Which denomination believes in this?

[Daniel_Marsh]

The thing I find most interresting is, he won’t define exactly what he believes. I wonder if he knows.

on a christadelphian site under angels I saw,

Summary

1. Angels are messengers. They can also guide, protect, deliver and destroy.

1. They help those who are true believers, but do not stop people committing sin.

1. They are usually not seen. When they were seen they appeared in many different forms.

1. They cannot sin, do not marry, and never die. In the Kingdom, believers will be like this.

1. At first Jesus was made lower than the angels, but after his resurrection he was exalted above them.

1. The angels will accompany Jesus when he returns to this earth.

theonehope.org/review.asp?ID=28

exactly where does christadelphian doctrine differ from catholic on this?

I don’t see how one can limit the meaning of angel to jus a messenger.

Anyone have any insight on this one?

Here is the article in catholic enyclopedia on angels
newadvent.org/cathen/01476d.htm

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Galatians 1:6-8 (New International Version)

6I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— 7which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8But even if we or an **angel from heaven ** should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned!

If angels, messengers from heaven can not sin, this this text has no meaning. Why list a creature that is incable of sinning as practicing a sinful practice?

Did not the devil in the temptations of Christ desire to be worshipped?

Is not a desire to be worshipped sin? YES to both

Let’s look for other instances where angels, who are now demons sinned.

How would you all introduce this?

2 Corinthians 11:14
And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

I have seen this text used to describe the fall of satan, is this text speaking of his fall or about someone else? Is this a good argument to bring up? or a waste of time?

Isaiah 14

12 How you have fallen from heaven,
O morning star, son of the dawn!
You have been cast down to the earth,
you who once laid low the nations!

13 You said in your heart,
"I will ascend to heaven;
I will raise my throne
above the stars of God;
I will sit enthroned on the mount of assembly,
on the utmost heights of the sacred mountain. [c]

14 I will ascend above the tops of the clouds;
I will make myself like the Most High."

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Is this worth using?

On the contrary, It is said, in the person of the devil (Isaiah 14:13-14), “I will ascend into heaven . . . I will be like the Most High.” And Augustine (De Qu. Vet. Test. cxiii) says that being “inflated with pride, he wished to be called God.”

I answer that, Without doubt the angel sinned by seeking to be as God. But this can be understood in two ways: first, by equality; secondly, by likeness. He could not seek to be as God in the first way; because by natural knowledge he knew that this was impossible: and there was no habit preceding his first sinful act, nor any passion fettering his mind, so as to lead him to choose what was impossible by failing in some particular; as sometimes happens in ourselves. And even supposing it were possible, it would be against the natural desire; because there exists in everything the natural desire of preserving its own nature; which would not be preserved were it to be changed into another nature. Consequently, no creature of a lower order can ever covet the grade of a higher nature; just as an *** does not desire to be a horse: for were it to be so upraised, it would cease to be itself. But herein the imagination plays us false; for one is liable to think that, because a man seeks to occupy a higher grade as to accidentals, which can increase without the destruction of the subject, he can also seek a higher grade of nature, to which he could not attain without ceasing to exist. Now it is quite evident that God surpasses the angels, not merely in accidentals, but also in degree of nature; and one angel, another. Consequently it is impossible for one angel of lower degree to desire equality with a higher; and still more to covet equality with God.

To desire to be as God according to likeness can happen in two ways. In one way, as to that likeness whereby everything is made to be likened unto God. And so, if anyone desire in this way to be Godlike, he commits no sin; provided that he desires such likeness in proper order, that is to say, that he may obtain it of God. But he would sin were he to desire to be like unto God even in the right way, as of his own, and not of God’s power. In another way one may desire to be like unto God in some respect which is not natural to one; as if one were to desire to create heaven and earth, which is proper to God; in which desire there would be sin. It was in this way that the devil desired to be as God. Not that he desired to resemble God by being subject to no one else absolutely; for so he would be desiring his own ‘not-being’; since no creature can exist except by holding its existence under God. But he desired resemblance with God in this respect–by desiring, as his last end of beatitude, something which he could attain by the virtue of his own nature, turning his appetite away from supernatural beatitude, which is attained by God’s grace. Or, if he desired as his last end that likeness of God which is bestowed by grace, he sought to have it by the power of his own nature; and not from Divine assistance according to God’s ordering. This harmonizes with Anselm’s opinion, who says [De casu diaboli, iv.] that “he sought that to which he would have come had he stood fast.” These two views in a manner coincide; because according to both, he sought to have final beatitude of his own power, whereas this is proper to God alone.

Since, then, what exists of itself is the cause of what exists of another, it follows from this furthermore that he sought to have dominion over others; wherein he also perversely wished to be like unto God.

newadvent.org/summa/106303.htm

 

[flameburns623]

Daniel Marsh:

I have seen this text used to describe the fall of satan, is this text speaking of his fall or about someone else? Is this a good argument to bring up? or a waste of time?

Isaiah 14

12 How you have fallen from heaven,
O morning star, son of the dawn!
You have been cast down to the earth,
you who once laid low the nations!

13 You said in your heart,
"I will ascend to heaven;
I will raise my throne
above the stars of God;
I will sit enthroned on the mount of assembly,
on the utmost heights of the sacred mountain. [c]

14 I will ascend above the tops of the clouds;
I will make myself like the Most High."

Brother Daniel:

This passage, and a similar passage in Ezekiel (28:13-19) refer literally to pagan kings. However, they are traditionally and widely understood to have spiritual application to the fall of Lucifer. The understanding is that the fall of each of the human kings in some way parallels the trajectory of Satan. Hope this is reasonably clear.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Matthew 8
28When he arrived at the other side in the region of the Gadarenes,[d] two demon-possessed men coming from the tombs met him. They were so violent that no one could pass that way. 29"What do you want with us, Son of God?" they shouted. “Have you come here to torture us before the appointed time?”
30Some distance from them a large herd of pigs was feeding. 31The demons begged Jesus, “If you drive us out, send us into the herd of pigs.”

32He said to them, “Go!” So they came out and went into the pigs, and the whole herd rushed down the steep bank into the lake and died in the water. 33Those tending the pigs ran off, went into the town and reported all this, including what had happened to the demon-possessed men. 34Then the whole town went out to meet Jesus. And when they saw him, they pleaded with him to leave their region.

Anyone know of any mental illness that pigs can catch from humans?

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Acts 19:13-16 (New International Version)
13Some Jews who went around driving out evil spirits tried to invoke the name of the Lord Jesus over those who were demon-possessed. They would say, “In the name of Jesus, whom Paul preaches, I command you to come out.” 14Seven sons of Sceva, a Jewish chief priest, were doing this. 15(One day) the evil spirit answered them, “Jesus I know, and I know about Paul, but who are you?” 16Then the man who had the evil spirit jumped on them and overpowered them all. He gave them such a beating that they ran out of the house naked and bleeding.

“And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.” (Jude 6) “Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels.” (Matthew 25:41)

1 John 3:8
He who does what is sinful is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil’s work.

John 8:44
You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desire.** He was a murderer from the beginning**, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

Do Christadelphians believe that Satan or the devil was created as an evil being?

Genesis 1:31 (New International Version)
God saw all that he had made, and it was very good.

Genesis makes it clear that no creature was created evil.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Other texts to look up:

I Chron 21
John 13:27
Jer 51
Eph 6:12
Hosea 4:12, 5:4
Zech 13:2
Rom 11:8
I Corn 2:12(7)
I John 4:3,6
Jude 6
Rev 12
II Peter 2:4
Luke 8:28
Matt 8:29
II Cor 11:3
Acts 5:3-4
Acts 26:18
Matt 12:24
Eph 2:2
I Kings 22:22

witch of endor?

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

So, the Isaiah and Eze texts are more of an intertextual example then a direct proof.

Job 4:18. Behold, they that serve him are not steadfast, and in his angels he found wickedness:

intertextuality

Relationship between two or more texts that quote from one another, refer to one another, or otherwise connect. New Testament passages that quote from the Old Testament are one example of intertextuality. Another example is Old Testament books such as Deuteronomy or the prophets that refer to the stories found in Exodus. Whereas a redaction critic would use such intertextuality to argue for a particular order and process of the authorship of the books in question, literary criticism takes a synchronic view that deals with the texts in their final form, as an interconnected body of literature. Some postmodern theorists like to talk about the relationship between “intertextuality” and “hypertextuality” - hypertextuality being the sort of jumping around one does on the world wide web.

read-the-bible.org/glossary.html

I think such a thing would be lost on the Christadelphians.

 

[Scholastic17]

Perhaps Mormon?

 

[Jennifer123]

Daniel Marsh:

Matthew 8
28When he arrived at the other side in the region of the Gadarenes,[d] two demon-possessed men coming from the tombs met him. They were so violent that no one could pass that way. 29"What do you want with us, Son of God?" they shouted. “Have you come here to torture us before the appointed time?”
30Some distance from them a large herd of pigs was feeding. 31The demons begged Jesus, “If you drive us out, send us into the herd of pigs.”

32He said to them, “Go!” So they came out and went into the pigs, and the whole herd rushed down the steep bank into the lake and died in the water. 33Those tending the pigs ran off, went into the town and reported all this, including what had happened to the demon-possessed men. 34Then the whole town went out to meet Jesus. And when they saw him, they pleaded with him to leave their region.

Anyone know of any mental illness that pigs can catch from humans?

Haha- not really. My understanding of this verse is that it shows once again that Jesus is who he says he is as even the demons recognize that when most men didn’t. Is that the point?

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

This is the post that got a Christadelphian banned over at catholic planet. Basically, Christadelphians deny the fact that Jesus as God could not sin. And, as best as I can discern Christadelphians believe that Jesus had a sin nature. Let’s discuss how to refute the claim that Jesus had a sin nature.

Daniel Marsh wrote: Bottom line, Jesus did not have a sin nature and thus his temptation had to come from the outside.

Composer responds: Bottom line, Jesus did have a potential to sin nature and the Scriptures say precisely that -

He hath made every [thing] beautiful in his time: also he hath set the world in their heart, so that no man can find out the work that God maketh from the beginning to the end. 12 I know that [there is] no good in them, but for [a man] to rejoice, and to do good in his life. (Eccl. 3:11 - 12) KJS

NB: There is NO GOOD in any man.

Even the RCC admit Jesus was a man.

The Scriptures do not contradict each other.

Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: {for that: or, in whom} (Rom. 5:12) KJS

That includes Jesus. True he ‘DID NO SIN’ but he obviously inherited the potential to sin as Rom. 5:12 states ALL men have sinned.

Jesus inherited that potential to sin from Adam.

For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: {for sin: or, by a sacrifice for sin} (Rom. 8:3) KJS

But trinitarians contradict the Scriptures and read it as “unlikeness?”

For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; (Rom. 3:23) KJS

But here again the trinitarians say" no God, you made a mistake’ and contradict yourself, 'cos Jesus was an exception?

And all flesh shall see the salvation of God. (Luke 3:6)

What, the trinitarian godmans flesh needs salvation from itself?

Who can bring a clean [thing] out of an unclean? not one. {can…: Heb. will give} (Job 14:4)

Jesus’ flesh was as unclean as any other mortal man born by way of a woman.

For such an high priest became us, (who is) holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens; 27 Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once, when he offered up himself. (Heb. 7:26-27) -

NB: Jesus had to offer up a sacrifice once for himself and then for the perople. Not on a daily basis as the other High-priests but just once and for all at his crucifixion.

catholicplanet.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=123

catholicplanet.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=103&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Here is exactly what I said, in post number 25,

Matthew 4

1Then Jesus was led by the **Spirit into the desert ** to be tempted by the devil. 2After fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. 3The tempter came to him and said, “If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread.”
4Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man does not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.’”

5Then the devil took him to the holy city and had him stand on the highest point of the temple. 6"If you are the Son of God," he said, “throw yourself down. For it is written:
" 'He will command his angels concerning you,
and they will lift you up in their hands,
so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.”

7Jesus answered him, “It is also written: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’”

8Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. 9"All this I will give you," he said, “if you will bow down and worship me.”

10Jesus said to him, “Away from me, Satan! For it is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.’”

11Then the devil left him, and angels came and attended him.

The text has Jesus starting his temptation in the wilderness and the temptation was moved twice, three times if you believe it ended back in the dessert. The point of the text is Jesus was tempted by Satan and his temptation was external and not from a sin nature.

Since Jesus is God he can not be tempted by evil, but he can be tested.

James 1
13When tempted, no one should say, “God is tempting me.” For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; 14but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. 15Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.

The whole point you are missing from the Temptation of Jesus by the devil or Satan is the fact that his temptations were external to himself because Jesus did not have a sin nature ( Gal 5 ) or have evil desire.

John 14
9Jesus answered: "Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you are not just my own. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work. 11Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the miracles themselves

**Do you really believe that the Father can sin? **

Hebrews 4:15
For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet was without sin.

Hebrews 9:14
How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God!

2 Corinthians 5:21
God made **him who had no sin ** to be sin offering for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

1 John 3:5
But you know that he appeared so that he might take away our sins. And in him is no sin.

1 Peter 2:22
“He committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth.”

Bottom line, Jesus did not have a sin nature and thus his temptation had to come from the outside.

catholicplanet.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=103&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=45

I only post this so that those who are dealing with christadelphians can gain some insight. I invited Composer to come here providing that he post what he believes up front.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Scholastic17:

Perhaps Mormon?

Hi Scholastic, the poster over there has outted himself as being a christadelphian by using a christadelphian bible and posting from christadelphian books.

thanks for trying to help.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Jennifer123:

Haha- not really. My understanding of this verse is that it shows once again that Jesus is who he says he is as even the demons recognize that when most men didn’t. Is that the point?

In person, I had a Christadelphian quote a bunch of scriptures concerning Saul’s depression and David’s music trying to claim that every case of “evil spirit” was nothing more than a mental disease. Thus, the point of bringing up the evil spirits going into the pigs.

 

[SDAgirl]

Hello. I’m an Adventist and I can say that we do not believe that the Son wasn’t a part of creation. I’m not sure where this idea came from. We do have our roots in Unitarianism, but roots in the 1800’s does not identify our religion now. Everyone has their ROOTS somewhere. You can be rooted in Satanism, and come to know God and believe. Am I right?
Daniel Marsh:

Hi Jennifer, if you are dealing with Martin aka zman you are dealing with homean arian doctrine of the Seventh Day Adventist fundamentalist type. The earily Seventh Day Adventists were indirectly influenced by unitarians of boston through the christian connection connexion movement. If it is Martin, he has never been able to refute the Isaiah 43:10 argument.

Basically, homean arians believe that the son of god was formed before creation and is therefore not a part of creation. They believe that the son of god is divine, but that he had a beginning. Isaiah 43:10 says clearly in hebrew that no gods will be formed, birthed, made or whatever. The same hebrew is used where it says God formed me in my mothers womb.

Martin, is not open to hearing truth, so don’t waste time with him.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Hi SDAgirl, Urah Smith and James White both came from the Christian Connection. If you read the eariler writings of Smith for example, you will see homean arian doctrine. Part of that doctrine was the Son of God as offspring of the Father before creation. This is a fact of history.

In fact, the Jehovah Witness argument that Rev 3:14 “beginning of creation” means Son of God was created comes directy out of Urah Smith’ s old bible commentary on the book of Revelation.

If you have not done so, you may want to read some of your own books and articles, including

Jerry Moon recently co-authored (with Woodrow Whidden and John W. Reeve) The Trinity: Understanding God’s Love, His Plan of Salvation, and Christian Relationships (Review and Herald, 2002).

The Adventist Trinity Debate Part 1: Historical Overview

The Adventist Trinity Debate Part 2: The Role of Ellen G. White

Two published articles by Jerry A. Moon, Ph.D., Associate Professor and Chair of the Department of Church History, SDA Theological Seminary, Andrews University. Moon explores further and updates the search for the biblical Trinity doctrine as held by the Seventh-day Adventist church.
The Arian or Anti-Trinitarian Views Presented in Seventh-day Adventist Literature and the Ellen G. White Answer.

Erwin Roy Gane, in his Masters Thesis examines the variant views of the Trinity held by many early church leaders. He contrasts their views with those of Ellen White, and shows how her view led to the Trinitarian position currently held by Seventh-day Adventists.

Heresy or Hopeful Sign? Early Adventists’ Struggle with the Truth about the Trinity

Including two sidebar notes: What Happened to Christ’s Deity When He Died? and Were early Adventists Arians? by Jerry Moon, Professor of Church History at the SDA Theological Seminary, Andrews University.

Arianism, Adventism and Methodism: The Healing of Trinitarian Teaching and Soteriology

Woodrow Whidden, Professor of Religion at Andrews University, Berrien Springs, Michigan, discusses the development of Trinitarianism in the Adventist Church in a paper addressed to a Wesleyan Methodist Institute.

Who is Michael?

Henry Feyerabend, speaker for It Is Written, Canada, addresses challenges that SDAs are not clear on the divinity of Christ because of their identification of Michael the Archangel with the preincarnate Christ. .

SDA Current Statement of Beliefs Regarding the Trinity are orthodox in nature.

sdanet.org/atissue/trinity/index.htm

72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:nTwMrMOHU_MJ:www.amfdn.org/ubb/Forum37/HTML/000378.html+semi+arian++adventist&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=21

If you want to do battle with those SDA who are trying to move back to the semi-arian position of earily adventists here they are:
smyrna.org/
restorationministry.com/
network54.com/Forum/31001/page-2

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Since 1980 or there abouts Adventists have been spliting up into different camps on several subjects.

Desmond Ford challenged their traditional views concerning Daniel 8:14 in his book Danile 8:14 The Day of Atonement and The Investigated Judgement

Geoffrey Paxton, and others fought over Justification see The Shaking of Adventism

There is a move to explain Doctrial Development within Adventisim, basically many of the early leaders a SDAism came out of the Christian Connextion movement which had its roots in Unitarianism thus they rejected all Creeds went to Bible Only.

Uriah Smith ( a publisher of review & hearld ) was an out and out Arian as was James White ( Ellen Whites’ Husband ). Latter the Waggoners were “Semi-Arians” claiming that Jesus was the offspring of the Father before creation, but Jesus was divine in nature. So far their two best works concerning Development of Doctrine are:

Continuity And Change in Adventist Teaching by Rolf J. Pohler ( a German Adventists ) published by special order by Peter Lang. Also, see Pohler’s Dissertation from Andrews University of similiar title. His book is simply a revision of his Thesis.

Crosscurrents in Adventists Christology by Eric Claude Webster

And, Water Rea exposed Ellen Whites Plagarism in the book The White Lie

"In 1980 Dr. Fred Veltman, at that time the chairman of the Religion Department of Pacific Union College, undertook a detailed analysis of Ellen White’s use of literary sources in her book The Desire of Ages, a study which took eight years to complete. Copies of the full 2,561-page report were distributed to Seventh-day Adventist college and university libraries throughout the world. The complete report, including its 100-page summary, is also available online at the General Conference Archives web site. Look for “Life of Christ Research Project” under “Categories” at archives.gc.adventist.org/ast/archives/ " whiteestate.org/issues/faq-egw.html#faq-section-b4

Veltman agrees that Rea was essentialy right concerning Ellen white’s borrowing, but argues that it was a low percentage of her writtings that contain this borrowing.

you may find this article of interest shepherds-rod.org/dsdaboard/docs/egwdoubt.htm

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Many of the Professors Overseas and in California are becoming Liberal concerning Ellen White’s writtings and posting articles like:
The Faces of Adventism Across America atoday.com/magazine/archive/1994/janfeb1994/articles/FacesofAdventism.shtml

go here and search on “Ellen White” and then on “Loma Linda” and then “liberal” etc., atoday.com/magazine/archive/

From Sinai to Golgotha
By Alden Thompson sdanet.org/atissue/white/Alden_index.htm sdanet.org/atissue/white/index.htm

Also they are debating over the nature of the incarnation, Did Jesus have orginal sin? Could Jesus have Sinned? Did Jesus have a Sin Nature? Was he Fully God and Fully Man? questions like those they are debating.

Also, there is a debate about inspiration of prophets and inspiration of scripture, some have lower their view of both Ellen White and Scripture, others lower their view of Ellen White and others defend both ellen White and Scripture as infallible.

like The Arian or Anti-Trinitarian Views Presented in Seventh-day Adventist Literature and the Ellen G. White Answer
by Erwin Roy Gane sdanet.org/atissue/trinity/gane-thesis/index.htm sdanet.org/atissue/trinity/index.htm google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=Adventist+views+Ellen+White

The Ellen White estate is the most “conservative” when it comes to Ellen White because they make their living producing her books and selling her books.

On top of the Divisions within main line adventistism, there are some called independent Seventh Day Adventists which include Arians, Semi-Arians and Trinitarians
too.
adventistreview.org/thisweek/1552-00-i.pdf
adventistreview.org/thisweek/1552-99-i.pdf

SDA Sites of Interest:
Here you can Browse or Search Mrs Whites Works egwestate.andrews.edu/ adventist.org/ sdanet.org/ sdanet.org/atissue/trinity/index.htm sdanet.org/atissue/covenants/index.htm answers your questions on law sdanet.org/atissue/trinity/TrinityWhidden.html sdanet.org/atissue/index.htm ellen-white.com/ andrews.edu/library/collections/departments/ahc.html biblicalperspectives.com/ biblicalresearch.gc.adventist.org/documents/Universal%20Justification.htm biblicalresearch.gc.adventist.org/documents/trinitydoc.pdf good reading for
context of smyrna.org/ and smyrna.org/Books/books.htm

The SDA Reformed group ( a second SDA denomination ) sda1914.com/ sdarm.org/

Unofficial but reflects SDA second coming views ( some independents ) armageddonbooks.com/historicist.html sdaoutreach.org/resource.html sdaoutreach.org/prophet.html

Arian and Semi-Arian in view restorationministry.com/ smyrna.org/

Gay SDA ( note in their book list are some Jesus Seminar books ) sdakinship.org/ksmainframe.htm

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

**Mainline SDA do believe in the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity. ** It is what they call “independent ministries” that are teaching Semi-Arian views concerning Jesus, the Son of God.

The claim is now being heard in various circles of Adventism that the doctrine of the Godhead, or Trinity, is a Catholic teaching without foundation in Scripture or in the Spirit of Prophecy. Such persons teach that the Holy Spirit is not God, but rather a divine essence working in conjunction with God. Many of these same persons wish to revive the Arian (or Semi-Arian) perspective on the divinity of Christ held by some of our Adventist pioneers. This view, while not denying the pre-existence of Christ prior to His birth in Bethlehem, holds that at some time in the past reaches of eternity, Christ was brought into existence by the Father.

greatcontroversy.org/gco/rar/pau-godhead.php

steps2life.com/php/view_article.php?article_id=1604

The Trinity
There is one God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, a unity of three co-eternal 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. He is forever worthy of worship, adoration, and service by the whole creation. (Deut. 6:4; Matt. 28:19; 2 Cor. 13:14; Eph. 4:4-6; 1 Peter 1:2; 1 Tim. 1:17; Rev. 14:7.)

1. The Father
   God the Eternal Father is the Creator, Source, Sustainer, and Sovereign of all creation. He is just and holy, merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness. The qualities and powers exhibited in the Son and the Holy Spirit are also revelations of the Father. (Gen. 1:1; Rev. 4:11; 1 Cor. 15:28; John 3:16; 1 John 4:8; 1 Tim. 1:17; Ex. 34:6, 7; John 14:9.)

1. The Son
   God the eternal Son became incarnate in Jesus Christ. Through Him all things were created, the character of God is revealed, the salvation of humanity is accomplished, and the world is judged. Forever truly God, He became also truly man, Jesus the Christ. He was conceived of the Holy Spirit and born of the virgin Mary. He lived and experienced temptation as a human being, but perfectly exemplified the righteousness and love of God. By His miracles He manifested God’s power and was attested as God’s promised Messiah. He suffered and died voluntarily on the cross for our sins and in our place, was raised from the dead, and ascended to minister in the heavenly sanctuary in our behalf. He will come again in glory for the final deliverance of His people and the restoration of all things. (John 1:1-3, 14; Col. 1:15-19; John 10:30; 14:9; Rom. 6:23; 2 Cor. 5:17-19; John 5:22; Luke 1:35; Phil. 2:5-11; Heb. 2:9-18; 1 Cor. 15:3, 4; Heb. 8:1, 2: John 14:1-3.)

1. The Holy Spirit
   God the eternal Spirit was active with the Father and the Son in Creation, incarnation, and redemption. He inspired the writers of Scripture. He filled Christ's life with power. He draws and convicts human beings; and those who respond He renews and transforms into the image of God. Sent by the Father and the Son to be always with His children, He extends spiritual gifts to the church, empowers it to bear witness to Christ, and in harmony with the Scriptures leads it into all truth. (Gen. 1:1, 2; Luke 1:35; 4:18; Acts 10:38; 2 Peter 1:21; 2 Cor. 3:18; Eph. 4:11, 12; Acts 1:8; John 14:16-18, 26; 15:26, 27;16:7-13.)

adventistbiblicalresearch.org/documents/adventist%20beliefs.htm

macgregorministries.org/seventh_day_adventists/trinity.html

sdanet.org/atissue/trinity/index.htm