搜寻结果

All trinity studies Previous Download 看中文 Next Who is the Comforter According to the Bible Who is the Comforter According to the Bible? John 14:16-28 tells us many times that the Comforter is Christ by His Spirit, but the moment Jesus says “another Comforter,” most become blind to the fact He is referring to Himself by His Spirit despite His clear words that follow. The Greek word for another is “allos,” which means another of the exact same kind and hence means another as the same kind as Christ. Jesus was present with His disciples in physical form but after His ascension He comes back in another form, that is, by His Spirit. Hence the “another” is His Spirit. Because Christ's Spirit can function independently of Himself, it is like His Spirit is “another.” And because it is His Spirit, it is “another” of the same kind. If the Comforter was someone different, then John would have used the word “heteros,” meaning another of a different kind. Easy to understand once you know. Most also fail to notice that Jesus often speaks of Himself in the third person as He has in this passage. See John 17:1-3 for one such example. Compare “heteros” with “allos” HELPS Word-studies © 1987, 2011 by Helps Ministries, Inc. G2087 héteros – another (of a different kind). 2087 /héteros (“another but distinct in kind”) stands in contrast to 243 /állos (“another of the same kind”). 2087 /héteros (“another of a different quality”) emphasizes it is qualitatively different from its counterpart (comparison). [2087 (héteros) sometimes refers to “another” of a different class group or type (as in Plato; Oxy. papyri).] G243 állos (a primitive word) – another of the same kind; another of a similar type. In v. 16 Jesus says He will send “another” Comforter but leaves no doubt as to who He meant in v. 18. In unmistakable words Jesus says “I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.” This “other Comforter” is none other than Christ Himself in another form (Spirit form). He is not seen (physically) as He was when He was here on earth. He is removed from the eye of sense, but He is still with us in Spirit. The Comforter is referred to as the Spirit of truth in v. 17, which is Christ. Ten verses earlier Jesus says, “I am the truth” (v. 6) and by His Spirit, He is the “Spirit of truth.” In v. 17 we also see that the Comforter is someone whom the world cannot receive because it does not know Him. But Christ tells His disciples that they know the Comforter for He is dwelling with them. The only one with them is Christ! In verse 19 Christ says that in a while the world seeth me no more referring to His death and resurrection, so in v. 18 and 19 Christ is saying that though He is leaving, He will not leave them Comfortless and is going to come back to them. So the disciples knew it was Christ who was going to return to them as their Comforter, but did not understand how. So Judas, not Iscariot, asks Christ how is He going to manifest Himself to them as the Comforter and not unto the world? (v. 22) How did the disciples understand “another Comforter?” Did they understand that Christ was talking about someone else? No! This Judas understood perfectly that it was Christ who was coming back to them and not someone else. Notice that his question is not “WHO” but “HOW?” So he was not wondering “who” but “how” Christ was going to manifest Himself to them as their Comforter. The answer is: by His Spirit, which is something they did not yet understand. In John 16:7 Jesus says, “Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.” So how is it that the Comforter who was yet to be sent to them was dwelling with them in John 14? In John 7:39 we find “But this spoke he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.” If the Holy Spirit was another being as per the trinity doctrine, it would not be dependent on Christ returning to the Father and being glorified before it could be given. The Holy Spirit could not be given until Christ was glorified as this is how Christ returns as another, that is, by His Holy Spirit. John 14:23 above says “we will come unto him and make our abode with him.” That is, both the Father and the Son through the Holy Spirit. This is not a separate person of the Godhead who is being sent, it is the very life of God coming to us through His Son Jesus Christ. Who is more qualified to comfort us other than someone who has lived and suffered as one of us and knows what it is like to be tempted? How precious is it to have both the Father and Son? How many times did Jesus say that He will be our Comforter in John 14? [Parentheses are added] 1. John 14:17 “Even the Spirit of truth [Jesus is the truth and by His Spirit He is the Spirit of truth]; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knows him: but you know him; for he dwelleth with you [Christ is the only one with them], and shall be in you [by His Spirit as the Comforter].” 2. John 14:18 “I [Jesus] will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.” 3. John 14:20 “At that day you shall know that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you [by His Spirit as the Comforter].” 4. John 14:21 “He that has my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him [by His Spirit as the Comforter].” 5. John 14:22 “Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that you [Jesus] will manifest thyself unto us [as the Comforter], and not unto the world?” 6. John 14:23 “If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we [Jesus and His Father] will come unto him, and make our abode with him.” 7. John 14:28 “You heard me say, I [Jesus] am going away and I am coming back to you [by His Spirit as the Comforter].” Note also that the Greek word “paraklētos” is used 5 times in Scripture and refers to Christ. It is used four times in John 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7 and is translated as “Comforter,” and it is used once in 1 John 2:1 where it is translated as “advocate.” 1 John 2:1 “if any man sin, we have an advocate [paraklētos] (Comforter) with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:” [Parentheses are added] Thus Jesus Christ is both our “Comforter” and “advocate.” The Comforter is not another being but Christ Himself by His Spirit. Who but Christ who has been tempted and suffered as us, and lived as one of us is more qualified to Comfort us? How blessed we are to have our Saviour in us as our Comforter! Previous All trinity studies Next Back to top

All trinity studies Previous Download Next Is the Holy Spirit the Third Highest Being in Heaven Is the Holy Spirit the Third Highest Being in Heaven? The Trinity doctrine teaches 3 CO-EQUAL beings and hence it claims the 3 highest BEINGS in Heaven are therefore the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Thus the Trinity doctrine declares the Holy Spirit is the third highest being in heaven. But according to Ellen White in the first chapter of Patriarchs and Prophets (p. 35), the third highest being in Heaven before the entrance of sin was Lucifer. And after the fall, Ellen White says Gabriel was the next in line. “It was Gabriel, the angel next in rank to the Son of God, who came with the divine message to Daniel.” — (E.G. White, DA, p. 234) Now consider the following. Who wants to be like the most High and be worshipped and prayed to as God? Isaiah 14:12-14 informs us that this is Satan's desire. Has Satan devised a clever scheme to regain his lost third position and the worship he craves? By Satan creating the Trinity doctrine, it creates a non-existent third being. Satan can then step into that position he has created and not only receives the worship he desires, but he would also effectively regain the position he lost as the third highest being in heaven. This is known as worship by representation and is what Satan has also done with Sunday worship. Has Satan succeeded in accomplishing his goal of being included as deity? If we now believe the Holy Spirit can be worshipped and prayed to just like the Father and the Son, who actually receives our worship? If the Holy Spirit is not a third being then what spirit would we have according to our belief and who would we be giving our adoration to? It would be Satan himself! Below is even a clearer quote from Ellen White that reveals the Holy Spirit is NOT a being let alone the third highest being as the Trinity doctrine claims. She wrote that Satan was second to Christ making Satan the third highest being in heaven. Hence the Holy Spirit is not some third being called “god the holy spirit” as the Trinity doctrine claims but the Spirit of the Father and Son. Below we find that Satan wanted to be next to God and have Christ second to Him. In other words, for the three highest beings in Heaven to be the Father, Satan and Christ. This also proves Ellen White was not a Trinitarian and never saw the Holy Spirit as a third being as some have misunderstood due to her use of the word person in regards to the Holy Spirit. “Satan, who was once a beautiful angel in the heavenly courts, became a fallen angel because HE DID NOT WANT TO OCCUPY A SECONDARY PLACE, BUT TO BE NEXT TO GOD. HE WOULD HAVE THE LORD JESUS BECOME SECOND TO HIM, for his own glory was very precious in his own sight. He was jealous of Christ, the Saviour. Study the Word of God, and see what this jealousy led to in the end. There is nothing to be gained by jealousies. Although in the beginning Satan was an exalted angel of great glory in the heavenly courts, THAT GLORY BECAME EXTINGUISHED THROUGH HIS CRAVING TO BE THE HIGHEST ONE NEXT TO GOD.” — (E.G. White, Ms74, March 20, 1910) This quote from Ellen White proves inarguably that the Holy Spirit is NOT and CANNOT be a third highest CO-EQUAL being in Heaven, and hence is NOT and CANNOT be a being at all. By Satan creating the Trinity doctrine and the idea of the Holy Spirit as a third being, Satan effectively gets his third highest position back, but more importantly, he obtains worship as a god by representation just as he always wanted. Thus the third person in the Trinity is actually Satan! It should be obvious that if you get this wrong you will not be in the kingdom. Note the table for clarity. The Holy Spirit is not included in the Biblical view as it is not a literal being but the Spirit of the Father and Son. Satan used to hold the third highest position in Heaven until he was thrown out and Gabriel took his place. Previous All trinity studies Next Back to top

All trinity studies Previous Download Next When Christians are Asked if They Believe in the Trinity When Christians are asked if they believe in the trinity, they often say yes without even knowing exactly what it is. And most also say that it does not really matter anyway as it is not a salvation issue. But that could not be further from the truth and if we truly love the Lord then we should want to know anyway. As seen earlier, John called those teaching that all three are one were antichrist. Are those John calls antichrist saved? Not likely! Many serious problems arise from not knowing as we have seen already, but the following is one of the worst. Seventh day Adventists are most easily misled here because when informed of the truth, they typically turn to the internet where they eventually find a handful of easily misunderstood quotes by Ellen White, which were compiled by LeRoy Froom with the deliberate intent to deceive. Without even checking what the Bible says, they put their trust in these misunderstood quotes and never look deeper, or examine her other writings to see what she really meant. Some have the mentality that their Church could never be wrong. What a tragic mistake. Reading Revelation chapters 13 and 14 we find that the mark of the beast is about who we worship. Isaiah 14:12-14 says that Satan desires to be worshipped as God. But if Satan asked you to worship him, would you do it? Of course not. And Satan of course knows this. So Satan gets himself a front man and props him up so when they are worshipped, he receives worship by proxy. This is called worship by representation. There are two ways Satan does this with Christians and both come from sun worship, which as you have already seen is really the worship of Satan. The first way is through Sunday worship. For those who are unaware, Scripture informs us that the Lord's Sabbath is a sign that it is God whom we worship and God who sanctifies us when we keep His Seventh day Holy. Revelation 13:2 says Satan gave his power, throne and great authority to the first beast which is the Papal Church system. So when this beast power is being worshipped, who is really being worshipped? Satan himself! So where does worship come into this? By Satan through the Catholic Church implementing his own day of worship being Sunday. That is, Sunday worship that evolved from sun worship. The second way is by worship of the Holy Spirit as a non-existent literal being, and so Satan steps in to receive this worship by representation once again. This was something he put in place a long time ago in 381 A.D. The Bible never teaches that the Holy Spirit is God or that the Holy Spirit should be prayed to or worshipped, and yet the Catholic Church does this. Today there are more and more from other denominations now doing the same. Previous All trinity studies Next Back to top

All trinity studies Previous Download 看中文 Next Whom to Worship WHOM TO WORSHIP ? THE FIRST ANGEL’S MESSAGE A Bible Study 1. What is the First Angel’s Message ? (Revelation 1:3) “Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand. (Revelation 14:6-7) “And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, Saying with a loud voice, Fear GOD, and give glory to HIM; for the hour of HIS judgment is come: and worship HIM that MADE heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.” 2. Who is the Judge ? (Hebrews 12:22-24) “But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and TO GOD the JUDGE OF ALL, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, AND TO Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.” 3. By Whom will God the Father judge all ? (Romans 2:16) “In the day when GOD SHALL JUDGE the secrets of men BY Jesus Christ according to my gospel.” (John 5:22-23) “For the FATHER judgeth no man, but hath COMMITTED all judgment unto the Son: That all men should honour the SON, even as they honour THE FATHER. He that honoureth not the SON honoureth not THE FATHER which hath sent him.” (John 5:30) “I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but THE WILL of THE FATHER which hath sent me.” 4. Who is the Creator? (Acts 4:24- 27) “Lord, thou art GOD, which hast MADE heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all that in them is: Who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said, Why did the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things? The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against THE LORD, and against HUS Christ. For of a truth against THEY HOLY CHILD Jesus, whom THOU hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together,” 5. By Whom did God the Father create all things ? (1 Corinthians 8:6) “But to us 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, and we by him.” (Proverbs 30:4) “Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended ? who hath gathered the wind in his fists ? who hath bound the waters in a garment ? who hath established all the ends of the earth ? what is HIS NAME, and what is HIS SON’S Name, if thou canst tell ?” (Ephesians 3:9) “And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been HID IN GOD, WHO CREATED ALL THINGS by Jesus Christ:” 6. How did the Father create all things by Jesus Christ ? (John 1:1-4) “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was WITH GOD, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning WITH GOD. All things were made by him; and without him was not anything made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men.” (John 5:26) “For as THE FATHER HATH LIFE IN HIMSELF ; so hath HE GIVEN to the Son to have life in himself;” 7. What does “God” in John 1:1 mean ? (John 1:1, 14, 18) “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was WITH GOD, and the Word was God....And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the ONLY BEGOTTEN OF THE FATHER,) full of grace and truth.... No man hath seen GOD at any time, THE ONLY BEGOTTEN SON, which is in the bosom of THE FATHER, he hath declared HIM.” 8. Did Christ inherit His name from His Father ? (Hebrews 1:1-5) “GOD, who at sundry times and in divers manners SPAKE in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days SPOKEN unto us BY HIS SON, whom HE hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also HE made the worlds; Who being the brightness of HIS GLORY, and the express image of HIS PERSON, and upholding all things by the word of HIS POWER, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on THE RIGHT HAND of the Majesty on high: Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by INHERITANCE obtained a more excellent name than they. For unto which of the angels SAID HE at any time, THOU ART MY SON, this day HAVE I BEGOTTEN THEE ? And again, I WILL BE to him A FATHER, and he shall be TO ME A SON ?” (Genesis 1:26, 5:2) “And GOD said, Let US make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness.... Male and female CREATED HE them; and blessed them, and called “their” name Adam, in the day when they were created.” (John 5:43) “I am come in MY FATHER’s NAME, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.” 9. How was the Holy Spirit involved in creation ? (Job 33:4) “THE SPIRIT OF GOD hath made me, and THE BREATH OF THE ALMIGHTY hath given me life.” (John 20:22) “And when he had said this, he BREATHED on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye THE HOLY SPIRIT:” (John 3:34-35) “For he whom GOD hath SENT speaketh THE WORDS OF GOD: for GOD GIVETH not THE SPIRIT by measure unto him. THE FATHER LOVETH THE SON, and hath GIVEN ALL THINGS into his hand.” 10. Whom do we worship ? (John 4:22-24) “Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews. But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship THE FATHER in spirit and in truth: for THE FATHER seeketh such to worship HIM. GOD is a Spirit: and they that worship HIM must worship HIM in spirit and in truth.” 11. How do we give glory to God the Father ? (John 5:22-24) “For THE FATHER judgeth no man, but hath COMMITTED all judgment unto THE SON: That all men should honour THE SON, even as they honour THE FATHER . He that honoureth not THE SON honoureth not THE FATHER which hath SENT him. Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on HIM that SENT me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.” (Philippians 2:10-11) “At the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and that every tongue should CONFESS that Jesus Christ is Lord, TO THE GLORY OF GOD THE FATHER.” 12. Whom alone do we exalt ? (John 17:3) “This is life eternal, that they might know thee THE ONLY TRUE GOD, (and) Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” 13. Is it important that we take John 17:3 seriously ? (1 John 2:22-25) “Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ ? He is antichrist, that denieth THE FATHER and THE SON. Whosoever denieth THE SON, the same hath not THE FATHER: he that acknowledgeth THE SON hath THE FATHER also. Let that therefore abide in you, which ye have heard from the beginning. If that which ye have heard from the beginning shall remain in you, ye also shall continue in THE SON, and in THE FATHER. And this is the promise that he hath promised us, even eternal life.” 14. Who is worshipped in Revelation ? (Revelation 5:13) “And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto HIM that sitteth upon the throne, (and) unto THE LAMB for ever and ever.” (Revelation 7:9-10) “Lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands; And cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our GOD which sitteth upon the throne, (and) unto THE LAMB.” 15. Whose kingdom is the kingdom of heaven ? (Revelation 11:15) “And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our LORD, (and) of HIS CHRIST; and he shall reign for ever and ever.” (Ephesians 5:5) “For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of CHRIST (and) of GOD.” (Revelation 22:1) “And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of GOD (and) of THE LAMB.” 16. Why are we not told to worship the Holy Spirit ? (Revelation 5:6) “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.” (Galatians 4:6) “And because ye are sons, GOD hath (sent forth) the Spirit (of HIS SON) into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. (John 14:6, 16-22) “(I am) the way, (the truth), and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.... And I will pray THE FATHER, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he.... [1] may (abide) with you forever; Even the Spirit (of truth); [2] whom the world cannot receive, because it (seeth him not), neither knoweth him: but ye know him; [3] for he dwelleth with you, and (shall be in you). [1] I will not leave you (comfortless): I WILL COME to you. [2] Yet a little while, and the world (seeth me) no more; but ye (see me): because I live, ye shall live also. [3] At that day ye shall know that I am (in) my FATHER, and ye (in) me, and I (in) you. He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my FATHER, and I will love him, and will (manifest myself) to him. Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, (how) is it that thou wilt (manifest thyself) unto us, and not unto the world ?” (Galatians 2:20) “I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ (liveth in me): and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of (The Son) of GOD, who loved me, and gave himself for me.” (Psalm 139:7) “Whither shall I go from (thy Spirit) ? or whither shall I flee from (thy Presence) ?” 17. What is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit ? (Mark 3:22, 29-30) “And the scribes which came down from Jerusalem (said), *He hath* Beelzebub, and by the prince of the devils casteth he out devils....But he that shall (blaspheme) against the Holy Spirit hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation: (Because they said), *He hath* an unclean spirit.” (Luke 11:19-20) “And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your sons cast them out ? therefore shall they be your judges. But if I with (the finger of God) cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you.” (John 14:10) “Believest thou not that I am (in) THE FATHER, and THE FATHER (in) me ? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but THE FATHER that (dwelleth) (in) me, (HE doeth) the works.” 18. Can we assume that anyone else is worshipped ? (John 14:1, 6) “Let not your heart be troubled: ye (believe) in GOD, (believe also) in me....I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man (cometh) unto THE FATHER, but (by me).” (1 John 1:3) “That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our (fellowship) is with THE FATHER, (and) with HIS SON Jesus Christ.” (Revelation 22:18-19) “For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man (shall add) unto these things, GOD (shall add) unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man (shall take away) from the words of the book of this prophecy, GOD (shall take away) his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.” Previous All trinity studies Next Back to top

All trinity studies Previous Download Next We Should Be Baptized Only in the Name of Jesus We should be baptized ONLY in the name of Jesus ! Acts 2:38 “Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” Acts 8:12 “ But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.” Acts 8:16 “For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.” Acts 10:48 “And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.” Acts 19:5 “When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.” Acts 22:16 “And now why tarriest you ? arise, and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.” Romans 6:3 “Know you not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death ?” 1 Corinthians 1:13 “Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were you baptized in the name of Paul?” [Implied] Galatians 3:27 “For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.” “The historical riddle is not solved by Matthew 28:19, since, according to a wide scholarly consensus, it is not an authentic saying of Jesus, not even an elaboration of a Jesus-saying on baptism.” — (Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 1, 1992, p. 585) Catholic Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (now pope Benedict XVI) makes this confession as to the origin of the chief Trinity text of Matthew 28:19 saying: "The basic form of our (Matthew 28:19 Trinitarian) 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 33 A.D. It was rather, as the evidence proves, a later invention of Roman Catholicism completely fabricated. Very few know about these historical facts.” ( http://www.askacatholic.com/_WebPostings/Answers/2012_01JAN/2012JanWhyWereAdjustmentsMade.cfm ) 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.” Does Matthew 28:19 prove a Trinity ? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRklea85ZsQ&t=1s  Previous All trinity studies Next Back to top

All trinity studies Previous Download Next The Spirit of Jesus is Our Comforter WE HAVE BEEN LIED TO. THE SPIRIT OF JESUS IS OUR COMFORTER. NOT SOME OTHER GOD AS THE TRINITY CLAIMS! “This refers to the omnipresence of the Spirit of Christ, called the Comforter.” — (Ellen G. White, 14MR 179.2) “Let them study the seventeenth of John, and learn how to pray and how to live the prayer of CHRIST. HE is THE Comforter. He will abide in their hearts, making their joy full.” — (Ellen G. White, Review and Herald, January 27, 1903) “As by faith we look to Jesus, our faith pierces the shadow, and we adore God for His wondrous love in giving JESUS THE COMFORTER.” — (Ellen G. White, 19MR 297.3) “Christ is to be known by the blessed name of Comforter. “The Comforter,” said Christ to His disciples, “which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in My name, He shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you, [John 14:26 quoted]” — (E.G. White, Ms7-1902, January 26, 1902) “The Saviour is our Comforter. This I have proved Him to be.” — (Ellen G. White, 8MR 49.3) Jesus said, “I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.” John 14:18 __________________________________________________________ NOTE: God raised the Adventist Church as non-Trinitarian. The Trinity doctrine was slowly brought into the Adventist Church long AFTER the death of Ellen White and the pioneers by a suspected Jesuit who is also a known Freemason. The idea of the Holy Spirit as another being was Satan's idea so he could get worship for his creation. The real truth is that the “Holy Spirit” is the power and presence of God and of Christ which can function independently of themselves like a third (but not a literal third) and is how “They” represent “Themselves” where they are not personally present. Previous All trinity studies Next Back to top

返回研究目录 上一篇 下载中文 Read in English 下一篇 叫耶稣从死里复活的是谁 叫耶稣从死里复活的是谁？ 问题： 叫耶稣从死里复活的是谁？耶稣在约翰福音10章17节说“我父爱我，因我将命舍去，好再取回来”，这是否表示祂叫自己复活？或者是所谓的“父，子，圣灵”叫祂复活？还是祂父亲（耶和华）从死里叫耶稣复活的？ 答案：是父上帝也就是耶稣的父亲叫耶稣复活！以下的23节经文证实了这一点。。。 1。 加拉太书 1:1 作使徒的保罗（不是由于人，也不是藉着人，乃是藉着耶稣基督，与叫他从死里复活的父上帝）， 2。 以弗所书 1:17,19,20 17 求我们主耶稣基督的上帝，荣耀的父，将那赐人智慧和启示的灵赏给你们，使你们真知道他。19 并知道他向我们这信的人所显的能力是何等浩大，20 就是照他在基督身上所运行的大能大力，使他从死里复活，叫他在天上坐在自己的右边， 3。 哥林多后书 4:14自己知道那叫主耶稣复活的，也必叫我们与耶稣一同复活，并且叫我们与你们一同站在他面前。 4。 罗马书 6:4 所以我们藉着洗礼归入死，和他一同埋葬，原是叫我们一举一动有新生的样式，像基督藉着父的荣耀从死里复活一样。 5。 使徒行传2:22,24 22 “以色列人哪，请听我的话：上帝藉着拿撒勒人耶稣在你们中间施行异能、奇事、 神迹，将他证明出来，这是你们自己知道的。24 上帝却将死的痛苦解释了，叫他复活，因为他原不能被死拘禁。 6。 使徒行传 2:32 这耶稣，上帝已经叫他复活了，我们都为这事作见证。 7。 使徒行传 3:15 你们杀了那生命的主，上帝却叫他从死里复活了。我们都是为这事作见证。 8。 使徒行传 3:26 上帝既兴起他的儿子，就先差他到你们这里来，赐福给你们，叫你们各人回转，离开罪恶。 9。 使徒行传 4:10 你们众人和以色列百姓都当知道，站在你们面前的这人得痊愈，是因你们所钉十字架、上帝叫他从死里复活的拿撒勒人耶稣基督的名。 10。 使徒行传 5:30 你们挂在木头上杀害的耶稣，我们祖宗的上帝已经叫他复活。 11。 彼得前书 1:21 你们也因信着他，信那叫他从死里复活，又给他荣耀的上帝，叫你们的信心和盼望都在于上帝。 12。 歌罗西书 2:12 你们既受洗与他一同埋葬，也就在此与他一同复活，都因信那叫他从死里复活上帝的功用。 13。 使徒行传 10:40 第三日，上帝叫他复活，显现出来。 14。 使徒行传 13:30,34 30 上帝却叫他从死里复活。34 论到上帝叫他从死里复活，不再归于朽坏，就这样说：‘我必将所应许大卫那圣洁可靠的恩典赐给你们。’ 15。 使徒行传 13:37 惟独上帝所复活的，他并未见朽坏。 16。 罗马书 8:11 然而叫耶稣从死里复活者的灵，若住在你们心里，那叫基督耶稣从死里复活的，也必藉着住在你们心里的圣灵，使你们必死的身体又活过来。 17。 罗马书 17：30，3130 世人蒙昧无知的时后，上帝并不监察，如今却吩咐各处的人都要悔改。31 因为他已经定了日子，要藉着他所设立的人按公义审判天下，并且叫他从死里复活，给万人作可信的凭据。” 18。 罗马书 4:24 也是为我们将来得算为义之人写的，就是我们这信上帝使我们的主耶稣从死里复活的人。 19。 哥林多前书 15:15 并且明显我们是为上帝妄作见证的，因我们见证上帝是叫基督复活了。若死人真不复活，上帝也没有叫基督复活了。 20。 帖撒罗尼迦前书 1:9-109 因为他们自己已经报明我们是怎样进到你们那里，你们是怎样离弃偶像，归向上帝，要服侍那又真又活的上帝，10 等候他儿子从天降临，就是他从死里复活的、那位救我们脱离将来忿怒的耶稣。 21。 哥林多前书 6:14 并且上帝已经叫主复活，也要用自己的能力叫我们复活。 22。 哥林多后书 13:4 他因软弱被钉在十字架上，却因上帝的大能仍然活着。我们也是这样同他软弱，但因上帝向你们所显的大能，也必与他同活。 23。 罗马书10:9 你若口里认耶稣为主，心里信上帝叫他从死里复活，就必得救。 相信父上帝（耶和华）叫耶稣从死里复活是关乎我们救恩的。 上一篇 返回研究目录 下一篇 到最頂

All trinity studies Previous Download 看中文 Next How is Jesus One With the Father How is Jesus one with the Father? JOHN 5: “But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.” (John 5:17) JOHN 10: “[37] If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, THAT THE FATHER IS IN ME, AND I IN HIM.” (John 10:37,38) “I and my Father are one.” (v. 30) By declaring that God was His Father, He made it clear that They are Two distinct Personalities. God was His Father and He was His Son, but although distinct from one another, there is oneness that exist between Them. Jesus gave the answer when He said, “the Father is in Me, and I in Him.” They are one by being in each other, but this in itself need clarification. How are They in each other? JOHN 12: Christ tried to explain this: “[44] Jesus cried and said, He that believeth on me, believeth not on me, but on him that sent me. [45] AND HE THAT SEETH ME SEETH HIM THAT SENT ME.” (12:44,45) JOHN 13: “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that receiveth whomsoever I send receiveth me [Jesus] and he that receiveth me receiveth him [Father] that sent me.” (13:20) [mine] JOHN 14: “[7] If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him. [8] Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us. [9] Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? [10] BELIEVEST THOU NOT THAT I AM IN THE FATHER, AND THE FATHER IN ME? THE WORDS THAT I SPEAK UNTO YOU I SPEAK NOT OF MYSELF: BUT THE FATHER THAT DWELLETH IN ME, HE DOETH THE WORKS.” (14:7-10) In their dull of understanding, Christ said: “[16] And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; [17] EVEN THE SPIRIT OF TRUTH; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and SHALL BE IN YOU. [18] I will not leave you comfortless: I WILL COME TO YOU.” (vss. 16-18) “AT THAT DAY ye shall know that ‘I AM IN MY FATHER,’ AND ‘YE IN ME,’ AND ‘I IN YOU.’” (v.20) So when the Comforter from the Father comes and dwells in them, they will know that Christ is in the Father, they are in Christ and Christ in them. “Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, AND ‘WE’ WILL COME UNTO HIM, AND MAKE ‘OUR’ ABODE WITH HIM.” (v.23) And what the disciples could not comprehend at that time, but when the Comforter comes, they will remember all these things and understand. “But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, WHOM THE FATHER WILL SEND IN MY NAME, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.” (v. 26) JOHN 15: “[9] As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you: continue ye in my love. [10] If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.” (John 15:9,10) “[12] This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you. [13] Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.” (vss. 12,13) When the Comforter comes and dwells in them, they will understand the love of God, and the close unity that exists in the Father and His Son. “But when the COMFORTER is come, whom I will send unto you FROM THE FATHER, even the Spirit of truth, WHICH ‘PROCEEDETH FROM THE FATHER,’ he shall testify of me.” (15:26) JOHN 16: “[2] They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service. [3] And these things will they do unto you, BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOT KNOWN THE FATHER, NOR ME.” (16:2,3) “[12] I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. [13] Howbeit WHEN HE, THE SPIRIT OF TRUTH, IS COME, HE WILL GUIDE YOU INTO ALL TRUTH…” (vss. 12,13) “These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs: BUT THE TIME COMETH, when I shall no more speak unto you in proverbs, BUT I SHALL SHEW YOU PLAINLY OF THE FATHER.” (v. 25) JOHN 17 Prayer: “…Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, THAT ‘THEY MAY BE ONE,’ ‘AS WE ARE.’” (17:11) “[20] Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; [21] THAT THEY ALL MAY BE ONE; AS THOU, FATHER, ART IN ME, AND I IN THEE, that they also may be ONE IN US…” (vss. 20,21) AT PENTECOST: “[1] And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.” “[4] AND THEY WERE ALL FILLED WITH THE HOLY GHOST…” (Acts 2:1,4) As Christ promised them, He sent them the Comforter, and plainly reveal to them Father and also testify of Christ that they might comprehend better the “oneness” Christ spoke of. Then Peter spoke of Jesus: “[33] Therefore being by the right hand of God EXALTED, and HAVING RECEIVED OF THE FATHER THE PROMISE OF THE HOLY GHOST, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.” “[36] Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, THAT GOD HATH MADE THAT SAME JESUS, WHOM YE HAVE CRUCIFIED, BOTH ‘LORD’ AND CHRIST.” (vss. 33,36) Remember Jesus said to the scribe… “[29] And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is ‘ONE LORD.’ [30] And thou shalt LOVE THE LORD THY GOD with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. [31] And the second is like, namely this, THOU SHALT LOVE THY NEIGHBOUR AS THYSELF. There is none other commandment greater than these.” (Mark 12:29-31) God the Father made His Son equal with Himself, as Lord of Heaven and earth. “[9] Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: [10] That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things IN HEAVEN, and things IN EARTH, and things under the earth; [11] And that every tongue should confess that JESUS CHRIST IS ‘LORD,’ to the glory of God the Father.” (Phil. 2:9-11) “Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God.” (Phil. 2:6) Therefore Paul wrote that we belong to both the Father and the Son. “But to us 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,’ and we by him.” (1 Cor. 8:6) “[9] I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine. [10] AND ALL MINE ARE THINE, AND THINE ARE MINE; and I am glorified in them.” (John 17:9,10) “…Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that THEY MAY BE ONE, AS WE ARE.” (v.11) How are we to be “one?” When we love one another as Christ and God love each other, and They will abide in us. “But the fruit of the Spirit is love…” (Gal. 5:22) “[4] There is ‘one body,’ and ONE SPIRIT, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; [5] One Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.” (Eph. 4:4,5) “[9] But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the SPIRIT OF GOD ‘dwell in you.’ Now if any man have not the SPIRIT OF CHRIST, he is none of his. [10] And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness. [11] BUT IF THE SPIRIT OF HIM THAT RAISED UP JESUS FROM THE DEAD DWELL IN YOU, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies BY HIS SPIRIT THAT DWELLETH IN YOU.” (Rom. 8:9-11) By one Spirit, the Father and the Son dwell in the believers thus we are one body reconciled to God by His Son. “Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and WE WILL COME UNTO HIM, AND MAKE OUR ABODE WITH HIM.” (John 14:23) “That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: AND TRULY OUR FELLOWSHIP IS WITH THE FATHER, AND WITH HIS SON JESUS CHRIST.” (1 John 1:3) God bless. Previous All trinity studies Next Back to top

All trinity studies Previous Download 看中文 Next The Truth of the Trinity [ trinitytruth.org ] 27-42 (total 42 parts) Is the Father greater than Jesus? What did Jesus mean when He said “my Father is greater than I” considering Paul also said that Jesus is equal with God? There is no contradiction in Scripture, so how do we reconcile these verses below? John 14:28 “You have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If you loved me, you would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.” 1 Corinthians 11:3 “But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.” Philippians 2:6 “Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:” The Greek word (theotes) for Godhead in Colossians 2:9 means the divine nature. Thus the fullness of the divine nature of God dwells in His Son Jesus Christ. And the word “form” in Philippians 2:6 means “shape/nature,” and so Paul is saying that the way Christ is equal with His Father is in “nature” which He inherited being His Son. The word “greater” in John 14:28 refers to position in the same way it does with a human father and son as well as a husband and wife. 1 Corinthians 11:3 states that the head of the woman is man. But does this mean the husband is a superior being to his wife? The answer is an obvious no. She is a human being just as the man is and so they are equal in nature. The husband is greater than his wife only by position. The same applies to a father and son. The father is greater because he was first being the father, and the same applies to our Heavenly Father and His Son. The Father is greater in position in that He was first, but not greater in nature or form as Philippians 2:6 states. For Adventists: “The Father was greater than the Son in that he was first.” — (James White, RH, Jan 4, 1881). “While both are of the same nature, the Father is first in point of time. He is also greater in that he had no beginning, while Christ's personality had a beginning.” — (E.J. Waggoner, ST, April 8, 1889) So we observe the same concept of being equal in nature, but Christ submitted Himself to the Father as He was greater in that He was first being His Father. We find in these verses the principle of headship and submission established by God as displayed in both marriage and the Godhead. These principles also reveal that God and Christ are a real Father and Son. As Waggoner, James White and Scripture reveals, Christ came after the Father being the Son. However, we also find that the Father has “given” His Son all power and placed everything into His hands. Thus Christ has been given an “exalted position” and has been “made equal” by His Father in power and authority also. But while the Father has made His Son equal, His Father is still greater than Him, and He still submits to His Father. “All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.” Matthew 28:18. And John wrote “The Father loves the Son, and has given all things into his hand.” John 3:35 For Adventists: “God is the Father of Christ; Christ is the Son of God. To Christ has been given an exalted position. He has been made equal with the Father.” — (E.G. White, 8T 268.3). The Trinity doctrine claims the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are 3 co-equal, co-eternal God's. But Ellen White says Christ was MADE EQUAL with His Father and by His Father as Scripture also reveals, again proving this doctrine from Satan a lie. Adam and Eve (man and woman) in fact is a small scale example of the Father and Son. Consider 1 Corinthians 11:3 and the following on Biblical headship. “Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.” Ephesians 5:22-24 The divine pattern of Biblical headship defined by the Father and Son reveals important principles. For example, in the same way God is the head of Christ, the husband is the head of his wife, and in like manner, Christ is the head of the Church. And while Adam was made from the dust of the earth, Eve came out of Adam from a rib. There is no logical reason for God to do it this way other than to show us that one being can come out of another and still have the same nature. Thus the example is given of how Christ came out of the Father and has His same divine nature. This also reveals why women's ordination is wrong. For example, the trinity doctrine claims there are three co-equal beings and that any one of the three could have played the role of the Son and died for us. So the trinity doctrine allows for the changing of roles, and by its principle, any in the above table could change roles. Hence man and woman switching roles in the leadership of the Church is no less error than Christ being subject to the Church, or husbands submitting to their wives, or even for the Son of God being head of His Father. They all break the divine pattern laid down by God. Switching any of the above roles changes the order established by God in the example of the Father and His Son. So the Trinitarian view does not follow the divine pattern and heavenly example and has many problems. For example, if the Holy Spirit was a third being, then where does it fit into God's divine pattern? 2 does not = 3 and neither does 3 = 1. Was Jesus Omniscient and Omnipotent on Earth? We find in John 21:17 Peter saying to Christ, “you know all things.” So how are we to understand Jesus saying, “But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.” Mark 13:32 . Compare with Matthew 24:36 . So here we have a problem because Jesus is confessing to not knowing something. And Scripture also says, “Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and men.” Luke 2:52 . How do you increase in wisdom when you know all things? And “Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered.” Hebrews 5:8. Was Jesus limited by the human body prepared for Him and had to learn things just as we do? So what did Peter mean? Was He right? Because Jesus did not contradict Him. Or is there some way that Jesus could effectively know anything He needed? We find the answer in many Scriptures such as John 14:26 “the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things,” Does this mean we could literally know all things? Can the human mind even contain all the infinite knowledge of God? The point to be made here is there is nothing that the Spirit of God could not teach or reveal to us or His Son. The Father knows all things and so Christ could know whatever was required through the power of the Holy Spirit whether it be the thoughts of others or any knowledge that is required according to the will of God. And it does not stop with the omniscience of the Spirit of God but also His power. In Matthew 12:22-32 we find Jesus casting out a demon. The Pharisees claimed He did it by the power of the devil. But Jesus being fully man said He did it by the Spirit of God. He then informs them that they can speak against the Son of man and be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven. Why? Because verse 28 says He did this by the power of the Holy Spirit. Remember that Jesus was the Word made flesh and was fully man. The Pharisees were not insulting the Son of man but the Spirit of God by whose power the demon was cast out and hence were blaspheming the Holy Spirit by attributing the work of the Holy Spirit to Satan. In any case, Jesus would not be casting out demons by the power of the Holy Spirit unless He had given up His omnipotence for a time now would He? Jesus said “I can of mine own self do nothing.” John 5:30 Note that Matthew 12:22-32 reveals that the unpardonable sin and blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is attributing the work of the Holy Spirit to Satan. Some Trinitarians who do not understand this conclude that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit could be sharing truth on this topic which is clearly not so. But what about Trinitarians? Could they in fact be guilty of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit? What if the “Spirit of God” is the “Spirit OF God” just as the Bible states, and not something called “god the holy spirit” which the Bible never says? If the Trinity doctrine is wrong, then the Holy Spirit is really a creation of Satan rather than the Spirit of the Father and Son. And if it is a creation of Satan, who would Trinitarians be attributing the work of the Holy Spirit to? They would inadvertently be attributing the work of the Spirit of God to Satan which is in fact the unpardonable sin! You cannot afford to get this wrong. For Adventists: “What constitutes the sin against the Holy Ghost? It is willfully attributing to Satan the work of the Holy Spirit.” — (E.G. White, 5T 634.1, 1889) The Bible reveals a handful of times that the miracles Christ performed while here on earth were done by His Father in heaven. John 11:40-41 indicates it was through His Father that Lazarus was raised. Every great miracle that Jesus did was done in a similar manner by His disciples or Old Testament prophets including walking on water and raising the dead. ( Matthew 14:29 ; John 14:12 ; Acts 20:9-10 ; 1 Kings 17:22 ). This is not a sign they had all power but a sign that God was with them as He was with His Son. After He healed the paralytic man, the crowd, “marvelled, and glorified God, which had given such power unto men.” Matthew 9:8. Peter explains, “God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.” Acts 10:38. Jesus also explains, “The Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.” John 14:10 For Adventists: “All the miracles of Christ performed for the afflicted and suffering were, by the power of God, through the ministration of angels.” — (E.G. White, RH, Jan 21, 1873) So Scripture reveals that Christ only knew what He had learned as a man and what His Father revealed to Him through His Spirit. Since our Father in Heaven knows all things, then Christ could also effectively know all things “if” the Spirit of God revealed it to Him. Thus if Jesus did not know the hour of His return it could only be because His Father had not revealed this to Him, and we are not told the reason why this was the case. Scripture shows that Jesus knew the thoughts of others but to be consistent with other Scripture, it had to be through the Holy Spirit. Peter, Elisha and Daniel all had the thoughts of others revealed to them by God also. ( Acts 5:1-4 ; 2 Kings 5:25-27 ; Daniel 2:28-30 ) Some will respond that Jesus did not know in His human nature but knew in His divine nature as the trinity teaches that there is one person subsisting in two natures. Jesus cannot have two minds, one that knew something and another that did not. Unless of course you want to make the absurd claim that mind and body are not correlated. Why is it so hard to accept and understand that the disciples and many others have done all the same miracles that Jesus did by the power of the Holy Spirit ( Romans 15:9 ), and so when Jesus came as a man that He did them the same way? It seems most refuse to accept that their Lord and Saviour gave up a lot when he came as a man, and cannot stand the thought that for a while He was not omnipresent, omniscience and omnipotent. Though most accept Christ gave up His omnipresence, but only because they have no choice as there is no avoiding this fact. However, how many have stopped to consider the incredible love of their Saviour here in that temporarily laying aside these things made an even far greater sacrifice that could have been disastrous in cosmic proportions. Jesus even had to give up His dignity and have dirty diapers changed! By accepting the facts of Scripture, one does not have to go looking for ways of explaining away other Scriptures that show one is in error. We need to be able to harmonize all Scripture and realize that when we have to start trying to jam a square peg into a round hole then we have something wrong. Paul in Philippians 2:5-9 speaks of the sacrifice and humility of Christ in regards to what He gave up coming as a man, even to the point of death, and that we should have the same mind and attitude as Him. The Greek text says He had the form or nature of God but emptied Himself, meaning He laid aside those divine attributes that prevented Him from living and dying as one of us. In having the same form and nature of God, He would never have been tired or suffered pain and other things that go with being in human form. Jesus had everything including immortality, and yet He willingly gave it up sacrificing all for us. But then He made an even greater sacrifice, giving up immortality, He died as a man by one of the most agonizing and drawn out deaths you could possibly imagine. When people refuse to acknowledge what Christ did give up, they also fail to acknowledge the magnitude and the depth of the sacrifice He really did make for us and how it demonstrates the immeasurable love that He and His Father have for us. So what did Jesus get back when He returned to the Father? The fact is we are not specifically told. But we know He got back His omnipresence through the Holy Spirit as our Comforter. For example, Jesus said “Lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Matthew 28:20. We also know that Jesus retained the scars in His hands, feet and side ( John 20:25-27 ). We assume He got back everything but we will have to wait until we see Him to find out just how great a sacrifice He and His Father really made in their incredible love for us. Here is one more example to consider that many have overlooked. Revelation 1:1 states, “The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:” This revelation was given to Jesus Christ by God. Why would Christ need His Father to reveal these things to Him if He knew all things? See also Gill's Commentary on John 10:30 in relation to Mark 13:32. This also reveals that Jesus cannot be the one true God the Father as the trinity doctrine claims. Was Jesus always Immortal? The Trinity doctrine teaches that Jesus Christ is co-equal with His Father in every way. Thus it is claimed that since the Father cannot die, then His Son cannot die either. But the Bible says there is only One person who cannot die and He is God the Father. The Bible says when Jesus appears that He will show, “who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone has immortality, dwelling in unapproachable light, whom no man has seen or can see, to whom be honor and everlasting power.” 1 Timothy 6:15-16. This can only be our Heavenly Father for He is the One whom “No man hath seen... at any time.” John 1:18. The Father is the one “who alone has immortality.” Yet we know that one day we will “put on immortality.” 1 Corinthians 15:53 So when the Bible says the Father “alone has immortality” it must mean immortality in an absolute and unlimited sense. The Bible reveals that the Father is the only One who cannot die under any circumstances. Jesus was made subject to death and “died for our sins.” 1 Corinthians 15:3. Man can die, “The soul that sinneth, it shall die.” Ezekiel 18:20. Angels can die, “everlasting fire,” is “prepared for the devil and his angels.” Matthew 25:41. God said to Satan, “I will bring forth a fire from the midst of thee, it shall devour thee, and I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold thee... and never shalt thou be any more.” Ezekiel 28:18-19. So it is true that the Father is the only person who cannot die under any circumstances, which excludes His Son who tasted “death for every man” Hebrews 2:9. So Christ was not immortal when He was here and the primary reason for Him becoming a human was so that He could die for our sins. The Son of God suffered a real death for our sins. ( Isaiah 53:6 and 1 John 2:2 ). Others claim that Christ came down from heaven and inhabited a human body and only the human body died while the divine being from heaven remained alive. By this we would have to conclude that there was only a human sacrifice made for our redemption. It is unbiblical to say that a human sacrifice is sufficient to redeem mankind or that only half of Christ died. If Christ only pretended to die it takes away the necessity of Him becoming a man and He could have done that without becoming one. The author of Hebrews says He “was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death.” Hebrews 2:9. Christ Himself made it clear to John that He was dead. Jesus said, “I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.” Revelation 1:18. Jesus Christ really “died for our sins according to the Scriptures.” 1 Corinthians 15:3 For Adventists: “He humbled himself, and took mortality upon him. As a member of the human family, he was mortal.” — (E.G. White, RH, Sept 4, 1900) Early church error Probably the most widely held Christian view of God is the Trinity doctrine which has its origins in the Church of Rome and the council of Nicea. This belief teaches that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God and yet there are not three gods but one God. But the question remains: Is this view found in Scripture? The most commonly accessed Encyclopedia on the Internet is Wikipedia . So a “consensus of Modern exegetes” tell us that both the Old and New Testaments do not explicitly contain the doctrine of the trinity. It came into Christendom from another source outside of Scripture. The Encyclopedia Britannica basically says the same thing as the Wikipedia. Both tell us that the idea of the trinity came after Scripture and from sources outside of Scripture. The Oxford Companion to the Bible says it “cannot be clearly detected within the confines of the canon”? Is that a nice way of saying that the Bible does not teach the doctrine of trinity? The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia and the Encarta Encyclopedia says the doctrine of the trinity is not explicitly taught in the New Testament. Can we base our faith purely on inference alone? If it is a fundamental doctrine in Christianity, it should surely have enough evidence to have become a doctrine! Another two from Encyclopedia of Religion and the New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology . If the Bible does not teach this doctrine then where did it come from? And last the International Standard Bible Dictionary . I will leave the reader to define the word “allusion.” Getting to the source of the trinity doctrine. Let's go to the authority which states that it is the source of the idea being the Roman Catholic Church and see if their definition has any Biblical basis. This Roman Catholic source is clear as to the origin of the trinity doctrine. Scripture does not present the idea of the trinity doctrine. It came after the canon of Scripture was closed and was developed in the 4th and 5th centuries. The New Catholic Encyclopedia puts it this way. So do we have one God in three parts, or three gods in one? Is Jesus God the Father? Jesus said that He was not the Father more than 80 times. While remaining one in purpose, Jesus and the Father are clearly two separate and distinct beings as previously seen. On more than one occasion, the Father spoke to Jesus from heaven. “And suddenly a voice came from heaven, saying, 'This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased'.” Matthew 3:17. Either Jesus and the Father are two separate individual persons, or Jesus was an expert ventriloquist. For Adventists: “The divine nature in the person of Christ was not transformed in human nature and the human nature of the Son of man was not changed into the divine nature, but they were mysteriously blended in the Saviour of men. He was not the Father but in him dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily,” — (E.G. White, Lt8a, July 7, 1890) “The man Christ Jesus was not the Lord God Almighty, yet Christ and the Father are one.” — (E.G. White, Ms140, 1903) “The unity that exists between Christ and His disciples does not destroy the personality of either. They are one in purpose, in mind, in character, but not in person. It is thus that God and Christ are one.” — (E.G. White, 8T 269.4, 1904) From the title below to the conclusion on this page contains the many arguments that are used to try and prove Jesus is God the Father. Seventh day Adventists should keep the above two quotes in mind while reading the remainder of this page as they apply to every remaining title. Ellen White states many times in many ways that Jesus is not God the Father. Is Jesus the Everlasting Father? The answer lies in the correct Hebrew translation. Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible explains, “The Chaldee renders this expression, 'The man abiding forever.' The Vulgate, 'The Father of the future age.' Lowth, 'The Father of the everlasting age.' Literally, it is the Father of eternity.” Thus in the Hebrew text, the phrase is literally “the Father of eternity,” not “the everlasting Father.” And so Isaiah 9:6 is not saying Christ is the Father but He is the Father of all time to come. Young's Literal Translation and the Darby Bible are two of very few that translated it correctly. “For a Child hath been born to us, A Son hath been given to us, And the princely power is on his shoulder, And He doth call his name Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace.” Isaiah 9:6 YLT “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder; and his name is called Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace.” Isaiah 9:6 Darby Jesus created all things and so in like manner He is also the Father of creation ( Hebrews 1:2 ; John 1:3 ; Colossians 1:16-17 ). It is also interesting to note that the Greek Septuagint that Jesus and the apostles quoted from does not contain this phrase. So how did this phrase that was wrongly translated by most find its way into the Hebrew Bible? “For a Child is born to us, and a Son is given to us, whose government is upon His shoulder; and His name is called the Messenger of great counsel; for I will bring peace upon the princes, and health to Him.” Isaiah 9:6 Septuagint The Greek Old Testament the Septuagint that Christ quoted from reveals what Isaiah 9:6 most likely originally said. It was translated by 70-72 Jewish scholars around 300-200 BC and hence came from the most ancient and reliable manuscripts available. The Hebrew Old Testament however was established by the Massoretes in the 6th century AD. It is known that many textual corruptions and additions crept into the Hebrew text between the 6th and 7th centuries. So where did this additional text in Isaiah 9:6 come from that was not even translated correctly by most modern translators? The one thing that no one can deny is that only one of these translations can be correct. But which one? The Septuagint that came from the oldest manuscripts. Or the later that has known corruptions that crept in between the 6th and 7th centuries. I and My Father are One? In John 10:30, Christ proclaimed, “I and my Father are one.” This would have to be the most misquoted and misunderstood verse used by Trinitarians today. Many conclude that this means Jesus and the Father are the same being as per the Trinity doctrine. And yet this verse should never be misunderstood as Jesus explained exactly what he meant later on in John. So this is a perfect example of how so many Trinitarians have been indoctrinated with preconceived ideas. Some of the confusion regarding the number of beings in the Godhead comes from a misunderstanding of the word “one.” Simply put, “one” in the Bible does not always mean numerical quantity. Depending on the Scripture, “one” often means unity. We see this principle established very early in Scripture. “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.” Genesis 2:24. “One flesh” here does not mean that a married couple melt into one human after their wedding, but rather they are to be united into one family. Romans 12:5 says, “So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.” So does that make us all one single Christian? You would have to say yes if you follow the Trinitarian formula! The Jewish leaders were outraged by this statement from Jesus in John 10:30 and sought to execute Him because they thought Jesus was claiming equality with God. “The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.” John 10:33. Three verses on we find Jesus clarifies and said that His claim was to be the Son of God. “Say you of him, whom the Father has sanctified, and sent into the world, You blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?” John 10:36 Thus Jesus did not mean He was the same person as He clarified and because the Father is a distinct person from the Son, and the Son a distinct person from the Father. As Gill's Commentary on John 10:30 states, this is further shown from the use of the verb plural, “I and my Father” εσμεν, “we are one.” In any case, we do not have to speculate what Jesus meant when He said He and His Father are one, because the words of Christ later in the book of John reveal exactly what He meant. Christ meant one in unity as He prayed that His disciples might be one in the same way He and His Father are one. This prayer did not contemplate one disciple with twelve heads, but twelve disciples working together in unity. “And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one:” John 17:22 “Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom you have given me, that they may be one, as we are.” John 17:11 John 14:11 is also often misquoted to imply that the Father and Son are the same one God, “I am in the Father and the Father is in me;” Based on that faulty understanding, I am not sure how one would explain that we are also in Him and He in us. “At that day you shall know that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you.” John 14:20. “That they all may be one; as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be one in us:” John 17:21 And since the Trinity doctrine teaches 3 co-equal beings, then according to this doctrine, John 10:30 should have said, “I and my Father and the Holy Spirit are one.” But not so. There are three entities in the Godhead but only two literal beings. For Adventists: “The divine nature in the person of Christ was not transformed in human nature and the human nature of the Son of man was not changed into the divine nature, but they were mysteriously blended in the Saviour of men. He was not the Father but in him dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily,” — (E.G. White, Lt8a, July 7, 1890) “The man Christ Jesus was not the Lord God Almighty, yet Christ and the Father are one.” — (E.G. White, Ms140, 1903) “The unity that exists between Christ and His disciples does not destroy the personality of either. They are one in purpose, in mind, in character, but not in person. It is thus that God and Christ are one.” — (E.G. White, 8T 269.4, 1904) “Christ prayed that his followers might be one as he and the Father were one.” — (E.G. White, RH, May 29, 1888) He that has seen Me has seen the Father In John 14:9 Jesus said “He that has seen me has seen the Father.” Did Christ mean He was the Father or that He was “the express image of His Father,” and so has the same nature, attributes and glory? In other words, he that sees one, sees the other: Below are comments from two theologians. John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible on John 14:9 says: “ He that hath seen me; not with the eyes of his body, but with the eyes of his understanding; he that has beheld the perfections of the Godhead in me: Hath seen the Father; the perfections which are in him also; for the same that are in me are in him, and the same that are in him are in me: I am the very IMAGE of him, and am possessed of the same nature, attributes, and glory, that he is; so that he that sees the one, sees the other:” Christ is the express image of His Father. 2 Corinthians 4:4 “In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.” Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible on 2 Corinthians 4:4 says: “ Who is the image of God - Christ is called the image of God: (1) In respect to his divine nature, his exact resemblance to God in his divine attributes and perfections; see Col_1:15; and Heb_1:3; and, (2) In his moral attributes as Mediator, as showing forth the glory of the Father to people. He “resembles” God, and in him we see the divine glory and perfections embodied, and shine forth. It is from his “resemblance” to God in all respects that he is called his image; and it is through him that the divine perfections are made known to people. It is an object of special dislike and hatred to Satan that the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine on people, and fill their hearts. Satan hates that image; he hates that people should become like God; and he hates all that has a resemblance to the great and glorious Yahweh.” Colossians 1:15 “Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:” Hebrews 1:3 “Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;” A son is to a greater or less degree a reproduction of his father. He has to some extent the features and personal characteristics of his father. Not perfectly of course because there is no perfect reproduction among mankind. But there is no imperfection in God or in any of His works, and so Christ is the “express image” of the Father's person. Thus Jesus was saying He is the express image of His Father and has the same nature, attributes and glory. Christ could not have meant literally of course as Scripture informs us that, “No man has seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.” 1 John 4:12. Only Christ has seen the only true God the Father. “Not that anyone has seen the Father, except He [Jesus] who is from God; He has seen the Father.” John 6:46 For Adventists: “Christ emphatically impressed on the disciples the fact that they could see the Father by faith only. God cannot be seen in external form by any human being. Christ alone can represent the Father to humanity; [John 14:9 quoted]” — (E.G. White, RH, Oct 19, 1897) According to the trinity teaching, this verse should have said, “He who has seen Me has seen the Father and the Holy Spirit.” But again, not so. While there are three entities in the Godhead, there are only two literal beings. The third is their Spirit. Did Thomas believe that Jesus was the Father? John 20:28 says, “And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.” One can really only speculate as to why Thomas said what he did, but being dubbed “doubting” Thomas, it would be understandable if his statement was one made in a moment of shock and disbelief. Thomas was a Jew and may have been using a mode of expression common to the Old Testament in which accredited representatives of God are referred to as “God.” The Hebrew word for God is “elohim” and can refer to any of the following for example: Brown-Driver-Briggs’ Hebrew Definitions a) rulers, judges, either as divine representatives at sacred places or as reflecting divine majesty and power: b) divine ones, superhuman beings including God and angels. So Thomas was not calling Jesus God in the Trinitarian sense but was probably addressing Him as one who reflected divine power and majesty or a ruler. If this was not the case, then the following is the most probable reason for what Thomas said. Staying within the bounds of proper grammar we find that two different individuals are being addressed in the expression “ο κυριος μου και ο θεος μου - My Lord and my God.” However, the expression “ειπεν αυτω - said unto him” means only one person is being spoken to. So while trusting the grammar, we need to find an interpretation which does not violate it. This can be done if we understand that while Thomas spoke these words to Jesus, he was addressing both Jesus and the Father who is in Jesus. The actual context supports this understanding which is found by looking at the last known conversation Jesus had with doubting Thomas and Phillip. John 14:5-10 “Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither you goest; and how can we know the way? Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. If you had known me, you should have known my Father also: and from henceforth you know him, and have seen him. Philip saith unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us. Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet have you not known me, Philip? He that has seen me has seen the Father; and how sayest you then, Show us the Father? Believest you not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? The words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.” In the presence of Thomas, Phillip tells Jesus that seeing the Father is enough for him. Jesus responds to Thomas and Phillip saying that to see Him (Jesus) is to see the Father because the Father is in Him. But Thomas still did not understand. The next known conversation Thomas had with Jesus is the passage of John 20:28. Thomas now understands that the Father works through Jesus, even raising Jesus from the dead, and thus to see Jesus is to see the Father, hence the exclamation cry from Thomas, “my lord (i.e. Jesus) and my God (i.e. the Father).” Thomas did not address Jesus as his “Lord and God.” We also know that it is not possible for doubting Thomas to be declaring Jesus is the one God from the following. A few verses earlier John records that the risen Jesus appeared to Mary Magdalene and told her, “I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.” John 20:17 Jesus said His God is His Father and that His God is also Mary's God. Did Jesus tell Mary that He was her God? To the contrary, Jesus was very specific in stating that His God was also her God. And since the risen Jesus called the Father “My God,” how can Jesus be God if He has a God? Indeed John could not have meant that Thomas was calling Jesus “my God” in the Trinitarian sense when John had just recorded that Jesus called the Father “My God.” Thomas could not be calling Jesus God because John just wrote that Jesus ascended to the same God Mary and Thomas both have. And further, only one verse after the confession of Thomas, John concludes by writing, “Many other signs therefore Jesus also performed … but these have been written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.” John 20:30-31 John did not write “that you may believe that Jesus was God.” If that were so, it would have been far greater for John to proclaim that Jesus is God rather than that He is the Son of God. Can God only forgive sins? The deception of some Trinitarians is easily seen when their focus is on the words of a Pharisee while being blind to the words of Christ Himself. Some claim that Jesus is the Father because these Pharisees said that God only can forgive sins. Mark 2:7 “Why does this man thus speak blasphemies? Who can forgive sins but God only?” But these Pharisees whom Christ said will not enter the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 5:20; Matthew 23:13) did not know or accept that Jesus was the Son of God who had been given authority by His Father to do so. Three verses later Jesus tells us that He has been given authority to forgive sins. Mark 2:10 “But that you may know that the Son of man has power on earth to forgive sins.” And not just power to forgive sins. Jesus also said “All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.” Matthew 28:18. And John wrote “The Father loves the Son, and has given all things into his hand.” John 3:35 Note that “all authority” and “all power” is “given” to the Son! If the Son is God as the Father is God, and the Son is almighty as the Father is, then how can the Son be “given” anything if He is God? How can God be “given” that which He has always possessed? God does not depend on anyone or anything so that it has to be “given” to Him. But we do see that Jesus had to be “given” all things into His hand just as Jesus was given authority to forgive sins by His Father. Should we worship God alone? Some claim that Matthew 4:10 says that God alone should be worshipped, and since Jesus is worshipped, they say the Son must be the Father. Matthew 4:10 “Then saith Jesus unto him, Get you hence, Satan: for it is written, You shall worship the Lord your God, andhim only shall you serve.” When Jesus said, “for it is written,” He was quoting Deuteronomy 6:13 from the Septuagint (LXX) which says, “You shall fear the Lord your God, and Him only shall you serve;” Deuteronomy 6:13 LXX The first thing to note is that technically, these verses do not say to “worship God alone.” These verses say that God only should you serve. However, there is an element of worship to the word serve in this verse. In any case, since Jesus taught that we should serve others, this is obviously not what He was saying. And since the Father commanded worship of His Son, that cannot be what He was saying either. “And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.” Hebrews 1:6 And not forgetting that Philippians 2:5-6 states that Jesus is “equal” with His Father in nature and hence is fully divine, and so of course He is worthy of worship! Jesus also said, “That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which has sent him.” John 5:23 So what then was Jesus saying to Satan that so many have misunderstood? It is not hard to work out. In Matthew 4:10 Jesus said, “for it is written.” So Jesus is referring to an example of something in the Old Testament Scriptures. To find the answer, all we have to do is look at what Jesus was referring to which will apply to what He was telling Satan. Note the reference. Deuteronomy 6:13-15 “You shall fear the Lord your God, and Him only shall you serve; and you shall cleave to Him, and by His name you shall swear. Go not after other gods, of the gods of the nations round about you, for the Lord your God in the midst of you is a jealous God, lest the Lord your God be very angry with you, and destroy you from off the face of the earth.” The issue could not be more obvious. It was about “idolatry” which is false worship as in worshipping false gods. To worship Christ and serve Him is not idolatry. Isaiah 14:12-14 tells us that Satan wanted to be worshipped like the most high God. Satan wanted Jesus to fall down and worship him as a god and so Jesus quoted Old Testament Scripture to him that says you should not worship or “go after other gods.” So the words of Christ have to be taken in the context of what He was quoting. So often Christians neglect the context of a passage and apply specific words in a way that was never intended. Thus we are to worship God, not false gods, and so this does not exclude the worship of His Son who is equal with His Father. And we are to serve God, not false gods, and so this does not exclude serving Christ. Did Jesus raise Himself from the Dead? Those who say Jesus must be God based on John 10:18 where they claim Christ raised Himself from the dead have failed to notice that Scripture at least 22 times states that His Father raised Him from the dead. The Greek word “exousia” translated “power” in the KJV means “authority,” “jurisdiction,” liberty,” power,” “right,” and “strength” and should have been translated as “authority” as has the NIV and more than 20 other translations. “No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.” John 10:18 KJV “No-one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father.” John 10:18 NIV Correctly translated this verse takes on a whole new meaning with no apparent contradiction as all the following state it was God who raised His Son from the dead. Note that most verses are truncated. Acts 2:24 “Whom God has raised up, having loosed the pains of death:”Acts 2:32 “This Jesus has God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.” Acts 3:15 “And killed the Prince of life, whom God has raised from the dead;”Acts 4:10 “Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead,”Acts 5:30 “The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you slew and hanged on a tree.”Acts 10:40 “Him God raised up the third day, and showed him openly;”Acts 13:30 “But God raised him from the dead:”Acts 13:33 “God has fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that He has raised up Jesus again;”Acts 13:34 “And as concerning that He raised him up from the dead,”Acts 13:37 “But he, whom God raised again, saw no corruption.”Acts 17:31 “He has given assurance unto all men, in that He has raised him from the dead.”Romans 4:24 “if we believe on Him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;”Romans 6:4 “Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father,”Romans 10:9 “believe in thine heart that God has raised him from the dead, you shall be saved.”1 Corinthians 6:14 “And God has both raised up the Lord, and will also raise up us”1 Corinthians 15:15 “we have testified of God that He raised up Christ:”2 Corinthians 4:14 “He which raised up the Lord Jesus shall raise up us also by Jesus,”Galatians 1:1 “by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead;”Ephesians 1:20 “Which He wrought in Christ, when He raised him from the dead,”Colossians 2:12 “through the faith of the operation of God, who has raised him from the dead.”1 Thessalonians 1:10 “And to wait for His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead,”1 Peter 1:21 “Who by him do believe in God, that raised him up from the dead,” Does Isaiah 43:11 or Hosea 13: 4 prove Jesus is God? Since these two verses say that there is no saviour but God and verses like 1 John 4:14 say that Jesus is our Saviour, then the argument is that Jesus must be the one God. But this argument does not hold water and is clutching at straws. Isaiah 43:11 “I, even I, am the LORD, and apart from me there is no saviour.” Hosea 13:4 “But I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt. You shall acknowledge no God but me, no Saviour except me.” The Hebrew word translated “saviour” in these verses is most commonly translated as “save,” “saved” and is also translated as “deliverer” and “delivered.” In Moses' day God saved His people from the power of Egypt, and in Isaiah's day He saved them from the power of Assyria. There was no one else who could save and deliverer them from these powers and so they had no other saviour but God as the context clearly reveals. Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible explains Isaiah 43, “This chapter ... refers mainly to the promised deliverance from Babylon. The people of God are still contemplated by the prophet as suffering the evils of their long and painful captivity, and his object is to comfort them with the assurances of deliverance.” And of course Hosea 13:4 refers to when God “saved” and “delivered” His people from the Egyptians. So Jesus is our Saviour of course. But the context of God being the saviour of His people in these verses is about saving them from captivity from Babylon and Egypt. Not saving them from their sin as Christ has done for us. Before Abraham was I am Another verse brought into question is John 8:58 . Note that the words “I am” also mean “I exist.” Some claim that Christ was declaring Himself to be God in John 8:58 because He used the words “I am.” This is erroneously based on the words “I am” being a reference to Exodus 3:14 . From this they draw the conclusion that Christ was alluding to a divine name and thereby telling the Jews that He was God. Trinitarians further try and support their claim by saying this is why the Jews picked up stones to kill Him. But this was due to many things Jesus said to them throughout John chapter 8 that slowly brought them to anger. The final straw being Jesus claiming seniority over Abraham who they said was their father. So Jesus claimed greater authority than the patriarch and hence was also claiming to be greater than them. The phrase “I am” in John 8:58 comes from two Greek words “egō” and “eimi.” The Strong's Definitions are:“ egō : “I” (only expressed when emphatic): - I, me.”“ eimi: I exist (used only when emphatic): - am, have been, X it is I, was.” How would you expect Jesus to respond to this comment? “Then said the Jews unto him, You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?” John 8:57 Not knowing Jesus existed before Abraham, the Pharisees are saying how could you have seen Abraham because you are not yet 50 years old. Since the Greek words for “I am” also mean I exist or existed, what is the obvious translation and response from Christ who existed before Abraham? “Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.” John 8:58Or “Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I existed.” John 8:58 Both are valid translations and the majority of Bible translations agree with the last one in fact with good reason! So “I exist”, “I have been” and “I was” are other possible translations which have all been used by various Bible translators for John 8:58 as well as elsewhere in the KJV. For example: ego eimi has been translated to “I was” in Luke 19:22 “You knewest that I was (ego eimi) an austere man,” These words formed a phrase that was in very common use by Jews and Christians and in New Testament Scriptures in the first century. It was not the name of any deity, be it the God of the Bible or any other god. It was never understood by Jews or Christians as declaring one to be God. If it were understood that way, you can be certain that the Jews would have never applied it to themselves as they did so frequently! In the following examples Peter, Paul, Gabriel and Zacharias all said, “I am” (ego eimi). But none of them were claiming to be God. Luke 1:18 “And Zacharias said unto the angel, Whereby shall I know this? for I am (ego eimi) an old man,” Luke 1:19 “And the angel answering said unto him, I am (ego eimi) Gabriel,” John 1:27 “He it is, who coming after me is preferred before me, whose shoe's latchet I am (ego eimi) not worthy to unloose.” Acts 10:21 “Then Peter went down to the men which were sent unto him from Cornelius; and said, Behold, I am (ego eimi) he whom you seek:” Acts 21:39 “Paul said, I am (ego eimi) a man which am a Jew of Tarsus,” And the blind man also identifies himself by saying, I am. John 9:9 “Some said, This is he: others said, He is like him: but he said, I am (ego eimi) he.” None of the Jews saw this man as declaring himself to be God either. Here are all the other verses where Jesus said ego eimi in the Gospels. Not one can be understood as Jesus claiming to be God. Matthew 24:5, Mark 13:6, Luke 21:8 “I am Christ”, John 8:24, 28, 13:19, 18:5, 6, 8, “I am he (Jesus),” Matthew 20:15 “I am good,” Matthew 28:20 “I am with you always,” Mark 14:62 “Jesus said I am (the Son of God),” Luke 22:27 “I am among you as one who serveth,” Luke 22:70 “You say that I am (the Son of God),” John 6:35, 48, 51 “I am the bread of life,” John 7:34, 12:26, 17:24, 14:3 “Where I am,” John 8:12 “I am the light of the world,” John 8:18 “I am the one that bear witness,” John 8:23 “I am from above,” and “I am not of this world,” John 10:7, 9 “I am the door,” John 10:11, 14 “I am the good shepherd,” John 11:25 “I am the resurrection,” John 14:6 “I am the way,” John 15:1, 5 “I am the true vine,” John 17:14, 16 “I am not of the world,” John 18:37 “Thou sayest that I am a king.” At the end of Christ's ministry when news of Him had spread far and wide, who did the Jews understand Christ to be saying He was and what was the charge they brought against Him? Matthew 26:63 “the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure you by the living God, that you tell us whether you be the Christ, the Son of God.” Matthew 27:40, 43 “If you be the Son of God, come down from the cross. 43 He trusted in God; let him deliver him now, if he will have him: for he said, I am the Son of God.” Mark 14:61 “Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed? 62 And Jesus said, I am [ego eimi]:” Mark 15:39 “when the centurion, which stood over against him, saw that he so cried out, and gave up the ghost, he said, Truly this man was the Son of God.” Luke 22:67, 70 “Are you the Christ? tell us. ... 70 Then said they all, Are you then the Son of God? And he said unto them, You say that I am [ego eimi].” John 19:7 “The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God.” Twice in the verses above Jesus responded, “I am” (ego eimi) and yet He was not saying He was God but confirming that He was the Son of God. The Jews clearly never understood Jesus to be declaring Himself God. The outrage would have been heard far and wide if He had. There is no record anywhere in the entire New Testament of anyone even asking Him if He was God. So how could the Jews have seen Him to be saying He was God in John 8:58? It is also notable that the words “I AM THAT I AM” in Exodus 3:14 have been variously understood for centuries. The Vulgate translates it as “I am who am.” The Septuagint to “I am he who exists.” The Targum of Jonathan and the Jerusalem Targum paraphrase the words as “He who spake, and the world was; who spake, and all things existed.” The original words literally signify, “I will be what I will be.” A comparison of Exodus 3:14 and John 8:58 using the Greek Old Testament the Septuagint, reveals that God said, “I am the being (ego eimi ho ohn),” and Jesus said, “Before Abraham was, I am (prin abraam genesthai ego eimi).” So the divine name is actually “The being (ho ohn)”, not “I am (ego eimi).” This is further proven by the end of Exodus 3:14 which says “The being (ho ohn) has sent me to you.” It does not say “I am (ego eimi) has sent me to you.” No matter how it is translated into English, “ho ohn” is not the same as “ego eimi.” So there is no connection between “I AM” in Exodus and “I am” in John. In no way does John 8:58 equate Jesus to God except by biased inference based on weak translation and bad grammar. Below are a few examples of how John 8:58 should have been translated. There are in fact over forty translations that translated this correctly. See the meaning of I am in John 8:58 for detailed information and more translations. “The absolute truth is that I was in existence before Abraham was ever born!” — (The Living Bible)“Jesus answered, before Abraham existed, I existed.” — (The Clarified New Testament)“In truth I tell you,” replied Jesus, “before Abraham existed I was.” — (Twentieth Century New Testament)“Jesus answered, “The truth is, I existed before Abraham was even born!” — (New Living Translation)“Jesus said to them, I am telling the truth: I was alive before Abraham was born!” — (International Bible Translators) The Alpha and Omega the Beginning and the End Some believe that the words Alpha and Omega found in Revelation 1:8 , 11 ; 21:6 and 22:13 means that Christ is without beginning or end but it does not say that. It says that Christ is the beginning and end of something. Not only that, but a beginning is the origin of something and an end is the termination of something. Since when does “always” have a beginning and what good is eternal life if it has an end? Many Christians have the wrong concept of the word beginning in Scripture. Remember that God had no beginning and has always existed. The “Alpha” is the “first” letter of the Greek Alphabet and hence is the “beginning” of the Alphabet, and “Omega” is the “last” letter of the Greek Alphabet and hence is the “end” of the Alphabet. So these terms are simply referring to the beginning and to the end of something, but what? Let's not make any assumptions and look at what Scripture does say and what these words meant to the Jews. Note that every single verse with a reference to the Alpha and Omega without fail follows a reference to the second coming of Christ and the “end” of the world. This is not a coincidence. Christ created this world and brought about its beginning, and He will be there in its end at His second coming and will bring about its destruction. Thus Christ is the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last as He states in Revelation 22:13 . All three phrases mean the same thing. In Revelation 1:17-18 we find, “I am the first and the last: I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore.” Who is the Alpha and Omega (the first and the last) that was dead and is alive for evermore? It is Christ. Note also that Revelation 21:1-8 and 22:12-14 while speaking of the end immediately reveal that those who keep the Commandments get to eat of the tree of life, and that the sorcerers, whoremongers, murderers, idolaters and liars perish. Note how Revelation 21:7 references Revelation 2:7, which in turn references Revelation 22:14 in regards to those who get to eat from the tree of life, which are those who keep the Commandments of God. So we find a reference to the end of this world and the second coming of Christ before the words in question while directly after these words are two more things that happen directly after the end. That is too much evidence to be coincidental. And since we are at the end of the Bible and dealing with the end, then that is why these verses only refer to the “end.” So if the “end” is referring to the end of this world than the “beginning” obviously refers to the beginning of this world, which we find in the beginning of the Bible such as Genesis 1:1 and references to the first chapter of Genesis. So everything we have seen so far reveals that these verses are referring to the second coming of Christ and the end of this world where the faithful who kept the Commandments of God get to eat from the tree of life while others perish. Note Clarke's Commentary on Revelation 1:8 and how these words were used and understood by the Jews. Did they see these words to mean that Christ has always existed and is God? This of course would also contradict Proverbs 8 that says Christ was brought forth and so would not be possible anyway. So as the Jews understood on the meaning of these words, from the beginning and first book of the Bible to the end and lastbook of the Bible, Jesus encompasses all things. Thus the Jews who actually knew the meaning of these words disagree with the claim made by Trinitarians. The beginning and the end referred to in these passages is the beginning of this created world by Christ, while the end is the second coming of Christ and the end of this world when a New Heaven and Earth are created. Christ brought about the beginning of this world and He also brings about its end. Barnes Commentary on Revelation 22:13 also confirms what Scripture reveals in this respect. Considering these verses in Revelation that state the beginning and the end are referring to the creating and beginning of this world, consider now Genesis 1:1 , Proverbs 8:23 , John 1:1-3 , Ephesians 3:9 and Hebrews 1:10 . Thus all references to the beginning in this context is consistent throughout Scripture and further supports the meaning of the words Alpha and Omega. For Adventists: “Christ says, “I am the true witness. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.” — (E.G. White, 1SAT, 231.3) “even from Genesis to Revelation. Christ is the Alpha, the first link, and the Omega, the last link, of the gospel chain, which is welded in Revelation.” — (E.G. White, 10MR 171.1) “He is the Author and Finisher of our faith, the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.” — (E.G. White, 1888, 783.2) “And so the statement that He is the beginning or head of the creation of God means that in Him creation had its beginning; that, as He Himself says, He is Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last. Rev. 21:6; 22:13. He is the source whence all things have their origin.” — (E.J. Waggoner, CAHR, p. 20, 1890) Conclusion Many are confused and do not know who they are worshipping or who abides in them. Is it a three in one god or a real Father and Son? And is the Holy Spirit God the Spirit or the Spirit of God through whom the Son comes to us? Jesus included Himself when He said, “we know what we worship” John 4:22. He then explained who He worships. He said, “the true worshipers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth.” Jesus worships His Father along with all “true worshipers” John 4:23. Jesus worships His Father because His Father is His God. Jesus said to Mary after His resurrection, “Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.” John 20:17. Jesus told His disciples that His God is the same God as their God. He also explained who this God is being the Father. He told the disciples that His Father is also our Father, and His God is also our God. Many are clearly confused. You often hear, “We thank you O Father for coming down and dying for our sins.” And then you hear people closing the prayer “in Jesus name.” Does it make sense to pray to Jesus in His own name? He is our mediator, and He told us to pray to the Father in Jesus' name ( Luke 11:2 ; John 16:23 ; Ephesians 5:20 ). You hear people pray to the Father and end with, “in your name.” The Bible says, “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” 1 Timothy 2:5. We are to pray to God, the Father, in the name of our mediator Christ Jesus. It would appear that people who confuse the Biblical distinctions and positions of the Father and Son do not know who they are worshiping and hence are not worshiping in spirit and in truth. The Bible states many times that Jesus is the literal Son of God. But the trinity doctrine says no, they are just role playing. And so the personality of the Father and Son is destroyed. God is no longer a real Father and Christ is no longer a real Son. This is Satan's plan to have Christians deny the Father and Son and to obtain the worship he has always desired. It is Christ who Comforts us and both He and His Father make their abode in us through His Spirit. John 14:16-23 . So is the trinity doctrine true or false? The testimony of Scripture is that there is but one God the Father and one Lord Jesus Christ and their Holy Spirit being the presence and power of God. The Father and Son not only created us, but loved us and devised an amazing plan to save a lost world from sin to restore us to His presence in paradise. Previous All trinity studies Next Back to top

返回研究目录 上一篇 下载中文 Read in English 下一篇 三位一体论的真相 [ trinitytruth.org ] 1-13 (共42部份) 三位一体论的真相 三位一体神论的教义是真理还是谬道？ 序言 英文的Trinity【译成三位一体神或三一神】这个词是源自拉丁文的Trinitas一词。后者源于希腊哲学家柏拉图（Plato）所用的术语Trias，意思是三。因此它发源于哲学。 Trinity一词是特土良（公元160-225年）最先使用的。特土良（Tertullian）从异教转进天主教成为神学家和早期的教父之一。他于第三世纪初著书，给真神的教义作出定义。他的结论是父、子、圣灵三位是同一本质，但不是同一位神。他也不认为圣子与圣父同为永恒。 关于三一神论有太多悬而未决的问题，最明显的问题就是《圣经》的什么地方对它作出阐释？史上很多学者承认《圣经》中找不到这个教义。很多人会回答说，三一神论可以在约翰一书5:7中找到。“在天上作见证的原来有三，父、道、和圣灵，这三样归于一。” 【编按：英王钦定本《圣经》加了这一句，其他英文版本和中文《圣经》都没有这一句。】 但是最早的抄本是没有“父、道、和圣灵，这三样归于一” 这句话的。 （1）三一神论的由来 在特土良之后约一个世纪，亚流派（Arianism）开始造成太多争端，以致罗马皇帝康斯坦丁（Constantine）不得不召开教会史上第一届大公会议，以解决这些难题。亚流（Arius）是第四世纪初亚历山大城【埃及北部港市】教会的一名长老。他教导说，基督真是上帝的独生子，所以上帝被称为基督的父亲，这是不言而喻的。换句话说，祂们真是父子关系。反对亚流教导的是亚他拿修（Athanasius），也是同样来自亚历山大城的一名执事。他的观点是三一神论的一种初期形式，他说父、子和圣灵都是同一位神，但却彼此分明，这使父子不可能是真的父子关系。他的观点比特土良的信念前进了一步，但却变得更糟糕，因为特土良还不至于说圣灵是个有位格的灵体生物。那要在后来才发展出来的。根据主流历史的论述，亚流教导说基督是被造的，但教会焚毁了亚流的所有著作，而有历史家声称当局窜改了记录，并造谣说亚流教导基督被造论，以败坏他的名声。天主教闻名之处是按他们的诠释捏造假历史记录，以掩盖真相。看看以下的例子。 亚他拿修的观点深受奥利金（Origen）的影响。奥利金是一名希腊哲学家和神学家，他透过新柏拉图派哲学来重新诠释基督教教义。他的著作后来被谴责为异端。奥利金所教导的包括炼狱、圣餐变体、轮回和灵魂再投胎等教义、以及圣灵是一股女性力量、耶稣只不过是一个受造生物、没有人体复活、创世记的创造论是个虚构的神话，还有据说他基于马太福音第19章而公开阉割自己。另一方面，亚流是安提阿（Antioch）的卢吉安（Lucian）门下的学生。卢吉安负责汇编《圣经》抄本，为后人留下新约希腊文《圣经》公认标准本（Textus Receptus）。这标准本后来由荷兰学者伊拉斯姆（Erasmus）继续完成，为我们赐下了可靠的《英王钦定本》（KJV）的新约《圣经》。这些事实告诉我们，亚他拿修受到了希腊哲学的影响，而亚流所教导的也许是根据《圣经》的真理，尽管主流历史论述不以为然。 有些人相信康斯坦丁是第一任基督徒罗马皇帝，但他其实是太阳神敬拜者，在他临死前受洗的。在他统治期间，他杀了自己的长子和妻子。他的信仰充其量不过是异教和基督教的混合，为了达到政治目的。所以他不关心也不明白这场争端，只是很想尽快结束这场争议，以维持帝国的和谐平稳。在公元325年5月20日当一群主教聚集在尼西亚（Nicea）以求解决危机时，很少人支持亚他拿修的基督观，因为大部分人都持既不是亚他拿修也不是亚流的中间立场。宗教辩论持续了两个月之后，会议拒绝了亚流的少数观点，但因没有其他选择，康士坦丁只好批准了亚他拿修的观点，这也是一个少数观点。结果教会支持了一个只有少数与会者抱持的信仰。《不列颠百科全书》写道：“康士坦丁自己主持会议，积极地引导讨论的方向，并亲自提议...关键的程式，在会议所发出的信条中表达基督对上帝的关系。... 主教们被皇帝所压倒，于是都签了信条，除了两名主教拒签之外，许多也是出于勉强签的。“——1971年版，第6卷，”康斯坦丁”,原文第386页。 恐怖的宗教逼迫随着康士坦丁所作的决定而来。康士坦丁这位基本上是个异教徒的皇帝，竟把一个耶稣从来没有传过的人造信条强加于与会者。康士坦丁放逐了凡拒绝接受此信条的与会者，而且凡认签此信条，但却拒绝参与谴责亚流的主教们，也遭驱逐出境。他也命令烧毁亚流所写的书籍及其所有抄本。可是过了几年之后，康士坦丁对那些他之前在会议上谴责并放逐的人变得态度温和，于是允许他们回国。公元335年，他们提控亚他拿修，这时康士坦丁居然把亚他拿修驱逐出境！这项决定与《圣经》真理无关。康士坦丁作为一名异教太阳神敬拜者，也在四年之前强制执行了历史上第一宗星期日法案，所以在这两项异教传统被引进教会的事上，他扮演了主要的角色。耶稣被钉十字架後400年，他们才制订了这个信条，这信条之前是不存在的，所以使徒们和早期教会也不可能教导过这样的信条。{待续} （2）三位一体论是什么？ 大多数教会所教导的三位一体论都有这样的阐述：有三位同等（各方面同等）、同为永恒（同年龄）、全知（知道一切）、全能（万事都能）的神；但他们不是三位神，而是一位神。《亚他拿修信经》的其中一句是这样写的：“父是上帝，子是上帝，圣灵是上帝，但他们不是三位上帝，而是一位上帝。” 《亚他拿修信经》（天主教信经）说，一位上帝是三位神性的位格在一个分不开的本质中。问题是在于分不开的本性这个部分，因为他们坚持说，这构成了一位上帝，就是1+1+1=1。也就是说，父是上帝，耶稣是上帝，圣灵是上帝，但却不是三位上帝，而是一位上帝，这就是三位一体论！ 你不需要有聪明的头脑来觉悟到这种说法是说不过去或不合理的。因此，教导这项教义的人会把它添上奥秘的标签，声称你永远不会明白，所以只要接受即可。他们也可能说，只因为这是天主教的教导，不一定表示它不对。所以，撒但用尽方法来欺骗人，叫人相信这个谬道，而不自己私下进行考证。其实《圣经》没有一节经文明明论述圣灵是上帝【除了父和子】，一处经文都没有！你稍后会发现，也没有任何有效的经文说三位是一体的。 有些教会在某些教义上与众不同，但在这基本的概念上，就是上帝是三位一体，所有教会的说法都与《亚他拿修信经》一模一样。天主教的信仰就是建立在这个信经上。 我们也发现，trinity（三位一体）一词于公元200年左右来自特土良的著作，但他并没有论述我们今天所知道的三位一体。三位一体论于公元325年来自亚他拿修，而圣灵作为第三位灵体生物的概念是于公元381年从三位卡帕多西亚人而来的。所以《圣经》中没有一处可以找到trinity（三位一体）这个词和这个教义。它是在众使徒死后以及《圣经》最后一本书的著作完成之后几百年才被天主教神学家汇集而成的。反之，三位一体论是从亚历山大人的比喻性观念来的，而且它是希腊与罗马哲学的混合物，松散地建立在一小撮被断章取义或添加进去的经文基础上。 故此，三位一体论是个人造教义，它借用了浓厚的异教和希腊哲学概念，而且是在《圣经》著作完成很多世纪之后才发展出来的。因此，这个教义不可能来自《圣经》而必须放在《圣经》旁边来教导。所以如果你从来没有听过三位一体论的话，你单单靠着读《圣经》，是不会自己得出三位一体的结论的。你必须听别人讲三位一体才会得出这样的结论。结果，你也会发现，你还必须用私意解经法或肆意诠释《圣经》【把个人偏见读进经文中】才能说服别人去相信这个教义。 在巴别塔，上帝混乱了人们的语言之后，太阳才开始被人以三个阶段作为三位神来崇拜。也就是说，东升的太阳是神，中午的太阳是神，黄昏的夕阳也是神，但这不是三位神，而是一位神！换句话说，1+1+1=1。这就是三位一体论的绝对起源。认识我们所敬拜的是谁，对永生是极其关键的；所以，如果上帝真的是三位一体的话，肯定会有《圣经》明确的论述，但却完全没有。 故此，三位一体论或三神论是一个从罗马教产生出来的异端，它等同于星期日的敬拜，是上帝面前的一个可憎之物。这个教义是直接从罗马皇帝污秽的命令下产生的。它不过是哲学、空谈和人造的传统。它否认耶稣，传另一个耶稣、另一个灵和另一个福音。 歌罗西书2：8-10 “你们要谨慎，恐怕有人用他的理学，和虚空的妄言，不照着基督，乃照人间的遗传，和世上的小学，就把你们掳去。因为神本性一切的丰盛，都有形有体的居住在基督里面。你们在祂里面也得了丰盛。他是各样执政掌权者的元首。” 哥林多後书11：3-4,13-14 “我只怕你们的心或偏于邪，失去那向基督所存纯一清洁的心，就像蛇用诡诈诱惑了夏娃一样。假如有人来，另传一个耶稣，不是我们所传过的，或者你们另受一个灵，不是你们所受过的，或者另传一个福音，不是你们所得过的，你们容让他也就罢了。...那等人是假使徒，行事诡诈，装作基督使徒的模样。这也不足为怪，因为连撒但也装作光明的天使。” 彼得後书2：1-2 “从前在百姓中有假先知起来，将来在你们中间，也必有假师傅，私自引进陷害人的异端，连买他们的主他们也不承认，自取速速的灭亡。将有许多人随从他们邪淫的行为，便叫真道，因他们的缘故被毁谤。” 《圣经》教导的是什么？ 《圣经》对上帝的启示是没有奥秘色彩的。按《圣经》的启示，只有一个真神，就是父上帝，是一个真正的亲父，和一个主耶稣基督，父上帝的亲生儿子，还有一个圣灵，就是上帝的同在和大能，而不是另一个有分开意识的生物。如一个基督徒作家所说： “上帝爱世人，甚至将祂的独生子赐给世人，不是一个如天使般受造的儿子，也不是一个如被赦免的罪人一般被领养的儿子，而是一个按着父本体的真像所生的儿子，在权柄和神性的完美方面与父同等的儿子。”（怀爱伦著，《时兆》1895年5月30日） 因此，我们有“父上帝”（基督的亲父），“上帝的儿子” 和 “上帝的灵”，就是祂的灵，如《圣经》重复地告诉我们一样。《圣经》从不说 “子上帝”或“圣灵上帝”。 下面保罗列出了七样分明的事物，表明他们都是分开的，没有重叠的，没有一样是指另一样的。所以说，父、子、和圣灵是三样分开的东西，一样不能是另一样。 以弗所书4：4-6 “身体只有一个，圣灵只有一个，正如你们蒙召，同有一个指望，一主【耶稣基督】，一信，一洗，一神，就是众人的父，超乎众人之上，贯乎众人之中，也住在众人之内。” {待续} （3）三位一体论的隐含意义 自从耶稣死而复活之后，人类的仇敌就不停尝试扭曲基督在道成肉身（救主的生平和死亡）之中所成就的一切事。由于撒但不能改变基督所成就的事，他只好走第二条路，就是提倡上帝的神性儿子其实没有真正死亡的道理。我听过牧师讲道说上帝差遣祂自己来死在十字架上，因为三位一体论教导说三位全是三合一的上帝。但是这就产生另一个问题，因为上帝是不可能死的。所以他们就声称，耶稣有两个本性，神性和人性，那么只有祂的人性死亡。但是如果说上帝的神性儿子不能死的话，就离《圣经》太远了，有如暗离光那么远。那么我们会问三位一体论者，我们得救是靠着基督的哪一个本性呢？答案是那个为我们流血而死的神性基督。明显的，如果只有祂的人性死亡的话，那么我们的救赎主就只不过是一个普通人罢了，而上帝神性的儿子也就没有份参与救赎之工，因为祂是不可能受苦或死亡的。撒但也有意要扭曲上帝在牺牲祂儿子的事上所付出的重大代价。根据三位一体论，父在赐下祂儿子这件事上从来没有冒任何风险，因为他们声称基督不可能犯罪，因此不会有任何失败的风险。如果只有基督的人性受苦和死亡的话，那么神性的基督就保持安然无恙，丝毫没有受到任何损伤。而由于上帝怎样都死不了，那么基督也就在任何情况之下都死不了的了。然而耶稣却说：“我曾死过，现在又活了。”（启1：18） 几乎所有的基督徒都会说：“耶稣是上帝的儿子。” 但这句话里面隐含着不同的意义。可悲的现实是，大多数自称为基督徒的人如果相信他们的教派所教导的基本信仰的话，就不相信耶稣是上帝亲生的儿子了。耶和华见证人说，耶稣是上帝的儿子，但当他们被要求解释时，就说耶稣是上帝所创造的第一位天使，与路锡甫或其他天使没什么不同。罗马天主教徒说，耶稣是上帝的儿子，但当被要求解释时，他们就说有父上帝、子上帝、和圣灵上帝，然而却不是三位上帝，而是一位上帝。其他人则声称，耶稣是与上帝同为永恒的伙伴，上帝把祂立为祂的儿子，虽然耶稣不是上帝真正的亲生儿子。独一神教主义者（unitarian）声称，耶稣在地上诞生之前是不存在的。还有另一些人会说，耶稣在伯利恒出生时才成为上帝的儿子，而在任何其他意义上都不是上帝的儿子。这些解释每一样都有一个同样严重的问题，而且这并非偶然。他们全都以某种方式否认耶稣是上帝亲生的儿子。这正是撒但所要达到的目的。 三位一体论教导说： 有三位神性生物，同为永恒 有三位神性生物，全都永存不朽 有三位神性生物，同样全知全能 有三位神性生物，全都配得敬拜赞美 有三位神性生物，各自扮演不同的角色 如果三位成员全都是同为永恒的，那么“从来没有”一个时候他们是不存在的，而他们也都必有同样无尽的年龄。如果真是这样的话，那么他们的称号也就只不过反映出他们在履行救赎计划中所各自采取的角色而已。这些称号也就不能按照字面解释来解读了。譬如，上帝的儿子就不是上帝真正亲生的儿子了，祂只不过是三位一体中扮演儿子的那位神。然而《圣经》重复地教导我们说，上帝赐下祂的独生子，但是三位一体论却告诉我们说，耶稣不是上帝亲生的儿子，祂只是那位扮演儿子角色的神性成员。三位一体论者典型的声称说，耶稣被称为上帝的儿子，是因为祂在伯利恒的诞生。但是《圣经》却说耶稣在万物被造以前就已生出。如果耶稣的存在没有开始的话，那么祂就不可能是上帝的儿子了。如果基督不是一个亲生的儿子，那么上帝也不是祂的亲父了。这样一来，三位一体论摧毁了上帝的位格，和我们的主耶稣基督，上帝儿子的位格。 这个教义也教导说，父、子、和圣灵都是同一位神。可见这理论否认父与子，而且它以各种形式来否认父子的神圣关系。约壹2：22-23说，不认父与子的就是敌基督者。注意，约翰没有说不认圣灵的。这样一来，超过100节提到耶稣是上帝儿子的经文就都变成谎言了，因为它们说的都不是实话。你能不能举出任何其他的教义，可以用比喻的方式来废掉这么多明确的经文的呢？你如果接受三位一体论的话，那么耶稣就不可能是上帝的儿子了。如果你不接受耶稣为上帝的儿子的话，那么你就得不到永生！有了这些事实摆在我们眼前，让我们仔细思考以下的经文，并扪心自问，藉着否认父与子真生的身份，是否能影响你的永生。鉴于三位一体论是出于撒但的，我们不难看透他的计划，只要我们打开眼界。 约翰壹书2：22-23 “谁是说谎话的呢？不是那不认耶稣基督的吗？不认父与子的，这就是敌基督的。凡不认子的就没有父，认子的连父也有了。” 约翰福音17：3 “认识你独一的真神，并且认识你所差来的耶稣基督，这就是永生。” 约翰福音3：36 “信子的人有永生，不信子的人得不着永生【原文作：不得见永生】，神的震怒常在他身上。” 约翰福音20：31 “但记这些事，要叫你们信耶稣是基督，是神的儿子，并且叫你们信了他，就可以因他的名得生命。” 最重要的是，这个教义可以影响我们的救恩问题。在我还没有深入研究这个课题并领会其所有的隐含意义之前，这问题是我不可能想象到的。还有圣灵的问题。如果三位一体论是谬道的话，那么圣灵就真的是撒但创造出来的，而不是父和子的灵了。如果这第三位生物是撒但的创作的话，那我们敬仰的对象会是谁呢？我们会得到谁的灵呢？如上面的经文所述，认识父和子究竟是谁，就是永生的秘诀。但是我们也不可以搞错圣灵的身份。 我们可以提出这个问题，如果圣灵是如三位一体论所声称的，是第三位同等的生物的话，那么《圣经》为何从来不叫我们去向圣灵“祷告”或“下拜”呢？我们受促祷告“求”圣灵，但从来没有受促“向”圣灵求告的。然而，随着三位一体论越来越牢固地渗入教会当中，有些人开始做出违反《圣经》所教导的事。你如果以为撒但不会引领基督徒去向圣灵祷告的话，那请你看看一则Youtube的视频片段。一位主讲人在视频中公开向“圣灵上帝”祷告。“圣灵上帝” 这名称是个天主教三位一体论的术语，因此在《圣经》中是找不到的。《圣经》所用的术语是“上帝的灵”，这术语有完全不同的意思。 如果圣灵是三位一体中第三位同等的生物的话，那么在人类犯罪之前，天上四位最高的生物是谁? 那会是父、子、圣灵、和路锡甫。是谁要像至高者一样受宇宙众生的敬拜，是谁要作上帝让众生向他祷告呢？（赛14：12-14）如果圣灵不是第三位实体的生物的话，是谁会是地位第三高的生物呢？路锡甫！这样，如果圣灵不是第三位实体生物或分开的一个神灵的话，那么如果我们向“圣灵”祷告的话，是谁会答应我们的祷告呢？是谁会立他自己作为第三位“神灵”配得万人赞美敬拜呢？撒但是否成功达到他的目标，被人封为一位神呢？现在我们如果相信圣灵可以接受敬拜和祷告，就像父和子一样，那么真正接受我们敬拜的会是谁呢？如果圣灵不是第三位生物的话，那么根据我们的信仰，我们会有谁的灵，我们会敬拜谁呢？ 预言之灵引言：在罪进入宇宙之前——“在天上的居民当中，仅次于基督的撒但，曾经是最受上帝尊荣的，在能力和荣耀上也是最高的。”——怀爱伦著，《时兆》1902年7月23日。预言之灵证实撒但曾经是天上地位第三高的生物。不存在如三位一体论所宣称叫做圣灵的第三位生物。 三位一体论声称耶稣也是那独一真神，因此19世纪的一位复临信徒作家这样写道：“要相信这个教义的话，我们在读《圣经》的时候就必须相信，上帝差遣祂自己来到世上受死，为要叫世人与祂自己和好，叫自己从死里复活，升天去见祂自己，在天上在祂自己面前代求，而且是人类与祂自己之间的唯一中保。...我们还必须相信，在园中上帝向祂自己祷告，倘若可能，将这杯从祂自己手中挪去，还有一千个其他同样荒唐的例子。”——拉夫伯勒。 三位一体论所教导的其他荒唐的例子包括: 耶稣是永存不朽的神但祂却死了，祂是看不见的神但却被人看见，祂是全能的神但却从一位天使得力，祂是全知的神但却不知道祂哪一天复临，祂和祂父亲同大但祂父亲却比祂大，祂与父亲同等但祂却是父亲，祂是儿子但却与父亲的年龄相等，祂是有父亲的儿子却也是没有父亲的神，祂是被生的儿子但却也是不被生的神，祂是全然的神也是全然的人，祂从自己出来，祂向自己祷告，祂赐下能力给自己，祂感谢自己，祂为自己作见证，祂回到自己身边，祂坐在自己的右边，祂是自己的父亲却也是自己的儿子，祂离开了天庭但却从来没有离开过天庭。《圣经》中固然有许多事是难以理解的，但你可以肯定，上帝从不期望我们去相信不可能的事。 你一而再，再而三听到说，福音浅显易懂，甚至连小孩子也能明白。我非常同意这句话。但是三位一体论的教导怎么可能浅显易懂呢？不但小孩子听不明白，连我们教会最知名的神学家也不能作出清楚的解释。然而，上帝差祂儿子来到世上为你我而死的概念是容易明白的，只要我们相信简单的《圣经》陈述，即耶稣真是上帝的儿子！而不是三位组成“一位神”的神秘生物之一。你怎么可能相信耶稣不是永生父神的独生子而又与人分享约3：16，从而希望邀请他们来接受永恒的救恩呢？当你否认耶稣是上帝儿子的那一刻，约3：16岂不成了一个谎言了吗？一个比喻不能差遣另一个比喻来救我们。事实是，一个父亲差遣了祂儿子来救我们。 约翰福音3：16 “上帝爱世人，甚至将祂的独生子赐给他们，叫一切信祂的，不致灭亡，反得永生。” 约翰贰书1：3 “恩惠、怜悯、平安，从父神和祂儿子耶稣基督，在真理和爱心上，必常与我们同在。” {待续} （4）撒但對真神的伪造 撒但是个大骗子，而他最大的武器就是迷惑。所以撒但已经伪造了上帝的一切事物，以便引领人离开真理，进入假崇拜当中，让人误以为自己蒙上帝的带领，殊不知却是撒但在带领他们。例如，上帝有真先知而撒但则有假先知。（彼后2：1；太24：24；林后11：13-15）上帝有真师傅而撒但则有假师傅。耶稣是世界的光而撒但则伪装成光明的天使。上帝有真使徒而撒但则有假使徒。上帝赐真的说方言的属灵恩赐，是人类所知的真语言，而撒但则有假方言，是你听不明白的，他也有假的翻方言，是你无从验证的。上帝有特别的安息日和崇拜日，也就是我们崇拜真神的记号，而撒但却设立了一个伪安息日，是来自太阳神和撒但的崇拜。当然有父、子、圣灵。撒但的伪造是什么呢？我们下一章会揭露三位一体论也是来自太阳神和撒但的崇拜和666号码的！ 哪一个是他的伪造呢？是承认有真的父和子这个观点，正如《圣经》超过一百次以字面的方式告诉我们的，还是那他们称为奥秘的三位一体神，说他们不是亲生父子而只不过是扮演各自的角色而已的观点? 后者是《圣经》连暗示都没有表达过的。有多少人会停下来想撒但会创造出一个教义来摧毁父和子的位格呢？而这个来自仇敌的假教义会是合理还是不可理喻呢？上帝不是混乱和神秘教义的创始者，撒但才是。不忘记圣灵的隐含意义。你如果搞错了，你可能不经意地把你的赞美都给了撒但，或者更糟的是，连你的崇拜也给了撒但！这是他最可怕的伪造，因它影响上帝和祂儿子的真敬拜。 三位一体论是敌基督者吗？ 以下四个章节是整本《圣经》中唯一使用“敌基督者”这句词组的。注意，约翰称为敌基督者的人是曾经属他教会的一份子，但后来背道而私自离开教会的。所以他们在约翰的有生之年还活在世间。因此，这些约翰称为敌基督者的人曾经一度与他一起，也自称为基督徒的，但他们却开始教导错误的道理。他们教了什么假道理，使约翰称他们为敌基督者呢？三位一体论声称，是那扮演儿子角色的独一上帝死在十字架上，所以这理论否认上帝的亲生儿子成了肉身来，并且死在十字架上。不认耶稣是上帝的儿子也意味着上帝不是亲父，所以这理论不认父和子。仔细看约翰壹书2：22-23。 约翰壹书2：18-19 “小子们哪，如今是末时了，你们曾听见说：那敌基督的要来，现在已经有好些敌基督的出来了，从此我们就知道如今是末时了。他们从我们中间出去，却不是属我们的，若是属我们的，就必仍旧与我们同在，他们出去，显明都不是属我们的。” 约翰壹书2：22-23 “谁是说谎话的呢？不是那不认耶稣基督的吗？不认父与子的，这就是敌基督的。凡不认子的就没有父，认子的连父也有了。” 约翰壹书4：3 “凡灵不认耶稣，就不是出于神，这是那敌基督者的灵，你们从前听见他要来，现在已经在世上了。” 约翰贰书1:7 “因为世上有许多迷惑人的出来，他们不认耶稣基督是成了肉身来的，这就是那迷惑人，敌基督的。” 在宗教改革期间，罗马教廷首次被辨认为启示录第13章的第一头兽，等同于约翰所称的敌基督者。天主教用反改革运动来回应这场宗教改革运动。他们委派两位耶稣会的成员去制造假教义来引开众人辨认出他们为敌基督者的焦点。（详情参考以后会陆续刊登的“谁是敌基督者”和“未来主义的圣经预言”。）这就是提倡敌基督者为一个人的假道理之发源地，这是《圣经》从来没有教导的。鉴于约翰所写的关于敌基督者的事，教廷否认父与子的方式显然是借着创造出三位一体论的教义，从而腐蚀了几乎整个基督教界。 许多人相信他们的信仰深深扎根于三位一体论之中，然而这项教义是敌基督者的最基本教义，使它无法建立在真磐石上——永生上帝的儿子基督。《今日天主教徒手册》原文第11页这样写道：“三位一体论的奥秘是天主教信仰的核心教义。”敌基督者的势力是建立在一个前提上：即耶稣不是上帝的亲生儿子。借此他否认了神圣的父子关系。上帝的真教会将要建立于彼得在马太16：13-18中所宣告的基础上：“你是基督，是永生上帝的儿子。...我要把我的教会建造在这磐石上。” 相信三位一体论其实就是跟随着敌基督势力的脚踪行。 既然三位一体论教导三位平行同等的神性生物之道理，那么约翰为什么没有包括不认圣灵在内，如果说圣灵真是第三位同等的生物呢？答案很简单。因为圣灵不是第三位生物（being），而是第三实体（entity），就是祂们的圣灵。正如约翰也说：“我们乃是与父并祂儿子耶稣基督相交的。”（约翰壹书1：3） 预言之灵引言： 什么教义是敌基督的？“谁是说谎话的呢？不是那不认耶稣基督的吗？不认父与子的，这就是敌基督的。...凡不认上帝的位格和祂儿子耶稣基督位格的人，乃是不认上帝和基督的。”——怀爱伦著，《评论与通讯》1906年3月8日，原文第9页。 什么教义不认上帝的位格和祂儿子的位格，也就是不认上帝和基督的呢？怀雅各解释道：“这里我们可以提出三位一体论，它毁灭了上帝的位格和祂儿子耶稣基督的位格。”——怀雅各著，《评论与通讯》1855年12月11日，原文第85页。 只有两位神性生物，如约翰所教导的：“唯独父和子当受尊崇。”——怀爱伦著，《青年导报》1898年7月7日。 （待续） （5）三位一体论为何影响救恩？ 没有研究过三位一体论的人从不视之为一个救恩问题，这是因为他们不了解这理论所涉及的许多确切含义。所以大多数人万万没料到这理论是史上最大且最严重的骗局，而且也是与兽印记和安息日有密切的关系。 你还记得三位一体论教导一位三合一和一合三的神吗？也就是说，三位平行同等、同为永恒的神，他们不是三位神而是一位神。1+1+1=1。三位据说是自有永有的神，所以三位都是没有开始的。那么如果耶稣与天父一起自有永有的话，祂怎能作天父的亲生儿子呢？如果耶稣不是天父的亲生儿子的话，天父又怎能作祂的父亲呢？所以三位一体论和其他类似的理论如独一神教主义（Unitarian）都以某种形式否认耶稣是上帝的独生儿子。 如果你不承认耶稣是上帝的儿子，你就与上帝隔绝了。“凡认耶稣为神儿子的，神就住在他里面，他也住在神里面。”（约翰壹书4：15）又说：“胜过世界的是谁呢？不是那信耶稣是神儿子的吗？”（约翰壹书5：5） 如果你不认耶稣是上帝的儿子，也否认上帝赐下了祂的亲生儿子的话，你就是将上帝当作说谎的，也就没有永生了。“信神儿子的，就有这见证在他心里，不信神的，就是将神当作说谎的，因不信神为祂儿子作的见证。这见证，就是神赐给我们永生，这永生也是在祂儿子里面。人有了神的儿子就有生命，没有神的儿子就没有生命。”（约翰壹书5：10-12） “但记这些事，要叫你们信耶稣是基督，是神的儿子，并且叫你们信了祂，就可以因祂的名得生命。”（约翰福音20：31） 故此，《圣经》告诉我们，只有借着承认耶稣是上帝的儿子，我们才能得救，才可到天父那里去。如果你不认耶稣是上帝的亲生儿子的话，那上帝也不可能是亲父了。因此，这理论不认父和子。这就是约翰所谓的敌基督，因为它反对基督是上帝亲生的儿子。它否认上帝亲生的儿子成了肉身来，并死在十字架上。 《圣经》一而再，再而三地启示说，祂们是真正的父子关系。但三位一体论说不是。今天有好些人包括复临教会牧师，当被人问及耶稣是否上帝的儿子时，却回答说：不是！他们说耶稣只不过是一位扮演儿子角色的神。然而，《圣经》里面却找不到任何哪怕是一丝暗示的经文，说父子俩只不过是在扮演各自的角色（即演戏），或说祂们不是真正的父子。上帝生了一个儿子，是一个祂非常爱的儿子，而撒但却在努力掩盖这个真相。 如果三位一体论是谬论的话，那么圣灵就是撒但的杰作了，而不是父和子之间的灵。如果我们把赞美归给撒但的杰作，而不是归给父和子的灵，那有没有关系呢？答案是明显的。《圣经》说，撒但渴望受万人的敬拜，像至高者上帝一样。他是否成功达到了他被人封为神的目标？今天越来越多人在向圣灵祷告和敬拜圣灵，这是《圣经》所没有吩咐我们做的事。如果圣灵不是第三位生物的话，那么根据我们的信仰，我们会有谁的灵，而我们的赞美又归给了谁呢？如果我们相信圣灵如同父和子一样可以接受人的敬拜和祷告的话，那么是谁会接受我们的敬拜呢？我们的敬拜就会归给撒但！你认为父和子会介意吗？答案是不言而喻的。 启示录13：17说：“除了那受印记，有了兽名，或有兽名数目的，都不得做买卖。” 你注意到吗？它列出了三样东西。不单是有兽印记，也有兽名和兽名的数目，这数目就是666。《三位一体论的异教起源》的研究揭开666是来自三位一体论和太阳神的敬拜及撒但的敬拜！ 《天主教要理问答》一书问道：“星期日是什么？....” 答案是，星期日 “是使徒奉献给至圣三位一体神作为敬拜的日子。”——《评论与通讯》第5卷，第24号，第86页。 这个问答很有意思，鉴于“星期日的敬拜”和“三位一体论”两者都是源自古代巴比伦人拜太阳神和拜撒但的风俗。两者也都是由上帝称为巴比伦的天主教带入基督教界的！两者也都涉及我们敬拜的对象，这正是如启示录第13章和第14章所启示的兽印记的确切课题。那么我们要敬拜独一真神而守祂的圣安息日呢，还是要敬拜那异教暨天主教的三位一体神而守其星期日呢？上帝的印记又怎么说呢？我们需要得哪一位神的印记呢？天父独一真神呢，还是天主教的三位一体神呢？这的确解释了为什么启示录会启示说，最后仍会有那么多人受迷惑而灭亡。 给复临信徒：鉴于“星期日敬拜”和“三位一体论”两个教义都是由兽（教宗制度）带入基督教界的，那么想想下面这句引言：“第三天使的信息已经传到世界各地去，警告人们不要接受兽的印记或兽像的印记在他们的额头裡或在他们的手里。接受这印记表示作出与兽所作出的相同决定，并且提倡相同的理念，与上帝的话恰恰相反。”——怀爱伦著，《评论与通讯》1897年7月13日。 怀爱伦说还有更多的亮光会陆续揭开。“我们在第三天使的信息上所得的亮光是真光。兽印记确切是我们所宣扬的。有关这课题的事，我们还不全然了解，而且我们也不会完全了解，直到书卷打开的时候。”——怀爱伦著，《教会证言》卷六，原文第17页第一段。1900年版。 基督来到世上之前已是上帝的儿子。“基督是上帝的独生子，而那荣耀的天使路锡甫为了这件事而掀起了一场战争，直到他不得不被扔到地上来。”——怀爱伦著，《文稿86》1910年8月21日。 撒但憎恨上帝的儿子，他要我们不认祂，不仅是为了满足他自己的私欲。一旦你彻底了解这个课题之后，你就会很容易看出三位一体论是撒但透过天主教所作的好事，目的是为了偷取你的救恩。怪不得撒但有那么多工人在努力把信徒禁锢在这个魔鬼教义的陷阱当中。它不仅是最严重不可的骗局，也是撒但最大的末世迷惑，与兽印记有关。以下主要是给复临信徒看的，但也适合其他守安息日的信徒看。{待续} （6）为何大多数教会相信三位一体论 其原因与为何大多数教会在星期日而非安息日敬拜相同。数以百计的宗派现在已经知道天主教在黑暗时期之前把安息日改为星期日。黑暗时期是一段为期1260年的天主教政教合一统治时期；期间逼迫了许多他们认为是异端份子的基督徒。这些基督徒包括守安息日的信徒，他们宁可顺从上帝也不愿顺从人的命令。到了15世纪随着印刷机的伟大发明，结果产生了《圣经》的大量印刷，世人才看明天主教就是《圣经》所描述的兽势力。 “威克里夫、廷达尔（翻译英文《圣经》——《廷达尔圣经版本》）、路德、咯尔文、克蓝麦；17世纪的本仁约翰、英王钦定本《圣经》的译者、和《西敏寺和浸信会信仰声明》的出版者；牛顿、卫斯理、惠特菲、爱德华；还有更近代的司布真、莱尔主教和洛依德琼斯；这些改革家和无数的其他名人都视教宗的职位为敌基督者。”——麦克.森利恩著，《条条道路通罗马》1991年，原文第205页。 这项知识产生了宗教改革运动，因许多人意识到了天主教是敌基督的势力。真安息日到了这时已经几乎完全被逼迫至销声匿迹的地步，所以从宗教改革运动中兴起的所有新教派，仍然继续无知的遵守星期日，直到今天星期日已经成为各教派坚固的堡垒。 但从宗教改革运动中出来的不仅是星期日的遵守，也有三位一体论。康斯坦丁皇帝其实扮演了重大角色。他于公元321年设立了史上第一宗星期日法案，又于公元325年假尼西亚会议中制定了三位一体论。不过在短短的四年间，这两项教义便从同一位拜太阳神的皇帝手中产生出来，两者也都是源自太阳神的敬拜。所以，三位一体论和星期日的崇拜两者都是源自巴比伦的太阳神敬拜和撒但敬拜，后来由上帝称之为巴比伦的天主教带入基督教界的。 星期日是撒但对真安息日的伪造，而三位一体论则是撒但对真神的伪造。“作为基本谬道，我们可以把这个伪造安息日一同归类在其他改革教徒从天主教带出来的谬道之中，例如洒水礼和三位一体论。”——怀雅各著，《评论与通讯》1854年9月12日，原文第36页。 我们在《天主教要理问答》中找到这个问题：“星期日是什么？....” 答案是，星期日 “是使徒奉献给至圣三位一体神作为敬拜他们的日子。”（《评论与通讯》第5卷，第24号，第86页） 因此，这两项教义是息息相关的，也都源自同一个出处。所以当宗教改革运动开始时，所有新的改革教派都无知的继续在星期日敬拜三位一体神，而且也很少人会质疑这些教义。结果，如今大多数教派都守星期日并相信三位一体论，任何人若尝试分享这两项教义的真相，就会被视为异端份子，而不被视为一个在深入研究后发现真理的人。 复临教会是第一个拥有安息日和真神这两项真理的主流教会。但在所有的复临先驱先后逝世之后，一位被怀疑为天主教耶稣会成员的学者渗透了教会，他渐渐把三位一体论引进教会，并从先知怀爱伦的著作中寻找容易被人误解的引言企图瞒天过海，除非你也查考她在其他地方所写的同一个主题，否则很容易误解她的话。结果，今天复临信徒以为怀爱伦在后期变成了三位一体论者，就因为她用了某些看似支持三位一体论的词汇，如第三位、天上三位等等、并似乎称圣灵为一位有本体的生物。但事实上，她指的是基督的圣灵而不是第三位本体生物。现今全球有超过550个守安息日的宗派而且还在不断增多，但大部分仍然困在三位一体论的陷阱中。注意下面两句来自天主教的引言，说明其两项教义都没有《圣经》根据的。 “大部分基督徒假设星期日是《圣经》所认可的敬拜日子。天主教反对说，教会已把基督徒的敬拜从《圣经》的安息日（星期六）转移到星期日去，而且若要争辩说这项改变是根据《圣经》权威的，那就等于不诚实和否认天主教的权威了。如果改革教派真要把其教义建立在唯独《圣经》的基础上，那么他们就应该在星期六敬拜了。”——罗马的挑战，网址：immaculateheart.com/maryonline，2003年12月。 “我们的反对派有时候声称，若没有《圣经》明文规定，则没有任何教条应当被武断地持守。...但改革教派自己都接受了这些教条，例如三位一体论，这理论在福音书中是没有确切权威认证的。”——玛利亚的升天，天主教《生命周刊》1950年10月30日，第51页。{待续} （7）众使徒相信三位一体论吗？ 这问题的答案这时应该很明显，但我们还是要回答。Trinity（三位一体）这词于公元200年左右源自特土良（Tertullian），一位从异教转进天主教的神学家。这词与《圣经》不可能有关系，因为它是来自柏拉图术语trias，其起源是属于哲学，而《圣经》从不教导希腊哲学。有意思的是，特土良没有教导说圣灵是第三位神性生物，他也从来没有教导过像三位一体论所教导的三合一神。所以我们知道这个教义是一步步发展的，在公元200年之前是不可能存在的。 最后一位使徒死后225年左右，尼西亚会议（Nicene Council）于公元325年在康斯坦丁皇帝的施压下，决定采纳亚他拿修的观点。正方为亚流，他相信父和子是两位不同的生物，而反方亚他拿修则维护三合一神的论点。大部分亚流派支持者不敢挑战康斯坦丁，于是都没有拒签信条，但亚流拒签，而惨遭放逐。然而，康斯坦丁后来改变主意，反而支持亚流，并让他回国。但亚流在路上惨遭杀害，学者怀疑是亚他拿修的阴谋。无论如何，现在轮到亚他拿修被放逐了。统治者所选择的观点在几十年里换了无数次，官方的观点完全视乎当时是哪一个皇帝在位和他所选择的观点而定。 最后一位使徒去世之后280年左右，于公元381年，圣灵才被正式宣布为第三位神性生物。于是，三位一体论就在这时完整成立，直到如今。19世纪著名的德国三位一体论历史家哈那克观察说，及至公元325年为止，大部分基督徒坚持圣灵不是第三位神性生物。所以，众使徒或他们的后世同僚，或他们的后代（所谓的早期教父）都不相信三位一体论。 三位一体论是个源自天主教的人造教义，它的形成分两个部分。第一部分是于公元325年成立，表述的是三合一神。第二也是最后部分是于公元381年成立。这最后部分表述圣灵是第三位神性生物。很多人拒绝这个人造教义中的三合一神部分，但却仍然接受圣灵的部分，然而这两个部分都是教皇制度所编造的。如果你傻傻相信他们的人造教义，那么你就应该接受两个部分，不然就全部拒绝。你怎能作一半三位一体论者，一半非三位一体论者呢？ 这场争端随着罗马帝国的政治演变而持续了数十年之久，期间召开了十多次会议，以企图解决这些争端。何时亚流派占上风，他们就逼迫三位一体论者，而何时轮到三位一体论者占上风，他们就逼迫亚流派者。大街上到处血迹斑斑。到了第八世纪，亚流派几乎完全灭绝。三位一体论者杀害亚流派者的效率明显比亚流派者杀害三位一体论者的效率来得高。如果亚流派者的杀人效率比三位一体论者的更高的话，那么三位一体论今天或许就不存在了。最后的结果不是理性辩论和虔诚研究所产生的结果，而是势力、政治、和流血所带来的结果。 众使徒相不相信三位一体论呢？他们怎么可能相信呢！众使徒不可能相信或写过关于这个在他们去世“之后”超过300年都不存在的人造教义。如果你认为《圣经》教导一位三合一的神以及圣灵是另一位生物的话，那你就应该重新思考。那素来灌输给你的是个错误的观念，因为众使徒不可能写过一个不存在于他们的时代的观念。你不久就会看到关于圣灵的真相，以及揭穿的骗局。真理比谎言好得多了。{待续} （8）有几位神性生物？ 毫无疑问，属神性（Godhead）的有三个实体（entity）。但既然《圣经》已经透露圣灵是父和子的灵，那么一共有几位真正的生物？记住，三位一体论教导三位 ”平行同等“ 的生物，原本是三位神，却变成一位神，这种说法的确不可理喻。撒但的说法没有一样是合理的。在下列的经文中，所有可能存在的生物都被提到，以便澄清只有天父知道那日子和时辰的事实。如果圣灵是第三位生物的话，他肯定也会被提到，因为圣灵比天使更有关系啊！”但那日子，那时辰，没有人知道，连天上的使者也不知道，子也不知道，惟有父知道。“ （马可福音13：32） 我们与几位神性生物相交？ “我们乃是与父并祂儿子耶稣基督相交的。” 约翰壹书1：3——答案：两位。 一个人不认几位神性生物就是敌基督的？为何圣灵不包括在内？“不认父与子的，这就是敌基督的。凡不认子的就没有父，认子的连父也有了。” 约壹2：22-23——答案：两位 不敬虔的人否认几位神性生物？这是否与约翰上述所说的一致？“因为有些人偷着进来，就是自古被定受刑罚的，是不虔诚的，将我们神的恩变作放纵情欲的机会，并且不认独一的主宰和我们主耶稣基督。” 犹大书1：4——答案：两位 约翰说我们需要认识几位神性生物以获得永生？ “认识你独一的真神，并且认识你所差来的耶稣基督，这就是永生。” 约翰福音17：3——答案：两位 有几位神性生物可以看见父，包括父本身？ “这不是说：有人看见过父，唯独从神来的，他看见过父。” 约翰福音6：46——答案：两位 有几位神性生物可以彼此彰显？“一切所有的，都是我父交付我的，除了父，没有人知道子是谁，除了子和子所愿意指示的，没有人知道父是谁。” 路加福音10：22——答案：两位 有几位神性生物可以被憎恨？“恨我的，也恨我的父。我若没有在他们中间行过别人未曾行的事，他们就没有罪，但如今连我与我的父，他们也看见也恨恶了。” 约翰福音15：23-24——答案：两位 有几位神性生物涉及中保的工作？三位一体论把圣灵当作另一位中保，但《圣经》不认同这种说法！ “因为只有一位神。在神和人中间，只有一位中保，乃是降世为人的基督耶稣。” 提摩太前书2：5——答案：两位 在启示录整本书中，有几位神性生物坐在宝座上面和旁边？ “大声喊着说：愿救恩归与坐在宝座上我们的神，也归与羔羊。” 启示录7：10——答案：两位 天上有几位神性生物？ “我看见天开了，人子站在神的右边。” 使徒行传7：56——答案：两位 我们是几位神性生物的后嗣？“即是儿女，便是后嗣，就是神的后嗣，和基督同作后嗣，如果我们和祂一同受苦，也必和祂一同得荣耀。” 罗马书8：17——答案：两位 有几位神性生物为基督作见证？“我是为自己作见证，还有差我来的父，也是为我作见证。” 约翰福音8：18——答案：两位 我们相信几位神性生物？“你们心里不要忧愁，你们信神，也当信我。” 约翰福音14：1——答案：两位 有几位神性生物涉及创造？“这道太初与神同在。万物是藉着祂造的，凡被造的，没有一样不是藉着祂造的。” 约翰福音1：2-3——答案：两位【神藉着道——儿子基督创造万物】 天国是属于几位神性生物的？“因为你们确实的知道，无论是淫乱的，是污秽的，是有贪心的，在基督和神的国裡都是无份的。” 以弗所书5：5——答案：两位 我们要尊敬几位神性生物？“叫人都尊敬子如同尊敬父一样。不尊敬子的，就是不尊敬差子来的父。” 约翰福音5：23——答案：两位 我们作几位神性生物的仆人？ “作神和主耶稣基督仆人的雅各请散住十二个支派之人的安。” 雅各书1：1——答案：两位 保罗在写每一封信时都会送上几位神性生物的祝福？彼得也一样。“愿恩惠、平安从我们的父神并主耶稣基督归与你们！” 罗马书1：7，哥林多前书1：3，哥林多后书1：2，加拉太书1：3，以弗所书1：2，腓立比书1：2，歌罗西书1：2，帖撒罗尼迦前书1：1，帖撒罗尼迦后书1：2，提摩太前书1：2，提摩太后书1：2，提多书1：4，腓利门书1：3，彼得后书1：2——答案：两位 最后，神性生物有几位？“然而我们只有一位神，就是父，万物都本于祂；我们也归于祂——并有一位主，就是耶稣基督——万物都是藉着祂有的；我们也是藉着祂有的。” 哥林多前书8：6——答案：两位 下面两节经文经常被三位一体论者来证明父、子、和圣灵是一位神。然而两节经文所描述的有几位生物呢？两位！根据三位一体论，第一节经文应该这样说： “人看见了我，就是看见了父和圣灵。” 而第二节经文应该说： “我与父和圣灵原为一。” 但是都没有，整本《圣经》每一次都只有显示两位神性生物而已。 有几位神性生物？“耶稣对他说：腓力，我与你们同在这么长久，你还不认识我吗？人看见了我，就是看见了父，你怎么说：将父显给我们看呢？” 约翰福音14：9——答案：两位 有几位神性生物？ “我与父原为一。” 约翰福音10：30——答案：两位 给复临信徒： 怀爱伦所用的 “位格” （person）和 “生物” （being）两个词有明显区分。她纵然提到三个位格或能力，不过她无例外的只认出两位生物的存在——父和子。所以，对怀爱伦来说，“位格” 和 “生物” 这两个词的含义是有区别的。 她称耶稣基督藉着祂的灵的体现为一个“位格”，但她显然不是指一个实在的生物，这有点令人混淆。”当试炼掩盖心灵时，记住基督的话，记住祂是以圣灵的位格【或作形骸】来到，为一个看不见的临格。“——（怀爱伦著，《上帝的女儿》原文第185页） 故此，当怀爱伦称圣灵为一个”位格“时，她不是指另一个”生物“。她指的是基督藉着祂的灵的体现。我们知道这一点，也是因为她总是认出两位生物而已——天父和祂的儿子。如果怀爱伦指的是一位实在的生物，那就会与她以下所有的引言自相矛盾，使她变成假先知了。 三位一体论声称有三位平行同等的神性生物，可是注意怀爱伦的以下引言说明只有两位神性生物，祂们就是父和子而已。故此，不可能有第三位神性生物。 注意怀氏所用的 “只有” 和 “唯独” 这类词汇。 有几位神性生物当受尊崇？“唯独父和子当受尊崇。” （怀爱伦著，《青年导报》1898年7月7日）——答案：两位 有几位神性生物知道为了人类的灵魂所付出的代价？ “唯独上帝和基督知道为了人类的灵魂所付出的代价。”——（怀爱伦著，《时兆》1909年1月13日）——答案：两位 有几位神性生物知道上帝的秘密计划，包括上帝本身？ “上帝告诉撒但说，祂只能把祂的秘密计划透露给祂儿子知道，而祂也要求天上的全家，甚至是撒但，对祂付出毫无疑问的绝对顺从。”——（怀爱伦著，《时兆》1879年1月9日）——答案：两位 有几位神性生物知道准备福音筵席所付出的昂贵代价？ “谁会思考上帝在准备福音筵席上所作出的屈尊俯就，及其昂贵的代价，而又轻视祂的邀请呢？没有一个人，即使是最高的天使，能估计其昂贵的代价；只有父和子知道。”——（怀爱伦著，《圣经回声》1895年10月28日）——答案：两位 在上帝的谋略当中有几位神性生物？ “基督是道，是上帝的独生子，是与永生之父合而为一的，——在性质、品格和意志上都是一致的，——祂是全宇宙中唯一能参与上帝一切谋略和旨意的【生物】。藉着基督，圣父创造了天上的众生。”——（怀爱伦著，《善恶之争》原文第493页）——答案：两位 有几位神性生物参与创造大工？ “父和子在祂们的创造大工完毕之后便安息了。”——怀爱伦著，《文稿25》原文第3页，1898年）——答案：两位 有几位神性生物完全合一？“从亘古以来，父与子之间是完全合一的。祂们是两位，但却是一模一样。在位格上是两位，但在灵、心、和品格上却是合而为一的。”——（怀爱伦著，《青年导报》1897年12月16日）——答案：两位 有几位神性生物与我们相交？“诚然，我们是与父和祂儿子耶稣基督相交的。”——（怀爱伦著，《评论与通讯》1905年7月13日）——答案：两位 有几位神性生物与彼此原为一？ “与上帝原为一的唯一生物，在人性中活出了律法，祂下降到一位普通劳工的卑微生活，并与祂地上的父亲一同在木匠坊裡辛苦工作。”——（怀爱伦著，《时兆》1897年10月14日）——答案：两位 有几位神性生物与彼此同等？ “上帝的律法遭人违背，要求罪人付出生命的代价。在全宇宙当中，只有一位能够代替人来成全律法的要求。既然神圣的律法与上帝本身同样神圣，唯独与上帝同等的一位，才能为违背律法赎罪。除了基督，再没有任何生物能够救赎堕落的人类脱离律法的诅咒，并再次把人类带回与天国和谐的境界。“——（怀爱伦著，《奇妙的神恩》原文第42页）——答案：两位 答案是有两位神性生物，然而根据三位一体论，应该是三位“平行同等的生物”，可是圣灵在每一次都被排挤在外。如果圣灵是一位神物的话，那么祂就会被称为“圣灵上帝” 而不是 “上帝的灵”了。《圣经》只谈到尊敬和崇拜父和子两位。没有一处提到我们要崇拜圣灵，连一个暗示都没有。这些经文和别处的经文都启示，圣灵不是一位名副其实的生物。其实，这些《圣经》经文还证明，圣灵不可能是一位实在的第三位生物。这种信念是在十字架之后348年狄奥多西皇帝（Theodosius——继康斯坦丁之后）所制定并且透过死刑来强制执行的。因此，圣灵作为第三位神性生物的观念不可能来自《圣经》，因为这是一个人造观念，在《圣经》写成“之后”超过250年才出现的。所以，虽然有三个实体，但却只有两位生物。圣灵是上帝的思想、大能、和个人的同在或临格，不是一股非个人或不具人格的力量。{待续} （9）神性名字对照表 与三位一体论有关的名字和短语有很多，但是没有一个是符合《圣经》教导的，所以也没有一个存在于《圣经》裡。以下是《圣经》对父、子和圣灵所用的短语，与三位一体论所用的短语作一个对照。三位一体论者会争论说，虽然“三位一体”这句短语不存在于《圣经》中，但其教义是存在的。然而，你不久将看到这些论点都站不住脚，而这个教义也不存在于《圣经》之中，就好像这些人造的三位一体论短语不存在一样。 以下是出现在和合本《圣经》的短语及其次数： 父上帝—— “全能者”（42次）——创49:25；民24:4,16；得1:20,21；伯5:17；6:4,14；8:3,5; 11:7; 13:3; 15:25; 21:15,20; 22:3,17,23,25,26; 23:16; 24:1; 27:2,10,11,13; 29:5; 31:2; 32:8; 33:4; 34:10,12; 35:13; 37:23; 40:2; 诗68:14; 91:1; 赛13:6; 结1:24; 珥1:15; 启1:8；4:8 ”全能的神/全能神” （9 次）——创17:1；28:3; 35:11; 43:14; 48:3; 出6:3；赛10:21；结10:5; 启19:15 “主神全能者” （4次）——启11:17; 15:3; 16:7; 21:22 “神全能者”（1次）——启16:14 “全能的主” （1次）——林后6:18 “至大全能的神”（1次）——耶32:18 “父神”（13次）——约6:27；林前15:24；加1:1,3；弗5:20；6:23；腓2:11；西3:17；帖前1:1；帖后1:2；提前1:2；提后1:2；多1:4；彼前1:2；彼后1:17；约贰1:3；犹1:1 “神我们的父”（9次）——林前1:3；林后1:2；弗1:2；腓1:2；西1:2；帖前1:3；帖后1:1；门1:3；雅1:27 “我们的父神/我们父神“ （5次）——罗1:7；腓4:20；加1:4；帖前3:13; 帖后2:16 “主耶稣基督的父神/耶稣的父神” (3次）——林后1:3；11:31; 弗1:3 “耶稣基督的父” （2次）——罗15:6；西1:3 “神，就是父”（1次）——林前8:6 “神，就是众人的父”（1次）——弗4:6 ”至高神/至高的神“（12次）——创14:18，19，20，22；诗78:56；但3:26；5:18，21；可5:7；路8:28；徒16:17；来7:1 “至高者” （12次）——民24:16; 诗18:13; 46:4; 50:14; 73:11; 82:6; 87:5; 107:11；路1:32, 35, 76; 6:35 ”大能者“（4次）——创49:24; 诗 50:1; 132:2, 5 “阿爸父”（3次）——可14:36; 罗 8:15; 加4:6 “亘古常在者”（3次）——但7:9, 13, 22 “独一真神”（1次）——约17:3 耶稣基督—— “神的儿子/神儿子/神之子” （44次）——太4:3, 6; 8:29; 14:33; 26:63; 27:40, 43, 54; 可1:1; 3:11; 15:39; 路1:35; 4:3, 9, 41; 22:70; 约 1:34, 49; 5:25; 9:35; 10:36; 11:4, 27; 19:7; 20:31; 徒8:37; 9:20; 罗1:4; 5:10; 林后1:19; 加2:20；弗4:13; 来4:14; 6:6; 7:3; 10:29; 约壹3:8; 4:15; 5:5, 10, 12,13, 20; 启2:18 “祂儿子/祂的儿子” （19次）——箴30:4；罗1:3, 9; 8:29; 林前1:9; 加1:16; 4:4, 6; 帖前1:10；来1:2；约壹1:3，7；3:23；4:10；5:9, 10, 11,20；约贰1:3 “我的爱子”（8次）——太3:17；17:5；可1:11；9:7；路3:22；9:35；20:13；彼后1:17 “我的儿子” （3次）——诗2:7；徒13:33；来1:5 “至高神的儿子”（2次）——可5:7；路8:28 “神自己的儿子”（2次）——罗8:3，32 “永生神的儿子”（1次）——太16:16 “至高者的儿子”（1次）——路1:32 “祂的独生子/祂独生子” （2次）——约3:16；约壹4:9 “祂爱子”（1次）——西1:13 “神独生子”（1次）——约3:18 ”独生子“（1次）——约1:18 “父独生子”（1次）——约1:14 “圣子”（2次）——徒4:27，30 ”首生”（3次）——西1:15，18 “长子”（2次）——罗8:29；来1:6 “保惠师”（4次）——约14:16，26;15:26;16:7 ”中保”（5次）——提前2:5；来8:6；9:15；12:24；约壹2:1 “圣者”（1次）——路1:35 “神的圣者”（1次）——约6:69 圣灵—— “神的灵” （22次）——创1:2; 41:38; 出35:31; 民24:2; 撒上10:10; 11:6; 19:20, 23; 代下15:1; 24:20; 伯33:4; 结11:24; 太3:16; 12:28; 罗8:9, 14; 林前2:11; 3:16; 6:11；7:40; 12:3; 约壹4:2 “耶和华的灵”（22次）——士3:10; 6:34; 11:29; 13:25; 14:6, 19; 15:14; 撒上10:6; 16:13, 14; 撒下23:2; 王上18:12; 22:24; 王下2:16; 代下18:23; 20:14; 赛11:2; 40:13; 63:14; 结11:5; 37:1; 弥3:8 “我的灵“（16次)——创6:3；出31:3；箴1:23；赛30:1；42:1；44:3；结36:27；37:14；39:29；珥2:28,29；该2:5；亚4:6；太12:18；徒2:17,18 “主的灵”（5次）——路4:18; 徒5:9; 8:39; 林后3:17, 18 ”祂的灵“（5次）——民11:29；伯26:13；赛48:16；弗3:16; 约壹4:13 “你的灵”（4次）——尼9:30；诗104:30；139:7；143:10 “真理的灵”（4次）——约14:7; 15:26; 16:13; 约壹4:6 “神的圣灵/神圣灵”（2次）——林前2:14；弗4:30 “基督的灵”（2次）——罗8:9；彼前1:11 “主耶和华的灵”（1次）——赛61:1 “永生神的灵”（1次）——林后3:3 “神荣耀的灵”（1次）——彼前4:14 ”从神来的灵“（1次）——林前2:12 “叫耶稣从死里复活者的灵”（1次）——罗8:11 “你们父的灵”（1次）——太10:20 “主的圣灵”（1次）——赛63:10 “祂的圣灵”（1次）——赛63：11 “你的圣灵”（1次）——诗51:11 “耶稣基督之灵”（1次）——腓1:19 “祂儿子的灵”（1次）——加4:6 “叫人活的灵”（1次）——林前15:45 三位一体—— 圣灵神/圣灵上帝（0次） 灵神/灵上帝（0次） 子神/子上帝（0次） 三位一体神（0次） 三一神（0次） 三位一体（0次） 平行同等【Co-equal】（0次） 同永恒【Co-eternal】（0次） 同质【Consubstantial】（0次） {待续} （10）一位神还是三位神？ 在三千多年的漫长时期里，犹太人重复宣读着申命记6：4—— “以色列啊，你要听，耶和华我们神是独一的主。“ 这篇神圣的经文在希伯来文中被称为《施玛篇》（Shema）。犹太人非常重视《施玛篇》，而且是千百年来为虔诚的犹太人所背诵的经文。三位一体论者相信三位神，于是他们说，如果《圣经》说只有一位神，那么三位神必定是一体的。但其他人则质疑说，如果只有一位神，那么神怎么可能由三位生物所组成呢？如果基督徒能接受《圣经》简单的话，而不把自己的见解读进《圣经》去，或者尝试逼使《圣经》去说一些无中生有的话，那问题就解决了。 当摩西说“耶和华我们神是独一的主”的时候，以色列国当时被敬奉多神教的外邦人所包围。在申命记第6章裡，摩西劝勉以色列人要听从上帝的话，并遵守祂的诫命。是哪一条诫命在《旧约》时代最常被干犯的呢？拜偶像！多神教在整个《旧约》都非常普遍，所以上帝不断责备以色列民的拜偶像作风。他们敬奉很多位假神，包括太阳神和月亮神，分别为男神和女神。结果，每一个虔诚的犹太人都会每天两次诵读《施玛篇》，至今仍然如此，这是为了延续古以色列对异教世界的多神主义和泛神主义的伟大民族抗议精神。这是以色列民族对信奉一位耶和华的信仰之伟大宣告！ 很多人未能承认的是，对犹太人来说，只有一位神，而神的灵就是神的灵，不是另一位神或生物。犹太人是上帝的选民，而上帝所兴起的犹太国是不信奉三位一体论的民族。这事实从来就没有改变过。三位一体论者还经常用犹太人的用语来证明三位一体论，却没想到这个语言是属于一个从来都不相信三位一体论的民族的！以下的经文启示了一位独一真神。 “我们岂不都【注： 中文《圣经》译成“是”，但文中的意思是“有”】一位父吗？岂不是一位神所造的吗？我们各人怎么以诡诈待弟兄，背弃了神与我们列祖所立的约呢？” 玛拉基书2：10 在马可福音12：28-34中，“有一位文士来”问耶稣说：“诫命中哪是第一要紧的呢？”（第28节）“耶稣回答说：第一要紧的，就是说：以色列啊，你要听，主我们的神，是独一的主。你要尽心、尽性、尽意、尽力，爱主你的神。”（第29，30节）注意耶稣引用了申命记6：4的话。“那文士对耶稣说：夫子说：神是一位，实在不错，除了祂以外，再没有别的神。”（第32节）耶稣怎么回应那文士呢？祂有没有告诉他“你错了”？相反的，“耶稣见他回答的有智慧，就对他说：你离神的国不远了。”（第34节） “神既是一位，祂就要因信称那受割礼的为义，也要因信称那未受割礼的为义。” 罗马书3：30 “你信神只有一位，你信的不错，鬼魔也信，却是战惊。” 雅各书2：19 这些鬼魔是堕落的天使，他们认识上帝和祂儿子。所以他们知道“神只有一位”，而他们也知道耶稣是“神的儿子,” 而不是独一真神。“他们喊着说：神的儿子，我们与你有什么相干？” 马太福音8：29 “但愿尊贵荣耀归与那不能朽坏不能看见永世的君王，独一的神，直到永永远远。阿们。” 提摩太前书1：17 注意：以下经文也说明只有一位神。但是《圣经》是否把耶稣包括在一位神里面，如三位一体论所声称的，还是有一位神“和”一位主耶稣基督，也就是说他们是两位不同的生物呢？ “身体只有一个，圣灵只有一个，正如你们蒙召，同有一个指望；一主，一信，一洗；一神，就是众人的父，超乎众人之上，贯乎众人之中，也住在众人之内。” 以弗所书4：4-6 “因为只有一位神，在神和人中间，【注：英文《圣经》有：并且】只有一位中保，乃是降世为人的基督耶稣。” 提摩太前书2：5 “认识你独一的真神，并且认识你所差来的耶稣基督，这就是永生。” 约翰福音17：3 “因为有些人偷着进来，就是自古被定受刑罚的，是不虔诚的，将我们神的恩变作放纵情欲的机会，并且不认独一的主宰，和我们主耶稣基督。” 犹大书1：:4 “然而我们只有一位神，就是父，万物都本于祂；我们也归于祂——并有一位主，就是耶稣基督——万物都是藉着祂有的；我们也是藉着祂有的。” 哥林多前书8：6 因此保罗、约翰和犹大都表明，父是独一真神，而耶稣基督并不包括在内，这表明耶稣不是父神，而是与父独一真神分开的一位。这么一来，唯一的矛盾就只有三位一体论的信仰了。 既然三位一体论教导一位三位一体的神，那么三位一体论者就会用这三句相应的短语“圣父上帝”，“圣子上帝”，和“圣灵上帝”。他们称三位全都是神。但由于《圣经》说只有一位神，那三位一体论者就不得不说三位全是一位神。如果这是真的，那《圣经》肯定会用这些短语来称呼他们全部为神。那么是这样吗？《圣经》有这样说吗？没有！如果真的有三位神，那《圣经》就会用这几句短语。但是《圣经》不用这些短语，因为没有三位神！《圣经》说的话都是认真的，都是实话实说！《圣经》说只有一位神，就是“父上帝”，所以父是唯一被称为上帝的。“圣子上帝”和“圣灵上帝”这些短语在《圣经》中是不存在的，它们一次都没有出现过！这些短语是来自天主教的，是被捏造的，为了配合他们所创造出来的教义。《圣经》用“神的儿子”这句短语，因为耶稣的确是神的儿子。《圣经》用“神的灵”或“父的灵”这句短语，因为圣灵的确是父上帝的灵。那为什么三位一体论者还用捏造出来，意思完全不同的短语呢？这些在《圣经》中是找不到的。你如果用天主教的，而不是出于《圣经》的“圣子上帝”或“圣灵上帝”的短语，那么你就在跟随着天主教和敌基督者，而不是上帝所默示的话语了。 给復临信徒： “基督本体中的神性没有变成人性，而人子的人性也没有变成神性，这两种本性在人类的救主之中神秘的混合在一起。祂不是父，但神本性一切的丰盛，都有形有体的居住在祂里面。”——（怀爱伦著，《信函8a》，1890年7月7日） “人子耶稣基督不是主神全能者，但基督和父是合而为一的。”——（怀爱伦著，《文稿140》，1903年） “存在于基督与祂门徒之间的合一，并不会摧毁他们各自的位格。他们是在目标上、思想上、品格上合一，但不是在本体上合一。那么上帝与基督也是这样合一的。”——（怀爱伦著，《教会证言卷八》，原文第269页，第4段，1904年） 既然《圣经》中找不到三位一体论，正如许多学者和神学家也这样承认，那么那些教导三位一体论的人就不得不用以下的步骤来尝试证明《圣经》有教三位一体论。首先，他们会说，《圣经》说圣父是神（这个没错），接下来就说耶稣被祂的父称为神（这个也没错）。然后又说，《圣经》说圣灵是神（“另一位神性生物”之意，这就不对了）。这一点的细节迟些再谈。 其次，他们会说，既然三位全都叫神（这就不对），而申命记6：4却说有一位神，“因此”三位全部都是一位神（或一体神）！你注意到吗，这不是“耶和华如此说”，而这种假设容许你想要说什么，就叫《圣经》说什么。这叫做红色消防车逻辑。也就是说，消防车是红色的，而我的车也是红色的，因此我的车是消防车！要用这种方法来假定一件这么重要的事——神圣父子的身份——而且是《圣经》没有明说的事，简直是愚昧！如果上帝要我们相信祂是三位一体神，那么祂一定会用简单清晰无误的字眼来告诉我们的。《圣经》没有具体说明圣灵是神，所以这是一种错误的假设。 第三，虽然独一真神称祂儿子为神，但是保罗、约翰和犹大在以上的经文中无误的排除基督为独一真神。这样，我们就回到了只有独一真神——就是父——这个原点上，正如申命记6：4所说的，也正如犹太民族当他们写下这些话时所相信的，而至今他们仍然相信的那样。真基督教是源于犹太教的，而不是纳入天主教的异教主义。你不能从犹太人所写的话当中去争辩三位一体论，因为他们从来不相信三位一体论。 《圣经》大部分内容是由从来不相信，也没有教导过三位一体论的犹太人所写的。而耶稣当然是犹太人，祂的门徒也都是。《圣经》既是一本非三位一体论的书，那你怎么能用《圣经》来教导三位一体论呢？比如使徒约翰不可能会教导说保惠师和真理的灵是另一位生物，因为犹太人从来就没有教导过或相信过这种说法。所以《圣经》的作者都不是三位一体论者。基督徒被灌输许多好听的错误观念，使他们以为这理论是从《圣经》来的，但其实这是不可能的事。 我们也知道，《圣经》是一本非三位一体论的书，连“三位一体”这个词汇在公元200年之前也是不存在的，而有了这个词汇之后，圣灵作位第三位生物和三位合成一位神的概念仍然不存在。完整的三位一体论要等到公元381年才发展出来。所以《圣经》的任何作者都不可能写一些在他们的时代仍然不存在的东西。 作家山穆贝尔（Summerbell）在与弗拉德（Flood）讨论三位一体论时，在其《三位一体》一书中原文第38页，他这样说：“犹太教会确实不相信这种教义。我一个朋友在纽约的犹太会堂裡，问了犹太拉比有关‘神’（希伯来文Elohim）这个词的解释。附近站着的一位三位一体论的牧师连忙回答说：‘怎么了，这词是指三位一体的三位啊。’ 一位犹太人听了立刻上前阻止他不可再提那个词，否则他们就会逼他离开会堂，因为在犹太会堂裡，是不允许提出任何陌生神明的名字的。” 那确实是一个陌生的神明。我们要敬拜独一真神天父，和祂儿子耶稣基督，而不是来自敬奉太阳神和撒但的什么三合一的神！“我们乃是与父并祂儿子耶稣基督相交的。” 约壹1：3 {待续} （11）Elohim【希伯来文指神】这个词是否证明三位一体神？ 有人声称，由于希伯来文《圣经》最常用来指神的词汇是Elohim（El的复数词），所以独一真神必然是三位一体。但这只是另一种欺骗或无知的说法。事实是，Elohim一词被用来指真神、假神、超自然的灵（天使）、甚至是人类领袖如君王和审判官。因此，Elohim这词可以用来指单独一位神；在这种情形下，语言学家称之为 ”加强语意性复数“ 或者 ”庄严性复数“，用来代表伟大之意。希伯来人如果要表达伟大或庄严，他们会把名词复数化，如”神“这个词就是一个好例子。所以当他们用Elohim这词来表达独一真神时，就叫作”庄严性复数“，代表上帝的伟大，而非其数目之意。 这是专属希伯来人的做法，所以在希伯来文《圣经》的希腊文译本（耶稣和使徒所引用的七十士译本【Septuagint】）当中，凡指真神的Elohim一词都被译成Theos。这个希腊词不是复数，而是单数。在《新约》中也出现同样的情形，Elohim一词被译成Theos，不是复数，而是单数。例如，在马可福音12：29中，耶稣引用了申命记6：4的话。在希腊文译本的这一节当中，指神的希腊词Theos是单数，而非复数。如果Elohim真是独一真神的复数的话，那么《新约》作者也就会用Theos的复数来指神了。不过，相反的，他们用的是单数的形式，而且每一次都是如此。但这词的复数形式却在《新约》中出现了8次，都是指着人的复数或假神的复数而言。（参阅约10：34-35；徒7：40；14：11；19：26；林前8：5；加4：8）鉴于希腊文中的神是单数的一位神，我相信没有人会说希伯来文中的神是三位一体神。 注意以下的例子。用来指神的Elohim的希伯来文词语形态学是普通名词、男性、复数和绝对的，而用来指神的Theos的希腊文词语形态学则是名词、主格、单数和男性。在希腊文的《旧约》和《新约》中，每一次用来指神的Theos都是单数的。 创世记1：1（希伯来文）——“起初，神（אלהים 复数）创造天地。” 创世记1：1（希腊文）——“起初，神（θεος 单数）创造天地。” 摩西又如何呢？对于法老王，摩西是不是三位一体呢？明显不是的。“耶和华对摩西说：我使你在法老面前代替神，你的哥哥亚伦是替你说话的。”（出7：1）【注：英文《圣经》的直译是：我使你在法老面前当作神（Elohim）。】 这里的Elohim指的是一个人，所以这词是一个“庄严性复数”，因此它所表达的是伟大。这词是简单指上帝要使摩西在法老的眼中看为伟大而庄严的。例如，“耶和华叫百姓在埃及人眼前蒙恩，并且摩西在埃及地法老臣仆，和百姓的眼中，看为极大。” （出11：3）而且，Elohim一词在英王钦定本KJV《圣经》中，也因其含义而被译成“伟大”和“大能”。 以下是一些学者针对Elohim作为“加强语意性复数”或“庄严性复数”所给的辞典定义。 “Elohim是个复数形式，经常在希伯来文中用来代表充分大能。”——Hertz著，《摩西五经和律法》。 “Elohim一词的形式是复数。希伯来人把名词复数化来表达伟大或庄严。”——Flanders著《圣经入门》。 “希伯来名词Elohim一词是复数，但其动词却是单数，这是《旧约》指称独一真神的正常用法。这种复数的用法表达了加强或激烈之意，而非指数目，也被称为庄严性复数，或潜力性复数。”——《新国际版圣经研究》原文第6页。 “Elohim这个词一般被视为Eloah的复数，它在《圣经》中指真神的用法，比El或Eloah这两个单数名词更常出现。当它用来指神时，复数的尾端【-im】通常被描述为庄严性复数，而不是真复数。这一点我们可以在Elohim这个名词所用的动词形式、形容词和代名词一律为单数的事实中看得出来。”——《旧约神学辞典》第1卷，原文第44页。 “Elohim的复数形式成为了极具争议的课题。这词指三位一体神的幻想概念如今在学者中间已经很难找到支持者了。它是文法家所称的庄严性复数，或者是 代表神力的丰盛，神所表现的能力之总和。耶和华具体指的是独一真神，祂的子民是犹太民族，祂使他们成为真理的监护人。”——《史密斯圣经辞典》 那么说Elohim是指三位一体这样一个幻想的概念为何现今在学者中间已经很难找到支持者呢？因为真理是逃避不过的。你如果还用这个词来证明一个谎言的话，最后你就会显得非常愚昧与受迷惑了。 以下是《布朗-德利瓦-伯利格的希伯来文定义》（Brown-Driver-Briggs’ Hebrew Definitions）对有关Elohim一词所给出的定义。当Elohim指伟大的一位时，它被称为加强语意性复数，所附带的意思是单数的。但是当这名词形式用作真复数时，它就是指复数的神。而当这名词形式作为真单数时，它就是一个加强语意性复数，附带着单数的含义，例如独一而且也是伟大的神。这就是“加强语意性复数”，也叫作“庄严性复数”。 《布-德-伯》定义： 1.复数 一，众统治者、众审判官 二，众神性者 三，众天使 四，诸神明或众神 2.加强语意性复数——单数含义 一，男神，女神 二，像神者 三，神的工作或特性或特有之物 四，独一真神 五，神 当你听见有争论说，Elohim指的是三位一体神时，那么要知道提倡这教导的人不是故意迷惑人就是完全无知的，而这等人是不可信的。 至于创世记1：26，希伯来文本中的代名词是复数形式，所以这节被译成：“神说，我们要照着我们的形像，按着我们的样式造人。” 三位一体论者声称，既然Elohim是复数，而其代名词也都是复数，那么神必定是超过一位的。然而，Elohim指的是那独一真神，这就留下一个问题：这一节中的 “我们”是指谁？《圣经》没有让我们在暗中摸索猜测。以弗所书3：9说：“【注：英文《圣经》有“藉着耶稣基督”】创造万物之神...” 这里的神显然不是耶稣基督。约翰福音1：3也说：“万物是藉着祂【=道】造的。” 歌罗西书1：16说：“因为万有都是靠祂【=基督】造的，...一概都是藉着祂造的。” 希伯来书1：2也说：“就在这末世，藉着祂儿子晓谕我们...，也曾藉着祂创造诸世界。” 这些章节都述说上帝藉着祂儿子创造万物。因此，谁在创世记1：26发言呢？祂说话的对象又是谁呢？父神对祂儿子说：“我们要照着我们的形像，按着我们的样式造人。” 基督是父神“本体的真像”（来1：3）；所以，任何人若是照着父的形像被造的话，也就是按着祂儿子的形像被造了。 给復临信徒： “圣父和圣子从事他们所策划的伟大奇妙之创造世界之工。..这时上帝对祂儿子说：‘我们要按着我们的形像...造人。’”——怀爱伦著，《预言之灵》第1卷，原文第24页。 本会全球总会会长威尔逊说，“父上帝、子上帝、圣灵上帝都参与了创造之工。”教会是否在神的课题上受迷惑了呢？威尔逊还证实，本会所教导的三位一体论与天主教的三位一体论是一致的。{待续} （12）约翰福音1:1 是不是说耶稣是上帝？ 约1：1说："（a）太初有道，（b）道与[那]上帝同在，（c）道就是神[或神性生物]。" 这神性的道不外乎就是耶稣基督，因为第14节告诉我们："道成了肉身，住在我们中间，充充满满的有恩典有真理。我们也见过他的荣光，正是父独生子的荣光。" 约1：1a说，道存在于太初，这是指什么的太初？它必定是某事的开始。是否这世界的开始？是否宇宙受造众生的开始？不管是什么开始，它肯定是某件事的开始。【这裡的太初似乎暗指箴言8：22-23的太初】 许多三位一体论者常用这节经文来证明基督的存在是没有开始的。但这经文所说的却恰恰相反。上帝的存在固然是没有开始的！但这一节说的，就是基督存在的开始。况且，“与” 这一词是有意思的。道"与"上帝同在。道和上帝不可能是同一位，否则就不能说一位与另一位同在。如约1：2说："这道[即基督]太初与上帝同在。" 《圣经》译者对约1：1的希腊原文的正确翻译至今仍然争论不休，尤其是（c）"道就是神"这一句。约翰福音第1节说，上帝的儿子耶稣基督，这里指的道，在太初与上帝同在，（a+b）。约1：1b没有说弥赛亚是上帝，而是说祂与"那"上帝同在。我们要知道，在希腊文中有"那"这个定冠词，但译者把它省略，可能是因为他们认为定冠词有误。中文翻译出来也就没有定冠词。但这定冠词其实是正确而且有其用意的。"道与[那]上帝同在"的希腊原文是 και【而且】 ο【定冠词】 λογος【道】 ην【动词不定式】 προς 【与...同在】τον 【定冠词】θεον【神】。 "那上帝"这句短语就认出了独一真神，父上帝，所以"那"字是很重要的。虽然这一节称耶稣为神，但在祂和与祂同在的"那"上帝之间是有清楚分别的。与耶稣同在的上帝就是"那"父神上帝。耶稣不是与祂同在的那位上帝，但耶稣是神，这是指祂有神性，就像祂父亲有神性一样。因为耶稣作为上帝的儿子，祂承受了祂父亲所有的特性。父是神，所以祂儿子在本质上也是神，正如人类承受父亲的人性和形体一样。 我们可以用相同的文法构造但以不同的人物来理解约1：1，比如亚当和夏娃。"太初有女，女与[那]人同在，女就是人。" 亚当是"那人"，而女人就是夏娃，夏娃也有人的本性，但夏娃的身份不是"那人"。他们是两个不同的人。 从这个角度来看这一节经文，我们就能领会其中的含意了："太初有道，道与那神同在，道就是神。" 道，神的儿子，太初与至高无上的父神同在，而道在本性上就是神。然而，神子不是“那”位神，不是“那”位父神，但子却承受了父的神性。道有祂父亲同样的神性。因此，耶稣在太初与上帝同在，但祂不是“那”父上帝，而是作为儿子祂承受了神的本性。祂是神，因为祂是上帝的儿子。就这么简单。 在希伯来书1：1-9中，我们注意到说话的是父上帝，祂正向祂儿子说话，并称祂为神。第2节说，基督被立为 ”承受万有的“。一个继承者当然是一个从某人身上承受产业的。在这个情况中，神子基督承受了祂父亲的产业。但祂承受了什么呢？祂的名字、祂的权柄、和祂的能力！换句话说，耶稣作为永生上帝的独生子，凭借祂的出生而承受了祂父亲所有的特性。第4节说：”祂所承受的名，既比天使的名更尊贵，就远超过天使。“ 第8节告诉我们，这个更尊贵的名字就是”神“ 这个名字，这是父给祂儿子的名字。”神啊，你的宝座是永永远远的，你的国权是正直的。“ 所以这个名字是”祂所承受的“。这不是一个祂所获赠的名字，而是一个祂从父亲那里承受的名字。 基督不但承受了祂的名字，也承受了其他东西。名字意味着权柄（可11：9；约5：43），它也意味着品格和本性（出33：18-19；34：5-6）。例如，亚当这个名字是指人的意思。孩子生下来的时候，不但承受父亲的姓氏，也承受父母的本性，就是人性。照样，耶稣承受了祂父亲同样的名字，就如孩子承受了父亲的姓氏一样。耶稣也承受了祂父亲的本性。“因为父怎样在自己有生命，就赐给祂儿子也照样在自己有生命。”（约5：26）如果耶稣的生命是与父神一样自有永有的，如三位一体论所声称的，那么父上帝就不可能赐给祂儿子生命了，既然祂儿子的生命是自有的。但这按《圣经》的启示是不可能的。所以，基督不但承受了父神的名字和本性，也承受了父神本身的生命。换句话说，基督承受了祂父亲同样的特性和本性。所以基督的名才会比天使的名更尊贵。祂有父神的神性，因祂从父神出来，所以祂与父神同等，并且与父一样有完全的神性。 有些人似乎选择相信三位一体论，因为他们觉得耶稣应该在每一方面都与祂父亲同等，甚至是一模一样，才能称得上神。但你的孩子是否必须在年龄上和权柄上与你一模一样，才能称得上是百分之百的人呢？如果我儿子必须在每一方面都与我相似，才能称得上是个完完全全的人，那就糟了。 既然这对许多人来说是如此大的一个绊脚石，我们就再来一次用简单的方式说明耶稣为什么被称为神。 你在本性上是不是人？——是。 你的孩子在本性上是不是人？——是。 你的孩子是不是承受了你的人性？——是。 你的孩子是不是承受了他父亲的姓氏？——是。 父上帝在本性上是不是神？——是。 祂儿子在本性上是不是神？——是。 耶稣是不是承受了祂父亲的名字？——是。 耶稣是不是承受了祂父亲的神性？——是。 我们难道还要期望别的答案吗？耶稣承受了祂父亲的名字和神性，因为祂是上帝的儿子啊！同样的道理也能用在人的身上。 基本上，有“一位”上帝。耶稣不是“那位“上帝，祂是上帝的儿子。祂凭着继承者的身份而带着上帝的“名字”。由于祂是上帝的儿子，所以祂是与上帝“同等”的。 给復临信徒： 以下是本会先驱瓦格纳所著的引言，备受怀爱伦的认可。为了方便阅读，我们把整篇分成小段。 “这个名字不是因为基督创造了什么伟大的功绩而授予祂的，而是凭借继承者的权利原本就属于祂的名字。希伯来书作者论到基督的能力和伟大时，说祂远超过天使，因为‘祂所承受的名，既比天使的名更尊贵。’（来1：4） 一个儿子总是正当地取父亲的名字；而基督作为‘上帝的独生子’也正当地取祂父亲同样的名字。 一个儿子也或多或少是父亲的复制品；他在一定的程度上有他父亲的样貌和个人特征；不是完全一模一样，因为在人类中是没有完美的复制的。但在上帝是没有不完美的，在祂的创作上，也没有不完美；所以，基督是父‘本体的真像。’ （来1：3） 基督作为自有永有之上帝的儿子，祂就自然地拥有神所有的特性。 上帝确实有很多儿子；但基督是‘上帝的独生子’，再没有别的生物可能成为上帝所生的儿子，因此，在这种意义上，基督是上帝独生的儿子。 藉着创造，众天使是上帝的儿子，亚当也是上帝的儿子（伯38：7；路3：38）；基督徒则是得着儿子的名分而成为上帝的儿子（罗8：14,15）；但基督生来就是上帝的儿子。 希伯来书的作者还进一步表明，上帝儿子的地位不是祂升官所得的，而是本来就属于祂的。“——瓦格纳著，《基督和祂的义》，原文第11,12页。 "耶稣是上帝的独生子。祂是亲生的，不是被造的。祂与父神是同质的，以致祂的本性是神; 因此，‘父喜欢叫一切的丰盛，在祂里面居住。’ （西1:19）虽然父子的本性相同，但父在时间上为优先。父也比儿子大，因父没有开始，但基督的位格是有开始的。" ——瓦格纳著，《时兆》1889年4月8日。{待续} （13）耶稣是不是神？ “神”或“上帝”这个词在《圣经》中有两种用法。第一种是用来指宇宙中至高无上的生物，万物的最终本源。每当《圣经》提到独一真神时，都是指着这位至高无上的生物说的，祂在万有之先，万物的生命最终都由祂而来。在这种意义上，没有任何其他的生物是上帝。“上帝”的第二种用法，是指拥有神的特性或上帝特征的一位。 《圣经》多次教导说，耶稣基督是父独一真神的独生子。耶稣作为儿子，就拥有祂父亲同样的神性和特征。每一个儿子都会继承他父亲的本性，这是不言而喻的事实。既然基督是从圣父出来的，那祂就有祂父亲的本质，因此祂有祂父亲相同的神性，因为祂生来就有祂父亲所有的特性和特征。事实上，希伯来书1：3说，基督是“神本体的真像。” 一个儿子也名正言顺地取他父亲的名字，所以基督作为上帝的独生子也得了同一个名字。注意希伯来书1：1-9说，耶稣作为后嗣，祂承受了一个比天使的名更尊贵的名（第4节），而这个名就是耶和华神（参阅出23：21）！所以耶稣承受了祂父亲的名字、品格、和神性，就像人的儿子承受他父母的人性和姓氏一样。 耶稣是神，因为祂是上帝的儿子。但祂不是也不可能成为“父神。” 祂是“神的儿子”，就如《圣经》清楚说明了超过一百次一样。祂是上帝的真儿子或亲生儿子。若说耶稣是父神的话，就等于说“儿子是父亲”。这意味着儿子不是真的亲生儿子，而父亲也不是真的父亲。换句话说，若说耶稣是父，只因为祂有祂父相同的神性，这就等于说，我父亲既是人，而我也是人，因此我就是我父亲！这种逻辑或神学不合情理，而且突然之间数以百计的《圣经》章节的意思就完全不能按字面来解释了。事实是，《圣经》是实话实说的，所说的没有别的意思，除非是用象征性的言语说的。上帝是基督的父；而基督是上帝的儿子。《圣经》从不称耶稣为“子上帝”，如三位一体论者所说的，这是有它理由的。《圣经》总是称祂为“上帝的儿子”或“神的儿子”，因为祂真的是上帝的儿子。 撒但的计划是让我们不认父和子，这就是约翰所谓的敌基督。（约壹2：22-23）撒但不在乎我们的信仰是三位一体还是独一神教或是其他的。只要我们不承认耶稣是上帝的真儿子，也不承认上帝是真的父亲，这就够了。承认耶稣是上帝的儿子是我们到父那里去的唯一途径，不承认这一点将造成永恒的后果。 总结来说，耶稣不是一个神或那个神，而只是在其本性上是神，因祂承受了祂父的本性。耶稣是个神性生物，但祂不是那位至高无上的生物。圣父才是那至高无上的生物和万物的本源，而父的生命流经祂儿子转而流向万物。耶稣是管道，藉着祂，我们从圣父那里得到一切，所以圣父把万物都交在圣子的手中（参阅太28：18）。只有圣父是被形容为“万物都本于祂”（林前8：6）的一位。祂是万物的大本源。耶稣不是另一个“万物都本于祂”的本源。若是的话，就会使祂变成另一位上帝了。不，耶稣被形容为“万物都是藉着祂有的”（林前8：6）。圣父已经把权柄交给基督，让祂治理万物，但这“万物”并不包括圣父本身（参阅林前15：27，28）。圣父的权柄更大，而且永远都是最大的。父神是万物的本源，包括祂儿子在内（参阅约5：26）。这样，万物都从圣父而来，包括基督本身（参阅约8：42；16：28），但是，“父喜欢叫一切的丰盛，在祂【儿子】里面居住”（西1：19）。所以，当我们说“耶稣是神”时，我们必须小心说明我们确切的意思。基督是个神性生物，但祂不是那至高无上的生物。当我们谈到那至高无上的生物时，只有一位这样的生物，而祂不是耶稣。 因此，只有“一位”上帝。耶稣“不是”上帝，祂是上帝的儿子。祂“承受”了上帝的“名分”。由于祂是上帝的儿子，所以祂与上帝“同等”。 “然而我们只有一位神，就是父，万物都本于祂；我们也归于祂——并有一位主，就是耶稣基督——万物都是藉着祂有的；我们也是藉着祂有的。“ 哥林多前书8：6 “一神，就是众人的父，超乎众人之上，贯乎众人之中，也住在众人之内。” 以弗所书4：6 给復临信徒： “上帝为基督的父；基督乃上帝的儿子。基督已蒙赐与崇高之位。祂得以与父同等，上帝所有的旨意没有不显明给祂儿子的。”——怀爱伦著，《教会证言》卷八，原文第268页。 “宇宙中除了圣父本身之外，只有一位生物承担上帝的名，那就是祂的儿子耶稣基督。”——怀爱生著【怀爱伦的儿子】，《来临的君王》原文第33页。 “祂【基督】不是父，但神本性一切的丰盛，都有形有体的居住在祂里面。”——怀爱伦著，《信函8a》1890年7月7日。 “降世为人的基督耶稣不是主神全能者，但基督与父原为一。”——怀爱伦著，《文稿140》1903年。 “基督与门徒之间的合一，对于双方的位格并无损害。祂们是在宗旨、思想、和品格上合一，并不是在身体方面合一。上帝与基督合一，也是如此。”——怀爱伦著，《教会证言》卷八，原文第269页。 《圣经》重复把父和子的本体分开。基督在世的时候，祂常说：“我在天上的父。” （太10：32）祂总是把祂的祈求导向天上的父，并表明父有祂自己的旨意：“父啊，你若愿意，就把这杯撤去，然而不要成就我意思，只要成就你的意思。”（路22：42）“申初的时候，耶稣大声喊着说：以罗伊！以罗伊！拉马撒巴各大尼？翻出来就是：我的神！我的神！为什么离弃我？”（可15：34）“父啊，我将我的灵魂交在你手裡！”（路23：46）祂死而复活之后，升到天上“在神的右边”。（罗8：34）只有上帝知道祂儿子什么时辰回来。“但那日子，那时辰，没有人知道，连天上的使者也不知道，子也不知道，惟有父知道。”（可13：32）约翰经常称呼父和子为不同的实体。“我们乃是与父并祂儿子耶稣基督相交的。” （约壹1：3）保罗也是一样：“因为只有一位神，在神和人中间，只有一位中保，乃是降世为人的基督耶稣。” （提前2：5） 他又说：“然而我们只有一位神，就是父，万物都本于祂；我们也归于祂——并有一位主，就是耶稣基督——万物都是藉着祂有的；我们也是藉着祂有的。” （林前8：6） 而至于司提反，“但司提反被圣灵充满，定睛望天，看见神的荣耀，又看见耶稣站在神的右边。” （徒7：55） 这些还有其他许多的《圣经》作者都证明，圣父有祂个别的位格。 我们不但有一堆的《圣经》章节向我们透露耶稣不是独一真神，而是明显分开的一位，而且也没有人见过真神上帝，那怎么能说耶稣是那独一真神呢？“从来没有人见过神，我们若彼此相爱，神就住在我们里面，爱祂的心在我们里面得以完全了。” （约壹4：12）惟有基督见过那独一真神父上帝。祂说：“这不是说有人看见过父，唯独从神来的，祂见过父。”（约6：46） 事实上，耶稣说祂不是父，有超过80次之多。耶稣和圣父是明显分开的不同生物，虽然他们俩在宗旨上仍是合一的。而且超过一次，父从天上对耶稣说话。“从天上有声音说：这是我的爱子，我所喜悦的。” （太3：17） 耶稣和天父是两位分开的不同生物，否则耶稣便是一位腹语专家，自导自演父说话的声音。{待续} 上一篇 返回研究目录 下一篇 到最頂

返回研究目录 上一篇 下载中文 Read in English 下一篇 历史上诸教派对安息日的论述 美国公理会（American Congregationalist） “现今有关基督和祂的门徒用权柄将第七日替换为第一日的观点，在新约圣经中找不到任何根据。” —— （莱曼·爱博特 博士，于1890年6月26日在基督徒联会上发表的演讲 [Dr.Layman Abbot, in the Christian Union, June 26, 1890]） 聖公宗（Anglican） “究竟圣经在什么地方告诉我们要遵守第一日呢？上帝吩咐我们要遵守的是第七日；圣经没有任何一处命令我们守第一日……正如我们遵守其它事情一样，我们守第一日而不守第七日为圣的原因并不是出于圣经，而是因为教会的命令。” ——（以撒·威廉斯， 《教理简训》第334-336页[Isaac Williams, Plain Sermons on the Catechism, pages 334, 336]） 浸信会（Baptist） “守安息日为圣的诫命，过去有，现在仍有，但那个安息日在过去并不是星期日。然而，不可带着得意的神情去肯定地说，安息日连同它的权力、特权和命令都已经从一周的第七日转到了第一日（星期日）。关于这个问题——这一转变的记载在哪里可以找到呢？我怀着热切的追根到底的心情研究了多年，发现它不在新约圣经之中——绝对不在新约圣经之中，它毫无圣经根据。” ——（ E·T·锡斯克思 博士《浸信会手册》 Dr. E. T. Hiscox, author of the “Baptist Manual”） “我很不解，为什么耶稣在三年的传道生涯中，经常与门徒们谈论安息日的问题，讨论有关安息日的某些不同的方面，将它从谬误的曲解（犹太传统）中解救出来。但在这些谈话中，从来没有任何暗示说，要将其转到其它的日子。并且，正如我们所知道的，在耶稣复活后的四十天当中，祂也没有表示出这样的意思。我们也知道，那叫门徒想起耶稣对他们所说的一切话的圣灵，也没有涉及到这个问题。那些受圣灵感动的门徒，在传道、建立教会、劝勉和教导中，都没有论述或提及这个问题。 当然，我十分清楚，在早期的基督教历史中，星期天就已经被视为一个宗教节日，正如基督教众教父和其它资料中所说的一样。然而，这个日子带着异教的烙印，并且以太阳神的名字为名号，然后，背道的教皇采纳并为此“祝圣”，最后又被视为神圣的遗产遗传给了改正教（新教），这一切是多么遗憾啊！” ——（1893年8月20日，在浸信会教牧人员会议上的证道论文，出版于《纽约观察者》1893年11月16日（有一位罗马天主教的领袖/发言人同意这个表述，见下文）[Dr. E. T. Hiscox, report of his sermon at the Baptist Minister's Convention, in 'New York Examiner,' November 16, 1893 (The leader / spokesman for the Roman Catholic Church agrees with this statement.See Below)]） “圣经没有任何一处称第一日为安息日……守星期日是没有圣经根据的，当然我们也没有义务去守它。” ——(《守望者》[The Watchman]) “我们相信，上帝的律法就是其道德政权永恒不变的准则。” ——（《浸信会手册》[Baptist Church Manual," Art. 12]） “从犹太人的安息日转变到基督徒所守的第一日，这是决无任何正当根据或权威的！” ——（威廉·欧文·卡弗《我们当今的主日》第49面[WILLIAM OWEN CARVER, "The Lord's Day in Our Day," page 49]） “没有任何一句经文，要求我们当守星期日为圣日，以此替代神圣的星期六。” —— (哈罗德·林赛（编辑）《今日基督教》1976年 11月5日[Harold Lindsell (editor), Christianity Today, Nov. 5, 1976]) 兄弟会（Brethren） “鉴于律法和我们曾经持守的安息日……这日也许仍旧是大多数忠心基督徒所持守的日子，我们承认，我们无法回答复临信徒。再者，我以前和至今所读到和听到的，都无法最终确凿地辩驳复临信徒建立在圣经之上有关第七日是安息日（出埃及记20:10）的论点。安息日并不是某个人制定的‘七日内任何一日’，而是‘根据诫命的第七日’” ——（《真理恩典之道》第281面[Words of Truth and Grace, p. 281]） 天主教（Catholic） “必须好好提醒长老会教徒、浸信会教徒、卫理公会教徒和其他所有的基督徒，圣经根本没有一处支持他们守星期日。星期日是罗马天主教所设立的一个制度，凡守那日子的人，都是守天主教的命令。” ——(布雷迪神父的致辞，于1903年3月18日出版在新泽西州伊丽莎白市的《新闻》上。参阅《这磐石》[Priest Brady, in an address, reported in the Elizabeth, NJ ‘News’ on March 18, 1903. See This Rock]) “改正教徒……接受星期日替代星期六以此作为公共礼拜的日子，他们乃是在效学天主教……但是改正教徒的思想似乎并没有意识到……藉着遵守星期日，他们乃是在接受那教会发言人——教皇——的权威。” ——(《我们的星期日来宾》1950年2月5日，参阅《这磐石》[Our Sunday Visitor, February 5th, 1950. See This Rock]) “当然，这两段久远的引证十分准确。天主教指定星期日作为公共礼拜的日子，并且因其作出这一改变而备受褒贬。” ——（《这磐石》，《天主教护教学和传道学杂志》1997年六月刊，第八面[This Rock, The Magazine of Catholic Apologetics and Evangelization, p.8, June 1997]) 问：“你有没有其它证据证明他们（改正教徒）并不是受圣经的指导呢？答：是的，此类证据太多了，以至于我们无法在这个小文章中容纳如此众多的例证。他们拒绝了许多清晰记载于圣经中的东西，并且公开承认很多圣经中从未提及的谬论。” 问：“各自举些例子好吗？” 答：“如果圣经是他们唯一的准则，那么他们应该根据约翰福音第十三章耶稣的命令彼此洗脚；他们也当根据“当记念安息日守为圣日”这条诫命，遵守星期六而不是星期日，圣经中根本没有改变或废除这条命令的证据；……” ——（斯提反·金南神父《教理论》，第101面，1857年，纽约[Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 101 Imprimatuer]） 问：“你还有其它方法证明（罗马天主教教会）有权柄设立法令节期吗？” 答：“倘若她没有此种权力，她就不会做成让当今所有宗教家都一致同意的事情——它就不会建立守一周第一日的星期日的制度，因为（圣经中教导的）当守的日子是星期六而不是第一日，这种改变是没有圣经经文根据的。” ——（斯提反·金南神父《教理论》第174面，1857年， 纽约。Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 174） 问：“我们用什么方法可以向一位改正教徒指出，他所说的那些反对禁食和禁欲的话是不合理的？” 答：“既然他不愿意禁食和禁欲，那就问他为什么要守星期日，而不守星期六作为安息日。如果他回答，圣经命令他守星期日，但没有论到禁食和禁欲，那你就告诉他圣经谈到星期六与安息日的事情，但是没有论及星期日与一周第一日的事情。如果他拒绝星期六为安息圣日，用星期日来代替它，说这只是因为古代教会是如此行，如果他愿意一直这样坚持下去，那么他就要去禁食和禁欲，因为古代教会也这样规定，难道他也要避开这命令？” ——（司提反·金南神父《教理论》第181面，1857年， 纽约[Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 181]） 问：“哪一日是安息日？” 答：“星期六是安息日。” 问：“那为什么我们遵守星期日而不是星期六呢？” 答：“我们之所以守星期日而不守星期六，是因为天主教将星期六的神圣性转移到了星期日。” ——（彼得·耶尔曼神父C.SS.R.《天主教教义教理详解》第50页[Rev. Peter Geiermann C.SS .R., The Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine, p. 50]） 问：“当一位明智的改正教徒发现自己的教会连圣经准则都不顺从的时候，岂不会产生严重的怀疑吗？” 答：“当然会的，当他看到人们给婴儿施洗，废除犹太人的安息日，而遵守没有圣经根据的星期日之时；当他看到他们忽视圣经中清晰命令的彼此洗脚的礼节，并且吃圣经中特别禁止的血和勒死的牲畜时，如果他全面思考，就必定会怀疑……” 问：“当改正教徒发现自己是以遗传为向导时，他会不会产生怀疑呢？” 答：“如果他认真思考，并晓得他守星期日为圣的行为完全是天主教的传统之时，他一定会怀疑的；……” ——（新版《最具争议的教理》作者斯提反?金南，乔治?格马克神父校订，伦敦伯恩斯&奥茨有限公司出版—纽约、辛辛那提，芝加哥：本辛格兄弟出版社，1896年，第6、7页。[Controversial Catechism by Stephen Keenan, New Edition, revised by Rev. George Cormack, published in London by Burns & Oates, Limited - New York, Cincinnati, Chicago: Benzinger Brothers, 1896, pages 6, 7]） “教会（罗马天主教）在把一周的休息日，从犹太教的安息日——也就是一周中的第七日，改成第一日之后；另一方面，又制定了第三条诫命（编者按：上帝十诫中的第四诫），规定星期日才是应当守为圣的主日。特伦特会议（第六部分，第十九条教法）谴责那些否认基督徒应当遵守十诫的人。” ——（《天主教百科全书》，上帝的诫命，卷四。 1908年，罗伯特·阿普尔顿 公司出品——在线版本 1999年，凯文·奈特，尼西·奥布斯塔出品——出版校对拉米·拉夫得-+约翰 M·法利，纽约大主教，第153面。The Catholic Encyclopedia, Commandments of God, Volume IV, ? 1908 by Robert Appleton Company, Online Edition ? 1999 by Kevin Knight, Nihil Obstat - Remy Lafort, Censor Imprimatur - +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York, page 153） “（罗马天主教）教会创始者耶稣基督将那绝无错误而神圣的权威赐给她，因此她将遵守安息日改变成了遵守星期日。改正教徒主张圣经是信仰中的唯一指南，但是对于遵守星期日，他们却没有任何圣经中的根据。在这一问题上，只有基督复临安息日会才是唯一与圣经相符的改正教会。” ——《天主教全球公告》1945年8月14日，第4面[The Catholic Universe Bulletin, August 14, 1942, p. 4]） “我们所有人所相信的许多有关信仰的事情都无法在圣经中找到根据。例如，我们在圣经中没有找到基督或是使徒们命令安息日必须从星期六改到星期日。我们有上帝赐给摩西的诫命，吩咐我们遵守安息日为圣，这安息日就是一周中的第七日——星期六。然而，今天绝大多数基督徒都在遵守星期日，因为这个日子是圣经之外的教会启示我们的。” ——（出自《天主教弗吉尼亚人》的《告诉你真相》卷22，编号49（1947年10月3日）The Catholic Virginian, "To Tell You The Truth,” Vol. 22, No. 49 (Oct. 3, 1947)） “……倘若你通读圣经，从创世记读到启示录的话，你不会找到任何一句经文可以证明星期日是神圣的。圣经强调了对星期六的虔诚遵守，而我们从来没有尊这一日为圣。” ——（《我们教父的信仰》作者巴尔的摩大主教雅各?卡丁纳?机本，88版，第89面 ，1876年出版，唐出版社和出版公司1980年授权再版。第72-73面。The Faith of Our Fathers, by James Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore, 88th edition, page 89. Originally published in 1876, republished and Copyright 1980 by TAN Books and Publishers, Inc., pages 72-73.） 倘若否认了教会的权威，你就再没有足够或合理的解释与理由证明上帝诫命中的第三条诫命中——也就是改正教的第四条诫命——中的星期六改成了星期日……教会超越了圣经的权威，更改安息日的遵守就是一个鲜明例证。” ——（《天主教记录》9月1日，1923年Catholic Record, September 1, 1923.） “但因为圣经所特别强调的是星期六，而不是星期日，所以对于那些声称自己的信仰是直接来自圣经而不是教会的非天主教徒，那么他们以守星期日来代替星期六的做法岂不令人感到奇怪么？是的，肯定会的，这样做乃是言行不一；然而，早在改正教出现之前十五个世纪，这个日子就已经被改变了，而且那个时候这日子曾得到普遍的遵守。迄今为止，改正教都在继续这个传统，然而它却是建立在天主教的权威之上，而非以圣经清晰的经文为根据。遵守星期日的传统存留下来就是提醒非天主教教派都是从母教会分裂出来的——就好像一个男孩逃出自己的家，但是他口袋中依然揣着母亲的相片或她的发夹。” ——（《千万人的信仰》The Faith of Millions） “在公元第一世纪，教会所做的也许是最大胆的事情，也是最革命性的改变——就是将圣日安息日从星期六转移到了星期日。‘主日’（dies Dominica）的制定并不是出自圣经中的任何指导，而是教会因着它自身的权柄擅自设立的。复活日以及在其五十天后的五旬节都是在一周的第一日。因此这就成了新的安息日。那些认为圣经是独一绝对权威的人，应该顺理成章地皈依基督复临安息日会，因为他们才是守星期六为圣的。” ——（《哨兵》，牧师手册，圣凯瑟琳天主教会，阿尔贡，密西根州，1995年 5月21日。Sentinel, Pastor's page, Saint Catherine Catholic Church, Algonac, Michigan, May 21, 1995） “如果改正教徒真的听从圣经，他们就应该在安息日敬拜上帝。他们守星期日就是在跟随罗马天主教的法律。” ——艾伯特·史密斯Albert Smith，巴尔的摩大主教（管辖）区的区长，回红衣主教的信，日期为1920年2月10日。Albert Smith, Chancellor of the Archdiocese of Baltimore, replying for the Cardinal, in a letter dated February 10, 1920.） “改正教守星期日是向（天主）教会权柄致敬的忘我行为。” ——（路易斯·瑟古阁下，《坦率谈论当今的改正教教义》Monsignor Louis Segur, ‘Plain Talk about the Protestantism of Today’, p. 213.） 当改正教再三向教皇提出疑问“你怎敢改变上帝的律法？”（主要是针对天主教为何将十诫中“不可拜偶像”这一诫命废除了。）但是，天主教向改正教提出的反问则更加尖锐。以下是（天主教发出的）正式的提问： “你会告诉我说：‘星期六是犹太人的安息日，但是基督教的安息日已经改到了星期日。它已经改变了！’那么，是谁改变的？谁有权柄改变全能之上帝亲自设立的诫命呢？倘若上帝亲自说当记念安息日，守为圣日，谁还敢——不是这样，第七日要劳碌做你一切的工，但第一日是当守的圣日呢？” “这是一个至关重要的问题，我不知道你会如何回答。你是一个改正教徒，并且你口口声声说要按圣经行事，且唯独以圣经为准绳；但是在‘守七日中哪一日为圣’的事情上，你的做法却与圣经明确的吩咐相悖，你还用其它日子代替了圣经中所吩咐的圣日，这是何等的严重啊！” “遵守第七日为圣日的命令是十诫中的一条；你认为其它九条诫命仍然有约束力；那么是谁给你权柄去践踏第四条诫命呢？如果你坚守自己的原则，如果你真的遵循圣经，并且以圣经为唯一的准则，那么，你应该从新约圣经中找出明确改变第四条诫命的经文来。” ——（《基督教教义图书：为什么你不守圣安息日》（伦敦：伯恩斯和奥茨有限公司）第3、4页[Library of Christian Doctrine: Why Don't You Keep Holy the Sabbath-Day? (London: Burns and Oates, Ltd.), pp. 3, 4]） “我再三出价1000美元，奖励给任何可以从圣经中向我证明必须守星期日为圣的人。圣经中没有这样的律法。它只来自圣天主教的律法。圣经说‘当记念安息日守为圣日。’天主教说：‘不对，藉着我的神圣权柄，我废掉了星期六，并且命令你们守一周的第一日。看那！整个文明世界都屈膝，以顺从圣天主教的命令。’” ——（托马斯·恩瑞特神父C.S.S.R.,1884年2月18日，在纽约罗马天主教1893年7月周刊《美国哨兵》出版，第173面。[Priest Thomas Enright, C.S.S.R., February 18, 1884, Printed in the American Sentinel, a New York Roman Catholic journal in June 1893, p. 173] “整个地球上只有一个教会有能力，或者说是自称有能力，制定约束道德良心的律法，这些律法是列于上帝之前，是以地狱之火为惩罚的。例如，星期日崇拜的制度。其它教会守这日子的权柄是什么？你的回答是因为第三条诫命（天主教去掉了第二条有关禁止拜偶像的诫命，所以称第四条诫命为第三条诫命），这一条诫命吩咐说‘当记念安息日守为圣日。’但是星期日并不是安息日。任何一位在校学生都知道，星期日是一周的第一日。我再三拿出1000美元，奖励给任何可以单从圣经中向我证明必须守星期日为圣的人。没有任何一个人能赢得这笔奖金。是圣天主教会将星期六，也就是第七日的安息日，改到了一周的第一日。” ——（T·恩瑞特辅理主教在1893年发表的一篇演讲。[T. Enright, C.S.S.R., in a lecture delivered in 1893]） “当然，天主教宣称这种改变是她的作为。并且这一作为，正是（天主教）教会权柄及其在宗教事务上之权威的标记。” ——（红衣主教团团长C`F`托马斯，在回答有关安息日改变的一封信中如此说，1895年11月11日。[C. F. Thomas, Chancellor of Cardinal Gibbons, in answer to a letter regarding the change of the Sabbath, November 11, 1895]） “耶稣基督的教会是建立在传统之上，而非圣经之上。” ——（爱吉恩·拿帮《天特会议所指定的天主教原则》第157面[Adrien Nampon, Catholic Doctrine as Defined by the Council of Trent, p. 157]） “教皇拥有如此伟大的权柄和能力，以至于他有能力修改、说明或诠释神圣的律法。”（教皇可以修改神圣的律法，因为他的权柄不是来自人，而是来自上帝，他乃是上帝在地上的代理人。” ——（卢修斯·费拉里斯《教会法典》教皇章二，卷六，第29面。[Lucius Ferraris, Prompta Bibliotheca, art. Papa, II, Vol. VI, p. 29]） “天主教的领袖因信仰而被定义为耶稣基督的代表（并且被众信徒普遍认可）。教皇被尊为在世上‘取代’全能三一上帝之第二位格的人。” ——（教皇 约翰·保罗二世，《穿越希望的门槛》第3面，1994年[John Paul II, Crossing the Threshold of Hope, p. 3, 1994 ]） “……牧养机构过去向母教会建议将那作为‘太阳日的’星期日基督化，‘太阳日’是罗马对这日的称呼，现代语言中仍然保留着此种说法。当时这样做，是为了带领忠心的信徒远离那些敬拜太阳之教派的诱惑，并且要指引他们纪念赞美基督，人类的真‘太阳’。” ——（教皇 约翰·保罗二世《受难日》。《基督——真光的日子》1998年（著名的改正教领袖都同意这个声明——请见上文《浸信会手册》的作者E?T?锡斯克思博士[John Paul II, Dies Domini, 27. The day of Christ-Light, 1998 (Prominent protestant leaders agree with this statement - See above for a statement by Dr. E. T. Hiscox, author of the ‘Baptist Manual’)]） “太阳神是异教中的主神……在波斯和其它地方都有太阳神的崇拜者……实际上，有关太阳尊贵王者的形象，适用于象征基督——公义的太阳。因此这些国家的教会可能会这样说‘过去古老异教的名字[太阳日]，应该保留下来，并视之为神圣，圣洁的’。这样，本来是献给巴德尔神的异教太阳日，变成了基督教的太阳日，归耶稣为圣了。” ——（神学博士威廉·吉尔第，《天主教世界》1894年3月，第809面。[William Gildea, Doctor of Divinity, The Catholic World, March, 1894, p. 809]） “留下星期日的异教名称太阳日，这在很大程度上是因为异教徒和基督徒在观点上基于一周第一日的联合。这是君士坦丁皇帝向他国民下的命令——异教徒和基督徒都一样——尊太阳日为‘可敬’的日子。” ——（亚瑟·P·斯坦利 《东方教会史》第184面。[Arthur P. Stanley, History of the Eastern Church, p. 184]） “当圣保罗批判律法的功效时，他当时并不是指十条诫命，十诫中与上帝自己一样，都是不会改变的，上帝无法在改变律法的同时，仍然算作是无穷神圣的上帝。” ——（《我们星期日的访客》1951年10月7日，[Our Sunday Visitor, Oct. 7, I951.]） 问：“你如何证明（罗马）教会有权柄支配节期和圣日？” 答：“凭着那将安息日改变到星期日的举动，而这又是改正教徒所接受的，所以他们的行为是自相矛盾的——一方面严格遵守星期日，一方面又去掉（罗马）教会所指定的大多数其它的节期。” ——（亨利·特伯威尔，《基督教教义节选》（1833年批准），第58面（这与但以理?法瑞斯所著的《基督教教义手册》中第67面的表述一致）[Henry Tuberville, An Abridgment of the Christian Doctrine (1833 approbation), p.58 (Same statement in Manual of Christian Doctrine, ed. by Daniel Ferris [1916 ed.], p.67)]） “有一些神学家持有这样一种观点——上帝同样也直接指定星期日为‘新律法’中崇拜的日子，祂自己毫不含糊地将星期日代替了安息日。但现今这个神学观点已经彻底被抛弃了。如今，普遍的观点就是：上帝直接赐给教会权柄，于是教会可以随意撇弃任何一天，或设立教会自己所视为合适的日子为圣。教会过去选择了星期日，也就是一周的第一日，并且也随着时间的推移选择其它的日子作为圣日。” ——（文森特·J·凯利《严禁星期日和宗教节日被占用》华盛顿，哥伦比亚特区(美国联邦直辖区)，天主教美国新闻大学，对神圣神学的研究。第70卷，1943年，第二面。[Vincent J. Kelly, Forbidden Sunday and Feast-Day Occupations, Washington, DC, Catholic University of America Press, Studies in Sacred Theology, No. 70.,1943, p. 2.]） “如果我们单单参考圣经，我们应当务必与犹太人一样遵守安息日，也就是星期六为圣，而安息日绝不是星期日…”” ——（《为天主教高中和学院准备的一个宗教课程》作者文学硕士约翰?拉瑞斯神父，本辛格兄弟出版社，1936年版，第一部分。[A Course in Religion for Catholic High Schools and Academies, by Rev. John Laux M.A., Benzinger Brothers, 1936 edition, Part 1.]） “星期日是天主教的一个制度，并且…只能用天主教的教义来辩护…从圣经的开始到结束没有任何一节经文授权我们将一周的公共敬拜日从一周的最后一日转移到一周的第一日。” ——（《天主教新闻》1900年8月25日。[Catholic Press, Aug. 25, 1900]） “安息日是星期六，不是星期日。是（罗马）教会将守安息日改为遵守星期日。当上帝清晰地表明：‘当记念安息日守为圣日’时，改正教教徒必定会为自己遵守星期日的行为而感到十分困惑。星期日这个字眼并没有出现在圣经中任何地方，因此，改正教徒无视这一点的同时，也是在顺从罗马天主教的权威。” ——（《教法大全，教理诠释》第89面[Canon Cafferata, The Catechism Explained, p. 89. ]） “理性和理智要求我们只能选择以下这点：要么改正教教义结合守星期六为圣，要么天主教教义结合守星期日为圣。妥协是不可能的。” ——（约翰 吉布斯 红衣主教，《天主教镜报》，1893年12月23日。[John Cardinal Gibbons, The Catholic Mirror, December 23, 1893.]） 基督教教会（Christian Church） “我认为主日并不可代替犹太人的安息日，我也不相信安息日从一周的第七日改到了一周的第一日，原因很简单——没有任何证据的事情就绝对不可信。在所有属天晓谕中都没有证据说明安息日已经改变，也没有证据说明主日代替了安息日。” ——（亚历山大·坎贝尔，《华盛顿报告》1921年10月8日[Alexander Campbell, in The Reporter, October 8, 1921]） “废除上帝圣言中的安息日，并且设立星期日为圣日，那就是推翻了上帝的第四条诫命。” ——（N·萨门博尔《基督教会历史》第三版，第415面。（[Dr. N. Summerbell, History of the Christian Church, Third Edition, p. 415] ） “并没有直接的圣经权威来支持将第一日作为主日的命令。” ——（D·H·卢卡斯博士，《基督教圣贤》1890年，1月23日。Dr. D. H. Lucas, Christian Oracle, Jan. 23, 1890） “一周的第一日通常被称为安息日，这是一个错误。圣经中的安息日其实是一周的第七日。整本圣经中从来都没有称一周的第一日为安息日。称安息日已经改变是一个错误。圣经从来没有将安息日从星期六改到星期日。圣经中也没有任何地方暗示要进行这样的改变。” ——《第一日的遵守》第17、19面。[First-Day Observance, pp. 17, 19.]） 基督的教会（Church of Christ） “然而，关于将一周中的第一日代替第七日安息日一事，我们并没有发现上帝直接的命令，复活之基督也没有任何此类的指示，早期使徒们也没有此类训诫。”“让我们把这一点分析清楚。虽然对于基督徒来说‘那日，也就是七日的头一日’是所有日子中最值得记念的……，但是在新约圣经中没有任何命令或根据，教导我们必须守那日为圣。”“罗马天主教选择了第一日来记念耶稣的复活……” ——（《圣经标准》1916年5月，新西兰，奥克兰。[Bible Standard, May, 1916, Auckland, New Zealand.]） “…如果第四条诫命是为了约束我们这些外邦人务必遵守这日。但是那些要求严格遵守安息日的人要记住，那是上帝所命令的独一的安息日，上帝从未废除这个诫命，如果你要记念安息日，就必须记念这一日；但星期天绝不是安息日。‘基督复临安息日会’所提出的论点是牢不可破的，诫命所提到的并不是一周的第一日，而是第七日。” ——（《圣经标准》作者G·阿尔瑞，1916年4月。[G. Alridge, Editor, The Bible Standard, April, 1916.]） “并没有直接的圣经权威来支持将第一日作为主日的命令。” ——（D·H·卢卡斯博士，《基督徒圣贤》1890年，1月23日。[DR. D. H. LUCAS, Christian Oracle, Jan. 23, 1890.]） “一周的第一日通常被称为安息日，这是一个错误。圣经中的安息日其实是一周的第七日。整本圣经中从来都没有称一周的第一日为安息日。称安息日已经改变是一个错误。圣经从来没有将安息日从星期六改到星期日。圣经中也没有任何地方暗示要进行这样的改变。” ——（《第一日的遵守》第17、19面。First-Day Observance," pages 17, 19） “改变第四条诫命，并且设立星期日为圣日，就是废除上帝圣言中的安息日。” ——（N·萨门博尔《基督教会历史》第三版，第415面。DR. N. SUMMERBELL, "History of the Christian Church," Third Edition, page 4I5.） “命令……人……遵守主日……乃是与福音相悖的。” ——（《亚历山大·坎贝尔的论文集》第528页，卷一。Memoirs of Alexander Campbell," Vol. 1, page 528.） “这里已经清楚表明，众教会的教牧人员废除了上帝十诫中的一条，而这条诫命不仅在旧约圣经，而且在所有的启示中，是被重点视为所有信仰和道德的总纲。” ——（亚历山大·坎贝尔《与珀塞尔的辩论》第214面[ALEXANDER CAMPBELL, "Debate With Purcell," page 214.]） “我认为主日并不可代替犹太人的安息日，我也不相信安息日从一周的第七日改到了一周的第一日，原因很简单——没有任何证据的事情就绝对不可信。在所有属天晓谕中都没有证据说明安息日已经改变，也没有证据说明主日代替了安息日。” ——亚历山大·坎贝尔，《华盛顿报告》1921年10月8日[ALEXANDER CAMPBELL, Washington Reporter, Oct. 8, 1821. ] 英格兰教会（Church of England） “许多人认为星期日就是安息日。但是不管是在新约圣经中还是在早期教会，并没有任何证据表明我们有权利将第七日的遵守转到第一日上。不管是在过去还是现在，安息日一直就是星期六，而不是星期日。如果该条诫命依然对我们有约束力，那么我们必须遵守这一日，而不是其它日子。” ——（莱昂内尔·皮尔神父《所有神徒的教会》新西兰，庞森比，《教会和百姓》1947年9月1日。[Rev. Lionel Beere, All-Saints Church, Ponsonby, N.Z. in Church and People, Sept. 1, 1947]） “圣经中没有任何一处指出应当在星期日进行崇拜。当记念安息日守为圣日……！ 那就是星期六！” ——（魁北克大主教P·卡灵顿， 1949年10月27日；引至《预言表号》第12面。[—P. Carrington, Archbishop of Quebec, Oct. 27, 1949; cited in Prophetic Signs, p 12.]) “第一日的遵守取代了第七日的安息日，这样的变更是建立在，而且仅仅是建立在教会本身的证词上。” ——（《霍巴特教会新闻》1894年7月2日；引至《预言表号》第14面。[Hobart Church News, July 2, 1894; cited in Prophetic Signs, p 14]） “究竟圣经什么地方告诉我们要遵守第一日呢？上帝吩咐我们要遵守的是第七日；圣经没有任何一处命令我们守第一日……正如我们遵守其它事情一样，我们守第一日而不守第七日为圣的原因并不是出于圣经，而是因为教会的命令。” ——（以撒·威廉斯神父《教理训言》第334面[Rev. Isaac Williams, Ser. on Catechism, p. 334.]） “诫命说第七日是向耶和华你上帝……当守的安息日。任何的计算，任何的年历都不能让七等于一，也无法让第七意味着第一，或星期六意味着星期天……事实是，我们每一位都是安息日的破坏者。” ——（乔·霍奇神父。[Rev. Geo. Hodges.] “在前三个世纪里，没有任何一位神学作家将守星期日的起源归咎于基督或是基督的使徒。” ——（威廉·顿威尔爵士《六个经文的检验》第6、7（附录）。[SIR WILLIAM DOMVILLE, "Examination of the Six Texts," pages 6, 7. (Supplement)]） “在整本新约圣经中，没有任何一个字，任何一个暗示说明要在星期日禁止一切的工。……在星期日安息根本不是神圣的律法……，对圣灰星期三（大斋首日：复活节前第七个星期三和大斋期的第一天，在这一天很多基督教都用灰在前额画一标记以作忏悔和必死的标志）或大斋节（从圣灰星期三到复活节的四十天，基督徒视之为禁食和为复活节作准备而忏悔的季节）的持守与守星期日一样，都是处于同一种立足点之上的。” ——《艾顿教法》—《十诫》第52、63、65面。[CANON EYTON, 'The Ten Commandments," pages 52, 63, 65.] “到底在新约圣经中有没有命令将一周的安息日从星期六改到星期日呢？绝对没有！” ——（《基督教教义手册》第127面。[Manual of Christian Doctrine," page 127.]） “主日根本没有取代安息日……主日只不过是教会的制度罢了。它并不是第四条诫命所吩咐人遵守的日子，因为他们遵着诫命守这日子约有三百年……早期教会的信徒可以在主日做一切的工，然而，甚至在逼迫的日子，他们都严格的遵守所有神圣的诫命；但是他们根本不知道这一点（要用主日取代安息日）。” ——（杰里米·泰勒主教《开导小信疑惑者-释疑》第一部，第二册，第二章，规则六，第51、59部分[BISHOP JEREMY TAYLOR, "Ductor Dubitantium," Part I, Book II, Chap. 2, Rule 6. Sec. 51, 59.]） “星期日（字译：太阳日）就是外邦人隆重朝拜那颗被称为太阳之行星的日子。受这日的影响，也出于是尊重这日的（依他们认为是）圣体，基督徒们认为合宜与外邦人同守这一日，并且用相同的称号，这样他们就不会显得与世俗格格不入了，因为倘若他们遵守安息日就会阻挠外邦人皈依基督教，甚至会产生更大的偏见，以至于使福音受抵制。” ——（T·M·莫尔《主日对话》第22、23面。[T. M. MORER, "Dialogues on the Lord's Day," pages 22, 23.]） “清教徒的观念历来就是令人不快的。它将星期日改成了安息日，甚至教导他们的百姓称星期日为安息日。连教牧人员都如此行。” “除非我的计算是完全错误，否则安息日就是从星期五傍晚六点后的24个小时。因此，在我们进入星期日之前它才结束。如果你向一个严守星期日为安息日的人提出他应当在正确的日子守安息日，那么你提不起他的热情。他会马上回答：这不是原则问题，日子已经更改了。然而，是谁改变了它？整个新约圣经中并没有命令基督徒将安息日改变为星期日呀！” ——（D·摩尔斯·博伊考特——《每日通讯》伦敦1931年2月26日。[D. MORSE-BOYCOTT, Daily Herald, London, Feb. 26, 1931.]） “基督教教会做得（改变安息日）不光明磊落，而是潜移默化、持渐积微、几乎不知不觉地将这一日改变到另一日子” ——（F·W·法勒D.D.《来自西奈山的声音》第167面。[F.W. FARRAR, D.D., "The Voice From Sinai," page 167.]） “不管你是研究教父作品还是研究现代作品，我们都无法找到主日是使徒所定下的制度；他们并没有将安息日变更到一周的第一日。” ——（彼得·赫伊林《安息日历史》第410面。[History of the Sabbath," page 410.]） “仅仅指责星期日世俗化是十分简单的，但也是无效的。我们所需要的就是找到某种原则，这种原则是我们这些基督徒靠得住的，并且我们能将自己的行为和劝勉建立在其之上的。当我们回到新约圣经，我们找不到任何的权威法规。基督的话中没有记载，也没有任何的使徒训言告诉我们必须守星期日，事实的确如此。这真的令人沮丧，如果我们指出那让我们没有选择，使我们要么顺从要么悖逆的确切法规，我们的任务就会变得简单轻省了……无论在圣经中还是在历史上，都没有守星期日为安息日的条例。” ——（斯蒂芬博士，纽卡斯尔主教，新南威尔士，在一篇出版于《纽卡斯尔晨讯》的报道如此说。1924年5月14日。[DR. STEPHEN, Bishop of Newcastle, N.S.W., in an address reported in the Newcastle Morn-ing Herald, May 14, 1924.]） 公理会（Congregational） “基督徒的安息日（星期日）并不是出至圣经，早期教会也没有称星期日为安息日。” ——（提摩太·德怀特1818年的107次传道，卷四，第49面，注：提摩太?德怀特曾任耶鲁大学校长(1795-1817年）[Timothy Dwight, Theology, sermon 107, 1818 ed., Vol. IV, p49 Note: Timothy Dwight (1752-1817) was president of Yale University from 1795-1817.]) “很显然，无论我们多么严格或虔诚地遵守星期日，我们都不是在守安息日……安息日是建立在一个明确无误的神圣诫命之上。我们无法为遵守星期日找到同样的诫命作为辩护……新约圣经中没有任何一句话暗示我们若违背那假定为圣洁的星期日就会招致惩罚。” ——（戴尔博士《十诫》第106、107面[Dr. Dale, The Ten Commandments, pp. 106, 107.]） “必须承认的是，在新约圣经中没有关于第一日的律法。” ——（《巴克神学字典》第430页，[Buck's Theological Dictionary page 403.]） “圣经中没有命令要求我们守一周的第一日作为基督徒的安息日。” ——（欧林·福勒《浸礼的模式和主题》[ORIN FOWLER, A.M., "Mode and Subjects of Baptism."]） 现今，有关基督和祂的使徒们凭借权威将第一日代替第七日的观点在新约圣经中是完全没有根据的。” ——（莱曼·爱博特 博士，于1882年1月18日于基督徒联会上发表的演讲。[DR. LYMAN ABBOTT, Christian Union, Jan. 18, 1882.]） 基督门徒会（Disciples of Christ） “并没有直接的圣经权威来支持将第一日作为主日的命令。” ——（D·H·卢卡斯博士，《基督教圣贤》1890年，1月23日[Dr D.H. Lucas,Christian Oracle,January,1890]） “如果它（十诫）仍然存在，就让我们持守它吧……如果十诫已经不存在了，也让我们放弃一个为了模仿安息日而屈从于另一个日子吧。有人会说‘但是它已经从第七日转到第一日了’。何时？何地？何人？——不，安息日从未改变，它也不会改变，除非再经历创造：因为那指定安息日为圣日的理由根据（创世记2:1-3）必须在尚未持守或尊重这理由之前就先被改变，否则鉴于这个根据，安息日不会改变。所有称‘安息日已从一周的第七日改到了第一日’的说法都是无稽之谈。如果安息日被改变了，那它就是‘威严显赫’之人改变了它，这人飞扬跋扈改变了节期和律法——我想他的名字就是‘敌基督者博士’。” ——（亚历山大·坎贝尔《基督徒的洗礼》卷一，第七章，1824年2月2日。[Alexander Campbell,The Christian Baptist,February 2,1824,vol 1,no. 7]） 圣公会（Episcopalian） “我们已经按照那神圣的、天主教的，使徒教会的权柄将第七日改到了第一日，从星期六改到了星期日。” ——（西莫主教《为什么我们要守星期日》[Bishop Symour,Why We keep Sunday.]） “圣经中的诫命说第七日你要安息。那一日就是星期六。圣经中没有一处称必须在星期日崇拜。” ——（飞利浦·开灵顿《多伦多每日星报》1949年10月26日[开灵顿（1892-）魁北克圣公会大主教，在一大群神职人员面前发表有关这安息日主题的信息。当时在新闻媒体上广为报道][ Phillip Carrington,quoted in Toronto Daily Star,Oct 26,1949 [Carrington (1892-),Anglican archbishop of Quebec,spoke the above in a message on this subject delivered to a packed assembly of clergymen. It was widely reported at the time in the news media].]） 路德宗（Lutheran） “主日（星期日）的遵守并不是建立在任何上帝的诫命之上，而是建立在教会的权威之上。” ——（《奥斯堡信条》[Augsburg Confession of Faith.]） “他们[天主教]宣称安息日已经改到了星期天，也就是主日了，这是与十诫截然相悖的，似乎再也没有其它的例子能比安息日的改变更加夸口自吹了。他们说：大哉！教会的权柄和能力，因为它废除了十诫中的一条。” ——（《奥斯堡信条》28条款，第9段[Augsburg Confession of Faith,ArT.28,par. 9.]） “他们（罗马天主教）宣称安息日已经改到主日了，这乃是更改上帝的十诫；而且他们除了自己口头更改安息日的例证之外，再没有例证来支持自己的观点。他们将教会的权柄膨胀到极至，因为它已经废除了十诫中神圣的原则。” ——（《奥斯堡信条》公元1530年（路德教会）第二部分，第7条款，在飞利浦?沙夫所著的《基督徒信条》第四版，卷3，第64面[这是路德教会所指定并梅兰克吞亲手所写的重要声明，就是在路德将论纲钉在门上并且开始宗教改革后十三年发表][ The Augsburg Confession,1530 A.D.(Lutheran),part 2,art 7,in Philip Schaff,the Creeds of Christiandom,4th Edition,vol 3,p64 [this important statement was made by the Lutherans and written by Melanchthon,only thirteen years after Luther nailed his theses to the door and began the Reformation].]） “迄今为止，人类仍然无视神圣之上帝所制定的最原始和最特别的启示——在西奈山上写于法板之上的十诫” ——（《科郎神学库》第178面[Crown Theological Library," page I78]） “古代教会的基督徒会很快就分别出一周的第一日，星期日；尽管它并不像安息日，但是作为教会聚会的日子，一起学习上帝的圣言，并且相互庆祝习俗：毫无疑问，这发生在第二世纪的最前叶。” ——（格灵麦伦德主教《安息日历史》第60面[Bishop GRIMELUND,"History of the Sabbath," page 60]） “星期日的（为节日）习俗，与其它习俗一样，都是人类的传统。” ——（奥古斯塔斯·尼安德《基督教信仰和教会史》第一卷，第186页[History of the Christian Religion and Church," Vol. 1,page 186.]） “我万分震惊，我怎么会被灌输这么一种观点：我应当弃绝十诫律法……不管是谁想要废除上帝的律法，与此同时也不可避免的取消了罪恶。” ——（马丁·路德《属灵敌基督者》71-72面[MARTIN LUTHER,Spiritual Antichrist," pages 71,72]） “我们都看到犹太教的安息日是如何逐渐从基督教教会的心中褪去，并且看到那基于对第一日遵守的新思想如何完全占据了教会。我们也已经看到前三世纪的基督徒从未混淆安息日和星期日，而是同时庆祝。” ——（出自路德教出版的一本学习手册《星期日的问题》（1923年）第36面[The Sunday Problem,a study book by the Lutheran Church (1923) p.36]） “但他们错就错在教导星期日已经代替了旧约圣经中的安息日，因此必须像以色列人遵守第七日一样来遵守星期日。……这些教会错就错在这只是他们自己的教训，因为圣经中决没有命令用一周的第一日代替安息日。新约圣经中根本没有带有此种含义的律法。” ——（约翰·西奥多·穆勒《安息日还是星期日》第15、16面。[John Theodore Mueller,Sabbath or Sunday,pp.15,16]） 路德自由教会（Lutheran Free Church） “因为圣经中找不到任何确凿之处可以证明主自己或者使徒们已经规定将安息日改为星期日，所以回答以下这个问题并不简单：谁更改了安息日，谁有权柄这样行呢？” ——（乔治·斯维尔德鲁普《一个新的日子》[George Sverdrup,‘A New Day.’]） 卫理公会（Methodist） “我们的主的确涂抹了这‘在律例上所写……的字据’，把它撤去并且钉在祂的十字架上了。（歌罗西书2: 14）但是道德律法是包含在十诫之中，是众先知所强调的，主并没有撤去……道德律法与仪文律法建立在完全不同的基础上。……这道德律法的每一部分对于历代的全人类都是有效的。” ——（约翰·卫斯理《在几个场合的训道》第二版，卷一，第221，222页。[JOHN WESLEY,"Sermons on Several Occasions," 2-Vol. Edition,Vol. I,pages 221,222.]） “无论如何，没有任何一位基督徒可以免于顺从那被称为道德律法的十条诫命。” ——（《卫理公会守则》(I904),第 23面[Methodist Church Discipline," (I904),page 23.]） “安息日是为人设立的；不只是为希伯来人，而是为全人类设立的。” ——（E·O·哈冯《真理的支柱》第88面。[E.O. HAVEN,"Pillars of Truth," page 88.]） “我们守第一日来代替第七日的理由并非基于那些肯定的诫命。任何一个人都不会在圣经中找到将第七日改成第一日的权威根据。早期基督徒开始在第一日崇拜的理由是耶稣在那日复活。逐渐这敬拜的日子也就变成了休息日，也就是法定的假日。这发生在公元321年。 我们守第一日来代替第七日的理由并非基于那些肯定的诫命。任何一个人都不会在圣经中找到将第七日改成第一日的权威根据……因此，我们所谓的基督徒的安息日并不是诫命所认定的。它只不过是教会的所赐予的一份礼物罢了。……” ——（克劳维斯·G·查培尔《人生的十大准则》第61面[CLOVIS G. CHAPPELL,"Ten Rules for Living," page 61.]） “在希伯来语中，安息日表示休息，并且它是一周的第七日……必须承认的是，新约圣经中没有任何有关第一日的律法。” ——（查尔斯·巴克《神学字典》“安息日”条款。[Charles Buck,A Theological Dictionary,"Sabbath"]） “在很久以前，地上的人就开始给万物取名字，并且将嘴中的声音变成单词，因此嘴唇可以表达一个人的想法。在那些日子，人们崇拜太阳，因为人们造出许多单词讲述了有关许多事物的诸多看法。人们当时成为了基督徒，并且在一个名叫君士坦丁的皇帝统治之下。这个皇帝将星期日（太阳日）代替了基督教的安息日，这是因为光和热都是从太阳而来的福气。因此星期日就是太阳日，难道不是吗？” ——（星期日学倡导，1921年12月31日[Sunday School Advocate,Dec. 31,1921.]） “道德律法包含在十条诫命之内，是众先知所强调的，基督也并没有撤去。祂来的目的不是废除十诫中的任何一个部分。这十条诫命永远都不能废除……这律法的每一部分必须存留在全地所有的人中，且在各个时代都有效，它不是受制于时间和地点，也不是受制于那些易变的环境，而是建立在上帝的天性和人的本性，并他们相互间不可改变的关系之上。” ——（约翰·卫斯理《在几个场合的证道》卷1，第二十五讲[JOHN WESLEY,"Sermons on Several Occasions," Vol. I,Sermon XXV.]） “的确，针对婴儿施洗没有明确的命令。同样也没有任何命令要求守一周的第一日。许多人相信基督已经改变了安息日。但是从祂自己的言语中，我们看到祂来并不是为了这个目的。那些相信耶稣已经改变安息日的人都是建立在臆想之上。” ——（阿摩司·宾尼《神学纲要》第180-181面。[Amos Binney,‘Theological Compendium’,p. 180-181]） “这在太初就已设立，并且由摩西和众先知一次又一次坚固的安息日从来都没有被废除。作为道德律，有关它神圣性的一点一划都没有被废弃。” ——（《纽约先驱论坛报》1874年，卫理公会主教牧声1874年[New York Herald 1874,on the Methodist Episcopal Bishops Pastoral 1874]） 慕迪神学院（Moody Bible Institute） “安息日是在伊甸园中制定的，自此以来一直有效。第四条诫命是以‘当纪念’这几个字开始的 ，这表明上帝在西奈山亲手将诫命写在法板之前，安息日就已经存在了。人们怎么会声明这条诫命已经废除，而同时又承认其它九条依然有效呢？” —— （D·L·慕迪“称重与亏缺”第47面。[D.L. MOODY,"Weighed and Wanting," page 47.]) “我真心相信现今这条诫命（第四条诫命）与从前一样有效。我曾与那些说安息日已经废除之人谈话，但是他们从未能向我指出在圣经中有任何地方说上帝已经将其撤除。当基督在世时，祂根本没有说安息日已经废除；而是将它从文士和法利赛人所强加与它的繁文缛节中释放出来，并且将它置于正确的位置，‘安息日是为人设立的，人不是为安息日设立的’对于今天的人们来说，它和以前一样可行，一样必要。实际上，我们如今比以往任何时候更需要它，因为我们生活在如此紧张的时代。” ——（同上，第46面） “这第四条诫命不是针对某个地方或某个时代的诫命，而是针对所有地方和所有时代的。” ——（D·L·慕迪，旧金山，1881年1月1日。[D.L. Moody,at San Francisco,Jan.1st,1881.]） 长老会（Presbyterian） “基督教的安息日（星期日）并非来自圣经，也不是早期教会所称的安息日。” ——（《德怀特的神学理论》卷14，第401面[Dwight's Theology,Vol. 14,p. 401.]） “我们在马太福音24:20节‘你们应当祈求，叫你们逃走的时候，不遇见冬天或是安息日’中看到一个对安息日永恒性质的更加深入之根据。但是耶路撒冷最后的毁灭是在基督教团体完全建立之后（公元70年）。主所说的这些话明显在暗示，当时的基督徒都在严格遵守安息日的。” ——（《约拿单·爱德华之工》（长老会）卷四，第621面[Works of Jonathon Edwards,(Presby.) Vol.4,p.621.]） “我们切不可凭空想象基督的降世已经将我们从律法的约束中解脱出来；因为律法是任何一个虔诚和圣洁生命的永恒之律，律法中包含着上帝的公义，因此律法必须如同上帝的公义一样永远不变，始终如一。” ——约翰·加尔文《有关福音书间相协和的解释》第一卷，第277面。[JOHN CALVIN,"Commentary on a Harmony of the Gospels," Vol.1,page 277.] “上帝在创造人之时就已设立了安息日，祂将第七日分别出来就是为此目的，并且将安息日的遵守指定为超越种族的普世永恒之道德义务。” ——（美国长老会出版卷宗，第175册[American Presbyterian Board of Publication,Tract No.175.]） “过去对安息日的持守从未停止，直到[罗马]皇帝成为基督徒之后将其废除。” ——（美国长老会出版卷宗，第188册[American Presbyterian Board of Publication,Tract No.118.]） “道德律法（十诫）对所有人永远具有约束力，不论是义人还是不义的人，顺从之人还是悖逆之人；此外，道德律法不仅仅是针对本身所包括的内容，而且它涉及到了那位设立它的创造主上帝的权威。基督在福音中不但没有将其废除，反而大大加强了遵守道德律法的义务。” ——（《威斯敏斯特信仰宣言》第19章，第5节。[Westminster Confession of Faith," Chap. 19,ArT.5.]） “安息日是十诫的一部分。诫命本身就可以解决有关这个法律是否持续到永恒的问题……因此，除非有证据表明所有的道德律法已经被废除，否则，安息日仍然不能改变……基督的教训证明安息日是永恒不变的。” ——（D.D博士 T·C·布雷克《神学精华》第474、475面[T.C. BLAKE,D.D.,"Theology Condensed," pages 474,475.]) “星期日（SUNDAY太阳日）就是外邦人隆重朝拜那颗被称为太阳之行星的日子。受这日的影响，也出于是尊重这日的（依他们认为是）圣体，基督徒们认为合宜与外邦人同守这一日，并且用相同的称号，这样他们就不会显得与世俗格格不入了，因为倘若他们遵守安息日就会阻挠外邦人皈依基督教，甚至会产生更大的偏见，以至于使福音受抵制。” ——（T·M·莫尔《主日对话》[T.M. Morer,Dialogues on the Lord's Day]） “在新约圣经中没有一个字，也没有任何暗示教导我们不可在星期日做工。圣灰星期三，或说是大斋节的遵守与守星期日是同出一辙。星期日休息并不是出自神圣的律法。” ——（《艾顿教法》—《十诫》[Canon Eyton,in The Ten Commandments.]） “某些人试图将遵守星期日的理论建立在使徒的命令之上，然而使徒们根本就没有给出有关这问题的命令……事实是，当我们去诉诸圣经的原文手迹时，守安息日的人拥有最佳的依据。” ——（《工作中的基督徒》1883年4月19日和1884年1月。[The Christian at Work,April 19,1883,and Jan. 1884]） 改正教圣公会（Protestant Episcopal） “那一日（安息日）根本没有从第七日改到第一日……但是对于这种改变，我们找不到任何经文根据，我们可以得出一个结论：这是教会的权威擅自改变的。” ——（《教理诠释》[‘Explanation of Catechism’]） 其它领域（Miscellaneous） “你会告诉我星期六是犹太人的安息日，但是基督徒的安息日已经改到了星期日。的确，改变了！然而是谁改变的？是谁有权柄改变这全能上帝亲自颁布的诫命呢？上帝亲口说当记念安息日，守为圣日，谁敢违抗说‘不是这样，第七日要劳碌做你一切的工，但第一日是当守的圣日呢？’这是一个最为重要的问题，我不知道你该如何回答。” “你是一个改正教徒，你口口声声说要按圣经行事，以圣经为唯一的权威；但是在你遵守七日中哪一日为圣的事情上，你所行的却与圣经所说的相悖，并且将其它的日子代替了圣经所命令的日子，这是何等的严重啊！守安息日为圣日的命令是十诫中的一条；你若认为其它九条诫命仍然有效；那么是谁给你权柄去践踏第四条诫命呢？如果你坚守自己的原则，如果你真的顺从圣经并以圣经为唯一的权威，你应当从新约圣经中找到某些能阐明第四条诫命已经彻底改变的证据。” ——（《基督教教义图书》第3、4页[The Library of Christian Doctrine," pages 3,4]） “圣经中的第一个命令就是定第七日为圣日：‘上帝赐福给第七日，定为圣日。’（创世记2:3）上帝在十诫中再次坚固了这个命令‘当记念安息日，守为圣日……第七日是向耶和华你上帝当守的安息日。’（出埃及记20:8,10）另一方面，基督宣称祂来不是要废掉律法，乃是要成全。（马太福音5:17）耶稣本人也遵守安息日：‘在安息日，照祂平常的规矩进了会堂’。（路加福音4:16 ）耶稣去世之后，祂的门徒们也遵守安息日：‘她们……遵着诫命安息了。’(路加福音23: 56)虽然有如此众多的圣经权威的证据表明应当遵守安息日，也就是第七日为圣日，但所有宗派中的改正教徒都在亵渎这日，并且将这日的义务转到了一周的第一日，也就是星期日。他们这样行的根据是什么？根本没有证据，只不过是口头的阐述，或者说是天主教的传统，因为天主教声称使徒们将安息日改到了星期日，为得是记念基督的复活，并且圣灵也是在一周的第一日降临。” ——(约翰·米尔纳《宗教争端的终结》第71面[JOHN MILNER,"The End of Religious Controversy," page 71.]) “当然，安息日就是星期六，也就是一周的第七日，但是早期的基督徒以遵守星期日来代替安息日，为的是记念基督死里复活。” ——（富尔顿·奥斯勒《世界主义》1951年9月，第34、35面[FULTON OURSLER. Cosmopolitan,SepT.1951,pages 34,35.]） “我不愿假冒为一位业余的圣经学者。我只是以普通人为要寻求指引而研读上帝借摩西颁布的十条诫命，在这‘十诫’中，我发现了美好生活的蓝图。” ——（同上，第33面） “十分肯定的是，现今需要十诫，或许比过去更加需要。十条诫命中的神圣信息使我们在这个罪恶横行的世代面临一个深层次的道德挑战；它是一个统一的信息，无论是犹太人、穆斯林，还是基督徒，都可以接受该信息。在历史和现今事件的亮光之下读完十诫时，谁还能怀疑这永恒之律法的特性呢？” ——（同上，第124面） “上帝命令要守第七日为安息日。不可守其它任何日子作为安息日。守一周的第一日或者第四日都不能算作是守安息日……安息日是一周的最后一天，在六日劳作之后，守第七日为圣。遵守任何星期六之外的日子都不能满足律法的要求。” ——文学博士、神学博士H·J·福劳沃斯《十诫的永恒价值》第13面。[ H.J.FLOWERS ,B.A.,B.D.,"The Permanent Value of the Ten Commandments," page 13.]） “传统上视星期日为基督复活的日子，在公元后的几个世纪以来，对于星期日的评价已经产生了巨大的改变。有时候它已经与一周的第七日，也就是安息日混为一谈。在延续那错谬的假定，也就是第四条诫命已经过时，已经被星期日所取代的推测上，以英文为母语的人是最一致的。在大众的演讲中，经常提到星期日，并且以此来指代安息日，但这是错误的。” ——(作者F.M. 赛特泽尔，馆长，人类学部门，史密森学会，摘自一封1949年9月1日的信。[F.M.SETZLER,Head Curator,Department of Anthropology,Smithsonian Institute,from a letter dated SepT.1,1949]) “那些遵守安息日的人正确地把握着有关遵守安息日真实可靠的历史，并且因此相信人的祖先是被造的；相信在六日内那为人预备的美好家园也是被造的；相信诸天和地球最原始和最完美的被造，并且相信在所有这一切被造之先就存在的造物主——祂完成了创造之工后，于第七日歇息了。安息日因此就成为一个记号，可以将那些相信历史启示之人和那些故意遗忘这些伟大事实之人区别开来。” ——(雅各·G·摩菲《对出埃及记的讲解》出埃及记20: 8-11解释。 [JAMES G. MURPHY,"Commentary on the Book of Exodus," comments on Exodus 20: 8-11]) 无信仰者（Infidel） “也许只有很少一部分的基督徒注意到他们所称的‘基督徒的安息日’（星期日、太阳日）是源于异教。…根据历史的记载，第一次守星期日是在公元第四世纪，当时君士坦丁发布一条法令（并没有要求在宗教上给以遵守，而只是禁止在这日做工），法令这样说‘所有的法官，城镇中所有的人以及做各种买卖的人都要在可敬的太阳日停工。’在发布这法令的时期，君士坦丁是一位拜太阳者；因此无论如何这都与基督教无关。” ——（亨利·M·泰博《信仰还是实事》（罗伯特·G·英格索尔十九世纪美国著名的无神论倡导者英格索尔所写序言），第112面[HENRY M. TABER. "Faith or Fact" (preface by Robert G. Ingersoll),page 112.]） “我想挑战任何一位基督教牧师或传道人，让他们向我提出哪怕一丁点有关遵守星期日为安息圣日的根据。倘若他们无法向我证明，为什么他们还坚持教导星期日是圣日呢？……星期日取代了星期六，而且因为犹太人受命守每周的第七日为圣，因此基督徒必须守每周的第一日，此类观点是十足彻底的谬误，令人不屑一顾……通过使徒行传18:4的记载——‘每逢安息日，保罗在会堂里辩论’可以看出保罗习惯性地遵守一周的第七日，并且在那日传道。” ——（同上，第114-116面） 上一篇 返回研究目录 下一篇 到最頂

All trinity studies Previous Download Next Why is the SDA organization Not Being Persecuted Today Here's the golden question-----Why is the SDA organization (supposed to be God's remnant church) not being persecuted today? Why is the church enjoying a golden age of peace and prosperity? Aren't these the last days? Is Satan sleeping or has the church become a synagogue of Satan? Ellen White gives us the answer, and there is only ONE reason, which wholly lies with the church: "There is another and more important question that should engage the attention of the churches of today. The apostle Paul declares that “all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.” [2 Timothy 3:12.] Why is it, then, that persecution seems in a great degree to slumber? - The only reason is, that the church has conformed to the world's standard, and therefore awakens no opposition. The religion which is current in our day is not of the pure and holy character that marked the Christian faith in the days of Christ and his apostles. It is only because of the spirit of compromise with sin, because the great truths of the Word of God are so indifferently regarded, because there is so little vital godliness in the church, that Christianity is apparently so popular with the world. Let there be a revival of the faith and power of the early church, and the spirit of persecution will be revived, and the fires of persecution will be rekindled." GC88 48.2 In summary, the GC SDA organization has-- (1) The organization has officially conformed to the world's standard, particularly the standard imposed by the World Council of Churches under the leadership of the MAN OF SIN. (2) The organization's faith (including the fundamental beliefs) is impure and unholy, in other words, adulterated with Babylonian doctrines. (3) The organization has compromised with SIN. (4) The great truths of the Bible are ignored. (5) The organization has become ungodly. (6) The organization values worldly popularity more than God's approval. Previous All trinity studies Next Back to top