Footnotes to Bruce Biven’s Book
On the Holy Spirit
Click to go to our Home Page
When the footnotes
are cut and pasted and/or when I transfer the book, the footnotes get
misnumbered for some reason, so I have copied them separately below. 1 Christ is
described as the “Lamb slain from the foundation of the world” (Rev. 13:8)
but this “slaying” took place over a period of time and was not yet complete
until He died on the cross of Calvary. Likewise, Christ’s blending His
divinity with that of humanity occurred over time and was not yet complete
until He was born in a human form here on this earth. Indeed, this “blending”
of divinity with humanity is “part and parcel” of His being “slain”—a
position that I hope will become clear as we advance further in this study. 2 I recognize
that most readers understand this point—but it is
important to establish this fact because there are those who
espouse a “Oneness” doctrine which is summed up by one “Oneness” organization
like this: “God has manifest himself in different ways; however, He is only one
Divine Entity, or one supreme spirit.” (Taken from the Thunder
Ministries website at http://www.thunderministries.com/history/triad/tricont.html
Emphasis mine). Nothing could be further from the Truth!
It is simply not Biblical and misses the mark in almost every
way when it comes to the “nature” of God, the creation, and the plan
of redemption. For a brief, yet more thorough refutation of the Oneness
doctrine, see Appendix “A.” 3 It is not
the purpose nor within the scope of this book to provide an “in-depth”
history of the Trinity Doctrine. Those wishing to find a more thorough
history are encouraged to look in any good encyclopedia and those who
wish to find a comprehensive history of this doctrine’s development may do
so by visiting a library or bookstore; or by taking advantage of the vast
amount of information available on the internet. 4 John A.
Hardon, S.J., Catholic Doctrine on the
Holy Trinity, (The Catholic Faith magazine,
May/June 2001). “The mystery of the Holy Trinity is the most fundamental
of our faith. On it everything else depends and form it everything else derives. Hence
the Church’s constant concern to safeguard the revealed truth that God is One
in nature and Three in Persons.” (Emphasis mine). 5 For those
readers who may not be Seventh-day Adventists or who may need further proof
of the Bible’s implication of the Catholic Church as the “Beast,” “Harlot,”
and “Anti-Christ” power—please see Appendix “B.” 6 See also:
John 14:16, 17 & Manuscript 20, 1906 “The Holy Spirit is a person... a divine person” who
“has a personality.” 7 I used to wonder
how it was that the “Sabbath” truth was unrecognized for so long. The
Scriptures are so clear and plain regarding the Sabbath—how could
anyone not see it? The truth is that it was buried beneath tradition,
popular opinion, and accepted doctrine that no-one thought to
question it. The Truth was hidden for so long God had to bring back
into focus and “reveal” it again before it was understood. Many still do not
understand the Sabbath or its importance. The same is true regarding the
Godhead, the incarnation, and the Holy Spirit. Mr. White tells us “The fact
that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people
is not proof that our ideas are infallible.” (RH, December 20, 1892). “We cannot
hold that a position once taken, an idea once advocated, is not, under any
circumstances, to be relinquished. There is but One Who is infallible—He Who
is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.” (TM, p. 105). Interestingly, she wrote
these statements long after the main “Pillars of our faith had been
established—including the ones being discussed here. 8 There are
instances where the word “nature” refers to the whole being—physical as
well as character natures (mental and emotional attributes). This is
especially true when speaking of “man” as it is difficult, if not impossible,
to separate
the two. But there are also instances (as in the one being discussed here)
where the word “nature” is indicative of a specific attribute and
does not refer to the subject as a whole—as is evidenced by the
listing of other attributes (i.e. Character and Purpose). 9 Please not
that Mrs. White’s asking Christ “if His Father had a form like
Himself” does not necessarily imply or convey the idea that their
“forms” were identical. Rather, it seems that it is used in the sense of
confirming that the Father does indeed have a “form.” The question is
really: “does your Father have a form?”—not “is His form identical to
yours?” or, “is His form like the one I see you as having?” In this vision
Mrs. White sees a multitude of peoples—both true believers and false
believers—which indicates that she is viewing Christ at a time after His incarnation and which would
make it impossible for Christ to have the same form as the Father. 10 “Cumbered
with humanity Christ could not be in every place personally,
therefore... He would represent Himself as present in all places by His Holy Spirit.”
(Manuscript Releases, vol. 14, p. 23: MR 1084). 11 Webster's New
Collegiate Dictionary (G.&C. Merriam Co., Publishers; Springfield, Mass.,
U.S.A.; 1961). 12 Richard M. Davidson, “Proverbs 8 and the Place of
Christ in the Trinity,” Journal of the Adventist Theological Society, 17/1
(Spring 2006): 33-54. Dr. Davidson is J.N. Andrews Professor of Old Testament
Interpretation, Chair of the Old Testament Department at the Seventh-day
Adventist Theological Seminary—Andrews University, and past-president of the
Adventist Theological Society. Professor Davidson’s paper deals, not with the
Trinity but with the person of Christ, his pre-existence and his being
brought forth. In quoting Dr. Davidson here, it should not be assumed that he
endorses the position set forth here or that his views on the Trinity are the
same as mine—they are not. I do believe, however, that Mr. Davidson’s
research does seem to lend credence to the plausibility of my position. 13 Matthew Henry, Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the
Whole Bible (Old Tappan: Revell, [original, 1710], 3:835) Quoted in Davidson,
p. 36. Emphasis and parenthetical notes—mine. 14 PLEASE NOTE: I am not
suggesting that Christ is a created being in making this
statement. I am merely stating the fact that angels are created
beings having form and substance. Christ also appeared as one of
these beings. In so doing, He exhibited both form and substance. Christ was not
created, nor was He an angel—but He appeared to be one to
those human beings with whom He interacted. He is also described as appearing
to be a man (Gen. 18:2). Men and Angels are apparently remarkably
similar in their appearance (an important fact that will become evident
later. When Christ was “Brought Forth” from the Father He was brought forth
in (and took on) a form that resembled both Men and
Angels—but He was not truly either of these. Christ was of “DIVINE” origin. He
was not created! Yet Christ was the leader of the Angelic Host. As such
He is referred to as the “Archangel.” This does not make Him a created
angel. However, His appearance did resemble that of the angels—so
much so that it caused Lucifer to mistakenly equate himself with
Christ and dare to claim supremacy over Him. We will get into this in a
moment. 15
“The glorious plan of man’s salvation was brought about through the infinite
love of God the Father.” (2T p. 200). 16 “The great
plan of redemption was laid before the foundation of the world. Christ did
not stand alone in this wondrous undertaking for the ransom of man. In the
councils of heaven, before the world was created, the Father and the Son
covenanted together that if man proved disloyal to God, Christ, one with the
Father, would take the place of the transgressor, and suffer the penalty of
justice that must fall upon him.” (RH November 15, 1898; par. 1). “. . . .Christ
and the Father would redeem the fallen race.” (ST Feb 17, 1909; par.
9). “The great gift of salvation has been placed within our reach at an
infinite cost to the Father and the Son” (RH March 10, 1891;
par. 2). 17 This point is extremely relevant to this study and to the creation of this
world. There is much more revealed here than the casual reader might discern!
Even the serious student might miss an important aspect of this statement if he or she does not consider it
within the context of the Great
Controversy. We will discover what this quote reveals as this study
progresses—perhaps some of you are already getting a glimpse into its meaning. 18 The word “slain”
also implies that someone else was involved with the death. We usually do not
describe a person’s regular death in terms of their being slain, but we do
use this word when describing a person’s death when it has been facilitated
by another. We are told that Christ was brought
forth from the Father. Jesus
Himself said that He had come forth (being brought forth) from the Father and that He had been sent by
the Father (John 8:42:17:8). This shows that the Father was an active participant in Christ’s incarnation and enables us to better
understand the reference to Christ’s being “the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world” and His title of the “Son
of God.” 19 “Surely he
hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows; yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he
was bruised for our iniquities:
the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are
healed.” (Isa. 53:4-5 KJV—emphasis mine). 20 “A specific
being or entity:” Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary (G. & C. Merriam Co.,
Publishers; Springfield, Mass., 1961). Emphasis mine. The term “existential”
as used in this book should not be
confused with the modern concept of existentialism.
The two concepts are not even remotely related. 21 Christ was the
“firstborn of all creation” in the sense that He was “brought forth” in a
visible form for the purpose of revealing the invisible and infinite God to
His visible and finite created beings. 22 The Father
stated that Christ was the only One who could enter into His counsel and that
“wherever was the presence of his son,
it was as his own presence (see SOP vol. 1, p. 17, par. 1-2). This
clearly indicates that Christ was not ever-present
(Omnipresent) with the Father while He (Christ) was interacting with the
angels. If Christ was not Omnipresent with the Father but would enter into His counsels (go to meet
with Him), then it is ridiculous for us to conclude that Christ was
Omnipresent with the rest of His creation. Surely, had Christ been
every-present with Lucifer and his angels, Lucifer would not have been so
bold. Christ interacted with them on a one-to-one basis and in their
assemblies, but He was not ever-present with them. 23 This
is the heritage of the servants of the LORD, and their righteousness is of me, saith the LORD.” (Isa. 54:17; KJV). “He
made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.” (2 Cor.
5:21; NASB). “All power is given into His [Jesus’] hands, that He may
dispense rich gifts unto men, imparting the
priceless gift of His own righteousness to the helpless human agent. That
is the message that God commanded to be given to the world. It is the third angel’s message which
is to be proclaimed with a loud voice, and attended with the outpouring of His Spirit in a large measure.”
(Testimonies to Ministers, p. 92). 24 I am not
suggesting that the Father is not
revealed in the Old Testament. What I am saying is that Jesus is the One who
came to reveal the Father to us
and we have no understanding of the
Father apart from Christ. When Christ cried out “My God, My God, why hast
thou forsaken me” He was speaking to His God and Father. For man, however, Christ is our Father and
our Savior and our GOD. For man; “there is no other God besides Me, A
righteous God and a Savior; There is none except Me.” (Isa. 45:21). 25 This is not to say that the Father is not our God also. But
we must remember Christ’s special
and unique role as it relates to
us as men. He is our “Creator,”
our “Savior,” our “Revelator,” and
our “God.” Some will say that Christ is referring to the “Father” as the One
who “comforts” and speaking only of His “Father” pouring out His Spirit at
the end of time—we will see that this is not
the case when we examine this closely in the next two chapters! 26 We
certainly see many references to “the Spirit” in the Old Testament, but the
“Spirit” seems to “come to life”
in the New Testament—Why? 27 First printed
by (The Bible Training School, South Lancaster, Mass. 1914) and reprinted by
(Review and Herald Publishing Association, Hagerstown, MD., 1984)—Ellen White
treasured this book. Another fine book is M.L. Andreasen’s, “The Sanctuary
Service” (Review and Herald Publishing Association, Takoma Par, Washington,
D.C., 1937). Frank B. Holbrook has also written much on this subject and is
an excellent authority to consult. 28 See also
Luke 10:22 “no one knows who . . . the Father is except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal
Him.” 29 I
understand that this is not a perfect
analogy but is the best one that I could think of to describe what Christ has done. This analogy certainly does not fit or cover all the aspects involved in the incarnation, but it is
sufficient to give us a glimpse
into an understanding of what transpired. 30 The Hebrew
word for “Cherubim’ actually carries the meaning of an “imaginary (or
mystical) figure” and is generally not
used as a direct reference to a created
being (angel). Except for its use in describing Lucifer (who we know was a created being, or angel)
most of the references using this word can be seen to represent a being
(Christ?) who is not only in close
proximity to God but has a unique
relationship with God (executing His Will)—apart from those of created
beings. Even in its use in reference to Lucifer, the word “covering’ can
actually mean “protect” or “protecting” (it is used in this sense in Ex.
33:22 where the LORD “covers” and protects Moses with His hand). Lucifer
then, can be understood to have been made a “protecting” Cherub—or Angel—and not necessarily one who stood in the
very presence of the Father.
Remember that Lucifer was not
allowed into the “councils” of God held between Christ and the Father. I also
believe that if Lucifer was in the direct
presence of the Father when he began to “rebel” (Sin) that he would have
been consumed immediately! Also, since everything
else in the Tabernacle was representative of Christ, doesn’t it seem odd to suddenly have two created beings (Angels) residing in
the Most Holy place of God? 31 The “Law”
not only showed men what they should
be doing—it also showed where men fail. Because all men have fallen short (transgressed God’s Law), the Law has
placed all men under its condemnation—which is death. This “condemnation” makes clear our need for a “Messiah” and so, serves
to point us to the “Christ”—Jesus. 32 In Christ’s
brought forth form He had “parted with” much of His inherent divinity in the
sense that He was not walking around with His “pre-creation” glory. He was
not Omnipresent, Omniscient, or Omnipotent. In His brought forth form, Christ
was subservient to His Father—yet rightfully
the “Son of God.” He was still the Creator and still had access to his own
“divine power”—but He voluntarily agreed not
to use it for His self. 33 The Greek
word used in 1 John 3:4 for the phrase translated in the KJV as
“transgression of the Law” is “anomia” and means “Lawlessness.” 34 “And His name
will be called . . . Eternal Father”
(Isa. 9:6). “And I will be a Father to
you.” (2 Cor. 6:18). “You shall call Me, My
Father” (Jer. 3:19). “Through the Spirit, Christ was to abide continually
in the hearts of His children”
(SC: p. 74). “This is the mystery of godliness. That Christ should take human nature, and by a life of
humiliation elevate man in the scale of moral worth with God; that He should
carry His adopted nature to the
throne of God, and there present His
Children to the Father, to have conferred upon them an honour exceeding
that conferred upon the angels,--this is the marvel of the heavenly universe,
the mystery into which angels desire to look. This is love that melts the
sinner’s heart.” (Australasian Union Conference Record: June 1, 1900; par.
15). Emphasis mine. 35 Fred C.
CONYBEARE, in The Hibbert Journal. A Quarterly Review of Religion,
Theology, and Philosophy, Vol. 1, No. 1 (Oxford: October 1902) pp. 102-108.
Emphasis mine. See also “The Eusebian Form of the Text of Matthew 28:19” Zeitsehrift fur Neutestamentlich
Wissenschaft 2: 1901, pages 275-288. 36 These
Hebrew manuscripts are of the Ante-Nicene
era (pre-dating the First Council of Nicaea-325 A.D.). Matthew’s Gospel was
written for the Jew and would most
likely have been written in Hebrew. Hebrew scribes were much more meticulous (careful not to use extraneous material) in their
transcription of manuscripts than were the Greek scribes—so these Hebrew
manuscripts are likely to be more reliable then the Greek manuscripts. 37 See Dr.
James D. Tabor, A Hebrew Gospel of Matthew @ www.religiousstudies.uncc.edu/jdtabor/shemtovweb.html 38 Conybeare. 39 If Jesus
could not have told His disciples to baptize men into the Holy Spirit, then
it is highly unlikely that He would have told them to baptize men into the Father either—especially given His
emphatic statement: “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through me.” (Jn. 14:6). 40 There is no
“magic” in being baptized by immersion—but this is the only manner
of baptism that demonstrates our understanding
of the significance of this
ordinance. We can be baptized by immersion and still not be baptized into
Christ! There is nothing magical
about the method, but the method is important because it demonstrates our understanding of the
significance of the act—and it demonstrates our commitment to doing things as God has prescribed, as opposed to how we may have been taught or might like to do things ourselves. 41 See—Eugene Van
Ness Goetchius, ed., The Language of the New Testament,
(New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1965), pp. 33, 34. 42 The
Complete Word Study Dictionary, Spiros Zodhiates, Th.D. (ed.), et al.
(Chattanooga, TN, AMG International, Inc., 1993). Emphasis mine. 43 I suppose
that it would be more accurate to say that the Holy Spirit did exist prior to the Creation but
that He existed as the “Word” (Jesus Christ in His Divine Totality) when He was “with God” and
“was God” before Jesus was
“Brought Forth” as the mediator between God and His Creations. 44 Webster’s
New Collegiate Dictionary: (G. & C. Merriam Col, Publishers;
Springfield, Mass., U.S.A., 1961). 45 Please
note: Jesus was still “God” even in His brought forth and incarnated form for
the simple reason that HE is of divine origin. He is not a created being, and
so, must always and rightfully be considered “God.” Jesus is also God because
He still has all the attributes of God albeit now existing in the form of two
individuals. I am not taking anything away from Christ’s divinity by
suggesting these things. But we simply must admit and understand that Christ
has “changed” and “sacrificed” a great deal in order to meet us in our fallen
(lost) state and to redeem us to the status of “Sons and Daughters of God.”
This is a mysteriously Wonderful fact, that
Christ would part with and sacrifice His complete Oneness with/as God
in order to save you and I! What love is this?! 46 This text
reveals that the “human nature” and the “divine (Spirit) nature” of Christ
are separated. It also shows that
Christ could have used His divine
nature to overcome temptation (this was
Christ’s biggest and most difficult temptation and the one the Devil
sought to convince Christ to do) but, as we saw earlier, if Christ had used His divine power—we would have been
lost. 47 It is very
doubtful that all of the redeemed
will “see” God the Father face to face. There is a special group of people that will have this honor and these are
described as the 144,000. These chosen ones will so fully partake of the
nature of Christ that they will be allowed into the very presence of the
Father. In 1T, p. 698, speaking of heaven after the second coming of Christ, we see the Temple—God’s
dwelling place—and Jesus declares that “Only the 144,000 enter this place.”
In fact, the names of the 144,000 are described as engraved in tables of
stone in letters of gold within this Temple. These people, I believe, are the
ones who will actually be
“reigning” with Christ. 48 Interestingly,
the shout, voice, and trumpet are ALL the voice of the
Lord (for “shout” see Jer. 25:30,
for “voice” see Jn. 5:25-29, and
for “trumpet” see Rev. 4:12 &
1:9, 10). God bless, Ron Beaulieu |