PS - Still not sure how all this ties in with Satan's future plans to personate the return of Jesus or having to depend our beliefs in courts of law in the future.

It seems to me we are in agreement with Nicea, while the rest of Christianity isn't.

Ellen White endorses this part of the Nicean formulation.

"'I and my Father are one.' The words of Christ were full of deep meaning as he put forth the claim that he and the Father were of one substance, possessing the same attributes." {ST, November 27, 1893 par. 5}

May I point out that despite your concluding appeal to the Bible as source of our knowledge of Jesus none of your quotes was from this book.

The trinity doctrine is our best human atempt to affirm all of those things you concluded above without giving up the truth from Moses that God is one. Anyone who rejects Trinity will either have the challenging task of doing a better job of this problem than the best minds in christianity for the last 2000 years or do as some have done and reject Jesus being divine and the Holy Spirit being a person at all.

But we will now return to the subject of The creation of man. We have seen already that man's being made in the image of God, could not refer to a moral image, for it would involve the absurdity that the lifeless clay of which man was formed, had a character like God. We now see the Scriptures clearly teach, that God is a person with a body and form. Then Gen. i, 26, may be understood to teach the fact, that man was made in the form of God. Other scriptures agree with this testimony. See Gen. ix, 6. "whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man." This testimony cannot apply to a spirit, or immaterial part of man: that which is the image of God has blood. 1 Cor. xi, 7. "For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God." James [Chap. iii, 9] speaking of the tongue says, "Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude (likeness, resemblance-Webster) of God." The foregoing testimony settles the point, that the image of God does not refer to character but to form. {1855 JNL, MPC 32.1}

Gen. ii, 7. "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." Grave Doctors of Divinity (as they are called) assert that what God breathed into man was a part of himself. This, say they, is what became a living soul. It must be immortal; for God cannot die, neither will he destroy a part of himself. But the text says, "man became a living soul." Man was made of dust; then the dust became a living soul after being inspired with the breath of life. If it is a fact, that because God breathed into man the breath of life, that breath is immortal, then beasts must have immortal souls. Moses, in giving, the account of the flood, [Gen. vii, 21, 22,] says, "And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowls, and of cattle, and of beasts and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man. All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died." {1855 JNL, MPC 32.2}

If we must admit, because the breath of life came from God, it must be a part of himself, and hence immortal, we get ourselves into a grand difficulty. Sinners, you say, are to be punished with eternal misery, because God cannot destroy a part of himself; but your theory makes out that God is going to torment a part of himself to all eternity. If the above sentiment were true, we might perhaps find in it, a solution for the difficulty of the Predestinarian, who states, that God decreed from all eternity that some mens would be lost, and they cannot alter their fate, but they are to be tormented eternally for being sinners, something they could not avoid. But if God has placed a part of himself in man, and finally punishes that soul, (a part of himself,) to all eternity, it may be after all, that the one would be punished on whom the charge of their sin rests; namely, Himself. {1855 JNL, MPC 33.1} [/quote]

True, I didn't quote from the Bible, but Ellen White did. I trust her inspired understanding of the Bible more than I trust mine. Does it count if I quote the SOP quoting the Bible to prove my point?


Moses wasn't sharing his personal opinion when he wrote, "The LORD our God is one LORD." As you may already know, the original word for "God" in this passage is Elohim, which is the plural form of God. God is a Godhead. The following link talks about it:

Elohim

It seems an unnecessary and roundabout way of doing things.
Shema Yisrael --- Hear Israel
Adoni Eloheinu --- The Lord our God
(I guess youd rather have it "The Lord your Gods"?)
Adoni Ehad --- The Lord One

I know of no other way to let the SOP explain what I believe the Bible says about it. I am appealing to a higher authority than myself or any other uninspired source. Do you know of someone outside the Bible who is more inspired and more qualified to explain the Bible than Ellen White?


I don't follow. Which word is "one"? And, is it singular or plural?

There is but one living and true God, everlasting, without body or parts, of infinite power, wisdom, and goodness; the maker and preserver of all things, both visible and invisible. And in unity of this Godhead there are three persons, of one substance, power, and eternity-the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. -- "http://www.umc.org/interior.asp?ptid=1&mid=1817" United Methodist Church

THE BAPTIST CONFESSION OF FAITH

Chapter 2: Of God and of the Holy Trinity
1._____The Lord our God is but one only living and true God; whose subsistence is in and of himself, infinite in being and perfection; whose essence cannot be comprehended by any but himself; a most pure spirit, invisible, without body, parts, or passions, who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; who is immutable, immense, eternal, incomprehensible, almighty, every way infinite, most holy, most wise, most free, most absolute; working all things according to the counsel of his own immutable and most righteous will for his own glory; most loving, gracious, merciful, long-suffering, abundant in goodness and truth, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin; the rewarder of them that diligently seek him, and withal most just and terrible in his judgments, hating all sin, and who will by no means clear the guilty. ...

IMMATERIALITY

THIS is but another name for nonentity. It is the negative of all things and beings - of all existence. There is not one particle of proof to be advanced to establish its existence. It has no way to manifest itself to any intelligence in heaven or on earth. Neither God, angels, nor men could possibly conceive of such a substance, being, or thing. It possesses no property or power by which to make itself manifest to any intelligent being in the universe. Reason and analogy never scan it, or even conceive of it. Revelation never reveals it, nor do any of our senses witness its existence. It cannot be seen, felt, heard, tasted, or smelled, even by the strongest organs, or the most acute sensibilities. It is neither liquid nor solid, soft nor hard - it can neither extend nor contract. In short, it can exert no influence whatever - it can neither act nor be acted upon. And even if it does exist, it can be of no possible use. It possesses no one, desirable property, faculty, or use, yet, strange to say, immateriality is the modern Christian's God, his anticipated heaven, his immortal self - his all! {1861 JW, PERGO 6.2}

O sectarianism! O atheism!! O annihilation!!! who can perceive the nice shades of difference between the one and the other? They seem alike, all but in name. The atheist has no God. The sectarian has a God without body or parts. Who can define the difference? For our part we do not perceive a difference of a single hair; they both claim to be the negative of all things which exist - and both are equally powerless and unknown. {1861 JW, PERGO 6.3}

The atheist has no after life, or conscious existence beyond the grave. The sectarian has one, but it is immaterial, like his God; and without body or parts. Here again both are negative, and both arrive at the same point. Their faith and hope amount to the same; only it is expressed by different terms. {1861 JW, PERGO 7.1}

Again, the atheist has no heaven in eternity. The sectarian has one, but it is immaterial in all its properties, and is therefore the negative of all riches and substances. Here again they are equal, and arrive at the same point. {1861 JW, PERGO 7.2}

As we do not envy them the possession of all they claim, we will now leave them in the quiet and undisturbed enjoyment of the same, and proceed to examine the portion still left for the despised materialist to enjoy. {1861 JW, PERGO 7.3}

What is God? He is material, organized intelligence, possessing both body and parts. Man is in his image. {1861 JW, PERGO 7.4}

What is Jesus Christ? He is the Son of God, and is like his Father, being "the brightness of his Father's glory, and the express image of his person." He is a material intelligence, with body, parts, and passions; possessing immortal flesh and immortal bones. {1861 JW, PERGO 7.5}

What are men? They are the offspring of Adam. They are capable of receiving intelligence and exaltation to such a degree as to be raised from the dead with a body like that of Jesus Christ, and to possess immortal flesh and bones. Thus perfected, they will possess the material universe, that is, the earth, as their "everlasting inheritance." With these hopes and prospects before us, we say to the Christian world who hold to immateriality, that they are welcome to their God - their life - their heaven, and their all. They claim nothing but that which we throw away; and we claim nothing but that which they throw away. Therefore, there is no ground for quarrel or contention between us. {1861 JW, PERGO 7.6}

We choose all substance - what remains
The mystical sectarian gains;
All that each claims, each shall possess,
Nor grudge each other's happiness.

An immaterial God they choose,
For such a God we have no use;
An immaterial heaven and hell,
In such a heaven we cannot dwell.

We claim the earth, the air, and sky,
And all the starry worlds on high;
Gold, silver, ore, and precious stones,
And bodies made of flesh and bones.

Such is our hope, our heaven, our all,
When once redeemed from Adam's fall;
All things are ours, and we shall be,
The Lord's to all eternity. {1861 JW, PERGO 8.1}

Who wrote the above?

the first paragraph is the methodist trinity doctrine,
the second paragraph is the baptist trinity doctrine
which i added to show what james white, the author of the article was referring to.