: Rosangela

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/19/06 01:43 AM

Colin, the meaning of “underived” is very simple: not derived from any source. If life was in any way transmitted to you, your life is derived.

“Children derive life and being from their parents.” {ST, September 10, 1894 par. 5}

As you see, Ellen White knew very well the meaning of the words she used, and her use of them was intentional. When she said “underived”, she meant “underived”.

Quote:

Your point here was dealt with ably by a non-Adventist scholar where he wrote that any position happening to and received by Christ by his Father in the story of redemption is based on that position having been true before sin entered the universe.

I completely disagree. Christ received the position of High Priest. When was it that this position was true before sin entered the universe? Christ received the position of Judge. When was it that this position was true before sin entered the universe?
Is this perchance a JW scholar?

Posted By: Larry Kirkpatrick

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/19/06 08:20 AM

Glenn,
Thanks for answering. It helps me understand something about your experience. Now I will share a few points from my own. I have no natural affinity for a pro-godhead position (one God manifest in three co-eternal persons). I have examined this teaching somewhat dispassionately. In some ways, if anything, it would be better if I could get rid of it since it is beyond complete explanation. Nevertheless, I am driven to it by Scripture. I can reconcile stack A and stack B of facts but God still requires me to accept where He has not given me the detail, by faith. I accept that in believing, He wants me to exercise faith and that this teaching is one place where He has worked as He has. He might have either given us more detail or less, and either way alleviated the apparent problem. HJe chose neither. So I am left to exercise faith or try to reason my way out of it independently of Him. I choose faith.

Another point, it is hard for me to see this issue as having a giant magnitude as an end-time "truth," as at least some seem to think it is. When I read Bible and read EGW, I can't see that this has the magnitude that some are adamant that it does. On the other hand, I see the Sabbath and its relationship to RBF and issues kindred to the cleansing of the sanctuary as dominant themes when I examine Daniel, Revelation, and EGW. I think the current stir on the three in one issue is much more fruit of the sharp meltdown in trust in church leaders that has been generated by their inaction and even radical embrace of pluralism. We are reaping the worldwind and this is just one more manifestation of it and the lost confidence some have in the church. I can only say this in the same breath as I acknowledge that in my understanding we actually have placed too much confidence in such leaders. However, there baby and bathwater and I think we should save the baby; we just need to learn to tell the babies apart from the bathwater. As long as leadership in the church is content to, through inaction, leave its influence in tatters, we will only see more of the same; more worlds made of atoms and atoms made of worlds.

Finally, I see no problem there in John 5:26. Father can raise the dead, Jesus can raise the dead. The Father appoints Jesus as Judge of men for that He took human flesh and became one of us. His mission, His coming in incarnation, are granted by the Father. That He has life in Himself is a given (life original, unborrowed, underived). Here, context shows that the main point is Jesus incarnation. The Jews were angry because they understodo that His claim made Him equal with God. Jesus did not just decide to come here on His own, but consulted with the Fatehr and the Holy Spirit before the mission was approved by the Father. I do not think that the passage is discussing ontology apart from the incarnational mission; the whole passage is littered with referneces to the incarnation specifically. I don't see the problem here, unless one is intent on removing 5:26 from its context and addressing it as an entirely independent ontological statement about God's being.

In any case, I was not stating my working beliefs as a proposition to defend them here. I have many other things at the moment that I am working on. I appreciate that you feel you have discovered significant problems in this teaching. However, I do not see these problems sustained by either the Bible or EGW. Perhaps as each of us continues to study, we will find increased clarity. But I think we can only expect that as we are willing to be led of God and to exercise faith on the way to a better understanding. If anyone would try to take the same journey on the basis of unaided human reason, it will be a lonely one without God's help. LK

Posted By: Colin

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/19/06 07:38 PM

Sorry, I don't have a problem with "underived" in the context of Sister White's position of Jesus begotten, divine & eternal Sonship - you have a problem...Otherwise, that non-Adventist scholar I referred to is a trinitarian defending orthodox trinitarianism.

The real mystery to me is that Adventism lays claim to the trinitarian label but rejects and refuses the very basis of trinitarian teaching: the Son of God is begotten of the Father, "God of God" etc.

All the while the Holy Spirit is Jesus' representative with us, since it is the spirit of the Godhead. Jesus' divinity is being debated instead, though....

Posted By: Tom

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/20/06 12:33 AM

The issue of issues in these last days is God's character. Every issue we study should be in the context of that issue. We should be able to explain all of our views in terms of how it fits into the Great Controversy.

That's something I find lamentably missing in virtually all threads.

One positive thing I'll mention that the minority position has brought up is that Jesus really was God's Son and that God's character is revealed in His giving of God's Son to us. I've stated this in my own words, so it's stated in a way all can agree with. That God so love the world that He gave His Son is essential truth, which everyone gives lip service to, but few dig deeper into the meaning.

While I disagree with the specific implementation of this truth that the minority position offers, I deeply appreciately the emphasis upon this truth. At least I can say that this conversation has led me to think about this truth more deeply and has caused a greater appreiation of it.

Posted By: Darius

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/20/06 12:39 AM

Tom, you baffle me in your first paragraph. I thought you were emphasizing the God's character then you ended up with the Great Controversy.

Posted By: Jeff

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/20/06 05:30 AM

Is that not the focal point of the GC?

Posted By: Tom

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/25/06 06:20 AM

Rosangela, could you do me a favor please? You have cited some texts from the Spirit of Prophecy where she refers to Christ as "God" and to the Holy Spirit as "God." Could you repost these please. Just the references would be enough.

Thanks very much.

Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT

Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/09/06 10:53 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/09/06 11:25 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/09/06 11:34 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/09/06 11:42 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/10/06 12:22 AM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/10/06 04:29 AM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/10/06 04:44 AM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/10/06 04:53 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/10/06 04:58 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/10/06 05:19 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/10/06 07:04 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/11/06 10:41 AM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/11/06 06:01 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/11/06 09:42 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/12/06 09:12 AM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/12/06 04:52 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/12/06 05:31 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/12/06 06:20 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/12/06 10:48 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/13/06 08:40 AM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/13/06 06:18 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/14/06 05:35 AM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/14/06 05:50 AM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/14/06 04:14 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/14/06 05:43 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/14/06 06:18 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/14/06 06:22 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/14/06 07:35 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/15/06 04:41 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/15/06 07:17 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/15/06 08:57 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/15/06 09:20 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/16/06 03:35 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/16/06 08:07 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/16/06 08:38 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/16/06 08:39 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/16/06 08:53 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/16/06 09:23 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/16/06 11:02 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/17/06 03:12 AM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/17/06 03:03 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/17/06 11:07 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 12:19 AM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 02:24 AM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 02:29 AM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 05:35 AM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 06:06 AM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 04:09 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 04:25 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 04:31 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 04:41 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 05:15 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 05:21 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 05:43 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 08:12 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 08:44 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 08:59 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/18/06 09:14 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/19/06 12:00 AM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/19/06 01:43 AM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/19/06 08:20 AM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/19/06 07:38 PM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/20/06 12:33 AM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/20/06 12:39 AM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/20/06 05:30 AM

Re: Lesson Study #3 - Jesus and the HOLY SPIRIT - 04/25/06 06:20 AM