|
Desire of Ages Did Not Change Doctrine by Colin Gyles Click to go to our Home Page
|
Welcome
Hi, I am Colin Gyles. For years, I have been a contributor to one of the
Caribbean’s leading newspapers. This site is an extension of those
contributions and more. All in the name of Love – God’s love.
That’s what my ministry is all about!
This
website is established on the underlying premise and belief that there is an
objective reality or truth concerning the universe, its inhabitants and its history.
I declare at the very outset that I am a PhD scientist by training who, like
Sir Isaac Newton, notwithstanding one’s fundamental scientific interest, have a
deep interest in religion and have written more on religion than even on
science.
Like Albert
Einstein (and Newton) I totally reject the notion that this well-ordered
universe came about by random chance. Einstein said “Well, a priori, one should expect a chaotic world which cannot be
grasped by the mind in any way” ….
Read More
The following article is from this link: http://www.colinagyles.com/articles/religion-and-politics/calvary-answers-all-mysteries-part-4
DESIRE OF AGES Did Not Change Doctrine
When
persons present a lame and ridiculous argument that the publication of the
book, Desire of Ages, marked an epochal
change in Seventh-day Adventist thinking concerning the Trinity, they do their
cause a great disservice, perhaps, without even realizing it.
Is that
the way a church and a prophet go about the business of correcting a
foundational heresy? Can one, for even a passing moment, entertain
the thought that a prophet and a church, realizing that they were in
fundamental error, preaching a false concept of a non-Trinitarian God,
misleading people, and they just silently publish a book that does not even
mention the term Trinity? No acknowledgement that they were
wrong? No statement that they used to believe this, but further
enlightenment has now led them to believe that? It had to be left to a
later generation to break the news that a change had taken place?
People
who present this kind of utterly flawed argument are begging the world to hold
the pioneers of Seventh-day Adventism in contempt. If one had set out to
discredit Ellen G. White as a prophet and to present the pioneers of
Seventh-day Adventism as deceiving and dishonest, they could hardly have done a
better job.
Those who are honestly seeking for truth and a correct
understanding will not, however, be deceived into rejecting Ellen G. White and
the Seventh-day Adventist pioneers. In light of the historical record
concerning Ellen G. White’s writings and editorial changes, since 1883 (Ronald Graybill, Ministry, April 1994, pp. 10-12), it is not difficult for one to
discern the reason for a number of contradictory statements attributed to Ellen
G. White since then.
When
scholars extend their editorial liberty beyond legitimate bounds and try to
clarify, amplify and re-interpret the writings of the prophets, invariably
confusion results, just as early Roman Catholic scholars have done in producing
their Latin Vulgate which continues to muddy the waters of truth and give the
impression that the Bible is sending mixed signals with respect to some
important concepts (See Colin
Standish and Russell Standish, Modern Bible Translations
Unmasked, 1993, Hartland
Publications, Rapidan Virginia 22733, USA).
For those
who are diligent and care about truth, they can verify for themselves that
there were no mixed signals, concerning the subject of the nature and
personality of God, in Ellen G. White’s writings prior to 1883 when the General
Conference passed resolutions setting up a review committee to make editorial
changes to Ellen G. White writings (Review
and Herald, Nov. 27, 1883). Since then, a number of seemingly conflicting
statements have appeared and, notwithstanding the claim by some persons
(including the acclaimed Professor
Walter Martin) that Ellen G. White changed her position on the Trinity, no statement
has been produced from the pen of Ellen G. White wherein the term Trinity has
been used to describe God or wherein there were any withdrawal or retraction of
the numerous non-Trinitarian statements that were made by her before.
If This
is Not The Omega, Then What Is?
It is
rather remarkable and unprecedented that one should have to be attempting to
defend the honour , integrity and calling of Ellen G. White and the pioneers
of Seventh-day Adventism against disparaging suggestions and insinuations being
made concerning them, not by avowed enemies of Seventh-day Adventism, but by
professed Seventh-day Adventists, and not mere pew-members, but leaders, for
the most part. On second thought, it is not altogether unprecedented;
Ellen G. White herself prophesied it. In light of the acceptance of Trinitarianism by professed Seventh-day Adventists and the
effect that such acceptance has had on doctrine, credibility and overall
direction, vis-à-vis the papacy, the predictions of Ellen
G. White concerning the ‘omega’ stand among the surest evidences that
she was indeed a prophet.
Many
people speak loosely of the ‘omega of apostasy’ without realizing that the term
‘omega’ was used by Ellen G. White in relation to a particular change of
doctrine that would be embraced within the church on account of which the
earlier foundation would be rejected. The following statements speak for themselves
(all emphases mine):
“In
the book Living Temple there is presented the alpha of deadly heresies. The omega will
follow, and will be received by those who are not willing to
heed the warning God has given. Special Testimonies, Series B, No. 2, pp. 49, 50. {1SM 200.2}
“”Living
Temple” contains the alpha
of these theories. I
knew that the omega would follow in a little while; and I trembled for
our people. I knew that I
must warn our brethren and sisters not to enter into controversy over the presence
and personality of God.” Special Testimonies, Series B,
No. 2, p53.
{1SM 203}
“The
spiritualistic theories regarding the personality of God, followed to their
logical conclusion, sweep away the whole Christian economy.”
“In a
vision of the night I was shown distinctly that these sentiments have been
looked upon by some as the grand truths that are to be brought in and made
prominent at the present time. I was shown a platform, braced by solid timbers,– the truths of the Word of God. Some
one high in responsibility in the medical work was directing this man
and that man to loosen the timbers supporting this platform. Then I heard a
voice saying, “Where are the watchmen that ought to be standing on the walls of
Zion? Are they asleep? This
foundation was built by the Masterworker, and will stand storm
and tempest. Will they
permit this man to present doctrines that deny the past experience of the
people of God? The time has come to take decided action.”
The
enemy of souls has sought to bring in the supposition that a great reformation
was to take place among Seventh-day Adventists, and that this reformation would
consist in giving up the doctrines which stand as the pillars of our faith, and
engaging in a process of reorganization. Were this
reformation to take place, what would result? The principles of truth
that God in His wisdom has given to the remnant church,
would be discarded. Our religion would be changed. The fundamental principles that have sustained the work
for the last fifty years would be accounted as error. A new organization
would be established. Books of a new order would be written. A system of intellectual philosophy would be introduced.” Special Testimonies, Series B,
No. 2, pp 54, 55.
{1SM 204}
These
statements were made in the year 1904. Therefore, the points of truth to
which reference has been made (“the last fifty years”)
would largely have been those that were held within the period 1854 to 1904 and
articulated in the statements of faith of 1874, 1889 and 1894. Consider
the following:
(1)
When people were being warned not to engage in any controversy concerning the
presence and personality of God, in light of the error that was seeking to
intrude, what was then the accepted belief in the church concerning the nature
and personality of God? Was it a Trinitarian view? The answer is,
no. Therefore she was not urging that the then accepted position be
changed. Quite the opposite, she was cautioning against an attempt to
change it.
(2)
The “alpha of deadly heresies” was being resisted and it
had to do with the presence and personality of God. She said, “the omega would follow in a little while” and “will
be received”. What doctrine, that had to do with the presence and
personality of God, was “received” by the
church “in a little while” after the
statement was made in 1904? There is only one doctrine that fits the
description – the Trinity doctrine. In 1931, after the prophet had died,
the first Trinitarian statement of faith was published by the Seventh-day
Adventist Church in the 1931Year Book of the Seventh-day Adventist Denomination
(Washington, D.C.: R&H 1931, p. 377) which marked a distinct shift
from all others that were previously published.
(3)
She further indicated what would be the result of the acceptance of that
particular heresy: “The fundamental principles that have
sustained the work for the last fifty years would be accounted as error” ; “A system of intellectual philosophy would be introduced” ; people would “deny the past experience of
the people of God” and this would result in “giving up
the doctrines which stand as the pillars of our faith”. Which
other doctrine but the Trinity doctrine fits the description? The
acceptance of the Trinity is the only major change of doctrine that has
occurred within the Seventh-day Adventist church since the pioneers fell
asleep. Other changes have taken place, but not on a scale such that a
doctrine which the pioneers actively campaigned against, as a pagan and papal
heresy, becomes accepted as truth, and on account of which the pioneers are
being discredited. So significant is the change that George Knight, Andrews University Seminary Professor said:
“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.” (Ministry, October 1993, p. 10)
With all
that I have highlighted concerning the Trinity and the prophetic forecast
concerning the omega of deadly heresies, I have only one further question to
ask concerning this matter: If the Trinity doctrine is not the omega of
deadly heresies of which we have been warned, then what is?
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?
Comments
1.
Ron
Beaulieu says:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
•
The Bible says God is a Spirit: Jhn
4:24 God [is] a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship [him] in spirit
and in truth.
•
The Bible says that there is ONE ETERNAL SPIRIT OR THE
ETERNAL SPIRIT: How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the
eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from
dead works to serve the living God? Hebrews 9:14.
•
I would take it that the words THE ETERNAL SPIRIT
means ONE ETERNAL SPIRIT.
•
We have access to the Father through ONE SPIRIT: 18For
through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father. Ephesians 2:18
•
God is of the substance of Spirit for God is a Spirit.
“The Jews had ever before heard such words from human lips, and a convicting
influence attended them; for it seemed that never before heard such words from
human lips, and a convicting influence attended them; for it seemed that
divinity flashed through humanity as Jesus said, “I and My Father are One.” The
words of Christ were full of deep meaning as He put forth the claim that He and
the Father were of one substance, possessing the same attributes.—The Signs of
the Times, November 27, 1893, p. 54. {7ABC437.3}
•
It is the one substance, the one eternal spirit, THAT
MAKES ALL PARTIES TO THE GODHEAD ONE GOD.
•
Jesus and the Father always had the ONE SUBSTANCE, the
ONE HOLY SPIRIT.
•
At His Incarnation, the humanity of Jesus cumbered His
Holy Spirit substance and its attributes like omnipresence, omnipotence, and
omniscience. Therefore, He divested His Holy Spirit from His humanity and it
became independent of His humanity–an independent THIRD PERSON for the first
time. He died to that DIVINE NATURE HOLY SPIRIT ONLY BEING forever to be combined
with humanity forever.
•
“But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an
unchangeable priesthood.” Hebrews 7:24.
•
“Cumbered with humanity Christ could not be in every
place personally, therefore it was altogether for their advantage that He
should leave them to go to His Father and send the Holy Spirit to be His
successor on earth. The Holy Spirit is Himself divested of the personality of
humanity and independent thereof. He would represent Himself as present in all
places by His Holy Spirit.” E.G. White, Manuscript
Releases Volume 14 (No’s 1081-1135) MR No.1084.
•
This divestation of His Holy Spirit ONLY Nature from
His humanity–FOREVER, met the prescribed limits of the the
Testator Covenant.
•
“The darkness rolled away from the Saviour and from
the Cross. Christ bowed His head and died. In His Incarnation He had reached
the prescribed limit as a sacrifice, but not as a redeemer.” E.G. White Manuscript Releases Volume Twelve,
p. 409.
•
What was the prescribed limit as a sacrifice? It was
death of the Testator? How did the Testator die BEFORE the cross, before
becoming our REDEEMER on the cross? What did He sacrifice? By divesting Himself
from being DIVINE NATURE HOLY SPIRIT ONLY, to become combined with humanity
forever, He sacrificed being DIVINE ONLY and died forever to that DIVINE HOLY
SPIRIT ONLY ESTATE OF BEING. That was a huge sacrifice. That sacrifice met the
prescribed limits of the Testator, for the Testator must die to something
eternally, for the wages of sin is eternal death, not just three days and
nights in a tomb.
•
Hbr 9:16 For where a testament [is], there must also of necessity be
the death of the testator.
•
Hbr 9:17 For a testament [is] of force after men are dead: otherwise
it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.
•
If Jesus did not die to something eternally, His
atonement would be of no strength at all while He should live on. There would
be no atonement. This is where the Trinity Doctrine becomes antichrist. It
bypasses this important pre-cross, Incarnation sacrifice in the Heavenly
Sanctuary. It was by that pre-cross sacrifice that Christ made an eternal
atonement for sin by dying forever to His DIVINE ONLY STATE OF BEING, and
bequeathing that life, the soul of His life, His Holy Spirit Divine Nature to
us as heavens “highest good, crowing gift,” for regenerating man back into the
image of God, and for empowering us in overcoming sin.
•
The Trinity Doctrine says that the Holy Spirit always
existed as a THIRD PERSON without this sacrifice at which time the THIRD PERSON
became such by the Incarnation sacrifice in the heavenly Sanctuary, meeting the
prescribed limit of a sacrifice–dying to something forever, namely His former existence
as DIVINE HOLY SPIRIT ONLY. To voluntarily cumber that DIVINE ONLY EXISTENCE
with humanity FOREVER, was the sacrifice of all
sacrifices. It was the “highest good, crowning gift heaven could bestow,” says
Ellen White.
•
“He (Christ) suffered the death which was ours, that
we might receive the life which WAS His.” Desire of Ages, p. 25 1 Cor.
11:24-265, cf. John 6:53, 54, Titus 3:5, 6.
•
What death was ours? Was it three days and nights in a
tomb? Nay! It is eternal death. Christ took that death at His Incarnation in
Heaven, and gave His eternal DIVINE NATURE HOLY SPIRIT LIFE to us, that we
might overcome the lust of the world and be renewed to our original creation in
His likeness. The Trinity Doctrine of Rome totally bypasses this important
INCARNATION ATONEMENT, which met the prescribed limit of a sacrifice BEFORE THE
REDEMPTIVE ACT ON THE CROSS of taking all our sins upon Himself.
•
“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.” 2Pe 1:4
•
“Christ declared that after his ascension, he would
send to his church, as his crowning gift, the Comforter, who was to take his
place. This Comforter is the Holy Spirit,–the soul of his life, the efficacy of
his church, the light and life of the world. With his Spirit Christ sends a
reconciling influence and a power that takes away sin.
In the gift of the Spirit, Jesus gave to man the highest good that heaven could
bestow….
The Spirit was given as a regenerating agency, and without this the sacrifice
of Christ would have been of no avail….
It is by the Spirit that the heart is made pure. Through the Spirit the
believer becomes a partaker of the divine nature. Christ has given his Spirit
as a divine power to overcome all hereditary and cultivated tendencies to evil,
and to impress his own character upon the church.” E.G. White, Review and
Herald Articles, May 19, 1904, vol. 5, p. 42.
Without the Heavenly Sanctuary
Incarnation sacrifice which provided for us the Holy Spirit soul of His life
BEFORE THE CROSS, the sacrifice on the cross would have been of no avail,
because there would have been no power to keep us from sinning. The Trinity
doctrine of Rome totally obfuscates that Heavenly Sanctuary sacrifice BEFORE
THE CROSS, by teaching that the Holy Spirit always existed as a third
person—thus, NO INCARNATION SACRIFICE of the Testator’s soul of His life as a
“highest good, crowning gift” for man whereby he is enabled to overcome sin.
And this is how the Trinity Doctrine, as a spiritualistic theory of man
(emanating from Rome), sweeps away the entire Christian economy because it does
not recognize the “highest good, crowning sacrifice heaven can bestow.”
“The Power of God in the Third
Person.–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.–
Special Testimonies, Series A, No. 10, p. 37. (1897).
Bible text
Acts 3:26 Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless
you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.
It is the Holy Spirit of Jesus
that is sent to us to turn every one of us from our iniquities.
“The Incarnation of Christ was an
act of self-sacrifice; His life was one of continual self-denial. The highest
glory of the love of God to man was manifested in the sacrifice of His
only-begotten Son, who was the express image of His person. This is the great
mystery of godliness. It is the privilege and the duty of every professed
follower of Christ to have the mind of Christ. Without self-denial and cross
bearing we cannot be His
disciples.” E.G. White, Selected Messages, Book 2, p. 185.
•
Without the heavenly Sanctuary Incarnation sacrifice,
there would be no atonement, thus rendering the Sanctuary/Atonement GONE, just
as Kellogg’s theory did in the Alpha of Apostasy:
Sanctuary Gone Atonement Gone —
“In a representation which passed before me, I saw a certain work being done by
medical missionary workers. Our ministering brethren were looking on, watching
what was being done, but they did not seem to understand. The foundation of our
faith, which was established by so much prayer, such earnest searching of the
Scriptures, was being taken down, pillar by pillar. Our faith was to have
nothing to rest upon–the sanctuary was gone, the atonement was gone.” E.G.
White, The Upward Look, 152.
•
That is what the Trinity Doctrine does. It renders the
Sanctuary/Atonement GONE, thereby destroying the entire Christian economy,
because it does not teach a heavenly Incarnation sacrifice that met the
prescribed limits of a sacrifice which is DEATH OF THE TESTATOR to something
eternally.
•
Without that “highest good, crowing gift,” the
sacrifice of the Christ’s Holy Spirit, the soul of His life, we could not
overcome, so all would be lost.
Eternal
Sacrifice as Divine Soul Only
“The apostle would call our
attention from ourselves to the Author of our salvation. He presents before us
His two natures, divine and human. . . . He voluntarily assumed human nature.
It was His own act, and by His own consent. He clothed His divinity with
humanity. He was all the while as God, but He did not appear as God. He veiled
the demonstrations of Deity which had commanded the homage, and called forth
the admiration of the universe of God. He was God while upon earth, but He
divested Himself of the form of God, and in its stead took the form and fashion
of a man. He walked the earth as a man. For our sakes He became poor, that we through His poverty might be made rich. He
laid aside His glory and His majesty. He was God, but the glories of the form
of God He for awhile relinquished. . . . He bore the sins of the world, and
endured the penalty which rolled like a mountain upon His divine soul. He
yielded up His life a sacrifice, that man should not
eternally die. He died, not through being compelled to die, but by His own free
will.” E.G. White, SDA Bible Commentary,
Vol. 7a, p. 446.
Glories of the form of God refer
to the glory He shared with the Father before the Incarnation. He gets that
glory (praise, worship) back, but His eternal humanity cumbers His Holy Spirit
ONLY being forever. That is why He had to pray to the Father to send the Holy
Spirit to us.
How Christ can be fully human and
fully divine, no one knows. But the above scenario is based on Bible and Spirit
of Prophecy fact. Ellen White says we will study this issue for eternity, so
there is much we don’t know.
22By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament.
23And they truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to continue
by reason of death:
24But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood.
25Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost
that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession
for them.
26For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate
from sinners, and made higher than the heavens;
27Who 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.
28For the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the
oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated for evermore.
Hebrews 7:22-28.
All blessings,
Ron