Pagan Pillars?

dedication · Posted: Fri Jun 28, 2002 12:39 pm Post subject: Pagan Pillars?

Look again at what

Uriah Smith said-- "Respecting this Spirit, the Bible uses expressions which cannot be harmonized with the idea that it is a person like the Father and the Son. Rather it is shown to be a divine influence from them both, the medium which represents their presence and by which they have knowledge and power through all the universe, when not personally present. " R&H Oct. 28, 1890

God is not a force, or power, separated from "personality". Pantheism sees the "force" in everything-- including yourself -- thus they quote "the kingdom is within yourself"

This is NEW AGE-- you see it everywhere --

dedication · Posted: Sat Jun 29, 2002 6:04 pm Post subject:

First I would like to qualify something.

1. The pioneers were not "new age". I'm just pointing out where that kind of reasoning leads too. They were no more New Age, then Martin Luther had the mark of the beast.----- But---- (well hope you understand what I'm trying to say).

2. I believe the SDA pioneers WERE led of God to find Biblical truths. They were convicted of the Seventh-day Sabbath and the role it played in the end scenes. Their presentation of the sanctuary and their thorough biblical studies to show it was truly Biblical should be read by every SDA!

Indeed I have some at my website at
http://dedication.www3.50megs.com/pioneerwritings.html

3. EGW was very careful when conflicts arose "among the brethern" as she was fearful that the points under discussion (ie. horns in Daniel 7, the daily, in Daniel 8. and I believe the "trinity" and even the King of the North which James White had a much better understanding of than U. Smith) yet she cautioned that to "denounce" these men, who had done so much to bring Adventism to the platform of truth we hold, even though upon some points they needed correction, would throw everything into confusion.

When one studies the history of 1888 we see quite a battle between EGW and some of the "old pioneers" she did not always agree with them, but she was careful NOT to discredit their "fuller" work.

My own policy has been --
Where EGW did not teach their postion-- and even wrote things contrary to their position -- we need to study and not be bound by what they said.

However, on those points that she strongly supported them--
prophetic outlines
sanctuary doctrine
sunday/sabbath issues etc. --

They were right on track.

Like I said before--

Why did Luther preach against the Seventh-day Sabbath? He was a man used mightly by God-- but somehow God didn't see the need to clarify that point at that time-- He leads His people step by step---

Therefore when I point out that the "anti-trinity" (and please stick to the concept of "trinity" we now hold, not all the deviations)
but the anti-trinity concepts are actually "pagan pillars"---
but in moving away from the "pagan pillars" please do not throw out all the true "pillars" that these men searched out with meticulous Bible study and prayer---

-- I see EGW clearly upholding the eternal godhood of Christ, with life underived (not obtained from any source) and that the Holy Spirit is the THIRD PERSON of the Godhead, I also see the in scripture, so I'm going to follow the fuller revelation of light.

I'm not going to throw out all EGW's writings after 1888, and refuse to follow.

dedication · Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2002 1:12 am Post subject:

Maintaining that Jesus was literally birthed or born out of the person of the Father before the foundations of the earth were laid, and that is how Jesus became the only begotten Son of God is actually prominent pagan concept.

Now we have a group of people (basing much of their "evidence" on a concept the Pioneers first held in the early years) that say the Father is the only God, or the only true God in the Godhead, and that Christ is NOT true God. They say that there was a time in which the Father existed alone before giving birth to Christ; that the Holy Spirit is not a separate Being or Person, but is merely the "power" or "breath" or "life" of the Father or the Son. They say that only God the Father is the true God, and Christ is not the true God, and the Holy Ghost is not an individual, not the 3rd person of the Godhead.

Spiritualism teaches--"Son of God, First-Born...the Second Logos or Higher Self,--the first emanation from the Father, the Absolute, or the First Logos." Dictionary of All Scriptures and Myths, by G.A. Gaskell, p 702 (this dictionary uses the philosophic sacredly held writings of all religions such as Zoroaster, Philo, Swedenborg, Buddah, Hermes, the Qabbalah, etc., in order to derive the definitions--hence the definitions given are mystical and spiritualistic). Spiritualism teaches--"The eternal Birth or generation of the Son or Divine Word.... "From our proper Source, that is to say, from the Father and all that which lives in Him, there shines,' says Ruysbroeck, 'an eternal Ray, the which is the Birth of the Son....We are celebrating the feast of the Eternal Birth which God the Father has borne..." Mysticism, p 146, by E. Underhill, quoted in Dictionary, p 702.
So spiritualism also teaches that the Son of God was literally birthed or born out of the Father from eternity--before anything else was created. Thus individuals promoting the "literal birthing of Christ before creation" are moving into occultic beliefs, unwittingly many are guilty of spreading spiritualistic lies as being the truth--putting darkness for light.
This spiritualistic doctrine--that the Christ was literally birthed or born out of the Father, gave rise to the spiritualistic belief that God must have female capabilities in order to give birth: the occult teaches that God is both father and mother in one being, or the "father-mother God." This belief is the foundation of the spiritualistic doctrine of dualism, yin-yang, positive-negative, that both good and evil must exist in order for the universe to survive and for man to achieve God-hood. The false belief that Jesus became the literal Son of God by literally being born or brought forth out of the Father before the earth was created, is clearly and only a teaching of spiritualism

NOW I FIND THE FOLLOWING RATHER INTERESTING:

MORMONISM seems to be saying they believe IN THE TRINITY!!
However, their understanding of the trinity is miles separated from the SDA understanding and actually has much closer resemblance to the understanding of the ANTI-TRINITIARINS we meet, then to trinitarian belief- I find this very interesting!

This is what I've found on Mormonism

dedication · Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2002 1:32 am Post subject:

Now the question that is tossed back and forth in the -- trinity, anti-trinity -- discussions is this.

Which belief is actually worshipping more than ONE God?

To me it seems plain that anyone believing that God the FATHER is the ONE AND ONLY true God or DEITY, and that Christ and God the Father are NOT both that ONE DEITY, are worshipping two gods.

Now the other side, in turn says:

Again, I must respectfully disagree. Please correct me if I'm misunderstanding. But the trinitarian belief system advocates that the Father is God and that the Son is God and that the Holy Spirit is God, right? And believers in the trinity worship THEM, right? Then I would have to submit to you that if this is the case, then trinitarians are the ones that are thus worshipping THREE Deities. I worship the "one true God" who Jesus Christ Himself has said is the Father.

My immediate response would be, “Don’t they then worship Christ? For the Bible plainly and forcefully says there is ONLY ONE GOD AND HIM ALONE ARE WE TO SERVE, {or worship} Yet scripture also tells us Christ is WORTHY to be worshipped.

Matt. 12.30,32
“And you are to love the Lord (KURIOS) thy God (DEITY) with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. for there is one God; (DEITY) and there is none other but He:”

1 Corinthians 8:4,5

There is no other God but One. For even if there are so called gods,
whether in heaven or on earth (as there are many gods and many lords)
for us there is ONE GOD;

These verses plainly say we are to worship ONLY the ONE and that there is no other gods to be worshipped-- no not even in heaven.

Matt. 4.9,10
[Satan] said unto [Christ] …fall down and worship me.

Then said Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shall you serve.

1 Corinthians 8:4-6

There is no other God but One. For even if there are so called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as there are many gods and many lords) yet for us there is ONE GOD; the Father of whom are all things and we for Him; and ONE LORD, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and we through him exist.
“There is no other GOD BUT ONE”

The term for God in that verse is “THEOS” = supreme DEITY, DIVINITY.According to scripture there is only ONE DIVINITY, ONE DEITY.

Even if there are other so called divinities, this text says, yet for us there is only ONE DIVINTY--ONE DEITY

This Divinity or Deity, consists of the Father of whom are all things
And of Jesus Christ who is given the title of one “KURIOS” (which means ONE God, supreme in authority)

So if there is BUT ONE DIVINITY-- it follows that both Christ and God the Father are of that ONE DIVINITY.

1 Cor. 8:6
For us there is ONE GOD; (ONE DEITY)

***the Father of whom are all things and we for Him;
***and ONE LORD, (KURIOS) Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and we through him exist .

ONLY ONE GOD, consisting of the Father, AND CHRIST our (KURIOS) in perfect unity, and ONENESS, who are NOT TWO SEPARATE GOD’S one lesser than the other.

To Deny that is denying the divinity of Christ.

And other texts include the Holy Spirit to show the trio which comprise the ONE DIETY.

___________________

The term given to Christ in that verse is ONE LORD--or “KURIOS” this term is used repeatedly in the NEW TESTAMENT to refer not only to Christ, but also God the Father.

If Christ is the "ONE KURIOS" as it says in 1 Cor. who is Jesus speaking of when He says:

Mark 12.29, 30

And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart,
(The “KURIOS” (Lord), our (God)THEOS” is ONE “KURIOS” Lord. And you shall love the “KURIOS” thy “THEOS” with all thy heart.)

If there is ONLY ONE “KURIOS” and that is Christ, as is stated in 1 Cor. 8:6, is Jesus in Mark 12:30 applying the SHEMA to Himself?

Matt. 4.10

Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

(Jesus says : Thou shalt worship the “KURIOS” your “THEOS”, and him ONLY shalt thou serve.)

Again, 1 Corinthians says that CHRIST is the ONE KURIOS, --- but if you insist that Christ is NOT "THEOS" then which ONE of the two are you ONLY TO SERVE?

WHO is Thomas speaking of:

John 20.28

And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.

Thomas called Christ “MY KURIOS” and
my "THEOS" (MY DIETY!)

We believe in ONE GOD, ONE DIETY in perfect unity of motive, purpose, principles, and thought--

Just as God knows YOUR every thought and motive, so the THREE PERSONS of the Godhead know each other's every thought and motive and are in absolute harmony and oneness and unity. When ONE member of the Godhead is present --all three are thus present.

dedication · Posted: Thu Aug 08, 2002 11:54 pm Post subject:

I found it rather interesting as I was surfing the internet to stumble upon a webpage denouncing the Trinity.

Many of the arguments were very similar to what we have encountered coming from a small minoritygroup who have emerged in Adventism, denouncing the trinity.

The interesting thing about the webpage, was that this was the
Baha'i Faith Explanation Of
The Trinity

Their point was --- Christians cannot accept the "second christ" Baha'i
because they have elevated the first Christ "Jesus" to son god status, thus Christian's cannot see the truth about the "second christ".

Here's a quote from the Bahai' webpage: