The White Family and the Trinity

“The evidence from his pen seems to indicate that from his first spiritual affiliations with the Christian Connection, until his death at the age of 60, James White opposed the trinity. The conclusion reached is intriguing due to his unique and special relationship with the Lord’s messenger who happened to be his wife. She was surely aware of his thinking on the subject.

Did she approve? If not, why did he continue his belief? Did she simply refrain from correcting him? Why?"

The Doctrine of the Trinity in the SDA church. p312. Russell Holt, doctoral dissertation, 1969, Andrews University.

“With a sorrow burdened heart, I have performed my unpleasant duty to my dearest friends, not daring to please myself by withholding reproof, even from husband;…

I see their errors and dangers, and feel compelled to speak of what is thus brought before me. I dare not resist the Spirit of God”

5T, 20.

Did he not heed the reproof then?

“He sometimes made plans and inaugurated policies that were not in harmony with the instruction given to his wife. But when reproved or instructed through the testimonies to the church for his error, he was quick to respond to counsel or reproof, and hearty in his confession of error.”

General Conference Bulletin, 1913-06-02, p11.

She affirms him many times, here are just a couple.

“Or work is to instruct them in God’s Word, to urge upon them the necessity of experimental religion, and to define as clearly as possible, the correct position in regard to the truth.”

“God has permitted the precious light of truth to shine upon His Word and illuminate the mind of my husband. He may reflect the rays of light from the presence of Jesus upon others by his preaching and writing.”

What about James Edson White?

"The talent God has given you in the ability to comprehend the truths of His Word is a precious gift."

Paulson Collection p103.

"But the Lord has shown me that He has accepted Edson White's work, and has several times preserved his life when in perilous places.

He has put His Spirit upon him, and has opened the way before him, giving him success."

SPM p216.

What did he say about the Godhead?

"Only one being in the universe besides the Father bears the name of God, and that is His Son, Jesus Christ." The Coming King p33, 1937.

"No one could teach it as He could, for no other being but the Father loved us as He loved us."

Ibid, p43.

What about W.C. White?

“The Mighty Healer said Live. I have put My Spirit upon your son, W.C. White, that he may be your counselor. I have given him the spirit of wisdom and a discerning perceptive mind…

I will be with your son, and be his counselor. He will respect the truth that comes through you to the people. He will have wisdom to defend the truth; for I will take charge of his mind.”

Pamphlets, Nashville Sanitarium, 1906, p20.

In another place she said he was as true as steel to the cause of God.

What did he say about the Godhead?

“The statements and arguments of some of our ministers in their efforts to prove that the Holy Spirit was an individual as are God the Father and Christ the eternal Son, have perplexed me, and sometimes they have made me sad…

There are many Scriptures which speak of the Father and the Son and the absence of Scripture making similar reference to the united work of the Father and the Holy Spirit, or of Christ and the Holy Spirit, has led me to believe that the Spirit without individuality was the representative of the Father and the Son throughout the universe, and it was through the Holy Spirit that they dwell in our hearts and make us one with the Father and the Son.”

Letter to W.H. Carr, April 30, 1935.

So, the three people on earth closest to Sis. White, who were blessed of God with clear light on the Scriptures are claimed to be in error, while Kellogg, whose mind “was under the control of Satan” who spoke about the trinity “as many Adventists speak about it today” was telling the truth? I don’t think so.

What about the brethren who argued against Kellogg’s trinitarian view?

“Of Elder Haskell and Elder Butler, God says, “I will guide them. I will put my grace in their hearts. Because they have not been turned away from the truth to give heed to seducing spirits, but have stood firm, declaring the messages given them, they are to be highly esteemed. They will not exchange the faith they have fervently declared, for another doctrine which is not true.”

SPM 380, 1905.

  “If you continue to believe and obey the truths you first embraced regarding the personality of the Father and the Son, you will be joined together with Him in love. There will be seen that unity for which Christ prayed just before His death and resurrection.”

Does that sound like she was moving for a new understanding?

“A survey of other Adventist writers during these years, reveals that, to a man, they rejected the trinity, yet with equal unanimity they upheld the divinity of Christ.”

Doctrine of the Trinity in the SDA Denomination. P. 311.

what happened to my last post?

I am just wondering what happened to my last post, as I cannot see it anywhere?

Considering that "all our writers to a man, were anti-trinitarian" in that era, I am wondering why you are so keen to have their writings re-published? I note the prophet did not call for any
corrections to be made. But they were affirmed as the truth we need for this time.
Still, I am glad you would welcome the reprinting of their writings. It would certainly put to rest
recent myths promoted in the Record, which I have been sickened to see people accepting as
gospel truth.

Selective Inattention

In my last post and in private emails I have implied and even stated that there is a dishonesty in some of the anti-Trinitarian publications. Well, I've been brought back to earth on reading the following quote. I realised that this 'dishonesty' tag could apply equally to me.

This is from Leroy Moore's "Theology in Crisis" (1979) pp352,353, a book about the issue of "Righteousness by Faith" as seen from the perspective of Ellen White and that of the 'Reformationists' represented by Dr Des Ford.

To emphasise that selective inattention can apply to all of us, I have divided what was one long paragraph, into two paragraphs.

It is important to note that blind spots may not reflect self-deception. Harry Stack Sullivan (Clinical Studies in Psychiatry, New York, W.W. Norton, Inc., 1956, 38-77), in dealing with the phenomenon of "selective inattention," indicates that the act of focusing on one thing prevents awareness of others. One cannot attend all implications, and what one does note is largely determined by the nature of his focus. The more convinced one is of the validity of his position the less capable he is to accommodate contrary factors. Moreover, psychological and spiritual sanity require certainty on some issues as the basis for both clarity and security needed for examining others. The important principle in (Ellen White's writing) is that the Word (and not some unwitting substitute for the Word) be the only fundamental "given" and that everything else be deliberately and deliberatively tested by it. the problem with the Laodicean mind is that it has unconsciously set its judgment above that of the "True Witness," and in the name of that "True Witness" declares its own judgment.

Nor should this principle be considered as applying peculiarly to Reformationists. It is a general trait characterizing all mankind, which must be overcome before Christ can exhibit His character through His people. The problem has always harassed even sincere men (such as Abraham, father of the faithful), thus is no proof of dishonesty in the normal sense of the word. It involves a self-deception so closely related to the psychological necessities of human experience as to require time, discipline, and the special guidance of and dependence on the Spirit to overcome. Since it is relatively easy to discern in others and almost impossible to see in one's self, the "straight testimony" must be prized and claimed by each for himself, the weakness of others being recognized as tools for self-understanding...

The part that struck home was: "It is a general trait characterizing all mankind, which must be overcome before Christ can exhibit His character through His people."

So not only do I damage my relationships with other and end up judging them falsely but I also hinder God's work on the earth.

How would I go about combating this process. This is probably the genius of the 'priesthood of believers' and accountability or wholistic small groups. In either case other people may well see what I can't about myself. This is the 'straight witness' Moore says we should prize... That would be hard to do.

We really do need to keep talking, keep the conversation up. And to keep listening, actually listening is more important than talking. So I'll try to listen if you point out my blind spots.

Another point arose from "The more convinced one is of the validity of his position the less capable he is to accommodate contrary factors." A good measure of humility about my own position is probably another antidote.

Moore states "time, discipline, and the special guidance of and dependence on the Spirit" can overcome the problem.

I need all these things.

These Articles Must be Reproduced

God is good isn't He? I'm sure He led me into contact with Geoff and his friends to teach me many new things that I wouldn't learn any other way.

I've just been reading Restitution Ministries' booklet 'The Living Voice of the Lord's Witnesses' and came across another truth for this time. Once again I challenge my 'Godhead' friends to live up to light they have been given. This is an important truth and it comes from Ellen White's article in the Review and Herald, May 25, 1905, entitled "The Work for This Time".

This rambling article covering many practical topics because it's an address to the (General?) Conference. In it I found a truth that I hadn't noticed before. I will quote the last part of the article as it appears in "The Living Voice" except I added the two concluding paragraphs for completeness. I commend Restitution for putting in such a long quote.

"Our Periodicals

God has given me light regarding our periodicals. What is it?--He has said that the dead are to speak. How?--Their works shall follow them. We are to repeat the words of the pioneers in our work, who knew what it cost to search for the truth as for hidden treasure, and who labored to lay the foundation of our work. They moved forward step by step under the influence of the Spirit of God. One by one these pioneers are passing away. The word given me is, Let that which these men have written in the past be reproduced. And in The Signs of the Times let not the articles be long or the print fine. Do not try to crowd everything into one number of the paper. Let the print be good, and let earnest, living experiences be put into the paper.

Not long ago I took up a copy of the Bible Echo. As I looked it through, I saw an article by Elder Haskell and one by Elder Corliss. As I laid the paper down, I said, These articles must be reproduced. There is truth and power in them. Men spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.

Let the truths that are the foundation of our faith be kept before the people. Some will depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils. They talk science, and the enemy comes in and gives them an abundance of science; but it is not the science of salvation. It is not the science of humility, of consecration, or of the sanctification of the Spirit. We are now to understand what the pillars of our faith are,--the truths that have made us as a people what we are, leading us on step by step.

Early Experiences

After the passing of the time in 1844 we searched for the truth as for hidden treasure. I met with the brethren, and we studied and prayed earnestly. Often we remained together until late at night, and sometimes through the entire night, praying for light and studying the Word. Again and again these brethren came together to study the Bible, in order that they might know its meaning, and be prepared to teach it with power. When they came to the point in their study where they said, "We can do nothing more," the Spirit of the Lord would come upon me. I would be taken off in vision, and a clear explanation of the passages we had been studying would be given me, with instruction as to how we were to labor and teach effectively. Thus light was given that helped us to understand the scriptures in regard to Christ, his mission, and his priesthood. A line of truth extending from that time to the time when we shall enter the city of God, was made plain to me, and I gave to others the instruction that the Lord had given me.

During this whole time I could not understand the reasoning of the brethren. My mind was locked, as it were, and I could not comprehend the meaning of the scriptures we were studying. This was one of the greatest sorrows of my life. I was in this condition of mind until all the principal points of our faith were made clear to our minds, in harmony with the Word of God. The brethren knew that, when not in vision, I could not understand these matters, and they accepted, as light directly from heaven, the revelations given.

Many errors arose, and though I was then little more than a child, I was sent by the Lord from place to place to rebuke those who were holding these false doctrines. There were those who were in danger of going into fanaticism, and I was bidden in the name of the Lord to give them a warning from heaven.

We shall have to meet these same false doctrines again. There will be those who will claim to have visions. When God gives you clear evidence that the vision is from him, you may accept it, but do not accept it on any other evidence; for people are going to be led more and more astray in foreign countries and in America. The Lord wants his people to act like men and women of sense.

Salvation in the Truth

In the future, deception of every kind is to arise, and we want solid ground for our feet. We want solid pillars for the building. Not one pin is to be removed from that which the Lord has established. The enemy will bring in false theories, such as the doctrine that there is no sanctuary. This is one of the points on which there will be a departing from the faith. Where shall we find safety unless it be in the truths that the Lord has been giving for the last fifty years?

I want to tell you that Christ lives. He makes intercession for us, and he will save every one who will come to him in faith and obey his directions. But remember that he does not want you to give your energies to criticism of your brethren. Attend to the salvation of your own soul. Do the work God has given you. You will find so much to do that you will have no inclination to criticize some one else. Use the talent of speech to help and bless. If you do the work God has given you, you will have a message to bear, and you will understand what is meant by the sanctification of the Spirit.

Do not think that Satan is not doing anything. Do not think that his army is passive. He and his agencies are on the ground today. We are to put on the whole armor of God. Having done all, we are to stand, meeting principalities and powers and spiritual wickedness in high places. And if we have on the heavenly armor, we shall find that the assaults of the enemy will not have power over us. Angels of God will be round about us to protect us. I have the assurance of God that thus it will be. In the name of the Lord God of Israel I ask you to come up to the help of the Lord, to the help of the Lord against the mighty. If you do this, you will have on your side a strong helper, a personal Saviour. You will be covered with the shield of providence. God will make a way for you, so that you will never be overtaken by the enemy. I am praying that the power of the Saviour will be exerted in behalf of those who have entered into the temptations of the enemy. They are not standing under the broad shield of Omnipotence. My brethren, it is our privilege to stand under this shield."

Powerful isn't it? "I want to tell you that Christ lives." Wonderful news!!

The truth I feel I stumbled across is summed up in the sentence: "Let the truths that are the foundation of our faith be kept before the people." Specifically through the reprinting of periodical articles from the years 1855-1905. Even more specifically, articles in the Bible Echo from late 1904 or early 1905 by Haskell and Corliss.

I challenge the folks at Restitution Ministries to do this. You have access to the means of production and of publication of booklets such as "Complete Periodical Articles of Haskell and Corliss - 1904, 1905". By spreading such articles you will be obeying Mrs White's very words. You obviously have access to the articles as evidenced by the extensive quotes in the rest of "The Living Voice".

Other books could be all the articles on the particular "foundation" truths mentioned in the quote: the spirit of prophecy (people claiming to have visions), the sanctuary and the "step by step" leading of God in the development of these doctrines. I would love to have such books and promote them.

This is a marvelous quote in that it warns us of some of the specific areas where deceptions will arise (SOP and the sanctuary) and even shows us the way we are to go about the work of letting the dead "speak": ie with the "science of humility, of consecration, (and) of the sanctification of the Spirit" and "he (Christ) does not want you to give your energies to criticism of your brethren."

Thank you again Restitution, and I commend to you the words:

"Do the work God has given you. You will find so much to do that you will have no inclination to criticize some one else. Use the talent of speech to help and bless. If you do the work God has given you, you will have a message to bear, and you will understand what is meant by the sanctification of the Spirit."

Sanctuary, sanctuary...

Geoff asked why I insisted that the Godhead question be tied to the sanctuary doctrine. The reason is the quote that leads my post True Knowledge of God

..remove the pillars of our faith concerning the sanctuary OR concerning the personality of God or of Christ."

The context is firmly "The Sanctuary" (title of the article) and is largely against Ballanger's attack on the sanctuary. The reason I want 'correlate' the two is that this is the only place I have seen where the Godhead is part of the 'pillars'. So the 'personality' of God and Christ are important present-truth as they relate to the sanctuary.

Geoff comments:

I notice that Waggoner felt that those views destroyed the atonement. It is an area that I have not explored.

That is interesting. (I'm thinking out loud) The atonement... The purpose of the sanctuary was so that God can safely dwell with His people (atonement). The priests and Christ as priest stand between us and the destroying fire or holiness of God. So Christ must be another individual for this to work. "As a personal Saviour He intercedes in the heavenly courts" Ministry of Healing 418.1. The whole system falls if He is not 'personal'.

Christ had to be 'a personal Saviour' to die for us too, He was personal as a human of course, but did He have to have separate divinity to His Father to die for us?

Most Christians, I'm surprised to learn, don't have, or at least haven't thought through, this 'personal' aspect to their religion. I think this message of a 'personal Saviour' makes atonement and the judgement and the sanctuary vivid and full of life. Thanks for leading me to this Geoff.

Geoff then talked about the love of God. I replied:
Thanks for the sharing, Geoff. Yes, of course, you reminded me of the most basic principle of them being separate! If they are sort of "one being" then ANY relationship is simply self love. Love is only possible between individuals in a relationship. So the Father and Christ being separate makes relationship possible. Great!

Victory for the Weak

I've just thought of a whole new reason why the it is important that the Father and Son are separate Persons.

When Jesus was on earth, He lived by faith, that is He didn't use His own divine power to live a victorious life. He depended wholly on His Father's power (John 5:19,30).

If we believed in the nebulous '3 in 1 God' of many churches then there is no separation between the power of God and the power of the Son. So if Jesus trusted "God's power" in this system, He was simply trusting in His own, innate divine power. In other words, unless the Father and Son are different individuals then Jesus was trusting Himself! This is the very temptation that Satan used in the wilderness (Matt 4:1-11) and again at the cross (Matt 27:41-43).

So the implications are:

Rev 14:12 says the saints are those who keep the commandments of God and the FAITH of Jesus. - the saints (hopefully us) must trust Jesus the way that He trusted His Father for the power to overcome (John 15:5 and all of ch 15).

Second, and here is the link to the sanctuary: We have a "great High Priest" who can "sympathise with our weaknesses" (Heb 4:14,15) because He was weak too (He willingly became totally dependent). So in v16 He can invite us to come and boldly ask for mercy and grace so we can overcome as He did.

Neither of these things, empowering trust and enabling sympathy, would be possible unless Christ and the Father were separate individuals.

Differences

Great to see that you are getting more confident with the whole blogging thing, Geoff, so I think it's time we ran up our true colours.

Stated as succinctly as I can, here are the three main 'Godhead' differences that have become apparent in previous discussions. Please correct me if I have misstated your case, Geoff.

1. The origin of Jesus - I believe Jesus is figuratively "the Son of God", with the meaning that He is one with His Father "in nature, in character, in purpose" (Like father, like son) and has been since eternity.
Am I correct in saying that you believe that Jesus is literally "the Son of God"? That is, He began when He was literally "born of God".

2. The Person of the Holy Spirit - I believe the Spirit is a literal Person, "the third Person of the Godhead". I think you believe that the Holy Spirit is a figurative Person. That is, it is the power, influence or thinking of the Father and Son.

3. The importance of the Godhead doctrine - I believe that a clear understanding of this subject is of minor importance at present, certainly not essential to salvation. My take on your belief, Geoff, is that you believe that it is 'present truth' and essential to salvation.

I can't think of any other differences between us. We both agree that the Bible and Mrs White are authoritative. We believe in all the other 27 Fundamental doctrines of the Seventh-day Adventist church. We both believe in the seventh-day Sabbath and the soon-return of Jesus Christ. We are fairly conservative in our approach to doctrine and religion and enjoy our families.

I won't go into the first two differences here because it gets tedious (we have already exchanged well over 100 long-winded emails on the subject) but I will delve into the third a little . I think this third difference is the most important.

Geoff, I was surprised when you showed me that the members of the Seventh-day Adventist church who were published from 1863 to around 1900 were overwhelmingly in agreement with you on the first two points of difference. That is, they believed that Jesus is a literal Son and the Holy Spirit is a figurative Person.

The booklets you gave me, Geoff, and quotes from our "pioneers" you sent me in correspondence as well as my own re- reading of E.J. Waggoner and James White clarified why I was surprised: they disagree with you on the third point.

Mrs White rarely refers to the issues in the first two points and when she does, it is indirectly and only to support another doctrine she holds as more important. In most of these statements she is equivocal, not offending either you or me, Geoff. It is only by inference that we can find support for our views. This changed after James White died when she started being more specific about these issues.

The statements she made from the 1890s onwards were interpreted to support the position of Jesus as a figurative Son of God and the Spirit a literal person. Whether this is the correct interpretation is what we are debating, but since the 1930s most SDAs believe this interpretation.

But, and this is essential, she only makes a few references to this topic. She never calls the Godhead a 'pillar' or fundamental belief, she never says it is 'present truth' or something we must set before the people. She is so reticent on the issue that even her own son, Willie White, did not understand what she believed.

So I was surprised at the position the church took in the early days, because Mrs White had never condemned or condoned it. In her writings it was a non-issue so I was never made aware of it.

The other pioneers were reticent too. Rereading their statements, with the knowledge of what they believed, I can see it there but like Mrs White, if you didn't know it was an issue you would see no threat to Protestant Trinitarian beliefs. In other words, they did not actively provoke the issue.

James White wrote extensively but I don't know of even one article specifically on this topic. Were there any articles by any author, published in our missionary magazines, like the Signs, that were candidly anti-Trinitarian?

E. J. Waggoner in "Christ and His Righteousness" talks about the origins of Christ but only to back up his contentions that Christ is uncreated and divine, which we both believe. He does not denigrate trinitarianism or insist his own beliefs on the Godhead are essential knowledge.

Willie White seems to have been specific only once on his beliefs on the nature of the Holy Spirit and that was in a private letter. So I think there is little evidence to support the belief that this was, or is, an important doctrine, as there was virtually no public discussion of it and very little discussion privately.

To sum up, Geoff, the problems I have with your beliefs are not so much with the beliefs themselves but with their promotion which has become divisive. This is not all your fault as you have often had the beliefs rejected out of hand with no discussion. Nonetheless, if you really believe that this is essential to salvation you must continue to promote your first two beliefs whether or not it edifies the church. I have a problem with this.

I don't question your motives. You are acting out of concern for souls. You are also motivated by the "Faithfulness Model" that says that if we return to faithful observance of the doctrines of old, God will bless the church and prosper it. These are great motives but, I think, misguided.

So why am I still in this discussion with you? I'll quote the way I ended my long profile (where you have been making your comments):

So I stay with it because I think that God purposes, through Geoff and his fellow believers, to remind me and the church, of truths we don't know we have neglected. Truths about the character of Christ and His salvation.

These are the truths that the Whites and other pioneers were speaking about when they made the quotes we argue over. These truths are important to our salvation.