Let's start with #2, "The Trinity"
"Christ is one with the father, but Christ and God are two distinct personages” (RH June 1, 1905)
“The Scriptures clearly indicate the relation between God and Christ, and they bring to view as clearly the personality and individuality of each. [Hebrews 1:1-5 quoted.] God is the Father of Christ; Christ is the Son of God. To Christ has been given an exalted position. He has been made equal with the Father. All the counsels of God are opened to His Son.” (Ellen White, Testimonies for the Church, vol. 8, page 268)
“The man Christ Jesus was not the Lord God Almighty, yet Christ and the Father are one.” (Ellen White SDA Bible Commentary, vol.5 p.1129)
“Here we might mention the Trinity, which does away the personality of God, and of his Son Jesus Christ”(James White, December 11, 1855, Review & Herald, vol. 7, no. 11, page 85, par. 16)
“The doctrine of the Trinity which was established in the church by the council of Nice, A. D. 325. This doctrine destroys the personality of God, and his Son Jesus Christ our Lord. The infamous, measures by which it was forced upon the church which appear upon the pages of ecclesiastical history might well cause every believer in that doctrine to blush.” (J. N. Andrews, March 6, 1855, Review & Herald, vol. 6, no. 24, page 185)
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.
"Most of the founders of Seventh-day Adventism would not be able to join the church today if they had to subscribe to the denomination's Fundamental Beliefs. More specifically, most would not be able to agree to belief number 2, which deals with the doctrine of the Trinity." George Knight, Ministry, October 1993, p. 10.
"Adventist beliefs have changed over the years under the impact of 'present truth'. Most startling is the teaching regarding Jesus Christ, our Saviour and Lord…the Trinitarian understanding of God, now part of our fundamental beliefs, was not generally held by the early Adventsists." William G. Johnsson, Adventist Review, Jan 6, 1994, p. 10.
The 1874 statements, by Uriah Smith, published in the June 4 Signs of the Times:
1. That there is one God, a personal, spiritual Being, the Creator of all things, omnipotent, omniscient, and eternal; infinite in wisdom, holiness, justice, goodness, truth and mercy; unchangeable, and everywhere present by His representative, the Holy Spirit. Psalm 139:7. [Where can I go from Thy spirit? or where can I flee from Thy presence?]
2. That there is one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Eternal Father, the One by whom God created all things, and by whom they do consist…"
But, the 28 fundamentals say:
2. The Trinity
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. 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.)
"He", as in the unity of all 3." Weird. I don't want to agree with that. They will deny you membership if you don't? I'd like to see them try and take my membership again. I believe God will not let them enforce this baleful church legislation.
"The revelation of Himself that God has given in His Word is for our study. This we may seek to understand. But beyond this we are not to penetrate. . . . None are to indulge in speculation regarding His nature. Here silence is eloquence. The Omniscient One is above discussion." The Faith I Live By p. 40.
101 what are you quoting from? Do you have any quotations from the bible or SOP to support your belief?
And if I am able to prove you wrong from the the SOP, are you willing to change your views?
You said: " Ellen White said that the fallen angels would obscure that the Son was begotten. She says that Lucifer got up a warfare over the Son being begotten and was thrust out of heaven as a result."
Can I see this quote?
You may have misunderstood the passage below:
"The great Creator assembled the heavenly host, that He might in the presence of all the angels confer special honor upon His Son. The Son was seated on the throne with the Father, and the heavenly throng of Holy Angels was gathered around them. The Father then made known that it was ordained by Himself, that Christ His Son should be equal with Himself, so that wherever was the presence of His Son, it was as His own presence. The word of His Son was to be obeyed as readily as the word of the Father. His Son He had invested with authority to command the heavenly host. Especially was the Son to work in union with Himself in the anticipated creation of the earth. His Son would carry out His will and His purposes, but would do nothing of Himself alone. The Father’s will would be fulfilled in Him"
Ask yourself why the Father had to reinforce or confer honor on Christ as being equal with Himself? Think of what Lucifer had done.
Who is Elohim and who is Theos?
Some claim that because the word most often used for God in the Hebrew Bible is Elohim (plural for El), then the one true God must be a trinity. But this is just another deception. The word Elohim is used for the True God, false gods, and human leaders. The word Elohim can also refer to a single person, and when it does, linguists call it a “plural intensive” or “plural of majesty” which denotes greatness. The Hebrew people pluralized nouns when they desired to express greatness or majesty as they did with God. “Theos” is the GREEK equivalent of the HEBREW word “Elohim”.
As we shall see, this title is not reserved for the True God, the Father – the unchangeable one, but also given to many others including the Son, one’s belly, satan etc. If Elohim was really a plurality of the one true God, then the New Testament writers would have used the plural of Theos also when referring to God. Instead they used the singular form “THEOS” every single time and yet the plural form is used eight times in the New Testament referring to men or false gods. (John 10:34-35; Acts 7:40, 14:11, 19:26; 1 Corinthians 8:5; Galatians 4:8).
No one can say that God is a trinity in the Hebrew language while being one God in the Greek language. The Father is the ONLY TRUE God in that He was without beginning of days and His life is the life that flows through the son to us and back. The Son however is God (capital "G") for it is written, “For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son? And again, when he bringeth in the first begotten into the world, he said, And let all the angels of God worship him.” Hebrews 1:4-6.
In the scriptures, we are told that there are many who are called “THEOS” for this title is given to those who receive worship. The Father made the Son to be equal with Himself and is therefore able to receive true worship.
There are only 2 Beings who are able to receive worship and that is God the Father and His Son (Hebrews 1:8 - "unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever"). The Son did not always receive worship as He was not always equal with the Father nor had the right to receive worship for the Father alone can give this.
Also please note that the SINGULAR “THEOS”, θεός, is used in the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament in place of ELOHIM. The claim that ELOHIM means more than one individual BEING and supports the TRINITY is erroneous as it does not stand up to the revealed Truth in God’s Word.
*(THEOS is used in place of Elohim, in this verse, in the Septuagint.)
ELOHIM* is used for God, the Father of Christ.
“In the beginning God [Elohim] created the heaven and the earth.” Genesis 1:1
ELOHIM* is used for Moses.
“And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made you a god [Elohim] to Pharaoh.” Exodus 7:1 The name of God, given to Moses to express the idea of the eternal presence, The Desire of Ages, pp. 469, 470.
ELOHIM* is used for false gods.
“Thou shalt have no other gods [Elohim] before me.” Exodus 20:3
"For Solomon went after Ashtoreth the goddess [Elohim] of the Zidonians, and after Milcom the abomination of the Ammonites." 1 Kings 11:5
“And call ye on the name of your gods [Elohim], and I will call on the name of the LORD: and the God [Elohim] that answereth by fire, let him be God [Elohim]. And all the people answered and said, It is well spoken.” 1 Kings 18:24
“And when the men of Ashdod saw that it was so, they said, The ark of the God [Elohim] of Israel shall not abide with us: for his hand is sore upon us, and upon Dagon our god [Elohim].” 1 Samuel 5:7
“Wilt not thou possess that which Chemosh thy god [Elohim] giveth thee to possess? So whomsoever the LORD our God [Elohim] shall drive out from before us, them will we possess.” Judges 11:24
“And they went out into the fields, and gathered their vineyards, and trode the grapes, and made merry, and went into the house of their god [Elohim], and did eat and drink, and cursed Abimelech.” Judges 9:27
THEOS is used for the Son of God
"But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God [THEOS], is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom. Hebrews 1:8
THEOS is used for one’s belly
"Whose end is destruction, whose God [THEOS] is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things. Philippians 3:19
THEOS is used for Satan
"In whom the god [THEOS] of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them. 2 Corinthians 4:4
Please supply links detailing why you think Elohiym is not the same as Theos.... my understanding is the LXX translates elohiym into theos, and tis is how the NT translations are, following the LXX....
Your examples are what I call double plurals which also exist I the OT....since elohiym is already a plural by the suffix ending "iym" the double plural is where elohiym's are used inn context...
Ge 3:5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
The Hebrew here is still elohiym and if translated into Greek would also be theos...
I do not agree with you that theos in the NT refers to a single quantity, ie the Father
My understanding is theos in the NT means elohiym..... and according to ancient Hebrew this word means
"Strong Authority whose power flows" whether this refers to the Father, Son of Holy Spirit depends upon context, as you say can also refer to pagan authorities as well....
I would agree with you elohiym refers to one flow of power when alone it is used.... but I also notice you do not find any faith in the 3rd person of the Godhead, except perhaps for a flow of power from the Father or His Son....
Notice these three functional Hebrew descriptors used many times in Scripture... why is this ?
I will show you three such functional descriptors in the NT
Re 4:8 ¶ And the four beasts had each of them six wings about him; and they were full of eyes within: and they rest not day and night, saying, Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come.
Here in Hebrew we see YHWH, Elohiym and SHADDAY ALL MENTIONED together....
You mention Lucifer wanting to be second to the Father in place of His Son.... correct....in a maleness dominated world as Hebrew powers are, the Shadday is not considered as her place in the 'family' is as a simile of a mother....EGW speaks of silence of this matter because Hebrew translations are not well understood in her time or even today...we are better loving GOD from faith...with some evidence from Scripture....
Have you considered the Shadday as a co-eternal personal power of Elhiym ? KJV translations render this word as almighty, for no reason apart from ignoring the Hebrew meanings of the breasted one.
In a Hebrew world all family powers flow from the Father and this is why confusion reins in studying the matter of the 'Family of God' the Hebrew word family never exists with Elohiym because elohiym did not originate as hman families do, they are eternal and without cause....
As I said according to the LXX the word elohiym = theos....and this word is a plural term, can be used to mean one power flows, but is best understood as a family of strong authorities.... in contexts of pagan or heavenly authorities...
Rod said: " .in a maleness dominated world as Hebrew powers are, the Shadday is not considered as her place in the 'family' is as a simile of a mother....EGW speaks of silence of this matter because Hebrew translations are not well understood in her time or even today..."
what are you saying here?