Might I be Forgiven?

I have had several people email me in a state of shock that I would abandon a belief in a three being Trinity; three wonderful friends who live in utopian love and harmony. It sounds nice, and yet there are many things that “sound nice” that are not Biblical.

I just want to list out a few inspired statements and tell you what I understand and then ask you if I might be forgiven for thinking the way I do on these subjects.

1 Cor 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.

Might I be forgiven for reading this Bible passage and thinking that Paul was referring to the Father as the One God from whom all things come from and that Jesus is the one Lord by or through all things come? Is that completely impossible to read from the above?

Heb 1:1-4 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.

Might I be forgiven for thinking that the above passage intends to tell me that Jesus was appointed by the Father to be heir or inheritor of all things? Might I be forgiven for thinking that Jesus did actually inherit all things and this is why He has a more excellent name than the angels? Might I be forgiven for thinking that an express image means total replica, carbon copy, just like the original? Is this so horribly inconceivable to read this in this text?

John 5:25-30 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live. For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man. Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation. 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.

Might I be forgiven for thinking that Jesus means that He does nothing by Himself but rather that He executes the authority given to Him by His Father, that He calls people to life by the Life that He inherited and was given by His Father? Is this so impossible to read from this passage?

Mat 3:17  And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

Joh 3:16  For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Matt 16:15-16 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

Might I be forgiven for thinking that God the Father actually meant that Jesus was His Son that He loved and was well pleased with? Is it such a crime to believe this? Should I blame the English teachers I had in school for teaching me a bad way of reading English? Am I completely missing something here?

Might I be forgiven for thinking that the word “gave” actually means “gave” and that the Father had the right to give His Son? Regardless of what you think begotten means, doesn’t “Son” still mean “Son”; doesn’t a Son receive something from a Father, an inheritance? What am I missing? Do I need glasses? I feel like I am sitting in a class of 500 people and the teach holds up his hand and says how many fingers and everyone screams three! But I can only see two! What am I missing here?

Might I be forgiven for thinking that when Jesus asked the disciples to tell Him who they thought He was that when Peter said “You are the Son of the Living God” and Jesus blessed him that Peter actually said the truth!

“Satan was once an honored angel in heaven, next to Christ. His countenance, like those of the other angels, was mild and expressive of happiness. His forehead was high and broad, showing great intelligence. His form was perfect; his bearing noble and majestic. But when God said to His Son, "Let us make man in our image," Satan was jealous of Jesus. He wished to be consulted concerning the formation of man, and because he was not, he was filled with envy, jealousy, and hatred. He desired to receive the highest honors in heaven next to God.” EW 145

Might I be forgiven for reading this passage and thinking that the Father spoke to His Son and made man and women in the image of the Father and the Son? Might I be forgiven for thinking that Satan was jealous that Jesus was included and that he was excluded from this process? Could I be forgiven for thinking that Satan was not happy about there being two and he actually wanted to be a third being included in this relationship?

“Some of the angels sympathized with Satan in his rebellion, and others strongly contended for the honor and wisdom of God in giving authority to His Son. There was contention among the angels. Satan and his sympathizers were striving to reform the government of God. They wished to look into His unsearchable wisdom, and ascertain His purpose in exalting Jesus and endowing Him with such unlimited power and command.” EW 145

Might I be forgiven for thinking that God actually gave authority to His Son? The loyal angels seemed to think that God actually gave Jesus authority were they deceived into thinking this? Were the evil angels actually trying to understand why God had exalted Jesus and endowing Him with unlimited power? Couldn’t God just tell them they misunderstood and this was just an illustration for the plan of salvation and that Jesus was not actually endowed with authority but that they were just role playing this to meet the rebellion of Satan? (If that makes sense to you, then I need help!)

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. GC 493

Might I be forgiven for reading this and believing that Jesus was the Only Begotten of God; for believing that He is the only Being in the universe (I understand universe to mean everywhere possible) that could enter into the counsels of God? Why must I be damned for thinking this? Am I really reading the English wrong? I am struggling to understand how “only” does not mean “only” and “begotten” does not mean” begotten” and “Son” does not mean” Son” and “Father” does not mean” Father”!!! What kind of sick dream is this?

“In Christ is life, original, unborrowed, underived. "He that hath the Son hath life." 1 John 5:12. The divinity of Christ is the believer's assurance of eternal life. "He that believeth in Me," said Jesus, "though he were dead, yet shall he live: and whosoever liveth and believeth in Me shall never die. Believest thou this?" Christ here looks forward to the time of His second coming. Then the righteous dead shall be raised incorruptible, and the living righteous shall be translated to heaven without seeing death. The miracle which Christ was about to perform, in raising Lazarus from the dead, would represent the resurrection of all the righteous dead. By His word and His works He declared Himself the Author of the resurrection. He who Himself was soon to die upon the cross stood with the keys of death, a conqueror of the grave, and asserted His right and power to give eternal life.” DA 530

Might I be forgiven for thinking that when it says IN HIM is life original that in conjunction with John 5:26 (which also speaks about the resurrection from the dead) that the Life that Jesus inherited was original, unborrowed and underived? Might I be forgiven for thinking that when it says that Jesus could assert His right to give eternal life that it actually means assert the authority given to Him by His Father?

Would you forgive me for thinking these things from reading these passages?