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   XIII

ELLEN G. WHITE A TRINITARIAN MONOTHEIST

The final chapters of this thesis are devoted to a relatively
brief discussion of the position of Ellen G. White in regard to the
nature of God. The present writer has found no evidence that Ellen
G. White ever wrote or declared herself orally in favor of the Arian
position. On the contrary all the evidence which will be presented
here is of a distinctly Trinitarian nature. As will become apparent,
by far the greatest number of the E. G. White statements on the
subject were made in the latter decades of the nineteenth century
and the early years of this century. It has been demonstrated that
there was an evolution of thought among Adventists generally on the
nature of God. This took the form of gradual repudiation of Arianism
and acceptance of Trinitarianism. But Ellen G. White�s writings do
not reveal this type of thought evolution. The profound statements
of her later period do not contradict anything she wrote in the
earlier period. Instead they reveal a growing awareness of the
deeper mysteries of the Godhead.

Certain of Ellen G. White�s statement, which clearly contradicted
the positions of her Adventist contemporaries, were written prior to
1898. Evidently the significance of these statements was not
immediately appreciated, as is evidenced by the continued
presentation of contrary views in denominational periodicals and
books. Ellen G. White�s statements on the nature of God became more
abundant, more insistent and increasingly unequivocal as the
nineteenth century drew to a close.

It is the purpose of the present writer to present in this and
the following two chapters Ellen G. White�s views on the nature of
the Godhead; the nature of Christ on relation to the Father before,
during, and after the incarnation; and the nature of the Holy Spirit
in relation to the Father and the Son.

THE MYSTERY OF THE GODHEAD

Some of Ellen G. White�s strongest warnings were given in regard
to the danger of presumptuously attempting to fathom the mysteries
of the Deity. She wrote:

Publish the truth, do not publish error. Do not try to explain
in regard to the personality of God. You cannot give any further
explanation than the Bible has given. Human theories regarding Him
are good for nothing. Do not soil your minds by studying
misleading theories of the enemy.1

On the other hand, she indicated that there are certain truths on
the nature of God revealed in the Bible which are available to those
who prayerfully seek to understand them:

The revelation of Himself that God has given in His Word is for
our study. This we may seek to understand. But beyond this we are
not to penetrate. The highest intellect may tax itself until it is
wearied out on conjectures regarding the nature of God, but the
effort will be fruitless. This problem has not been given us to
solve. No human mind can comprehend God. None are to indulge in
speculation regarding His nature. Here silence is eloquence. The
Omniscient One is above discussion.2

It must, therefore, be in a spirit of humble caution that we
attempt to present a little of what has been revealed on this
mysterious subject.

ONE GOD

Ellen G. White was manifestly a monotheist. There is no
suggestion anywhere in her writings that there are three Gods. The
complete oneness between the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are
emphasized in many statements. This unity is likened to that between
Christ and his disciples, and John chapter 17 is quoted as evidence
of the validity of the analogy.3
But the analogy is a partial and imperfect one. The disciples were
not divine; Christ was. The relationship between them and Christ is
therefore only in certain respects similar to that between the
Father and the Son. If the relationship between Christ and His
disciples were in all respects similar to that between the Father
and the Son there would be no mystery involved in Christ�s
relationship to the Father. But here is something which is said to
be "infinitely mysterious:"4

There are light and glory in the truth that Christ was One with
the Father before the foundation of the world was laid. This is
the light shining in a dark place, making it resplendent with
divine, original glory. This truth, infinitely mysterious in
itself, explains other mysterious and otherwise unexplainable
truths, while it is enshrined in light unapproachable and
incomprehensible.5

Thus the oneness between the Father and the Son is declared to be
a mysterious union not yet explained to mortals. The relationship
between Christ and the Father presents no real problems to the
tritheist. To him there are three Gods who are united in purpose and
identical in character and attributes, but nonetheless just as
distinct as was Christ from His disciples. What is there infinitely
mysterious about this? Here is just another of man�s attempts to
apprehend the "light unapproachable and incomprehensible." It is not
difficult to understand why the Adventist Arians repudiated this
position. But the answer to it, as will be demonstrated,  is
not to be found in the subordination of the Son to the Father or the
conception of a time when the Father alone existed.

Ellen G. White speaks of the Father and the Son as being of "one
substance."6

With what firmness and power he uttered these words. The Jews
has never before heard such words from human lips, and a
converting influence attended them; for it seemed that divinity
flashed through humanity as Jesus said, "I and my Father are one."
The words of Christ were full of deep meaning as he put forth the
claim that he and the Father were of one substance, possessing the
same attributes. The Jews understood his meaning, there was no
reason why they should misunderstand, and they took up stones to
stone him.7

The tritheist, who limits the oneness between Christ and the
Father to that between Christ and His disciples, is now obliged to
explain in what sense it might be true that Christ and His disciples
are "of one substance, possessing the same attributes."8
Is there any evidence in the Bible or the writings of Ellen G. White
to suggest that the believer is in possession now, or will be at
some time in the future, of the "substance" of God? The present
writer has discovered none.

On the other hand the Adventist Arian is faced with the
difficulty that the supreme God includes Christ. The statement says
that the Jews understood His meaning. And they understood Him on
other occasions when He claimed complete union with the Father. For
instance Jesus claimed to be the "I am."

With solemn dignity Jesus answered, "Verily, verily I say unto
you, before Abraham was I AM."

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 had 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."9

Then Christ as the "I am" was the "self-existent One." But is not
the Father the self-existent One? Of course. Then is not the Arian
right in responding that such a doctrine postulates the existence of
two Gods?10
Ellen G. White answers this question by stating quite unequivocally
that the "I AM" is One. Commenting on Ezekiel 1:4, 26; 10:8 she
says:

Heavenly beings, sustained and guided by the hand beneath the
wings of the cherubim, were impelling the wheels; above them, upon
the sapphire throne was the Eternal One; and round about the
throne a rainbow, the emblem of divine mercy.

The history which the great I AM has marked out in His word,
uniting link after link in the prophetic chain, from eternity in
the past to eternity in the future, tells us where we are to-day
in the procession of the ages, and what may be expected in time to
come.11

The theme of the whole passage is divine intervention and control
in the affairs of men. The "Eternal One" is clearly the "I AM." But
because of Christ�s claim the I AM includes both Christ and the
Father. The One Upon the throne is the One God. Ezekiel and Ellen
White were monotheists. But here is one God including both Christ
and the Father. Here is a mysterious oneness which cannot be
explained in Arian or tritheistic terms.

The God who revealed Himself to Moses was the "Eternal One." This
One was "the Deity."

To the transgressor it is a fearful thing to fall into the
hands of the living God; but Moses stood alone in the presence of
the Eternal One, and He was not afraid; for his soul was in
harmony with the will of his Maker. . . .

The Deity proclaimed Himself, "the Lord, the Lord god, merciful
and gracious�."12

Elsewhere it is clearly stated that Christ was with the Father at
Sinai:

When they came to Sinai, He took occasion to refresh their
minds in regard to His requirements. Christ and the Father,
standing side by side upon the mount, with solemn majesty
proclaimed the Ten Commandments�.13

Therefore the "Eternal One" who revealed Himself at Sinai
included both the Father and Christ. Moses communed with one God,
the Deity. Both Christ and the Father are included in that term "the
Eternal One:"

It was Christ who had spoken to Israel through Moses. If they
had listened to the divine voice that spoke through their great
leader, they would have recognized it in the teachings of Christ.
Had they believed Moses, they would have believed Him of whom
Moses wrote.

Jesus knew that the priests and rabbis were determined to take
his life; yet He clearly explained to them His unity with the
Father, and His relation to the world.14

The Jews would have understood something of the unity between
Christ and the Father if they had understood that it was Christ who
spoke to Israel at Sinai.

As quoted above, Ellen G. White emphasized that "the Deity
proclaimed Himself" to Moses.15
Of course the Deity is the Godhead, and Mrs. White explained
elsewhere what she understood by the Godhead.

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 manifested. The Word
of God declares Him to be "the express image of His Person." "God
so loved the world, that He gave His only-begotten Son, that
whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting
life." Here is shown the personality of the Father.

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 Saviour. 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 three powers will co-operate
with the obedient subjects of Heaven in their effort to love the
new life in Christ.16

It might be asked of the Arian how Christ could be inferior to
the Father and yet be "all the fullness of the Godhead manifested."
Clearly, in this passage, the Holy Spirit is God, for the Godhead
consists of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. This passage also provides
a dilemma for the Adventist tritheist for if the Father, Christ, and
the Holy Spirit are each "the fullness of the godhead," then they
are in some mysterious sense in one another. There is a union here
that is beyond human comprehension and that transcends all man-made
analogies, a union which renders it perfectly accurate to say that
our God is one God.

The God of creation is one God according to Ellen G. White.
"nature testifies that one infinite in power, great in goodness,
mercy and love, created the earth, and filled it with life and
gladness."17
There are many Scriptural passages and many statements in the
writings of Ellen G. White that render it abundantly apparent that
the Creator includes the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Ellen
White wrote, "all things were created by the Son of God."18
Further she stated:

"When He, the Spirit of Truth, is come, He will guide you into
all truth." John 16:13. Only by the aid of that Spirit who in the
beginning "was brooding upon the face of the waters;" of that Word
by whom "all things were made;" of that "true light, which
lighteneth every man that cometh into the world," can the
testimony of science be rightly interpereted.19

Here the Holy Spirit promised by Christ is identified with the
Spirit of Genesis 1:3. Christ and the Holy Spirit are therefore
included with the Father in the "one infinite in power" who "created
the earth."

The Jehovah of the Old Testament is one God according to Ellen G.
White. "Jehovah, the eternal, self-existent, uncreated one, Himself
the source and sustainer of all, is alone entitled to supreme
reverence and worship."20
Elsewhere she wrote, "Jehovah is the name given to Christ. �behold,
God is my salvation,� writes the prophet isaiah; �I will trust, and
not be afraid; for the Lord Jehovah is my strength and my song. . .
. �"21
Therefore, Jehovah, the one God of the Old Testament, included
Christ.

The mysterious union between the Father and the Son is such that
Ellen G. White referred to Jesus as our Father in a manner
reminiscent of the words of Isaiah 9:6. "However much a shepherd may
love his sheep, he loves his sons and daughters more. Jesus is not
only our shepherd; he is our �everlasting Father.� John 10:14, 15
r.v."22

The conclusion to be drawn from the foregoing evidence is that
Ellen G. White was a decided monotheist. God is one God; the Father,
the Son and the Holy Spirit.

THREE DISTINCT PERSONALITIES IN THE DEITY

Ellen G. White taught the unity of the Deity but she wrote many
statements indicating that God consists of three distinct
personalities. As indicated above, to her God comprised Father, Son
and Holy Spirit who were each "the fullness of the Godhead."23
The union between them is such that it is true to say that our God
is one God. But this does not destroy the distinct personalities of
the members of the Deity.

As we consider the question in the light of Ellen G. White�s
statements on the unity of the Deity it appears that the term
"personality" must be given a special connotation when it is used in
reference to a member of the Godhead. There is no mysterious union
between human personalities so that it could be said that any three
are also one. From the point of view of human terminology one is
one, three are three, and three can logically never be one. But in
regard to the Deity three personalities comprise one God. Then
evidently the distinction between human personalities is by no means
analogous to that between the personalities of the Father, the Son
and the Holy Spirit; otherwise the three would comprise three Gods,
not one.

Just as the complete unity of the Godhead is a mystery so is the
distinction between the personalities comprising it. To rush in
where angels veil their faces and with a dogmatic gesture declare
that the existence of three equal, distinct personalities in the
Deity postulates the existence of three Gods is to give the word
"personality" its purely human connotation. But God is infinitely
superior to things human. In reference to Him the word must be given
a new connotation. What that should be is not revealed. Ellen G.
White�s use of it in the passages to be quoted here is perfectly
understandable since she was obliged to use what language was
available to her in explaining the mysteries of the nature of
God.

There follows a brief series of quotations which emphasize that
God is a personal Being and that the numbers of the Godhead are
distinct personalities:

The mighty power that works through all nature and sustains all
things is not, as some men of science represent, merely an
all-pervading principle, an actuating energy. God is a Spirit; yet
He is a personal Being; for so He has revealed Himself.24

Christ is one with the Father, but Christ and God are two
distinct personages.25

The Lord Jesus Christ, the divine Son of God, existed from
eternity, a distinct person, yet one with the Father.26

There is a personal God the Father; there is a personal Christ,
the Son.27

The Scriptures clearly indicate the relation between God and
Christ, arid they bring to view as clearly the personality and
individuality of each.28

The unity that exists between Christ and His disciples does not
destroy the personality of either. They are one in purpose, in
mind, in character, but not in person. It is thus that God and
Christ are one.29

Care must be taken in interpreting this last passage and in
interpreting John chapter 17 on which it is based. In the light of
the evidence of the preceding section we are bound to conclude that
there are similarities in the relationship between Christ and the
Father and in that between Christ and His disciples. But there are
also vast differences. The unfallen angels were entirely united to
the Father and the Son, but they were not divine, nor were they able
to enter into all the secrets of their Ruler.

Even the angels were not permitted to share the counsels
between the Father and the Son when the plan of salvation was
laid. Those human beings who seek to intrude into the secrets of
the Most High show their ignorance of spiritual and eternal
things.30

If the distinction between Christ and His disciples and the union
between them were entirely analogous to the distinction and union
between Christ and the Father then there would be no such divine
secrets kept from the human believer. Partaking of the divine nature
by human beings would then be elevation to the level of the Deity.
It was Satan�s effort to achieve this that precipitated the Great
Controversy, and he continues to perpetuate his own demonic
covetousness by degrading man�s conception of Christ in relation to
the Father and elevating man�s conception of himself in relation to
Christ.

More will be said concerning the Holy Spirit in the final chapter
where Ellen G. White�s overall teaching on the subject will be
presented, but suffice it to say here that she conceived of the Holy
Spirit as a person. "The Holy Spirit is a person, for He beareth
witness with our spirits that we are the children of God."31

The evidence of this chapter may be summarized by saying that
Ellen G. White was clearly a monotheist who understood the one God
as comprising three distinct personalities. But the student of the
Deity is bound to admit that both the oneness of God and the
distinction of the personalities are mysteries which human
terminology cannot define.

ENDNOTES

1E. G. White, Counsels to Writers and
Editors (Nashville, Tennessee: Southern Publishing Association,
1946), pp.93, 94. Citing Letter 179, 1904.

2E. G. White,
The Ministry of Healing (Mountain View, Cal.: Pacific Press
Publishing Association, 1905), p. 429.

3Ibid., p. 421.

4E. G. White, "The
Word Made Flesh," Review and Herald, LXXXIII (April 5, 1906),
8. Cited by Francis D. Nichol (ed.), Seventh-day Adventist Bible
Commentary (Washington, D. C.: Review and Herald Publishing
Association, 1956) V, 1126. (Hereafter referred to as 5 BC).

5Ibid.

6E. G. White,
"The True Sheep Respond to the Voice of the Shepherd," The Signs
of the Times, XX (November 27, 1893), 54.

7Ibid.

8Ibid.

9E. G. White,
The Desire of Ages (Mountain View, Cal.: Pacific Press
Publishing Association, 1898), pp. 469, 470.

10J. N.
Loughborough, "Questions for Bro. Loughborough." Review and
Herald, XVIII (November 5, 1861), 184.

11E. G.
White, Education (Mountain View, Cal.: Pacific Press
Publishing Association, 1903), p.178.

12E. G.
White, Patriarchs and Prophets (Mountain View, Cal.: Pacific
Press Publishing Association, 1890), p. 329.

13E. G.
White, Evangelism (Washington, D. C.: Review and Herald
Publishing Association, 1946), p. 616. Citing E. G. White,
Historical Sketches, p. 231. (1866).

14E. G.
White, The Desire of Ages (Mountain View, Cal.: Pacific Press
Publishing Association, 1898), p. 213.

15E. G.
White, Patriarchs and Prophets (Mountain View, Cal.: Pacific
Press Publishing Association, 1890), p. 329.

16E. G.
White, Evangelism (Washington, D. C.: Review and Herald
Publishing Association, 1946), pp. 614, 615. Citing E. G. White,
Special Testimonies, Series B, No. 7, pp.62, 63. (1905).

17E. G.
White, Testimonies for the Church, Vol. VIII (Mountain View,
Cal.: Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1904), p. 256.

18E. G.
White, The Desire of Ages (Mountain View, Cal.: Pacific Press
Publishing Association, 1898), p. 281.

19E. G.
White, Education (Mountain View, Cal.: Pacific Press
Publishing Association, 1903), p. 134.

20E. G.
White, Patriarchs and Prophets (Mountain View, Cal.: Pacific
Press Publishing Association, 1890), p. 305.

21E. G. White,
"The Word Made Flesh," The Signs of the Times, XXV (May 3,
1899), 2.

22E. G. White,
The Desire of Ages (Mountain View, Cal.: Pacific Press
Publishing Association, l898), p. 483.

23Cf. Ante,
p. 73.

24E. G. White,
The Ministry of Healing (Mountain View, Cal.: Pacific Press
Publishing Association, 1905), p. 4l3. In this as in certain other
statements Ellen G. White was obviously attempting to answer the
pantheistic notions which J. H. Kellogg had attempted to introduce
into the Church. This was a more serious threat to the Denomination
than was Arianism because of the militant disposition of the man who
was propagating it. Undoubtedly Ellen G. White�s overall teaching on
the nature of God was intended to answer what she recognized as
prevailing misconceptions on the subject, including both Arianism
and pantheism. See A. W. Spalding, Origin and History of
Seventh-day Adventists (Washington, D. C.: Review and Herald
Publishing Association, 1962), III, 140, 141.

25E. G.
White, "The Work in Washington," Review and Herald, LXXXII
(June 1, 1905), 13. Cited by 5 BC, 1148.

26E. G.
White, Selected Messages, Book One (Washington, D. C.: Review
and Herald Publishing Association, l958), p. 247. Citing Review
and Herald, April 5, 1906.

27E. G.
White, "The Revelation of God," Review and Herald, LXXV
(November 8, 1898), 709.

28E. G. White,
The Ministry of Healing (Mountain View, Cal.: Pacific Press
Publishing Association, 1905), p. 421.

29Ibid.

30E. G.
White, Testimonies for the Church, Vol. VIII (Mountain View,
Cal.: Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1904), p. 279.

31E. G.
White, Evangelism (Washington, D. C.: Review and Herald
Publishing Association, 1946), p. 616. Citing Manuscript 20,
1906.

At Issue Index
Trinity
Index   Table of
Contents   Previous
Next