THE TRINITY BEGINNING: NICAEA 325 AND CONSTANTINOPLE 381 YEAR

Below is a statement from one of the most important Adventist pioneers, J. N. Andrews about the Trinity:

  • “The doctrine of the TRINITY which was established in the church by the council of Nice, A. D. 325THIS DOCTRINE DESTROYS THE PERSONALITY OF GOD, and his SON JESUS Christ our Lord. The infamous, measures by which it was forced upon the church which appear upon the pages of ecclesiastical history might well cause every believer in that doctrine to BLUSH.“ {J N.  ANDREWS: RH, March 6, 1855} 

The doctrine of the Trinity was introduced at the first time to Christianity during the Council of Nicaea in 325ad. The Trinity had to be reinforced and adopted once again and confirmed in 381ad during the Council of Constantinople. If the Trinity had been in the Christian world prior to 325ad, it would not have been necessary to force its adoption and to impose it again after a couple of decades in 381ad. Constantine introduced Sunday worship officially in 321ad and forced everyone to keep it, which made it easier to later introduce and enforce the Trinity doctrine in 325ad. 

Due to its prevalence, the resistance was much easier to break. Opposing groups have almost completely disappeared over time, as in our church, where the Trinity was introduced after several attempts and then the opposition was broken. But even such clear facts receive a different interpretation, and the fact that the pagan Apocrypha were removed in 325ad is another “proof”. Of course, the definition of the Bible books was changed, because the false Apocrypha had already been inserted into biblical scripts, otherwise, they should not have been excluded. 

Only something already present can be thrown out, and something new can be introduced. If the Trinity and the celebration of the week had been present in Christianity, there would have been no need for the introduction or dictatorial imposition of the notion of God! When someone who knew a complete truth falls away from it, then he/she becomes seven times worse than the one who is a part of Babylon. Even the fall of Christianity in Nicaea, despite the proclamation of the holy Spirit as a “Divine Being”, still left the fact that Jesus was the literal Son, and that the holy Spirit proceeded from God the Father and the Son. To this day, both the Catholic and Orthodox Churches advocate the heresy of rebirth and regeneration. 

The Trinity doctrine was approved after the Pope managed to exterminate all three Arian tribes that opposed the Trinity. Almost all churches believe that Jesus literally and completely died for us on the cross! Today we are almost the only church in which, many theologians blasphemously declare that Jesus did not really die for us, but that he only slept in the grave, while His fleshly garment was dead! Below we see the formulation of the theological points from Nicaea, which were then closer to the Bible than today’s teaching of the fully fulfilled Omega Apostasy of the last church:

  • I believe in one God the Father, the Almighty, the Creator of heaven and earth, and all things visible and invisible.
  • And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Only Begotten, by the Father begotten before all ages; Light from Light, true God from true God, Born, not Created, one in essence with the Father, through Whom all things came into being.
  • And in the holy Spirit, the Lord of Life, who proceeds from the Father, who is honored and glorified together with the Father and the Son; who spoke through the prophets.

Jesus has always been the literal Son and that the holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son! Tertullian of Carthage (160-220ad), as we read from historical records, was the first person to suggest the theory of the Trinity. We are faced with the remark that, since we have such an early description of the Trinitarian doctrine in Christianity, it must be true. 

Unfortunately, the same logic is used by Darwinists, as well as most Evolutionists, and human explanations and assumptions become truths and dogmas after a certain time. Darwin was the first to try to explain the origin of plant and animal species, and other scientists have built various theories and evidence on the origin of life on Earth.

  • “The formulation ‘one God in three persons‘ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.“ {New Catholic Encyclopedia FIRST Edition: 1967., Vol. XIV, p. 299}

At the same time, in year 325 AD, the verses in Matthew 28:19.20 were changed, and through this falsification came baptism in the name of the Trinity, to give authority to the doctrine of the Trinity:

Matthew 28:18-20 is changed

  • “And Jesus came, and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Goe ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptising them in the Name of the Father, and of the Sonne, and of the holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things, whatsoever I have commanded you: and lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.“ {Matthew 28:18-20}

In the book of Acts, the evangelist Luke described the same statement of Jesus from Matthew 28:19.20. But in Acts 1:8 Jesus calls us to proclaim His truth to all nations, without any mention of baptism in the name of the Trinity:

  • „But ye shall receive power, after that the holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto Me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.“ {Acts 1:8}

Why does this difference exist? Because This verse (Matthew 28:18-20) was changed in the year 325ad to support and introduce the doctrine of the Trinity. We know the following facts: the doctrine of the Trinity” was the basis of many pagan religions alongside “life after death”. During the council in Nicea in 325ad, Emperor Constantine ordered that an ecumenical Bible be compiled to unite pagans with Christians. He entrusted this task to the leading Bishop Eusebius of Caesarea, who implemented what Bishop Origen had tried earlier but without success. Interestingly, Bishop Eusebius quoted the above verse differently 17 times in his works before Nicea:

  • “Surely none save our only Saviour has done this, when, after His victory over death, he spoke the word to His followers, and fulfilled it by the event, saying to them, “Go ye and make disciples of all nations in My name.” {Eusebius: Oration in Praise of Emperor Constantine, Chapter 16, Section 8}
  • “But while the disciples of Jesus were most likely either saying thus, or thinking thus, the Master solved their difficulties, by the addition of one phrase, saying they should triumph “In MY NAME.” And the power of His name being so great, that the apostle says: “God has given Him a name which is above every name, that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth,” He shewed the virtue of the power in His Name concealed from the crowd when He said to His disciples: “Go, and make disciples of all the nations in My Name.” He also most accurately forecasts the future when He says: “for this gospel must first be preached to all the world, for a witness to all nations.” {Eusebius: Proof of the Gospel, Book III, ch. 7, 136 (a-d), p. 157}
  • “Who said to them:  ́Make disciples of all the nations in My Name. ́” {Eusebius: Proof of the Gospel, Book III, Chapter 7, 138 (c), p. 159}
  • “Relying upon the power of Christ, who had said to them, “Go ye and make disciples of all the nations in My name.” {Eusebius: Book III of his History, Chapter 5, Section 2, (about the Jewish persecution of early Christians)}
  • “With one word and voice, He said to His disciples: “Go, and make disciples of all nations in My Name, teaching them to observe all things whats over I have commanded you” {Eusebius: Proof of the Gospel, Book III, ch 6, 132 (a), p. 152}

It is not surprising that, after the introduction of the Trinity in year 325, Eusebius suddenly changed the form of those verses, and used the current version of the verses in his writings. The whole Bible only knows baptism ‘in the name of Jesus’. The true Bible certainly does not contradict itself, and Matthew 28:19 directly contradicts all other verses. This is the strongest evidence of the falsification. One is 180 degrees different than the others, and is impossible to have both at the same time. God never contradicts Himself!

  • “When they heard this, they were baptised in the Name of the Lord Jesus.“ {Acts 19:5}
  • “But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the Name of Jesus Christ, they were baptised, both men and women. ́” {Acts 8:12}
  • “For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptised in the Name of the Lord Jesus“. {Acts 8:16}
  • “And he commanded them to be baptised in the Name of the Lord“. {Acts 10:48}
  • “For as many of you as have bene baptised into Christ, have put on Christ.“ {Galatians 3:27}

Whose name do we call at baptism in order to be washed from sin? A Trinity?

  • “Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptised every one of you in the Name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the holy Ghost.“ {Acts 2:38}
  • “And now, why tarriest thou? Arise, and be baptised, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.“ {Acts 22:16}

Is there any other name under heaven besides Jesus who can save us?

  • “He that believeth and is baptised, shall be saved, but he that believeth not, shall be damned.“ {Mark 16:16}

Many Theologians are making the claim that baptism should be in the name of Trinity. Actually, baptism and immersion in the water are a symbol of His (and not of a triune) death, His lying in the grave, and His resurrection. ONLY Jesus died, and through baptism, we show acceptance of His sacrifice for us and thereby become Christians.

-The immersion in the water symbolises the death of Jesus on the cross

-The short stay in the water symbolises the time of Jesus in the grave

-The emergence from the water symbolises the resurrection of Jesus

The apostle Paul clearly emphasises that baptism is only in the name of Jesus and that this is directly connected with the sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross:

  • Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptised in the name of Paul?” {1 Corinthians 1:13}
  • “Know ye not, that so many of vs as were baptised into Jesus Christ, were baptised into His death? Therefore we are buried with Him by baptism into death, that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father: even so wee also should walk in newness of life” {Romans 6:3}
  • Buried with Him in baptism, wherein also you are risen with Him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised Him from the dead.“ {Colossians 2:12}

Below is the excerpt from Shem Tob’s MSS Hebrew Matthew Gospel, Matthew 28th chapter, which comes from a book by Dr. George Howard, a specialist in the Hebrew language. The original of this manuscript is in the Jewish Theological Seminary of America in New York. This Gospel was saved by Hebrews during the first century and was discovered in the 14th century. In the 14th century, there was no discussion of the Trinity! And in this old original manuscript of the Gospel, Matthew 28:19, there is no trinitarian form of baptism, there is no statement by Jesus in this regard. Matthew wrote his Gospel in Hebrew and not in Greek, as most theologians claim today:

  • Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome and laying the foundations of the church.” {Irenaeus in the second century: Adv. Haer. 3.1.1}

9. As they were going Jesus passed before them saying: May the Name deliver you. They came near to Him, bowed down to Him, and worshipped Him.

10. Then Jesus said to them: Do not be afraid; tell My brothers that they should go to Galilee and there they will see Me.

11. While they were going some of the guards entered the city and declared to the chief priests all that had happened.

12. They came together for counsel with the elders of the people. Then they gave much money to the horsemen

13. and said to them: Say that His disciples came by night and stole Him while you were sleeping.

14. If this should come to the ears of Pilate we will tell him that he should leave you alone.

15. They took the money and said thus as they instructed them. This is the word [held] in secret among the Jews unto this day.

16. After this when His twelve disciples came to Galilee He appeared to them in the mountain where they had prayed.

17. When they saw Him they worshipped Him, but there were some of them who doubted Him.

18. Jesus drew near to them and said to them: To Me has been given all power in heaven and earth.

19. Go

20. and (teach) them to carry out all the things which I have commanded you forever.

The same is also stated in the other 3 Bible translations:

  • “Then, coming toward them, Jesus spoke, saying, ‘All power has been given me in heaven and on earth. So, go and make disciples in all nations IN MY NAME, teaching them to obey all the things that I commanded you. And [Look!] I’ll be with you every day until the end of the age.“ {Matthew 28:18-20} Bible 2001
  • “Jesus approached and said to them, “All authority has been given to me in heaven and on earth. Consequently, when you go, disciple all nationalities IN MY NAME. Teach them to keep everything I commanded you to do. Understand this: I am with you every day until the consummation of the age!“ {Matthew 28:18-20} MIT – Idiomatic EN – 2006
  • “Yeshua [God is Salvation] drew near to them and said to them: “All power has been given to Me in heaven and earth”. “Go and make disciples, of all the nations, to believe IN MY NAME” “and teach them to observe all the words which I have commanded you, forever” {Matthew 28:18-20} New Messianic Version Bible

Today’s Bible says that the apostles should go and all should baptise in the name of the Father, Son, and holy Spirit, which is a contradiction of the rest of the New Testament, where the apostles were all exclusively baptised in the name of Jesus! The true Bible can never contradict itself! The Catholic Church, which proudly proclaimed a change in the Sabbath, confirms itself that it changed Matthew 28:19:

  • “The basic form of our (Matthew 28:19 Trinitarian) profession of faith took shape during the second and third centuries in connection with the ceremony of baptism. So far as its place of origin is concerned, the text (Matthew 28:19) came from the city of Rome.” {Joseph Ratzinger (pope Benedict XVI): Introduction to Christianity, 1968 edition, pp. 82, 83.}
  • “The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and holy Spirit by the Catholic Church in the second century.“ {Britannica Encyclopedia, 11th Edition, Volume 3, page 365}
  • “The passages in Acts and the Letters of St. Paul. These passages seem to point to the earliest form as baptism in the name of the Lord.” Also, we find. “Is it possible to reconcile these facts with the belief that Christ commanded His disciples to baptise in the triune form? Had Christ given such a command, it is urged, the Apostolic Church would have followed him, and we should have some trace of this obedience in the New Testament. No such trace can be found. The only explanation of this silence, according to the anti-traditional view, is this the short Christological (Jesus Name) formula was (the) original, and the longer triune formula was a later development.“ {The Catholic University of America in Washington, D. C. 1923, New Testament Studies Number 5: The Lord’s Command To Baptise An Historical Critical Investigation. By Bernard Henry Cuneo, page 27}

A Collection of Evidences Against the modern Wording of Matthew 28:19:

The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics:

  • “Matthew 28:19: It is the central piece of evidence for the traditional (Trinitarian) view. If it were undisputed, this would, of course, be decisive, but its trustworthiness is impugned on grounds of textual criticism, literary criticism, and historical criticism. The same Encyclopedia further states that: “The obvious explanation of the silence of the New Testament on the triune name, and the use of another (JESUS NAME) formula in Acts and Paul, is that this other formula was the earlier, and the triune formula is a later addition.”

Edmund Schlink, The Doctrine of Baptism, page 28:

  • “The baptismal command in its Matthew 28:19 form cannot be the historical origin of Christian baptism. At the very least, it must be assumed that the text has been transmitted in a form expanded by the [Catholic] church.”

The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, I, 275:

  • “It is often affirmed that the words in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Ghost are not the ipsissima verba [exact words] of Jesus, but…a later liturgical addition.”

Wilhelm Bousset, Kyrios Christianity, page 295:

  • “The testimony for the wide distribution of the simple baptismal formula [in the Name of Jesus] down into the second century is so overwhelming that even in Matthew 28:19, the Trinitarian formula was later inserted.”

The Catholic Encyclopedia, II, page 263:

  • “The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and holy Spirit by the Catholic Church in the second century.”

Hastings Dictionary of the Bible 1963, page 1015:

  • “The Trinity.-…is not demonstrable by logic or by Scriptural proofs,…The term Trias was first used by Theophilus of Antioch (c AD 180),…(The term Trinity) not found in Scripture…” “The chief Trinitarian text in the NT is the baptismal formula in Mt 28:19…This late post-resurrection saying, not found in any other Gospel or anywhere else in the NT, has been viewed by some scholars as an interpolation into Matthew. It has also been pointed out that the idea of making disciples is continued in teaching them, so that the intervening reference to baptism with its Trinitarian formula was perhaps a later insertion into the saying. Finally, Eusebius’s form of the (ancient) text (“in my name” rather than in the name of the Trinity) has had certain advocates. (Although the Trinitarian formula is now found in the modern-day book of Matthew), this does not guarantee its source in the historical teaching of Jesus. It is doubtless better to view the (Trinitarian) formula as derived from early (Catholic) Christian, perhaps Syrian or Palestinian, baptismal usage (cf Didache 7:1-4), and as a brief summary of the (Catholic) Church’s teaching about God, Christ, and the Spirit:…”

The Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge:

  • “Jesus, however, cannot have given His disciples this Trinitarian order of baptism after His resurrection; for the New Testament knows only one baptism in the name of Jesus (Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:43; 19:5; Gal. 3:27; Rom. 6:3; 1 Cor. 1:13-15), which still occurs even in the second and third centuries, while the Trinitarian formula occurs only in Matt. 28:19, and then only again (in the) Didache 7:1 and Justin, Apol. 1:61…Finally, the distinctly liturgical character of the formula…is strange; it was not the way of Jesus to make such formulas… the formal authenticity of Matt. 28:19 must be disputed…” page 435.

The Jerusalem Bible, a scholarly Catholic work, states:

  • “It may be that this formula, (Triune Matthew 28:19) so far as the fullness of its expression is concerned, is a reflection of the (Man-made) liturgical usage established later in the primitive (Catholic) community. It will be remembered that Acts speaks of baptising “in the name of Jesus,”…”

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 4, page 2637, Under “Baptism,” says:

  • Matthew 28:19 in particular only canonises a later ecclesiastical situation, that its universalism is contrary to the facts of early Christian history, and its Trinitarian formula (is) foreign to the mouth of Jesus.”

New Revised Standard Version says this about Matthew 28:19:

  • “Modern critics claim this formula is falsely ascribed to Jesus and that it represents later (Catholic) church tradition, for nowhere in the book of Acts (or any other book of the Bible) is baptism performed with the name of the Trinity…”

James Moffett’s New Testament Translation:

  • “In a footnote on page 64 about Matthew 28:19 he makes this statement: “It may be that this (Trinitarian) formula, so far as the fullness of its expression is concerned, is a reflection of the (Catholic) liturgical usage established later in the primitive (Catholic) community, It will be remembered that Acts speaks of baptising “in the name of Jesus, cf. Acts 1:5 +.”

Tom Harpur, former Religion Editor of the Toronto Star in his “For Christ’s sake,” page 103 informs us of these facts:

  • “All but the most conservative scholars agree that at least the latter part of this command [Triune part of Matthew 28:19] was inserted later. The [Trinitarian] formula occurs nowhere else in the New Testament, and we know from the only evidence available [the rest of the New Testament] that the earliest Church did not baptise people using these words (“in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Ghost”) baptism was “into” or “in” the name of Jesus alone. Thus it is argued that the verse originally read “baptising them in My Name” and then was expanded [changed] to work in the [later Catholic Trinitarian] dogma. In fact, the first view put forward by German critical scholars as well as the Unitarians in the nineteenth century, was stated as the accepted position of mainline scholarship as long ago as 1919, when Peake’s commentary was first published: “The Church of the first days (AD 33) did not observe this world-wide (Trinitarian) commandment, even if they knew it. The command to baptise into the threefold [Trinity] name is a late doctrinal expansion.”

The Bible Commentary 1919 page 723:

Dr. Peake makes it clear that:

  • “The command to baptise into the threefold name is a late doctrinal expansion. Instead of the words baptsing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Ghost we should probably read simply “into My Name.”

Theology of the New Testament:

R. Bultmann, 1951, page 133:

  • “Under Kerygma of the Hellenistic Church and the Sacraments. The historical fact that the verse Matthew 28:19 was altered is openly confesses to very plainly. “As to the rite of baptism, it was normally consummated as a bath in which the one receiving baptism completely submerged, and if possible in flowing water as the allusions of Acts 8:36, Heb. 10:22, Barn. 11:11 permit us to gather, and as Did. 7:1-3 specifically says. According to the last passage, [the apocryphal Catholic Didache] suffices in case of the need if water is three times poured [false Catholic sprinkling doctrine] on the head. The one baptising names over the one being baptised the name of the Lord Jesus Christ,” later expanded [changed] to the name of the Father, Son, and the holy Spirit.”

Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church:

Dr. Stuart G. Hall 1992, pages 20 and 21. Professor Stuart G. Hall was the former Chair of Ecclesiastical History at King’s College, London England. 

Dr. Hall makes the factual statement that Catholic Trinitarian Baptism was not the original form of Christian Baptism, rather the original was the Jesus name baptism.

  • “In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy Spirit,” although those words were not used, as they later are, as a formula. Not all baptisms fitted this rule.” Dr Hall further, states: “More common and perhaps more ancient was the simple, “In the name of the Lord Jesus or, Jesus Christ.” This practice was known among Marcionites and Orthodox; it is certainly the subject of controversy in Rome and Africa about 254, as the anonymous tract De rebaptismate (“On rebaptism”) shows.”

The Beginnings of Christianity: The Acts of the Apostles Volume 1, Prolegomena 1:

The Jewish Gentile, and Christian Backgrounds by F. J. Foakes Jackson and Kirsopp Lake 1979 version pages 335-337:

  • “There is little doubt as to the sacramental nature of baptism by the middle of the first century in the circles represented by the Pauline Epistles, and it is indisputable in the second century. The problem is whether it can in this (Trinitarian) form be traced back to Jesus, and if not what light is thrown upon its history by the analysis of the synoptic Gospels and Acts.According to Catholic teaching, (traditional Trinitarian) baptism was instituted by Jesus. It is easy to see how necessary this was for the belief in sacramental regeneration. Mysteries, or sacraments, were always the institution of the Lord of the cult; by them, and by them only, were its supernatural benefits obtained by the faithful. Nevertheless, if evidence counts for anything, few points in the problem of the Gospels are so clear as the improbability of this teaching. The reason for this assertion is the absence of any mention of Christian baptism in Mark, Q, or the third Gospel, and the suspicious nature of the account of its institution in Matthew 28:19: “Go ye into all the world, and make disciples of all Gentiles (nations), baptising them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the holy Spirit.” It is not even certain whether this verse ought to be regarded as part of the genuine text of Matthew. No other text, indeed, is found in any extant manuscripts, in any language, but it is arguable that Justin Martyr, though he used the trine formula, did not find it in his text of the Gospels; Hermas seems to be unacquainted with it; the evidence of the Didache is ambiguous, and Eusebius habitually, though not invariably, quotes it in another form, “Go ye into all the world and make diciples of all the Gentiles in My Name.“ No one acquainted with the facts of textual history and patristic evidence can doubt the tendency would have been to replace the Eusebian text (In My Name) by the ecclesiastical (Catholic Trinitarian) formula of baptism, so that transcriptional evedence” is certainly on the side of the text omitting baptism.But it is unnecessary to discuss this point at length, because even if the ordinary (modern Trinity) text of Matthew 28:19 be sound it can not represent historical fact. Would they have baptised, as Acts says that they did, and Paul seem to confirm the statement, in the name of the Lord Jesus if the Lord Himself had commanded them to use the (Catholic Trinitarian) formula of the Church? On every point the evidence of Acts is convincing proof that the (Catholic) tradition embodied in Matthew 28:19 is a late (non-Scriptural Creed) and unhistorical. Neither in the third gospel nor in Acts is there any reference to the (Catholic Trinitarian) Matthaean tradition, nor any mention of the institution of (Catholic Trinitarian) Christian baptism. Nevertheless, a little later in the narrative we find several references to baptism in water in the name of the Lord Jesus as part of recognised (Early) Christian practice. Thus we are faced by the problem of a Christian rite, not directly ascribed to Jesus, but assumed to be a universal (and original) practice. That it was so is confirmed by the Epistles, but the facts of importance are all contained in Acts.“ 

Also in the same book on page 336 in the footnote number one, Professor Lake makes an astonishing discovery in the so-called Teaching or Didache. The Didache has an astonishing contradiction i.e. found in it. One passage refers to the necessity of baptism in the name of the Lord, which is Jesus the other famous passage teaches a Trinitarian Baptism. Lake raises the probability that the apocryphal Didache or the early Catholic Church Manual may have also been edited or changed to promote the later Trinitarian doctrine. It is a historical fact that the Catholic Church at one time baptised its converts in the name of Jesus but later changed to Trinity baptism.

In the actual description of baptism in the Didache the trine (Trinity) formula is used; in the instructions for the Eucharist (communion) the condition for admission is baptism in the name of the Lord. It is obvious that in the case of an eleventh-century manuscript *the trine formula was almost certain to be inserted in the description of baptism, while the less usual formula had a chance of escaping notice when it was only used incidentally.”

The Catholic University of America in Washington, D. C. 1923, New Testament Studies Number 5: The Lord’s Command To Baptize An Historical Critical Investigation. By Bernard Henry Cuneo page 27:

  • “The passages in Acts and the Letters of St. Paul. These passages seem to point to the earliest form as baptism in the name of the Lord.” Also we find. “Is it possible to reconcile these facts with the belief that Christ commanded His disciples to baptise in the trine form? Had Christ given such a command, it is urged, the Apostolic Church would have followed Him, and we should have some trace of this obedience in the New Testament. No such trace can be found. The only explanation of this silence, according to the anti-traditional view, is this the short christological (Jesus Name) formula was (the) original, and the longer trine formula was a later development.”

A History of The Christian Church:

1953 by Williston Walker former Professor of Ecclesiastical History at Yale University. On page 95 we see the historical facts again declared. “With the early disciples baptism generally was “in the name of Jesus Christ.” There is no mention of baptism in the name of the Trinity in the New Testament, except in the command attributed to Christ in Matthew 28:19. That text is early, (but not the original) however. It underlies the Apostles’ Creed, and the practice recorded (*or interpolated) in the Teaching, (or the Didache) and by Justin. The Christian leaders of the third century retained the recognition of the earlier form, and, in Rome at least, baptism in the name of Christ was deemed valid, if irregular, certainly from the time of Bishop Stephen (254-257).“ On page 61 Professor and Church historian Walker, reviles the true origin and purpose of Matthew 28:19:

  • “This Text is the first man-made Roman Catholic Creed that was the prototype for the later Apocryphal Apostles’ Creed. Matthew 28:19 was invented along with the Apocryphal Apostles’ Creed to counter so-called heretics and Gnostics that baptised in the name of Jesus Christ! Marcion although somewhat mixed up in some of his doctrine still baptised his converts the Biblical way in the name of Jesus Christ. Matthew 28:19 is the first non-Biblical Roman Catholic Creed! The spurious Catholic text of Matthew 28:19 was invented to support the newer triune, Trinity doctrine. Therefore, Matthew 28:19 is not the “Great Commission of Jesus Christ.” Matthew 28:19 is the great Catholic hoax! Acts 2:38, Luke 24:47, and 1 Corinthians 6:11 give us the ancient original words and teaching of Yeshua/ Jesus! Is it not also strange that Matthew 28:19 is missing from the old manuscripts of Sinaiticus, Curetonianus and Bobiensis? While the power of the episcopate and the significance of churches of apostolical (Catholic) foundation was thus greatly enhanced, the Gnostic crisis saw a corresponding development of (man-made non-inspired spurious) creed, at least in the West. Some form of instruction before baptism was common by the middle of the second century. At Rome this developed, apparently, between 150 and 175, and probably in opposition to Marcionite Gnosticism, into an explication of the baptismal formula of Matthew 28:19 the earliest known form of the so-called Apostles Creed.“

Catholic Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger makes this confession as to the origin of the chief Trinity text of Matthew 28:19:

  • “The basic form of our profession of faith took shape during the course of the second and third centuries in connection with the ceremony of baptism. So far as its place of origin is concerned, the text (Matthew 28:19) came from the city of Rome.” 

The Trinity baptism and text of Matthew 28:19 therefore did not originate from the original Church that started in Jerusalem around AD 33. It was rather, as the evidence proves, a later invention of Roman Catholicism that was completely fabricated. Very few know about these historical facts.

Conclusion:

  • None of the disciples baptised: “in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit.”
  • The Scholars quoted all agree that it was not part of the original text but an interpolation.

77 Biblical Reasons why the TRINITY DOESN´T EXIST:

Pavle Simović

  1. Where in the Scriptures does it say that God is a Trinity?
  1. Where in the Bible are the terms “God the Son” or “God the holy Spirit” found?
  1. Was Jesus wrong in declaring that His Father was “the only true God” (John 17:3)?
  1. Why does God say in the First Commandment of the Decalogue, “I am the Lord thy God… Thou shalt have no other gods before me” (Exodus 20:3,4), ), if the Deity is in fact a plural of three gods?
  1. Did Jesus agree with the declaration, “Hear, Israel! The Lord is our God, the Lord is one!” (Deuteronomy 6:4; compare Mark 12:28-34)?
  1. Did Jesus misrepresent the relationship between Him and God when He said, “My Father is greater than I” (John 14:28)? How is it possible that the Father is greater among the “co-equal” members of the Trinity?
  1. How could the apostle Paul declare that “the head of Christ is God” (1 Corinthians 11:3) if they are equal members of the Trinity?
  1. Did the apostle Paul agree that there is only one God (Romans 3:30)?
  1. Why does Paul make a unique distinction when he speaks of “eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God” (1 Timothy 1:17), if there are three co-eternal gods?
  1. Did the apostle Paul err in declaring that “there is but one God, the Father, of Whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by Whom are all things…” (1 Corinthians 8:6)?
  1. Did the apostle James perhaps believe in more than one God (James 2:19)?
  1. Why does Judas distinguish between “the only Lord (Despotos in Greek), lord or owner in the absolute sense, the one who has complete jurisdiction over all] God, and our Lord [Greek Kurios] Jesus Christ” (Jude 1:4)?
  1. How is it that Paul states that there is “one Lord [Jesus]” and one God and Father of all, who is above all” (Ephesians 4:4-6), if there are in fact three co-equal gods?
  1. Did God misrepresent His “co-equal” and “eternal fellow” of the “Trinity” when He Jesus’ baptism the Father said, “This is my beloved Son” (Matthew 3:17)?
  1. Did God once again misinform Jesus’ disciples about His true identity on the Mount of Transfiguration when He repeated “This is my beloved Son” (Matthew 17:5)?
  1. Did Peter misidentify Jesus when he declared, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matthew 16:13-17; compare John 6:69), or did he receive confirmation from the Father? Why didn’t he recognize Jesus as the “second person of the deity”?
  1. Why did Paul, in his first sermon immediately after his conversion, “preach Christ that he is the Son of God” (Acts 9:20)? Shouldn’t he have said that he was a “member of the Divine Trinity”?
  2. Was Martha wrong when she confessed, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of God, which should come into the world” (John 11:27)?
  1. Why did the accusation of the Jewish leaders and priests against Jesus remain only in the context of His presentation as “Son of God” and “Christ / Messiah” (Matthew 26:63; Luke 22:67, 70; John 19:7), if He was the “second person of a deity”, etc ?.
  1. Did Philip misrepresent the gospel to the Ethiopian courtier who finally made a confession of faith: “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God” (Acts 8:37)?
  1. Why did God need to give the Son “life in Himself” (John 5:26) if the Son is in fact the “second co-eternal person of the deity” who always had life?
  1. How is it that even demons (fallen angels) knew that Jesus was “the Son of God” (Matthew 8:29)? Could those who once lived in the presence of God have been misinformed?
  1. If God is “triune” (3 in 1 and 1 in 3), does it mean: i) that He sent Himself into the world; ii) that He died to reconcile the world with Himself; iii) that He resurrected Himself; iv) that He ascended Himself to Heaven; c) that He prays and intercedes before Himself in Heaven; vi) that He is the sole mediator between man and Himself; vii) that He is invisible and yet seen; viii) that God is omnipotent still needed to be strengthened by angels; ix) that He is an omniscient God but did not know the day of His return; x) that He is as great as His Father but that the Father is greater than Him; xi) that He is equal to the Father but He is still the Father; xii) that He is the Son but of the same age as the Father; xiii) that He is the Son who has the Father, and God who has no Father; xiv) that He is a born Son and an unborn God; xv) that He is truly God and truly man; xvi) that He came out of Himself; xvii) that He gave strength to Himself; xviii) that He thanked to Himself; xix) that He bore a testimony to Himself; xx) that He has returned to Himself; xxi) that He sits to the right hand of Himself; xxii) that He is His own Father and His own Son; xxiii) that He left Heaven and yet was there all the time…
  1. Why is the Son of God called “the image of the invisible God” (Colossians 1:15; Hebrews 1:3) if He is in fact another co-eternal and co-equal god?
  1. Why is Jesus called “the firstborn of every creature” (Colossians 1:15; Hebrews 1:6) if He is a “co-eternal” and “co-equal” God with the Father and with the holy Spirit?
  1. How is it that Jesus Christ is the “only begotten son” (monogenes) of the Father (John 1:14; 1:18; 3:16; 3:18; 1 John 4:9) if he is a “co-eternal member of the Trinity”?
  1. How and why is the Son (Jesus Christ) always and without exception receiving authorisation from the Father and is instructed or appointed by God the Father (John 5:22; Matthew 28:18; John 8:28, 42; Hebrews 1:6, etc.), if He Himself is a co-eternal and co-equal god?
  1. Is the holy Spirit, if he is an equal member of the Divine Trinity, actually the Father of Christ (Matthew 1:18)?
  1. Why does John mention only God and the Word when he refers to the creation (John 1:1-3, 14)?
  1. How is it that Paul lists only two Divine Beings who were involved in the creation (Ephesians 3:9; Colossians 1:15-16; Hebrews 1:1-2)?
  1. Why in Paul’s, Peter’s and John’s writings does it always say that grace and peace come only from the Father and the Son (Romans 1:7; 1 Corinthians 1:3; 2 Corinthians 1:2; Galatians 1:3; Ephesians 1:2 Philippians 1:2, Colossians 1:2, 1 Thessalonians 1:1, 2 Thessalonians 1:2, 1 Timothy 1:2, 2 Timothy 1:2, Titus 1:4, Philemon 1:3, Peter 1:2; 2 John 1:3)?
  1. Why did Jesus completely omit the holy Spirit when He declared that eternal life depends on knowing God and Him (John 17:3)?
  1. Who and why forged the text in 1 John 5:7, a section known as Comma Johanneum? Was it to support the dogma of the Trinity, which does not exist in the Bible?
  1. Because at Pentecost, just ten days after Christ’s last instructions to the disciples before His ascension into heaven (Matthew 28:19-20; Acts 1:2-3), Peter preached that “everyone should be baptised in the name of Jesus Christ” (Acts 2:38), does this mean that he had already “forgotten” the Trinitarian baptismal formula, that the inspiration under which he preached was not valid, or was it that the formula in Matthew’s Gospel was falsified in the fourth century, as the (scientifically proven) Comma Johanneum (1 John 5:7) was?
  1. How is it that in the New Covenant there is no recorded example of someone being baptised “in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy Spirit,” but only in the name of Jesus Christ (Acts 2:38; Acts 8:12; Acts 8:16); Acts 10:48; Acts 19:5; Acts 22:16; Romans 6:3; 1 Corinthians 1:13 and Galatians 3:27)?
  1. Why does the Bible never teach us to love, worship, or pray to the holy Spirit?
  1. Jesus declares that only the Son saw the Father (John 6:46; Luke 10:22). How can the holy Spirit be a literal being without ever seeing the Father?
  1. Why did the apostle John omit the holy Spirit when he said that “our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ” (1 John 1:3)?
  1. How is it that the Bible speaks only of the thrones of the Father and the Son, and the throne of the holy Spirit is never mentioned?
  1. Why did the Father never speak to the holy Spirit?
  1. Why did Jesus never speak to the holy Spirit?
  1. Why did the holy Spirit never speak to Jesus?
  1. Why did the holy Spirit never speak to the Father?
  1. Why did the holy Spirit manifest in the form of a dove at Jesus’ baptism (Matthew 3:16) if He is God Himself? Wouldn’t that be a direct violation of God’s Commandment on the Prohibition of Idolatry and the Representation of Deity by Material Things (Exodus 20:4; Deuteronomy 4:15-19)?
  1. How many “holy spirits” are there if the dogma of the Trinity is correct?
  1. Why does Paul say that there is only one Spirit (Ephesians 4:4), while the Bible speaks of the “Spirit of God”, the “Spirit of Christ” (Romans 8:9), the “Spirit of the Lord”? Is it a separate being or the Spirit spoken of throughout Scripture: “God sent the Spirit of his Son” (Galatians 4:6); the spirit through which the Father and the Son dwell in the faithful (John 14:23; Ephesians 2:18; Galatians 2:20; Philippians 1:19; 1 Peter 1:11)?
  1. How is it that “the day and hour of Christ’s second coming” no one knows, neither the angels in heaven nor the Son, but the Father” (Mark 13:32)? Why is the holy Spirit not mentioned as an equal God who should also know this?
  1. Why does Scripture call “antichrists” those who deny the literal Father and Son (1 John 2:22-23; Jude 1:4)?
  1. How is it that the Son of God is the only being who knows the Father (Luke 10:22)?
  1. How is it that the Father and the Son are the only Divine Beings that one can hate (John 15:23-24)?
  1. How is it that only two Beings are involved in the intercession for us if, according to the dogma of the Trinity, the holy Spirit is the mediator: “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus” (1 Timothy 2:5)?
  1. Why does the same verse (1 Timothy 2:5) explicitly state that there is “only one God” and why is Jesus not even called “God-man”?
  1. Why do we owe “Salvation to our God who sits upon the throne, and unto the Lamb” (Revelation 7:10)? Does the holy Spirit have no merit?
  1. If Jesus Christ is one of the three co-eternal gods, how could He die on the cross and testify by Himself that he was “dead” (Revelation 1:18), if we know that God is the only immortal being (1 Timothy 6:16)?
  1. How is it that in Divine revelation, Stephen saw in heaven only “the Son of man standing at the right hand of God” (Acts 7:56)? Where did the third member go?
  1. How is it that we will be “heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ” (Romans 8:17)? Where is the third?
  1. Why does not the holy Spirit testify of Christ, but only the Father who sent him (John 8:18)?
  1. Why does Jesus say, “Believe in God, believe also in me” (John 14:1) if there is another god we should believe in?
  1. Why does John associate faith in Jesus Christ, the Son of God, with the acquisition of eternal life (John 20:31; 1 John 5:10-12) if God is in fact a Trinity of three co-eternal gods?
  1. Why does John say that the world is conquered by those who believe that Jesus is the Son of God (1 John 5:5)?
  1. Why does the “antichrist” deny only the Father and the Son (1 John 2:22,23) if there is also a holy spirit god?
  1. Why do the one hundred and forty four thousand only “having His [Christ’s] Father’s name written in their foreheads” (Revelation 14:1) if there are two more co-equal gods?
  1. Why do the saved in Heaven say that “salvation to our God, who sits on the throne, and the Lamb” (Revelation 7:10)? How is it possible that they don’t know about the “third person of the deity” and thank him too?
  1. Why is there no holy Spirit in the “kingdom of Christ and God” (Ephesians 5:5)?
  1. Why, after the completion of the Plan of Salvation, there is again no holy Spirit on God’s throne, but only the throne of God and the Lamb / Christ (Revelation 22:1)?
  1. Why will “the Son also Himself be subject unto him (God)” after the realisation of the Plan of Salvation if he is a co-equal god (1 Corinthians 15:27, 28)?
  1. Why do we only honor the Father and the Son (John 5:23)?
  1. Why does the apostle James say of Himself that he is “a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ” (James 1:1)? Did he refuse to serve the third?
  1. Why does Jesus emphasise that He is in unity only with the Father (John 10:30) if there is a “triune God”?
  1. Why did Jesus promise His disciples, and Christians in all ages to come, that He “will not leave us comfortless” (John 14:18) and that He would be “with you always, even unto the end of the world” (Matthew 28:20), if the holy Spirit, as a separate being, would be the one who performs the act of conviction, consolation, etc.?
  1. How is it that the Spirit of truth does not speak for Himself, but the Father who tells him what to say, and that “He” is Christ (John 8:28; 12:49; 14:10, 24 and 16:13)?
  1. How is it that throughout the Scriptures, God the Father is always the Source and the highest Authority from Whom everything comes, and the Son is God’s Divine channel, through which everything is (John 12:49; John 14:10; John 14 John 24:28), either in physical or spiritual manifestation, if there are three co-equal gods (the third is actually nowhere to be found, while with the two mentioned there is a clear hierarchy and domain of action that never changes)?
  1. Who actually raised Jesus from the grave, if God is triune (see Acts 2:24; 2:32; 3:15; 4:10; 5:30; 10:40; 13:30,33,34,37; 17:31; Romans 4:24; 6:4; 10:9; 1 Corinthians 6:14; 15:15; 2 Corinthians 4:14; Galatians 1:1; Ephesians 1:20; Colossians 2:12; 1 Thessalonians 1:10; 1 Peter 1:21)?
  1. How is it that Jesus Christ, after ascending and taking authority in Heaven (Matthew 28:18), needed God the Father to give Him revelation (Revelation 1:1) if He Himself is an equal omniscient god?
  1. If Jesus is a co-eternal God with the Father, why did he tell Mary Magdalene that He ascends to “my God and your God” (John 20:17)?
  1. Why in Revelation 3:12 does Jesus call his Father “my God” three times? (see also Matthew 27:46) Is there only one true God in Heaven or perhaps a hierarchy of lower and higher gods? How does this fit into the dogma of the “triune god” and the three “co-eternal” and “co-equal” Beings?
  1. If Jesus was obviously not a member of a “Trinity” or a Trinitarian, then why are you?

ADVENTISTS:

Despite these unbeatable facts, the disarmed bearers of the Trinity doctrine show the works of Tertullian (160-220ad) from Carthage, who wrote about the Trinity much earlier than the council of Nicaea (325ad) happened. Does this mean that if a person wrote their belief prior to the establishment of the doctrine, the teaching has to be true? According to the method, a few hundred years later, somebody could prove with the books of Dr. Kellogg, that we have believed in the Far Eastern nature of the holy Spirit, or that the Apocrypha were true.

But when an Apostasy occurs, it always begins in a small circle and spreads slowly more and more to the larger masses. If Tertullian really represented the faith of that time, why did the majority of the (Arian) bishops in Nicaea reject the Trinity? Arian teaching is misrepresented by claiming that Jesus is not recognised as a Divine being, which is a lie. True Arian teaching rejects only the Trinity!

All of the old Adventist pioneers, including Ellen White, were (semi) Arians. Why would the Trinity have to be established in the year 381ad, if it was already part of the Christian faith? Why was Prof. Prescott unable to establish a Trinity with the chief leaders of the General Conference in 1919? Why was determined resistance, if we, as a church, had already believed in the Trinity for a while?

Today it is said that James White, known as the GREATEST OPPONENT of the Trinity Doctrine, used the modern version of the verse at a baptism, without any opposition from EGW. If that were the truth, it would mean that James White believed in the One God, but would have practiced the opposite! Do we really have original evidence today that Adventists were really baptised in the name of the Trinity prior to EGW losing her influence to the church in 1888?

What did Ellen White write about baptism? In whose name should it be?

  • “But with clearer light, they gladly accepted Christ as their Redeemer, and with this step of advance came a change in their obligations. As they received a purer faith, there was a corresponding change in their life. In token of this change, and as an acknowledgment of their faith in Christ, they were rebaptised in the name of Jesus.“ {Ellen White AA, p. 285.1}
  • “After the wonderful manifestation of the holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost, Peter exhorted the people to repentance and baptism in the name of Christ, for the remission of their sins.“ {Ellen White: Acts 2:38, 39 und GC ix.2}

Then, how is it that there are some quotes from EGW describing baptism “in the name of the Father, Son, and holy Spirit”? In any case, these would contradict the previous quotes, as well as the entire Bible. There is ample evidence of how many quotes were removed from her books and how many were brought in by infiltrated servants from the other side. 

However, we must not be discouraged and reject the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy. The simplest criterion for us to be able to recognise in prayer whether a verse or quote is original or not is to see whether it harmonises with the rest of the Bible or Spirit of Prophecy, or if it teaches something that is 180 degrees opposite. Ellen White also announced that her quotes would be under attack:

  • “Whatever wrong construction may be placed upon my testimony by those who profess righteousness, yet know not God, I shall in humility go forward with my work.“ {Ellen White: SM1, p.73, and Manuscript 4, 1883}

FIRST COMMANDMENT OR TRINITY?

Why is the belief that the holy Spirit is God, as stated in our new list of points of belief, a literal and direct VIOLATION OF THE FIRST COMMANDMENT about the one and only God? The title of the SUPREME, the ONLY true God, the Ruler of the whole universe and the great Law-giver refers, according to the following quotes, ONLY to God the Father, the Only One Who bears the right to it and the highest worship!

  • Jehovah (Father), the eternal, self-existent, uncreated One, Himself the Source and Sustainer of all, is alone entitled to supreme reverence and worship.” {Ellen White: PP, 305} {7ABC 439.2}
  • Our heavenly Father is the God of the universe, and Christ is the Divine Son, the One equal with the Father.” {Ms49 – April 14, 1906, p. 26}
  • The Lord GOD of heaven is our LEADER. He is a leader Whom we can safely follow; for He never makes a mistake. Let us honour GOD and His SON Jesus Christ, THROUGH Whom He communicates with the world.” {Ellen White: 1BC, p. 1117, 1903}
  • “…it is God (Father), the only true and living God, to Whom our worship and reverence are due. …Let the brightest example the world has yet seen be your example, rather than the greatest and most learned men of the age, who know not God, nor Jesus Christ Whom he has sent. The Father and the Son alone are to be exalted.” {Ellen White: YI, July 7, 1898 par. 2}
  • Jehovah is THE ONLY true God, and He is to be reverenced and worshiped.” {Ellen White: 6T, p. 166, 1901}
  • “As Jehovah, the supreme Ruler, God could not personally communicate with sinful men, but He so loved the world that He sent Jesus to our world as a revelation of Himself.” {Ellen White: 9MR, p. 122.3, 1903}
  • THE GREAT Jehovah has proclaimed from His throne, ‘This is My beloved SON.’” {Ellen White: DA, p. 579.4}
  • Jehovah is the name given to Christ.” {Ellen White: ST, 3. May 1899, par 18}
  • “Thy words were found, and I did eat them; and thy word was unto me the joy and rejoicing of mine heart: for I Am called by Thy name, O LORD God of hosts.“ {Jeremiah 15:16}

God the Father, the GREAT Jehovah, also gave the Son the name Jehovah to give Him the honor of being treated in the same way as the Father, without breaking the first commandment!

  • The Son of God was NEXT in authority TO THE GREAT LAWGIVER.” {Ellen White: RH, December 17, 1872 par. 1} {Ellen White: 2SP 9}
  • God is a moral governor as well as a Father. HE is the LAWGIVER.“ {Ellen White: 12MR 208}
  • The Ancient of days is GOD THE FATHER. Says the psalmist, “Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever Thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, Thou art God.” [Psalm 90:2.] It is He, THE SOURCE OF ALL BEING, AND THE FOUNTAIN OF ALL LAW, i.e. to preside in the Judgment. And holy angels, as ministers and witnesses, in number “ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands,” attend this great tribunal.” {Ellen White: GC 1888, p. 479}

Is there still a doubt that the One who really gave the 10 Commandments is only God the Father, to Whom the following words of the FIRST commandment IN SINGULAR apply? Let’s read the first commandment:

  • “And God spake all these words, saying, IAM the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before ME.“ {Exodus 20:1-3}

In Revelation 14:12 and 12:17 we read a clear confirmation of the words of affiliation, and that the 10 commandments are from God the Father, and that the faith is Jesus’.

  • “Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the COMMANDMENTS OF GOD, and the faith of Jesus.“ {Revelation 14:12}
  • “…which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.“ {Revelation 12:17}

God the Father communicated with mankind through His Son, brought Israel out of Egypt, created the Earth and us, and through Jesus revealed the 10 Commandments. Jesus only spoke in the name of the Father. In the quotes below, we can recognise that God the Father is the Source of the law of the 10 commandments in Sinai:

  • The Lord God of heaven is our Leader. He is a leader Whom we can safely follow; for He never makes a mistake. Let us honor God and His Son Jesus Christ, THROUGH Whom He communicates with the world.” {Ellen White: 1BC, p. 1117, 1903}
  • Christ was not only the leader of the Hebrews in the wilderness—the Angel in Whom was the name of Jehovah, and who, veiled in the cloudy pillar, went before the host—but it was He who GAVE the law to Israel.” {Ellen White: PP, p. 366, 1890}
  • “When the law was spoken, the Lord, the Creator of heaven and earth, STOOD BY THE SIDE OF His Son, enshrouded in the fire and the smoke on the mount.“ {Ellen White: ST 15. October 1896, par. 4} {Ellen White: 1BC, 1103.13}
  • “That there might be no mistake in the matter, the Father and the Son descended upon Mount Sinai, and there the precepts of HIS (Father’s) law were spoken in awful grandeur in the hearing of all Israel.” {Ellen White: ST 15. October 1896} {1BC 1103.13} {EGW: Manuscript 3, 1886, CTr 109.6}  {Ellen White: Christ Triumphant, 12. April, CTr 109.6}
  • It was Christ who (just) SPOKE the law on Mount Sinai” {Ellen White: FE, 237.1}

The words of the first commandment IN SINGULAR have to do exclusively with God the Father, Who, according to the Bible and EGW, is the Only One bears the name of the only true God. But then, what did Jesus mean by these words?

– “If ye love Me, keep My commandments.“ {John 14:15}

Does Jesus say in these words that He is also the Author of the 10 Commandments? Or does He make a call to the Commandments that He brought, proclaimed, and kept in the name of His Father? We all know that only the highest instance writes the constitution, which is the binding, primary law of that state. In that sense, of course, the constitutional law of God the Father is also the law of Jesus, since He, together with the Father, is the Co-Ruler of that heavenly estate, although only the Beneficiary but not the Writer of that law. We read in the Gospel of John that everything comes from the Father:

  • “He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father’s which sent me.“ {John 14:24}

Only God the Father, and not a Trinity, is that God, the Source of the law with the 10 commandments and the Head over all, even over His Son Jesus!  But we should also think that Jesus is the only one that can be in us, because only through His power and guidance in prayer can we overcome sin. If Jesus does not live in us with His Spirit, then our faith becomes worthless.

666 = Trinity

The search for complete truth, as described in this chapter, does not remove any point of the pioneer’s truth. It only represents an additional deepening of the old truth:

  • “And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, OR the name of the beast, OR the number of his name. Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.“ {Revelation 13:17-18}

Why, in addition to the truth about the false week as a mark of the beast, are we researching additional aspects in that area? Because Ellen White announced that in the last days we will need even stronger protection from the enemy and his scams.

  • “The light we have received upon the third angel’s message is the true light. The mark of the beast is exactly what it has been proclaimed to be. Not all in regard to this matter is yet understood, nor will it be understood until the unrolling of the scroll; but a most solemn work is to be accomplished in our world. The Lord’s command to His servants is: “Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet, and show My people their transgression, and the house of Jacob their sins. Isaiah 58:1.“ {Ellen White: 6T 17.1} 

We all know about the fact that the mark of the beast is Sunday, and that the name of the beast brings acceptance of the papacy and its religious and secular authority in all (additional) aspects. The last point is the number 666. Theologians represent the name of the beast, i.e. Papacy and the number of her name 666 in fused form, although the conjunction “OR” clearly separates them! 

When we look at all three components separately, as Revelation alone shows us, we come to the fact that the number 666 signifies the Trinity! Eternal life also requires the rejection of all 3 points! It is not enough to just reject Sunday! What does the Catholic Church itself write about the Trinity and its position?

  • “The mystery of the Most holy Trinity is the central mystery of Christian faith and life. It is the mystery of God in Himself. It is therefore THE SOURCE OF ALL THE OTHER MYSTERIES of faith, the light that enlightens them. It is the most fundamental and essential teaching in the “hierarchy of the truths of faith”  {Vatican Catechism 234} 
  • “The mystery of the Most holy Trinity is the central mystery of the Christian faith and of Christian life. God alone can make it known to us by revealing Himself as Father, Son and holy Spirit.“ {Vatican Catechism 261} 
  • “And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou marvel? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carrieth her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns.” {Revelation 17:7}

Revelation tells us clearly that the church of the other side carries a secret, i.e. mystery. The Catholic Church itself emphasises that the mystery of the Trinity is the source of all other mysteries! Of course, that point is central, because it decides which God we worship!

Heavenly Sanctuary and 666:

  • “The minds of believers were to be directed to the heavenly sanctuary, where Christ had entered to make atonement for His people.” {Ellen White: 1SM, p. 67} 
  • “The correct understanding of the ministration in the heavenly sanctuary is the foundation of our faith.” {Ellen White: Letter 208, 1906} 
  • “Thou shalt also make a table of shittim wood.“ {Exodus 25:23}
  • “And thou shalt overlay it with pure gold, and make thereto a crown of gold round about. And thou shalt make unto it a border of an hand breadth round about, and thou shalt make a golden crown to the border thereof round about.“ {Exodus 25:24-25}
  • “And thou shalt set upon the table shewbread before me alway.“ {Exodus 25:30}
  • “And thou shalt set them in TWO rows, SIX on a row, upon the pure table before the LORD.“ {Leviticus 24:6}

The Old Testament shows a table with 12 thin loaves in the sanctuary, representing 12 tribes. That table is surrounded by a golden wreath, which is also surrounded by another larger golden wreath. In the middle of the table lie 12 loaves of bread. When the crown does not stand on the head of the ruler, then what surrounds it or on which it stands represents the area of ​​his power. That the wreath symbolises the crown and authority, as well as the sacrifice, we see at the crucifixion of Jesus, when Satan’s servants put a wreath of thorns on Jesus, to ridicule His rule over the Universe. Julius Caesar wore a wreath without thorns as a crown. The table in the sanctuary represents absolutely everything, as it is surrounded by two golden wreaths, which represent the crowns and authority of God the Father and His Son Jesus.

We also see that Jesus is below the Father in his ruling position, because the larger crown of the Father’s crown surrounds the smaller crown of Jesus’ crown. They are both complete Rulers over the entire Universe because all other created Beings are both under the Father and the Son. We see the reign of only these Two in Revelation, because it describes the heavenly convocation after the victory over sin! Why, then, does Jesus still bear the name of the Lamb, as part of the plan of salvation? Because He will forever preserve His human nature, and has the scars as a remembrance of His sacrifice and victory over sin!

  • “And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him.“ {Revelation 22:3}

If God is a Trinity, and not God the Father, then Jesus has a double existence, because on the one hand he “exists in the God of the Trinity”, and on the other hand He is also the Lamb of God! If the holy Spirit is God, why does he not sit on the throne that’s described after the plan of salvation is accomplished? It is clear to all honest Bible students how false the teaching of the Trinity is and mathematically meaningless because number 2 does not mean 3! The claim that the holy Spirit is still present but not in that form is tragic because the Bible does not speak of two thrones or three thrones, but only of one that God the Father shares with his Son. This truth is clarified through the 12 loaves, which symbolise the authority of God the Father and the Son, the 12 tribes of the Old Testament, and the 12 tribes of the New Testament in Revelation. 

The 12 tribes represent God’s people on Earth. Also, the presence of the 12 tribes in both Testaments, confirms that this is an eternal principle of heavenly rule and not just a temporary symbolism of the sacrificial system of the Old Testament. The thin loaves are arranged in 2 sets of 6 loaves, which shows that the Father and the Son as 2 Beings share power and rule together over God’s people and that Jesus has the same authority over God’s people as the Father. 12 loaves are divided into two sets, i.e. 2×6 = 12 and not in 3 i.e. 3×4 = 12 because the Bible does not teach the Trinity nor three Divine Beings on the throne. Why are 12 loaves divided into two sets? There is no other answer, except that there are only 2 Divine Beings and Rulers. Why aren’t there 3 wreaths? Why in Psalm 110:1 do we see that is only the Father and the Son who sit on the throne?

  • “And he put the table in the tent of the congregation, upon the side of the tabernacle NORTHWARD, without the vail.“ {Exodus 40:22}
  • “For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the NORTH: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be LIKE the most High.“ {Isaiah 14:13,14}

We can see that these two wreaths actually symbolise the crowns and the power of the Father and the Son by the fact that the table stands on the north side, just like the throne of God also does in heaven! On the other hand, we see that Satan Himself wants to steal God’s throne on the north side, which is symbolised by this table with 2×6 loaves. In what way does Satan transmit his desire to be equated with the Most High? By adding a third pile of 6 loaves of bread, in order to “show” in front of the whole Universe that he has the same authority as God Himself! There is no other way to interpret this work, no matter how hard you try! 

For this reason, it is no coincidence that our theologians do not study in college the symbolism of the division of the 12 loaves into two groups of 6 or 2 wreaths, just as rabbis do not receive education about the book of Daniel, because it would lead them to the truth about Jesus. In the attempts of the enemy to equate Himself with the true God, we can understand why he wants the third pile of 6 loaves as a sign of power and authority. As a falsification, he enters the third number 6, as the third set of loaves of bread in the sanctuary. The number of the Father and the Son, Satan merged into the number 66. To this, he added his number 6 and equated Himself with the Most High. That is how Satan made his number 666. The enemy wants to blind undecided people that he is God and has the same power as the true God. 

Satan merged the Father’s number 6, Christ’s number 6, and his number 6 into one digit 666 and thus created the Trinity! The Father’s number 6 and Son’s number 6 do not merge into one digit 66, because that would mean Duality. God is not a Duality! There is no one God: Father and Son. The expression, one God, always and exclusively refers only to the Father! We see from the whole Word of God that the Son always exalts the Father, and although He was one with His Father in thoughts, intentions, goals, He never wanted to be equal with Him. The table with the loaves reveals that the Father is greater than the Son (‘… for My Father is greater than Me.’ John 14:28), because the Father’s wreath surrounds and is greater than the Son’s wreath; while two equal rows of loaves show that The Father and the Son are one in nature, in character, in intention.

  • Christ, the Word, the only begotten of God, was one with the eternal Father—one in nature, in character, in purpose—the only being that could enter into all the counsels and purposes of God.” {Ellen White: PP, p. 34} 
  • “Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made Himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men.” {Philippians 2:6,7}

Satan is the one who wants to be equated with the Most High, who wants to instill in us a lie in thought, in faith, in teaching, that there is one God: the Father, the Son, and the holy Spirit. In this way, he creates the Trinity. As a picture of that Trinity, these sixes are merged into one number 666. With the living God, these sixes do not unite! Each set of loaves stands for itself on the table and they do not merge into one number. The Father’s bread on the table is clearly separated from Christ’s, and these two sets must not be marked with the number 66.

  • “And thou shalt take fine flour, and bake twelve cakes thereof: two tenth deals shall be in one cake. And thou shalt set them in two rows, six on a row, upon the pure table before the LORD.“ {Leviticus 24:5,6}

In the holy Word of God, we find the number 666, where it is clearly indicated that it is the number of the beast. The number 66 is nowhere in the Word of God and the Spirit of Prophecy.

  • “Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred three score and six.“ {Revelation 13:18}

Now we can recognise that the number 666, i.e. The Trinity, recognises Lucifer as “God”, just as the celebration of Sunday recognises him as “God” and he receives prayers on Earth. The symbolic throne, a table with crowns and bread, stands like a real heavenly throne on the north side and symbolises the power and rule of God and Jesus. Since Satan wants to take over power and rule, he also brings his 6 loaves to the north side. This was completely fulfilled both in the triple Deity of pagan religions and in fallen Christianity, with the extended number 6 + 6 in the trinity – 666.

  • “And I heard the number of them which were sealed: and there were sealed an hundred and forty and four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel. Of the tribe of Juda were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Reuben were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Gad were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Aser were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Nepthalim were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Manasses were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Simeon were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Levi were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Issachar were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Zabulon were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Joseph were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Benjamin were sealed twelve thousand.“ {Revelation 7:4-8}

The 12 tribes in Revelation, which make up the 144,000 sealed ones, confirms once again that the two rows of 6 loaves of bread from the Old Testament are still important today, not just as a sacrificial symbolism. The description of the 12 tribes, with a number of 12,000 per tribe, emphasises that they are the people of God. These tribes do not exist now, but were, except for the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, exterminated. The negation of the Trinity is confirmed in another way. In Revelation we get a description of 7 Christian communities, which together all form one community of God, because God has only one Christian community and not countless of different churches:

  • “The mystery of the seven stars which thou sawest in my right hand, and the seven golden candlesticks. The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches: and the seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the seven churches.“ {Revelation 1:20}

And the Old Testament confirms Jesus’ words that as a Bridegroom, He has only one church as His bride:

  • “Then will I cause to cease from the cities of Judah, and from the streets of Jerusalem, the voice of mirth, and the voice of gladness, the voice of the bridegroom, and the voice of the bride: for the land shall be desolate.“ {Jeremiah 7:34}

In addition, the description of the 7 Spirits, ascending from the throne of God and through Jesus go into the whole Universe, represent only 1 – the holy spirit, just like one church is composed of 12 tribes or of 7 candlesticks. Thus, we can see once again why the Spirit of Prophecy explains that there are three forces in heaven, namely the Father, Jesus, and the power of the holy Spirit emanating from them. Nowhere in the entire Bible do we see a clearer confirmation that the holy Spirit proceeds directly from the Father and the Son, and does not sit on the throne as a Divine Being:

  • “And out of the throne proceeded lightnings and thunderings and voices: and there were seven lamps of fire burning before the throne, which are the seven Spirits of God.“ {Revelation 4:5}

Who sits on the throne, as the Person from Whom the holy Spirit proceeds? It’s God the Father Himself:

  • “And when those beasts give glory and honor and thanks to Him that sat on the throne, Who liveth for ever and ever“ {Revelation 4:9}
  • “I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: His throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire.“ {Daniel 7:9}

Why is Jesus not the One who sits on the throne? Because Revelation describes Him as the Lamb who comes to the Father, the One sitting on the throne, and the One who sends the holy Spirit into the whole earth:

  • “This Spirit is the Spirit of God, and the Spirit of Christ; the Spirit being the same whether it is spoken of as pertaining to God or Christ.  …Again we read of “the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth.” Rev. 1:4; 3:1; 4:5; 5:6. This is unquestionably simply a designation of the holy Spirit, put in this form to signify its perfection and completeness. But it could hardly be so described if it was a person. We never read of the seven Gods or the seven Christs.” {Uriah Smith, Review & Herald, October 28, 1890}  
  • “And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth.“ {Revelation 5:6}

This was the belief of the Adventist pioneers! God confirms this truth in several ways and with different symbols. Despite this confirmation, it is rejected, because the Bible is studied in the pride of knowledge, and not humbly on the knees, asking for God to reveal the truth! In the papacy, the fallen church, the symbolic numbers 7, 10 and 12 are also used:

  • “And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.“ {Revelation 13:1}
  • “So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet colored beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns“ {Revelation 17:3}

These 10 horns represent the symbol of triumph over the Church of God, because it is one of the 10 horns, or 10 pagan nations that conquered Rome and accepted the old apostolic Christianity. There were 3 tribes that, through their Arian doctrine, fought against the Trinity, and because of this the Pope exterminated them. 

But the lie that Arius rejected the Deity of Jesus was written by a victor, who wrote history at his own will and thus rewrote historical facts. The 10 horns signify that even today the Pope does not allow the defense of the truth. According to the power he enjoys, he has 3 horns taken out, but continues to have control over 7 horns – Christianity. Unfortunately, he also has control over Adventism, through the Jesuits who have taken over a good percentage of the leadership of our church.

  • “After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns. I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before Whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things.“ {Daniel 7:7,8}

This helps us to fully recognise why the Pope, according to the prophet Daniel, rose just above the 7 horns, and Revelation confirmed that he remained above them, with power over all 10 horns, just as Satan desired to rise above God. The three tribes – the 3 torn horns, which, like the Arians, stood in the way of spreading the teaching of the Trinity, were the Vandals, the Heruli, and the Ostrogoths. In the beginning, like all other 7 nations, they accepted and took over the old unadulterated Christianity.

The Heruli, like their leader Flavius Odocar (433-493), the first Italian king, had Arian beliefs and rarely interfered in church affairs. The Ostrogoths, led by Theodoric the Great (454-526), enjoyed the freedom of religion that had not been practiced until then. The last king of the Vandals, Gelimer (480-553), after the great battle that marked the collapse of the kingdom, had to refuse the offered consolation act “Patricius”, because he could not renounce his Arian faith:

  • Gelimer was honorably treated, and received large estates in Galicia. He was also offered the rank of a patrician but had to refuse it because he was not willing to change his Arian faith.” {Catholic Encyclopedia (1913), Volume 15, Vandals} 

The only group that accepted the Trinity at that time was just a small circle around the Bishop of Rome, in that same city! That fact alone should lead honest people to deep thinking, as one of the most important pioneers explained:

  • “The doctrine of the Trinity which was established in the church by the council of Nice, A. D. 325. This doctrine destroys the personality of God, and his Son Jesus Christ our Lord. The infamous, measures by which it was forced upon the church which appear upon the pages of ecclesiastical history might well cause every believer in that doctrine to blush.” {J.N. Andrews, March 6, 1855, Review & Herald, vol. 6, no. 24, page 185.} 

The Bishop of Arius, who was a leader in theology of his time fought a great battle for truth against the pagan emperor Constantine, and unfortunately lost this battle at the Council of Nicaea in 325ad. But since many of the believers refused to accept the new belief, the enforcement of the Trinity had to be tried again at the Council of Constantinople in 381ad. This time it was somewhat more successful, although primarily only within the Romans. 

It was not until after the destruction of these 3 nations, that all resistance was extinguished, and the false doctrine triumphed! Such a clear truth, confirmed from several angles, was opposed by philosophers. Many theologians, in their “Pharisaic wisdom”, argue that the number 666 in the New Testament is written in Greek, which in that language does not mean 3 digits with the number 6 next to each other – but three digits of another value, 600 + 60 + 6. Therefore, the connection with 6 + 6 loaves is impossible. But in that verse it says that we can understand that number only with wisdom:

  • “And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is six hundred threescore and six.“  {Revelation 13:17,18}

One question:

If it already says it here that that number has a mathematical number, an arithmetic value, 666, why is wisdom required to calculate it? Since the Pope holds the title “Vicarius Filii Dei”, and a huge number of Protestants understand that it means 666, such a discovery certainly does not represent the wisdom of the last minority at the end of time. When we look at the historical facts, we can see that the number in the Greek language – 666, announced the number of the beast that was coming and which did not yet exist, at a time when the Greek language was dominant. 

That beast, the Pope, and his name in Latin, “Vicarius Filii Dei”, originate from the time of the Roman Empire, when the Latin language was the dominant one. Thus, we see that the number 666 in Greek was only a descriptive announcement of the Latin number system, which would lead to discovering the number 666. Calculating from the Latin name of the papal title “Vicarius Filii Dei”, we get many numbers that have no prophetic biblical meaning, but as a sum, they give us the number 666. An important detail in this case, is that there are literally three 6 digits next to each other. 

This is why the argument of the interpretation of the Greek language is meaningless. According to Revelation, the name “Vicarius Filii Dei” on the Pope’s Tiara must contain the number 666, which is not a name but “the number of her name”, according to most translations in the world. It is an excerpt from that name that only refers to that name, but does not have the same characteristics as the name itself. The number 666 is not a full name, i.e. title, because not all Latin letters in “VICARIUS FILII DEI” are a sign for a number, but only some letters represent a number, the sum of which gives the number 666. 

Vicarius Filii Dei = 666 666 ≠ Vicarius Filii Dei

V=5 I=1 C=100 A=0 R=0 I=1 U=5 S=0 112 

F=0 I=1 L=50 I=1 I=1 53 

D=500 E=0 I=1 501 

112+53+501 = 666 

For this reason, it is meaningless to reverse and say that the number 666 means “Vicarius Filii Dei”, and thus place part of the Pope’s name in the place of the third way of worshiping the beast – number 666. How does the title “Vicarius Filii Dei” belong to the Pope’s name? The designation “Papa Vicarius Filii Dei” represents his full name, part of which is the number 666. The title is always part of the name and belongs to the name, like when “Professor” or “Doctor” always stands by the person’s name. That is why the Pope’s title is part of the second and not the third condition:

  • “And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark (Sunday), OR the name of the beast (the Pope – Vicarius Filii Dei), OR the number of his name (666).“ {Revelation 13:17}

That is why there is an attempt to move the Pope’s title to the third part, so that the number would mean the Pope instead of the Trinity. In other words, the Bible says that we will lose eternal life if we accept Sunday, i.e. mark, OR the Pope i.e. his authority and ecumenism, OR 666 as a third condition, and that 666 must be a special point! It is enough to fall on only one of those three conditions and lose eternal life. Since we clearly read the parting conjunction – OR, it is completely meaningless that we will lose salvation if we accept the pope OR the pope, which today’s theology brings out. 

The name of the Pope as well as the title “Vicarius Filii Dei” signify the power of the Pope and not two different conditions! The prophecy of the number 666 was fulfilled by Satan when he introduced the lie of the Trinity, which was accepted by most Christians, that “he too is God and prayer belongs to him.” Also, the fact that the number 666 was calculated from the Pope’s name shows that the Trinity originates from the Pope and not from the Bible. We can see that in the history of Christianity:

  • Satan, ambitious to exalt Himself, and unwilling to submit to the authority of Jesus, was insinuating against the government of God.“ {Ellen White: EW, p. 145.2 } 

Ellen White wrote in Early Writings that Lucifer’s desire in heaven was to become equal to the Father and the Son. She also saw that Lucifer, even at the third coming of Jesus, would still not admit that he was the father of lies so that even before his own destruction he could lead unrepentant people into a senseless battle against God and the new Jerusalem. That is why even today he hides behind the formulation of the Trinity, as the “third Divine Being”, so that he too can receive prayers, which unfortunately is happening amongst God’s people. It can be heard more and more often how some address the holy Spirit as God, arguing that the Bible does not say anything against that. Jesus, on the other hand, says quite clearly, that “this is how it is written.” Jesus teaches us to address our prayers to our Father in heaven (Matthew 6: 9-13), and the Apostle Paul completes Jesus’ counsel with the following words:

  • “Giving thanks always for all things unto God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.“ {Ephesians 5:20}

Isn’t it strange that in the hundreds of pages of the entire Bible, which describe all the phases of history – before sin, during sin, and after its destruction – there is not a single trace of the teaching of praying to the holy Spirit? If the holy Spirit were a Divine Being, it would be really strange not to pray to him. Unfortunately, instead of accepting the word of God with a humble spirit, the lukewarm Laodicea has a dormant mind, and easily accepts the explanations from the pulpit without studying the Word for herself. God announced – and through Ellen White confirmed it – that when Ezekiel watched through the hole of the temple as the leaders worshiped idols, that prophecy applies directly to us as well, and we see its fulfillment through the doctrine of the Trinity.

We know that the Pharisees were far better educated theologically than any professor of theology today. That they even knew by heart the entire Old Testament and many other writings. Even though the Old Testament already contained the whole message of the plan of salvation, they were not able to understand the most basic truth! And today’s situation is similar or even worse, because even the highest theological title does not prove an understanding of the topic. That is why Jesus had to take the most ordinary fishermen, who humbly and through the power of the holy Spirit, received the complete truth which they further revealed to others.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.