Sei sulla pagina 1di 16

DONT BE FOOLED BY "IT" -

The Ultimate Refutation of the Faulty Arguments Against the Holy Spirit’s Individual Personhood

By Derrick Gillespie

First Edition (February 2018)

By Derrick Gillespie First Edition (February 2018) How often have you heard the argument that the

How often have you heard the argument that the Holy Spirit being called an “it” must mean the Spirit is not a person since persons are never called “it”? Time to debunk that falsehood once and for all in this 2018 booklet. Knowledge is power!!

*THIS FREE BOOKLET IS BEST READ WITH A LIVE INTERNET CONNECTION

INTRODUCTION:

For many years Seventh-day Adventists have been troubled by certain dissident and misguided groups within its ranks bent on misleading either the unlearned or those not grounded in the faith with the false teaching that the Holy Spirit is not a “third” or separate person, personality, or being of or in the “threefold” Godhead. Their various approaches to support this false view have been identified, tackled and shown to be groundless by my ministry over the years, and some of my more potent presentations on this issue can be seen at the following links online (*click the links below, and all other links throughout this booklet to get vital additional info):

One widespread ploy used by the dissidents is to mislead people with the idea that God and Christ are never depicted as an impersonal “it” (OR SO THEY ARGUE) but the Holy Spirit is (both in the Bible and in the writings of the SDA pioneers, Mrs. White included), and so that must mean the Spirit is not a person separate from Jesus and the Father. Very often you will hear or read them making the claim that by no stretch of the imagination can a real person be referred to as “it”, and they point to Mrs. E.G. White and other SDA pioneers referring to the Spirit as “it”, and many people (precious souls) are being taken in because of their ignorance on the matter. But in this booklet I aim to lay that falsehood to rest for those willing to see the truth and to be consistent in their theology. I aim to show how the SDA pioneers themselves gradually came to understand after 1888 how the expression “it” can apply to the Holy Spirit as a real person and yet it does not take away from him being a “distinct personality” or individual personal being alongside Jesus and the Father. I will also show how God the Father himself and Jesus in the bible are often manifested in impersonal ways as “it”, and how babies and children (including the baby Jesus, and the Christ child), angelic and demon spirits, and even normal human persons like yourself (dear reader) are depicted as “it”, both in the Bible and in the writings of Mrs. White. As a result no longer should you be fooled, dear reader, by the “it” expression when you read it being applied to the Holy Spirit; the Godhead “person” deemed and depicted by Mrs. White (on behalf of true SDAs) as a “living [Godhead] person” of “three living [Godhead] persons”, or as a “distinct personality” or separate personal being of/among “the three holiest beings in heaven”, all forming the “Eternal Godhead”.

THE BIBLE’S TESTIMONY ABOUT YOU AND ME AS AN “IT”

Let’s allow both the Bible, THE ULTIMATE SOURCE OF TRUTH for Christians, to show clearly that YOU, dear reader, a living person or distinct personal being, can be called “IT”; a truth being either ignored or being covered up by some today who deny the personhood of the Holy Spirit by misleading people with the “it” pronoun often applied to the Holy Spirit.

with the “it” pronoun often applied to the Holy Spirit. “ Ezekiel 18:4 … all souls

Ezekiel 18:4 all souls [living humans] are mine [saith the Lord]; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth,*IT shall die.- KJV

Notice that you, dear reader, a living soul or a living person or personal being, can be called an "IT" in a certain manner of speaking, or by certain ignored rules of grammar, and no problem is there. And, as all SDAs know, the whole person is what the Bible calls the “soul”; it’s not a separate entity from the body, but rather the life force or energizing spirit and the body together forms the human soul or human being. And together the Bible calls that soul an “it”, based on ancient rules of grammar related to the Hebrew word for the soul (i.e. nephesh).

So hereafter, dear reader, when the dissident SDA anti-Trinitarians within the SDA Church (or any other anti-Trinitarian in Christendom) tries to fool you with the “it” expression applied to the Holy Spirit, point them to and surprise/debunk them with the following Scriptures (supplied below with Strong’s numbers for further research):

Exodus. 2:9; Ruth 4:16; Revelation. 12:4-5; Ezekiel 18:4,20 (King James Version)

Revelation. 12:4-5; Ezekiel 18:4,20 (King James Version) As the above shows, human babies (even the baby
Revelation. 12:4-5; Ezekiel 18:4,20 (King James Version) As the above shows, human babies (even the baby

As the above shows, human babies (even the baby Jesus and Christ child in Revelation 12:4-5) and adult humans (all separate or distinct souls) are deemed as “it” and he or she at the same time. It is a principle seen all over the Bible as well with angelic and demonic beings, and even the Holy Spirit who is God or the Lord Jesus himself in living *representation (see 2 Cor. 3:17, 18 with 2 Samuel 23:2-3 and Acts 5:3-5 and Acts 13:1-4)….all called “it” and he at the same time because of the rules of grammar, with no denial of personality involved!

The following Scripture references (Luke 9:38-40 and Luke 8:29-31) show that spirits are called “it” and “hesimultaneously because of the rules of grammar related to the Greek word for “spirit” (i.e. pneuma)

related to the Greek word for “spirit” (i.e. pneuma ) What this revelation now does from
related to the Greek word for “spirit” (i.e. pneuma ) What this revelation now does from

What this revelation now does from the very outset is to totally obliterate the misguided notion that one cannot refer to a living person as both “it” and “he” at the same time. This is an argument often used by the heretical “pneumatomachi” movement (or the “fighters against the Spirit”, in terms of him being deemed a living person, as God himself is a person), so as to mislead the unlearned or those not grounded in the faith, and to ultimately cause them to fail to honor and worship God or divinity in this distinct personal form called the Holy Spirit. If you wish to see the evidence that the Holy Spirit was, and is to be worshipped by true SDAs, and on what basis that is done, see the following links for the irrefutable evidence:

2. https://www.scribd.com/document/356730652/Proofs-We-Should-Worship-the-Spirit-as-SDAs

MRS WHITE’S TESTIMONY ABOUT THE “IT” PRONOUN APPLYING TO REAL PERSONS

For years many in Adventism wondered how Mrs. White could repeatedly refer to the Holy Spirit BOTH as an "IT" and a "HE", and yet deem the Spirit after 1888 as, quote, "also a divine person", or “the third person of the Godhead” of "three living persons" in the "Eternal Godhead". It’s rather simple. It’s similar to her legitimately (by biblical rules of

language) calling YOU and ME an “IT”, dear reader; a living human person, a soul (as you clearly

saw for yourself in the above quotes)

persons in a certain way, based on ancient rules of grammar.

since

it is an acceptable manner of speaking about living

"The soul [or the person] that God has created and Christ has redeemed is of great value because of the possibilities before *IT, the spiritual advantages that have been granted *IT, the capabilities that *IT may possess if vitalized by the word of God, and the immortality *IT may gain through the hope presented in the gospel." ---E.G. White, Acts of the Apostles, pg. 370

"…His [Christ’s] grace alone can quicken the lifeless faculties of the soul, and attract *IT [i.e. the soul or living person] to God, to holiness." Ellen G. White, Steps to Christ, pg. 18

holiness." — Ellen G. White, Steps to Christ, pg. 18 MRS WHITE’S TESTIMONY ABOUT THE HOLY

MRS WHITE’S TESTIMONY ABOUT THE HOLY SPIRIT THAT SHE AT TIMES CALLED “IT”:

“The Spirit is freely given us of God if we will appreciate and accept it. And what is it? The representative of Jesus Christ. It is to be our constant helper. It is through the Spirit that Christ fulfills the promise, "I will never leave thee nor forsake thee." ---E.G. White, Letter 38, May 30, 1896

The Holy Spirit is the Comforter, in Christ’s name. He

personifies Christ [or

Comforter, in Christ’s name. He personifies Christ [or impersonates him] , yet is a distinct personality

impersonates him], yet is a distinct personality [or separate individual]. We may have

the Holy Spirit if we ask for it .---E.G. White, Manuscript 93, 1893

“We need to realize that the Holy Spirit, who is as much a person as God is a person, is walking through these grounds. ---E.G. WhiteManuscript 66, 1899 (From a talk to the students at the Avondale School, Australia.).

The Holy Spirit is a person, for He beareth witness with our spirits that we are the children of God. When this witness is borne, it carries with it its own evidence… The Holy Spirit has a personality, [or individuality] else He could not bear witness to our spirits and with our spirits that we are the children of God. He must also be a divine person….” -- E.G. White, Manuscript 20, 1906.

“…there are three living persons of the heavenly trio [“trio” being an interchangeable term for “trinity” among the SDA pioneers themselves; as plain historical evidence proves]; in the name of these three great powersthe Father, the Son, and the Holy Spiritthose who receive Christ by living faith are baptized, and these powers will co- operate with the obedient subjects of heaven in their efforts to live the new life in Christ. ----E.G. White, Manuscript 21, 1906, pg.11

The above is clear. The Spirit, called “it” and “he” SIMULTAENOUSLY, he is a person as much as God is a person, and is not Jesus literally (as the dissidents love to argue) but is his “representative” and he is such as a “distinct personality” or another individual who “personifies” or impersonates him; thus the Holy Spirit is the One who is NUMERICALLY the

“third” of “three living persons” of divinity or of the Godhead. Notice now Mrs. White’s own (largely post-1888 or post-1892) gradual/cumulative testimony about the THREE Godhead “persons”, and notice her unequivocal messages about how we should relate to them in worship as true SDA members:

let "

and then may we all unite to swell the songs, “Praise God, from whom all blessings flow; Praise him, all creatures here below; Praise him above, ye heavenly host; Praise Father, Son, *AND Holy Ghost.” ---E.G. White, RH January 4, 1881

us [SDAs] consecrate to Him ["the Lord" our God] all that we are, and all that we have,

When we have accepted Christ, and in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit have pledged ourselves to serve [i.e. reverence, honor, worship and obey; see

Joshua 24:15; Psalm 100:2] God, the Father, Christ, *AND the Holy Spirit --the three dignitaries and powers of heaven--pledge themselves that every facility shall be given to us if we carry

out our baptismal vows to "come out from among them, and be not the unclean thing. ----E.G. White, Manuscript 85, 1901

separate,

and touch

"God says, [notice after this whom she means says this] "Come out from among them, and be

ye separate,

and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, and will be a Father

unto you [notice hereafter who is speaking as “I” and “the Almighty” here], and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith [or pledges] the Lord Almighty." [Now notice carefully] This is the pledge of [not one person, but] the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit [i.e. the *pledge to receive and be a Father to you]; made to you if you will keep your baptismal vow, and touch not the unclean thing… In order to deal righteously with the world, as members of the royal family, children of the heavenly King, Christians must feel their need of a power, which comes only from the [three] heavenly agencies that have pledged themselves to work in man's

behalf. After we have formed a union with the great THREEFOLD POWER [singular; collective], we shall regard our duty toward the members of God's family with a sacred awe.” -E.G. White, Signs of the Times, June 19, 1901

"As the saints in the kingdom of God are accepted in the beloved [i.e. Paradise], they hear:

“Come, ye blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.” And then the golden harps are touched, and the music flows all through the heavenly host, and they fall down and worship the Father and the Son *AND the Holy Spirit." ---E.G. White, Manuscript 139, 1906.

“You are baptized in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. You are raised up out of the water to live henceforth in newness of life--to live a new life. You are born unto God, and you stand under the sanction and the power of THE THREE HOLIEST *BEINGS IN

HEAVEN, who are able to keep you from falling

to relate myself toward the work that God has given me to do, I just call upon the three great

Worthies, and say: You know I cannot do this work in my own strength. You must work in me, and by me, and through me… this is the prayer that every one of us may offer

When

I feel oppressed and hardly know how

-E.G. White, 1906, Manuscript Release, Vol.7, pgs. 267, 268

The foregoing quotes are self-explanatory, and while some dissidents in Adventism try to deny she wrote all of the foregoing, the evidence is compelling that she did, since the E.G. White Estate has reasonable evidence indicating she did pen them, and the quotes consistently state or imply the same truths in principle, and all around her after 1888 other pioneers were saying the same thing in essence, and she never objected. Click the link above for eye-opening details.

And never forget that it’s not just grammatically a “third person” style of language Mrs. White employed when speaking of the Holy Spirit as “the third person of the Godhead” (as dissidents in Adventism love to mislead the unlearned with this faulty argument), but rather it’s a NUMERIC reality of “three living personalities” or individuals involved (since its always the word/expressions “three” and “personality” or “distinct personality” she adopted and used, among the Trinitarian expressions, when she wanted to express separate individual beings in the Godhead in relation to each other). And this was why this Trinitarian “third person of the Godhead” expression was understood by the pioneers initially (or in the earlier years; before 1888) to be a “heretical” Trinitarian expression connected to the Trinity, as they fully well knew it meant “three persons”, and not two!! This was what pioneer W.W. Prescott candidly admitted at the 1919 Bible Conference (making us know Mrs. White herself was now adopting formerly considered “heretical” expressions connected to the Trinity), when he said:

"I was in the same place that Brother Daniells was, and was taught the same things by authority [of the SDA Church], that Christ was the beginning of God's creative work, that to speak of the third person of the "

Godhead or of the trinity was heretical

--- W.W. Prescott, July 6, 1919 Bible Conference.

heretical --- W.W. Prescott, July 6, 1919 Bible Conference. DID YOU CATCH THAT??? Not only did

DID YOU CATCH THAT??? Not only did the earlier expressions of some of the SDA pioneers ( like that of Uriah Smith, and J.M. Stephenson , among others ) present Jesus as a “created being” but the expressions "third person of the Godhead" and "the trinity" were considered

"heretical" by early SDA pioneers because they were TRINITARIAN EXPRESSIONS

whole world knows it!! So when later pioneers (like Uriah Smith, A.T. Jones, S.N. Haskell, Robert Hare, F.M. Wilcox, E.G. White, et al) started to use these formerly deemed “heretical”

Trinitarian expressions after 1888, it is plain they were now leaning in the direction of Trinitarianism (clearly the revised version ); not continuing in a totally non-Trinitarian direction!! Click this link for the irrefutable details regarding this historical reality.

and the

THE SDA PIONEERS GRADUALLY UNDERSTOOD THAT THE PRONOUN “IT” DOES NOT DENY PERSONALITY OR PERSONHOOD

This now brings me to the issue of how the SDA pioneers gradually came to understand that despite the Spirit can be legitimately called an “it” (just like other real persons in the Bible), yet that Spirit was a divine being, and not just a mere influence. Click here for details on the STEP BY STEP march of the SDA pioneers and gradual doctrinal development on the Spirit’s nature. Recently, an 1879 letter by pioneer J.H. Waggoner was found in the General Conference

archives of the SDA Church, and it was addressed to James White (Mrs. White’s husband) before White’s 1881 death. J.H. Waggoner was one of the main SDA pioneers who did intense studies on the Holy Spirit in the earlier years before 1888, and this letter revealed how he was grappling with the Spirit’s nature in the years before the SDA Church started to accept his separate personhood among the “three living persons” of the Godhead. And in the letter he AMAZINGLY said to James White:

And in the letter he AMAZINGLY said to James White: "I have thought considerable about the

"I have thought considerable about the matter you wrote of, though I have been too busy to apply my mind to it. But there is one query which will arise in my mind. It is on question of the personality of the Holy Spirit. The more I think of it the more I am inclined to believe that the generally received view [i.e. the Trinitarian view] is correctWe know that the word spirit in Greek is in the neuter gender, and in Hebrew, feminine. The Hebrew has no neuter gender. But it is generally conceded that the Authorized Version (KJV) is correct in using masculine pronouns when referring to the Holy Spirit. Instance, John 14:16,17,26. We [Seventh-day Adventists in 1879] ordinarily use *IT instead of he - perhaps it is allowable. But, to it are ascribed attributes of personality, as power, intelligence, emotions: - it instructs, guides, moves to speak or do, is grieved, etc. But most of

all, we are baptized into name of the Holy

of the Holy Spirit is placed with those of the Father and Son, and to the Holy Spirit is given such prominence in creation, in redemption, in everything. As much as I have studied on this subject -and you know that for years my study in the Spirit has not been small- I am not prepared to take a positive position. I am yet a student, or an inquirer, ready to be convinced by sufficient reasons. I can appreciate this, that to remove the Spirit from that position assigned to it in the Scriptures, would be no small error. Perhaps, in the light of Matt. 12:22-37, no greater error could be committed. It is this which has, for years, prevented my speaking with positiveness on the subject. But if the Spirit is a personality, and is third in position and power with the Father and Son, then it would be an offense against the Spirit [not to give him that position]."

in the rite of baptism the name

----Letter from J.H. Waggoner to James White - July 28, 1879 (*discovered by Denis Kaiser in the Center for Adventist Research)

*Seen below and overleaf is a photocopy of parts of the actual letter from 1879, and so it is proven to be legitimate.

* Seen below and overleaf is a photocopy of parts of the actual letter from 1879,
*Here is what stood out for me in this revealing letter from J.H. Waggoner: Interstingly,

*Here is what stood out for me in this revealing letter from J.H. Waggoner:

out for me in this revealing letter from J.H. Waggoner: Interstingly, it was just over a

Interstingly, it was just over a decade after this J.H. Waggoner letter (i.e. after 1888) that increasing numbers of SDA pioneers started to adjust their view on the Holy Spirit, and long before LeRoy Froom even came on the scene (see the link above for details) it became clear

that no longer did increasing numbers of the SDA pioneers see the pronoun “it” as any hindrance to understanding the Holy Spirit as as person, and even Uriah Smith, OF ALL PERSONS (earlier a stanch opposer of the Spirit’s personhood), changed his tune. Minor changes were seen in his March 1891 sermon) about the Spirit, as he spoke at the General Conference of that year, where he spoke for the first time of the Spirit as “it” being “omniscient”, as “it” being “tender”, and can be “insulted” and “grieved” as one of the “three great agencies” connected to salvation and dispensing grace and gifts to the church.

Uriah Smith knew even before 1891 that the Spirit's presence is not Jesus himself

in person literally

of the Godhead being "a trinity" (considering that the word "trinity", when applied to

the Godhead, means "three persons"). Note his words as he gradually adjusted his view:

and

Note his words as he gradually adjusted his view: and he knew this even BEFORE his

he knew this even BEFORE his later monumental 1896 addition

" [the

Spirit is] the medium which represents their [the Father's and Jesus'] presence

and by which they have knowledge and power through all the universe, when not personally present. Christ is a person, now officiating as priest in the sanctuary in heaven; and yet he says that wherever two or three are gathered in his name, he "

is there in the midst. Mt. 18:20. How? Not personally, but by his Spirit

---Uriah Smith, "In the Question Chair", Review and Herald, Oct. 28, 1890, pg. 664

" [the Spirit] is called the Eternal Spirit; it is a spirit that is omniscient and

omnipresent; it is the spirit that moved, or brooded, upon the face of the waters in the early days when chaos reigned, and out of the chaos was brought the beauty and the glory of this world it is the medium through which all God’s blessings and graces come to his people. It is the Comforter; it is the Spirit of Truth; It is the vital connection between us and our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ; for the apostle tells us that if we “have not the Spirit of Christ,” were are “none of his.” It is a spirit which is tender; which can be insulted, can be grieved, can be quenched. It is THE AGENCY through which we are to be introduced, if ever we are introduced to immortality….the apostle brings to view the THREE GREAT AGENCIES which are concerned in this work: God, the Father; Christ, his Son; and the Holy Spirit…."

---Uriah Smith, “The Spirit of Prophecy and Our Relation To It,” The General Conference Bulletin, Vol. IV, March 18, 1891, pg 146, 147

If the above was Uriah Smith's understanding when he was calling the Spirit an "it", can you imagine what he would say when he would finally have the understanding of Mrs. White that the Spirit, as an "AGENCY", is indeed "a person as God is a person" (EGW, 1899), and is NUMERICALLY “the thirdof "three persons" of the "Eternal Godhead"?? To imagine how the above quotes would then read, just substitute the pronoun "he" everywhere the "it" appears, and let the power of that reality hit you, dear reader. Uriah Smith after 1890 (i.e. after Mrs. White's NOT-WELL-KNOWN 1890 letter of rebuke to him) he amazingly came to deem the Spirit REPRESENTING Jesus as a Spirit that's:

--"omniscient and omnipresent" --"THE AGENCY *through which life is imparted"

--"the medium through which all God’s blessings and graces come to his people"

--"the Comforter

[and]

the vital connection between us and our Lord and

Savior Jesus Christ" --"tender, can be insulted, can be grieved, can be quenched"

And remember this was Smith speaking after he for many years deeming the Spirit as not a person but as a mere influence (a thing). What dawned on me recently, is that Uriah Smith, even then in 1891 (after Mrs. White's December 1890 letter of rebuke; see the link above for details), he might have begun to see the Spirit as a "living person" acting as an "AGENCY" of Jesus's actions, because the pronoun "IT", as we have seen earlier, is legitimately applied to living beings (angelic and demonic spirits, babies, human souls or living human beings), and only a living being can be omniscient, tender, insulted, grieved, etc. Could it be that SDAs today have allowed a misunderstanding of the pronoun "IT" (as used by pioneers both before and after they spoke about the Spirit being a living person) to blind us to when Uriah Smith really started to see the personhood of the Spirit? This is one of those historical realities which led me to pursue, with much vigor, the truth of the matter, and now, backed by compelling evidence, I am here sharing with you, dear reader, that the pronoun "IT" is no obstacle to being deemed a person!!

Clearly to Uriah Smith in 1891, it was becoming plain that the Spirit was a person of “the same Trinity” the Father and Son belonged to, and so in 1896 he made the next leap and said plainly:

Do the Scriptures warrant praise to and worship of the Holy Sprint?

in the

formula for baptism, the name “Holy Ghost,” or” Holy Spirit,” is associated with that of the Father and the Son. And if the name can be used thus, why could it not properly stand as a part of the same *TRINITY in the hymn of praise, “Praise Father, Son and Holy Ghost”?”

-- Uriah Smith (“U.S.”), In the Question Chair, Review and Herald, 1896, Vol. 73, No. 43, pg. 685

By 1896, we see Uriah Smith changing significantly with regards to the so-called “unscriptural” and “pagan” word "trinity" being applied to the Godhead, and as it concerns praise to the separately listed Holy Spirit in "the same trinity" (considering that this would immediately imply “three persons” inherently involved). Keep in mind that this 1896 “trinity” defense, of sorts, from Uriah Smith was not just Uriah Smith using the word “trinity” as just an ‘innocent label’ for the Father, Son and Holy Spirit as a mere “group of three”, as some would want to argue, (since he could have used “trio”), but he is using it in the context of WORHIP DIRECTED TO THE HOLY SPIRIT AS A MEMBER OF “THE TRINITY” …knowing full well that a “trinity” of the Godhead is “three persons”; not two. Uriah Smith knew full well the implications of him using this formerly considered “heretical” and “unscriptural” Trinitarian term directly applied to the Godhead, and the implications of him defending worship of the Holy Spirit in those Trinitarian-type terms. Was he now leaning in the direction of endorsing certain aspects (not all) of the Trinity doctrine he had formerly frowned upon (terminology and all)? You bet! And I KNOW this was the case because this was taking place with Uriah Smith at precisely the time when other SDA pioneers were adopting Trinitarian sentiments in the late

1890s as well (applying formerly considered “heretical” expressions like “Trinity”, “God the Son”, “third person of the Godhead”, etc., to their Godhead expressions). Click this link to see more details on this post-1888 matter; details not easily explained away by the modern dissidents who fail to study as they should. And, again, if you wish to see details of how and why Uriah Smith came to label the Godhead as a “Trinity” worthy of worship as susch, click this link to view the details.

TYING UP THE LOOSE ENDS AND DEBUNKING THE DISSIDENT CLAIMS

With all of the irrefutable evidence supplied so far, it is now plain how the dissidents are debunked many times over!! And if they claim that the Holy Spirit is literally Jesus himself in person, then they would have shot themselves in the foot because those same dissidents claim that the pronoun “it” applied to the Holy Spirit means “it” is not a person. Thus, by their own faulty logic they have unwittingly claimed that Jesus as the Holy Spirit is not a person. But we have seen clearly that both the Bible and the writings of Mrs. White makes plain that the Spirit can be deemed as both an “it” and a “he” yet is a “a person as God is a person”, and is a “distinct personality” from Jesus himself, even if sometimes spoken as if its Jesus himself. Mrs. White made plain that Jesus is REPRESENTATIONALLY “God himself” or “the Father with us”, and yet she repeatedly made plain that Jesus is a “distinct personality” from the Father!! Same principle applies to the Holy Spirit in relation to Jesus. It is consistent as consistent can be. See at this link (click to read) the irrefutable details on the matter of Jesus being “God himself” and the Spirit being Jesus himself, and yet as a separate “representative” personality.

Finally, all those who claim that God as a person cannot both be deemed as an IT as well as a “he”, they need to recognize the very many ways God has manifested himself to humanity. The following pictorial shows God manifested in many inanimate ways (as an IT) yet is depicted as also a “he” as well (read the comments accompanying the pictures to get the message).

the comments accompanying the pictures to get the message). Moses was met by God manifested as

Moses was met by God manifested as a burning bush (an IT) and yet was the person of Jehovah

The children of Israel were accompanied by God manifested as a pillar of fire (an

The children of Israel were accompanied by God manifested as a pillar of fire (an IT) by night and as a pillar of cloud (an IT) by day, and yet was Jehovah himself being manifested.

IT) by day, and yet was Jehovah himself being manifested. Even Jesus is depicted in symbol

Even Jesus is depicted in symbol as a slain lamb with seven eyes, and seven horns, and is even called an “it” (as the Lamb) in Revelation 5:6-7 (KJV), and yet we know he is a person called both “it” and “he” as the Lamb. His soul (or “it”; Ez. 18:4) was poured out unto death (Isaiah 53:12), yet a soul is a literal person; not an inanimate thing to be literally poured out.

poured out unto death (Isaiah 53:12), yet a sou l is a literal person; not an

Thus the Holy Spirit (a living person) can be, and is depicted, as both a dove at Jesus s baptism, as cloven or separated tongues of fire (Acts 2), as a fiery human form with an outstretched hand (as seen in Ezekiel 8:2-4), as the seven eyes of the Lamb (Rev. 5), as the “seven Spirits” or “seven-fold Spirit” in front of or before the throne of the Father and Jesus the Lamb, equally sending greetings to the Church and being the source of grace and blessings (Rev. 1:4-5), and yet is separate from the Father and Son as a person (just as Jesus is depicted as the wisdom and power of God, as the arm of the Lord, and even as “God himself” and yet is separate as a “distinct personality” from him).

as the arm of the Lord, and even as “God himself” and yet is separate as
as the arm of the Lord, and even as “God himself” and yet is separate as
as the arm of the Lord, and even as “God himself” and yet is separate as
as the arm of the Lord, and even as “God himself” and yet is separate as

SUMMARY AND APPEAL:

Job 11:7-9 makes plain that as it concerns the things of God it is beyond our human ability to fathom, and so we should expect challenges every step of the way to fully understand and wrap our minds around the things of God. But enough has been revealed for the SDA member to be assured that the Godhead is indeed “three living persons” who all are to be worshipped, and even though the Holy Spirit is called both an “it” and a “he”, just like us human beings called “it” in Ezekiel 18:4, 20, just like spirits are called both “it” and “he”, and just as God is manifested both as inanimate objects and in personal ways as a “he”, so too the Holy Spirit is depicted, and is “a person as God is a person” (E.G. White, 1899), and must be praised, worshipped or served just as God the Father himself would be worshipped:

us [SDAs] consecrate to Him ["the Lord" our God] all that we are, and all that we have,

and then may we all unite to swell the songs, “Praise God, from whom all blessings flow; Praise him, all creatures here below; Praise him above, ye heavenly host; Praise Father, Son, *AND Holy Ghost.” ---E.G. White, RH January 4, 1881

let "

When we have accepted Christ, and in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit have pledged ourselves to serve [i.e. reverence, honor, worship and obey; see Joshua 24:15; Psalm 100:2] God, the Father, Christ, *AND the Holy Spirit --the three dignitaries and powers of heaven--pledge themselves that every facility shall be given to us if we carry

out our baptismal vows to "come out from among them, and be not the unclean thing. ----E.G. White, Manuscript 85, 1901

separate,

and touch

I APPEAL TO THE DISSIDENTS IN ADVENTISM (IF THEY READ THESE WORDS OF MINE) TO HUMBLE THEMSELVES, SEE THE PLAIN TRUTH OF GOD’S WORD, LISTEN TO THE COUNSELS OF MRS. WHITE LEADING US BACK TO THE BIBLE, SEE AND FOLLOW THE EXAMPLE OF OUR PIONEERS WHO HUMBLY CHANGED THEIR VIEWS WHEN TRUTH BECAME PLAIN. LET GOOD SENSE PREVAIL. REBELLING AGAINST THE PLAIN FACTS OF HISTORY AND THE BIBLE IN THE FACE OF CONVICTING EVIDENCE IS SATANIC, AND IF PERSISTED IN IT MIGHT NOT END WELL. MEDITATE ON AND HEED MY WARNINGS.

THE FACE OF CONVICTING EVIDENCE IS SATANIC, AND IF PERSISTED IN IT MIGHT NOT END WELL.

"When someone who is genuinely mistaken learns the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or will no longer remain genuine." Anonymous

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Many of the SDA dissidents sadly display the following traits:

(*quoted from Lazarus Castang)

display the following traits: (*quoted from Lazarus Castang) Dear reader, l et’s pray for them that

Dear reader, let’s pray for them that God will humble them and release them from the chains of self-deception that they have allowed themselves to be in. I am certainly doing so myself (i.e. praying for them and myself), even as I do what Isaiah 58:1 calls me to do, i.e. lift up my voice like a trumpet, and, speaking fearlessly and frankly, but with the deepest love for all concerned, show my people in Zion where they are going wrong….living in denial and refusing to accept historical and biblical truth when it becomes evident!!!

historical and biblical truth when it becomes evident!!! Derrick Gillespie is a trained teacher in the

Derrick Gillespie is a trained teacher in the Social Sciences, History, and Geography, and remains a member of the SDA Church in Jamaica and a lay evangelist for SDAs. (Contact Info: ddgillespie@live.com OR https://www.facebook.com/derrick.gillespie