The History of the Trinity Debate Among Adventists..

[reddogs]

The Doctrine of the Trinity among Adventists

Introduction

While the Seventh-day Adventist Church today espouses the doctrine of the Trinity, this has not always been so. The evidence from a study of Adventist history indicates that from the earliest years of our church to the 1890s a whole stream of writers took an Arian or semi-Arian position. The view of Christ presented in those years by Adventist authors was that there was a time when Christ did not exist, that His divinity is a delegated divinity, and that therefore He is inferior to the Father. In regard to the Holy Spirit, their position was that He was not the third member of the Godhead but the power of God.

A number of Adventist authors today, who are opposed to the doctrine of the Trinity, are trying to resurrect the views of our early pioneers on these issues. They are urging the church to forsake the “Roman doctrine” of the Trinity and to accept again the semi-Arian position of our pioneers.

Definition and Terms
1. Arianism
A teaching which arose in the fourth century AD in Alexandria. Named after its most prominent representative Arius, a presbyter of Alexandria. It denied that Jesus Christ was of the same substance (Gk. homoousios) as the Father and reduced the Son to the rank of a creature, though pre-existent before the world. Arianism was condemned at the Council of Nicaea (AD 325).

2. Semi-Arianism
Semi-Arians attempted a compromise between the orthodox and Arian position on the nature of Christ. They rejected the Arian view that Christ was created and had a different nature from God (anomoios - dissimilar), but neither did they accept the Nicene Creed which stated that Christ was “of one substance (homoousios) with the Father.” Semi-Arians taught that Christ was similar (homoios) to the Father, or of like substance (homoiousios), but still subordinate.

3. Trinitarianism
Trinitarianism is the orthodox belief that there is but one living and true God. Nevertheless this one God is a unity of three persons, who are of one substance, power and eternity, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

4. Anti-Trinitarians
Anti-Trinitarians are people who oppose the doctrine of the Trinity for various reasons. They may
be Arians, semi-Arians, or hold other views that deny the Trinity.

The Early Pioneers were Arian and anti-Trinitarian

Two of the principal founders of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, Joseph Bates and James White, were originally members of the Christian Connection Church which rejected the doctrine of the Trinity. James White was an ordained minister of that church. When he and Bates joined the Advent Movement, they continued to hold the anti-Trinitarian view which they had learned in the Christian Connection Church.

In 1855 J. White published an article in the Review and Herald entitled “Preach the Word.” In dealing with Paul’s statement in 2 Timothy 4:4 “they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables” he wrote, “Here we might mention the Trinity, which does away the personality of God and His Son Jesus Christ, ....” 1 Joseph Bates wrote in 1868, “Respecting the trinity, I concluded that it was impossible for me to believe that the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father, was also the Almighty God, the Father, one and the same being.”2

Other prominent Adventists who spoke out against the Trinity were J. N. Loughborough, R. F. Cottrell, J. N. Andrews, and Uriah Smith:

1 Review and Herald, Dec. 11, 1855, p. 85.
2 Autobiography (Battle Creek, 1868), 205.

THE DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY. . .
J. N. Loughborough In response to the question “What serious objection is there to the doctrine of the Trinity?”

Loughborough wrote, “There are many objections which we might urge, but on account of our limited space we shall reduce them to the three following:

1. It is contrary to common sense. 2. It is contrary to scripture [sic]. Its origin is Pagan and fabulous.”3

R. F. Cottrell
In an article on the Trinity, Cottrell wrote, To hold the doctrine of the trinity is not so much an evidence of evil intention as of intoxication from that wine of which all the nations have drunk. The fact that this was one of the leading doctrines, if not the very chief, upon which the bishop of Rome was exalted to the popedom, does not say much in its favor.4

J. N. Andrews
In an article concerning the identity of Melchizedek in Hebrews 7:3, Andrews argued that the words “having neither beginning of days” cannot be taken literally since every being in the universe except God the Father has a beginning. It is in this context that he wrote, “And as to the Son of God, he would be excluded also, for he had God for his Father, and did, at some point in the eternity of the past, have a beginning of days.”5

Uriah Smith
In the 1865 edition of the book Thoughts, Critical and Practical, on the Book of Revelation, Smith called Christ “the first created being.”6 However, by the time the 1881 edition was published he had modified his view. Concerning the phrase “the Beginning of the creation of God” in Revelation 3:14 he wrote, “Some understand by this language that Christ was the first created being ... But the language does not necessarily imply that he was created ... he himself came into existence in a different manner, as he is called ‘the only begotten’ of the Father.”7

Our pioneers clearly held Arian or Semi-Arian views in regard to the person of Christ. They understood “firstborn over all creation” (Col 1:15) and “only begotten Son” (John 3:16) in a literal sense. The Father, therefore, was first and superior, and the Son, who had a beginning sometime in eternity, was subordinate to the Father. A corollary of this view was the belief that the Holy Spirit is an influence or the power of God, but not a person.

3 Review and Herald, Nov. 5, 1861.
4 Ibid., July 6, 1869.
5 Ibid., Sept. 7, 1869.
6 Thoughts, Critical and Practical, on the Book of Revelation (Battle Creek, 1865), 59.
7 Ibid., 74. Smith, however, never abandoned his semi-Arian views. In 1898, five years before his death he published the book Looking Unto
Jesus (Review and Herald, 1898). In the chapter on “Christ as Creator,” he wrote, “With the Son, the evolution of deity, as deity, ceased.
All else, of things animate or inanimate, has come in by the creation of the Father and the Son ...” (page, 13).






http://www.adventistbiblicalresearch.org/documents/trinitydoc among sda.pdf

 

[reddogs]

The Position of Ellen White
During the early decades of our church Ellen White made statements which could be interpreted as anti-Trinitarian. She at times referred to the Holy Spirit as “it,”8 and in the context of her description of the fall of Satan, she wrote, A special light beamed in his [Satan’s] countenance, and shone around him brighter and more beautiful than around the other angels; yet Jesus, God’s dear Son, had the pre-eminence over all the angelic host. He was one with the Father before the angels were created. Satan was envious of Christ, and gradually assumed command which devolved on Christ alone.

The great Creator assembled the heavenly host, that he might in the presence of all the angels confer special honor upon his Son.... The Father then made known that it was ordained by himself that Christ, his Son, should be equal with himself; so that wherever was the presence of his Son, it was his own presence.... His Son would carry out His will and His purposes, but would do nothing of himself alone.9

This seems to imply that after the angels were created, they did not know or recognize that Christ was equal with the Father and it took a special “heavenly council” to inform them of this.

8 Testimonies to the Church, 1:124; 1888 Material, 1249; Pamphlet 154, 4; Youth Instructor, 8-1-1895.
9 Spirit of Prophecy, 1:17, 18 (emphasis supplied).

On the other hand, if Christ’s equality was a “special honor” which was conferred upon him, the implication is that he was not equal to the Father before that time.10 In the book Patriarchs and Prophets (1890) she wrote, “He [Satan] was beloved and reverenced by the heavenly host, angels delighted to execute his commands, and he was clothed with wisdom and glory above them. Yet the Son of God was exalted above him, as one in power and authority with the Father.”11 Two paragraphs further on she explains, There had been no change in the position or authority of Christ. Lucifer’s envy and misrepresentation and his claims to equality with Christ had made necessary a statement of the true position of the Son of God; but this had been the same from the beginning. Many of the angels were, however, blinded by Lucifer’s deceptions.12

Nevertheless, these kind of statements are used today to support to the semi-Arian position that some Adventists have recently begun to advocate. Could it be that these passages express Ellen White’s understanding of Christ’s position in heaven at that time? And that as time progressed she received more light which eventually led to her very clear Trinitarian statements in the late 1890s?13 At any rate, we should not forget that in contrast to the two or three statements of this kind, there are a number of passages where she emphasizes that Christ was equal with the Father from the beginning, 14 and that he was God essentially and in the highest sense.15

As is the case with ambiguous texts in Scripture, we need to clarify ambiguous passages in Ellen
White with clear statements on the topic. As we shall see below, during the 1890s several statements came from the pen of Ellen White which clearly support the Trinitarian concept of God.

There were also changes in the understanding of the Godhead in the writings of other Adventist authors as the nineteenth century progressed, e.g., by about 1880 the idea of Christ as a created being faded away and the concept of Christ as the “begotten” Son of God, became the standard position. The word “begotten” was taken literally which meant that Christ at some point in eternity
proceeded from the Father, and was therefore subordinate to Him.

A Time of Transition
The first positive reference to the Trinity in Adventist literature appeared in the Bible Students’ Library series in 1892. The Bible Students’ Library was “a series of pamphlets, designed for the public, containing brief and pointed essays on Bible doctrines, the fulfillment of prophecy, and other aspects of SDA teachings.”16 Pamphlet number 90 was entitled “The Bible Doctrine of the Trinity.” What is significant is the fact that the author, Samuel Spear, was not an Adventist. The pamphlet was a reprint of an article from the New York Independent of November 14,1889.17

While teaching the doctrine of “one God subsisting and acting in three persons.”18 Spear insists on the eternal subordination of the Son to the Father. “The subordination of Christ, as revealed in the Bible” he says, “is not adequately explained by referring it simply to His human nature... His subordination extends to His divine as well as His human nature.”19 Although this pamphlet was certainly an improvement on previous positions it still fell short of the true picture of the Trinity. Nevertheless, the fact that it was printed by Pacific Press indicates that the concept of the Trinity was beginning to be accepted by the church. The breakthrough came with the publication of Ellen White’s article “Christ the Life-giver” in Signs of the Times in 1897,20 and the book The Desire of Ages in 1898. In “Christ the Life-giver” after quoting John 10:18 “No one takes it [life] from Me, but I lay it down of Myself,” she says, “In Him was life, original, unborrowed, underived.”21 In Desire of Ages in the chapter “The Light of Life” she quotes Jesus’ answer to the Jews in John 8:58 “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.” Then she comments, Silence fell upon the vast assembly. The name of God, given to Moses to express the idea of the eternal presence, had been claimed as His own by this Galilean Rabbi. He announced Himself to be the self-existent One, He who had been promised to Israel, “whose goings forth have been from of old, from the days of eternity.” Micah 5:2 margin.

16 Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia, s.v. “Bible Students’ Library.”
17 This pamphlet is reproduced in M. L. Andreasen, The Book of Hebrews (Review and Herald, 1948), 115-124.
18 Samuel Spear, “The Bible Doctrine of the Trinity,” New York Independent (November 14,1889), 9.
19 Ibid., 7.
20 Signs of the Times, April 8, 1897.
21 Quoted in Selected Messages, 1:296.

A few pages further in the book, in the chapter “Lazarus, Come Forth” she repeats her statement from 1897, “In Christ is life, original, unborrowed, underived.”23 These statements clearly describe Christ as God in the highest sense. He is not derived from the Father as most Adventists up to that time believed, nor has divinity been bestowed upon him. He is the self-existent One, equal to the Father in every respect. In fact Ellen White had said that much already in 1897, “He was equal with God, infinite and omnipotent ... He is the eternal selfexisting Son.”24

In spite of these clear statements from the pen of Ellen White, it took many years before this truth was accepted by the church at large. Not only did Uriah Smith, editor of the Review and Herald, believe until his death in 1903 that Christ had a beginning, but during the first decades of this century there were many who held on to the view that in some way Christ came forth from the Father, i.e., he had a beginning, and was therefore inferior to Him.

During the 1919 Bible Conference, for example, Elder W. W. Prescott made a presentation on “The Person of Christ.” In the ensuing discussion the question of the Trinity was raised. L. L. Caviness voiced his concern and said, I cannot believe that the two persons of the Godhead are equal, the Father and the Son, — that one is the Father and the other the Son, and that they might be just as well the other way round.... In praying he [Christ] said it was his wish that the disciples might see the glory which he had with the Father, and which the Father had given him. It was not something he had all through eternity, but the Father had some time given to him the glory of God. He is divine, but he is the divine Son. I cannot explain further than that, but I cannot believe the so called Trinitarian doctrine of the three persons always existing. 25

Elder Prescott then raised the question, “Can we believe in the Deity of Christ without believing in the eternity of Christ?”26 Some of those present said, “yes.” W. T. Knox suggested that Christ was the eternal Son in the same sense that Levi was in the loins of Abraham. He said, “There came a time — in a way we cannot comprehend nor the time that we cannot comprehend, when by God’s mysterious operation the Son sprung from the bosom of his Father and had a separate existence .... “27

This discussion indicates that twenty years after Ellen White’s clear statement on the eternal divinity of Christ and his absolute equality with the Father, many in the church still held on to the idea that Christ, although divine, had a beginning.

In 1930 church administrators in Africa requested that the General Conference include a statement in the Yearbook of what Seventh-day Adventists believe. “Such a statement,” they said, “would help government officials and others to a better understanding of our work.”28

A committee of four (M. E. Kern, E. R. Palmer, C. H. Watson, F. M. Wilcox) was appointed to draft such a statement. They produced a 22 point statement which in 1931 was printed in the Adventist Yearbook. Fundamental Beliefs three and four stated:

That the Godhead, or Trinity, consists of the Eternal Father, a personal, spiritual Being, omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, infinite in wisdom and love; the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Eternal Father, through whom all things were created and through whom the salvation of the redeemed hosts will be accomplished; the Holy Spirit, the third person of the Godhead, the great regenerating power in the work of redemption. Matt. 28:19.

That Jesus Christ is very God, being of the same nature and essence as the Eternal Father. While retaining His divine nature He took upon Himself the nature of the human family, lived on the earth as a man, exemplified in His life as our Example the principles of righteousness, attested His relationship to God by many mighty miracles, died for our sins on the cross, was raised from the dead, and ascended to the Father where He ever lives to make intercession for us. John 1:1, 14; Heb. 2:9-18; 8:1,2; 4:14-16; 7:25.29

These statements fully expressed the biblical doctrine of the Trinity. Christ is described as “very God,” self-existent and eternal, and the Holy Spirit is identified as the third person of the Godhead.

...Ellen White in 1897 and 1898 taught that in Christ “was life, original, unborrowed, underived.”43 This can only be true if he was God in the highest sense and did not derive his existence from the Father. In regard to the Holy Spirit she told the students at Avondale College in 1899, “We need to realize that the Holy Spirit, who is as much a person as God is a person, is walking through these grounds.”44

In the context of the Kellogg crisis, Ellen White in 1905 wrote a warning to our workers connected with the medical work in which she unambiguously endorsed the Trinity doctrine. The Father is all the fullness of the Godhead bodily, and is invisible to mortal sight. The Son is all the fullness of the Godhead manifest.... The Comforter that Christ promised to send after He ascended to heaven, is the Spirit in all the fullness of the Godhead, making manifest the power of divine grace to all who receive and believe in Christ as a personal Savior. There are three living persons of the heavenly trio; in the name of these three great powers — the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit — those 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.45

Only someone who believed the Trinity doctrine would speak of “three living persons in the heavenly trio.” Anti-Trinitarians would not use such language. Furthermore, her bold statements on the Trinity took many by surprise. M. L. Andreasen recounts, “I remember how astonished we were when Desire of Ages was first published, for it contained some things that we believed were unbelievable; among other things the doctrine of the trinity which was not generally accepted by Adventists then.”46

During 1909 Andreasen spent three months at Elmshaven where he was able to look at her handwritten manuscripts. He wrote, In her own handwriting I saw the statements which I was sure she had not written — could not have written. Especially was I struck with the now familiar quotation in Desire of Ages, page 530: “In Christ is life, original, unborrowed, underived.” This statement at that time was revolutionary and compelled a complete revision of my former view — and that of the denomination — on the deity of Christ.47

This clearly took place long before Ellen White’s death. Thus, the charge that only after Ellen G. White’s death was the Trinity doctrine introduced into the church cannot be sustained.
.....


10 A similar statement is found as late as 1904. At that time she wrote, “God is the Father of Christ; Christ is the Son of God. To Christ had been
given an exalted position. He has been made equal with the Father. All the counsels of God are opened to His Son” (Testimonies to the
Church, 8:268). This statement appears immediately following a quote from Hebrews 1:1-5, where reference is made to the fact that
Christ after his ascension is “appointed heir of all things” and is “being made so much better than the angels.” Her statement in this
context can be seen as an elaboration of the text in Hebrews which refers to Christ after his ascension.
11 Patriarchs and Prophets, 37.
12 Ibid, 38.
13 Another case of increasing light leading to a clearer understanding are her statements on the eating of pork. In 1858 she wrote, “If God requires
His people to abstain from Swine’s flesh, He will convict them on the matter” (1T 207). At that time most Adventists ate pork. After
receiving more light on the subject, she wrote in 1868, “You know that the use of Swine’s flesh is contrary to His express command, given
not because He wished to especially show His authority, but because it would be injurious to those who should eat it.” (CD 392).
14 Fundamentals of Education, 536; Counsels To Parents, Teachers, and Students, 13; Letter 64, 1909 (Mind, Character, and Personality,
1:352).
15 Selected Messages, 1:247.
20 Signs of the Times, April 8, 1897.
21 Quoted in Selected Messages, 1:296.
22 The Desire of Ages, 469-470.
23 Ibid., 530.
24 Manuscript 101, 1897; Manuscript Release, 12:395.
25 1919 Bible Conference Transcripts, July 6, 1919, 57.
26 Ibid., 62.
27 Ibid., 64.

 

[reddogs]

Summary
The early Adventist pioneers were anti- Trinitarians. In the late 1890s Ellen White published articles and books in which she made strong statements supporting the Trinity concept, although she never used the word “Trinity.” Because many in the church remained opposed to it, more than three decades would go by before the church at large accepted the doctrine. In 1931 the Adventist Yearbook contained a statement of twenty-two fundamental beliefs, one of which was the Trinity.

The 1980 Dallas statement of Fundamental Beliefs again reiterates that “there is one God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, a unity of three co-eternal Persons.”57

Modern Seventh-day Adventist anti-Trinitarians seek to recover the heritage of our pioneers in regard to the Trinity. They believe that only after Ellen White’s death did the doctrine of the Trinity enter the church, and that her books have been manipulated and changed. As we have seen the evidence does not support these charges.

While the Trinity is a divine mystery and no mortal man will ever be able to understand it fully, the
Scriptural evidence clearly indicates the equality
BLESSINGS IN THE LORD!!!

David M. Curtis
The Loud Cry Ministries