Have people rightly understood the primary doctrine on Father, Son & Holy Ghost?

[BluePrints]

Have people rightly understood the primary doctrine on Father, Son & Holy Ghost? Why is it important to every other doctrine, and what is the connection to them?

Words and phrases have been created, like "trinity", "una substantia", "perfectly one superabound", "essence", among others, and yet seem to have only created confusion everywhere, and a 'thousand' factions and definitions. What is the truth? How can a person know? Well, turning to Jhn. 17:17, it says,

Joh 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.​

An all new resource on this topic has been made available for discussion, questions, and prayerful consideration on the very words of God as found in scripture and while also, considering some additional historical materials as well - Godhead - The Eternal Heavenly Trio : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Questions like,

What is the name of God?​

​

Does 1 Jhn. 5:7 belong in scripture, and if so, what does it mean in context?​

​

Who is Jesus?​

​

What about the Holy Ghost / Spirit, is this a Personal Being or a non-Personal Being, something only rather than a someone?​

​

Where is God? Is God in the sinner? Is God in the tree, and / or the rock? Does the Bible teach pantheism, or panentheism, or are those teachings dangerous and counterproductive to the Gospel in salvation / redemption?​

​

Are there three, two, or one Persons / Beings? If more than one, how are they one?​

As always, please feel free to comment, ask questions, participate in discussion, engage in prayerful bible study together! Take the time to follow scriptural counsel and read the material before entering into conversation, Pro. 18:13,17, and come to listen to what is being presented, as in Job before speaking. There is no need to rush into anything when discussing such weighty matters. Better to ask clarifying questions, and listen to one another, and then go to the Bible together.

I will be glad to discuss this topic with those also desiring to do so.

 

[Lamb]

Here's a great video on the Trinity:

 

[BluePrints]

Here's a great video on the Trinity:

Did you consider the original linked material? Pro. 18:13,17?

If I consider the video, and time index it for discussion, will you do so with me about it?

 

[BluePrints]

Here's a great video on the Trinity:

As for instance:

Time Index - 0:50 - 0:52 - Henry Eyster Jacobs (November 10, 1844 – July 7, 1932 - Henry Eyster Jacobs - Wikipedia ) and his book "Elements of Religion" (1894 - Elements of religion : Jacobs, Henry Eyster, 1844-1932 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive ). This man was a Lutheran (- Henry Eyster Jacobs - Wikipedia ), and thus adheres to certain Lutheran ideology, which came ostensibly, and originally, from Romanism (Roman Catholicism), and thus his "trinity" is Roman.

The Roman Catholic "trinity" is erroneous and illogical for numerous reasons. First of all, the Roman "trinity" carries within its doctrine, the error of Tertullian, who described the Roman trinity as "una substantia" (one substance / essence - Trinity - Wikipedia ; or as Jacobs says, "simple Substance" (page 47)), and others later call "perfectly one superabound" - CATHOLIC LIBRARY: The Credo of the People of God (1968)

He (Jacobs) was also a spiritualist (immortal soul / spirit, pagan dualism) and proclaimed certain pantheist / panentheist ideology (while proclaiming the Personality of God, contra page 38 to the pagan pantheists), for in his book, it is stated,

"... [Page 41] As the soul, a finite, simple substance, is everywhere present in the body, so God, an infinite, simple Substance is everywhere present in the universe. ..." - Elements of religion : Jacobs, Henry Eyster, 1844-1932 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive​

Immortal Soul / Spirit theology stems from the enemy of all souls, and may be considered here - Sincerely Dead Dying, To Know Jesus by brother Aaron Earnest : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

As to the omnipresence of God the Father, this was already addressed in the OP linked materials, as for instance on pages 59-60:

"... [page 59] God is omnipresent through omniscience (Psa. 139:1-24 KJB). What does the Bible say, where God [the Father] actually is?​

​

Matthew 6:9 KJB - After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. (See also Luk. 11:2 KJB)​

​

Matthew 16:17 KJB - And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.​

​

The 3rd “heaven”, also known as “paradise”, and God’s “garden” of heavenly “eden”, is a real tangible place, just beyond the first (atmosphere; Gen. 1:20 KJB) and second heavens (local Sol system; Gen. 1:14-19 KJB), filled with living beings (Eze. 28:13; Luk. 23:43; 2 Cor. 12:2,4; Rev. 2:7, 12:12, 22:2,14 KJB). [page 59-60]​

​

The Father dwells there “in heaven” (Mat. 5:16,45,48, 6:1,9, 7:11,21, 10:32,33, 12:50, 16:17, 18:10,14,19, 23:9; Mar. 11:25,26; Luk. 11:3, Jhn. 12:28, 17:1; 1 Jhn. 5:7 KJB), though by His omniscient mind (Job 21:22, 40:2; Psa. 113:5-6; Isa. 40:13-14, 46:9-10; Rom. 11:34; 1 Cor. 2:16 KJB) is everywhere present (omnipresent; 1 Kin. 8:27,39; 2 Chr. 2:6, 6:18,30; Psa. 11:4, 14:2, 53:2; Pro. 15:11 KJB) by His all-knowing (Psa. 139:1-24 KJB). He is a “Person” (Job 13:8; Heb. 1:3 KJB), of which His Son (Jesus) is the “express image” of.​

​

God is local (Gen. 4:16; Exo. 19:17,21, 20:21, 33:14-15; Num. 23:15; Deu. 5:5; 1 Kin. 19:11 KJB),​

has dwelt among mankind (Exo. 25:8, 29:43-45; Lev. 26:11-12; 1 Kin. 6:11-13, 8:13; 2 Chr. 6:2,18; Psa. 132:14; Mic. 1:2; Hab. 2:20; Zec. 2:10; Rev. 21:3 KJB) ..." - Godhead - The Eternal Heavenly Trio : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive​

Nowhere in scripture is the Godhead said to be of "one substance". More on this later.

The rest of the video may be discussed in each of its Time Indexes.

 

[Lamb]

Did you consider the original linked material? Pro. 18:13,17?

If I consider the video, and time index it for discussion, will you do so with me about it?

The trinity is not up for debate here on CH. It is a core belief for Christians.

 

[BluePrints]

The trinity is not up for debate here on CH. It is a core belief for Christians.

I hear what you are saying, but if I may point out, that I am posting (as I am allowed to by this forums own regulation, correct? - Site Rules as I saw no regulation posted that stated it is not allowed, correct, or am I mistaken, and if so, please point me to the correct regulation that is posted, and it would be appreciated) in the "Non-Trinitarian & Non-Credal Discussions", in the "World Religion & Speculative Theology" section of the forums. This is the correct place to have such discussions, is it not? Or, are you saying that the position of the forums on the 'Nicaean Trinitarianism' cannot be questioned / discussed, at all (ever), by anyone, from either a scriptural and / or historical consideration?

I am aware that the forum itself is "Nicaean Trinitarian" (ie. Roman Catholic) in its credalism. I accept that is this forum's position. I was very honest in my enrollment in answering the question of whether or not I agreed with that position. My answer, respectfully, and yet clearly, was "No," I do not agree with that position, as it is in error, and out of harmony with scripture (ie. the Bible).

The position that the forums have taken may indeed have a certain length of history behind it, as well as a certain level of support from varied writers, theologians, scholars, but those things do not guarantee the truthfulness / rightness of those stated positions (the question then is raised, "What does determine what is truth from error?"). In other words, error hoary with age does not ever sanctify the error into the truth (that is a logical fallacy, often called 'argumentum ad antiquitatem / traditionem'). In other words, the amount of persons who have adhered or accepted an error, does not ever sanctify the error into the truth (that is also a logical fallacy, such as 'ad majorem', 'ad populum', at the least).

As you can see, I am not "trinitarian" in the Roman Catholic definition of the word. You are aware that there are multiple definitions of that word, correct? The OP linked material provided this in brief, as for instance:

"... [Page 189] Tertullian; Against Praxeas, Chapter XXV (25) - The Paraclete, or Holy Ghost. He is Distinct from the Father and the Son as to Their Personal Existence. One and Inseparable from Them as to Their Divine Nature. Other Quotations Out of St. John's Gospel.​

​

[Latin] “... Ita connexus Patris in Filio, et Filii in Paracleto, tres efficit cohaerentes, alterum ex altero, qui tres unum sint, non unus. ..." dynaXML Error: Invalid Document ynchronizedEN/anf.000073.Tertullian. AgainstPraxeas.html;chunk.id—00000053​

​

[English] *... Thus the connection of the Father in the Son, and of the Son in the Paraclete, produces three coherent Persons, who are yet distinct One from Another. These Three are one347essence, not one Person,348 ..." ..." - Godhead - The Eternal Heavenly Trio : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive​

"... [Page 496, emphasis supplied (bold & underline)] Wikipedia – Trinity:​

​

“... The word “trinity” is derived from Latin trinitas, meaning “the number three, a triad, tri”. This abstract noun is formed from the adjective trinus (three each, threefold, triple),[21] as the word unitas is the abstract noun formed from unus (one). [Page 496-407]​

​

The corresponding word in Greek is tριάς, meaning “a set of three” or “the number three”.[22] The first recorded use of this Greek word in Christian theology was by Theophilus of Antioch in about the year of 170. …​

​

Tertullian, a Latin theologian who wrote in the early 3rd century, is credited as being the first to use the Latin words “Trinity”,[26] “person” and “substance”[27] to explain that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are “tres personae, una substantia”.[28] While “personae” is often translated as “persons,” the Latin word personae is better understood as referring to roles as opposed to individual centers of consciousness. ...” - Trinity - Wikipedia​

​

Already, a thinking person can see at least 2 varying definitions, [1] between Theophilus of Antioch (which is where they were first called “Christians”; Act. 11:26 KJB), and [2] the later Latin Tertullian, which included “una substantia” (one / single substance; false doctrine). There is nowhere in scripture (KJB) which states that all three Persons / Beings are of “one substance”. If a person desires to use the word “trinity” without the “una substantia” (one substance) of Tertullian and other such things from the Roman definition (denying such as error), and simply means it as ‘three Persons / Beings of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost / Spirit all working together in perfect harmony’ under the Hebrew word “Elohiym” (“God/s”) and sharing the family name “JEHOVAH” as “Godhead” over all creation, that is not really an issue with this author, but most do not mean it that way. ..." - Godhead - The Eternal Heavenly Trio : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive​

... to be continued ...

 

[BluePrints]

The trinity is not up for debate here on CH. It is a core belief for Christians.

... continued ...

Others, learned in the material of scripture and history, have also made the same distinctions:

"... [Page 497] A.T. Jones, himself, a lawyer, and one-time Seventh-day Adventist, understanding words and definitions, also makes the distinction, between one “trinity” definitional use (Rome’s) and another (others):​

​

Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, Volume 69, May 31, 1892, page 337.13:​

​

“[page 337.13] BY ELDER A. T. JONES ...​

​

... After citing “historical” statements which show that the Roman Catholic religion might be the religion of this nation; which establish the righteousness of religious test-oaths as a qualification for office; which require belief in the doctrine of the Trinity—the Catholic doctrine of the Trinity, of course—and in the inspiration of the Old and New Testaments; and which establish the righteousness of Sunday laws,—after citing statements which establish the legality of all these religious things, then the court quotes from the First Amendment to the Constitution that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” and upon this, flatly declares:—ARSH May 31, 1892, page 337.13 ...” - https://text.egwwritings.org/read/1058.19 ..." - Godhead - The Eternal Heavenly Trio : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive​

​

This is common knowledge (or at least should be at the very least) in that the "trinity" of, say, the LDS (Mormon) is not the same definitionally as the "trinity" of the Roman Catholic or Lutheran. There are other variations as well among those who call themselves "Christian" (and this is not to say automatically that such are not, for that is determined by other factors).

From the evidence and documented sources in the linked material, as is also in general knowledge base of the world (see Google Books, Google Scholar, Internet Archive, other Libraries (digital or physical), etc., it has not always been the case that "it" (Nicaean Trinitarianism) was a "core belief" of "Christians". Nicaean council itself was literally first begun in the 4th century - First Council of Nicaea - Wikipedia when the power of Rome was prevailing everywhere, consider "The Two Republics" by A. T. Jones - SDA A T Jones The Two Republics : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive or consider "Truth Triumphant" by Benjamin G. Wilkinson - Doctrine Bible Benjamin G Wilkinson Truth Triumphant : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive or several other histories that could be provided.

If something cannot be discussed in a peaceful rational and even prayerful fashion, one begins to question "Why?" and what is the motivation behind the "curtain" / "veil" that is over it? What is it that is not meant to be seen and understood into the broad daylight?

Joh_18:20 Jesus answered him, I spake openly to the world; I ever taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said nothing.​

Is that an example that Jesus gave? In other words, Jesus, laid everything bare (even unto Himself exposed in nakedness upon the cruel cross) for all the world, and the unfallen worlds to witness, so that no confusion, no mistaken notion, would be had about whom God is.

I am not expecting you to necessarily answer the questions asked. They are more for internal thinking, but if you feel you desire to answer them, I will read your responses and consider them in the light of the scriptures (Isa. 8:20). Perhaps, you may have a misunderstanding about what I believe on this matter. If you have some questions for me, I would be glad to consider them in response on this subject. I mean you, nor anyone here, any ill will.

 

[BluePrints]

The trinity is not up for debate here on CH. It is a core belief for Christians.

Maybe I should ask this:

If I am not allowed to question / discuss the Forum's position in a negative light (ie. contrary), then am I allowed to discuss my own position without getting into the Forum's position (where possible)?

In other words, if I cannot ask this forum about its position (ie. in question / dicussion fashion), is it possible for others (including yourself) to ask me about my position (no one has asked me anything, really as of yet about my position, and there seems to be some assumptions (incorrect ones) going on, but perhaps not), and perhaps, in addition, show the differences between the two?

 

[Frankj]

Maybe I should ask this:

If I am not allowed to question / discuss the Forum's position in a negative light (ie. contrary), then am I allowed to discuss my own position without getting into the Forum's position (where possible)?

In other words, if I cannot ask this forum about its position (ie. in question / dicussion fashion), is it possible for others (including yourself) to ask me about my position (no one has asked me anything, really as of yet about my position, and there seems to be some assumptions (incorrect ones) going on, but perhaps not), and perhaps, in addition, show the differences between the two?

Independent from Lamb's answer whatever it may be, I'm interested in where you are intending to go with this, what are you trying to accomplish and for what purpose?

 

[BluePrints]

Independent from Lamb's answer whatever it may be, I'm interested in where you are intending to go with this, what are you trying to accomplish and for what purpose?

The OP's intent was to have all understand what the truth of the matter (on the subject) is, from scripture, in a study together, and a prayerful discussion / searching of the matter. The purpose is so that all may come to have a "love of the truth" (2 Thes. 2:10), and that "truth" (Deu. 32:4; Psa. 25:10, 119:142,151; Jhn. 14:6, 17:17; 1 Jhn. 5:6) is found in the Bible. If that, by so doing, means that certain things fall away that may have long been accepted in truth's place, but are found to be out of harmony with that "truth", then all the better, for error never helped anyone in the long run, and usually attracts other errors in an ever widening sinkhole. I (and my position) are not excluded from being discussed in that same light and purpose. For instance, if I (my position) were to be in error, I would not desire to remain in it either, but to "come unto the knowledge of the truth" (1 Tim. 2:4), but how could such as I know that 'I am in error' (as others may assume, but usually without even asking) unless someone show me from scripture, rather than from a seemingly 'pious' and long-held 'infallible creed' that 'shall not be questioned (ever)'. Even Jesus accepted the questions of His disciples about many matters and took the time to help them come to understanding. Jesus wanted them to understand about the Father, Himself (Son) and Holy Ghost and their relation to each other and to the disciples.

 

[Frankj]

The OP's intent was to have all understand what the truth of the matter (on the subject) is, from scripture, in a study together, and a prayerful discussion / searching of the matter. The purpose is so that all may come to have a "love of the truth" (2 Thes. 2:10), and that "truth" (Deu. 32:4; Psa. 25:10, 119:142,151; Jhn. 14:6, 17:17; 1 Jhn. 5:6) is found in the Bible. If that, by so doing, means that certain things fall away that may have long been accepted in truth's place, but are found to be out of harmony with that "truth", then all the better, for error never helped anyone in the long run, and usually attracts other errors in an ever widening sinkhole. I (and my position) are not excluded from being discussed in that same light and purpose. For instance, if I (my position) were to be in error, I would not desire to remain in it either, but to "come unto the knowledge of the truth" (1 Tim. 2:4), but how could such as I know that 'I am in error' (as others may assume, but usually without even asking) unless someone show me from scripture, rather than from a seemingly 'pious' and long-held 'infallible creed' that 'shall not be questioned (ever)'. Even Jesus accepted the questions of His disciples about many matters and took the time to help them come to understanding. Jesus wanted them to understand about the Father, Himself (Son) and Holy Ghost and their relation to each other and to the disciples.

When you say "Jesus wanted them to understand about the Father, Himself (Son) and Holy Ghost and their relation to each other and to the disciples." I have to ask:
What is Your understanding of this?

Because that seems to be what you are trying to promote and convince others that your understanding is the right one and others that their understanding is the wrong one.

In my experience this leads only to the setting of one Christian against another, introducing hostilities where there should be none. Something that seems to be an increasing trend in the Church today with denominations and sects being set against one another and draining the power of the Church so that it has less and less influence on out civilization. The Church has become what Jesus directly warned against, a house divided against itself.

As I see it, and not necessarily the only right way of seeing it. I tend to look for truth as proven by the results of practicing it, not the theory.

BTW, totally aside from this discussion your screen name suggests you may be a fellow maker of things, are you?

 

[BluePrints]

When you say "Jesus wanted them to understand about the Father, Himself (Son) and Holy Ghost and their relation to each other and to the disciples." I have to ask:
What is Your understanding of this? ...

My position is the OP linked materials position, as standing upon the scriptures therein provided, for any to consider as well (Pro. 18;13,17). My understanding, is standing under the Bible (Isa. 8:20; 1 Pet. 4:11) as final authority in all matters of faith and practice. I do not adhere to "private interpretation" (2 Pet. 1:20) of the scripture, and am forbidden to do so, since it is the Author of scripture, which interprets the scripture (Gen. 40:8), and given in such a fashion that the words of God explain themselves, perfectly (Jhn. 10:35), and are internally defined, "line upon line" (Isa. 28:10,13). I (and any really) am only allowed to 'amen' ('second') the scriptures, in what they say (Isa. 8:20; 1 Pet. 4:11).

There is a chapter on each; speaking of the Father (Chapter's 3-4), the Son (Jesus; Chapters 5-7) and the Holy Ghost / Spirit (Chapters 8-9) in the provided and linked material. Here is a small excerpt on each [pages 121-123, edited]:

"... [Page 121] QUESTION: WHO MADE THE WORLD, THE HEAVEN (SKY) & EARTH, AND ALL THAT IS ON IT?​

​

GOD – ELOHIYM (THREE PERSONS/BEINGS THAT WORK TOGETHER IN HARMONY, AS FAMILY, AS MARRIAGE, AS TEAM, AS CHORD)​

​

“Elohiym” (Gen. 1:1 HOT, etc.) x (a lot) (true plural, 3 or greater form), “us” x 4 (plural pronoun), “our” x 3 (plural pronoun): Gen. 1:26, 3:22, 11:7; Isa. 6:8; “we” x 3 (plural pronoun): Jhn. 3:11; “Creators” x 1 (Ecc. 12:1 HOT, “בוראיך”) (plural pronoun) (see also Job 33:4; Isa. 43:7; Rom. 11:36; 1 Cor. 8:6; Heb. 1:2, 2:10; Rev. 4:11), “Makers” x 3 (Job 35:10 HOT, “עשׂי”) & (Psa. 149:2 HOT, “בעשׂיו”) & (Isa. 54:5 HOT, “עשׂיך”) (plural pronoun); “Holy Ones” x 1 (Pro. 9:10 HOT, “קדשׁים”) (plural pronoun); &c; Verbs are plural in association with Elohiym: Gen. 20:13, “התעו” (wander) connected to Elohiym is plural; Gen. 35:7, “נגלו” (revealed) connected to Elohiym is plural; Deu. 4:7, “קרבים” (nigh) connected to Elohiym is plural; Jos. 24:19, “קדשׁים” (Holy) connected to Elohiym is plural; 2 Sam. 7:23, “הלכו” (went) connected to Elohiym is plural; Psa. 58:11, “שׁפטים” (judge) connected to Elohiym is plural; Pro. 30:3-4, “קדשׁים” (holy) connected to vs 4 with the “name” (of the Father), and that of “son’s name”. Even the word “Adonai” (“לאדני”) is given mostly / majority in the plural (Gen. 18:30; Exo. 34:23; Deu. 10:17; Jos. 3:11,13; Psa. 45:11; 114:7; 135:5; Mal. 1:6).​

​

(A.) Genesis 1:1 KJB - In the beginning God (H430; Elohiym, true plural, 3) created the heaven and the earth. (“God said”, “God made”, “God saw”)​

​

(B.) Zechariah 3:2 KJB - And the LORD said unto Satan, The LORD rebuke thee, O Satan; even the LORD that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee: is not this a brand plucked out of the fire?​

​

(C.) 1 John 5:7 KJB - For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. (“agree in one”, parallel in 1 Jhn 5:8 KJB) ​

​

(D.) Ecclesiastes 4:12 KJB - "... a threefold cord is not quickly broken." [Page 121-122]​

​

(1.) The Person / Being of the Father (Mat. 6:9; Luk. 11:2 KJB), JEHOVAH (“the LORD”, Gen. 19:24b; Zec. 3:2b KJB), the “Ancient of Days” (Dan. 7:9,13,22 KJB), “the only true God” (Jhn. 17:3 KJB; “τον μονον αληθινον θεον”), “God” (Psa. 45:7b.; Heb. 1:9b.; Jhn. 1:1b KJB, “τον θεον”), speaking to the Son: ​

​

(A.) Revelation 4:11 KJB - Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.​

​

(B.) Revelation 10:6 KJB - And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer:​

​

(C). Genesis 1:6 KJB - "And God said, ..."​

​

(2.) The Person / Being of the Son, Jesus JEHOVAH ((H3444; H3068) “ישׁועתה ליהוה”; Gen. 49:18; Exo. 14:13; 2 Chr. 20:17; Jon. 2:10; Psa. 119:174 HOT) or JEHOVAH Immanuel ((Psa. 46:7,11) Psa. 46:8,12 HOT, (H3068; H5973; H430), “יהוה ... עמנו... אלהי”), “the LORD” (Gen. 19:24a.; Zec. 3:2a.; Heb. 1:10; Psa. 102:12,25-27; Heb. 13:4-8), “the son of man” (Dan. 7:13), “the only begotten” (Jhn. 1:14,18, 3:16,18; Heb. 11:17; 1 Jhn. 4:9, is basically monogene (μονογενῆ; Jhn. 3:16; Heb. 11:17; 1 Jhn. 4:9) or monogenes (μονογενὴς; Jhn. 1:18) or monogenous (μονογενοῦς; Jhn. 1:14, 3:18)), “the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father” (2 Jhn. 1:3; Κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ πατρός), “the express image of his (God, The Father’s) person” (Heb. 1:3; χαρακτὴρ τῆς ὑποστάσεως αὐτοῦ), being Himself also “God” (Jhn. 1:1c., “θεος ην ο λογος”; Jhn. 1:14,18, 3:16,18; Heb. 11:17; 1 Jhn. 4:9; Psa. 47:5a.; Heb. 1:8,9a.), even “O God” (Heb. 1:9, “ο θεος”), and the “son of man” (Dan. 7:13), the “fellow” (Zec. 13:7), who acted, “made” all things (Jhn. 1:1-3; Eph. 3:9; Col. 1:16; Heb. 1:1-3), on behalf of the Father’s will (Pro. 8:22-36; Jhn. 5:30, 6:38), though, a father in His own right (Isa. 9:6; Heb. 2:13; Isa. 8:16,18; Jhn. 13:33), and yet also the perfect Son (Num. 19:2; “without spot, wherein is no blemish, and upon which never came yoke”), the “Angel (Messenger)” (Mal. 3:1b) “of the LORD (Father)” (Zec. 3:1); “Michael” (Dan. 10:13,21, 12:1; 1 Thes. 4:16; Jud. 1:9; Rev. 12:7), the great “I am” (Jhn. 8:58; ἐγὼ εἰμί), see also Jhn. 4:26, 6:20,35,41,48,51, 8:12,18,24,28,58, 9:5, 10:7,9,11,14, 11:25, 14:6, 15:1,5, 18:5,6,8, 13:19: ​

​

(A.) John 1:1 KJB - In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.​

​

John 1:2 KJB - The same was in the beginning with God.​

​

John 1:3 KJB - All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.​

​

(B.) Ephesians 3:9 KJB - "... God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:"​

​

(C.) Colossians 1:16 KJB - For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:​

​

(D.) Hebrews 1:1 KJB - God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,​

​

Hebrews 1:2 KJB - Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; [Page 122-123]​

​

(E.) Genesis 1:7 KJB - "And God made ..."​

​

(3.) The Person / Being of the Holy Ghost / Spirit, the “another Comforter” (Jhn. 14:16 KJB), the “Spirit of truth.” (Jhn. 14:17 KJB), “Comforter ... the Holy Ghost” (Jhn. 14:26 KJB), the “LORD” (Zec. 3:2c KJB), and a father in His own right (Mat. 1:18; Luk. 1:35; 1 Pet. 1:23; Jhn. 1:13, 3:3-8; 1 Jhn. 3:9, 4:7, 5:1,4,18 KJB), yet differing than the Father or the Son (Isa. 48:16; Jhn. 14:26 KJB): ​

​

(A.) Job 33:4 KJB - The Spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life.​

​

(B.) Genesis 1:2 KJB - "... the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters."​

​

(C.) Genesis 1:31 KJB - And God saw ..." - Godhead - The Eternal Heavenly Trio : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive​

Is this what you were seeking to know about my position?

 

[Frankj]

When you say you do not agree with private interpretation you seem to use Bible verses that are interpreted into English from the Greek they were written in which was an interpretation of the Hebrew (Aramaic as such), and then re interpreted again as our language changed over time, in which they were originally spoken but not written in.

English is one of the most difficult languages to actually express exact thinking since there are so may ways it can be understood according to the mindset of the person hearing or reading it at the time he hears or reads it.

This is why we must express our own thoughts about about the nuanced meanings of scripture instead of simply quoting scripture and saying something like 'See, this proves I'm right' while another will use the same scripture and say 'No this proves me right and you wrong'.

All of us have different world views although sometimes we don't realize it and each of us will understand things differently, even if at a subtle level, while thinking that others have the exact same mental processes as ourselves.

 

[BluePrints]

When you say you do not agree with private interpretation ...

That is correct. The OP is not about "private interpretation", but the subject of the Godhead, as stated, "... the primary doctrine on Father, Son & Holy Ghost". Please remain on subject, it would be appreciated.

... Bible verses that are interpreted into English from the Greek they were written in which was an interpretation of the Hebrew (Aramaic as such) ...

You have a confusion of the word "interpretation" and "translation". You also have a slight confusion on Hebrew & another language Syriack (aka 'Aramaic').

Again, it is God (Gen. 40:8) that interprets the scriptures, "line upon line" (Isa. 28:10,13), and the scriptures are inspired of God (2 Tim. 3:16-17; 2 Pet. 1:21, &c.), and since the OT was given by the inspiration of God in the Hebrew language, and some small portions in Syriack (aka 'Aramaic'), it is God who is able to inspire the NT authors, to translate, and utilize those scriptures into koine Greek and be inspired to write the rest of the NT in the same, and some Latinized Greek, and also later through such persons as Tyndale, Genevans, and the King James Bible committee, to translate the preserved words of God into English, the words themselves in each language are still defined internally, by God, not by "private interpretation".

As the word of God is inspired, preserved and translated, God does the same by the Gospel to believing mankind, inspiring them, preserving them and then translating them. All of the action is originated by God.

Now, if you will please, remain upon the OP subject, as stated, "... the primary doctrine on Father, Son & Holy Ghost".

English is one of the most difficult languages to actually express exact thinking since there are so may ways it can be understood according to the mindset of the person hearing or reading it at the time he hears or reads it.

Again, it is not within the prerogative of mankind to interpret God's words. That is God's prerogative alone. The meaning of the English of the King James Bible (or of the OT Hebrew & Syriack, or of the NT koine Greek and Latinized Greek) is understood within the pages of the Bible itself. Several examples could be provided, here, but that is not the subject of this thread (at all). Again, see "line upon line" (Isa. 28;10,13).

Now, if you will please, remain upon the OP subject, as stated, "... the primary doctrine on Father, Son & Holy Ghost".

This is why we must express our own thoughts about about the nuanced meanings of scripture instead of simply quoting scripture and saying something like 'See, this proves I'm right' while another will use the same scripture and say 'No this proves me right and you wrong'.

No. I am not interested in mankind's thoughts. I am interested in God's thoughts, which is found in the inspired scriptures (the Bible).

Isa 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.​

​

1Pe 4:11 If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.​

​

Now, if you will please, remain upon the OP subject, as stated, "... the primary doctrine on Father, Son & Holy Ghost".

All of us have different world views ...

I am not interested in any "world" "views". I am only interested in what God says upon the OP topic. The world is fallen. God's word is true from the beginning (Psa. 119:160), and is truth (Jhn. 17:17) itself. What the "world" says, "thinks" or "does" is contrary to Heaven and the words of God. The "world" is at enmity with God.

Now, if you will please, remain upon the OP subject, as stated, "... the primary doctrine on Father, Son & Holy Ghost".

although sometimes we don't realize it and each of us will understand things differently, even if at a subtle level, while thinking that others have the exact same mental processes as ourselves.

Whether 'you' or 'I', or even 'they' exist or not, the word of God is eternal, and does not ever rely upon the understanding or misunderstanding of any creature. It is from heaven (Exo.20:22; Psa. 119:89), living on its own (Heb. 4:12) and is the instructor of mankind (2 Tim. 3:16-17), not the other way 'round.

Now, if you will please, remain upon the OP subject, as stated, "... the primary doctrine on Father, Son & Holy Ghost".

 

[Webster]

As long as I can remember @BluePrints - by the way, its' good to see a fellow Adventist here! - its always been....
(1) God the Father
(2) God the Son, Jesus Christ
(3) God, the Holy Spirit

We know from Scripture that the term Godhead is found thrice - Acts 17:29, Romans 1:20 and Colossians 2:9. We also know that in John, Jesus Christ spoke of Him and God being one and the same - "In the beginning there was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God." (John 1:1).

Think about the wording there, my friend; if God the Father and Jesus Christ, His Son, were completely separate, why did then the Apostle John, write about the Word being with God if they're separate? By inference, he's saying they are one and the same.

Two thirds of the Godhead or the Trinity.

Then we have the third part of the Godhead, the Holy Spirit. Now, I can't speak of what others here will say, but I believe the Holy Spirit is as just as much a part of the Godhead as Jesus Christ is. The Holy Spirit to me is a personal being, a Comforter and Intercessor, helping lead me towards the straight and narrow path we must all travel as Christians no matter our denomination. He is eternal; He was there in the beginning and is there today just as He was to Peter and the crowds in the Upper Room on the day of Pentecost.

He helps me find solace when untoward things happen, He helps me find those nuggets of Scripture that I may've not noticed before and He helps guide me in my walk with Christ.

He is as much a part of the Godhead as Christ and the Father are.

 

[Webster]

Now, from an Adventist perspective, there's a really good article that talks about the Holy Spirit through the eyes of the Spirit of Prophecy. (For non-Adventists, anytime you hear a reference to the "Spirit of Prophecy" it references prophetess and SDA co-founder Ellen G. White)

Ellen White and the Personhood of the Holy Spirit

This article explores Ellen G. White’s understanding of the Holy Spirit against the background of early Seventh-day Adventist theology and experience.

www.ministrymagazine.org

Very thought-provoking article, @BluePrints, as one definitely worth reading.

 

[Frankj]

That is correct. The OP is not about "private interpretation", but the subject of the Godhead, as stated, "... the primary doctrine on Father, Son & Holy Ghost". Please remain on subject, it would be appreciated.


You have a confusion of the word "interpretation" and "translation". You also have a slight confusion on Hebrew & another language Syriack (aka 'Aramaic').

Again, it is God (Gen. 40:8) that interprets the scriptures, "line upon line" (Isa. 28:10,13), and the scriptures are inspired of God (2 Tim. 3:16-17; 2 Pet. 1:21, &c.), and since the OT was given by the inspiration of God in the Hebrew language, and some small portions in Syriack (aka 'Aramaic'), it is God who is able to inspire the NT authors, to translate, and utilize those scriptures into koine Greek and be inspired to write the rest of the NT in the same, and some Latinized Greek, and also later through such persons as Tyndale, Genevans, and the King James Bible committee, to translate the preserved words of God into English, the words themselves in each language are still defined internally, by God, not by "private interpretation".

As the word of God is inspired, preserved and translated, God does the same by the Gospel to believing mankind, inspiring them, preserving them and then translating them. All of the action is originated by God.

Now, if you will please, remain upon the OP subject, as stated, "... the primary doctrine on Father, Son & Holy Ghost".


Again, it is not within the prerogative of mankind to interpret God's words. That is God's prerogative alone. The meaning of the English of the King James Bible (or of the OT Hebrew & Syriack, or of the NT koine Greek and Latinized Greek) is understood within the pages of the Bible itself. Several examples could be provided, here, but that is not the subject of this thread (at all). Again, see "line upon line" (Isa. 28;10,13).

Now, if you will please, remain upon the OP subject, as stated, "... the primary doctrine on Father, Son & Holy Ghost".


No. I am not interested in mankind's thoughts. I am interested in God's thoughts, which is found in the inspired scriptures (the Bible).

Isa 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.​

​

1Pe 4:11 If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.​

​

Now, if you will please, remain upon the OP subject, as stated, "... the primary doctrine on Father, Son & Holy Ghost".


I am not interested in any "world" "views". I am only interested in what God says upon the OP topic. The world is fallen. God's word is true from the beginning (Psa. 119:160), and is truth (Jhn. 17:17) itself. What the "world" says, "thinks" or "does" is contrary to Heaven and the words of God. The "world" is at enmity with God.

Now, if you will please, remain upon the OP subject, as stated, "... the primary doctrine on Father, Son & Holy Ghost".


Whether 'you' or 'I', or even 'they' exist or not, the word of God is eternal, and does not ever rely upon the understanding or misunderstanding of any creature. It is from heaven (Exo.20:22; Psa. 119:89), living on its own (Heb. 4:12) and is the instructor of mankind (2 Tim. 3:16-17), not the other way 'round.

Now, if you will please, remain upon the OP subject, as stated, "... the primary doctrine on Father, Son & Holy Ghost".

You don't accept (believe in) the Trinity or the Nicene Creed by your own profile, I do.

The Nicene Creed states what I believe and it doesn't use a single quote of scripture to do it, it just states what is believed without trying to justify or confuse it by endless quotes that don't really state what the belief actually is.

Can you do the same for what you believe, just state your personal Creed of beliefs as simply and clearly as the Nicene Creed does for those of us who believe it?

 

[BluePrints]

... We know from Scripture that the term Godhead is found thrice - Acts 17:29, Romans 1:20 and Colossians 2:9.

Not in question. Already addressed in the linked OP material page 331

"... [page 331] QUESTION 008: Is the word “Godhead” used anywhere in the scriptures?

ANSWER 008: The answer will depend on the English translation one is utilizing, but if one is utilizing the King James Bible (KJB, or ‘AV1611’ or subsequent editions thereof), the word “Godhead” appears 3 times in the NT texts, referring to that which is Deity or Divine:

Act. 17:29 KJB (translated from [G2304], “θειον”, “theion”);​

Rom. 1:20 KJB (translated from [G2305], “θειοτης”, “theiotes”);​

Col. 2:9 KJB (translated from [G2320], “θεοτητος”, “theotetos”).​

Acts 17:29 KJB - Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device.​

​

Acts 17:29 GNT TR - γενος ουν υπαρχοντες του θεου ουκ οφειλομεν νομιζειν χρυσω η αργυρω η λιθω χαραγματι τεχνης και ενθυμησεως ανθρωπου το θειον ειναι ομοιον​

​

Romans 1:20 KJB - For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:​

​

Romans 1:20 GNT TR - τα γαρ αορατα αυτου απο κτισεως κοσμου τοις ποιημασιν νοουμενα καθοραται η τε αιδιος αυτου δυναμις και θειοτης εις το ειναι αυτους αναπολογητους​

​

Colossians 2:9 KJB - For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.​

​

Colossians 2:9 GNT TR - οτι εν αυτω κατοικει παν το πληρωμα της θεοτητος σωματικως ..." - Godhead - The Eternal Heavenly Trio : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive​

We also know that in John, Jesus Christ spoke of Him and God being one and the same - "In the beginning there was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God." (John 1:1).

No. Jhn. 1:1 says nothing about Jesus ("Him") and the Father ("God") "being one and the same". It clearly says that there are two Persons / Beings, two whom are "God" in their own right, and thus "God" (Word / Jesus / Son / only begotten] was "with" "[the] God" [Father], and the English and koine Greek are explicit in this:

"... [page 363] John 1:1 KJB - In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.​

​

[Joh 1:1 εν αρχη ην ο λογος και ο λογος ην προς τον θεον και θεος ην ο λογος]​

[“The Word” was “God” who “was with” another, who is also “God”. “God” was “with” “[the] God”. That is two Gods, or two Persons / Beings both being identified as an individual “God”, with one next to and with the other. The Holy Ghost is the third silent or Invisible Person / Being in the verse, Being the One Who Inspired the verse (2 Tim. 3:16-17; 2 Pet. 1:21 KJB), having been the Witness at Creation of the events between the Father (Who was with His Son) and Son (Who was with His Father); see also Pro. 8:22-31; Eph. 3:9; Col. 1:16; Heb. 1:1-3 KJB, &c.] ..." - Godhead - The Eternal Heavenly Trio : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

They are not "one and the same" - ever. Their very eternal natures precludes this, see Jhn. 17:3 (Father), and Jhn. 3:16 (Son).

Think about the wording there

Consider the written material (Pro. 18:13,17), already provided, as it already addresses the misconceptions many are carrying from the woman of Rev. 17.

, my friend;

Truly? Consider the OP linked material. The friends of Job at least gave opportunity for Job to speak his case and listened to his response.

if God the Father and Jesus Christ, His Son, were completely separate, why did then the Apostle John, write about the Word being with God if they're separate?

The word "with" in koine Greek or English, is clear. "God" (theos) [Son] was "with" (pros) "[the] God" (ton theon) [Father]. That is two Persons / Beings, God next to / with the God. The phrase "In the beginning" ties to Genesis, in which "God said" [the Father] speaks to another who is also there, "God made" [the Son], whom is accomplishing the will of the Father, even as Pro. 8 also shows:

Pro_8:30 Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him;​

They (two; Father & Son) are not "one and the same" - ever, for that would deny their eternal separate and individual natures (Jhn. 17:3 [Father] & Jhn. 3:16 [Son]).

... to be continued ...

 

[BluePrints]

... continued ...

By inference, he's saying they are one and the same.

No. There is no "inference" to the Two being "one and the same". That is coming from 'you', ("private interpretation"; 2 Pet. 1:20) and not the text (scripture) itself.

Two thirds of the Godhead or the Trinity.

Neither.

Then we have the third part of the Godhead, the Holy Spirit.

Never in question. Perhaps, consider following the counsel of scripture (Pro. 18:13,17) and take the time to consider the OP linked material, and then (afterwards) comment.

Now, I can't speak of what others here will say, but I believe the Holy Spirit is as just as much a part of the Godhead as Jesus Christ is.

Not in question, but I would be very careful in using the word "part of" in your definition, for if you truly believe that "Jesus Christ spoke of Him and God being one and the same", then you just advocated "partialism", which is an error.

The Holy Spirit to me is a personal being,

I am not interested, per se, in what the Holy Spirit is to 'you'. I am only interested in whom the Holy Ghost / Spirit is stated as Being in scripture. That the Holy Ghost / Spirit is a Personal Being is not in question by myself or the OP linked material. Will you at least read it?

a Comforter and Intercessor ...

The Holy Ghost / Spirit is "another Comforter", "αλλον παρακλητον", "allon parakleton" (Jhn. 14:16). Therefore, this Person / Being is also not "one and the same" as Jesus or the Father. He (the Holy Ghost / Spirit) is still yet (in addition to) "another", being the "third" of the "three". That the Holy Ghost / Spirit is "another Comforter" or His own as another "intercessor" is not in question by me, or the OP linked material. The Holy Ghost / Spirit takes the place of Jesus on Earth, and whereas Jesus intercedes in Heaven, the Holy Ghost / Spirit does so in the heart / mind / spirit of mankind:

Rom_8:26 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.​

​

Rom_8:27 And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God.​

​

Rom_8:34 Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.​

, helping lead me towards the straight and narrow path we must all travel as Christians no matter our denomination.

Then consider the linked OP material and see what the Holy Ghost / Spirit says to you after reading / considering it (prayerfully).

1Th 5:19 Quench not the Spirit.​

1Th 5:20 Despise not prophesyings.​

1Th 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.​

He is eternal;

Not in question by me or the OP linked material.

He was there in the beginning

Not in question by me or the OP linked material.

Gen 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.​

​

Gen 1:4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.​

and is there today just as He was to Peter and the crowds in the Upper Room on the day of Pentecost.

Not in question by me or the OP linked material.

He helps me find solace when untoward things happen, He helps me find those nuggets of Scripture that I may've not noticed before and He helps guide me in my walk with Christ.

Then consider the linked OP material and see what the Holy Ghost / Spirit says to you after reading / considering it (prayerfully).

1Th 5:19 Quench not the Spirit.​

1Th 5:20 Despise not prophesyings.​

1Th 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.​

He is as much a part of the Godhead as Christ and the Father are.

Not in question, but I would be very careful in using the word "part of" in your definition, for if you truly believe that "Jesus Christ spoke of Him and God being one and the same", then you just advocated "partialism", which is an error.

 

[BluePrints]

Now, from an Adventist perspective

I am not merely an "Adventist". I am a Seventh-day Adventist. There is a major difference. Catholics are also "Adventists". JW are also "Adventists". &c.

I am also not interested in "an Adventist perspective". I am only interested in the scriptural (Bible) perspective. It is infallible (Jhn. 10:35, 17:17, &c.). Mankind is not. For "Seventh-day Adventist" and statements by sister White on that, see pages 259-269 - Godhead - The Eternal Heavenly Trio : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

, there's a really good article

Have you considered the possibility that I have already read it, and contacted "Ministry Magazine", the "BRI", the "General Conference" and others and sent them the same linked OP material? As for "good", the Bible is clear about that. "God" is "good".

that talks about the Holy Spirit through the eyes of the Spirit of Prophecy.

If you had, in any way, considered the linked OP material, in any depth, you would have come across many statements in the linked OP material about the Holy Ghost / Spirit. See Chapter 14, section, Section 3. – The Statements on the Godhead, pages 269-327 [really starting on page 274], and in them, a diligent student, will find many statements on the Holy Ghost / Spirit. - Godhead - The Eternal Heavenly Trio : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

(For non-Adventists, anytime you hear a reference to the "Spirit of Prophecy" it references prophetess and SDA co-founder Ellen G. White)

That is incorrect. The phrase "Spirit of Prophecy" does not only reference "Ellen G. White", as a messenger of the LORD, since the Bible is clear, that the "spirit of prophecy" is actually "the testimony of Jesus":

Rev_19:10 And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.​

This "testimony" works through all the messengers of God, not just sister White. As for instance:

"... [page 147] Consider the immediate context of Rev. 1:10 KJB:​

​

John was on the Isle of Patmos for what reasons?​

​

Revelation 1:2 KJB - “... the word of God ... the testimony of Jesus Christ ...”​

​

Revelation 1:9 KJB - “... the word of God ... the testimony of Jesus Christ ...”​

​

It is even given in other places:​

​

Revelation 6:9 KJB - “... the word of God ... the testimony ...”​

​

Revelation 20:4 KJB - “... the witness of Jesus ... the word of God ...”​

​

What are these two things? No need to guess:​

​

Revelation 12:17 KJB - “... the commandments of God ... the testimony of Jesus Christ.”​

​

This is found way back in the OT:​

​

Deuteronomy 4:2 KJB - “... the word which I command you, ... the commandments of the LORD your God ...” [page 147-148]​

​

When John writes “the Lord's day” (Rev. 1:10 KJB), it is in the context of “the word of God”, or, God’s Commandments. Well, which commandment then? John says:​

​

Revelation 14:7 KJB - “... worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.”​

​

Revelation 14:12 KJB - “... keep the commandments of God ... the faith of Jesus.”​

​

John is specifically citing the 4th Commandment:​

​

Exodus 20:11 KJB - For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.​

​

The LORD has chosen a specific (definite article) “day”. It is thus “the LORD(’s) ... day”, being His sabbath, the 7th day, from the foundation of the world in Gen. 2:1-3,4 KJB, where therein it is “God(’s; the LORD’s) ... day”.​

​

The “word of God” = God’s commandments:​

​

Isaiah 1:10 - “... the word of the LORD ... the law of our God ...”​

​

The “testimony of Jesus” is the Spirit of prophecy (Rev. 19:10 KJB):​

​

Revelation 19:10 KJB - And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.​

​

Notice the two witnesses are always together:​

​

2 Kings 17:13 KJB - “... the LORD testified ... by all the prophets, and by all the seers ... keep my commandments ... the law which I commanded ... by my servants the prophets.”​

​

Psalms 19:7 KJB - “The law of the LORD ... the testimony of the LORD ...”​

​

Psalms 78:5 KJB - “... a testimony ... a law ...”​

​

Proverbs 29:18 KJB - “... vision ... the law ...”​

​

Isaiah 8:16 KJB - “... the testimony ... the law ...”​

​

Isaiah 8:20 KJB - “... the law ... the testimony ... this word ...”​

​

Lamentations 2:9 KJB - “... the law ... prophets ... vision from the LORD.”​

​

Ezekiel 7:26 KJB - “... a vision of the prophet ... the law ...”​

​

Matthew 22:40 KJB - “... the law ... the prophets.”​

​

Romans 3:21 KJB - “... the law ... the prophets;”​

​

Revelation 1:10 KJB - “I [the prophet & apostle John] was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day ...” [page 148-149]​

​

The Apostle and prophet John receives a “vision” in connection with keeping God’s word, His commandments; resting specifically on “the LORD’s day” (Rev. 1:10 KJB):​

​

Revelation 1:10 KJB - I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,​

​

The Law (Lord’s day) & the testimony (in the spirit; prophecy):​

​

Look again at the parallels:​

​

[A1] Rev. 1:2 KJB - “word” & “testimony”​

​

[B1] Rev. 1:9 KJB - “word” & “testimony”​

​

[C1] [Reverse] Rev. 1:10 KJB - “in the Spirit” & “the Lord’s day”​

​

[A2] Rev. 6:9 KJB - “word” & “testimony”​

​

[B2] Rev. 12:17 KJB - “commandments” & “testimony”​

​

[C2] [Reverse] Rev. 20:4 KJB - “witness” & “word”​

​

It (“the Lord’s day; Rev. 1:10 KJB) always speaks of the 7th day the sabbath of the LORD, His holy day of His “word” or “commandments”, and the “Spirit” refers to the “testimony” or “witness”. ..." - The 7th Day The Sabbath - The Rest Of His Eternal Story (by Aaron Earnest) : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive​

This means that when the proper use of the terms "spirit of prophecy" is used, it refers, in truth, to "the testimony of Jesus", which works through all His messengers (plural, like John the Apostle), and not only sister White, and thus does not at all times refer to sister White's writings.

Ellen White and the Personhood of the Holy Spirit

This article explores Ellen G. White’s understanding of the Holy Spirit against the background of early Seventh-day Adventist theology and experience.

www.ministrymagazine.org

Very thought-provoking article, @BluePrints, as one definitely worth reading.

The "personhood" of the Holy Ghost / Spirit is not in question by me or the OP linked materials - ever.

I recommend reading the original OP linked material, before the "Ministry Magazine", and see which is more informational and useful, but that is just a suggestion, and may be ignored at the readers desire.