What Ellen White Has Written About the Godhead

[John317]

...In the hand-written manuscript, EGW made another edit in the line that reads, "There are (three) living three persons (alities) of the heavenly trio ..."

In the published statement, EGW's original word "persons" was not changed to her edited "personalities." This presents a point of confusion, because without this original manuscriipt, we would not understand why W. C. White wrote "personality" in his 1935 letter.

....With the above example of "persons" being published instead of "personalities," we may profit from examining original manuscripts when doubts arise.

I looked into this before, a couple of years ago, and I believe what happened is that Ellen White originally wrote "persons," then changed it to "personalities," and then decided to have the original writing published. But I will check again and find out for sure.

In any case, since Ellen White repeatedly said that "the Holy Spirit is a person," and "a divine person," we can be sure that she believed the Holy Spirit is indeed a person.

[John317]

Originally Posted By: Letter: W. C. White to Carr; April 30, 1935

[...]My perplexities were lessened a little when I learned from the dictionary that one of the meanings of personality, was characteristics. It is stated in such a way that I concluded that there might be personality without bodily form which is possessed by the Father and the Son.

[... (study of Scriptures)] 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 with the Son. [...] (W. C. White to Carr; Apirl 30, 1935)

We cannot know precisely what writings W. C. White keyed on to make his comment about "personality," but what he did NOT mention was "person."

Originally Posted By: Wikipedia

William Clarence "Willie" White (1854–1937) was secretary (a term now referred to as "director") of the Ellen G. White Estate. He was placed in charge of his mother's (Ellen G. White) estate at her death in 1915. "Willie," as his mother referred to him as, took on additional responsibility in helping his mother travel, write, and publish after his father's death in 1881. During the 1890s up until the end of her life he was especially prominent as an influential minister in the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

The son of Ellen White ("an influential minister in the Seventh-day Adventist Church") who had significant responsibilities, including assisting his mother with writing and publishing and becoming "director" of the Ellen G. White Estate, did not know she had become Trinitarian even to the time he wrote the letter to Bro. Carr in 1935. If Ellen White had become Trinitarian, do you not think this "prominent" minister would have known? by 1935?

I think we do well to remember that W.C. White himself said that he didn't understand his mother's statements on this topic. Also, it is significant that Willie White was a semi-arian along with his father. It is clear that neither of them would ever have made the statements that Ellen White made about the Godhead in such books as Evangelism 614-617.

The bottom line is the only way to understand Ellen White's beliefs and teachings is by reading Ellen White, not by referring to the writings of her sons or husband.

Again, we don't need to read the sons and the husband of the prophet to understand what the prophet wrote. Study the prophet's own writings.

[John317]

In the published statement, EGW's original word "persons" was not changed to her edited "personalities." This presents a point of confusion, because without this original manuscriipt, we would not understand why W. C. White wrote "personality" in his 1935 letter.

...We cannot know precisely what writings W. C. White keyed on to make his comment about "personality," but what he did NOT mention was "person."

....With the above example of "persons" being published instead of "personalities," we may profit from examining original manuscripts when doubts arise.

Do you really think that the only way to understand what Ellen White wrote about the Godhead, and particularly what she meant by "personalities," is to study what her son said?

Did Ellen White ever use the word "personality" or "personalities" in reference to a non-person?

Since the Father and the Son are distinct persons, and she called them "personalities," why would anyone think that her use of "personality" in regard to the Holy Spirit would signify anything different?

Are you aware that Matt. 28: 19 can only be understood to mean that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, are three distinct persons?

[Pastor_Chick]

John,

There is a "Trinity debate" within Adventism. Everyone has access to the SAME writings from "the prophetess." Each side of the issue explains the writings from a different perspective. You and I are at a wall, and we were there before we met. Nothing has changed.

The Review has stated that the Seventh-day Adventist Church of today has come "to doctrinal agreement on the Trinity." While this may be true among the theologians of the church, it is not true among the laity who constitute the vast majority of the church. In the March, 1999 issue of the S. D. A. Collegiate Quarterly, Mornie Sinclair Knight reveals that this certainly is not the case. Mornie wrote, "Recently, I was having a biblical discussion with a group of Adventist and non-Adventist friends, during which the following question was raised. It caused me to reflect. ‘What do Adventists believe about the Trinity?’ Immediately, a Sunday worshiper said the word Trinity cannot be found in the Bible. All the Adventists conceded. One answered that there is one God, one being with three personalities, meaning that God the Father has a kind of split personality.

"Another Adventist answered that God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit are all equal in power and in thought. A third Adventist said that when we get to heaven we will see God the Father and Jesus Christ, but the Holy Spirit will not be in evidence because there would no longer be a need for Him. A fourth said that all three Gods exist, but God the Father is most powerful, Jesus less powerful, and the Holy Spirit the least powerful. Finally, a fifth Adventist said that the Father is God, but Jesus Christ was not God.

"Understandably, my non-Adventist friends were confused. ‘How could five people from the same church have such different opinions about God?’ they asked. A Jewish friend remarked, ‘That means every time Adventists pray, some are praying to one God and some are praying to many Gods.’ ‘Your church sounds like confusion,’ a Muslim interjected.

"This incident troubled me for the entire week. I had always believed in the Trinity as stated in The Twenty-Seven Fundamental Beliefs of Seventh-day Adventists, so it never occurred to me that some Adventists believed otherwise.

"The following Sabbath, I went to church and asked various people their belief about the Trinity. Amazingly, I received radically different opinions. It seems clear that we do not know what we believe." (S. D. A. Collegiate Quarterly, March 26, 1999, p. 113)

So, John, double-speak, over-speak, spamming quotes, etc. will not bring forth unity of any sort. It is the Spirit of Truth that brings unity, and the remnant people of YAHWEH have that blessed unity.

[John317]

... In the March, 1999 issue of the S. D. A. Collegiate Quarterly, Mornie Sinclair Knight reveals that this certainly is not the case. Mornie wrote, "Recently, I was having a biblical discussion with a group of Adventist and non-Adventist friends, during which the following question was raised. It caused me to reflect. ‘What do Adventists believe about the Trinity?’ Immediately, a Sunday worshiper said the word Trinity cannot be found in the Bible. All the Adventists conceded. One answered that there is one God, one being with three personalities, meaning that God the Father has a kind of split personality.

"Another Adventist answered that God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit are all equal in power and in thought. A third Adventist said that when we get to heaven we will see God the Father and Jesus Christ, but the Holy Spirit will not be in evidence because there would no longer be a need for Him. A fourth said that all three Gods exist, but God the Father is most powerful, Jesus less powerful, and the Holy Spirit the least powerful. Finally, a fifth Adventist said that the Father is God, but Jesus Christ was not God.

"Understandably, my non-Adventist friends were confused. ‘How could five people from the same church have such different opinions about God?’ they asked. A Jewish friend remarked, ‘That means every time Adventists pray, some are praying to one God and some are praying to many Gods.’ ‘Your church sounds like confusion,’ a Muslim interjected.

"This incident troubled me for the entire week. I had always believed in the Trinity as stated in The Twenty-Seven Fundamental Beliefs of Seventh-day Adventists, so it never occurred to me that some Adventists believed otherwise.

"The following Sabbath, I went to church and asked various people their belief about the Trinity. Amazingly, I received radically different opinions. It seems clear that we do not know what we believe." (S. D. A. Collegiate Quarterly, March 26, 1999, p. 113)

It doesn't show that the church's official doctrine is wrong. All this shows is that as a church we haven't been studying the subject like we should for the last 50 years. Our pastors and leaders have assumed that since the church as a whole accepted the Trinity, we could just take it for granted that everyone would study it and understand it. But that is wrong about the Trinity just like it is wrong about any doctrine, including the Investigative Judgment, the gift of prophecy, the Sabbath, the state of the dead, and the second coming of Christ. Every generation of SDAs needs to study these doctrines in order to understand what they believe and why.

So that is the purpose of this discussion: to study the topic of the Godhead.

[Pastor_Chick]

John,

You suggest that we cannot rely on the family members of Ellen G. White for input on her beliefs. You imply that they would be almost dishonest and advocate their own beliefs and not those of the prophetess. I disagree.

The following is much of a presentation given by W. C. White at the General Conference Session of 1913:

[John317]

...So, John, double-speak, over-speak, spamming quotes, etc. will not bring forth unity of any sort.

Neither will being dishonest. Don't make false accusations. Write to others as you want them to speak to you.

You need to deal with evidence and the arguments people make, and not make accusations. I have posted many quotes from Ellen White which you have not even addressed. I haven't even come close to quoting everything she has said on the topic.

If anyone has "double-spoken," it is you. You want us to inspect the words of the son of a prophet in order to find out what the prophet wrote. If that is not double-speaking, I'd like to know what is.

Unity is brought by the Holy Spirit,and the Holy Spirit will never be in a discussion about Him in which people are not showing love for each other. That is one of the main reasons that Ellen White did not participate in such discussions. Unless you and others who take part in it can keep to the evidence and not bring up personalities, this discussion can't continue.

[John317]

OK, thanks for that. I have read all of it. I don't see, though, how it contradicts what I am saying, which is that Ellen White wrote what she intended to say and that we don't have to read what the prophet's son said in order to understand what the prophet wrote. She was a good and clear writer.

[John317]

There is a "Trinity debate" within Adventism.

The Seventh-day Adventist Church believes and accepts the Trinity as expressed in our official doctrines. There is no debate about that. There are some individuals who question it and "debate" it, but that is different from saying there is a debate about it within the SDA church.

There is actually more of a debate in the church about the Investigative Judgment and Righteousness by Faith than there is about the Trinity.

On the Forums there is much more disagreement than you will find in the congregations of the SDA church itself. In all the time I have been in the SDA church, I have never ran into members or leaders who argued against the belief that we worship one God in three persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Nor do our church's publications reflect any kind of debate. Our recently published books on the Trinity, however, do indeed talk about the fact that there are some SDAs who believe the church should return to the views of the "Pioneers" on the topic. But those are a very small minority, and many of them are not even in the SDA church.

Originally Posted By: Pastor_Chick

Everyone has access to the SAME writings from "the prophetess." Each side of the issue explains the writings from a different perspective.

The problem is just as it is with the Bible: too many people are not reading ALL of the writings. They accept some and reject others. We need to accept all of them.

It isn't a matter of explaining them. It's a matter of accepting them as they read.

Are you going to say that Ellen White's writings are confused so that we can't be sure what they mean? That is what some are claiming about the Bible. Neither the Bible nor Ellen White's writings are to blame for the differences in how people understand them. The differences are due to people picking and selecting what they want to accept. (Many who reject the Trinity find it convenient, for example, to reject Matt. 28: 19, although that verse is in every ancient Greek manuscript of Matthew.)

For instance, Ellen White said:

Quote:

You are born unto God, and you stand under the sanction and the power of the three holiest beings in heaven, who are able to keep you from falling. You are to reveal that you are dead to sin; your life is hid with Christ in God. Hidden "with Christ in God,"--wonderful transformation. This is a most precious promise. When I feel oppressed, and hardly know how to relate myself toward the work that God has given me to do, I just call upon the three great Worthies, and say; You know I cannot do this work in my own strength. You must work in me, and by me and through me, sanctifying my tongue, sanctifying my spirit, sanctifying my words, and bringing me into a position where my spirit shall be susceptible to the movings of the Holy Spirit of God upon my mind and character. {7MR 267, 268}

Here is where the work of the Holy Ghost comes in, after your baptism. You are baptized in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. You are raised up out of the water to live henceforth in newness of life--to live a new life. You are born unto God, and you stand under the sanction and the power of the three holiest Beings in heaven, who are able to keep you from falling. You are to reveal that you are dead to sin; your life is hid with Christ in God. Hidden "with Christ in God"--wonderful transformation. This is a most precious promise. When I feel oppressed and hardly know how to relate myself toward the work that God has given me to do, I just call upon the three great Worthies, and say: You know I cannot do this work in my own strength. You must work in me, and by me, and through me, sanctifying my tongue, sanctifying my spirit, sanctifying my words, and bringing me into a position where my spirit shall be susceptible to the movings of the Holy Spirit of God upon my mind and character. And this is the prayer that every one of us may offer. {1SAT 367, 368}

How much clearer can Ellen White be than "three holiest Beings in heaven" and "the three great Worthies"?

[Gordon1]

Gordon1, I am shocked and sad to see that you do not adhere to the teaching of one God in Three Persons!

At present it may seem sorrowful Laval, but why espouse the doctrine of Jones & Waggoner in half-measure when it is indeed a most precious message from heaven? Neither was Trinitarian, both were Protestant. God used them to sound a message of repentance, restoration and order, but it was never heeded.

One God in Three Persons is not the doctrine of Christ, for it confounds God's Order.

God's Order is laid forth by Paul in 1 Corinthians 11:3:

"But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ;

and the head of the woman is the man;

and the head of Christ is God."

_______________________________

[Dr. Rich]

Please define the word "Person".

[cheddar]

Originally Posted By: skyblue888

Gordon1, I am shocked and sad to see that you do not adhere to the teaching of one God in Three Persons!

At present it may seem sorrowful Laval, but why espouse the doctrine of Jones & Waggoner in half-measure when it is indeed a most precious message from heaven? Neither was Trinitarian, both were Protestant. God used them to sound a message of repentance, restoration and order, but it was never heeded.

One God in Three Persons is not the doctrine of Christ, for it confounds God's Order.

God's Order is laid forth by Paul in 1 Corinthians 11:3:

"But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ;

and the head of the woman is the man;

and the head of Christ is God."

_______________________________

EJ Waggoner taught in 'Christ and his Righteousness' that before the earth and angels were created that Jesus proceeded from the Father, implying that he had a beginning.

This is clearly error and speculation - Jesus Christ as the son of God has no beginning or end of life, so I suspect his understanding of the Holy Spirit may have been equally flawed.

He may have been an instrument to bring 'a most precious message' but that doesn't mean he was right about everything.

[John317]

...why espouse the doctrine of Jones & Waggoner in half-measure when it is indeed a most precious message from heaven? Neither was Trinitarian, both were Protestant.

Jones and WAggoner were not prophets of God, although God did give them a most precious message for the church. However, both Jones and Waggoner underwent changes in their view of Christ and the Godhead. Neither one taught the same thing about Christ and the Godhead in 1900 that they had taught in the 1870s and 80s.

Our standard has to be the Bible and the Spirit of prophecy. Both Jones and Waggoner made mistakes, as is evident from Ellen White's communications with them.

Our Pioneers never would have wanted modern SDAs to base our beliefs on the Pioneers. They would have been the first to urge us to find the truth in Scripture and in the writings of God's last-day prophet.

As I've shown many times before, our Pioneers were not even in agreement about the Godhead. They had disagreements over the nature of Christ and the Holy Spirit. Some believed Christ was a created being, while others taught that Christ was equal with the Father. Ellen White taught that there are "three holiest Beings in heaven," or "three great Worthies," "three great dignitaries of heaven," etc. She said she prayed to "the three great Worthies," and she defined these as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Ellen White wrote that the "Holy Spirit is a person," "a divine person," and a "distinct personality," "the third person of the Godhead." These are not things that you would ever find in the writings of James White, Joseph Bates, Uriah Smith, Loughborough, or J.H. Waggoner.

Yet at the same time, we should not forget that among the early SDAs were also Trinitarians. And James White wrote that the doctrine of the Trinity should never be a test of character or fellowship among the early Adventists.

[John317]

EJ Waggoner taught in 'Christ and his Righteousness' that before the earth and angels were created that Jesus proceeded from the Father, implying that he had a beginning.

This is clearly error and speculation - Jesus Christ as the son of God has no beginning or end of life, so I suspect his understanding of the Holy Spirit may have been equally flawed.

He may have been an instrument to bring 'a most precious message' but that doesn't mean he was right about everything.

All true.

E.J. Waggoner was changing his view of Christ between 1887 and 1900. So was A.T. Jones. It appears to me that A. T. Jones in fact ended up a believer in the Trinity.

E.J. Waggoner enjoyed pointing out the big differences between himself and his father in their views of the Godhead. It illustrates the differences between the Pioneers in this area.

[John317]

Please define the word "Person".

Used of God, the 3 persons of the Godhead, it means "a thinking intelligent being." See definition #1. Thus the Father is the first Person of the Godhead; the Son is the second Person of the Godhead; and the Holy Spirit is the third Person of the Godhead. Persons have a will, intelligence, can feel, make choices, etc.

Ellen White never used the word "person" in regard to a non-person or in regard to anything except a living being, whether human or divine.

Webster's Dictionary, 1828--

PERSON, n. per'sn. [L. persona; said to be compounded of per, through or by, and sonus, sound; a Latin word signifying primarily a mask used by actors on the state.]

1. An individual human being consisting of body and soul. We apply the word to living beings only, possessed of a rational nature; the body when dead is not called a person. It is applied alike to a man, woman or child.

A person is a thinking intelligent being.

2. A man, woman or child, considered as opposed to things, or distinct from them.

A zeal for persons is far more easy to be perverted, than a zeal for things.

3. A human being, considered with respect to the living body or corporeal existence only. The form of her person is elegant.

You'll find her person difficult to gain.

The rebels maintained the fight for a small time, and for their persons showed no want of courage.

4. A human being, indefinitely; one; a man. Let a person's attainments be never so great, he should remember he is frail and imperfect.

[John317]

[quote name="Gordon1One God in Three Persons is not the doctrine of Christ, for it confounds God's Order.

God's Order is laid forth by Paul in 1 Corinthians 11:3:

"But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ;

and the head of the woman is the man;

and the head of Christ is God."

[/color"]

But you seem to neglect the fact that the Scriptures refer to Christ as God and to the Holy Spirit as God.

It's true that Christ has voluntarily subjected Himself to God the Father, but that doesn't mean Christ is not fully God. "The Word was God." The Revised English gives it correctly: "What God was, the Word was."

Here are just a few of the main verses of the NT showing that Christ and the Holy Spirit are both God:

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.

1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

John 20--

20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.

Acts 5--

5:3 But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back [part] of the price of the land?

5:4 Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.

Heb. 1: 3--

1:3 (the Son)... Who being the brightness of [his] glory, and the express image of his (the Father's) 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;

1:6 And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him. (Compare Rev. 22: 9, "Worship God!")

1:8 But unto the Son [he saith], Thy throne,[color:#FF0000] O God, [is] for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness [is] the sceptre of thy kingdom.

1:10 And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands:

Phil. 2--

2:6 [Christ] Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

Col. 2:9--

2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

[John317]

Gordon1, let's look at some statements by Ellen White in regard to the Godhead:

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 powers will co-operate with the obedient subjects of heaven in their efforts to live the new life in Christ.-- Special Testimonies, Series B, No. 7, pp. 62, 63. (1905) {Ev 615.1}

The Pre-existent, Self-existent Son of God.--Christ is the pre-existent, self-existent Son of God.... In speaking of his pre-existence, Christ carries the mind back through dateless ages. He assures us that there never was a time when He was not in close fellowship with the eternal God. He to whose voice the Jews were then listening had been with God as one brought up with Him.--Signs of the Times, Aug. 29, 1900. {Ev 615.2}

He was equal with God, infinite and omnipotent. . . . He is the eternal, self-existent Son.--Manuscript 101, 1897. {Ev 615.3}

What do these statements say about Christ? For instance, what does it mean to say Christ is "self-existent"? And that there are three living persons of the heavenly trio? Who are these living persons?

[Pastor_Chick]

[...]

How much clearer can Ellen White be than "three holiest Beings in heaven" and "the three great Worthies"?

John,

I realize that much of your posting technique is intended to arrest the attention of other forum readers.

As I (Pastor Chick) read your words to me, they are a larger than default font and in blazing red color. That is how they look on my computer screen. AND, your point is addressing ME specifically.

Now, earlier, you told me I have made "false accusations;" you have rebuked me for not treating others as I would want to be treated. If I am guilty of those, please forgive me. I am not yet aware of my sin.

Additionally, I am a person with perceptions and feelings. What I have said may not make sense to you, but I do not think my computer screen is telling me lies. I share this one example so that you may give some thought to the possibility that sensitivity to the feelings of others can be an asset.

John, I would rather die than to unnecessarily offend you or anyone else. I also realize that in the "heat" of "debate"/discussion, a person's zeal may overtake good reason. Though feeling "trampled" at times, I have forgiven you.

[Dr. Waite]

After reading the following quotations, how can one believe that Ellen G. White supported the worship of a third divine or Godhead being?

PP 36

GC 493

SR 15, 22

5T 291

3T 328

3T 115

DA 769 (1898)

Signs of the Times, Jan. 16, 1870, par 22, May 12 1890, par 2, Dec. 12, 1895, par 7, Aug 27, 1902, par 15

Bible Echo Oct 28, 1895, par 4

YI June 14, 1900, par 5

8T 157

YI July 7, 1898, par 2

GC 676

CG 568