Trinity Concept Justifies Papal Teachings

            Those who advance the idea of God being a Trinity seem to believe that Jesus Christ must, of necessity, have existed as a distinct Being for as long as His Father if He is to be regarded as a Divine Being.  If such is the case, then, by the same premise, would it not also be true that Jesus must always exist and therefore could not have died at any point if He is to be regarded as a Divine Being?  Unless one’s idea of death is similar to that of those who believe in the immortality of the soul, who would hold that there is an aspect of a person that is still alive when the person appears to be dead.  If that was true of Christ, then what of human beings who were made in the image of God?

            I maintain that, in following the Trinitarian line, one is inescapably led to justify not only the doctrine of the immortality of the soul but every single Roman Catholic doctrine.  Indeed, the Roman Catholic church has declared that all their other doctrines are based on the doctrine of the Trinity (Handbook for Today’s Catholic, p.16).  Consider even the idea of Mary being co-mediatrix.  If Jesus Christ is also, Himself, the God from whom humanity has been estranged and to whom humanity needs to be reconciled, then, is it not evident that there would be a need for someone to go between us and Jesus Christ?

            How have Seventh-day Adventist come to the place where they are now declaring that Jesus raised Himself from the dead?  Could the Bible have made itself any clearer when, in Gal. 1:1, it declares that it was “God the Father, who raised him from the dead”?  Or, could Ellen G. White have been more explicit when, referring to Christ’s resting in the tomb, she declared that “He was bearing the sins of the world and His Father only could release Him” (Youth’s Instructor, May 2, 1901 pr. 8)?

Trinity Concept Discredits Seventh-day Adventism

            I put it to you that Seventh-day Adventism has no credibility (so far as the matter of truth is concerned) if Trinitarianism is correct.  What rational explanation could be given for such an anomaly as God’s specially led people being in error on a fundamental issue as the question of who God is, when most of  the other churches which they denounced as Babylon had a clearer understanding, in that they believed in the Trinity whereas the pioneers did not? 

            Which set of people would more fit the bill of being classified as Babylon, if Trinitarianism should be regarded as truth?  Would not the pioneers of Seventh-day Adventism be found as fitting the bill of being labeled false prophets and Babylon?  Is it not inexplicable that some of these very persons had previously belonged to Trinitarian churches before accepting Seventh-day Adventism and this great enlightenment that was brought to their spiritual experience should be tainted by the rejection of truth (the so-called truth of Trinitarianism), which they had previously embraced, only to have it replaced with damnable heresy (the supposed error of non-Trinitarianism)?  Yet the world was to accept and believe that these people were specially called by God?

Trinity Concept Denies Bible And Spirit of Prophecy Consistency

            If the Trinitarian line that is being advanced is correct, then the inescapable conclusion is that the Bible and Spirit of Prophecy contradict themselves.  I will now highlight some statements which, I maintain, can never be reconciled to a Trinitarian position (all emphases mine).

(1)               “The Father and Son alone are to be exalted” (Youth’s            Instructor, 7^th July, 1898).

(2)               “There is but one God, the Father” (1 Cor. 8:6).

(3)               “The head of Christ is God” (1 Cor. 11:3).

(4)               “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, p. 34).  The implication of this is that the Holy Spirit is not a being since the Holy Spirit “searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.” (1 Cor. 2:10); yet Christ is the only being who could enter into all God’s counsels (and note, this was referring to the creation!).

(5)               “The Sovereign of the universe was not alone in His work of beneficence.  He had an associate – a co-worker who could appreciate His purposes” (Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 34).  An associate – not two.  The associate was not Himself the Sovereign.  Plainly, the God that the Word was (John 1:1), could not have been the same God that the Word was with.

(6)               Prior to the incarnation, Christ was “next in authority” to the Father (Review and Herald, Dec. 17, 1872; also Spirit of Prophecy, vol. 2, p. 9).

(7)               Prior to the incarnation, before Lucifer’s fall, Lucifer “was a high and exalted angel, next in honour to God’s dear Son.”  (Story of Redemption, p. 13).  There was a clear line of authority: The Father first, The Son second and Lucifer third.  The first two were worshipped, being uncreated Beings and the “counsel of peace” was between them both (Zechariah   6:13).  The third was not worshipped, being a creature.  The third wanted to be worshipped.  After being removed from his position Lucifer (now Satan), has obviously found a way of getting humanity to accept the idea of offering worship to a third being.

(8)               Speaking of the creation, “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.”  (Signs of the Times, Jan. 9, 1879, pr. 2).

(9)               “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,”  (Testimonies vol. 8, p. 268.)

(10)            “A complete offering has been made; for ‘God so loved the world, that He gave His only-begotten Son’ – not a son by creation, as were the angels, nor a son by adoption, as is the forgiven sinner, but a Son begotten in the express image of the Father’s person, and in all the brightness of His majesty and glory, one equal with God in authority, dignity and divine perfection.  In him dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.” (Signs of the Times, May 23, 1895).

I could go on and on.  But it is not necessary.  The point is that there are many statements that simply cannot be reconciled to a Trinitarian concept of God.

READ MORE:
Calvary answers all mysteries PART ONE ARGUMENT OF CALVARY
Calvary answers all mysteries PART TWO TRINITY, PAPAL TEACHING and more
Calvary answers all mysteries PART THREE SEEMING CONTRADICTIONS
Calvary answers all mysteries PART FOUR DESIRE OF AGES
Calvary answers all mysteries PART FIVE VIOLENCE TO THE GOSPEL?

Trinity Concept Contrary To Calvary Truth

Contrary to the argument of Calvary, the Trinity concept declares that Father, Son and Holy Ghost constitute an inseparable unity. This implies that no separation took place at Calvary. Which will you believe? It is either the truth as declared at Calvary that there is One Supreme Being and that Jesus Christ is His only begotten Son or the omega of deadly heresies – the doctrine of antichrist that denies the Father and the Son (1 John 2:22). The choice is yours.
Contrary to the argument of Calvary, the Trinity concept declares that the Son is as eternally self-existent as the Father. To be eternally self-existent means that you cannot die. This implies that the Son of God cannot die and, therefore, did not die at Calvary. Which will you believe? It is either the truth as declared at Calvary that the Son of God was made flesh so that He could die and did in fact die (give up His hold on divine life) or the doctrine of antichrist that denies that Christ came in the flesh (1 John 4:3), thus implying that Christ was incapable of dying (going out of existence).

Contrary to the argument of Calvary, the Trinity concept declares that, apart from the Father and the Son, there is another who is deserving of worship and adoration. There is no precedent or authority given in scripture for worship to be offered to anyone except the Father and the Son, for they only are worthy (Rev. 5:12,13). The choice is yours. Will you follow the example and precept of scripture in worshiping “the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb” (Rev. 21:22) only, and accept that the Holy Spirit is not another, but rather, the Spirit of God Himself, or will you worship another who “sitteth (is positioned) in the temple (place of worship) of God, showing himself that he is God” (2 Thess. 2:4)?
In the name of this other object of worship, many are supposedly speaking in tongues, performing many miracles and communicating with all manner of spirits. Will you join the band-wagon of believing in the Trinity, thus fulfilling the one criterion necessary for acceptance with the World Council of Churches and being a part of the Babylonish ecumenical spiritualistic confederation that will be overthrown at the second coming of Christ, or will you accept the argument of Calvary?
Calvary discounts the three pivotal concepts of the Trinity, namely: (1) Inseparability of Father, Son and Holy Ghost,
(2) Eternal self-existence of the Son and
(3) Worship of the Holy Ghost.
Do you dare contend with the argument of Calvary? I hope that, once and for all, those who were ready to declare the pioneers of Seventh-day Adventism in error in their rejection of the Trinity will thoughtfully reconsider.

READ MORE:
Calvary answers all mysteries PART ONE ARGUMENT OF CALVARY
Calvary answers all mysteries PART TWO TRINITY, PAPAL TEACHING and more
Calvary answers all mysteries PART THREE SEEMING CONTRADICTIONS
Calvary answers all mysteries PART FOUR DESIRE OF AGES
Calvary answers all mysteries PART FIVE VIOLENCE TO THE GOSPEL?