We should always listen to the voice of God and not try to take away from what is written in the bible. God's word stand forever. Thanks pastor for speaking truth.
i repete ur word JESUS acknowledge the existence of the spirit OF GOD ,you say it the spirit of who the spirit of GOD not the spirit of the second person not the spirit of the third person but the spirit of the father
*@Keating-ue6do:* - *MORE THE REASONS WHY THE TRINITY DOCTRINE SHOULD BE REJECTED.* *In the Bible, three words are used repeatedly in connection with God. They are "Father", "Son", and "Holy Spirit" [Holy Ghost].* - *Two divine beings but three powers.* - *There is one Son who is called Christ* [1 Cor 8:6], - *and The only true God who sent and gave His Son* [John 17:3; 3:16], - *and one Spirit who is the Spirit of God and of Christ.* [Gal 4:6; 2 Cor 3:17; 1 Cor 2:12; 2 Cor 3:17]. *So, the Trinity doctrine is not rejected because of the simple idea that it means "three,"* - *but* -*because of the deeper philosophical and theological concepts embraced. Therefore, the following common reasons are submitted for rejecting it:* *1.* - *Trinity is un-Biblical, a term nowhere found in the Bible from Genesis through Revelation. *It is a complete "foreign" term to the Biblical languages.* - *Christ never preached it, and it was utterly foreign to the apostles. It is a complete perversion of the language of the Bible.* *We are exhorted to:* - *"Preach the Word." 2 Tim 4:2. We need not use extra-Biblical words and phrases to put a certain theological "spin" on God's word, causing it to be "wrested" from His objective of imparting truth to the soul.* *2.* - *Trinity is unbiblical and anti-Biblical. *It is the doctrine of anti-Christ and is contrary to the teachings of both the Old and New Testaments.* *3.* - *This teaching is an imposition, a usurper, a distortion, a perversion,* - *and a counterfeit of the truth. Those who teach and preach it are "handling the Word of God deceitfully." 2 Cor 4:2 It is a "corrupted" concept of God, the eternal Father, and Creator of all.* *4.* - *Trinity is pagan and fabulous [a fable] a polytheistic monstrosity of false religion,* - *an invention of Satan intruding its evil presence into the three angels' messages and the true worship of God Almighty and His only begotten Son, our Lord and Saviour.* *5.* - *Trinity is "baptized" paganism.* - *It is "pseudo" Christian, coming from the foreign, Roman Latin word "trinitas," a Latin abstract noun that most literally means "three-ness" [or "the property of occurring three at once"]. Or, simply put, "three are one".* - *A cleverly contrived counterfeit of the truth about God and His only begotten Son.* *6.* * - *Trinity is a phantasm, a fiction, a figment of perverted imagination?* - *contrary to sanctified reason and common sense. It has been portrayed in caricature as a heathen conception of a three-headed being with a body.* *7.* - *Trinity is a "philosophical idol”, a false concept of God based on Platonic Greek philosophy. ["Beware of philosophy and deceit." [Col.2:8].* - *It was later formulated into Roman theology and the entire world wonders after the Beast.* [See Rev. 13:1-10].* - *The "Global Christian Forum" states, you need to "confess the triune god"* *8.* - *Trinity is idolatry, a violation of the first three commandments,* - *and therefore the entire decalogue [See James 2:10-12]. *It constitutes false worship and sin, just as Baal-worship in Elijah's day.* *9.* - *Trinity is seductive, destroying the real truth of God’s sovereignty as the eternal Father, over all the universe of His own creation, making Him merely one of three co-equal eternals.* *10.* - *Trinity is Satan's subtle sophistry, destroying the truth of the divine Son's relationship to His Father, as a true Son of relativity [See John 3:16] making Him an actor, a role-player, a deceiver, and a liar.* - *The doctrine of the Trinity is a cruel heathen monstrosity, removing Jesus from his true position of Divine Savior and Mediator.* *11.* - *Trinity is Satan's cunning deception regarding the Holy Spirit, making it into a third being separate from the Father and His Son - thus a third God,* - *rather than the divine life-giving presence and power of God and His Son. [See Luke 1:35, Rom.8:9, etc].* *12.* - *Trinity teaches that the Spirit is "another Comforter" other than the Spirit of Christ.* - *The Greek word for 'comforter' is 'parakletos',* [G3875] which means 'intercessor, advocate, comforter'.*- * If you take a look at 1 John 2:1 it says that Jesus Christ is our 'advocate'.* - *And the Greek word used for an advocate in this verse is the same 'parakletos' used for comforter in the other verses regarding the Spirit.* - *1 Timothy 2:5 also confirms we only have ONE mediator [advocate] with the Father, and that is Jesus Christ.* - *So, what was to be 'sent' as a comforter for us?* - *The Spirit of Christ.* *John 14:16-28 tells us many times that the Comforter is Christ by His Spirit, but the moment Jesus says “another Comforter,”* - *most become blind to the fact He is referring to Himself by His Spirit despite His clear words that follow.* - *Just because Jesus said the Father would send 'another [allos] Comforter,* - *many people instinctively take this to mean a different being from Christ. What they fail to realize is the manner in which John wrote and the other vital point is how Jesus spoke about Himself in the 'third person'.* *13.* - *Trinity is subversive of the atonement of Christ, making His sacrifice on the cross merely human, and not divine, therefore inadequate to atone for the broken law of God which is divine.* *14.* - *Trinity nullifies the everlasting gospel, making Jesus a metaphorical Son.* - *This also means that there is no true Father and Son and it is all a metaphor because all three are not individual beings but part of the same God. In reality, this means that salvational bible verses now have to be taken as not for what they mean, which means they lose their salvational power.* - *This is utterly contrary to Bible teachings.* - *Caiaphas was not asking Jesus if He was the Son of God in any metaphorical [figurative] sense.* - *He was speaking literally. [Matthew 26:63; Luke 22:70. 22:71].* *15.* - *Trinity destroys the true character of God, thus making Him to be an impostor.* - *Behold the effects of this dark doctrine written in the blood of thousands of saintly martyrs during the Dark Ages.* *16.* - *Trinity is a confusion, making the Holy Spirit to be the Father of Christ [See Luke 1:35] rather than Jehovah.* - *Jesus never referred to the Spirit as His Father.* *17.* - *Trinity is the foundation of the Papacy, being formulated in the early Catholic ecumenical councils of the fourth century, •two centuries after the death of Christ's apostles, during the great apostasy in which the bishop of Rome was elevated to Head-Bishop over all other bishops on the strength of this doctrine.* - *This was the beginning of the Papacy.* *18.* - *Trinity is the fundamental doctrine of all apostate Protestant churches, Rome's harlot daughters, who keep Sunday, her counterfeit Sabbath [falsely called the Lord's day] and who also believe in the immortality of the soul and the eternal torment of the wicked, all of which are Rome's doctrines.* - *"We are on the same team...they would all say we believe in the Trinity."* - Rick Warren. *19.* - *Trinity is the foundation and prime doctrine of the entire worldwide ecumenical-evangelical movement throughout Christendom - the false revival, reformation, and unity of the last days, just prior to Christ's Second Advent.* *"The central ecumenical importance of the doctrine of the Trinity has become increasingly recognized in recent years."* (MATTHIAS HAUDEL, professor of theology at Munster Protestant Theological University, Germany). *20.* - *The phrase Trinity was used by EGW only once in a negative sense [ST, June 8, 1931, page 6]. This is tremendously significant, for if it were Bible truth, there would be absolutely no justifiable reason for her not to use it over and over again since it had been in usage throughout Christendom for over 1500 years before she was born.* *21.* - *Trinity is a compromise in Adventist religion, received as a "fundamental doctrine" by SDA leaders *in collusion with Evangelical leaders in the historic conferences of the mid-1950s.* - *This dramatic change in SDA beliefs as a church was done to prevent the church from being labeled in Christendom by Walter Martin as a dangerous cult.* *22.* - *Trinity makes the one true God into being three Gods: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit [or Holy Ghost].* - *According to this doctrine, all three Gods are coexistent, coequal, and coeternal. This is Tritheistic-Trinitarianism or pagan polytheism in Christian garb.* *23.* - *Trinity is now listed as the second Heading in the table of contents of the new, modern SDA Hymnal, so it is not only preached from SDA pulpits, published by SDA presses, and taught in SDA schools, but it is also sung in SDA churches.* - *When singing Hymn 73, would or could any visitor from the Roman Catholic or so-called Protestant churches discern any difference between the SDA Trinity and their own?* *24.* - *Trinity is now a "test of fellowship" in the modern SDA church, whereas it was never so done while E.G. White and SDA pioneers were still alive! Why? Is not this the Omega of apostasy that she prophesied would be "most startling?" *What could be more startling than the SDA Church adopting as her fundamental doctrine the very foundation of the Papacy?*
@@seekertruth3577 Anti-Trinitarians have substantial similarities to the Roman Catholic Church's concept of the trinity. They seem to have inherited the Roman Catholic Church's understanding of God with the Son in subordination to the Father having been begotten in a birthing event deriving his existence from the Father. This similarity is also seen in the procession of the Holy Spirit from both the Father and Son. We Adventists don't believe these Arian or Catholic theologies.
@@harley6394-h3f: *Keating, you a making erroneous claims. So, let us hear what the Bible say and not what Keating-ue6do speculate.* - *I will make it as simple as possible so that even a little boy will understand.* *There is only one Spirit* - “There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling” Ephesians 4:4 [1 Corinthians 12:13; Ephesians 2:18]. *This one spirit is shared by the Father and the Son* - “But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.” Romans 8:9. *It is the spirit of the Father* - “For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you.” Matthew 10:20, *and also the spirit of His Son* - “For I know that this shall turn to my salvation through your prayer, and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ” Philippians 1:19. *When we have this spirit of God we actually have His very own presence:* - “Whither shall I go from thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence?” Psalm 139:7 [Psalm 51:11]. *By His own spirit God [not someone else] is everywhere present* - “Can any hide himself in secret places that I shall not see him? saith the LORD. Do not I fill heaven and earth? saith the LORD.” Jeremiah 23:24. *Therefore, the presence of the Holy Spirit is the very presence of the Father and the Son [not someone else]* - “Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and *we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.”* John 14:23. *This Holy Spirit *comes [PROCEED]* to us from the Father, it proceeds from Him* - “But when the Comforter is come, whom I [Jesus] will send unto you from the Father, EVEN THE SPIRIT OF TRUTH, WHICH PROCEEDETH FROM THE FATHER,* he shall testify of me” John 15:26. *The Spirit comes to us through the Son* - “For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.” Ephesians 2:18. *The spirit of God and the spirit of man are comparable to each other.* - “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.” 1 Corinthians 2:11. *Therefore, just as the spirit of man is his very own person, so also the Spirit of God is His very own person, it is also the very person of Christ our Lord* - “Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.” 2 Corinthians 3:17. *Therefore, in giving us His Spirit, God gives us Himself, not someone else*- *“I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.”* John 14:18. *It is Christ [the Spirit of Christ] who comforts us in all our trials* - “And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.” Galatians 4:6. *This is the Bible teaching regarding the Holy Spirit of God. It proceeds from God, it is the presence of God in all the universe, it is the personal presence of God and Christ among their people on earth. This spirit brings us into fellowship with two beings* - “and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.” 1 John 1:3. “The influence of the Holy Spirit is the life of Christ in the soul. We do not now see Christ and speak to Him, but His Holy Spirit is just as near us in one place as another. It works in and through every one who receives Christ. Those who know the indwelling of the Spirit reveal the fruits of the Spirit,-“love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith.” BEcho June 17, 1901, par. 6 “Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: *that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature,* having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.” 2 Peter 1:4 “Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: *that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature,* having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.” 2 Pt. 1:4 *Christ in His humanity [and NOT aka god the holy spirit] had to first live this life by living a perfect character before He could impart it to us. Christ brought glorified humanity back to heaven. It is this life that He now offers to us.* *“Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.”* Heb 2:17-18 and Hebrews 4:15 *“For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.”* *This is why the spirit could not be given in its fullness and this is the very reason the spirit could not be given unless Christ was glorified.* - *In humanity Jesus first had to live a perfect life [to overcome see Revelation 3:2], sanctified then glorified and finally poured out upon His church.* *For SDA:* - *“During His humiliation upon this earth, the Spirit had not descended with all its efficacy; and Christ declared that if He went not away, it would not come,* [but] that if He went away, He would send it. It was a representation of Himself, *and after He was glorified it was manifest.”* - ST, May 17, 1899 par. 4 *Why was it necessary for Christ go away?* *“But while Christ was on earth, the disciples had desired no other helper. Not until they were deprived of His presence would they feel their need of the Spirit, and then He would come.”* DA 669.1 *”The Holy Spirit is Christ's representative, but divested of the personality of humanity, and independent thereof. Cumbered with humanity, Christ could not be in every place personally. Therefore it was for their interest that He should go to the Father, and send the Spirit to be His successor on earth. *No one could then have any advantage because of his location or his personal contact with Christ. [By the Spirit the Saviour would be accessible to all.] In this sense He would be nearer to them than if He had not ascended on high.”* - DA 669.2 *The key point to this passage is the first sentence:* *“… while Christ was on earth, the disciples had desired no other helper.”* *Typical example:* - *Peter had great courage when he was with Christ, yet he denied Him, when he was without Him.* *The disciples felt secure while Jesus was with them in person.* - *They only wanted to stay close to Jesus in His physical presence.* - *But those who were distanced would feel disadvantaged.* - *With this mindset of the people, the saviour was cumbered, or hindered, AND COULD NOT BE IN EVERY PLACE PHYSICALLY.* - *Thus, they had no desire for the Spirit.* *Christ endeavoured to get their minds off His physical presence to His spiritual presence. This He can only do by going away.* *Notice the next line:* - *“…Not until they were deprived of His presence would they feel their need of the Spirit, and then He would come.”* - DA 669.1 *In this way, Christ in the Spirit is “divested of the personality of humanity, and independent thereof.”* - *That is to say, Christ is free to work independently with all His disciples, including us today.* *This is why it says:* - *“NO ONE COULD THEN HAVE ANY ADVANTAGE BECAUSE OF HIS LOCATION OR HIS PERSONAL CONTACT WITH CHRIST. BY THE SPIRIT THE SAVIOUR WOULD BE ACCESSIBLE TO ALL. IN THIS SENSE HE WOULD BE NEARER TO THEM THAN IF HE HAD NOT ASCENDED ON HIGH.”* DA 669.2 *No other person other than Christ could fulfil this role. Jesus is our comforter. Jesus is the “third person” of the Godhead [not a literal person/personality but a grammatical person], in spirit.* *Inspiration declares that,* *“He [Satan] has sought to shut Jesus from their view as the Comforter,”* 1888 Material 696.1 [The Righteousness of Christ] [RH, August 26, 1890 par. 10] *Christ has said:* - “Search the Scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life; and they are they which testify of me. John 5:39.”* - RH July 26, 1892, par.1 *CHRIST is the central thought of the gospel [Glad Tidings];* - *for it is “the gospel of God . . . concerning His Son Jesus Christ our Lord.”* - *An indwelling Christ is the power and life of the gospel.* *Romans 1:16* “I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God unto salvation...” *1 Corinthians 1: 23* “We preach Christ crucified : . . . *v24* “…Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.” *Romans 8:10* - *“And if CHRIST BE IN you, the body is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is Life because of righteousness.”* *And Christ said,* “Abide in Me and I in you [Jn15:4] . . . . for without Me ye can do nothing. [Jn 15:5] *”And just as He was departing from His disciples in His bodily presence, He made this promise, “Lo, I Am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.”* [Mat 28:20] *Paul’s experience in the gospel was this:* “I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, Who loved me, and gave Himself for me.” Galatians 2:20. *Now we know that the giving of the Holy Spirit is the giving of Christ, and the presence of the Holy Spirit is the Presence of Christ in us* [Colossians 1:27, 2 Corinthians 3:17].
@@harley6394-h3f: *Two Hebrew verbs that are pertinent to our discussion, is Christ begotten.* - *The first is the Hebrew verb qânâh [H7069 קָנָה ]* found in Pro 8:22. The KJV renders this verb as "possessed" but it actually means "to get." It is in the past tense so it is properly rendered as "got" or "gotten." This same verb is used by Eve in Genesis 4:1, speaking of Cain, when she said "I have “gotten” H7069 a man from the LORD." - *The second verb that concerns us is "chûwl" [H2342 חוּל]* which is found in Prov.8:24,25 as “brought forth.” -- The specific form that it is in here indicates birth language. It's the same as the usage in Psalm 51:5; Job 15:7. - *Thus contextually it is impossible to avoid birth language here.* *Thus some versions of Scripture like the EXB and NABRE render this verb as "begot" which, contextually speaking, is the most accurate rendering.* *“possessed” [H7069, “qânâh”]* Gen 4:1 “And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, *I have gotten [H7069,“qânâh”]* a man from the Lord.” or Gen 14:19 “And he blessed him, and said, Blessed be Abram of the most high God, *possessor [“ qânâh” H7069 קָנָה]* of heaven and earth: Thus, we've got two verbs here that are used 3 times in this passage that strongly indicate we are dealing with birth language here just as Eve bore Cain [Gen 14:1] and God being the *“possessor” [“qânâh” H7069]* or the originator of heaven and the earth [Gen 14:19]. *There is no basis [as some claim] to make this only a matter of anointing or bestowal in a soteriological sense of the sonship on a pre-existing being who was not the actual/ontological Son of God prior to bestowal or anointing.* *“brought forth” [H2342, "chûwl"]* *The "brought forth" clearly denotes labor [having pain and travail], or giving birth:* Psa 51:5 "Behold, I was *shapen [H2342]* in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me." Psalm 90:2 “Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst *formed* [H2342] the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God. Isa 13:8 "And they shall be afraid: pangs and sorrows shall take hold of them; they shall be in*pain* [H2342] *as a woman that travaileth*: they shall be amazed one at another; their faces shall be as flames." Isa 26:17 "Like as a woman with child, that draweth near the time of her delivery, is in *pain,* [H2342] and *crieth out in her pangs;* so have we been in thy sight, O LORD." Isa 45:10 "Woe unto him that saith unto his father, What begettest thou? *or to the woman, What hast thou brought forth? H2342"* Isa 51:2 "Look unto Abraham your father, and unto *Sarah that bare [H2342]* you: for I called him alone, and blessed him, and increased him." Isa 54:1 "Sing, O barren, thou that didst not bear; break forth into singing, and cry aloud, *thou that didst not travail with child: [H2342]* for more are the children of the desolate than the children of the married wife, saith the LORD." Isa 66:7 *"Before she travailed, [H2342] she brought forth; before her pain came, she was delivered of a man child."* *As you can see the Hebrew word, "chûwl", translated as "brought forth" clearly refers to a birth language. Therefore, Prov. 8 denotes "wisdom" or Christ being "brought forth" as in begetting or being begotten.* *To the question, if it is possible that the Son was •"brought forth" in the creation of the world?* *Some people believe that but if you look at Proverbs 8, THAT CONCLUSION IS NOT POSSIBLE.* - *Look at the timing markers in the passage.* - *Vs. 22 says that the Lord begot wisdom *"BEFORE"* his works since.* - *Vs. 23 says He was set up *“FROM EVERLASTING, FROM THE BEGINNING, BEFORE THE WORLD.”* - *Vs. 24,25, explain that He was brought forth before the fountains of water, before the mountains and hills.* - *THUS IT IS IMPOSSIBLE THAT THIS IS REFERENCE TO HIS HUMANITY. WE ARE SPEAKING HERE ABOUT AN EVENT THAT OCCURRED BEFORE THIS WORLD WAS, EVEN FROM EVERLASTING. *Now, regarding the genuineness of Christ's Sonship, He is called the* - *“only begotten” six times, “the firstborn” three times, “the firstbegotten” once and God's “holy child” twice.* - *Four verses say He was “begotten” prior to His incarnation so this cannot be applied to His birth on earth from Mary as some have chosen to believe. Four verses say that He “proceeded forth from,” “came out from” or “camest forth from” the Father.* - *The evidence on this subject is overwhelming. Christ truly is the •literal begotten Son of God who was •brought forth from the Father before all creation.* - *The example verses below with the help of the Thayer dictionary also reveal that Jesus was born of the Father before the world was, then much later, He came into the world.* *Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon:* *G1831* - *To come forth from physically, arise from, to be born of.* *G2064* - *To come from one place to another.* *Some also claim that Jesus cannot be divine if He was born of God.* - *But this is just another tactic Satan uses to deter people from the truth.* - *In any case, the problem is actually the other way around.* - *DIVINITY IS NOT BASED ON HOW OLD YOU ARE BUT WHO YOU CAME FROM.* - *JESUS INHERITED EVERYTHING FROM HIS FATHER INCLUDING HIS DIVINITY.* *EVERYTHING THAT CHRIST CONSISTS OF HAD NO BEGINNING, His divinity, His makeup, His substance had no beginning as it all came from the Father. - *If you trace Christ back you will have to go through the Father and you will never get to a beginning.* - *BUT HIS PERSONALITY AS THE SON BEGAN WHEN HE WAS BROUGHT FORTH BY HIS FATHER.* And *IF JESUS DID NOT GET HIS DIVINE NATURE FROM HIS FATHER, THEN WHERE DID HE GET IT FROM?* *Another means of trying to discredit the truth is to say that Jesus cannot be born of God because He has no mother.* - *But this is an anthropomorphic thought.* - *Why do Trinitarians try and put “human” limitations on God?* - *He is God, NOT human.* - *Strangely, these very same people have no problem with the virgin birth.* - *Just because something does not seem reasonable or logical to us, or just because it does not make sense to us, it does not mean it is not truth.* - *Our heavenly Father said,* - *“For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.”* Isaiah 55:8-9. - *GOD CAN AND DID BRING FORTH A SON WITHOUT HAVING TO CREATE HIM.* - *Scripture does not lie and those opposing the truth on Christ being begotten of the Father should know all things are possible with God.* - *We must not put human limitations on how or what God can and cannot do based on our human finite knowledge over the omniscience and omnipotence of God.* - *Why do so many Christians try to explain away clear words that state Jesus is the Son of God just to uphold a pagan doctrine that does not exist in the Bible?* - *When Satan goes to this much effort you know it has to be extremely important.* *Since Christ is the same substance of His Father, then everything He consists of had no beginning. So His divinity had no beginning, His makeup; His nature had no beginning as it all came from the Father.* In principle, everything Christ is had no beginning. - *IF YOU TRACE CHRIST BACK YOU WILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE FATHER AND YOU WILL NEVER GET TO A BEGINNING.* - *BUT HIS PERSONALITY AS THE SON OF GOD BEGAN WHEN HE WAS BROUGHT FORTH BY HIS FATHER.* - *This principle is brought out in Scripture many times. In effect it was only the personality of Christ that had a beginning.* - *These are the mysteries of God and things our mind cannot possibly comprehend.*
@@harley6394-h3f: For your knowledge, the BRI believes in a metaphorical Sonship. Statement made by Angel Manuel Rodriguez [now retired] was a Seventh-day Adventist theologian and was the “director” of the Adventist BRI (Biblical Research Institute). In the November 2015 issue of Adventist World on page 42 he wrote the following:"The Son is not the natural, literal Son of the Father. A natural child has a beginning, while within the Godhead the Son is eternal. The term “Son” is used metaphorically when applied to the Godhead. It conveys the ideas of distinction of persons within the Godhead and the equality of nature in the context of an eternal, loving relationship" The Bible clearly tells us that Christ, in His pre-existence, is begotten of God therefore He is truly the Son of God [John 1:14, 18, 3:16, 3:18, 1 John 4:9]. *This truth we must accept that God had a Son to give, and we must savour this reality.* *EGW writes,* “The Father, in union and loving sympathy with His Son, subjected Himself to suffer with His Son. He spared not His only begotten Son, but freely delivered Him up for us all. This gift of Christ is the crowning truth of God’s love, and His Fatherhood through all time and through eternity. Here the love of God in His Fatherhood is shown. Let us drink in this love, that we may know by experience what a real, tender, joyful, experience there is in a realization of the Fatherhood of God.” 12LtMs, Lt 50, 1897, par. 51 *Etymologists at some point decided* that the term *μονογενης (monogenes)* did not in fact carry the meaning of ‘begotten’. Rather, *it seems to be the case.* This is the reason that modern translations of the Bible have effectively dropped the use of this term in English. *Thus, they say that the word means ‘one-of-a-kind’ and is reserved for Jesus in the Johannine literature of the NT.* In every instance of *μονογενης (monogenes)* in the NT, the meaning ‘only begotten’ fits the context better than ‘one of a kind’ or unique’. It may be concluded that the usage of *μονογενης (monogenes)* that there is clear warrant for retaining the meaning ‘only begotten’. If *μονογενης* truly mean ‘one of a kind’ or ‘unique’, without any reference to ‘begetting’, then one might expect *μονογενης (monogenes) * could be used of a brother or sister and even of a father. Therefor we might expect to also find *μονογενης αδελφος* meaning ‘one of a kind/unique brother’, or *μονογενης αδελφη* meaning ‘one of a kind/unique sister’ and *μονογενης πατηρ* meaning ‘one of a kind/unique father’. Such expressions do not occur throughout the whole of Greek literature. *Whenever μονογενης (monogenes) is used in the context of personal relationship, the relationship is always that of offspring to parent. This strongly suggest that the concept of ‘begotten’ is indeed present in μονογενης (monogenes).* *μονογενης (monogenes)* is a Greek adjective consisting of two parts, *μονο (mono) and γενης (genes).* There is no argument regarding the derivation of the first part of the word; it is from the Greek word *μονον (monon),* an adverb meaning ‘only’. The difference of opinion only arises in regard to the second part of the word, *γενης.* The traditional view is that *γενης* is to be derived from the Greek verb *γενναω* Strong’s 1080 *(‘meaning to beget, conceive‘),* so that *μονογενης* meaning ‘class’, ‘sort’, ‘kind’, so that *μονογενης* must mean ‘one of a kind’ or ‘unique’. In support of the letter view, some point out that *γενος* has only a single v (the Greek letter, pronounced ‘nu’) as does *μονογενης while γενναω* has two v’s. So which etymology is correct? *It must also be recognized that it is only in recent times that some scholars have advanced the view that the Greek word* - *μονογενης (monogenes)* - *does not mean ‘only begotten’, as in the Authorised King James Version, but ‘one of a kind’ or ‘unique’ or something which omits the concept of ‘begotten’.* *It must also be noted that there is nothing in the term *μονογενης (monogenes)* to indicate that Christ was ‘the eternal Son of God,’ as many suggested.* If the type was not literal than the anti-type should also not be literal, but this is not so. *The Bible is clear that the type and anti-type are both literal Father and Son.* - *Nowhere in the Bible do we read that Jesus is a unique or metaphorical Son, but it rather gives the direct opposite repeatedly.* *The claim that the γενης (genes) [Strongs 1085 meaning descendant, Family] ending of μονογενης is to be derived from γενος with the meaning ‘class’, or ‘sort’, ‘kind’, may be tested by examining the meaning of the γενης ending in a similar Greek adjective which also have the same two-part structure.* *Herewith a list of such adjectives.* *1* πρωτογενης: - *first born* - *2* ομογενης: - *of the same race or family* - *3* πολυγενης: - *of many families* - *4* αγεηνς: - *not of noble birth; low born* *5* παλιγενης: - *born again, generated anew* - *6* ευγενης: - *well born, high born* - *7* αγεννης: - *low born δυσγενης: low born* - *8* προγενης: - *born before* - *9* συγγενης: - *related, akin* *It may be observed that in all the above-mentioned [9] words the concept of ‘begetting’ or ‘derivation by birth’ is clearly present.* *The Nicene Creed of the year 325 defines monogenēs as “only-begotten.”* *Monogenēs was always translated as “only-begotten,” even in the Latin translations that preceded the first English Bible.* *The word is monadikos (μοναδικός) and it antedates Christianity, having been employed by Aristotle, Philo, and others. The Greek word monadikos (μοναδικός) means unique or one of a kind and nothing else, as native Greeks know. Its morphology hasn't changed in over two thousand years. monadikos (μοναδικός) is the word that Greek speakers have been using for unique for more than two thousand years, and it is the word native Greeks still use today when they want to say unique or one of a kind.* *Neither has the morphology of (monogenes) μονογενης changed in over two thousand years, and monogenes has always meant only begotten or its equivalent.* *Just as only begotten is not equivalent to unique, so monogenes is not equivalent to monadikos. The Greek word monogenes does not mean unique, nor has it ever. The Greek word monadikos means unique. It has always meant unique.* *Had the writers of the New Testament wanted to say unique, THEY WOULD HAVE USED THE GREEK WORD WHICH MEANS UNIQUE - monadikos (μοναδικός).* *The reason the writers of the New Testament didn’t employ monadikos when they penned the New Testament is simple - because the writers of the New Testament didn’t mean unique. The writers of the New Testament meant only begotten or its equivalent. That’s why they used the word monogenes (μονογενης) instead of monadikos (μοναδικός).* *According to both history and native Greeks themselves, the Greek word monogenes means only begotten or its equivalent, and it has always been so,* notwithstanding the delusions of Anglo-bible scholars and modern version translators who cannot speak Greek. *SCRIPTURE CLEARLY INDICATES A PERSONAL PATTERN OF A FATHER AND SON RELATIONSHIP.* *Another objection that many put forth is:* - *If Paul meant to convey that Christ was the first created being, why did he not use the Greek word protoktistos, which means "first created"?* - *Prōtoktistos comes from the said adjective prōtos and the verb ktizō ‘to build, construct, create.’* *Christian theologians have often used this distinction as evidence that Jesus was “begotten, not made”* and is therefore of the same substance/dna as the Father as opposed to a mere part of the creation. - In Col. 1:15, the rendering "every creature" in context designates the class being spoken as being all living creatures. On the other hand, *Jesus is certainly NOT the firstborn of only one creature, which really would make no sense.* *If Jesus was the first created, as some people claim, surely the Greek word ‘protoktistos’ would have been used instead.* *One could ask a similar question concerning Paul’s usage of firstborn in Colossians 1:18, such as* - *why didn't he say "first raised" from the dead, rather than "firstborn" from the dead?* *There is no record that the word protokistos was in common use in Paul's day. If the word protokistos [which nowhere appears in the Bible] had been used, then the thought would have been shifted from the rights of the one who is firstborn to his being the first created.* - *Paul was not emphasizing that Jesus was the first created,* - *but rather that Jesus held the rights of heirship as the firstborn of all creation.* - *This in no way negates the fact that the firstborn one is included in the group spoken of; it certainly does not provide any reason to change its meaning in this case from the meaning shown in its usage throughout the scriptures.*
@@harley6394-h3f: - *There can be absolutely no mistaking this.* - *The Lamb, He, is King of kings and Lord of lords too!* - *Thus He has the very same titles as His Father.* - *This is a co-regency that God Himself has established so His Son carries the same royal titles as does His Father, the Sovereign of the universe.* - *Yet again we must recognize that the Son has titles that God the Father does not* - *such the great Prince, Prince of princes, the Prince [or Captain] of the host and Archangel (Dan 12:1; **8:25**; **8:11**; Joshua **5:14**; Jude 1:9).* - *These latter titles in no way negate the previous titles that He has as God’s co-regent.* - *They do help us to see the next layer or tier in the authority though.* *It should also be apparent that “Lord God Almighty” is a title that belongs to the Son of God just as much as it does to God the Father.* - *How else can the angels bow before Christ and declare as much?* *In Hebrews 1:1-9 we note that the speaker is God the Father and that He is addressing His Son and calling Him “God.”* *The Scripture says,* - *‘God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by HIS SON, WHOM HE HATH APPOINTED HEIR OF ALL THINGS, by whom also he made the worlds.’* Hebrews 1:1, 2 *Verse 2 says,* - *that Christ was ‘appointed heir’ of all things. An ‘HEIR’ of course is someone who receives an ‘inheritance’ from someone.* - *In this case Christ the Son received an ‘INHERITANCE’ from His Father.* *Verse 4 says,* - *“Being made so much better than the angels, as he has BY “INHERITANCE” OBTAINED A MORE EXCELLENT ‘NAME’ THAN THEY.’* - *Verse 8 says that this more excellent ‘NAME’ is the name ‘Title,’ which was given by the Father to His Son. ‘Unto the Son He [God] saith, Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever.’* *Verse 8 says,* - *that this more excellent NAME is the name ‘God,’ which was given by the Father to His Son.* - *‘Unto the Son He [God] saith, Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever.’* *What did Jesus receive?* - *His ‘NAME,’ His authority and His power.* - *In other words, Jesus being the one and only begotten Son of the living God received by virtue of His birth all of the attributes that His Father possessed.* - *And so, this name ‘He has by “INHERITANCE.”* - *It is not a ‘NAME’ that was bestowed but a ‘NAME’ that was ‘INHERITED’ from His Father.* *Note:* - *An heir is defined as a person who is legally entitled to inherit the property or rank of another on that person's death or at the appointed time when the person is to receive his recognition.* - *If Jesus was the heir, then whatever he was to receive as the rightful heir.* *Jesus declares:* - *‘I AM COME IN MY FATHER'S NAME, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.’* John 5:43 *Christ not only inherited His name but other things as well. Name means authority [Mark 11:9, John 5:43], and it also means character and nature [Exodus 33:18-19, Exodus 34:5-6].* - *The name Adam means human for example.* - *When people have children, they not only inherit the name of their parents but they also inherit the nature of the parents, which of course is human nature.* *In like manner, Jesus inherited the same name as His Father, just as a child inherits the name of the parents, and He also inherits the nature of His Father, which is His divine nature.* *‘Behold, I send an ANGEL before thee, to keep thee in the way, and TO BRING THEE INTO THE PLACE WHICH I HAVE PREPARED. Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions:* - *FOR MY NAME IS IN HIM.’* - Ex. 23:20,21 *‘And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, BY THE NAME OF GOD ALMIGHTY, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.’* Ex. 6:3 *‘JEHOVAH IS THE NAME GIVEN TO CHRIST.* - *'Behold, God is my salvation,' writes the prophet Isaiah; 'I will trust, and not be afraid; for the Lord Jehovah is my strength and my song; He also is become my salvation.* - *ST, May 3, 1899, par. 18 Quoting 1saiah 12:2* *Christ also inherits His Father’s life. ‘For as the Father has life in himself; so has he given to the Son to have life in himself.’ John 5:26.* - *If Jesus had always existed alongside the Father as the Trinity doctrine claims,* - *then God could not have given life to His Son as He would have always had life.* - *But Scripture reveals this is impossible.* *Thus, there is only ‘ONE’ true God.* - *Jesus is ‘NOT’ the God, He is the ‘Son of God.’* - *He carries the ‘NAME’ of God by virtue of His ‘INHERITANCE.’* - *And because He is the Son of God, He is ‘EQUAL’ with God.* *Philippians 2:6 reads,* - *‘Who, being in the form of God, THOUGHT IT NOT ROBBERY TO BE EQUAL WITH GOD:’ Doesn’t this mean that Jesus is equal with the Father?* *This title [God] was not given to Christ in consequence of some great achievement, but it is His by right of inheritance.* *A son always rightfully takes the name of the father; and Christ, as ‘the only begotten Son of God,’ has rightfully the same name.* *A son, also, is, to a greater or lesser degree, image of the father;* - *he has, to some extent, the features and personal characteristics of his father; not perfectly, because there is no perfect reproduction amongst mankind.* *But there is no imperfection in God, or in any of His works; So, Christ is the ‘express image’ of the Father's person.* Heb. 1:3. *An image is never the original but always a likeness or duplication of the original. Christ is the Son of God and therefore the express image of His Father. In the two Pauline passages, the word used is eikon, which was generally the Septuagint rendering of tselem [Vulagte: imago]; it is derived from eiko, eoika, ‘to be like,’ ‘resemble,’ and means that which resembles an object and represents it, as a copy represents the original. In Heb.1:3 the word used is character, which is found here only in the NT, and is translated in Vulgate [Jerome’s Latin Bible, 390-405 AD] figura, the KJV ‘EXPRESS IMAGE,’.* - The RV [British and American] ‘very image,’. *As the Son of the self-existent God, he has by nature all the attributes of Deity.* *It is true that there are many sons of God; but Christ is the ‘only begotten Son of God,’ and therefore the Son of God in a sense in which no other being ever was, or ever can be.* - *The angels are sons of God, as was Adam [Job 38:7; Luke 3:38], by creation; Christians are the sons of God by adoption [Rom. **8:14**,15];* *Jehovah is the name given to Christ.* - *‘Behold, God is my salvation,’ writes the prophet Isaiah; ‘I will trust, and not be afraid; for the Lord JEHOVAH is my strength and my song; He also is become my salvation.’* Isa. 12:2 *In Exodus 23:20 The word mal’ak, ‘angel’, means ‘messenger,’ and is translated as often one way as the other. Christ was ever the Messenger of God to Israel, and as such conveyed to them a knowledge of the character, will, and mercy of God (Gen.22:1, 10-12; Ex.32:34; Isa.63:7-9; Mal. 3:1-2; John 8:54-58; 1 Tim. 2:5*. - SDA BC. Vol.1. Page 628. *Jesus is the only being in the universe that has the right to bear the name of God because He is the only begotten Son of God, the express image of God’s person.* *If God created everything through Christ - it is quite logical for Him to continue to do everything through His Son.* - *Jesus is the one through whom God saves every sinner from eternal destruction.* *We see here the beauty of divine character.* - *Father and Son have always worked together.* - *Jesus will always be the one through whom God accomplishes everything. From Genesis to Revelation, we find no one else to declare the name of Jehovah but Christ.* *“He stepped down from the throne of honor, laid off his royal robe and his royal crown, gave back into his Father’s hand the scepter, and veiling divinity with humanity, humbled himself, and came to a world all seared and marred with the curse. “For your sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be rich.” Although he was the Majesty of heaven, he bore the cross of shame.” YI May 27, 1897, par. 3. *Thus, what is happening here, in this giving back the scepter into the Father’s hand, is that the Son temporarily gave up His rights and status as the Almighty.* - *Again, the following quote clarifies:* “When Jesus was awakened to meet the storm, He was in perfect peace. There was no trace of fear in word or look, for no fear was in His heart. *BUT HE RESTED NOT IN THE POSSESSION OF ALMIGHTY POWER. It was not as the “Master of earth and sea and sky” that He reposed in quiet. THAT POWER HE HAD LAID DOWN, and He says, “I can of Mine own self do nothing.”* John 5:30. He trusted in the Father’s might. It was in faith-faith in God’s love and care-that Jesus rested, and the power of that word which stilled the storm was the power of God.” Desire of Ages, page 336.1 *This is why the Man Christ Jesus WAS NOT the Lord God Almighty during His time here on earth. That power He had laid down.* - *He was not manifest in His fully glory. However, He has now been reinstated to His original glory that He had in His oneness with the Father. [read John 17] Thus, He is currently carrying that title once again for the angels worship Him as such.* - I trust that this is clear.* - *It cannot be explained an better.* *Scripture affirms the idea that Christ inherited the Father’s appellation.*
if i need the holy ghost who to ask for it according the bible PASTOR i have to ask the third entity of God let read LUc 11;13 read for yourself can the third entity give something he do not have the bible said God
And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. Exodus 3:14 Who was the God who spoke those words to Moses, I AM THAT I AM? It was Christ who from the bush on Mount Horeb spoke to Moses saying, “I AM THAT I AM: Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.” This was the pledge of Israel's deliverance. So when He came “in the likeness of men,” He declared Himself the I AM. The Child of Bethlehem, the meek and lowly Saviour, is God “manifest in the flesh.” 1 Timothy 3:16. 42 . FLB 47.5 EG White Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham. was, I am. John 8:58
according the bible how to define this third entity if you still believe on the bible PASTOR let read Luc 1 : 35 AND THE ANGEL ansewed and said unto her THE HOLY GHOST shall come upon thee,and THE POWER OF THE OF THE HIGHEST SHALL OVERSHAHADOW THEE.if you do not believe on this word let read ACTS 1: 8 JESUS WORD BUT YE SHALL RECEIVE POWER after THE HOLU GHOST IS COME UPON YOU {ONE QUESTION YOU DISTRUBUTE THIS POWER}
SDA vs Catholic vs Anti-trinitarian CATHOLIC TRINITY The Trinity of the Catholic Church is derived from Greek philosophy and teaches that it is the Father who eternally generates the Son. The Son is seen as having been derived/begotten by the Father while the Holy Spirit proceeds from both. This implies that the generation of the Son depends on the Father theologically and that the Father is the only one without origin. The Catholic Church affirms the eternal subordination of the Son. ANTI-TRINITARIANS Anti-Trinitarians have substantial similarities to the Roman Catholic Church’s concept of the trinity. They seem to have inherited the Roman Catholic Church’s understanding of God with the Son in subordination to the Father having been begotten in a birthing event deriving his existence from the Father. This similarity is also seen in the procession of the Holy Spirit from both the Father and Son. SDA GODHEAD The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one Godhead or one God with three co-eternal, co-equal divine Persons each God, in perfect unity though distinct from one another, None is the origin of the others. The anti-trinitarians in reality are expounding Roman Catholic trinity doctrine. They are under a strong delusion and it is possible that Rome herself is at the head of their movement and has them deceived.
If God the Holy Spirit can take any form he desires, then can He transform himself into the devil or a flower, or vapor, or the whole universe? That is PANTHEISM MR. SKEETE! WHY JESUS WILL CONFESS OUR NAMES BEFORE THE FATHER (MAT. 10:32) AND THE ANGELS (LUKE12:8) AND NOT BEFORE THE HOLY SPIRIT?
For several minutes, starting at about 8:00, Elder Skeete addresses a wonderful passage in Hebrews 5. He makes the valid point that the son had not selected himself for the position of high priest, but had been appointed by someone else. But then, he strays widely from the text of verse 4, which identifies the Caller as "God." Elder Skeete says at 9:57 that the Father appointed him. But the word "Father" was nowhere in that text! Yes, the Father did anoint Jesus--that is true. But the text says "God" did this. If Jesus were God, then God would have anointed "God"--defeating the entire point Elder Skeete has just tried to make. His rationalize is actually against the Trinity--though he sees it not.
Hebrews 1-8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom. So here none less than God the Father speaking (v5) using the worshipful phrase "O God" to address Jesus. This was during his incarnation as a man yet He referred to Christ as God. But although Christ’s divine glory was for a time veiled and eclipsed by His assuming humanity, yet He did not cease to be God when He became man. The human did not take the place of the divine, nor the divine of the human. This is the mystery of godliness. The two expressions “human” and “divine” were, in Christ, closely and inseparably one, and yet they had a distinct individuality. {5BC 1129.3}
@@harley6394-h3f Beware of mistranslations. This text in Hebrews 1:8 is anomalous, and was not correctly translated. I have given a detailed explanation of this elsewhere here, but it should have said "...your throne is of God..." based on the original grammar.
@@MongRay-n8i The angels all wear the yoke of obedience. They are the appointed messengers of Him who is the Commander of all heaven. But Christ is equal with God, infinite and omnipotent. He could pay the ransom for man's freedom. He is the eternal self-existing Son, on whom no yoke had come; SDA Bible Commentary, vol. 5, p. 1136 "Christ had not ceased to be God when He became man. Though He had humbled Himself to humanity, the Godhead was still His own. Christ alone could represent the Father to humanity, and this representation the disciples had been privileged to behold for over three years. {DA 663.5} Christ was seeking to lead them from their low condition of faith to the experience they might receive if they truly realized what He was,-God in human flesh." { DA 664.2}
@@harley6394-h3f No. I am not sure if I have even seen a Jehovah's Witness Bible. I certainly do not have one in my possession. I have been studying Hebrew for over six years, through Hebrew University in Jerusalem, with about 8-10 hours of classes per week. My present Hebrew level may be ahead of many pastors who study Hebrew in seminary; however, Biblical Hebrew is a complex language, and I am still soaking it up, feeling there is much more to learn. I often have questions for my professors, and am able to learn from them as well, one of whom answered some of my questions relative to this particular verse. However, Hebrew, not English, is their focus, and my English rendering is my own.
PAS TOR GENESIS SAID MY SPIRIT it do not say his spirit or her spirit GOD SAID my spirit when you say my it is belong to someone else or it belong to you when GOD SAID MY SPIRIT IT BELONG TOME NOT TO A THIRD PERSON OF TRINITY read JOEL 2;28 zacharie 4;6 by my spirit sad the LOrd
Psalms 104:4 Who makes His angels spirits, His ministers a flame of fire. 5 You who laid the foundations of the earth, So that it should not be moved forever, Psalms 106:33 Because they rebelled against His Spirit, So that he spoke rashly with his lips.
this third entity give or distrubute the HOLY GHOST LET READ HEBREUX 2: 4 GOD ALSO BEAR THEM WITNESS both with signs and wonders and with divers miracles and gifts of THE HOLY GHOST ACCORDING HIS OWN WILL let read 1 corinthiens 12 ; 11 but all of these that one and self same SPIRIT WORKETH ,apportioning to every man individually as he will .i do not have to wrote eveything but read for yourself
This poor pastor has not yet understood John 4:24. "God is a spirit," Jesus said. The "spirit of God" is just what the words tell us--God's spirit. It is not a third being of the Godhead, something separate from the Father. John 4:21-23, the verses immediately preceding the one in which Jesus said God is a spirit, tell us that the Father is the God whom we are to worship. Jesus said in John 17:3 that the Father was "the only true God." Should we be quick to change Jesus' words, and to teach contrary to them?
With every text and passage, the evidence is clear to me....The GODHEAD exists (3). If you eliminate the Holy Spirit, you run the risk of offending Him, of committing blasphemy against Him Just as Ananias and Sapphira lied unto the Holy Spirit, whom Peter called GOD, Your position of rejecting the Holy as a part of the GODHEAD is the same sort of act. What we cannot do is understand everything about GOD. Your position breeds confusion. Bible: There are 3 that bear record in heaven You: No theres only 2 Bible: God the Father spoke from heaven, the spirit descended like a dove, as Jesus was coming up out of the water You: No, there wasn't three there...there was only two. Bible: When I go to the Father, I will send Another Comforter...He will testify of me...He will lead you into all truth You: Jesus sent himself back This is Confusion..and Deception. The position is The Bible is not really saying shat it is actually saying. 🙏🏾🔥📖🙏🏾🔥📖🙏🏾🔥📖🙏🏾🙏🏾📖🔥
@@msladymack1960 According to the Bible, the Father is God, and it was the Father God who sent His son Jesus. Jesus is "the son of man." Look up Numbers 23:19 to see what that means Jesus _isn't._ Then confirm this by looking at Jesus' own words in Luke 24:39 which contrast clearly with his words in John 4:24. The Ten Commandments clearly state that we are to have no other god before "me." That "me" is singular in Hebrew, just as it is in English. Who are you putting beside Him? If Jesus is God, then we are God's _brothers_ according to Jesus in John 20:17, not God's _sons_ as we are so often told, such as in John 1:12. It is the Trinitarian who brings confusion to the Biblical text.
You are speaking about jesus after incarinationHere Christ shows them that, although they might reckon His life to be less than fifty years, yet His divine life could not be reckoned by human computation. The existence of Christ before His incarnation is not measured by figures.-The Signs of the Times, May 3, 1899. it [God's Word] we may learn what our redemption has cost Him who from the beginning was equal with the Father.-Counsels to Parents, Teachers, and Students, 13. you are narrowing it down to the level of you human mind my question is where did you put christ before incarination it is going from chiristanty to the teaching of islam Dening the the devinity of jesus@user-fd1lj4pn4g
Think alittle higher please don't say poor that is the spirit of Satan. Instead ,he understands. the way he understands is different from the way you understand
@@derartubedasso2831 I affirm what the Bible affirms, and deny what it denies. The Bible is clear: Jesus cannot have been God. Jesus was tempted (see Matthew 4:1): God cannot be tempted (see James 1:13). Jesus died: God cannot die (see 1 Timothy 1:17). Jesus was Lord of the dead (see Romans 14:9): God is not the God of the dead (see Matthew 22:32). Jesus was seen of multitudes, and his voice was heard: God has never been seen by anyone (see 1 John 4:12, John 1:18) nor has the Father's voice ever been heard (see John 5:37). Jesus calls us his "brethren" (see John 20:17): God calls us His "sons" (see e.g. John 1:12). If Jesus had been God, scores of Bible verses would be wrong. How do you explain them? Was Jesus tempted or not? If he was, then he was not God, because God cannot be tempted with evil (James 1:13). If even one verse denies the Trinity, then the Trinity must be given up. The Bible is clear: God sent His _son._ They are two separate entities, and they are not equal. Jesus said himself "my father is greater than I" (John 14:28). Ellen White says if God sent His son, then he had a son to send. Hebrews 10:5 indicates that the son came to dwell in a body that had been prepared for him. I believe that before this incarnation, Jesus was known as Michael in heaven--who was called an archangel but is nowhere called God. Interestingly, the Father has commanded _the angels_ to worship His son (see Hebrews 1:6). Why would the angels have needed this command if the son had already been God? Do you suppose the angels would have been ignorant of who God was? And if being God's son means one is God, why are we not _all_ Gods, as Jesus calls us in John 10:34? And why, if Jesus had been God, would it have been wrong for them to worship him? For Ellen White tells us that before he met the Father after his resurrection, he commanded the angels not to worship him until he had received the Father's approbation. Would God ever command His subjects not to worship him? There are simply too many inconsistencies with a Trinitarian belief system--especially for those of us who hold the writings of Ellen G. White.
Pastor is preaching another gospel. We know whose spirit it is, not a separate person. This equality gospel which started in heaven as part of the great controversy is destroying society. The issue of the trinity is not a small doctrine, it is false and destroys the personality of Christ. Christ has always submitted to the will of His Father so are we to submit to Christ as the head of the church. Satan is the one who brings this issue of equality through this false gospel. You may wonder why the world has pushed this gospel of equality in everything? Now you know where it is coming from. The Spirit is not a separate entity but the presence of Christ and His Father in the soul. That’s the reason why we still have verses in the Bible that call the spirit an IT. John personified the spirit because it is the spirit of Christ John 14:18. God is one. 1Cori8:6-8
*Dr. Kwabena Donkor, PhD in systematic theology from Andrews University and retired Associate Director Biblical Research Institute (BRI) states,* - *“No text of Scripture specifically says that God is three Persons:* - *but theological reasoning on the basis of biblical principles leads to that conclusion.”* - *Release 9, May 2015, page 20, God in 3 Person - in Theology* So, then what is being stated is that *“No text of Scripture specifically says that God is three Persons”* *Then he [Kwabena Donkor] concludes,* - *“theological reasoning based on biblical principles leads to that conclusion.”* *What a contradiction!* - *First, he says there is no prooftext* - *then he contradicts himself by saying theological reasoning based on biblical principle leads to that conclusion.* - *He should have been a politician.* *Since when does dogma replace scripture?* *An official Church Publication reads,* - *“If Adventism is to meet the needs of all people around the world, the landmarks must remain simple and straightforward. The Bible will be our only creed. Complex theological definitions, *THE TRINITY, FOR EXAMPLE, MAY SERVE THE CHURCH WELL IN GENERAL BUT CANNOT BE IMPOSED AS A TEST FOR ALL ADVENTIST EVERYWHERE.”* - Issues: The Seventh-day Adventist Church and Certain Private Ministries, 1992, p.50, (NAD 1977) “Adventism can expect fresh insights into truth, ‘present truth’ that will enhance the appreciation of old landmarks. Such an expectation has always been a part of historic Adventism and is reaffirmed in the Statement of Fundamental Beliefs voted in 1980. When ‘present truth’ is of a complex nature, however, *it may be more helpful for some in the church than for others. In such a case it cannot be imposed on the church as a whole.”* (Ibid). *Then he [Kwabena Donkor] says,* - *“Remember our non-Trinitarian past as well as the simplicity of our landmarks should encourage a certain humility in the church and lead us to resist any attempt by one segment of the church to impose its views on the rest.”* (Ibid) *Now, be honest and tell me, is it proper for the GC of the SDA Church to impose its synthesis on members, and expel those who conscientiously do not agree with the church’s reasoning, even though those members accept everything the Bible actually says?* *Today, we all know that the word PERSON refers to an individual. An individual is someone composed of a physical form that we can recognize by sight and one who also possesses a non-physical entity, the spirit, which we recognize to be the person, personality, or character of that individual.* - *THIS HAS NOT ALWAYS BEEN THE CASE.* *The etymology of the phrase PERSON reveals the following:* - *”The word, “person” has had different meanings over the course of time.* The New World Encyclopedia notes [Subtitle Historical Development of the Doctrine of the Trinity], “Tertullian started to use the expression of ‘three persons’ (tres personae in Latin). *The Latin word persona in the days of Tertullian never meant a self-conscious individual person,* which is what is usually meant by the modern English word ‘person.’ *In those days, it only meant legal ownership or a mask used at the theater.* Thus, three distinct persons are still of one substance (una substantia in Latin). It was in this context that Tertullian also used the word trinitas” (key word “Trinity”)”. *Webster's Dictionary, 1828:* - *Person,* noun. per'sn. Latin persona; said to be compounded of per, through or by, and sonus, sound; a Latin word signifying primarily a mask used by actors on the stage. *So, in the Trinity doctrine the holy Spirit is supposed to be a mask because at the time the Trinity doctrine was developed the term "person" actually meant mask.* *Here is the punchline:* --- *"The third Person was asserted at a Council of Alexandria in 362...and finally by the Council of Constantinople of 381"* - *A Catholic Dictionary, p. 812.* *The UNREASONABLE INSISTENCE UPON THE USE OF 21st-CENTURY ENGLISH IDIOMS OF SPEECH TO INTERPRET FIRST CENTURY GREEK OR HEBREW HAS LED TO SOME EXTREME VIEWS INDEED.* - *Scores of contradictions would appear in both the Old and New Testaments if this principle were ignored.* - *We must compare Scripture with Scripture and use the idiom of the language in which the Bible was written and not our own thoughts and ideas.* *The Trinity doctrine was now fully established as we know it today.* - *So, the Trinity doctrine is a manmade doctrine from the Catholic Church which was formed in two parts.* *“The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century… Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective”* -New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. 14. Spirit Defined as per American Heritage Dictionary: “Part of a human associated with the mind, will and feelings” *A simple Google search describes spirit as:* - *the non-physical part of a person which is the seat of emotions and character; the soul.* www.google.com/search?q=spirit+define&oq *Spirit is the mind or character or personality of God and of Jesus.* God is Holy, therefore His character is holy. [holy: adjective describing the Spirit: Noun]. *The reference work A Catholic Dictionary similarly acknowledges,* - *“On the whole the New Testament, like the Old, speaks of the spirit as a divine energy or power”* (William Addis and Thomas Arnold, 2004, “Trinity, Holy,” p. 827). *From Bible evidence, God's Spirit is His mind, life, divine presence, and glory.* - *The evidence points to the fact that God's Spirit is a part of God - the personality and character of God, able to manifest itself in various ways apart from God's bodily form.* - *Because it ‘proceeds from the Father’ [John 15:26], it is most commonly called the ‘Spirit OF God’ or ‘Spirit OF Christ’, and as opposed to our spirit, it is ‘Holy’.* *The word ‘Holy’ is an adjective* - *be it in English or Greek.* - *‘Holy Spirit’ is not a name but a description of God's Spirit.* - *The Bible mentions several types of spirits. We find ‘evil spirit,’ ‘dumb spirit,’ ‘unclean spirit,’ ‘foul spirit,’ ‘humble spirit,’ ‘excellent spirit,’ ‘good spirit,’ ‘broken spirit,’ ‘wounded spirit,’ ‘faithful spirit,’ and ‘haughty spirit’ etc,.* - *All these spirits are distinguishable by the adjective that describes them such as good, foul and humble etc,. We know that God the Father has a spirit* [Matthew 10:20] and His Spirit of course could be nothing other than Holy.*
"Theological Reasoning based on biblical principle leads to that conclusion" - in other words you are quoting this text: "Isaiah 28:13 (KJV) But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken". Which a is biblical method of studying and preaching of the scripture and you got problem with scripture, very sad. The Pastor is using biblical method in preaching to explain, expound and drawn out the truth. MOST OR IF NOT ALL PEACHING USE THIS METHOD. If you saying that this method of bible study and preaching is wrong and in error than, you might as well; THROW ALL FOUNDATIONAL "DOCTRINES" OF THE CHURCH INTO THE WASTE PAPER BASKET OR TRASH CAN. BECAUSE THESE FOUNDATIONAL "DOCTRINES" WERE DERIVED USING THIS METHOD. Can you see how your argument is stupid and nonsensical?
That goes to "PROPHECY INTERPRETATION". One cannot interpret and understand prophecy without using this method. Come on dude!😂 Your argument is hilarious 😂
@@christophertunusau3023: Strange, you have not proven anything. The only funny thing is your hilarious laughing emoji faces. Now that is what is nonsensical.
@@christophertunusau3023: *The Greek word for •'comforter' is 'parakletos',* - *which means* - *'intercessor, advocate, comforter'.* - * If you take a look at 1 John 2:1 it says that •Jesus Christ is our 'advocate'.* - *And the Greek word used for advocate in this verse is the same 'parakletos' used for comforter in the other verses regarding the Spirit.* 1 Timothy 2:5 also confirms we only have ONE *mediator [advocate]* with the Father, and that is Jesus Christ. *So, what was to be 'sent' as a comforter for us?* - *The Spirit of Christ.* *Strong's Concordance G3875 is found five times in scripture (KJV).* John 14:16, 14:26, 15:26, 16:7 and 1 John 2:1 - *Its usage is: an ADVOCATE, Intercessor, a consoler, COMFORTER, helper, Paraclete or Parakletos.* *Re: John 14:26* - Comforter (KJV): *Strong's Concordance G3875 is found five times in scripture (KJV).* - *John 14:16, 14:26, 15:26, 16:7 and 1 John 2:1* - *Its usage is: an ADVOCATE, Intercessor, a consoler, COMFORTER, helper, Paraclete or Parakletos.* 1 John 2:1 reads "My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, *we have an ADVOCATE with the Father, JESUS CHRIST THE RIGHTEOUS."* www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g3875/kjv/tr/0-1/ *Who does Revelation 1:13 say is walking amongst the candlesticks [churches]? A separate third being?* - *No, it is Jesus Christ Himself.* *VERSE USED - John 16:7-8* - *“Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, THE COMFORTER WILL NOT COME UNTO YOU; BUT IF I DEPART, I WILL SEND HIM UNTO YOU. And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment.”* *Many people read these verses and say Jesus is talking about another person here, because Jesus says 'HIM' and 'HE' referring to the Holy Spirit." ... It is clearly proven above that when Jesus spoke about Himself,* - *He did it in the 'third person,* - *and in some cases, Jesus would switch between first-person and third-person references in the same sentence structure.* - *Illeism is sometimes used in literature as a stylistic device.* *Illeism /ˈɪli.ɪzəm/ (from Latin ille meaning "he, that") is the act of referring to oneself (often habitually) in the third person instead of first person. Also called self-talk.* The *phrase third person* is a grammatical construct called a simile.* - *They are figures of speech and are used to explain, make comparisons or draw contrasts.* - *Figures of speech are not exactly reliable to draw dogmatic positions from.* *FOR SDA:* - “[1] The incarnation of Christ, [2] HIS DIVINITY, [3] His atonement, [4] His wonderful life in heaven as our advocate, [5] the OFFICE of the Holy Spirit-all these vital themes of Christianity are revealed from Genesis to Revelation. Each is a golden link in the perfect chain of truth. Why, then, should not the Scriptures be exalted in every school in our land?” - CT, p. 427.3 EGW [brackets mine] *Before she says, “all these vital themes of Christianity,” she lists:* *1.)* - *“The incarnation of Christ,* *2.)* - *“HIS DIVINITY,”* *3.)* - *“His atonement,”* *4.)* - *“His wonderful life in heaven as our advocate,”* *5.)* - *“the OFFICE of the Holy Spirit.* It is not that difficult to see that all the “vital themes” mentioned in the above quote refers to Christ and His divine activities; He is the one who will “IMPART TO US HIS OWN INDIVIDUALITY” [Ms70, 1896, par.33] which is “THE DIVINITY OF HIS CHARACTER” - RH April 5, 1906, par. 12 via His own Spirit. “The Son of God was next in authority to the great Lawgiver. He knew that his life alone could be sufficient to ransom fallen man. He was of as much more value than man as his noble, spotless character, *and exalted [office] as commander of all the heavenly host,* were above the work of man. He was in the express image of his Father, NOT IN FEATURE ALONE, BUT IN PERFECTION OF CHARACTER.” 2SP, 9.1 *The significant underlying context as to why she chose such expression as the* - *“third person” or “personality” language in describing the Holy Spirit.* - *It was NOT intended to bring in a new theology* [“God the Holy Spirit” being an entirely separate individual] *but to uphold the truths of the sanctuary and the personality of God.* By portraying the Spirit as a “third person” or having a “distinct personality”, *it counters the depersonalization of the Pantheistic concept of god and it also distinguishes the Spirit as the very personal presence and power of the Father and Son that is distinctly different than Father and Son’s corporeal personality.* The “agency” or the “office” therefore which Ellen White speaks of does NOT connote “another being” but rather an “operational distinction” that defines the “character of it’s office.” The agency of the Holy Spirit brings with it the personality of Christ’s divinity that is distinctly different than Christ’s humanity. And this is precisely the reason why the Inspiration, both Scripture and the Spirit of Prophecy, gives personal attributes to the Holy Spirit. There are Three Economic Personalities - Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit. “They have ONE God and ONE Saviour; and ONE Spirit-the Spirit of Christ-is to bring unity into their ranks.” - E.G. White, 9T 189.3, 1909. *Holy Spirit:* = *the non-corporeal aspect of the Father and Son’s personality whereby they are omnipresent.* *The words such as “person” and “personality” in the Spirit of Prophecy have a range of meanings, but two are important to this matter:* *1.)* - *“Person” and “personality” can refer to a WHOLE BEING.* *2.)* - *“Person” and “personality” can also refer to an ECONOMIC OFFICE OR ROLE.* We may refer to the first of these the “Capital ‘P’ Person” and the second of these the “lower case ‘p’ person” definitions. *But there are three distinct ACTIVITIES of deity.* *1.)* - *There is what the Father is doing in His immediate locality,* *2.)* - *What the Son is doing in His immediate locality,* and *3.)* - *The WORK They are performing [TOGETHER] throughout the universe. These constitute three economic offices or “persons”/”personalities” in the sense of roles. Thus, in this sense, the Holy Spirit would be considered a lower-case ‘p’ person.* *Please read page 2*
@@christophertunusau3023: - *Trinitarian exegete does violence to scriptures to the extent of legitimizing and propagating their theories.* *If the Holy Spirit is indeed a "separate" person [corpus being] from the Father and His Son, then:* *1.* - *Why is the Spirit also called "Ghost"?* [John 1:33, 7:39 20:20]. *2.* - *Why were the Spirit in Job's nostrils? Same Heb. Root word as in Genesis 1:2* [Job 27:3]. *3.* - *Why is the Spirit never spoken of as reigning upon a throne, as are the Father and His Son?* [Revelation 3:21]. *4.* - *Why no hymns of adoration to the Spirit, as there are to God and the Lamb?* [Revelation 5:9-13]. *5.* - *Why are there seven Spirits before God's throne?* [Revelation 1:4, 3:1, 5:6]. *6.* - *Why does the Spirit have no personal name, like the Father and Son?* [Exodus 6:3, Matthew 1:21]. *7.* - *Why is the Spirit synonymous with God and His Son?* [John 4:24, 2 Corinthians 3:17, Romans 8:9,1 Corinthians 15:45]. *8.* - *Why did Jesus call "God" His Father, when it was the Holy Ghost that came upon the virgin Mary?* [Luke 1:35]. *9.* - *Why did not Paul, Peter, James, John, and Jude include the Spirit in the salutations in their epistles?* [Romans 1:7, 2 Peter 1:2, 11 John 3, James 1:1, Jude 1,2]. *10.* - *Why do Paul and John both speak of Christians having "fellowship" with the Father and His Son, but never with the Holy Spirit?* [1 Corinthians 1:9, 1 John 1:3]. *11.* - *Why is the Spirit "neuter" in gender, whereas Father and Son are "masculine"?* *12.* - *Why is the Spirit "Symbolized" by impersonal symbols; wind, water, fire, oil, etc?* [Acts 2:1-4, Isaiah 44:3, Zechariah 4:1-7]. *13.* - *Why is the Spirit spoken of as being "poured out", "shed forth", "falling upon", "filling", etc?* [Acts 2:1-4, 2:17, 33, Titus 3:4,5]. *14.* - *Why is the Spirit never addressed in prayer, as are Father and Son?* [Matthew 6:9, Acts 7:59, 60]. *15.*- *Why do neither Father nor Son ever address the Spirit, as they do each other?* [John 12:27,28, Hebrews 1:8-10]. *16.* - *Why can the Spirit be given by God in measured amounts?* [John 3:34, Philippians 1:19, Joel 2:23]. *17.* - *Why do the Hebrew and Greek origins of the word "Spirit" always mean breath, wind, air, power, animation, etc?* [Genesis 1:2 ruach, Matthew 1:18, 3:16- pneuma]. *18.* - *Why could Jesus "breathe" the Holy Ghost upon His disciples?* [John 20:22]. *19.* - *Why are Christ's "words" the same as Spirit?* [John 6:63, See Psalms 33:6, 9]. *20.* - *Why are the neuter pronouns "it" and "itself" used with reference to the Spirit, but never the Father and Son?* [Numbers 11:17, 25, John 1:32, Romans 8:16, 26, 1 Peter 1:11, 1 John 2:27]. *21.* - *Why are the Hebrew and Greek root words for "Spirit" [rauch and pneuma) the same, where applied to God, Angel, Man, or beast (God - Genesis 1:2; Angel - Hebrews 1:7; Man - 1 Corinthians 2:11; Beast-Ecclesiastes **3:21**]* *22.* - *Why is "Spirit" not considered a separate entity when applied to angel, demon, or man and yet considered to be so when applied to God?* [Hebrews 1:7, 14, Mark 5:12, 13, 1 Corinthians 2:11]. *23.* - *Why are "Spirit" and "breath" synonymous, coming from the same root word in the Hebrew tongue?* [Genesis 1:2, Psalms 33:6, Job 27:3]. *24.* - *Why does the Spirit have no substance, as do the Father and His Son?* [Psalms 104:29, 30, Luke 24:39]. *25.* - *How is it that the Father knows the Son and vice versa but the Holy Spirit is excluded?* [[Matt 11:27]. *26.* - *Why does Scripture almost always mention the Holy Spirit as a possessive pronoun/noun, as in ‘His Spirit’, His Holy Spirit’, ‘Spirit OF God’ or ‘Spirit OF Christ’?* [Is 63:10; Num 11:29; Gen 1:2; 1 John 4:2; Rom 8:9; 1 Pet 1:11; Judg 3:10; 2 Cor 3:10]. *27.* - *Scripture never mentions that the Holy Spirit has a Spirit,* - *WHY?* *28.* - *If the Holy Spirit is a person like the Father and Son then why is there not a single verse, anywhere in Scripture, where we find any of the phases: trinity, triune or God the Holy Spirit?* *29.* - *Why is there not one verse, anywhere in Scripture, where we are told that we will ever see and/or meet the Holy Spirit?* *30.* - *How is it that “no one hath seen God at any time” except the Son?* [John 1:18] - *Surely, if the Holy Spirit was a being and was present during the creation week as the trinity doctrine claims, then He would have certainly seen the Father.* *Please, dear reader, diligently and prayerfully study the word of God for yourself and allow the Spirit of God to help you make the right decisions.*
I have followed and attended his sermons personally here in Windhoek. He lacks understanding of context. Generally he reads one verse and goes out of its context. The trinity contracts the hierarchical order that God has established. Those who believe in this false doctrine have a God who can die. No wonder why there is no power in the church since we changed our fundamental beliefs in favor of this Catholic doctrine.
Amen, they are equal in the plan of salvation, for saving of souls. Thank you Lord.
We should always listen to the voice of God and not try to take away from what is written in the bible. God's word stand forever. Thanks pastor for speaking truth.
Amen, amen, God bless you pastor for speaking the truth of God's words.
Amen 🙏
Explained clearly as crystal.
No one can get it wrong concerning Trinity now.
Amen, Amen, Amen.
i repete ur word JESUS acknowledge the existence of the spirit OF GOD ,you say it the spirit of who the spirit of GOD not the spirit of the second person not the spirit of the third person but the spirit of the father
Amen
Pastor Skeete is speaking the truth.
*@Keating-ue6do:* - *MORE THE REASONS WHY THE TRINITY DOCTRINE SHOULD BE REJECTED.*
*In the Bible, three words are used repeatedly in connection with God. They are "Father", "Son", and "Holy Spirit" [Holy Ghost].* - *Two divine beings but three powers.* - *There is one Son who is called Christ* [1 Cor 8:6], - *and The only true God who sent and gave His Son* [John 17:3; 3:16], - *and one Spirit who is the Spirit of God and of Christ.* [Gal 4:6; 2 Cor 3:17; 1 Cor 2:12; 2 Cor 3:17].
*So, the Trinity doctrine is not rejected because of the simple idea that it means "three,"* - *but* -*because of the deeper philosophical and theological concepts embraced. Therefore, the following common reasons are submitted for rejecting it:*
*1.* - *Trinity is un-Biblical, a term nowhere found in the Bible from Genesis through Revelation. *It is a complete "foreign" term to the Biblical languages.* - *Christ never preached it, and it was utterly foreign to the apostles. It is a complete perversion of the language of the Bible.*
*We are exhorted to:* - *"Preach the Word." 2 Tim 4:2. We need not use extra-Biblical words and phrases to put a certain theological "spin" on God's word, causing it to be "wrested" from His objective of imparting truth to the soul.*
*2.* - *Trinity is unbiblical and anti-Biblical. *It is the doctrine of anti-Christ and is contrary to the teachings of both the Old and New Testaments.*
*3.* - *This teaching is an imposition, a usurper, a distortion, a perversion,* - *and a counterfeit of the truth. Those who teach and preach it are "handling the Word of God deceitfully." 2 Cor 4:2 It is a "corrupted" concept of God, the eternal Father, and Creator of all.*
*4.* - *Trinity is pagan and fabulous [a fable] a polytheistic monstrosity of false religion,* - *an invention of Satan intruding its evil presence into the three angels' messages and the true worship of God Almighty and His only begotten Son, our Lord and Saviour.*
*5.* - *Trinity is "baptized" paganism.* - *It is "pseudo" Christian, coming from the foreign, Roman Latin word "trinitas," a Latin abstract noun that most literally means "three-ness" [or "the property of occurring three at once"]. Or, simply put, "three are one".* - *A cleverly contrived counterfeit of the truth about God and His only begotten Son.*
*6.* * - *Trinity is a phantasm, a fiction, a figment of perverted imagination?* - *contrary to sanctified reason and common sense. It has been portrayed in caricature as a heathen conception of a three-headed being with a body.*
*7.* - *Trinity is a "philosophical idol”, a false concept of God based on Platonic Greek philosophy. ["Beware of philosophy and deceit." [Col.2:8].* - *It was later formulated into Roman theology and the entire world wonders after the Beast.* [See Rev. 13:1-10].* - *The "Global Christian Forum" states, you need to "confess the triune god"*
*8.* - *Trinity is idolatry, a violation of the first three commandments,* - *and therefore the entire decalogue [See James 2:10-12]. *It constitutes false worship and sin, just as Baal-worship in Elijah's day.*
*9.* - *Trinity is seductive, destroying the real truth of God’s sovereignty as the eternal Father, over all the universe of His own creation, making Him merely one of three co-equal eternals.*
*10.* - *Trinity is Satan's subtle sophistry, destroying the truth of the divine Son's relationship to His Father, as a true Son of relativity [See John 3:16] making Him an actor, a role-player, a deceiver, and a liar.* - *The doctrine of the Trinity is a cruel heathen monstrosity, removing Jesus from his true position of Divine Savior and Mediator.*
*11.* - *Trinity is Satan's cunning deception regarding the Holy Spirit, making it into a third being separate from the Father and His Son - thus a third God,* - *rather than the divine life-giving presence and power of God and His Son. [See Luke 1:35, Rom.8:9, etc].*
*12.* - *Trinity teaches that the Spirit is "another Comforter" other than the Spirit of Christ.* - *The Greek word for 'comforter' is 'parakletos',* [G3875] which means 'intercessor, advocate, comforter'.*- * If you take a look at 1 John 2:1 it says that Jesus Christ is our 'advocate'.* - *And the Greek word used for an advocate in this verse is the same 'parakletos' used for comforter in the other verses regarding the Spirit.* - *1 Timothy 2:5 also confirms we only have ONE mediator [advocate] with the Father, and that is Jesus Christ.* - *So, what was to be 'sent' as a comforter for us?* - *The Spirit of Christ.*
*John 14:16-28 tells us many times that the Comforter is Christ by His Spirit, but the moment Jesus says “another Comforter,”* - *most become blind to the fact He is referring to Himself by His Spirit despite His clear words that follow.* - *Just because Jesus said the Father would send 'another [allos] Comforter,* - *many people instinctively take this to mean a different being from Christ. What they fail to realize is the manner in which John wrote and the other vital point is how Jesus spoke about Himself in the 'third person'.*
*13.* - *Trinity is subversive of the atonement of Christ, making His sacrifice on the cross merely human, and not divine, therefore inadequate to atone for the broken law of God which is divine.*
*14.* - *Trinity nullifies the everlasting gospel, making Jesus a metaphorical Son.* - *This also means that there is no true Father and Son and it is all a metaphor because all three are not individual beings but part of the same God. In reality, this means that salvational bible verses now have to be taken as not for what they mean, which means they lose their salvational power.* - *This is utterly contrary to Bible teachings.* - *Caiaphas was not asking Jesus if He was the Son of God in any metaphorical [figurative] sense.* - *He was speaking literally. [Matthew 26:63; Luke 22:70. 22:71].*
*15.* - *Trinity destroys the true character of God, thus making Him to be an impostor.* - *Behold the effects of this dark doctrine written in the blood of thousands of saintly martyrs during the Dark Ages.*
*16.* - *Trinity is a confusion, making the Holy Spirit to be the Father of Christ [See Luke 1:35] rather than Jehovah.* - *Jesus never referred to the Spirit as His Father.*
*17.* - *Trinity is the foundation of the Papacy, being formulated in the early Catholic ecumenical councils of the fourth century, •two centuries after the death of Christ's apostles, during the great apostasy in which the bishop of Rome was elevated to Head-Bishop over all other bishops on the strength of this doctrine.* - *This was the beginning of the Papacy.*
*18.* - *Trinity is the fundamental doctrine of all apostate Protestant churches, Rome's harlot daughters, who keep Sunday, her counterfeit Sabbath [falsely called the Lord's day] and who also believe in the immortality of the soul and the eternal torment of the wicked, all of which are Rome's doctrines.* - *"We are on the same team...they would all say we believe in the Trinity."* - Rick Warren.
*19.* - *Trinity is the foundation and prime doctrine of the entire worldwide ecumenical-evangelical movement throughout Christendom - the false revival, reformation, and unity of the last days, just prior to Christ's Second Advent.*
*"The central ecumenical importance of the doctrine of the Trinity has become increasingly recognized in recent years."* (MATTHIAS HAUDEL, professor of theology at Munster Protestant Theological University, Germany).
*20.* - *The phrase Trinity was used by EGW only once in a negative sense [ST, June 8, 1931, page 6]. This is tremendously significant, for if it were Bible truth, there would be absolutely no justifiable reason for her not to use it over and over again since it had been in usage throughout Christendom for over 1500 years before she was born.*
*21.* - *Trinity is a compromise in Adventist religion, received as a "fundamental doctrine" by SDA leaders *in collusion with Evangelical leaders in the historic conferences of the mid-1950s.* - *This dramatic change in SDA beliefs as a church was done to prevent the church from being labeled in Christendom by Walter Martin as a dangerous cult.*
*22.* - *Trinity makes the one true God into being three Gods: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit [or Holy Ghost].* - *According to this doctrine, all three Gods are coexistent, coequal, and coeternal. This is Tritheistic-Trinitarianism or pagan polytheism in Christian garb.*
*23.* - *Trinity is now listed as the second Heading in the table of contents of the new, modern SDA Hymnal, so it is not only preached from SDA pulpits, published by SDA presses, and taught in SDA schools, but it is also sung in SDA churches.* - *When singing Hymn 73, would or could any visitor from the Roman Catholic or so-called Protestant churches discern any difference between the SDA Trinity and their own?*
*24.* - *Trinity is now a "test of fellowship" in the modern SDA church, whereas it was never so done while E.G. White and SDA pioneers were still alive! Why? Is not this the Omega of apostasy that she prophesied would be "most startling?" *What could be more startling than the SDA Church adopting as her fundamental doctrine the very foundation of the Papacy?*
@@seekertruth3577 Anti-Trinitarians have substantial similarities to the Roman Catholic Church's concept of the trinity. They seem to have inherited the Roman Catholic Church's understanding of God
with the Son in subordination to the Father having been begotten in a birthing event deriving his existence from the Father. This similarity is also seen in the procession of the Holy Spirit from both the Father and Son.
We Adventists don't believe these Arian or Catholic theologies.
@@harley6394-h3f: *Keating, you a making erroneous claims. So, let us hear what the Bible say and not what Keating-ue6do speculate.* - *I will make it as simple as possible so that even a little boy will understand.*
*There is only one Spirit* - “There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling” Ephesians 4:4 [1 Corinthians 12:13; Ephesians 2:18].
*This one spirit is shared by the Father and the Son* - “But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.” Romans 8:9.
*It is the spirit of the Father* - “For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you.” Matthew 10:20,
*and also the spirit of His Son* - “For I know that this shall turn to my salvation through your prayer, and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ” Philippians 1:19.
*When we have this spirit of God we actually have His very own presence:* - “Whither shall I go from thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence?” Psalm 139:7 [Psalm 51:11].
*By His own spirit God [not someone else] is everywhere present* - “Can any hide himself in secret places that I shall not see him? saith the LORD. Do not I fill heaven and earth? saith the LORD.” Jeremiah 23:24.
*Therefore, the presence of the Holy Spirit is the very presence of the Father and the Son [not someone else]* - “Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and *we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.”* John 14:23.
*This Holy Spirit *comes [PROCEED]* to us from the Father, it proceeds from Him* - “But when the Comforter is come, whom I [Jesus] will send unto you from the Father, EVEN THE SPIRIT OF TRUTH, WHICH PROCEEDETH FROM THE FATHER,* he shall testify of me” John 15:26.
*The Spirit comes to us through the Son* - “For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.” Ephesians 2:18.
*The spirit of God and the spirit of man are comparable to each other.* - “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.” 1 Corinthians 2:11.
*Therefore, just as the spirit of man is his very own person, so also the Spirit of God is His very own person, it is also the very person of Christ our Lord* - “Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.” 2 Corinthians 3:17.
*Therefore, in giving us His Spirit, God gives us Himself, not someone else*- *“I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.”* John 14:18.
*It is Christ [the Spirit of Christ] who comforts us in all our trials* - “And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.” Galatians 4:6.
*This is the Bible teaching regarding the Holy Spirit of God. It proceeds from God, it is the presence of God in all the universe, it is the personal presence of God and Christ among their people on earth. This spirit brings us into fellowship with two beings* - “and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.” 1 John 1:3.
“The influence of the Holy Spirit is the life of Christ in the soul. We do not now see Christ and speak to Him, but His Holy Spirit is just as near us in one place as another. It works in and through every one who receives Christ. Those who know the indwelling of the Spirit reveal the fruits of the Spirit,-“love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith.” BEcho June 17, 1901, par. 6
“Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: *that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature,* having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.” 2 Peter 1:4
“Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: *that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature,* having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.” 2 Pt. 1:4
*Christ in His humanity [and NOT aka god the holy spirit] had to first live this life by living a perfect character before He could impart it to us. Christ brought glorified humanity back to heaven. It is this life that He now offers to us.*
*“Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.”* Heb 2:17-18 and Hebrews 4:15 *“For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.”*
*This is why the spirit could not be given in its fullness and this is the very reason the spirit could not be given unless Christ was glorified.* - *In humanity Jesus first had to live a perfect life [to overcome see Revelation 3:2], sanctified then glorified and finally poured out upon His church.*
*For SDA:* - *“During His humiliation upon this earth, the Spirit had not descended with all its efficacy; and Christ declared that if He went not away, it would not come,* [but] that if He went away, He would send it. It was a representation of Himself, *and after He was glorified it was manifest.”* - ST, May 17, 1899 par. 4
*Why was it necessary for Christ go away?*
*“But while Christ was on earth, the disciples had desired no other helper. Not until they were deprived of His presence would they feel their need of the Spirit, and then He would come.”* DA 669.1
*”The Holy Spirit is Christ's representative, but divested of the personality of humanity, and independent thereof. Cumbered with humanity, Christ could not be in every place personally. Therefore it was for their interest that He should go to the Father, and send the Spirit to be His successor on earth. *No one could then have any advantage because of his location or his personal contact with Christ. [By the Spirit the Saviour would be accessible to all.] In this sense He would be nearer to them than if He had not ascended on high.”* - DA 669.2
*The key point to this passage is the first sentence:*
*“… while Christ was on earth, the disciples had desired no other helper.”*
*Typical example:* - *Peter had great courage when he was with Christ, yet he denied Him, when he was without Him.*
*The disciples felt secure while Jesus was with them in person.* - *They only wanted to stay close to Jesus in His physical presence.* - *But those who were distanced would feel disadvantaged.* - *With this mindset of the people, the saviour was cumbered, or hindered, AND COULD NOT BE IN EVERY PLACE PHYSICALLY.* - *Thus, they had no desire for the Spirit.*
*Christ endeavoured to get their minds off His physical presence to His spiritual presence. This He can only do by going away.*
*Notice the next line:* - *“…Not until they were deprived of His presence would they feel their need of the Spirit, and then He would come.”* - DA 669.1
*In this way, Christ in the Spirit is “divested of the personality of humanity, and independent thereof.”* - *That is to say, Christ is free to work independently with all His disciples, including us today.*
*This is why it says:* - *“NO ONE COULD THEN HAVE ANY ADVANTAGE BECAUSE OF HIS LOCATION OR HIS PERSONAL CONTACT WITH CHRIST. BY THE SPIRIT THE SAVIOUR WOULD BE ACCESSIBLE TO ALL. IN THIS SENSE HE WOULD BE NEARER TO THEM THAN IF HE HAD NOT ASCENDED ON HIGH.”* DA 669.2
*No other person other than Christ could fulfil this role. Jesus is our comforter. Jesus is the “third person” of the Godhead [not a literal person/personality but a grammatical person], in spirit.* *Inspiration declares that,*
*“He [Satan] has sought to shut Jesus from their view as the Comforter,”* 1888 Material 696.1 [The Righteousness of Christ] [RH, August 26, 1890 par. 10]
*Christ has said:* - “Search the Scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life; and they are they which testify of me. John 5:39.”* - RH July 26, 1892, par.1
*CHRIST is the central thought of the gospel [Glad Tidings];* - *for it is “the gospel of God . . . concerning His Son Jesus Christ our Lord.”* - *An indwelling Christ is the power and life of the gospel.*
*Romans 1:16* “I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God unto salvation...” *1 Corinthians 1: 23* “We preach Christ crucified : . . . *v24* “…Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.” *Romans 8:10* - *“And if CHRIST BE IN you, the body is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is Life because of righteousness.”*
*And Christ said,* “Abide in Me and I in you [Jn15:4] . . . . for without Me ye can do nothing. [Jn 15:5] *”And just as He was departing from His disciples in His bodily presence, He made this promise, “Lo, I Am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.”* [Mat 28:20]
*Paul’s experience in the gospel was this:* “I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, Who loved me, and gave Himself for me.” Galatians 2:20.
*Now we know that the giving of the Holy Spirit is the giving of Christ, and the presence of the Holy Spirit is the Presence of Christ in us* [Colossians 1:27, 2 Corinthians 3:17].
@@harley6394-h3f: *Two Hebrew verbs that are pertinent to our discussion, is Christ begotten.* - *The first is the Hebrew verb qânâh [H7069 קָנָה ]* found in Pro 8:22. The KJV renders this verb as "possessed" but it actually means "to get." It is in the past tense so it is properly rendered as "got" or "gotten." This same verb is used by Eve in Genesis 4:1, speaking of Cain, when she said "I have “gotten” H7069 a man from the LORD." - *The second verb that concerns us is "chûwl" [H2342 חוּל]* which is found in Prov.8:24,25 as “brought forth.” -- The specific form that it is in here indicates birth language. It's the same as the usage in Psalm 51:5; Job 15:7. - *Thus contextually it is impossible to avoid birth language here.*
*Thus some versions of Scripture like the EXB and NABRE render this verb as "begot" which, contextually speaking, is the most accurate rendering.*
*“possessed” [H7069, “qânâh”]*
Gen 4:1 “And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, *I have gotten [H7069,“qânâh”]* a man from the Lord.” or
Gen 14:19 “And he blessed him, and said, Blessed be Abram of the most high God, *possessor [“ qânâh” H7069 קָנָה]* of heaven and earth:
Thus, we've got two verbs here that are used 3 times in this passage that strongly indicate we are dealing with birth language here just as Eve bore Cain [Gen 14:1] and God being the *“possessor” [“qânâh” H7069]* or the originator of heaven and the earth [Gen 14:19].
*There is no basis [as some claim] to make this only a matter of anointing or bestowal in a soteriological sense of the sonship on a pre-existing being who was not the actual/ontological Son of God prior to bestowal or anointing.*
*“brought forth” [H2342, "chûwl"]*
*The "brought forth" clearly denotes labor [having pain and travail], or giving birth:*
Psa 51:5 "Behold, I was *shapen [H2342]* in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me."
Psalm 90:2 “Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst *formed* [H2342] the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God.
Isa 13:8 "And they shall be afraid: pangs and sorrows shall take hold of them; they shall be in*pain* [H2342] *as a woman that travaileth*: they shall be amazed one at another; their faces shall be as flames."
Isa 26:17 "Like as a woman with child, that draweth near the time of her delivery, is in *pain,* [H2342] and *crieth out in her pangs;* so have we been in thy sight, O LORD."
Isa 45:10 "Woe unto him that saith unto his father, What begettest thou? *or to the woman, What hast thou brought forth? H2342"*
Isa 51:2 "Look unto Abraham your father, and unto *Sarah that bare [H2342]* you: for I called him alone, and blessed him, and increased him."
Isa 54:1 "Sing, O barren, thou that didst not bear; break forth into singing, and cry aloud, *thou that didst not travail with child: [H2342]* for more are the children of the desolate than the children of the married wife, saith the LORD."
Isa 66:7 *"Before she travailed, [H2342] she brought forth; before her pain came, she was delivered of a man child."*
*As you can see the Hebrew word, "chûwl", translated as "brought forth" clearly refers to a birth language. Therefore, Prov. 8 denotes "wisdom" or Christ being "brought forth" as in begetting or being begotten.*
*To the question, if it is possible that the Son was •"brought forth" in the creation of the world?*
*Some people believe that but if you look at Proverbs 8, THAT CONCLUSION IS NOT POSSIBLE.* - *Look at the timing markers in the passage.* - *Vs. 22 says that the Lord begot wisdom *"BEFORE"* his works since.* - *Vs. 23 says He was set up *“FROM EVERLASTING, FROM THE BEGINNING, BEFORE THE WORLD.”* - *Vs. 24,25, explain that He was brought forth before the fountains of water, before the mountains and hills.* - *THUS IT IS IMPOSSIBLE THAT THIS IS REFERENCE TO HIS HUMANITY. WE ARE SPEAKING HERE ABOUT AN EVENT THAT OCCURRED BEFORE THIS WORLD WAS, EVEN FROM EVERLASTING.
*Now, regarding the genuineness of Christ's Sonship, He is called the* - *“only begotten” six times, “the firstborn” three times, “the firstbegotten” once and God's “holy child” twice.* - *Four verses say He was “begotten” prior to His incarnation so this cannot be applied to His birth on earth from Mary as some have chosen to believe. Four verses say that He “proceeded forth from,” “came out from” or “camest forth from” the Father.* - *The evidence on this subject is overwhelming. Christ truly is the •literal begotten Son of God who was •brought forth from the Father before all creation.* - *The example verses below with the help of the Thayer dictionary also reveal that Jesus was born of the Father before the world was, then much later, He came into the world.*
*Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon:*
*G1831* - *To come forth from physically, arise from, to be born of.*
*G2064* - *To come from one place to another.*
*Some also claim that Jesus cannot be divine if He was born of God.* - *But this is just another tactic Satan uses to deter people from the truth.* - *In any case, the problem is actually the other way around.* - *DIVINITY IS NOT BASED ON HOW OLD YOU ARE BUT WHO YOU CAME FROM.* - *JESUS INHERITED EVERYTHING FROM HIS FATHER INCLUDING HIS DIVINITY.*
*EVERYTHING THAT CHRIST CONSISTS OF HAD NO BEGINNING, His divinity, His makeup, His substance had no beginning as it all came from the Father. - *If you trace Christ back you will have to go through the Father and you will never get to a beginning.* - *BUT HIS PERSONALITY AS THE SON BEGAN WHEN HE WAS BROUGHT FORTH BY HIS FATHER.* And *IF JESUS DID NOT GET HIS DIVINE NATURE FROM HIS FATHER, THEN WHERE DID HE GET IT FROM?*
*Another means of trying to discredit the truth is to say that Jesus cannot be born of God because He has no mother.* - *But this is an anthropomorphic thought.* - *Why do Trinitarians try and put “human” limitations on God?* - *He is God, NOT human.* - *Strangely, these very same people have no problem with the virgin birth.* - *Just because something does not seem reasonable or logical to us, or just because it does not make sense to us, it does not mean it is not truth.* - *Our heavenly Father said,* - *“For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.”* Isaiah 55:8-9. - *GOD CAN AND DID BRING FORTH A SON WITHOUT HAVING TO CREATE HIM.* - *Scripture does not lie and those opposing the truth on Christ being begotten of the Father should know all things are possible with God.* - *We must not put human limitations on how or what God can and cannot do based on our human finite knowledge over the omniscience and omnipotence of God.* - *Why do so many Christians try to explain away clear words that state Jesus is the Son of God just to uphold a pagan doctrine that does not exist in the Bible?* - *When Satan goes to this much effort you know it has to be extremely important.*
*Since Christ is the same substance of His Father, then everything He consists of had no beginning. So His divinity had no beginning, His makeup; His nature had no beginning as it all came from the Father.* In principle, everything Christ is had no beginning. - *IF YOU TRACE CHRIST BACK YOU WILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE FATHER AND YOU WILL NEVER GET TO A BEGINNING.* - *BUT HIS PERSONALITY AS THE SON OF GOD BEGAN WHEN HE WAS BROUGHT FORTH BY HIS FATHER.* - *This principle is brought out in Scripture many times. In effect it was only the personality of Christ that had a beginning.* - *These are the mysteries of God and things our mind cannot possibly comprehend.*
@@harley6394-h3f: For your knowledge, the BRI believes in a metaphorical Sonship. Statement made by Angel Manuel Rodriguez [now retired] was a Seventh-day Adventist theologian and was the “director” of the Adventist BRI (Biblical Research Institute). In the November 2015 issue of Adventist World on page 42 he wrote the following:"The Son is not the natural, literal Son of the Father. A natural child has a beginning, while within the Godhead the Son is eternal. The term “Son” is used metaphorically when applied to the Godhead. It conveys the ideas of distinction of persons within the Godhead and the equality of nature in the context of an eternal, loving relationship"
The Bible clearly tells us that Christ, in His pre-existence, is begotten of God therefore He is truly the Son of God [John 1:14, 18, 3:16, 3:18, 1 John 4:9].
*This truth we must accept that God had a Son to give, and we must savour this reality.*
*EGW writes,* “The Father, in union and loving sympathy with His Son, subjected Himself to suffer with His Son. He spared not His only begotten Son, but freely delivered Him up for us all. This gift of Christ is the crowning truth of God’s love, and His Fatherhood through all time and through eternity. Here the love of God in His Fatherhood is shown. Let us drink in this love, that we may know by experience what a real, tender, joyful, experience there is in a realization of the Fatherhood of God.” 12LtMs, Lt 50, 1897, par. 51
*Etymologists at some point decided* that the term *μονογενης (monogenes)* did not in fact carry the meaning of ‘begotten’. Rather, *it seems to be the case.* This is the reason that modern translations of the Bible have effectively dropped the use of this term in English. *Thus, they say that the word means ‘one-of-a-kind’ and is reserved for Jesus in the Johannine literature of the NT.*
In every instance of *μονογενης (monogenes)* in the NT, the meaning ‘only begotten’ fits the context better than ‘one of a kind’ or unique’. It may be concluded that the usage of *μονογενης (monogenes)* that there is clear warrant for retaining the meaning ‘only begotten’. If *μονογενης* truly mean ‘one of a kind’ or ‘unique’, without any reference to ‘begetting’, then one might expect *μονογενης (monogenes) * could be used of a brother or sister and even of a father. Therefor we might expect to also find *μονογενης αδελφος* meaning ‘one of a kind/unique brother’, or *μονογενης αδελφη* meaning ‘one of a kind/unique sister’ and *μονογενης πατηρ* meaning ‘one of a kind/unique father’. Such expressions do not occur throughout the whole of Greek literature. *Whenever μονογενης (monogenes) is used in the context of personal relationship, the relationship is always that of offspring to parent. This strongly suggest that the concept of ‘begotten’ is indeed present in μονογενης (monogenes).*
*μονογενης (monogenes)* is a Greek adjective consisting of two parts, *μονο (mono) and γενης (genes).* There is no argument regarding the derivation of the first part of the word; it is from the Greek word *μονον (monon),* an adverb meaning ‘only’. The difference of opinion only arises in regard to the second part of the word, *γενης.* The traditional view is that *γενης* is to be derived from the Greek verb *γενναω* Strong’s 1080 *(‘meaning to beget, conceive‘),* so that *μονογενης* meaning ‘class’, ‘sort’, ‘kind’, so that *μονογενης* must mean ‘one of a kind’ or ‘unique’. In support of the letter view, some point out that *γενος* has only a single v (the Greek letter, pronounced ‘nu’) as does *μονογενης while γενναω* has two v’s. So which etymology is correct?
*It must also be recognized that it is only in recent times that some scholars have advanced the view that the Greek word* - *μονογενης (monogenes)* - *does not mean ‘only begotten’, as in the Authorised King James Version, but ‘one of a kind’ or ‘unique’ or something which omits the concept of ‘begotten’.*
*It must also be noted that there is nothing in the term *μονογενης (monogenes)* to indicate that Christ was ‘the eternal Son of God,’ as many suggested.*
If the type was not literal than the anti-type should also not be literal, but this is not so. *The Bible is clear that the type and anti-type are both literal Father and Son.* - *Nowhere in the Bible do we read that Jesus is a unique or metaphorical Son, but it rather gives the direct opposite repeatedly.*
*The claim that the γενης (genes) [Strongs 1085 meaning descendant, Family] ending of μονογενης is to be derived from γενος with the meaning ‘class’, or ‘sort’, ‘kind’, may be tested by examining the meaning of the γενης ending in a similar Greek adjective which also have the same two-part structure.*
*Herewith a list of such adjectives.*
*1* πρωτογενης: - *first born* - *2* ομογενης: - *of the same race or family* - *3* πολυγενης: - *of many families* - *4* αγεηνς: - *not of noble birth; low born*
*5* παλιγενης: - *born again, generated anew* - *6* ευγενης: - *well born, high born* - *7* αγεννης: - *low born δυσγενης: low born* -
*8* προγενης: - *born before* - *9* συγγενης: - *related, akin*
*It may be observed that in all the above-mentioned [9] words the concept of ‘begetting’ or ‘derivation by birth’ is clearly present.*
*The Nicene Creed of the year 325 defines monogenēs as “only-begotten.”*
*Monogenēs was always translated as “only-begotten,” even in the Latin translations that preceded the first English Bible.*
*The word is monadikos (μοναδικός) and it antedates Christianity, having been employed by Aristotle, Philo, and others. The Greek word monadikos (μοναδικός) means unique or one of a kind and nothing else, as native Greeks know. Its morphology hasn't changed in over two thousand years. monadikos (μοναδικός) is the word that Greek speakers have been using for unique for more than two thousand years, and it is the word native Greeks still use today when they want to say unique or one of a kind.*
*Neither has the morphology of (monogenes) μονογενης changed in over two thousand years, and monogenes has always meant only begotten or its equivalent.*
*Just as only begotten is not equivalent to unique, so monogenes is not equivalent to monadikos. The Greek word monogenes does not mean unique, nor has it ever. The Greek word monadikos means unique. It has always meant unique.*
*Had the writers of the New Testament wanted to say unique, THEY WOULD HAVE USED THE GREEK WORD WHICH MEANS UNIQUE - monadikos (μοναδικός).*
*The reason the writers of the New Testament didn’t employ monadikos when they penned the New Testament is simple - because the writers of the New Testament didn’t mean unique. The writers of the New Testament meant only begotten or its equivalent. That’s why they used the word monogenes (μονογενης) instead of monadikos (μοναδικός).*
*According to both history and native Greeks themselves, the Greek word monogenes means only begotten or its equivalent, and it has always been so,* notwithstanding the delusions of Anglo-bible scholars and modern version translators who cannot speak Greek.
*SCRIPTURE CLEARLY INDICATES A PERSONAL PATTERN OF A FATHER AND SON RELATIONSHIP.*
*Another objection that many put forth is:* - *If Paul meant to convey that Christ was the first created being, why did he not use the Greek word protoktistos, which means "first created"?* - *Prōtoktistos comes from the said adjective prōtos and the verb ktizō ‘to build, construct, create.’*
*Christian theologians have often used this distinction as evidence that Jesus was “begotten, not made”* and is therefore of the same substance/dna as the Father as opposed to a mere part of the creation. - In Col. 1:15, the rendering "every creature" in context designates the class being spoken as being all living creatures. On the other hand, *Jesus is certainly NOT the firstborn of only one creature, which really would make no sense.*
*If Jesus was the first created, as some people claim, surely the Greek word ‘protoktistos’ would have been used instead.*
*One could ask a similar question concerning Paul’s usage of firstborn in Colossians 1:18, such as* - *why didn't he say "first raised" from the dead, rather than "firstborn" from the dead?*
*There is no record that the word protokistos was in common use in Paul's day. If the word protokistos [which nowhere appears in the Bible] had been used, then the thought would have been shifted from the rights of the one who is firstborn to his being the first created.* - *Paul was not emphasizing that Jesus was the first created,* - *but rather that Jesus held the rights of heirship as the firstborn of all creation.* - *This in no way negates the fact that the firstborn one is included in the group spoken of; it certainly does not provide any reason to change its meaning in this case from the meaning shown in its usage throughout the scriptures.*
I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, said the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.
Yes Christ is the Almighty
@@harley6394-h3f: - *There can be absolutely no mistaking this.* - *The Lamb, He, is King of kings and Lord of lords too!* - *Thus He has the very same titles as His Father.* - *This is a co-regency that God Himself has established so His Son carries the same royal titles as does His Father, the Sovereign of the universe.* - *Yet again we must recognize that the Son has titles that God the Father does not* - *such the great Prince, Prince of princes, the Prince [or Captain] of the host and Archangel (Dan 12:1; **8:25**; **8:11**; Joshua **5:14**; Jude 1:9).* - *These latter titles in no way negate the previous titles that He has as God’s co-regent.* - *They do help us to see the next layer or tier in the authority though.*
*It should also be apparent that “Lord God Almighty” is a title that belongs to the Son of God just as much as it does to God the Father.* - *How else can the angels bow before Christ and declare as much?*
*In Hebrews 1:1-9 we note that the speaker is God the Father and that He is addressing His Son and calling Him “God.”*
*The Scripture says,* - *‘God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by HIS SON, WHOM HE HATH APPOINTED HEIR OF ALL THINGS, by whom also he made the worlds.’* Hebrews 1:1, 2
*Verse 2 says,* - *that Christ was ‘appointed heir’ of all things. An ‘HEIR’ of course is someone who receives an ‘inheritance’ from someone.* - *In this case Christ the Son received an ‘INHERITANCE’ from His Father.*
*Verse 4 says,* - *“Being made so much better than the angels, as he has BY “INHERITANCE” OBTAINED A MORE EXCELLENT ‘NAME’ THAN THEY.’* - *Verse 8 says that this more excellent ‘NAME’ is the name ‘Title,’ which was given by the Father to His Son. ‘Unto the Son He [God] saith, Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever.’*
*Verse 8 says,* - *that this more excellent NAME is the name ‘God,’ which was given by the Father to His Son.* - *‘Unto the Son He [God] saith, Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever.’*
*What did Jesus receive?* - *His ‘NAME,’ His authority and His power.* - *In other words, Jesus being the one and only begotten Son of the living God received by virtue of His birth all of the attributes that His Father possessed.* - *And so, this name ‘He has by “INHERITANCE.”* - *It is not a ‘NAME’ that was bestowed but a ‘NAME’ that was ‘INHERITED’ from His Father.*
*Note:* - *An heir is defined as a person who is legally entitled to inherit the property or rank of another on that person's death or at the appointed time when the person is to receive his recognition.* - *If Jesus was the heir, then whatever he was to receive as the rightful heir.*
*Jesus declares:* - *‘I AM COME IN MY FATHER'S NAME, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.’* John 5:43
*Christ not only inherited His name but other things as well. Name means authority [Mark 11:9, John 5:43], and it also means character and nature [Exodus 33:18-19, Exodus 34:5-6].* - *The name Adam means human for example.* - *When people have children, they not only inherit the name of their parents but they also inherit the nature of the parents, which of course is human nature.*
*In like manner, Jesus inherited the same name as His Father, just as a child inherits the name of the parents, and He also inherits the nature of His Father, which is His divine nature.*
*‘Behold, I send an ANGEL before thee, to keep thee in the way, and TO BRING THEE INTO THE PLACE WHICH I HAVE PREPARED. Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions:* - *FOR MY NAME IS IN HIM.’* - Ex. 23:20,21
*‘And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, BY THE NAME OF GOD ALMIGHTY, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.’* Ex. 6:3
*‘JEHOVAH IS THE NAME GIVEN TO CHRIST.* - *'Behold, God is my salvation,' writes the prophet Isaiah; 'I will trust, and not be afraid; for the Lord Jehovah is my strength and my song; He also is become my salvation.* - *ST, May 3, 1899, par. 18 Quoting 1saiah 12:2*
*Christ also inherits His Father’s life. ‘For as the Father has life in himself; so has he given to the Son to have life in himself.’ John 5:26.* - *If Jesus had always existed alongside the Father as the Trinity doctrine claims,* - *then God could not have given life to His Son as He would have always had life.* - *But Scripture reveals this is impossible.*
*Thus, there is only ‘ONE’ true God.* - *Jesus is ‘NOT’ the God, He is the ‘Son of God.’* - *He carries the ‘NAME’ of God by virtue of His ‘INHERITANCE.’* - *And because He is the Son of God, He is ‘EQUAL’ with God.*
*Philippians 2:6 reads,* - *‘Who, being in the form of God, THOUGHT IT NOT ROBBERY TO BE EQUAL WITH GOD:’ Doesn’t this mean that Jesus is equal with the Father?*
*This title [God] was not given to Christ in consequence of some great achievement, but it is His by right of inheritance.*
*A son always rightfully takes the name of the father; and Christ, as ‘the only begotten Son of God,’ has rightfully the same name.*
*A son, also, is, to a greater or lesser degree, image of the father;* - *he has, to some extent, the features and personal characteristics of his father; not perfectly, because there is no perfect reproduction amongst mankind.*
*But there is no imperfection in God, or in any of His works; So, Christ is the ‘express image’ of the Father's person.* Heb. 1:3.
*An image is never the original but always a likeness or duplication of the original. Christ is the Son of God and therefore the express image of His Father. In the two Pauline passages, the word used is eikon, which was generally the Septuagint rendering of tselem [Vulagte: imago]; it is derived from eiko, eoika, ‘to be like,’ ‘resemble,’ and means that which resembles an object and represents it, as a copy represents the original. In Heb.1:3 the word used is character, which is found here only in the NT, and is translated in Vulgate [Jerome’s Latin Bible, 390-405 AD] figura, the KJV ‘EXPRESS IMAGE,’.* - The RV [British and American] ‘very image,’.
*As the Son of the self-existent God, he has by nature all the attributes of Deity.*
*It is true that there are many sons of God; but Christ is the ‘only begotten Son of God,’ and therefore the Son of God in a sense in which no other being ever was, or ever can be.* - *The angels are sons of God, as was Adam [Job 38:7; Luke 3:38], by creation; Christians are the sons of God by adoption [Rom. **8:14**,15];*
*Jehovah is the name given to Christ.* - *‘Behold, God is my salvation,’ writes the prophet Isaiah; ‘I will trust, and not be afraid; for the Lord JEHOVAH is my strength and my song; He also is become my salvation.’* Isa. 12:2
*In Exodus 23:20 The word mal’ak, ‘angel’, means ‘messenger,’ and is translated as often one way as the other. Christ was ever the Messenger of God to Israel, and as such conveyed to them a knowledge of the character, will, and mercy of God (Gen.22:1, 10-12; Ex.32:34; Isa.63:7-9; Mal. 3:1-2; John 8:54-58; 1 Tim. 2:5*. - SDA BC. Vol.1. Page 628.
*Jesus is the only being in the universe that has the right to bear the name of God because He is the only begotten Son of God, the express image of God’s person.*
*If God created everything through Christ - it is quite logical for Him to continue to do everything through His Son.* - *Jesus is the one through whom God saves every sinner from eternal destruction.*
*We see here the beauty of divine character.* - *Father and Son have always worked together.* - *Jesus will always be the one through whom God accomplishes everything. From Genesis to Revelation, we find no one else to declare the name of Jehovah but Christ.*
*“He stepped down from the throne of honor, laid off his royal robe and his royal crown, gave back into his Father’s hand the scepter, and veiling divinity with humanity, humbled himself, and came to a world all seared and marred with the curse. “For your sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be rich.” Although he was the Majesty of heaven, he bore the cross of shame.” YI May 27, 1897, par. 3.
*Thus, what is happening here, in this giving back the scepter into the Father’s hand, is that the Son temporarily gave up His rights and status as the Almighty.* - *Again, the following quote clarifies:*
“When Jesus was awakened to meet the storm, He was in perfect peace. There was no trace of fear in word or look, for no fear was in His heart. *BUT HE RESTED NOT IN THE POSSESSION OF ALMIGHTY POWER. It was not as the “Master of earth and sea and sky” that He reposed in quiet. THAT POWER HE HAD LAID DOWN, and He says, “I can of Mine own self do nothing.”* John 5:30. He trusted in the Father’s might. It was in faith-faith in God’s love and care-that Jesus rested, and the power of that word which stilled the storm was the power of God.” Desire of Ages, page 336.1
*This is why the Man Christ Jesus WAS NOT the Lord God Almighty during His time here on earth. That power He had laid down.* - *He was not manifest in His fully glory. However, He has now been reinstated to His original glory that He had in His oneness with the Father. [read John 17] Thus, He is currently carrying that title once again for the angels worship Him as such.* - I trust that this is clear.* - *It cannot be explained an better.*
*Scripture affirms the idea that Christ inherited the Father’s appellation.*
Also God caused Mary to conceive Jesus christ our saviour through the Holy Spirit.
if God is a first person of trinity who made men GOD with what with earth GOD CREATED THE
HEAVEN AND THE EARTH think about it
Very true and many people are trapped into this illusion. Being loudest doesn’t mean truth.
if i need the holy ghost who to ask for it according the bible PASTOR i have to ask the third entity of God let read LUc 11;13 read for yourself can the third entity give something he do not have the bible said God
This pastor is teaching another gospel there is no light in him
And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. Exodus 3:14
Who was the God who spoke those words to Moses, I AM THAT I AM?
It was Christ who from the bush on Mount Horeb spoke to Moses saying, “I AM THAT I AM: Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.” This was the pledge of Israel's deliverance. So when He came “in the likeness of men,” He declared Himself the I AM. The Child of Bethlehem, the meek and lowly Saviour, is God “manifest in the flesh.” 1 Timothy 3:16. 42 . FLB 47.5 EG White
Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham. was, I am. John 8:58
according the bible how to define this third entity if you still believe on the bible PASTOR let read Luc 1 : 35 AND THE ANGEL ansewed and said unto her THE HOLY GHOST shall come upon thee,and THE POWER OF THE OF THE HIGHEST SHALL OVERSHAHADOW THEE.if you do not believe on this word let read ACTS 1: 8 JESUS WORD BUT YE SHALL RECEIVE POWER after
THE HOLU GHOST IS COME UPON YOU {ONE QUESTION YOU DISTRUBUTE THIS POWER}
SDA vs Catholic vs Anti-trinitarian
CATHOLIC TRINITY
The Trinity of the Catholic Church is derived from Greek philosophy and teaches that it is the Father who eternally generates the Son. The Son is seen as having been derived/begotten by the Father while the Holy Spirit proceeds from both. This implies that the generation of the Son depends on the Father theologically and that the Father is the only one without origin. The Catholic Church affirms the eternal subordination of the Son.
ANTI-TRINITARIANS
Anti-Trinitarians have substantial similarities to the Roman Catholic Church’s concept of the trinity. They seem to have inherited the Roman Catholic Church’s understanding of God
with the Son in subordination to the Father having been begotten in a birthing event deriving his existence from the Father. This similarity is also seen in the procession of the Holy Spirit from both the Father and Son.
SDA GODHEAD
The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one Godhead or one God with three co-eternal, co-equal divine Persons each God, in perfect unity though distinct from one another, None is the origin of the others.
The anti-trinitarians in reality are expounding Roman Catholic trinity doctrine. They are under a strong delusion and it is possible that Rome herself is at the head of their movement and has them deceived.
SDA removed the word Godhead and replaced it with trinity to be uniformly aligned with the world. You are the only one trying to justify it
Sounds good but it kills the inner man(soul),for he is too good to interpret, but without the true revelation..
If God the Holy Spirit can take any form he desires, then can He transform himself into the devil or a flower, or vapor, or the whole universe? That is PANTHEISM MR. SKEETE!
WHY JESUS WILL CONFESS OUR NAMES BEFORE THE FATHER (MAT. 10:32) AND THE ANGELS (LUKE12:8) AND NOT BEFORE THE HOLY SPIRIT?
For several minutes, starting at about 8:00, Elder Skeete addresses a wonderful passage in Hebrews 5. He makes the valid point that the son had not selected himself for the position of high priest, but had been appointed by someone else. But then, he strays widely from the text of verse 4, which identifies the Caller as "God." Elder Skeete says at 9:57 that the Father appointed him. But the word "Father" was nowhere in that text! Yes, the Father did anoint Jesus--that is true. But the text says "God" did this. If Jesus were God, then God would have anointed "God"--defeating the entire point Elder Skeete has just tried to make. His rationalize is actually against the Trinity--though he sees it not.
Hebrews 1-8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
So here none less than God the Father speaking (v5) using the worshipful phrase "O God" to address Jesus. This was during his incarnation as a man yet He referred to Christ as God.
But although Christ’s divine glory was for a time veiled and eclipsed by His assuming humanity, yet He did not cease to be God when He became man. The human did not take the place of the divine, nor the divine of the human. This is the mystery of godliness. The two expressions “human” and “divine” were, in Christ, closely and inseparably one, and yet they had a distinct individuality. {5BC 1129.3}
@@harley6394-h3f Beware of mistranslations. This text in Hebrews 1:8 is anomalous, and was not correctly translated. I have given a detailed explanation of this elsewhere here, but it should have said "...your throne is of God..." based on the original grammar.
@@MongRay-n8i Did you get your translation from the Jehovah's Witness bible?
@@MongRay-n8i The angels all wear the yoke of obedience. They are the appointed messengers of Him who is the Commander of all heaven. But Christ is equal with God, infinite and omnipotent. He could pay the ransom for man's freedom. He is the eternal self-existing Son, on whom no yoke had come; SDA Bible Commentary, vol. 5, p. 1136
"Christ had not ceased to be God when He became man. Though He had humbled Himself to humanity, the Godhead was still His own. Christ alone could represent the Father to humanity, and this representation the disciples had been privileged to behold for over three years. {DA 663.5}
Christ was seeking to lead them from their low condition of faith to the experience they might receive if they truly realized what He was,-God in human flesh." { DA 664.2}
@@harley6394-h3f No. I am not sure if I have even seen a Jehovah's Witness Bible. I certainly do not have one in my possession.
I have been studying Hebrew for over six years, through Hebrew University in Jerusalem, with about 8-10 hours of classes per week. My present Hebrew level may be ahead of many pastors who study Hebrew in seminary; however, Biblical Hebrew is a complex language, and I am still soaking it up, feeling there is much more to learn. I often have questions for my professors, and am able to learn from them as well, one of whom answered some of my questions relative to this particular verse. However, Hebrew, not English, is their focus, and my English rendering is my own.
PAS TOR GENESIS SAID MY SPIRIT it do not say his spirit or her spirit GOD SAID my spirit when you say my it is belong to someone else or it belong to you when GOD SAID MY SPIRIT IT BELONG TOME NOT TO A THIRD PERSON OF TRINITY read JOEL 2;28 zacharie 4;6 by my spirit sad the LOrd
Psalms 104:4 Who makes His angels spirits, His ministers a flame of fire. 5 You who laid the foundations of the earth, So that it should not be moved forever,
Psalms 106:33 Because they rebelled against His Spirit, So that he spoke rashly with his lips.
@@jorambulilo2033angels are spirits. By these spirits God doesn’t His work through His Son.
this third entity give or distrubute the HOLY GHOST LET READ HEBREUX 2: 4 GOD ALSO BEAR
THEM WITNESS both with signs and wonders and with divers miracles and gifts of THE
HOLY GHOST ACCORDING HIS OWN WILL let read 1 corinthiens 12 ; 11 but all of these that one and self same SPIRIT WORKETH ,apportioning to every man individually as he will .i do not have
to wrote eveything but read for yourself
Trinity is the best teaching from the devil,for it is the "Mark of the beast"..
🤣
That's a strange doctrine about trinity being the mark of the beast. I thought Sunday was.
This fellow is confused, The Mark of the BEAST is Sunday according to the Bible, the above comment is an assumption@@harley6394-h3f
😂
The Pastor clearly lying when You reed more in context its clear its Jesus Christ or Gods spirit
This poor pastor has not yet understood John 4:24. "God is a spirit," Jesus said. The "spirit of God" is just what the words tell us--God's spirit. It is not a third being of the Godhead, something separate from the Father. John 4:21-23, the verses immediately preceding the one in which Jesus said God is a spirit, tell us that the Father is the God whom we are to worship. Jesus said in John 17:3 that the Father was "the only true God." Should we be quick to change Jesus' words, and to teach contrary to them?
With every text and passage, the evidence is clear to me....The GODHEAD exists (3).
If you eliminate the Holy Spirit, you run the risk of offending Him, of committing blasphemy against Him
Just as Ananias and Sapphira lied unto the Holy Spirit, whom Peter called GOD, Your position of rejecting the Holy as a part of the GODHEAD is the same sort of act.
What we cannot do is understand everything about GOD.
Your position breeds confusion.
Bible: There are 3 that bear record in heaven
You: No theres only 2
Bible: God the Father spoke from heaven, the spirit descended like a dove, as Jesus was coming up out of the water
You: No, there wasn't three there...there was only two.
Bible: When I go to the Father, I will send Another Comforter...He will testify of me...He will lead you into all truth
You: Jesus sent himself back
This is Confusion..and Deception. The position is The Bible is not really saying shat it is actually saying.
🙏🏾🔥📖🙏🏾🔥📖🙏🏾🔥📖🙏🏾🙏🏾📖🔥
@@msladymack1960 According to the Bible, the Father is God, and it was the Father God who sent His son Jesus. Jesus is "the son of man." Look up Numbers 23:19 to see what that means Jesus _isn't._ Then confirm this by looking at Jesus' own words in Luke 24:39 which contrast clearly with his words in John 4:24. The Ten Commandments clearly state that we are to have no other god before "me." That "me" is singular in Hebrew, just as it is in English. Who are you putting beside Him?
If Jesus is God, then we are God's _brothers_ according to Jesus in John 20:17, not God's _sons_ as we are so often told, such as in John 1:12. It is the Trinitarian who brings confusion to the Biblical text.
You are speaking about jesus after incarinationHere Christ shows them that, although they might reckon His life to be less than fifty years, yet His divine life could not be reckoned by human computation. The existence of Christ before His incarnation is not measured by figures.-The Signs of the Times, May 3, 1899. it [God's Word] we may learn what our redemption has cost Him who from the beginning was equal with the Father.-Counsels to Parents, Teachers, and Students, 13. you are narrowing it down to the level of you human mind my question is where did you put christ before incarination it is going from chiristanty to the teaching of islam Dening the the devinity of jesus@user-fd1lj4pn4g
Think alittle higher please don't say poor that is the spirit of Satan. Instead ,he understands. the way he understands is different from the way you understand
@@derartubedasso2831 I affirm what the Bible affirms, and deny what it denies. The Bible is clear: Jesus cannot have been God. Jesus was tempted (see Matthew 4:1): God cannot be tempted (see James 1:13). Jesus died: God cannot die (see 1 Timothy 1:17). Jesus was Lord of the dead (see Romans 14:9): God is not the God of the dead (see Matthew 22:32). Jesus was seen of multitudes, and his voice was heard: God has never been seen by anyone (see 1 John 4:12, John 1:18) nor has the Father's voice ever been heard (see John 5:37). Jesus calls us his "brethren" (see John 20:17): God calls us His "sons" (see e.g. John 1:12).
If Jesus had been God, scores of Bible verses would be wrong. How do you explain them? Was Jesus tempted or not? If he was, then he was not God, because God cannot be tempted with evil (James 1:13). If even one verse denies the Trinity, then the Trinity must be given up.
The Bible is clear: God sent His _son._ They are two separate entities, and they are not equal. Jesus said himself "my father is greater than I" (John 14:28). Ellen White says if God sent His son, then he had a son to send. Hebrews 10:5 indicates that the son came to dwell in a body that had been prepared for him. I believe that before this incarnation, Jesus was known as Michael in heaven--who was called an archangel but is nowhere called God.
Interestingly, the Father has commanded _the angels_ to worship His son (see Hebrews 1:6). Why would the angels have needed this command if the son had already been God? Do you suppose the angels would have been ignorant of who God was? And if being God's son means one is God, why are we not _all_ Gods, as Jesus calls us in John 10:34? And why, if Jesus had been God, would it have been wrong for them to worship him? For Ellen White tells us that before he met the Father after his resurrection, he commanded the angels not to worship him until he had received the Father's approbation. Would God ever command His subjects not to worship him?
There are simply too many inconsistencies with a Trinitarian belief system--especially for those of us who hold the writings of Ellen G. White.
Pastor is preaching another gospel. We know whose spirit it is, not a separate person. This equality gospel which started in heaven as part of the great controversy is destroying society. The issue of the trinity is not a small doctrine, it is false and destroys the personality of Christ. Christ has always submitted to the will of His Father so are we to submit to Christ as the head of the church. Satan is the one who brings this issue of equality through this false gospel. You may wonder why the world has pushed this gospel of equality in everything? Now you know where it is coming from. The Spirit is not a separate entity but the presence of Christ and His Father in the soul. That’s the reason why we still have verses in the Bible that call the spirit an IT. John personified the spirit because it is the spirit of Christ John 14:18. God is one. 1Cori8:6-8
*Dr. Kwabena Donkor, PhD in systematic theology from Andrews University and retired Associate Director Biblical Research Institute (BRI) states,* - *“No text of Scripture specifically says that God is three Persons:* - *but theological reasoning on the basis of biblical principles leads to that conclusion.”* - *Release 9, May 2015, page 20, God in 3 Person - in Theology*
So, then what is being stated is that *“No text of Scripture specifically says that God is three Persons”*
*Then he [Kwabena Donkor] concludes,* - *“theological reasoning based on biblical principles leads to that conclusion.”*
*What a contradiction!* - *First, he says there is no prooftext* - *then he contradicts himself by saying theological reasoning based on biblical principle leads to that conclusion.* - *He should have been a politician.*
*Since when does dogma replace scripture?*
*An official Church Publication reads,* - *“If Adventism is to meet the needs of all people around the world, the landmarks must remain simple and straightforward. The Bible will be our only creed. Complex theological definitions, *THE TRINITY, FOR EXAMPLE, MAY SERVE THE CHURCH WELL IN GENERAL BUT CANNOT BE IMPOSED AS A TEST FOR ALL ADVENTIST EVERYWHERE.”* - Issues: The Seventh-day Adventist Church and Certain Private Ministries, 1992, p.50, (NAD 1977)
“Adventism can expect fresh insights into truth, ‘present truth’ that will enhance the appreciation of old landmarks. Such an expectation has always been a part of historic Adventism and is reaffirmed in the Statement of Fundamental Beliefs voted in 1980. When ‘present truth’ is of a complex nature, however, *it may be more helpful for some in the church than for others. In such a case it cannot be imposed on the church as a whole.”* (Ibid).
*Then he [Kwabena Donkor] says,* - *“Remember our non-Trinitarian past as well as the simplicity of our landmarks should encourage a certain humility in the church and lead us to resist any attempt by one segment of the church to impose its views on the rest.”* (Ibid)
*Now, be honest and tell me, is it proper for the GC of the SDA Church to impose its synthesis on members, and expel those who conscientiously do not agree with the church’s reasoning, even though those members accept everything the Bible actually says?*
*Today, we all know that the word PERSON refers to an individual. An individual is someone composed of a physical form that we can recognize by sight and one who also possesses a non-physical entity, the spirit, which we recognize to be the person, personality, or character of that individual.* - *THIS HAS NOT ALWAYS BEEN THE CASE.*
*The etymology of the phrase PERSON reveals the following:* - *”The word, “person” has had different meanings over the course of time.* The New World Encyclopedia notes [Subtitle Historical Development of the Doctrine of the Trinity], “Tertullian started to use the expression of ‘three persons’ (tres personae in Latin). *The Latin word persona in the days of Tertullian never meant a self-conscious individual person,* which is what is usually meant by the modern English word ‘person.’ *In those days, it only meant legal ownership or a mask used at the theater.* Thus, three distinct persons are still of one substance (una substantia in Latin). It was in this context that Tertullian also used the word trinitas” (key word “Trinity”)”.
*Webster's Dictionary, 1828:* - *Person,* noun. per'sn. Latin persona; said to be compounded of per, through or by, and sonus, sound; a Latin word signifying primarily a mask used by actors on the stage.
*So, in the Trinity doctrine the holy Spirit is supposed to be a mask because at the time the Trinity doctrine was developed the term "person" actually meant mask.*
*Here is the punchline:* --- *"The third Person was asserted at a Council of Alexandria in 362...and finally by the Council of Constantinople of 381"* - *A Catholic Dictionary, p. 812.*
*The UNREASONABLE INSISTENCE UPON THE USE OF 21st-CENTURY ENGLISH IDIOMS OF SPEECH TO INTERPRET FIRST CENTURY GREEK OR HEBREW HAS LED TO SOME EXTREME VIEWS INDEED.* - *Scores of contradictions would appear in both the Old and New Testaments if this principle were ignored.* - *We must compare Scripture with Scripture and use the idiom of the language in which the Bible was written and not our own thoughts and ideas.*
*The Trinity doctrine was now fully established as we know it today.* - *So, the Trinity doctrine is a manmade doctrine from the Catholic Church which was formed in two parts.*
*“The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century… Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective”* -New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. 14.
Spirit Defined as per American Heritage Dictionary: “Part of a human associated with the mind, will and feelings”
*A simple Google search describes spirit as:* - *the non-physical part of a person which is the seat of emotions and character; the soul.* www.google.com/search?q=spirit+define&oq
*Spirit is the mind or character or personality of God and of Jesus.* God is Holy, therefore His character is holy. [holy: adjective describing the Spirit: Noun].
*The reference work A Catholic Dictionary similarly acknowledges,* - *“On the whole the New Testament, like the Old, speaks of the spirit as a divine energy or power”* (William Addis and Thomas Arnold, 2004, “Trinity, Holy,” p. 827).
*From Bible evidence, God's Spirit is His mind, life, divine presence, and glory.* - *The evidence points to the fact that God's Spirit is a part of God - the personality and character of God, able to manifest itself in various ways apart from God's bodily form.* - *Because it ‘proceeds from the Father’ [John 15:26], it is most commonly called the ‘Spirit OF God’ or ‘Spirit OF Christ’, and as opposed to our spirit, it is ‘Holy’.*
*The word ‘Holy’ is an adjective* - *be it in English or Greek.* - *‘Holy Spirit’ is not a name but a description of God's Spirit.* - *The Bible mentions several types of spirits. We find ‘evil spirit,’ ‘dumb spirit,’ ‘unclean spirit,’ ‘foul spirit,’ ‘humble spirit,’ ‘excellent spirit,’ ‘good spirit,’ ‘broken spirit,’ ‘wounded spirit,’ ‘faithful spirit,’ and ‘haughty spirit’ etc,.* - *All these spirits are distinguishable by the adjective that describes them such as good, foul and humble etc,. We know that God the Father has a spirit* [Matthew 10:20] and His Spirit of course could be nothing other than Holy.*
"Theological Reasoning based on biblical principle leads to that conclusion" - in other words you are quoting this text:
"Isaiah 28:13 (KJV)
But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken".
Which a is biblical method of studying and preaching of the scripture and you got problem with scripture, very sad. The Pastor is using biblical method in preaching to explain, expound and drawn out the truth.
MOST OR IF NOT ALL PEACHING USE THIS METHOD.
If you saying that this method of bible study and preaching is wrong and in error than, you might as well; THROW ALL FOUNDATIONAL "DOCTRINES" OF THE CHURCH INTO THE WASTE PAPER BASKET OR TRASH CAN. BECAUSE THESE FOUNDATIONAL "DOCTRINES" WERE DERIVED USING THIS METHOD.
Can you see how your argument is stupid and nonsensical?
That goes to "PROPHECY INTERPRETATION".
One cannot interpret and understand prophecy without using this method.
Come on dude!😂 Your argument is hilarious 😂
@@christophertunusau3023: Strange, you have not proven anything. The only funny thing is your hilarious laughing emoji faces. Now that is what is nonsensical.
@@christophertunusau3023: *The Greek word for •'comforter' is 'parakletos',* - *which means* - *'intercessor, advocate, comforter'.* - * If you take a look at 1 John 2:1 it says that •Jesus Christ is our 'advocate'.* - *And the Greek word used for advocate in this verse is the same 'parakletos' used for comforter in the other verses regarding the Spirit.* 1 Timothy 2:5 also confirms we only have ONE *mediator [advocate]* with the Father, and that is Jesus Christ. *So, what was to be 'sent' as a comforter for us?* - *The Spirit of Christ.*
*Strong's Concordance G3875 is found five times in scripture (KJV).* John 14:16, 14:26, 15:26, 16:7 and 1 John 2:1 - *Its usage is: an ADVOCATE, Intercessor, a consoler, COMFORTER, helper, Paraclete or Parakletos.*
*Re: John 14:26* - Comforter (KJV): *Strong's Concordance G3875 is found five times in scripture (KJV).* - *John 14:16, 14:26, 15:26, 16:7 and 1 John 2:1* - *Its usage is: an ADVOCATE, Intercessor, a consoler, COMFORTER, helper, Paraclete or Parakletos.* 1 John 2:1 reads "My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, *we have an ADVOCATE with the Father, JESUS CHRIST THE RIGHTEOUS."* www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g3875/kjv/tr/0-1/
*Who does Revelation 1:13 say is walking amongst the candlesticks [churches]? A separate third being?* - *No, it is Jesus Christ Himself.*
*VERSE USED - John 16:7-8* - *“Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, THE COMFORTER WILL NOT COME UNTO YOU; BUT IF I DEPART, I WILL SEND HIM UNTO YOU. And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment.”*
*Many people read these verses and say Jesus is talking about another person here, because Jesus says 'HIM' and 'HE' referring to the Holy Spirit." ... It is clearly proven above that when Jesus spoke about Himself,* - *He did it in the 'third person,* - *and in some cases, Jesus would switch between first-person and third-person references in the same sentence structure.* - *Illeism is sometimes used in literature as a stylistic device.* *Illeism /ˈɪli.ɪzəm/ (from Latin ille meaning "he, that") is the act of referring to oneself (often habitually) in the third person instead of first person. Also called self-talk.*
The *phrase third person* is a grammatical construct called a simile.* - *They are figures of speech and are used to explain, make comparisons or draw contrasts.* - *Figures of speech are not exactly reliable to draw dogmatic positions from.*
*FOR SDA:* - “[1] The incarnation of Christ, [2] HIS DIVINITY, [3] His atonement, [4] His wonderful life in heaven as our advocate, [5] the OFFICE of the Holy Spirit-all these vital themes of Christianity are revealed from Genesis to Revelation. Each is a golden link in the perfect chain of truth. Why, then, should not the Scriptures be exalted in every school in our land?” - CT, p. 427.3 EGW [brackets mine]
*Before she says, “all these vital themes of Christianity,” she lists:*
*1.)* - *“The incarnation of Christ,*
*2.)* - *“HIS DIVINITY,”*
*3.)* - *“His atonement,”*
*4.)* - *“His wonderful life in heaven as our advocate,”*
*5.)* - *“the OFFICE of the Holy Spirit.*
It is not that difficult to see that all the “vital themes” mentioned in the above quote refers to Christ and His divine activities; He is the one who will “IMPART TO US HIS OWN INDIVIDUALITY” [Ms70, 1896, par.33] which is “THE DIVINITY OF HIS CHARACTER” - RH April 5, 1906, par. 12 via His own Spirit.
“The Son of God was next in authority to the great Lawgiver. He knew that his life alone could be sufficient to ransom fallen man. He was of as much more value than man as his noble, spotless character, *and exalted [office] as commander of all the heavenly host,* were above the work of man. He was in the express image of his Father, NOT IN FEATURE ALONE, BUT IN PERFECTION OF CHARACTER.” 2SP, 9.1
*The significant underlying context as to why she chose such expression as the* - *“third person” or “personality” language in describing the Holy Spirit.* - *It was NOT intended to bring in a new theology* [“God the Holy Spirit” being an entirely separate individual] *but to uphold the truths of the sanctuary and the personality of God.* By portraying the Spirit as a “third person” or having a “distinct personality”, *it counters the depersonalization of the Pantheistic concept of god and it also distinguishes the Spirit as the very personal presence and power of the Father and Son that is distinctly different than Father and Son’s corporeal personality.*
The “agency” or the “office” therefore which Ellen White speaks of does NOT connote “another being” but rather an “operational distinction” that defines the “character of it’s office.” The agency of the Holy Spirit brings with it the personality of Christ’s divinity that is distinctly different than Christ’s humanity. And this is precisely the reason why the Inspiration, both Scripture and the Spirit of Prophecy, gives personal attributes to the Holy Spirit.
There are Three Economic Personalities - Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit.
“They have ONE God and ONE Saviour; and ONE Spirit-the Spirit of Christ-is to bring unity into their ranks.” - E.G. White, 9T 189.3, 1909.
*Holy Spirit:* = *the non-corporeal aspect of the Father and Son’s personality whereby they are omnipresent.*
*The words such as “person” and “personality” in the Spirit of Prophecy have a range of meanings, but two are important to this matter:*
*1.)* - *“Person” and “personality” can refer to a WHOLE BEING.*
*2.)* - *“Person” and “personality” can also refer to an ECONOMIC OFFICE OR ROLE.*
We may refer to the first of these the “Capital ‘P’ Person” and the second of these the “lower case ‘p’ person” definitions.
*But there are three distinct ACTIVITIES of deity.*
*1.)* - *There is what the Father is doing in His immediate locality,*
*2.)* - *What the Son is doing in His immediate locality,* and
*3.)* - *The WORK They are performing [TOGETHER] throughout the universe. These constitute three economic offices or “persons”/”personalities” in the sense of roles. Thus, in this sense, the Holy Spirit would be considered a lower-case ‘p’ person.*
*Please read page 2*
@@christophertunusau3023: - *Trinitarian exegete does violence to scriptures to the extent of legitimizing and propagating their theories.*
*If the Holy Spirit is indeed a "separate" person [corpus being] from the Father and His Son, then:*
*1.* - *Why is the Spirit also called "Ghost"?* [John 1:33, 7:39 20:20].
*2.* - *Why were the Spirit in Job's nostrils? Same Heb. Root word as in Genesis 1:2* [Job 27:3].
*3.* - *Why is the Spirit never spoken of as reigning upon a throne, as are the Father and His Son?* [Revelation 3:21].
*4.* - *Why no hymns of adoration to the Spirit, as there are to God and the Lamb?* [Revelation 5:9-13].
*5.* - *Why are there seven Spirits before God's throne?* [Revelation 1:4, 3:1, 5:6].
*6.* - *Why does the Spirit have no personal name, like the Father and Son?* [Exodus 6:3, Matthew 1:21].
*7.* - *Why is the Spirit synonymous with God and His Son?* [John 4:24, 2 Corinthians 3:17, Romans 8:9,1 Corinthians 15:45].
*8.* - *Why did Jesus call "God" His Father, when it was the Holy Ghost that came upon the virgin Mary?* [Luke 1:35].
*9.* - *Why did not Paul, Peter, James, John, and Jude include the Spirit in the salutations in their epistles?* [Romans 1:7, 2 Peter 1:2, 11 John 3, James 1:1, Jude 1,2].
*10.* - *Why do Paul and John both speak of Christians having "fellowship" with the Father and His Son, but never with the Holy Spirit?* [1 Corinthians 1:9, 1 John 1:3].
*11.* - *Why is the Spirit "neuter" in gender, whereas Father and Son are "masculine"?*
*12.* - *Why is the Spirit "Symbolized" by impersonal symbols; wind, water, fire, oil, etc?* [Acts 2:1-4, Isaiah 44:3, Zechariah 4:1-7].
*13.* - *Why is the Spirit spoken of as being "poured out", "shed forth", "falling upon", "filling", etc?* [Acts 2:1-4, 2:17, 33, Titus 3:4,5].
*14.* - *Why is the Spirit never addressed in prayer, as are Father and Son?* [Matthew 6:9, Acts 7:59, 60].
*15.*- *Why do neither Father nor Son ever address the Spirit, as they do each other?* [John 12:27,28, Hebrews 1:8-10].
*16.* - *Why can the Spirit be given by God in measured amounts?* [John 3:34, Philippians 1:19, Joel 2:23].
*17.* - *Why do the Hebrew and Greek origins of the word "Spirit" always mean breath, wind, air, power, animation, etc?* [Genesis 1:2 ruach, Matthew 1:18, 3:16- pneuma].
*18.* - *Why could Jesus "breathe" the Holy Ghost upon His disciples?* [John 20:22].
*19.* - *Why are Christ's "words" the same as Spirit?* [John 6:63, See Psalms 33:6, 9].
*20.* - *Why are the neuter pronouns "it" and "itself" used with reference to the Spirit, but never the Father and Son?* [Numbers 11:17, 25, John 1:32, Romans 8:16, 26, 1 Peter 1:11, 1 John 2:27].
*21.* - *Why are the Hebrew and Greek root words for "Spirit" [rauch and pneuma) the same, where applied to God, Angel, Man, or beast (God - Genesis 1:2; Angel - Hebrews 1:7; Man - 1 Corinthians 2:11; Beast-Ecclesiastes **3:21**]*
*22.* - *Why is "Spirit" not considered a separate entity when applied to angel, demon, or man and yet considered to be so when applied to God?* [Hebrews 1:7, 14, Mark 5:12, 13, 1 Corinthians 2:11].
*23.* - *Why are "Spirit" and "breath" synonymous, coming from the same root word in the Hebrew tongue?* [Genesis 1:2, Psalms 33:6, Job 27:3].
*24.* - *Why does the Spirit have no substance, as do the Father and His Son?* [Psalms 104:29, 30, Luke 24:39].
*25.* - *How is it that the Father knows the Son and vice versa but the Holy Spirit is excluded?* [[Matt 11:27].
*26.* - *Why does Scripture almost always mention the Holy Spirit as a possessive pronoun/noun, as in ‘His Spirit’, His Holy Spirit’, ‘Spirit OF God’ or ‘Spirit OF Christ’?* [Is 63:10; Num 11:29; Gen 1:2; 1 John 4:2; Rom 8:9; 1 Pet 1:11; Judg 3:10; 2 Cor 3:10].
*27.* - *Scripture never mentions that the Holy Spirit has a Spirit,* - *WHY?*
*28.* - *If the Holy Spirit is a person like the Father and Son then why is there not a single verse, anywhere in Scripture, where we find any of the phases: trinity, triune or God the Holy Spirit?*
*29.* - *Why is there not one verse, anywhere in Scripture, where we are told that we will ever see and/or meet the Holy Spirit?*
*30.* - *How is it that “no one hath seen God at any time” except the Son?* [John 1:18] - *Surely, if the Holy Spirit was a being and was present during the creation week as the trinity doctrine claims, then He would have certainly seen the Father.*
*Please, dear reader, diligently and prayerfully study the word of God for yourself and allow the Spirit of God to help you make the right decisions.*
The poor pastor is just identifying scripture but not explaining the verses what they mean!...sad he is deceived. 1 Corinthians 8:6
I have followed and attended his sermons personally here in Windhoek. He lacks understanding of context. Generally he reads one verse and goes out of its context. The trinity contracts the hierarchical order that God has established. Those who believe in this false doctrine have a God who can die. No wonder why there is no power in the church since we changed our fundamental beliefs in favor of this Catholic doctrine.