A Reform-minded Seventh-day Adventist forum In our aim to exalt everything important, first and foremost, we seek to promote a clear understanding of Daniel, Revelation, the three angels' messages and the alpha and omega of apostasy.
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2002 9:10 pm Post subject: The Holy Spirit is Not a Person
It is interesting that Kellogg's beliefs centered around his understanding of the Trinity.
"He (Kellogg) said that all the way along he had been troubled to know how to state the character of God and His relation to His created works....but that within a short time he had come to believe in the trinity and could now see pretty clearly where all the difficulty was,...it was God the Holy Ghost, and not God the Father that filled all space and every living thing." Letter from A. G. Daniells to W. C. White Oct. 29, 1903.
"As far as I can fathom, the difficulty which is found in The Living Temple, the whole thing may be simmered down to this question: Is the Holy Ghost a person? You say no....How He can be the third person and not a person at all is difficult for me to see." Letter from J. H. Kellogg to G. I. Butler Oct. 28, 1903.
It seems that Kellogg thought the Holy Spirit to be a person. The teaching in the Adventist Church at that time was to the contrary.
"Thus the Spirit is personified in Christ and God, but never revealed as a separate person. Never are we told to pray to the Spirit; but to God for the Spirit. never do we find in the Scriptures prayers to the Spirit, but for the Spirit.
"The Spirit is the creative power of God by which angels and all other creatures came into existence. God fills them with His Spirit, His life, and makes them ministers of His life and power to others, especially to His people." Questions and Answers "Sign of the Times" By Milton Wilcox Pacific Press Publishing Assoc. 1911.
"The Bible shows us God in His high and holy place, not in a state of inactivity, not in silence and solitude, but surrounded by ten thousand times ten thousand and thousands of thousands of holy beings, all waiting to do His will. Through these messengers He is in active communication with every part of His dominion. By His Spirit He is everywhere present. Through the agency of His Spirit and His angels He ministers to the children of men." MH - 417
"Never before have the angels listened to such a prayer. They are eager to bear to their loved Commander a message of assurance and comfort. But no; the Father Himself will answer the petition of His Son. Direct from the throne issue the beams of His glory. The heavens are opened, and upon the Saviour’s head descends a dovelike form of purest light, – fit emblem of Him, the meek and lowly One." DA - 112
In trying to understand what was meant by Ellen White in some of her writings in which she uses the term third person, I first noticed that she never called Christ the second person of the Godhead nor did she ever use the term God, the Son. Maybe I missed it so if someone else has found these terms used in her writings please show me.
Next, I looked up what "third person" meant in the dictionary:
"1.) A set of linguistic forms (as verb forms, pronouns, and inflectional affixes) referring to one that is neither the speaker or writer of the utterance in which they occur nor the one to whom that utterance is addressed." (Webster's New Collegiate).
This term makes sense when one considers that the Holy Spirit is the agent or representative of God:
"For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father." Eph. 2:18
"Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak..." John 16:13
"But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you." Rom. 8:11
But to use the term "Third Person" (capitalized) takes this from being the linguistic third person (as described above) and makes it the first or second person (i.e. the speaker or writer of the utterance in which it occurs or the person or thing address in the utterance in which it occurs) and since the Bible says that he will not speak of himself then that use of this term is false!!!
"When the Holy Spirit is referred to by the masculine name parakletos, "Comforter," the masculine pronoun is used (see John 15:26; 16:7,13). It is obvious that the personality of the Holy Spirit cannot be argued by the gender of the pronouns used." SDA Bible Commentary p568.
“Sin originated with him who, next to Christ, had been most honored of God and was highest in power and glory among the inhabitants of heaven. Lucifer, "son of the morning," was first of the covering cherubs, holy and undefiled.”(PP 35)
“To dispute the supremacy of the Son of God, thus impeaching the wisdom and love of the Creator, had become the purpose of this prince of angels. To this object he was about to bend the energies of that master mind, which, next to Christ's, was first among the hosts of God.” (PP 35)
THE ONLY BEING NEXT TO CHRIST WAS LUCIFER!!!
“The King of the universe summoned the heavenly hosts before Him, that in their presence He might set forth the true position of His Son and show the relation He sustained to all created beings. The Son of God shared the Father's throne, and the glory of the eternal, self-existent One encircled both. About the throne gathered the holy angels, a vast, unnumbered throng—‘ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands’ (Revelation 5:11.), the most exalted angels, as ministers and subjects, rejoicing in the light that fell upon them from the presence of the Deity. Before the assembled inhabitants of heaven the King declared that none but Christ, the Only Begotten of God, could fully enter into His purposes, and to Him it was committed to execute the mighty counsels of His will. The Son of God had wrought the Father's will in the creation of all the hosts of heaven; and to Him, as well as to God, their homage and allegiance were due. Christ was still to exercise divine power, in the creation of the earth and its inhabitants. But in all this He would not seek power or exaltation for Himself contrary to God's plan, but would exalt the Father's glory and execute His purposes of beneficence and love.” Patriarchs and Prophets, page 36, paragraph 2
“Christ, the Word, the only begotten of God, was one with the eternal Father--one in nature, in character, in purpose--the only being that could enter into all the counsels and purposes of God.” Patriarchs and Prophets page 34, paragraph 1
EITHER THE HOLY SPIRIT IS A LESSER BEING OR THE HOLY SPIRIT IS NOT A BEING AT ALL SINCE JESUS IS THE ONLY BEING IN COUNSEL WITH GOD.
THE FATHER AND THE SON HAVE THE HIGHEST POSITIONS IN THE UNIVERSE (REV. 22:1 ONLY TWO SIT ON THE THRONE IN HEAVEN; ZECH. 6:13 ONLY TWO ARE IN THE COUNSEL OF PEACE)
“Be not deceived; many will depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils. We have now before us the alpha of this danger. The omega will be of a most startling nature.
“We need to study the words that Christ uttered in the prayer that He offered just before His trial and crucifixion. "These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee: as thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do. And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was. I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word" (John 17:1-6).” (1SM 197,198)
HERE THERE ARE TWO BEINGS WE NEED TO KNOW, MORE THAN THIS, IS SATAN'S DECEPTION. THE OMEGA APOSTASY
It is interesting that Kellogg's beliefs centered around his understanding of the Trinity.
You are deceived by Kellogg’s obfuscation. I’ve already proven this. HdtSDAcbT p. 2. There is no mention of anything Trinitarian in Kellogg’s book (Living Temple), and it’s the pantheism in that book that received Ellen White’s condemnation.
While it may be true that he did not mention the Trinity in his book it is he himself who is here clarifying what he meant:
Quote:
"As far as I can fathom, the difficulty which is found in The Living Temple, the whole thing may be simmered down to this question: Is the Holy Ghost a person? You say no....How He can be the third person and not a person at all is difficult for me to see." Letter from J. H. Kellogg to G. I. Butler Oct. 28, 1903.
Also in the Interview between Elder G. W. Amadon, Elder A. C. Bourdeau, and Dr. John Harvey Kellogg we read:
Quote:
B: That is one of the points I wanted to speak to you about sometime -- that is, what is contained in that book.
K: I will tell you about that. It will take but just a minute to say all I have to say about it, and that is this thing. I believe in the omnipresence of God. How God is omnipresent, I don't know. Do you believe in the omnipresence of God?
B: I do -- omnipresence, omnipotence, and omniscience.
A: Present as a Holy Spirit.
K: That is all I believe.
B: I believe we are in the likeness of God with regard to intellect as well as to body. But at the same time that the knowledge that He has is unlimited, but with us it is limited. And power He has is unlimited, but with us it is limited.
K: Certainly, certainly. Now I hear the brethren say when they are in a meeting, "I feel that the Lord is here." I go into the laboratory, look into a microscope, see cells under my eyes, see cells working there, and I say "God is here working." I cannot see how God's Spirit is separate from His presence. Now you see I don't mean the Lord Himself is here; I mean His Spirit is here. It is all right as far as I am concerned. All I wanted to explain in Living Temple was that this work that is going on in the man here is not going on by itself like a clock wound up, but it is the power of God and the Spirit God that is carrying it on.
Now, I thought I had cut out entirely the theological side of questions of the trinity and all that sort of things. I didn't mean to put it in at all, and I took pains to state in the preface that I did not. I never dreamed of such a thing as any theological question being brought into it. I only wanted to show that the heart does not beat of its own motion but that it is the power of God that keeps it going.
Now, Sister White wrote an article and said, "It is wrong to say that God Himself is in the tree." Now, I didn't intend to say that. I didn't intend to say that -- that God Himself, the Almighty, separate and distinct from His power, from His Spirit as a separate entity -- that He was in the tree. I didn't mean to say that. I meant simply that the Spirit, the power, the intelligence of the Almighty, is being manifested in all these living things that are going on about us.
A: Yes, in all vegetable life, in all animal life.
B: In everything.
K: Certainly. I never dreamed of such an interpretation being put upon it as they have. When I found such an interpretation was being put on it, I said, "I will change it, do anything to correct that." And you know, they would not let me change it.
I read your article on Pantheism and the summation:
Quote:
Thesis
Life is the reciprocal of death. Just as Dr. Kellogg’s emphasis was on “life, and the relation of God to all living things” in the Living Temple, expect a similar crisis and another prominent Seventh-day Adventist at the end time with an even larger following, completing Kellogg’s thesis, giving a great pantheistic emphasis on death as the withdrawal of God’s presence (a la Kellogg),—their doctrine being death, and the relation of God to how all of the lost will die. That’s the omega.
I agree that the emphasis of Kellogg was on the relation of God to all living things. That was the point he made in the quotes I used previously. However I believe that the use of the terms Alpha and Omega would denote not recipricals but a continuum. As used in Revelation the first and the last, the beginning and the end, initiation and completion. Reciprical denotes the inverse or opposite. The alpha did give a description of the relationship of God to all living things but it also subtlely gave a description of the personality of God Himself that was false.
Quote:
"You are not definitely clear on the personality of God, which is everything to us as a people. You have virtually destroyed the Lord God Himself." E.G. White Letter 300 1903 to J.H. Kellogg
Kellogg used his discussion of the relationship of God to His creation to describe God. The Omega is not the opposite but a continuum of the same.
Quote:
“Be not deceived; many will depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils. We have now before us the alpha of this danger. The omega will be of a most startling nature.
“We need to study the words that Christ uttered in the prayer that He offered just before His trial and crucifixion...( She then quotes John 17:1-6).” (1SM 197,198)
Here Ellen White tells us how to prepare to resist this evil. She says study John 17:1-6 which describes the relationship of God, the Father to Jesus.
Posted: Tue Aug 20, 2002 9:22 am Post subject: The alpha-omega unity vs. a ridiculous looking chimera
Steve,
We’re only talking about two letters. Two does not constitute a continuum. There is an initial and final. They must relate in a sensible way.
You’re not giving me any credit for this illustration:
Eugene Shubert wrote:
The omega is an astoundingly perfect completion of Kellogg’s heresy. Here is a perfect illustration of what I mean by “astoundingly perfect completion.” Suppose you only have a picture of half a face (say the left side). That’s the alpha. Take the mirror image of that half face. That’s the omega. Bring the two pictures together and you have a perfect whole—a complete object—a naturally symmetric face.
When I said, “life is the reciprocal of death,” I simply meant that the reciprocal of infinity is zero. You can’t get any farther apart than alpha and omega. They’re on the opposite sides of the Greek alphabet.
A is the opposite of Z. Alpha is the opposite of Omega. As you’ve said, “reciprocal denotes the inverse or opposite.” The point is, if you recognize the first you’ll be able to discern the last.
When I used the word opposite, I meant ‘mirror image’ and I specifically said “mirror image.” I made it clear that if all we have is half a face then we know what the other side looks like, assuming symmetry.
When we reconstruct a whole face from a picture of a half, aren’t we dealing with “a continuum of the same”? The point is, when we’re done, we’d better end up with a perfect unity and a perfectly symmetric face!
Quote:
I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End. —Revelation 22:13.
What you have is a ridiculous looking chimera.
Quote:
chi·me·ra n.
1. An imaginary monster made up of grotesquely disparate parts.
2. A vain, foolish, or incongruous fancy, or creature of the imagination; as, the chimera of an author.
3. (Greek mythology) A monster represented as vomiting flames, and as having the head of a lion, the body of a goat, and the tail of a dragon.
Alpha and Omega are at opposite ends but they are not symmetrical. Yes, to complete the other half of a face you need the mirror image but in a progressive movement such as first to last, beginning to end, start to finish I see this as a continuum. Not repeating the first but adding to it in a progressive manner. 1 to 2 to 3, etc. or A to B to C, etc., or Alpha, Beta...Omega. Yes while they are only two letters there are a lot of letters in between, just like Jesus as the Author and Finisher of our faith starts and completes us but there is a whole lot of activity in between (i.e. the process of sanctification) and it is progressive.
You will indeed have a ridiculous looking chimera if one half looks like an A and the other half looks like a Z, that is not symmetry that is progression as they are not mirror images.
"In the book Living Temple there is presented the alpha of deadly heresies. The omega will follow, and will be received by those who are not willing to heed the warning God has given." 1SM 200
What is heresy?
Quote:
"Dissent from a dominate theory or opinion. An opinion or doctrine contrary to the truth or to generally accepted beliefs." Webster
The Omega
1.) "would follow in a little while..." 1SM 203
2.) "the great apostasy, which is developing and increasing and waxing stronger, and will continue to to so until the Lord shall descend from heaven with a shout..." Special Testimonies, B7 p57,58
3.) "Will be receive by those who are not willing to heed the warning God has given." 1SM 200
4.) "It introduces that which is nought but speculation in regard to the personality of God and where His presence is..." 1SM 202
The SDA Church
1.) The Trinitarian view really was first introduced in writing as one of our beliefs in the 1931 yearbook. Only 15 years after the death of EGW.
2.) The only official change in the doctrine of the SDA Church since it was organized in 1863 was an official change to trinitarianism. Other beliefs (i.e. The Sanctuary, The Sabbath, Baptism by immersion, the state of the dead, etc.) have not had an official change, even though there may be undercurrents of members with different beliefs.
3.) The SDA Church was called a cult at one time especially because of its non-Trinitarian belief but now the Trinitarian belief is the dominant view.
4.)Deny the past belief of the pioneers with regard to the personality of God and their belief in God's litteral Son.
This places the doctrine of the Trinity at the top of the list of candidates for the Omega Apostasy. (Apostasy--renounciation of a religious faith or abandonment of a previous loyalty).
Posted: Thu Aug 22, 2002 12:27 am Post subject: The true omega
Steve,
You are in desperate need of spiritual discernment. Seventh-day Adventists are being seduced wholesale by the pantheism of A. Graham Maxwell in the most perfect fulfillment of the type illustrated by Kellogg imaginable. Why is it that this fulfillment means nothing to you? You must be either completely isolated and ignorant of the false gospels in Adventism or you are fearfully deceived and have no understanding of the true gospel of Jesus Christ yourself.
Posted: Thu Aug 22, 2002 9:10 am Post subject: A most startling fulfillment
Steve,
I’ll make this as simple for you as I possibly can.
Kellogg and his followers were enraptured with the idea that life is the presence of God in living and life-giving things. Their joy was in believing that God was in the water they drank, the air they breathed and the bread they ate. The morning bath was, for Kellogg, a religious experience because he knew he was splashing God-filled water all over himself.
Maxwell and his followers are greatly enraptured with the idea that death is the withdrawal of God’s presence. Their greatest joy is their belief that God does not kill but merely “lets people go” to suffer the natural consequences of sin. Their gospel is all about death. What are you telling me? You never heard Adventists everywhere you go talking about “natural consequences”? It’s the new pantheism in Adventism!
Who is Maxwell? Of all the people known for teaching their unique brand of the gospel in Adventism—Morris Venden, Jack Sequeira, Desmond Ford etc.—A. Graham Maxwell is the most popular, the most heretical and the best received.
I did not say you don’t understand the gospel of Christ. I said “You must be either completely isolated and ignorant of the false gospels in Adventism or you are fearfully deceived and have no understanding of the true gospel of Jesus Christ yourself.”
That's interesting. I had never heard of A. Graham Maxwell. I knew of Ford and Sequeira I had read some (but I though he had lost touch with the Bible). Venden I know of him but had't read anything recent.
However, my contention is that we have changed as a church and one major change has been our doctrine of the Trinity. This change is so significant that it has been said that our founding fathers would not even be able to join this church because of this. And since that is a departure from our (SDA Church) foundation that would constitute apostasy and hence, the reason I say it's the Omega Apostasy
I read your article on the new pantheism in Adventism. I must admit that I was ignorant of this other gospel. While it is far from the gospel of Christ I am not ready to say that it is the Omega Apostasy.
Of the Alpha Apostasy Ellen white says:
Quote:
"It introduces that which is nought but speculation in regard to the personality of God and where His presence is..." 1SM 202
Of the Omega she said:
Quote:
"I knew that I must warn our brethren and sisters not to enter into controversy over the presence and personality of God. The statements made in Living Temple in regard to this point are incorrect." 1SM 203
Trinitariaism is man's attempt to describe the personality and presence of God. This theory is refuted by a true understanding of John 17:3. And this text is part of the verse Ellen White said would help us in defense against this apostasy.
Quote:
“Be not deceived; many will depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils. We have now before us the alpha of this danger. The omega will be of a most startling nature.
“We need to study the words that Christ uttered in the prayer that He offered just before His trial and crucifixion...( She then quotes John 17:1-6).” (1SM 197,198)
Posted: Fri Aug 23, 2002 12:23 pm Post subject: But it’s a perfect completion to Kellogg’s pantheism!
Steve wrote:
I read your article on the new pantheism in Adventism. I must admit that I was ignorant of this other gospel. While it is far from the gospel of Christ I am not ready to say that it is the Omega Apostasy.
Would you be willing to say that it’s an apostasy just like Kellogg’s apostasy and that it teaches a pantheism that’s a perfect compliment to Kellogg’s pantheism?
All times are GMT - 5 Hours Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6Next
Page 1 of 6
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in
