Atonement on the cross Doctrine is a destructive error?

[pythons]

“Another error, even more generally endorsed than any of the foregoing, is the doctrine of the atonement on the cross. This also furnishes another support for Unitarianism. The Scriptures plainly teach that Christ died for all men. Now if his death on the cross was the atonement, then the sins of all men are atoned for, and all will be saved. The conclusion is unavoidable, and we deny the doctrine of the atonement on the cross, not because it leads to this belief, but because it is scripturally untrue, and then as an incentive for proclaiming its falsity we have the fact that it is a strong pillar for a destructive error.” Sabbath Herald, August 29, 1865 No. 13

The above type of Scripture Scholar is also credited with the Doctrines of the Sabbath, soul sleep, creature christ & the sanctuary. I'm not sure even the Mormons have made such an outlandish affirmation.

 

[SDAchristian]

Prologue:
I already warned you about early days of pioneers. Early years of rapid growth, which brought in a lot different people, and their ideas.

“Another error, even more generally endorsed than any of the foregoing, is the doctrine of the atonement on the cross. This also furnishes another support for Unitarianism. The Scriptures plainly teach that Christ died for all men. Now if his death on the cross was the atonement, then the sins of all men are atoned for, and all will be saved. The conclusion is unavoidable, and we deny the doctrine of the atonement on the cross, not because it leads to this belief, but because it is scripturally untrue, and then as an incentive for proclaiming its falsity we have the fact that it is a strong pillar for a destructive error.” Sabbath Herald, August 29, 1865 No. 13

The above type of Scripture Scholar is also credited with the Doctrines of the Sabbath, soul sleep, creature christ & the sanctuary. I'm not sure even the Mormons have made such an outlandish affirmation.

Where do you want to go with first, Wm. C. Gage's quote/statement or another point you brought up ???

Can you cross reference "Wm. C. Gage's quote/statement" to an EGW quote ???

---

From my perspective, I have identified several issues to discuss the ARSH quote.

Yours in Christ, Michael

 

[pythons]

Prologue:
I already warned you about early days of pioneers. Early years of rapid growth, which brought in a lot different people, and their ideas.

Where do you want to go with first, Wm. C. Gage's quote/statement or another point you brought up ???

Can you cross reference "Wm. C. Gage's quote/statement" to an EGW quote ???

---

From my perspective, I have identified several issues to discuss the ARSH quote.

Yours in Christ, Michael

A lot of different people brought heretical doctrines into the SDA Church...
...Ellen subsequently had visions & made statements confirming those doctrines.
....This is the point I and others have been making.

The statement is affirmed by Ellen's confirmation of the 1844 Sanctuary teaching.

 

[SDAchristian]

A lot of different people brought heretical doctrines into the SDA Church...
...Ellen subsequently had visions & made statements confirming those doctrines.
....This is the point I and others have been making.
The statement is affirmed by Ellen's confirmation of the 1844 Sanctuary teaching.

This is a discussion. Not an agreement !!!

AV Mt 7:1-2 Judge not, that ye be not judged. 2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

Judgment is a dangerous topic to many, because of GOD's back fire from it.

"heretical doctrines" per se, are not unique to the SDA Church only, but to other churches' doctrines. You have a right to discussion at CARM, to state your opinion of what are "heretical doctrines".

"heretical doctrines", I am noting the label here, but we need to discuss what are those "heretical doctrines", in definition.

AV Mt 15:9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching [for] doctrines the commandments of men.

I was doing additional study and noted "Unitarianism" with "Unitarian means rejecting the doctrine of the Trinity."

AV Mt 28:18-20 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power{G1849 exousia} is given unto me in heaven and in earth. 19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, [even] unto the end of the world. Amen.

In the precedence of authority, Who has authority above Jesus' "All power{G1849 exousia}"/authority then ???

Is it "heretical" to reject the man made word and doctrine of "Trinity" and it's man made meanings in man's authority, in preference for Three Persons of the GODhead ??? <<< Noting Jesus never used a word such as "Trinity". But that did not stop anyone from stealing Jesus' authority{G1849 exousia}.

Are you ready for continued discussion ???

Yours in Christ, Michael

 

[CrowCross]

“Another error, even more generally endorsed than any of the foregoing, is the doctrine of the atonement on the cross. This also furnishes another support for Unitarianism. The Scriptures plainly teach that Christ died for all men. Now if his death on the cross was the atonement, then the sins of all men are atoned for, and all will be saved. The conclusion is unavoidable, and we deny the doctrine of the atonement on the cross, not because it leads to this belief, but because it is scripturally untrue, and then as an incentive for proclaiming its falsity we have the fact that it is a strong pillar for a destructive error.” Sabbath Herald, August 29, 1865 No. 13

The above type of Scripture Scholar is also credited with the Doctrines of the Sabbath, soul sleep, creature christ & the sanctuary. I'm not sure even the Mormons have made such an outlandish affirmation.

Col 2:13 When you were dead in your trespasses and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our trespasses, 14 having canceled the debt ascribed to us in the decrees that stood against us. He took it away, nailing it to the cross! 15 A nd having disarmed the powers and authorities, He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.

 

[SDAchristian]

Col 2:13 When you were dead in your trespasses and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our trespasses, 14 having canceled the debt ascribed to us in the decrees that stood against us. He took it away, nailing it to the cross! 15 A nd having disarmed the powers and authorities, He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.

AV Col 2:13-15 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; 14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; 15 [And] having spoiled principalities and powers{G1849 exousia}, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.

There are many here, that will not understand your referencing this part of Paul's writings.

Yours in Christ, Michael

 

[pythons]

This is a discussion. Not an agreement !!!

AV Mt 7:1-2 Judge not, that ye be not judged. 2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

Judgment is a dangerous topic to many, because of GOD's back fire from it.

"heretical doctrines" per se, are not unique to the SDA Church only, but to other churches' doctrines. You have a right to discussion at CARM, to state your opinion of what are "heretical doctrines".

"heretical doctrines", I am noting the label here, but we need to discuss what are those "heretical doctrines", in definition.

AV Mt 15:9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching [for] doctrines the commandments of men.

I was doing additional study and noted "Unitarianism" with "Unitarian means rejecting the doctrine of the Trinity."

AV Mt 28:18-20 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power{G1849 exousia} is given unto me in heaven and in earth. 19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, [even] unto the end of the world. Amen.

In the precedence of authority, Who has authority above Jesus' "All power{G1849 exousia}"/authority then ???

Is it "heretical" to reject the man made word and doctrine of "Trinity" and it's man made meanings in man's authority, in preference for Three Persons of the GODhead ??? <<< Noting Jesus never used a word such as "Trinity". But that did not stop anyone from stealing Jesus' authority{G1849 exousia}.

Are you ready for continued discussion ???

Yours in Christ, Michael

I agree with your point about judgement but please realize I'm forwarding what SDA scholars have formally conceded, i.e. that their denomination taught heresy for generations and Ellen White never wrote anything to stop it.

 

[pythons]

Col 2:13 When you were dead in your trespasses and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our trespasses, 14 having canceled the debt ascribed to us in the decrees that stood against us. He took it away, nailing it to the cross! 15 A nd having disarmed the powers and authorities, He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.

The Scripture you quoted serves to make the point I made. In fact it was one of the Scriptures I was thinking about when making that post. Are you an SDA?

 

[CrowCross]

The Scripture you quoted serves to make the point I made. In fact it was one of the Scriptures I was thinking about when making that post. Are you an SDA?

No.

My post showed that if the belief is that the doctrine of the atonement on the cross is bogus...then that belief is wrong.

 

[SDAchristian]

Prologue:
AV Jn 16:12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.
AV Ro 3:22-26 Even the righteousness of God [which is] by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: 23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; 24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: 25 Whom God hath set forth [to be] a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; 26 To declare, [I say], at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

... but please realize I'm forwarding what SDA scholars have formally conceded, i.e. that their denomination taught heresy for generations and Ellen White never wrote anything to stop it.

Man's definition of heresy is an opinion, to GOD's Omniscience.

"... Ellen White never wrote anything to stop it.", Maybe it was not 'heresy' in the absence of absolute spiritual evidence then ???

Yours in Christ, Michael

 

[pythons]

No.

My post showed that if the belief is that the doctrine of the atonement on the cross is bogus...then that belief is wrong.

My bad! & my apologies.

 

[CrowCross]

My bad! & my apologies.

no problem

 

[Common Tater]

Prologue:
AV Jn 16:12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.
AV Ro 3:22-26 Even the righteousness of God [which is] by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: 23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; 24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: 25 Whom God hath set forth [to be] a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; 26 To declare, [I say], at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

Man's definition of heresy is an opinion, to GOD's Omniscience.

"... Ellen White never wrote anything to stop it.", Maybe it was not 'heresy' in the absence of absolute spiritual evidence then ???

Yours in Christ, Michael

Are you saying that the belief that Christ was not eternal God, but rather a created being is not heresy? Because that is the position that virtually the entire leadership of the church took, and that included Ellen White's own husband.

 

[SDAchristian]

Prologue:
While I pray and study, a quick question then.

Are you saying that the belief that Christ was not eternal God, but rather a created being is not heresy? Because that is the position that virtually the entire leadership of the church took, and that included Ellen White's own husband.

What does EGW say about the matter, with a reference please ???

Yours in Christ, Michael

 

[pythons]

Prologue:
While I pray and study, a quick question then. What does EGW say about the matter, with a reference please ???

Yours in Christ, Michael

What EGW said was as bad as it can get.

Ellen White:
There is no one who can explain the mystery of the incarnation of Christ. Yet we know that He came to this earth and lived as a man among men. The man Christ Jesus was not the Lord God Almighty, yet Christ and the Father are one. The Deity did not sink under the agonizing torture of Calvary, yet it is nonetheless true that 'God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.'" (Lift Him Up, page 235, paragraph 3.)

&

Ellen White, 1888 Great Controversy 493.1
Christ the Word, the only begotten of God, was one with the eternal Father,--one in nature, in character, and in purpose,--the only being in all the universe that could enter into all the counsels and purposes of God. By Christ, the Father wrought in the creation of all heavenly beings. "By him were all things created, that are in Heaven, . . . whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers;" [COL. 1:16.] and to Christ, equally with the Father, all Heaven gave allegiance. {GC88 493.1}

There it is, God = The Father ONLY, a flesh, bone member, and part hominid God (= 1 Being).

And Christ (aka Michael the archangel - who is another BEING and allegedly THE ONLY BEING that was allowed to enter into all the counsels of God ( The hominid flesh Father). That's two Beings right there.

Observe the 'demarcation' between the two Beings (Flesh Father and Michael Christ). ONLY Flesh Father had absolute immortality and ONLY Flesh Father was absolutely Good. Michael Christ was "test driving" another Being's deity - He was, for lack of a better term LICENSED to operate this deity provided he towed the rope!

Review and Herald November 14, 1854
Again, where it is declared, that there are none good except the Father, it cannot be understood that none others are good in a relative sense; for Christ and angels, are good, yea perfect, in their respective sphere; but that the Father ALONE is supremely, or absolutely, good; and that he ALONE is immortal in an absolute sense; that he alone is self-existent; and, that, consequently, every other being, however high or low, is absolutely dependent upon him for life; for being. This idea is most emphatically expressed by our Savior himself; " For as the Father hath life in himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself." John v, 26. This would be singular language for one to use who had life in his essential nature, just as much as the Father. To meet such a view, it should read thus: For as the Father hath life in himself, so hath the Son life in himself If as Trinitarians argue, the Divine nature of the Son hath life in himself (i. e., is self existent) just the same, and in as absolute a sense, as the Father

Review and Herald November 14, 1854

Again, where it is declared, that there are none good except the Father, it cannot be understood that none others are good in a relative sense; for Christ and angels, are good, yea perfect, in their respective sphere; but that the Father alone is supremely, or absolutely, good; and that he alone is immortal in an absolute sense; that ho alone is self-existent; and, that, consequently, every other being, however high or low, is absolutely dependent upon him for life; for being. This idea is most emphatically expressed by our Saviour himself; " For as the Father hath life in himself, so hath he given to the Son to havo life in himself." John v, 26. This would be singular language for one to use who had life in his essential nature, just as much as the Father. To meet such a view, it should read thus: For as the Father hath life in himself, so hath the Son life in himself If as Trinitarians argue, the Divine nature of the Son hath life in himself (i. e., is self existent) jusl the same, and in as absolute a sense, as the Father, why should he represent himself as actually dependent upon the Father for life ? What propriety in representing the Father as conferring upon him a gift which he had possessed from all eternity ? If it be said that his human nature derived its life from the Father, I would answer, It does not thus read; 01 even if it did, 1 would still urge the impropriety of the human nature of the Son of God representing itself as being absolutely dependent upon the Father for the gift of life

​

Thus, when in Desire of Ages when Ellen White wrote that in Christ was life eternal she was saying the SAME THING that the anti-Trinitarian SDA Pioneers repeatedly said and from their perspective this was a grand fact - in Christ was the life of the Father - REAL DEITY issued by Flesh Father to Michael the archangel.

And this "Deity" was Michael's to keep - provided he didn't "screw up" (i.e. sin and loose his salvation).

Ellen White, Seventh Day Adventist Bible commentary.
Though Christ humbled Himself to become man, the Godhead was still His own. His Deity could not be lost while He stood faithful and true to His loyalty.

That's page 40 of the following URL

http://docs.adventistarchives.org/do...pdf#search=%22 true to his loyalty %22&view=fit

Even the most hard-core historical Seventh-day Adventist wouldn't dare to suggest it possible that flesh Father

 

[Common Tater]

Prologue:
While I pray and study, a quick question then. What does EGW say about the matter, with a reference please ???

Yours in Christ, Michael

"... Ellen White never wrote anything to stop it.", Maybe it was not 'heresy' in the absence of absolute spiritual evidence then ???

You're attempting to move the goal posts. You commented that maybe it was not heresy in the absence of absolute spiritual evidence.

 

[SDAchristian]

Prologue:
AV Ro 5:13-17 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. 15 But not as the offence, so also [is] the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, [which is] by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. And not as [it was] by one that sinned, [so is] the gift: for the judgment [was] by one to condemnation, but the free gift [is] of many offences unto justification. 17 For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)

"... Ellen White never wrote anything to stop it.", Maybe it was not 'heresy' in the absence of absolute spiritual evidence then ???
You're attempting to move the goal posts. You commented that maybe it was not heresy in the absence of absolute spiritual evidence.

AV Mt 22:37-38 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38 This is the first and great commandment.

Maybe we need LOVE this out with GOD's Point Of View between us then.

In your own mind, heart and soul, has GOD identified all sin against GOD, that can be called heresy, by men then ??? <<< I am exploring your understanding of who's authority is greater GOD's or a man's.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_burned_as_heretics So punishing for heresy regardless of method, should be GOD's decision in a theocracy, Right ??? It's only blasphemy, when it's not GOD's will for us to execute, Right ???

So in Conclusion: Any heresy is traceable to a GOD's authority to defined sin, Right ???

---

"You're attempting to move the goal posts.", Yes, because "the goal posts" belong in GOD's end zone, You agree ???

Yours in Christ, Michael

 

[SDAchristian]

Prologue:
I so do appreciate your ability to research and recall this information !!!

Let us explore the Omnipresence of GOD !!!

AV 1C 3:16-21 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and [that] the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? 17 If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which [temple] ye are. 3:18 Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise. 19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness. 20 And again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain. 21 Therefore let no man glory in men. For all things are yours;

If GOD is in your "the temple of God"/"body flesh", are you GOD now ???

What EGW said was as bad as it can get.

Ellen White:
There is no one who can explain the mystery of the incarnation of Christ. Yet we know that He came to this earth and lived as a man among men. The man Christ Jesus was not the Lord God Almighty, yet Christ and the Father are one. The Deity did not sink under the agonizing torture of Calvary, yet it is nonetheless true that 'God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.'" (Lift Him Up, page 235, paragraph 3.)
{Additional Emphasis by SDAchristian}

AV Jn 6:55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
AV Col 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
AV 1Jn 2:6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

So you want to split spiritual hairs doctrine over Jesus' flesh body ??? <<< Will you say Yes ???

AV Hb 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

State of the Dead issue alert: So why did GOD die in THAT flesh body then ???

Yours in Christ, Michael

 

[SDAchristian]

Prologue:
AV Mt 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

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

AV Isa 9:6-7 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. 7 Of the increase of [his] government and peace [there shall be] no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.

We need understand "Father" as Originator, and Creator(even pro-Creator of Jesus' flesh/body), to comprehend this type of GOD given diction.

AV Jn 20:17 Jesus saith unto her, 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.

Please tell me, you are not calling Jesus a liar, in your understanding and comprehension, in Jesus' words here ???

AV Hb 6:13-20 For when God made promise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he sware by himself, 14 Saying, Surely blessing I will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thee. 15 And so, after he had patiently endured, he obtained the promise. 16 For men verily swear by the greater: and an oath for confirmation [is] to them an end of all strife. 17 Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed [it] by an oath: 18 That by two immutable things, in which [it was] impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us: 19 Which [hope] we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and stedfast, and which entereth into that within the veil; 20 Whither the forerunner is for us entered, [even] Jesus, made an high priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

The precedence of Truth is: There is none higher than when GOD speaks, you agree ???

More, splitting spiritual hairs doctrine over Jesus' flesh body ...

Ellen White, 1888 Great Controversy 493.1[/COLOR]
Christ the Word, the only begotten of God, was one with the eternal Father,--one in nature, in character, and in purpose,--the only being in all the universe that could enter into all the counsels and purposes of God. By Christ, the Father wrought in the creation of all heavenly beings. "By him were all things created, that are in Heaven, . . . whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers;" [COL. 1:16.] and to Christ, equally with the Father, all Heaven gave allegiance. {GC88 493.1}
There it is, God = The Father ONLY, a flesh, bone member, and part hominid God (= 1 Being).
And Christ (aka Michael the archangel - who is another BEING and allegedly THE ONLY BEING that was allowed to enter into all the counsels of God ( The hominid flesh Father). That's two Beings right there.
Observe the 'demarcation' between the two Beings (Flesh Father and Michael Christ). ONLY Flesh Father had absolute immortality and ONLY Flesh Father was absolutely Good. Michael Christ was "test driving" another Being's deity - He was, for lack of a better term LICENSED to operate this deity provided he towed the rope!

AV Jn 1:14 And the Word was made{G1096 ginomai} 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.

You interjected "Flesh" to "Father" as Originator/Creator(or Co-Creator), that is on you !!!

Of course, maybe, if you have some direct EGW words to say so ???

---

@Formersda to notice too:
AV Mk 2:27 And he said unto them, The sabbath was made{G1096 ginomai} for man, and not man for the sabbath:

Our debates run in small circles at times over Word usage, Right ???

Yours in Christ, Michael

 

[Common Tater]

Prologue:
AV Ro 5:13-17 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. 15 But not as the offence, so also [is] the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, [which is] by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. And not as [it was] by one that sinned, [so is] the gift: for the judgment [was] by one to condemnation, but the free gift [is] of many offences unto justification. 17 For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)

AV Mt 22:37-38 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38 This is the first and great commandment.

Maybe we need LOVE this out with GOD's Point Of View between us then.

In your own mind, heart and soul, has GOD identified all sin against GOD, that can be called heresy, by men then ??? <<< I am exploring your understanding of who's authority is greater GOD's or a man's.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_burned_as_heretics So punishing for heresy regardless of method, should be GOD's decision in a theocracy, Right ??? It's only blasphemy, when it's not GOD's will for us to execute, Right ???

So in Conclusion: Any heresy is traceable to a GOD's authority to defined sin, Right ???

---

"You're attempting to move the goal posts.", Yes, because "the goal posts" belong in GOD's end zone, You agree ???

Yours in Christ, Michael

Perhaps you could answer my question. Are you saying that the belief that Christ was not eternal God, but rather a created being is not heresy?