Francis is exact rock that builders rejected .
This is end days and power hunger has entered the church of Christ creating confusions and divisions .it’s sad that those old folks never accept changes their old constitution rag them to day 21st century.

Amen

All good except for I don’t believe that He gave up His equality, as you quoted, “Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant,…” He was both God and man mysteriously combined in one Being (the Son of God, and the Son of man).

The way the denomination now teaches about the Godhead is becoming more like the Catholics, and trinitarians. However, the SOP, and the bible makes it abundantly clear, in many quotes, that there are Three Persons of the Godhead, each with their own personality. SOP never used the word trinity, though, to describe its doctrine. Though it teaches three Persons of the Godhead, it does not teach the trinity. There’s a vast difference. The trinity teaches that originally there was only the Father. Then He divided Himself to become also the Son. Then He futher divided Himself to become also the Holy Spirit. SOP, and the Bible teaches that all three existed from all eternity. So, antitrinitarian is actually closer to catholic, and trinitarian doctrine, by saying that Jesus didn’t always exist, and was born in heaven, and that the Holy Spirit is not a separate Person, with its own Personality.

John

Some time has passed, and I failed to come back and check on our conversation last week. In the hopes that you will eventually come back to check also, I’m writing back.

First, let me state my great satisfaction and joy in being able to express these thoughts between us without emotions flaring up and blocking the path forward. I think that most of us in this day and age have lost the ability to talk about things in a reasonable way, without accusation and without defensiveness. I appreciate people that are willing to consider the weight of biblical evidence even if it goes against their initial ideas and I strive to do the same. I’ll share with you one of my favorite non-EGW quotes from one of the early Advent pioneers:

“Error, always shuns the light; truth, never. Error fears to stand by the side of truth, lest its naked deformity shall be seen. Truth courts investigation, and challenges comparison with an erroneous view, knowing it will suffer nothing by such comparison. While the truth wishes to be presented side by side with the opposite error, that impartial minds may decide its merits; error shrinks from such scrutiny, as embarrassing and unjust restrictions.” HST July 17, 1844, page 189.22

Incredible… no one writes or even thinks in this manner anymore.

I was born into Seventh-day Adventism and have lived and practiced as an SDA all of my adult life; and yet, it wasn’t until around 2012 that certain things came to my attention that challenged my firmly entrenched doctrinal understanding (given to me in a lifetime of church going and K-12 SDA schooling) which forced me to pick up my Bible and really start digging to see if these things were so. It has been a challenging road ever since as one erroneous doctrine after another was brought to my attention of which I was oblivious – one of which was the Godhead, or Trinity. I say “or” simply because at the time I used them interchangeably, not to diminish your previous points. I share this with you to let you know that I understand 100% where you are coming from, because it is the same hill on which I used to stand as well.

I could go on and on about my story, but to get to the point, the weight of evidence is finally what convinced me. There is an overwhelming weight of evidence in Scripture and in the inspired writings of Sister White in contradiction to the concept of a trinity/godhead that simply cannot, or at least should not be ignored. When a contradiction is encountered, if we seek after truth we must consciously decide that the contradiction is not in the inspired text (EGW included) but rather in our interpretation of the text. Unfortunately, this is not the decision made by most, rather they choose to ignore or at least diminish the statements which stand in contradiction to their belief and fail to investigate where the greater weight of evidence lies, if not outright refusing to acknowledge it. It is for this reason that the position of the modern corporate SDA church, which is repeated ad nauseum by the leadership from the local church pastor all the way up the president of the GC, is that the pioneer’s understanding of the identity and personality of God “evolved” (I despise it when they use that fictitious word) from being decidedly non-trinitarian and over time the founders came into a fuller understanding which brought them to embrace the Godhead/trinity concept. I cannot accept such a conclusion, for to do so would be to disregard the inspired, uplifting and reassuring words of sister White which I copied in my prior post regarding the line of truth which SHE SAW (meaning it was shown to her by God) that would extend to the time when we will enter the city of God. That quote is only one from hundreds of others. I ask, is there an example from Scripture where we find an individual being directly instructed by God in matters of truth (where they can say the words “I saw”), even being glimpses of heaven itself without first having the knowledge of Who it is that is instructing him or her? The only examples I can think of are individuals who knew who God is. Some later rebelled and separated themselves from God such as Balaam and Saul, but in no wise does God communicate doctrinal points of truth directly with those who do not know him. Thus, the entire premise that the modern SDA church presents is flawed from the onset. It cannot be that God showed Ellen White such things while she was worshiping only the Father and his only begotten Son Jesus Christ and stating over and over that it was by their Holy Spirit that she not only received the points of truth, but also the fact that they would be unchangeable for as long as time should last. I want to get to your three points, so I’ll leave it with this… If the founders had to “evolve” into an understanding of who God is, meaning the Trinity or the SDA coined Godhead, then our entire foundation is built on sand, storm and tempest will therefore wash it away, and we are fools for believing in it.

1. Trinity

I agree with you wholeheartedly – the churches that hold to the Trinity absolutely include fallen Protestantism. I would direct your attention to the General Conference Website where the 28 fundamental beliefs are explained. Fundamental (meaning foundational and non-negotiable) belief #2 – THE TRINITY https://www.adventist.org/trinity/

An evidence of a falsehood is that the story changes. I am not legally minded, but I know that this is what police officers and lawyers are trained to do, they ask questions to see if the story changes. When it does, they know that the person is lying. Let us apply this principle to the modern SDA doctrine of the trinity (officially adopted in 1980). In order to do so, we will be looking at past copies of the SDA GC website explaining the 2nd most important doctrine of the modern church (by the way, it should be the 1st most important doctrine as it was in the days of the founders when they put forth the fundamental principles – please see https://egwwritings.org/read?panels=p931.2&index=0). We will start with a web capture of the GC website made in 2018 using archive.org – https://web.archive.org/web/20171229143012/https://www.adventist.org/en/beliefs/god/trinity/. In this link, you will find that the General Conference of SDA states “There is one God, Father Son and Holy Spirit, a unity of three coeternal Persons.” This is directly from fundamental belief #2 – the Trinity. However, they went on to clarify their belief further by saying that this god comprised of three person is “the only BEING worthy of our worship.” I cannot bold or change colors for emphasis on this forum, so I use all caps to emphasize, not because I’m yelling. To recap, according to the General Conference a mere five years ago, God is three persons, yet one being. What is a being, if not an individual and therefore one substance? This is called orthodox trinitarianism and is for all practical purposes the same as the doctrine of the whore of Babylon and her daughters. This position is confirmed by the papers issued by the Biblical Research Institute, the official arm of the GC which is tasked with defining the doctrinal beliefs of SDA’s (consider if that is how it is supposed to be) which I will quote from later. So far as I can tell by searching the web archives, this orthodox trinitarian position was displayed to the world on the GC website for multiple years.

From sometime in 2018 through sometime in the first quarter of 2021 the GC website eliminated the explanation of the fundamental belief for God as three persons, yet one being, in favor of simply stating the fundamental belief as voted in GC session. See https://web.archive.org/web/20191222163416/https://www.adventist.org/beliefs/fundamental-beliefs/god/trinity/. While this doesn’t constitute a “change in the story”, it nonetheless starts to reveal that the language used to state the 2nd most important fundamental belief of the denomination was crafted in such a way that leadership and theologians of the church may emphatically declare to the Christian world that we are orthodox trinitarians, just like them, and thus are part of mainstream Christianity, while concurrently, the majority of the SDA membership may interpret the same fundamental belief as stating that God is comprised of three beings which together constitute one God, which incidentally, is called tritheism, not trinitarianism. Tritheism is an example of many gods which is what Paul warned about in 1 Corinthians 8:5:

1 Corinthians 8:5 For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)

Was Paul a tritheist? Absolutely not. Was Paul a trinitarian? Let us allow him answer:

1 Corinthians 8:6 But to us there is but one God, THE FATHER, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

The Father is very clearly identified as Paul’s God. Scripture further declares the Father to be the God of Jesus Christ in multiple places.

Let’s get back to the SDA General Conference website and move forward in time from early 2021 to sometime in the 2nd quarter of 2021 through present day. The GC changed the website with their fundamental beliefs once again, but this time, they added back some explanatory language. You can just look it up at the current website https://www.adventist.org/trinity/, or you can also see it in May of 2021 at https://web.archive.org/web/20210515124257/https://www.adventist.org/trinity/. The first thing declared on the page is the following: “Seventh-day Adventist Christians believe there is one God. And that this one God is three co-eternal beings who work together in unity.”

Now we have a startling revelation on our hands. Aside from this new declaration being poorly written, we find that in the span of less than three years, the official story from the General Conference website regarding the identity of the god that Seventh-day Adventists worship has changed dramatically from one God which is ONE BEING manifested in three persons (this is an inexplicable concept and is therefore is ALWAYS identified as a mystery by all orthodox trinitarians, including SDA’s) to three beings which are partners and work together in unity, thus making them one God. We have already seen that this tritheist view is contrary to scripture. In less than three years, the official story has gone from orthodox trinitarianism (which is still the official position of the church as we will see) to tritheism, which is the erroneous position held by most of the SDA membership as a hybridized version between orthodox trinitarianism and the truth as presented in Scripture and the Spirit of Prophecy. Remember, we are talking about a fundamental belief, not some abstract undocumented collection of opinions. Remember, we are talking about a doctrine that the modern church claims that the pioneers “evolved” into, not a whimsical idea that suddenly popped into the head of the webmaster at the General Conference office and was thrown haphazardly onto the website, going unnoticed for years at a time. The story has changed. God has permitted it thus so that anyone with eyes to see may perceive that something is not right. God has not, nor will He ever change. We may therefore conclude that there is a lie, a conspiracy, if you will, afoot.

Following are some statements from the theologians which staff the Biblical Research Institute. All of these were taken from papers which are still posted on the GC website, thus, they stand as a part of the church’s official position, since the BRI has authority given to it by the GC to establish points of doctrine.

“The core elements of the doctrine of the Trinity are oneness and distinctiveness. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are one, yet three. To express this conviction, words and expressions came into use that are NOT EXPLICITLY USED IN THE BIBLE. The oneness of God we confess by claiming that GOD IS ONE IN BEING; the distinctiveness we confess by teaching that there are three persons.” (Paul Petersen, Andrews University, May 2015, page 3, ‘God in 3 Persons — in the New Testament’) Published by the Biblical Research Institute as Release 11 https://www.adventistbiblicalresearch.org/home/releases/.

Notice in the above that it is openly confessed that the trinity requires the use of language not found in the Bible. Further, the fact that the SDA denomination is firmly entrenched as an orthodox trinitarian organization. Compare this with any number of Catholic definitions of the trinity and you will find negligible differences. In fact, let’s do it now before going to the next quote from the BRI.

Catholic – “We firmly believe and openly confess that there is only one true God, eternal and immense, omnipotent, unchangeable, incomprehensible, and ineffable, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; THREE PERSONS indeed but ONE ESSENSE, SUBSTANCE, OR NATURE absolutely simple.” (Canons of the fourth Lateran Council, 1215 https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/basis/lateran4.asp)

SDA Fundamental Belief #2 – There is one God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, a unity of three coeternal Persons. God is immortal, all-powerful, all-knowing, above all, and ever present. He is infinite and beyond human comprehension, yet known through His self-revelation. God, who is love, is forever worthy of worship, adoration, and service by the whole creation. https://www.adventist.org/trinity/

Incredibly, the belief statement from SDA’s, when coupled with our official doctrinal statements that we’re looking at now, is borderline plagiarism. I honestly cannot understand how someone can conclude that the SDA denomination does not worship the same false god as Rome.

Now back to statements by our top theologians at the BRI who have authority to define doctrine on behalf of the denomination:

“While the Seventh-day Adventist Church today ESPOUSES THE DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY, this has not always been so…” “Trinitarianism is the ORTHODOX belief that there is but one living and true God. Nevertheless this one God is a unity of three persons, who are of ONE SUBSTANCE, power and eternity, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.” (Dr. Gerhard Pfandl, “The Doctrine of the Trinity Among Adventists, 1999) https://www.adventistbiblicalresearch.org/materials/the-doctrine-of-the-trinity-among-adventists/.

The above statement is unequivocal. The denomination is declaring proudly by the official and authoritative arm of the General Conference who is the official god of the Seventh-day Adventist denomination. It is one being mysteriously made up of three persons. It is the orthodox trinity of Rome. “Mystery, Babylon the great, the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth.” I am very sad to report to you that the SDA denomination has a mother.

“the father-son image cannot be literally applied to the divine Father-Son relationship within the Godhead. 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.” (Angel Manuel Rodriguez, “A question of Sonship”) https://www.adventistbiblicalresearch.org/materials/a-question-of-sonship/

Notice in the above quote from the director emeritus of the BRI that Jesus is not the literal son of God, nor is God the literal Father of Christ, it is only a metaphor… which is to say a role play… which is to say acting… which is to say a falsehood or lie. This one really hurts because of the third Bible text I will supply to address this apostacy.

Text #1 – Titus 1:2 In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;

Text #2 – 2 Peter 1:17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

Text #3 – 1 John 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.

2. – The GODHEAD

Now that we have seen that the modern SDA denomination is absolutely orthodox trinitarian in its doctrinal position, I have to ask, who is it that establishes the definition of “The GODHEAD”? It cannot be from the church since it does not espouse this position. You provided a definition in your previous post, but did not provide the source. Was it from scripture? If so, which verses inform us of three distinct eternal beings, two of which volunteered to take submissive roles (please don’t forget what “role” playing means – a lie)? If it is in scripture, then it must, by God’s own rules, have at least two or three witnesses to confirm it with very direct and plain language. I will guess that you cannot supply the verses only based on my own journey, because I tried for a very long time to find them, even reading the entire Bible with no other purpose in mind than to find where and how God directly identifies himself. Since presumably there is no Bible proof texts for this definition of Godhead, then I must ask, where else can we draw from?

I’ve previously pointed out that use of the term “Godhead” in scripture is limited to the concept of divinity. Let’s look at the three places where the word is used and see if there is evidence to lead us to understand that it more, including an exclusive club with membership of three.

Acts 17:29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device.

The concordance tells that this use of the term Godhead = divine or God-like. A parallel verse where the same Greek word is used is found in 1 Peter 3:4

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.

The same Greek word is shown in all caps in the above text. This is not a club, nor an alternate term for Trinity. Let’s go to the next use of Godhead:

Romans 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

This is the only use of this Greek word in all of scripture. Contextually, it is impossible to apply this term in the sense of a group of beings which are god(s?). In case some might try, we can take note that Paul is speaking in the above verse about God. God who? A trinity? – It cannot be since that is not found in scripture. God the Son? Again, that is not a term found in scripture. God the Holy Spirit? You get the picture… not in Scripture. Paul tells us himself who he identifies as God in this sublime letter to the Roman believers (and all of his other epistles for that matter). See Romans 1:7

Romans 1:7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.

In Romans 1:20, Paul uses the word Godhead to refer to the divinity of God. It is the Father’s divine nature, his Godhood. In fact, someone researched the etymology of the term Godhead and it was derived from the Old English term Godhade. The suffix ‘hade’ has a meaning of “state or condition of being.” Another example of the use of this Old English suffix is the word fæderhade which today is the word Fatherhood. Thus, Godhead rightfully means Godhood – the condition and characteristics of being God.

Now we will look at the final use of the word Godhead:

Colossians 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

This verse is speaking of Christ’s divinity, not of a group of beings. Christ is divine because he is the Son of God. Christ possess all the attributes and qualities of God by virtue of his literal sonship to the heavenly Father, but yet, he is not the God of the Bible because Christ himself declares that the Father is his God (See Revelation 3:12, John 20:17 – also Eph 1:17 and Hebrews 1:9).

Next, I would like to address your reference to a statement by Sister White regarding life original, unborrowed, underived. You said that all three possess this life. I’m not familiar with where Sister White directly states that the Holy Spirit possess life original unborrowed and underived. She does however state that this immortal life is exclusively the property of God and then proceeds to state that the Word, who was with God (the Father), and who was God (remember that Christ possess Godhood or divinity as the Son of God) had this life. I’ll just quote her. It’s better that way.

“In him was life; and the life was the light of men.” It is not physical life that is here specified, but immortality, the life which is exclusively the property of God. The Word, who was with God, and who was God, had this life. Physical life is something which each individual receives. It is not eternal or immortal; for God, the lifegiver, takes it again. Man has no control over his life. But the life of Christ was unborrowed. No one can take this life from him. “I lay it down of myself,” he said. In him was life, original, unborrowed, underived. This life is not inherent in man. He can possess it only through Christ. He cannot earn it; it is given him as a free gift if he will believe in Christ as his personal Saviour. “This is life eternal, that they might know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” This is the open fountain of life for the world. ST April 8, 1897, par. 2

I really wish I could highlight on these posts. Maybe Brother Andy Roman can make that a future upgrade? In the above, I want you to notice that after saying “In him (Christ) was life, original, unborrowed, underived” she says that man can possess this same life through Christ as a free gift! Hallelujah! But wait, what does that mean to the concept of the godhead club, or for that matter the trinity. Most SDA trinitarians and tritheists will use a similar quote by Sister White from the Desire of Ages, but won’t come near to this one in Signs of the Times. Why is that? Is it ignorance, or is it because it is highly inconvenient to their doctrinal position? Personally, I’ve learned to relish when I come across something that crosses me, partly because it’s happened so many times already, but mostly because it means that God is trying to reveal something to me that I have misinterpreted previously. It is in that spirit that I hope you take this. Remember that when something contradictory comes to our attention, it is not our position to criticize the inspired text, but rather to reflect inwardly to discover where our preconceived ideas are preventing us from seeing the beauty of the full picture of truth. Thus, when this little quote hit me across the face, I had no other choice than to reconsider whether the possession of life original, unborrowed and underived is one of the qualifying characteristic for Godhood, otherwise I would be virtually declaring that I will be like God someday, when I receive the free gift that same immortal life from Christ. That is too close to Satan’s statement to Eve, so I run in the opposite direction.

With all this laid out, your final statement on this section indicated that true Seventh-day Adventists believe in the “Godhead.” I hope you can see that the basis for such a statement is shaky at best; for how can a true SDA believe in something that:
A. Is not defined explicitly in Scripture
B. Requires that there be many gods in contradiction to Scripture
C. States that these gods (who are presumably all equal in nature and existence) are acting out parts, or pretending to take submissive roles, thus making them liars
D. And depends on a qualifying characteristic of “life original unborrowed and underived” for each that isn’t directly stated for one of them (Holy Spirit) but is directly stated to be something that the redeemed will possess as a free gift?

My brother, it is hard to kick against the pricks…

3. Holy Spirit: An impersonal force.

This section was the hardest for me to understand from the explanation you provided. I am unaware of a single Seventh-day Adventist non-trinitarian that considers the Holy Spirit to be an “impersonal force,” and I’ve been talking about this for many years with many people across many states. Basically, this is a strawman argument that has been built up by those in positions of influence and leadership in the church which has then trickled down to the membership. I do not cast stones at you for using the argument, but do wish that people wouldn’t use it and could acknowledge it to be based on pink polka dotted flying unicorn, at least so far as Seventh-day Adventism is concerned. It is very easy to tear apart a strawman because that is the very purpose for which they are built.

I also was left confused by your conclusion that this strawman is the same thing as the Trinity doctrine. With the “impersonal force” bit set aside, the one could not be further from the other. The Trinity doctrine demands that there are three persons (not beings or individuals, but persons – whatever that means) who are coequal, coeternal and consubstantial. This definition has been established through millennia of war, bloodshed, persecution, defamation, and every other evil manifestation of the sinful nature of mankind. We are not at liberty, so far as the use of language is concerned, to alter the definition of words, particularly such a word as trinity that carries so much historical baggage with it. If, as you correctly noted, Christ was begotten way back in eternity (this is the position which was held by the founders of the Seventh-day Adventist church and is reflected in scripture as we will shortly see), then Christ is not coeternal with the Father. They are not the same. If we wish to avoid the characterization of antichrist that we previously read from 1 John, then we must confess that Jesus is the literal Son of God the Father and that God the Father is the literal father of Christ. This point is amply confirmed both by scripture and the Spirit of Prophecy. So then if Christ is the literal son of God, then He cannot be consubstantial to the Father. They are distinct beings or individuals. Not the same again. I’m not going to get into the coequal part, because that would take a whole sidebar to document. For now, we will be satisfied with demonstrating 2 out of 3. The conclusion is decisive that these are not even remotely the same, in fact, they are opposites!

Another part of the strawman is to characterize those that do not subscribe to a third individual “member” of the “Godhead” or otherwise a Third Person of the trinity being, is to call them anti-Holy Spirit or some variant. My brother, this is a crude and incorrect characterization and it demonstrates an inability or lack of desire to weigh evidence that is unfamiliar in favor of tossing people into a belittling category. We must not treat others in this way, even if we do not agree, for it may be that we as the ones casting people into such categories may one day find ourselves to be the ones in error. I know that it was not your intention to denigrate me or anyone else that doesn’t believe as you do, but that can be how it is perceived. I can assure you that I am a well-adjusted person with at least average intelligence and that there are many others like me who have studied deeply into the subject, spending many years and shedding many tears in the process. Isn’t it possible that you might be in error?

You appear to stand firmly upon the writings of Sister White. I hope you agree with me that the same Spirit that inspired Paul, Jeremiah, John, and Moses (to name a few) is the Spirit that inspired Sister White. If so, then I know that you agree with her statement previously referenced that the truths she was shown would extend like a line all the way to our entrance into the city of God. I also know that you must then accept that God does not change nor alter the thing that he has once spoken (Psalm 89:34, Mal 3:6). What then will you do with the following statements from the inspired pen?

“The prince of the power of evil can only be held in check by the power of God in the third person of the Godhead, the Holy Spirit.” SpTA10 37.1

Now compare the previous quote with the following and see if it is reconcilable in a tritheist or trinitarian mindset.

“Jesus alone has power to save from sin, to free from the power of evil; and to doubt him who has laid down his life for us, is to grieve and insult the Father, who has in one gift poured out all heaven to a lost world.” RH February 10, 1891, par. 5

To the tritheist or the trinitarian, these two quotes would seem difficult to settle, but when one becomes acquainted with the Biblical fact that the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God the Father, and that the Father has given to Christ the promise of his Holy Spirit (Acts 2:32-33, Titus 3:5-6) without measure, which then is shed forth from Christ to his disciples, the two quotes are in perfect harmony.

“Let them be thankful to God for His manifold mercies and be kind to one another. They have one God and one Saviour; and one Spirit—the Spirit of Christ—is to bring unity into their ranks.” 9T 189.3

“Christ is to be known by the blessed name of Comforter. ‘The Comforter,’ said Christ to His disciples, ‘which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in My name, He shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you, [John 14:26 quoted]” —17LtMs, Ms 7, 1902, par. 10

“The Saviour is our Comforter. This I have proved Him to be.” 8MR 49.3

“We want the Holy Spirit, which is Jesus Christ.” 9LtMs, Lt 66, 1894, par. 18

The last two quotes are quite direct and unmistakable. Please explain how the “Godhead” tritheist and/or the trinitarian can explain them. Yet, when we lay down the unproveable ideas that have been implanted in our heads through years of endless repetition by church leaders of three in one and one in three, it becomes clear that the Holy Spirit is the mind, power and personal presence of the very life of God that the Father sends to us through His Son. Isn’t this exactly what we read from Acts 2:32-33?

“The Father gave his Spirit without measure to his Son, and we also may partake of its fulness. Jesus says: “If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your Heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?” RH November 5, 1908, par. 4

The Spirit is not a separate being of the “Godhead” club who is sent, it is the very life of God coming to us through His Son.

“’I will not leave you comfortless; I will come to you.’ The divine Spirit that the world’s Redeemer promised to send, is the presence and power of God. ST November 23, 1891, par. 1

Let’s finish the rest of the paragraph from the above quote to see if there is any shred of evidence to suggest that the Spirit is an individual separate from the Father and Christ.

“I will not leave you comfortless; I will come to you.” The divine Spirit that the world’s Redeemer promised to send, is the presence and power of God. He will not leave his people in the world destitute of his grace, to be buffeted by the enemy of God, and harassed by the oppression of the world; but he will come to them. The world cannot see the truth; they know not the Father or the Son, but it is only because they do not desire to know God, they do not wish to look upon Jesus, to see his goodness, his love, his heavenly attractions. Jesus is inviting all men to accept him; and wherever the heart is open to receive him, he will come in, gladdening the soul with the light and joy of his presence.” ST November 23, 1891, par. 1

The truth is such a beautiful thing. It never requires the ideas of men to explain. It always is supported by Scripture and complements all of God’s word. I would recommend reading the entire article just referenced in Signs of the Times titled “The Comforter.” It’s all about Christ.

The question might arise, how can it be that the Holy Spirit is called the Spirit of God and yet also the Spirit of Christ in the Bible? Which is it? Well, it’s both. The Spirit is the power and life of God which the Father has given to his Son – John 5:26 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself. That life is the original, unborrowed and underived life that is exclusively the property of God. Christ possess it as his own, yet it was given to him by the Father according to Scripture. Likewise, we have already seen that the promise of the Father was to give his Spirit to Christ. Thus, the omnipresent and omnipotent Spirit and life of God is Christ’s possession. This is why the Bible speaks of the Spirit of God and the Spirit of Christ even in the same verse.

Romans 8:9 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.

The Father and Son are united in one Spirit. Ellen White confirms this:

“From eternity there was a complete unity between the Father and the Son. They were two, yet little short of being identical; two in individuality, yet one in spirit, and heart, and character.” YI December 16, 1897, par. 5

“By the Spirit the Father and the Son will come and make their abode with you.” BE January 15, 1893, par. 8

“Let them study the seventeenth of John, and learn how to pray and how to live the prayer of CHRIST. HE is THE Comforter. He will abide in their hearts, making their joy full.” — RH, January 27, 1903

“As by faith we look to Jesus, our faith pierces the shadow, and we adore God for His wondrous love in giving JESUS THE COMFORTER.” — MR 19, p. 297.3

“Christ is to be known by the blessed name of Comforter. “The Comforter,” said Christ to His disciples, “which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in My name, He shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you, [John 14:26 quoted]” — Manuscript 7, January 26, 1902

The quotes from Sister White of this nature are nearly endless. We could write volumes about her references to the Spirit as “it.” We could look up even more where she declares things like “The Father and the Son alone are to be exalted.” (YI July 7, 1898). We could read in the Story of Redemption how “Lucifer in heaven, before his rebellion, was a high and exalted angel, next in honor to God’s dear Son.” (SR 13.1) Look them up. Read them in context. You very quickly dismissed the link that Brother Alan previously posted for you… Did you look at it to see if these things might be true? Your comment back to him three hours later was that “such things…never sway me.” Why is that? You must not ignore points of truth, for many have perished and will perish for so doing. Do not mistake what I am saying as an attempt to pit Sister White against Sister White. God forbid. What I am calling for is a reconciliation, which will not be possible so long as we cling stubbornly, even hard-headedly to our preconceived ideas placed in our heads by men through indoctrination. We must permit the Spirit of Christ to indwell and guide us into all truth. This is my prayer for you.

I am posting this treatise after many hours of writing in the hopes that you will see this, endure through the end and that it will serve to guide you into a decision to study the matter further for yourself. This is a matter of life and death. It is not a side issue. Our eternal cases weigh in the balance on this matter.

John 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

Brother John –

Sorry for my absence. I’m preparing a response. I hope that you come back to check this later.

Blessings

If the Brother is teaching contrary to the following Scriptures…then he is in error. The Godhead can be compared to the United States Government. (President, Congress, Supreme Court) … Three co-equal parts…but one Government. The Bible is clear…Jesus (The Word) gave up that equality and became a human being, with flesh and bones…and blood, and gave up His life and made the atonement…for in order to save Mankind, He had to die for him.

Hebrews 9:22
And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

Leviticus 17:11
For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.

John 1:1

John
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

John 1:2
The same was in the beginning with God.

John 1:3
All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

John 1:14
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

Philippians 2:6
Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

Philippians 2:7
But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

Philippians 2:8
And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.