At Issue Index
Trinity
Index   Table of
Contents   Previous
Next

The Arian or Anti-Trinitarian
Views Presented in Seventh-day Adventist Literature and the Ellen G.
White Answer

by Erwin Roy
Gane

C H A P
T E R   II

THE BELIEF OF
THE EARLIEST PIONEERS
OF THE ADVENTIST
CHURCH

Although he was not a seventh-day Sabbath
observer, William Miller is regarded as the spiritual father of the
Seventh-day Adventist Church. Adventists are proud to identify
themselves with a religious pioneer who manifested such remarkable
insight as an exponent of prophecy, and who labored so tirelessly to
warn the careless multitudes of the soon coming of Jesus. The burden
of Miller�s message was the Second Advent of Christ. The doctrine of
the nature of God was not, with him, a subject of immediate and
paramount importance.

MILLER A TRINITARIAN

In spite of the strength of the Unitarian
and Socinian movements in America in the first half of the
nineteenth century, Miller, who was regarded as distinctly
unorthodox in other respects, abided by the orthodox Trinitarian
position. Some years after the infant Seventh-day Adventist movement
had gained a firm hold on life, James White produced a work
entitled, Sketches of the Christian
Life and Public Labors of William Miller. White quotes
Miller�s statement of faith written at Low Hampton, September 5,
1822:

"I hereby acknowledge that I have
long believed it my duty� to leave, for the inspection of my
brethren, friends and children, a brief statement of my faith (and
which ought to be my practice); and I pray God to forgive me where
I go astray. I made it a subject of prayer and meditation, and
therefore, leave the following as my faith,�reserving the
privilege of correction.  (Signed) Wm. Miller

"Article Two.

"I believe in one living and true
God, and that there are three persons in the Godhead�as there is
in man, the body, soul, and spirit. And if any one will tell me
how these exist, I will tell him how the three persons of the
Triune God are connected."1

Here then is an unequivocal declaration of
Miller�s acceptance of the broad outline of Trinitarianism, with a
frank admission of the mysterious nature of the union between the
three persons on the Godhead. In the absence of evidence that he
later exercised his "privilege of correction" by an expression of
anti-Trinitarian views, we are justified in assuming that this was
Miller�s belief to the day of his death.

HIMES AND THE
CHRISTIAN CONNECTION

One of Miller�s ardent supporters in
preaching the imminent return of the Lord was Joshua V. Himes, a
well-known minister of the denomination known as the "Christian
Connection."2
In 1835, Rev, T. Newton Brown published his Encyclopedia of Religious
Knowledge, which included an article on the "Christian
Connection" written by Himes.3
The beginning of the Christian Connection is dated about 1800.
No individual is recognized as the leader or founder of the sect.
The members had come from a number of the more conservative
religious denominations such as the Calvinistic Baptists, the
Free-will and Six-principle Baptists, the Methodists and
Presbyterians. Coming as they did from such a diversity of
backgrounds, the members retained their variant opinions on
doctrinal matters. Himes points out that the early distinguishing
characteristic of the group was "universal toleration." In regard to
their attitude to the doctrine of the Trinity, Himes wrote, "At
first, they were generally Trinitarian; subsequently they have,
almost unanimously, rejected the Trinitarian doctrine as
unscriptural." 4
Then he proceeds to itemize the doctrines which are generally
accepted by this sect:

That there is one living and true God, the
Father almighty, who is unoriginated, independent, and eternal,
the Creator and Supporter of all worlds; and that this God is one
spiritual intelligence, one infinite mind, ever the same, never
varying�. That Christ is the Son of God, the promised Messiah and
Saviour of the world�5

The statement clearly states that the Father
alone is "unoriginated, independent and eternal." Christ was then
originated, dependent and brought into existence by the Father. This
statement is of course quite consistent with Himes� remark that the
Christian Connection "have, almost unanimously, rejected the
Trinitarian doctrine as unscriptural."6

It will become evident as this discussion
progresses that where such views of Christ were prevalent, the Holy
Spirit was generally divested of personality and separate existence
as a member of the Deity, being regarded as a mere influence
emanating from the Father and from Christ. This was the view held by
the Christian Connection as enunciated by Himes. Among those beliefs
which they generally accepted as Scriptural doctrines was the view
"that the Holy Spirit is the power and energy of God, that holy
influence of God by whose agency, in the use of means, the wicked
are regenerated�."7
It is very significant that Himes, one of the spiritual fathers of
the Seventh-day Adventist Church, should hold these doctrines. It is
of further significance that others of the pioneers of this Church
had been members of the Christian Connection, prior to accepting the
tenets of Seventh-day Adventism.8

BATES� VIEW
OF THE GODHEAD

Joseph Bates is justly revered by
Seventh-day Adventists for his faithful part in the successful
launching of the movement. In 1868 the Publishing Association of the
Church issued The Autobiography of
Elder Joseph Bates.9
Bates tells of his early struggles and labours. He mentions a
revival of religion in the Christian Church at Fairhaven in
1827.10
Bates, at this time, was seriously considering uniting with some
Christian group or another, and he was influenced by this revival.
Since before their marriage his wife had been a member of the
Christian Church. Bates had attended the meetings of this
organization with is wife when he was at home and had become
somewhat acquainted with their views. "They took the Scriptures for
their only rule of faith and practice, renouncing all
creeds."11
Bates� parents were well established members of the Congregational
Church and ardently hoped that he and his wife would also join them.
But there were certain doctrinal matters which prevented this. Bates
wrote, "But they embraced some points in their faith which I could
not understand. I will name only two: their mode of baptism, and
doctrine of the trinity."12

His father tried unsuccessfully to convince
Joseph Bates that in these matters of doctrine the Congregational
Church was correct. In regard to the subject of the Trinity, 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. I said to my father, "If you can convince me
that we are one in this sense, that you are my father, and I your
son, and also that I am my father, and you my son, then I can
believe in the trinity."� In a few days I was immersed and joined
the Christian Church.13

The Christian Church referred to the
Christian Connection which, as has been seen, rejected the
Trinitarian position. Later Bates became an active worker in this
organization, and still later one of the founding fathers of the
Sabbatarian Adventist movement.14

Joseph Bates� objection to the doctrine of
the Trinity evidenced an attitude which was to be reiterated
forcefully by later militant Seventh-day Adventist
anti-Trinitarians. Bates rejected Trinitarianism because it involves
the complete identification of Father and Son. Of course,
Trinitarianism does no such thing. William Miller asserted his
belief in "one living and true God," composed of "three persons." He
understood the "Triune God" to contain "three persons."15
This is the true Trinitarian understanding of the doctrine, and
since Miller wrote in 1822, and Bates objected to Trinitarianism, on
the grounds presented, in 1827, it is a justifiable assumption that
the conception which Trinitarians have today of the relations
between members of the Deity, was the conception current when Bates
wrote. Undoubtedly there were in vogue in the nineteenth century, as
there are today, extreme forms of Trinitarianism, against which the
early Adventists seriously reacted. Evidence for this will be
presented as we proceed. But this is not an adequate explanation of
the extreme anti-Trinitarianism of the early Adventists. Bates
assumes that, pushed to its logical conclusion, Trinitarianism
becomes Monarchianism, I which the Father is the Son and vice-versa.
Then he objects to this on the ground that one person cannot
possible be another. But he is not objecting to Trinitarianism, as
he imagined. He is objecting to his interpretation of what
Trinitarians teach. He is objecting to
Monarchianism.

Bates wrote his autobiography in 1868. There
is no indication in his narration of the events of his past life
that his view had changed in the interval since 1827. It is,
therefore, reasonable to conclude that, after becoming a Seventh-day
Adventist, Bates retained his anti-Trinitarian
belief.

JAMES WHITE
AN ENIGMA

Prior to becoming an Adventist, James White
was an ordained minister of the Christian Connection.16
He wrote his "Life Incidents" in 1868 for the Review and Herald.17
He says, :At the age of fifteen I was baptized and untied with the
Christian Church."18
Later he was ordained and carried on revival work for this
organization. In 1842 he heard William Miller preach and became an
enthusiastic adherent of the Second Advent faith.19

Since White came out of the Christian
Connection, one would expect to discover that he was, at least early
in his career, opposed to Trinitarianism. But the evidence is not
readily forthcoming, and what is available is inconclusive. It is
true that James White was editor of the Signs of the Times in 1879. On May
22 of that year there appeared an article strongly opposing
Trinitarianism written by A. J. Dennis.20
It would be easy to conclude that White concurred with the position
taken in the article, since he was editor and there is no indication
that he, as editor, might have held another view. But James White
was a Christian gentleman, and possibly he published a view with
which he could not agree simply as a gesture of Christian courtesy.
He did not agree with certain workers on some other issues, but
remained silent, even when their views were published, simply for
the sake of avoiding a serious doctrinal cleavage.

On the other hand, there are certain
indications which point in the direction of the view that James
White was not a Trinitarian. In 1877 he wrote a tract entitled Christ in the Old Testament in
which the following statement appears:

The work of emancipating, instructing and
leading the Hebrews was given to the One who is called an angel. Ex.
13:21; 14:19, 24; 23:20-23; 32:34; Num. 20:16; Isa. 63:9. And this
angel Paul calls "that spiritual Rock that followed them," and he
affirms, "That Rock was Christ." 1 Cor. 10:4.

The eternal Father is never called an angel
in the Scriptures, while what angels have done is frequently
ascribed to the Lord, as they are his messengers and agents to
accomplish his work.21

We have here a suggested distinction between
"the eternal Father" and Christ. Christ is called an angel in
Scripture, the Father is not. Christ is referred to as "the Lord" to
distinguish Him from "the eternal Father." It would be possible to
read between the lines and assume that James white did not regard
Christ, the Lord, as eternal in the same sense as the Father; that,
in fact, Christ was to some extent inferior in rank to the Father,
because he is called an angel and the Father is not. But, in the
absence of corroborating evidence, this would not be a fair
conclusion.

There is in the James White Memorial Library
at Andrews University a thesis which states that A. T. Robinson
declared in an interview that James White was not a
Trinitatian.22
Robinson had been acquainted with the Whites. This type of evidence
based on the testimony of an old man is hardly to be regarded as
entirely satisfactory. But it is nonetheless an additional finger
pointing in the same direction as other fragmentary pieces of
evidence. At all events, White did not allow his view, whatever it
was, to come to the fore, at a time when a major Trinitarian
controversy might have split the infant Adventist
Church.

ENDNOTES

1James White, Sketches of the Christian Life and Public
Labors of William Miller (Battle Creek, Mich.: Steam Press of
the Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association, 1875), p. 59.

2Joshua V. Himes,
"Christian Connection," Encyclopedia of Religious
Knowledge, ed. T. Newton Brown (Boston: Shattuck & Co.,
1835), 362.

3Ibid., pp. 362, 363.

4Ibid., p. 363

5Ibid.

6Ibid.

7Ibid.

8Seventh-day Adventists Answer Questions
on Doctrine (Washington, D. C.: Review and Herald Publishing
Association, 1957), p. 47.

9Joseph Bates, The Autobiography of Elder Joseph Bates
(Battle Creek, Mich.: Steam Press of the Seventh-day
Adventist Publishing Association, 1868).

10Ibid., p. 204.

11Ibid.

12Ibid.

13Ibid., p. 205

14L. E. Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers
(Washington, D. C.: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1954),
IV, 954.

15James White, Sketches of the Christian Life and Public
Labors of William Miller (Battle Creek, Mich.: Steam Press of
the Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association, 1875), p. 59.

16James White, "Life
Incidents," The Advent Review and
Sabbath Herald, XXXI (February 18, 1868), 147. (Hereafter
referred to as Review and
Herald).

17Ibid., p. 146.

18Ibid. The Christian Church
referred to is generally understood to have been the Christian
Connection. See L.E. Froom, The
Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers (Washington, D. C.: Review and
Herald Publishing Association, 1954), IV 1057.

19James White, "Life
Incidents," Review and
Herald, XXXI (February 18, 1868), 147.

20A. J. Dennis, "One
God," The Signs of the
Times, V (May 22, 1879), 162.

21James White, Christ in the Old Testament
(Oakland, Cal.: Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1877), p.
11.

22C. M. Taylor, "The
Personality of the Holy Spirit," (unpublished Master�s dissertation,
James White Memorial Library, Andrews University, 1953), pp. 7,
8.

At Issue Index
Trinity
Index   Table of
Contents   Previous
Next