Sabbath: The Father, the Son, and the Spirit
Daily Lesson for Sabbath 7th of December 2024
Image © Pacific Press
Read for This Week’s Study: John 14:10,24; Genesis 3:7-9; John 16:27-28; John 16:7-11; John 17:1-26.
Memory Text:
“ ‘The Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you’ ” (John 14:26, NKJV).
The Gospel of John is a mosaic of themes. John calls upon signs (miracles) to show that Jesus is the Messiah promised by the prophets. John uses an array of witnesses to proclaim Jesus as the Christ. He also uses the “I AM” statements to point to His divinity.
All three members of the Godhead are mentioned in John 1:1-51 (John 1:1-4,14,18,32-34). For centuries humans have tried fully to understand the nature of the Godhead, but because we can’t, many reject the idea. How foolish, though, to reject something just because we can’t fully understand it or because it doesn’t fit within the narrow limits of human reasoning.
John says that if you want to understand God, you must look at Jesus and what has been revealed in the Word. This approach opens to us a whole new world of relationships—among the Three Members of the Godhead, between the Members of the Godhead and humans, and among humans themselves. This week’s lesson looks at how the Gospel of John presents the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, but now within the context of the farewell discourse (John 13:1-38; John 14:1-31; John 15:1-27; John 16:1-33; John 17:1-26).
*Study this week’s lesson to prepare for Sabbath, December 14.
(18)
I find it somewhat disconcerting that arguments over the nature of the Godhead have been so divisive throughout the history of the Christian Church. Heresies have been declared, and even wars have been fought over the issue. Is it time to emphasise the unity of the Godhead and work on our unity with our brothers and sisters in the faith?
Just a background thought to colour our study this week.
True. I've seen congregations torn apart by heated arguments across the church floor, for a reality that is infinitely beyond our understanding. The challenge has been, people hold opinions and analogies of their understanding, but then try to push it down the throats of others as the absolute reality.
This should always be approached with alot of reverence without the "know-it-all" pride, and having in mind the fact that:
"No one knows the Father except the Son, and no one knows the Son except the Father, and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him". (Matthew 11:27)
The trinity is pagan in its believe it denies the Father and the Son and adds a third god in the mix ,its acts stems from Babylon and God the Father through his Son calls us out of Babylon .The God head that the above comments states is talking about the divinity of the Father and the Son no other created angel or human holds that title except for the ONLY BEGOTTEN SON OF GOD .Thats what Satan wanted in heaven to be like the most high but he could not because he was created not Begotten.When it says let us create man in our image the Us means two not three not four and not 20 God created all things through his Son why because he was the express image of the Father .John chapter 17 verse 3 the question is what is eternal life ?
Some folk believe the Trinity concept came out of Babylon. This idea is promoted in Hyslop’s book, “The Two Babylons”. In a nutshell Hyslop claims that Nimrod, Semiramis, and Tammuz were worshipped as three gods in Babylon. While it is true that these three were part of the pantheon of Babylonian gods, there is no evidence to suggest that they resembled the Christian concept of the Trinity.
Hyslop was a Scottish theologian in the Presbyterian Free Church of Scotland and first published his book as a pamphlet in 1853, with several later editions up until 1907. It received wide acceptance among some protestant churches because of its anti-Roman Catholic stance. A copy of it was in my father’s library.
Now-a-days it has been largely discredited because in makes associations that are unsupported by the archaeological evidence. For example; Hyslop claims that Semiramis is Nimrod’s consort, but there is not a single reference anywhere associating the two. There is no evidence to suggest that there is any association between these three gods/historical/mythological identities.
Nimrod lived in the second millennium BC and is possibly the king or ruler associated with The Tower of Babel. While he is considered an important figure in Babylon’s history there is no evidence that he was considered as s deity.
Semiramis is possibly based on an Assyrian queen in the 9th century BC. Over time legends were built around her and she was often linked with fertility and love.
Tammuz was a Mesopotamian deity associated with life and death. His worship was associated with the pre-Babylonian period, as well as some later periods.
Marduk was perhaps the most prominent god particularly around the time when Babylon was mentioned in the Bible.
The Babylonians also had a number of other gods, but many of these were localised in time or were assigned particular duties.
The word Trinity or any "threeness: expression is not found in the Biblical text. The use of a word used to describe "threeness" developed in the 2nd century CE largely as a convenience. There were several early church theologians who used the term.
Great summary, Maurice. Thanks!
The Two Babylons appears to be largely a work of fiction. For instance, that the biblical Nimrod who lived not long after the Flood could be married to the Semiramus who lived some 825 years before Christ seems rather unlikely, seeing their lifespans could hardly have overlapped. Unfortunately the book is still distributed with a lot of Bible software in spite of the many unsupportable claims in makes.
The concept of the three-in-one God we characterize as the Trinity appears to be distinctly Christian, with no pagan religions having any gods with characteristics in any way similar.
Jesus said that he and his father would come into the person who will receive them...thats 2...the Father is a Spirit and Jesus his son. His death translated him to a spiritual form. Now you have 2 spirits influencing earth but physically reigning from the physical heaven base. The fact the father suffered the horrific death of his son would put himself in great expectation of acceptance and even more reverence. If that is not displayed by a human they are dealing with The Spirit that will not forgive, i believe, is The Father himself because he went so far to save humanity. The 2 dwelling in heaven are 1 in Spirit and Truth and purpose...imho
Hello Michelle! In John 1 we get the bigger picture of Who Jesus was before His incarnation (becoming human). In John 1:14 we are shown that the spirit, the Word, (logos) became flesh and dwelled among man. So the Son (Jesus/the Word) actually proceeded from spirit form to human form, not vice versa. He has chosen to forever retain His glorified body. Jesus promised His disciples before He left earth that He would send "another comforter" to take His place on earth, the Holy Spirit. Jesus also gave the Great Commission prior to returning to heaven in His Glorified body to make disciples and to baptize them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit would be Christ's Omnipresent representative on the earth in Christ's absence. Matthew 28:18-20
Michelle, Jesus Himself, after His resurrection, made clear that He was/is not "a spirit" in Luke 24:39 "Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have."
Christ went back to heaven as the "firstborn from the dead" (Col. 1:18) with the same kind of body the resurrected righteous will have. See 1 Cor. 15:50-23.
Jesus said He would send "another Comforter" to His disciples - someone just like Himself, that is the third Person of the Godhead. See my previous comment for more details.
From the provided Scriptures, John 17:1-26 speaks to me in the most clear and succinct terms on what the unity between the Father, the Son, and those the Father has given Jesus Christ is based on - His Love.
v.11 - ”Now I am no longer in the world but these are in the world, and I come to you. Holy Father, keep through Your name those whom You have given Me, that they may be one as We are.”
v.25-26 - ”O righteous Father! The world has not known You, but I have known You; and these have known that You sent Me. And I have declared to them Your Name, and will declare it, that the LOVE with which You loved Me may be in them, and I in them.”
John 14:26 points out the Helper, the Teacher the Father will send in Jesus’ name, ‘to bring to our remembrance all things that I said to you.’
All Jesus said and taught is based on the Love the Father has for His Son and the Son has for those He received from the Father. Now we are included in His Love as our life is kept by His Son Jesus Christ through the exchange of His Truth by the Holy Spirit.
Tongues of men or of angels, if void of the Spirit of Love bringing to life the Word from God the Father, become like a sounding gong – 1 Cor.13:1-6.
Part of my 2 decades or so away from Christianity revolved in part around the idea that God is too big to be grasped fully, too immense and beyond the human mind to try to figure it all out. I was reading a lot of theological books in my early 20s - commentaries and Christian fathers/mothers like Merton, C.S. Lewis, Augustine, Ellen White, etc. On top of this eventual disillusionment with working so hard to understand, I witnessed where all the theological digging could lead. My Dad (with his theology master's degree from an Adventist college), in particular, was prone to frequent yelling matches about doctrine with his friends, over the phone and in Bible studies. Eventually, for various reasons, my whole family stopped going to church. It seemed to me that love was more important than all that fuss. So, Satan crept a falsehood into my thinking in at least 2 areas: (1) God is pretty much unknowable so don't try too hard ... it honors Him more to recognize how small you are compared to His greatness; and (2) All the zealousness about trying to figure out God often leads to breakups in friendships and in churches, and a lot of unloving behavior and rigid constructs. So, I decided, it is much better to leave it at "God is love" and live life by what my instinct told me was loving.
Beginning about 8 years ago, I started on a journey of reading and then trusting the Bible again. Eventually, I wanted to rededicate my life to Jesus, to declare publicly that I definitely do trust and love Him as my Savior and Best Friend, to acknowledge that He is the only way to God...to say that truth is not relative, Truth is Jesus.
As it happened, I was back at the church of my childhood and there were the doctrinal dissensions again. Disputes about the nature of the Trinity were rocking the church. I was told that I needed to pledge myself to read the 28 beliefs printed by the Church at my re-baptism and pledge myself to believing only what the church leaders put forward. I explained that I had no trouble with any doctrine in particular, but that I would only pledge myself to God and to His Word, never to a denomination or to a group of religious leaders or their interpretation of the Bible, even if I agreed with their interpretation. It was a painful process that took years and tears before I was finally rebaptized.
I'm writing my story here not to cast any shadow on Adventism or on any particular congregation, but to share something so important to me. I dig in the Bible eagerly every day and every chance I have not to prove anything or disprove anything, but because in the Scriptures I do breathe the "fresh air" of eternal life (John 5:39)....and more particularly, because I meet Jesus on every page. I want to have a more intimate relationship with Him. As God increases my faith, He increases my understanding. The transformation process in my thinking is gradual and an act of God's grace, for sure. I read that God has many thoughts about me, and He gives me many thoughts about Him (Ps. 139:17). And the mystery parts are not cause for argument, or for forming a carefully-worded doctrinal statement to be safe and to put everyone on the same page, or for shunning those who are sincerely searching for Truth but seeing God a bit differently from their reading of Scripture. I think the mystery parts are there for us to bow to the majesty of God and to trust that as we draw closer to Jesus and to His Word, HE...HE...HE....will draw us closer to each other (1 Cor. 2:16).
Human words are only pointers towards reality. Often, when I hear disputes about the Trinity/Godhead, I hear both sides saying something that to me is compatible to the other. It sounds to me more like both-and. Not either-or. It's looking past the pointing finger to the vision it is pointing to. The apostle Paul alluded to the limits of words when he was given a glimpse of heaven and he said that he "heard things that cannot be told, which man may not utter" (2 Cor. 12:4). Human language - none of them - is fully capable of carrying the bigness and greatness of all that God is. For example, the "I AM that I AM" of God's name given to Moses was not even utterable...the best the Hebrew language could do was to string some consonants together, YHVH. Nevertheless, God gave humans language. He wants us to use it, and to reason with Him (Is. 1:18). Jesus is THE WORD made flesh. Jesus uses all the I AM statements in John to compare Himself to so many human realities - light, bread, sheep, Shepherd, door. God uses language because He wants us to know Him better. Jesus often used metaphors and parables as tools to help us understand God and His Kingdom of heaven.
So, as I read about the Godhead this week, I am eager to dive further into the vision of God and His character once more. Whatever I discover through the aid of the Holy Spirit will be God's sweet gift to me (Ps. 19:10). And if it is truly from God, it will be a beautiful "aha" that will be something that will bring me and anyone I share it with closer to God...not closer to agreeing or disagreeing with me.
Dear sister Esther. Thank you so much for sharing this powerful testimony, so poignantly. Indeed having a loving relationship with GOD, is far more important than the wrangling of human interpretation. All we can ever only know is what GOD has chosen to reveal namely His beloved Son and His works. ‘To those who don’t believe no amount of evidence will suffice, to those who believe no evidence will be required.
Many thanks again.
Amen! What a refreshing read! This is truly a healing balm for the soul. How much greater would the blessing be when we find it for ourselves. Thank you Esther Pelletier for your testimony! May we seek this deep nourishment for ourselves as well.
Thank you for sharing your story ❤ God bless you 💓 let us continue to strive for the mastery.i hope you continue to share
It's challenging but not impossible. Three as One. At the same time, Jesus, the King of the Universe, became like us so we could grasp the Godhead.
He who has the Son has the Father and he who has the Father has the Son...i see no 3rd person. No other God. The Spirit of the Father guided Jesus just as He will when he and his son "Come in and sup with us and make their abode in us"
There is only one God! The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit make up this one God. Please study every lesson of this week carefully, as well as the comments, to get a fuller understanding of the subject. I suggest that it is only through the person of the Holy Spirit that we "have" the Father or the Son, because Christ is currently in heaven in human form, and He cannot be with us personally, due to the limitations of His human body.
I suggest you also watch the video under "Our Unique Three-In-One God."
Pioneers never believed in the Trinity. Catholics documented that. You can thank Froom, the infiltrated Jesuit priest, for the Trinity teachings in SDA.
Peter, we hear a lot of assertions that the pioneers did not believe in the Trinty, and that it is a Catholic doctrine. I also here accusations that our theologians are Jesuit priests. While it is easy to make these assertions in bare statements, they provide little in the way of substantive evidence.
One must recognise that the Seventh-day Adventist Church is a dynamic and not a static. Many of our beliefs wer forged over years and indeed decades and statements of belief, even today are consensus rather than creedal in intent. If you want to get a handle on the development of the perception of the Godhead in the Seventh-day Adventist Church I suggest that reading Gerhard Pfandl's Paper.
Accusing theologians of being Jesuit priests just because you disagree with them is unworthy of a Christian. While you are welcome to disagree with their arguments, making a personal accusation without evidence other than disagreement it is defamation or slander.
The discussion about the Godhead should be conducted in a Christian spirit even when we disagree with one another. After all, we still have much to learn and even when we reach eternity we are still going to be challenged.