Ellen White & the Trinity

[Gregory Matthews]

Responses may be started in several ways.

1) In a given situation, I could say:  Frank, does not live by what he preaches.  He does not walk his talk.  He is a hypocrite.

Or I could say:

2) In post X, Frank sets down a standard by which he believes Biblically we should follow in our posts.

In post Y, Frank, seems to me to violate the standard that he set in Post X.

There is a major difference between # 1 & # 2.

# 1 is clearly a personal attack.  It calls him a hypocrite and states that he does not walk his talk.

#2 does none of the above. It's focus is on the content of the posts, rather than Frank.

 

 

[Kevin H]

On Tuesday, February 23, 2016 at 1:21 PM, JoeMo said:

"This people honoreth me with their lips; But their heart is far from me.   But in vain do they worship me, teaching as their doctrines the precepts of men." (Matt. 15:8-10; Is. 29:13)

I believe that the concept of a Triune God (3 distinct persons in one God); and the concept of the Holy Spirit is a distinct 3rd Person of the Trinity rather than the Spirit of the Father or the Spirit of Christ is a time-honored "precept of men" dating back over a thousand years to some pronouncement by the Catholic Church. 

 

I'm sorry that I cannot give a more specific quote, but I've listened to some recorded lectures of one of my former professors Dr. Jim Fleming* says that one of his colleagues (sadly he does not name him)  from Hebrew University is a Jewish Rabbi and was quite upset at his discovery since he was anti-trinity and assumed that it was a doctrine made by the Catholic church well into the Christian era. However this Rabbi is the world's leading scholar on second temple Judaism. According to Dr. Fleming his colleague discovered that the trinity was developed by second temple Rabbis trying to explain concepts that are implied in the Old Testament as Israel moved from a more ancient/eastern thought to a more modern/western thought process which did not see or recognize these concepts in the Bible.  However after the church-synagogue split of 135 AD the Jews and Christians ended up splitting the doctrine between them with the Jews going from holding the view of the trinity into focusing more on the oneness of God, and the Christians went more for the threeness of God, which evolved into the view of trinity formed by the Catholic Church. Among the Eastern Orthodox views of the trinity you can find preserved what is closer to the original Jewish/Early Christian view.

I believe that the lecture series where he discusses the trinity is the series "Biblical Imagery in the Prophets and Jesus"

http://www.biblicalresources.net/product.cfm?product=32

He also deals with it in "Act's New Discoveries from the Early Church"

http://www.biblicalresources.net/product.cfm?product=37

And in his lecture series "Lest we forget: A history of Anti-Jewishness in the church"

What I found fascinating is that the way Dr. Fleming describes second temple Trinity is exactly how Mrs. White's view of the trinity developed.  Also you talk about how Mrs. White is not infallible, which is true (and no I don't hold to the Adventist tradition "Mrs. White was not infallible it's just that she never made any mistakes.") but her errors are more in using something to illustrate the larger message. She says that the framework that she is working with is what comes directly from God. This included that God did lead in the Millerite movement and that we should not give it up as not being lead by God. the formation of the church and guidance in say evangelizing cities. Setting up the health and education work, and finally the issues of the Great Controversy.

When we come to the issues of the Great Controversy the trinity becomes central. It is a theme of 3s. that are all interrelated: The three aspects of the trinity, That Satan has 3 lies against God and that each one attacks a member of the trinity. Different stories in the Old Testament. (while she does not mention it the 3 thirds of the 10 commandments fit her structure.) Events in the New Testament, especially the 3 wilderness temptations which deal with the 3 aspects of the trinity, the events that Mrs. White focuses on in the chapters of the passion of Christ, and that the trinity if fully vindicated in the 3 angels messages.

These are not things like "What is the meaning of the daily" or whether or not there was an innkeeper in the birth story of Jesus in Luke or if there were Jews keeping pigs when Jesus healed the man etc. These are central themes to her writing and to Adventist theology. Satan tries to get us to chase off on all these subtopics where Mrs. White says we will find errors or things where she gives some advice for one situation but has "balancing statements or practices" that shows that what she said on those are not the final answer.

I hope this helps.

 

* Dr. James Fleming, lecturer, is the director of Biblical Resources, LLC and the CEO of Biblical History Center, a museum of daily life in biblical times, located in LaGrange, GA. He obtained his Ed.D. degree from Southwestern Theological Seminary, Ft. Worth, TX.

He has lived and worked as an archaeologist and educator in Israel since 1974 and has taught classes in the School for Overseas Students at Hebrew University and the Ecumenical Institute in Jerusalem.

Dr. Fleming has developed courses in historical geography and biblical history, uniquely tying the studies with the biblical text, with an emphasis on the theological implications. He is the author of several dozen notebooks and teaching materials that are an excellent help to pastors and leaders.

[JoeMo]

Thanks for the resources, Kevin.  I'm at work right now and can't read them thoroughly; but I will later.

If the Trinity is such a central premise of Christianity, why is it not more obvious in scripture?  Why does it take professors and theologians and prophets to explain it to us?  If I were totally ignorant of the Bible and its contents; and stumbled across one and studied it with an open mind without the input of rabbis, priests, pastors theologians, etc., I don't think I would ever arrive at a "Trinity doctrine"  on my own.  I am a student of scripture and a believer; and I still don't see explicit evidence of a Trinity in scripture until I read some human's esoteric logic based on extra-biblical sources, mistranslation, and strained assumptions.  Other central themes are crystal clear - the sovereignty of God, Jesus' divinity, salvation by grace Jesus as Redeemer, 2nd coming, 10 commandments, etc.

I don't fault or judge anyone for being a Trinitarian any more than I would fault them for being Baptist.  It's just not part of my belief system based on my study.

As a hippie in another lifetime I was taught to "question all the answers". That's what I'm doing here.

[Kevin H]

First we are western thinkers. The trinity would have been in the eastern thought implications of the Old Testament. So it was a part of their culture which we are unfamiliar with. Second in the New Testament the Rabbis has already developed the theology and it was taken for granted. Thus the Bible did not need to spell it out to the people it was written to.

On the contrary, if the Pharisees were wrong, then why do the New Testament writers use the incorrect language. Why did they not correct the situation then instead of expect us to do it now?

[Gustave]

Ellen's statements about the peccability of Christ are absolutely incompatible with the Doctrine of the Trinity...

...Dr. Kellogg, was a militant anti-Trinitarian that the denomination used for it's news paper debates.

...Until Dr. Kellogg began to accept the Trinity - he was ejected shortly after that.

 

 

[Kevin H]

But Dr. Kellogg also came to see God as "Everything" and while "Everything" is quite big, it is still much smaller than the infinite he was making God too small. That was where the issue lay.

[Gustave]

13 hours ago, Kevin H said:

But Dr. Kellogg also came to see God as "Everything" and while "Everything" is quite big, it is still much smaller than the infinite he was making God too small. That was where the issue lay.

He believed that God was actually what held everything in the universe together as well as made it...

...In other words he believed that anyone lookin at nature or the human body for instance.

...Would be forced to conclude that a craftsman was responsible for the things existence.

 

Kellogg got himself into trouble with SDA leadership & Ellen when he speculated that God the Holy Spirit was behind it...

...SDA's at that time and well past were militant in their believe that God the Father had a body of flesh.

...SDA's at that time also were militant in their belief that prior to the Incarnation Michael & Lucifer  the archangels also had bodies of flesh.

 

Kellogg wrote many articles ( more like newspaper debates ) arguing that God ( to mean the Father ) always had a body of flesh...

...After Kellogg began to believe in the Trinity he fell in ill favor with the SDA leadership.

...A Christian person today ( nor back then ) would not read living temple and concluded it's was Pantheism.

...To SDA's at that time  it was a historic departure from their deposit of faith.

 

 

 

 

[8thdaypriest]

On 2/25/2016 at 8:06 PM, Green Cochoa said:

Joe and Rachel,

It would appear that both of you are setting yourselves up as wiser than the Bible.  Joe is making assumptions from inferences and accepting a "context" over a "proof text."  Rachel is contradicting the text more directly to say she doesn't believe it at face value (that "the Spirit is pleading with God"), but rather that the Spirit is working on human hearts instead.

You may both be sincere, but I don't see how I can legitimately have an honest Bible study under these conditions. 

Green Cochoa.

Green,

Please refrain from derogatory comments.  Neither Joe nor I believe we are "wiser than the Bible".  We simply do not accept the interpretation that you believe in. 

If we must accept the interpretation that you favor, before we can have "an honest Bible study" - with you, then it would probably be best to agree to disagree - and move on.  

I will participate in discussions concerning the Trinity doctrine, any time they come up at CA.  If you do not wish to "study" with me, that's your choice.  Just ignore my posts.  

[8thdaypriest]

On 2/23/2016 at 8:38 AM, Green Cochoa said:

Here is where you and I may need to part ways.

Green,

This forum accepts person of DIFFERENT views.  If you do not wish to dialog with me, or respond to my posts - then simply ignore them.  That's how it works.

[8thdaypriest]

On 2/25/2016 at 3:08 PM, Kevin H said:

First we are western thinkers. The trinity would have been in the eastern thought implications of the Old Testament. So it was a part of their culture which we are unfamiliar with. Second in the New Testament the Rabbis has already developed the theology and it was taken for granted. Thus the Bible did not need to spell it out to the people it was written to.

On the contrary, if the Pharisees were wrong, then why do the New Testament writers use the incorrect language. Why did they not correct the situation then instead of expect us to do it now?

Kevin,

Thanks for the references.  I will check them out.  Not sure I can readily accept "theology" put forth by the same Rabbis that burdened the people with laws of their own creation (the oral Torah).

[APL]

On 10/29/2015 at 9:51 AM, 8thdaypriest said:

In Scripture, there are only TWO beings - Father and Son.  What I found in Ellen White's writings caused me to realize that she was NOT infallible, and HAD made mistakes. 

 

"“If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upraideth not; and it shall be given him. But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering.” “And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him because we keep his commandments and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.” “And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life. Little children keep yourselves from idols.” The Lord is soon to come. We want that complete and perfect understanding which the Lord alone can give. It is not safe to catch the spirit from another. WE WANT THE HOLY SPIRIT, WHICH IS JESUS CHRIST. If we commune with God, we shall have strength and grace and efficiency.” {Lt66-1894 (April 10, 1894) par. 18} - EGW *previously unpublished statement

 

"JEHOVAH, OUR FATHER, AND HIS SON JESUS CHRIST ARE ALONE TO BE EXALTED. The knowledge of God is eternal life to those who receive it. His holy banner is to stand elevated above all the greatness of the greatest men, above all the honor and glory of the world.” {Ms11-1898 (June 29, 1898) par. 11} - EGW *previously unpublished statement

 

"Christ is to be known by the blessed name of Comforter.” {Ms7-1902 (January 26, 1902) par. 10} - EGW *previously unpublished statement

 

"Before He left them, Christ gave His followers a positive promise that after His ascension He would send them the Holy Spirit. “Go, ye therefore,” He said, “and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father (a personal God) and of the Son (a personal Prince and Saviour), and of the Holy Ghost (sent from heaven to represent Christ); teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you; and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.” {Ms41-1897 (April 29, 1897) par. 34} - EGW *inserted comments in original. *previously unpublished statement

 

Christ the Word, the only begotten of God, was one with the eternal Father,—one in nature, in character, and in purpose,—the only being in all the universe that could enter into all the counsels and purposes of God. By Christ, the Father wrought in the creation of all heavenly beings. “By him were all things created, that are in Heaven, . . . whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers;” [Colossians 1:16.] and to Christ, equally with the Father, all Heaven gave allegiance. {GC88 493.1}

 

[8thdaypriest]

Jesus would have had a hard time explaining to 11 Galilean fishermen, what a cell-phone is.  I believe the Spirit comforter is like a cell phone, built in.  We all have built in "receivers".  God can talk to us.  Our brains are wonderful bio-computers.  Satan knows this - which is how he also puts thoughts into our minds. 

[8thdaypriest]

12 hours ago, APL said:

"“If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upraideth not; and it shall be given him. But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering.” “And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him because we keep his commandments and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.” “And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life. Little children keep yourselves from idols.” The Lord is soon to come. We want that complete and perfect understanding which the Lord alone can give. It is not safe to catch the spirit from another. WE WANT THE HOLY SPIRIT, WHICH IS JESUS CHRIST. If we commune with God, we shall have strength and grace and efficiency.” {Lt66-1894 (April 10, 1894) par. 18} - EGW *previously unpublished statement

 

"JEHOVAH, OUR FATHER, AND HIS SON JESUS CHRIST ARE ALONE TO BE EXALTED. The knowledge of God is eternal life to those who receive it. His holy banner is to stand elevated above all the greatness of the greatest men, above all the honor and glory of the world.” {Ms11-1898 (June 29, 1898) par. 11} - EGW *previously unpublished statement

 

"Christ is to be known by the blessed name of Comforter.” {Ms7-1902 (January 26, 1902) par. 10} - EGW *previously unpublished statement

 

"Before He left them, Christ gave His followers a positive promise that after His ascension He would send them the Holy Spirit. “Go, ye therefore,” He said, “and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father (a personal God) and of the Son (a personal Prince and Saviour), and of the Holy Ghost (sent from heaven to represent Christ); teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you; and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.” {Ms41-1897 (April 29, 1897) par. 34} - EGW *inserted comments in original. *previously unpublished statement

 

Christ the Word, the only begotten of God, was one with the eternal Father,—one in nature, in character, and in purpose,—the only being in all the universe that could enter into all the counsels and purposes of God. By Christ, the Father wrought in the creation of all heavenly beings. “By him were all things created, that are in Heaven, . . . whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers;” [Colossians 1:16.] and to Christ, equally with the Father, all Heaven gave allegiance. {GC88 493.1}

 

"The Holy Spirit is Himself divested of the personality of humanity and independent thereof.  He would represent Himself as present in all places by His Holy Spirit, as the Omnipresent."  Manuscript Releases Vol. Fourteen, pg.23-24

And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying out, 'Abba, Father!'" (Galatians 4:6).

"After His inauguration, the Spirit came and Christ was indeed glorified, even with the glory which He had from all eternity with the Father.  During His humiliation upon this earth, the Spirit had not descended with all its efficacy; and Christ declared that if He went not away, it would not come, but that if He went away, He would send it.  It was a representation of Himself, and after He was glorified it was manifest."  Signs of the Times May 17, 1899, pr.3

After Mrs White's death, in later editions of her writings, the publishers later went through and changed the "it" to "He" in references concerning the Holy Spirit. 

 

[Green Cochoa]

13 hours ago, APL said:

"Before He left them, Christ gave His followers a positive promise that after His ascension He would send them the Holy Spirit. “Go, ye therefore,” He said, “and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father (a personal God) and of the Son (a personal Prince and Saviour), and of the Holy Ghost (sent from heaven to represent Christ); teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you; and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.” {Ms41-1897 (April 29, 1897) par. 34} - EGW *inserted comments in original. *previously unpublished statement

You can't "represent" somebody if you "are" that somebody, can you?  This statement appears to be teaching the opposite of what its poster may have intended.  To represent someone means to go in their place, as their substitute.

Blessings,
Green Cochoa.

[8thdaypriest]

"The Father and the Son alone are to be exalted" (YI 7/7/1898).  This was two years AFTER Desire of Ages was published.  In Desire of Ages, the Holy Spirit is called "the third person of the Godhead".  (pg 671)

My understanding is that Mrs White's understanding of the Holy Spirit CHANGED right around 1896. 

I have a copy of the letter sent from Herbert C. Lacey to Elder Leroy Froom, dated Aug. 30, 1945.  Lacey wrote in answer to Froom's letter. 

Froom had asked, "I am coming to you with an inquiry that you may or may not feel free to answer.  It pertains to the beginnings of the discussion of Trinitarianism versus Arianism.  Elder Andreasen has been under the impression that when Mrs. White began to write those statements, most of which now appear in Desire of Ages concerning the eternal existence of Christ and His oneness with the Father through all past time, that there was no agitation or discussion of any sort."  

Froom asks Lacey about his lectures at the 1989 conference at Cooranbong (on "The personality of the Holy Spirit"), and asks whether Mrs. White "was given light that was possibly discomfiting to those who had believed the Arian view of the relatively recent origin of Christ."   

In Lacey's return letter, He talks about Professor Prescott's influence upon Marion Davis (Mrs White's underwriter for Desire of Ages).  Prescott believed that Christ had always existed as a separate being from the Father, and never came into being - as the Son. 

Lacey wrote:  "I have always known that Elder Uriah Smith was an Arian in belief.  ("Thoughts on Daniel and the Revelation") reveal that!"

Lacey wrote:  "But we, as a family, had been brought up in the church of England, and were naturally, may I say, Trinitarian.  We just believed it, subconsciously, and I do not remember our ever discussing the question with the brethren who brought us into the Truth.  . . . "  He further comments about his mother's discomfort with the Holy Spirit being referred to as "it" or "its". 

"Desire of Ages" came out in 1898. 

Lacey then quoted the following paragraph by Mrs White, written 9 years later, which appeared in Testimonies, Series B, No 7, pg 63, November 1905.

"The Comforter that Christ promised to send after He ascended to heaven, is the Spirit in all the fulness of the Godhead, making manifest the power of divine grace to all who believe in Christ as a personal Saviour.  There are three living persons in 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 cooperate with the obedient subjects of heaven in their efforts to live the new life in Christ." 

(Lacey continues)  "exactly as I had endeavoured to teach 9 years previously".

My point in quoting from Lacey's letter to Froom, is that dueling quotes from Mrs White can be used endlessly to support one's view - either of God the Father who beget a Son in His exact image OR of three co-eternal divine beings.  Mrs White wrote statements supporting BOTH views.  She NEVER SAID, "God is three co-eternal, co-equal divine beings".  Others came up with that description, basing it on those statements that seemed to support this view.  

Either the LORD told her (after some 56 years of ministry) that God is actually three divine beings, OR she was influenced (mostly by Prescott and Lacey), OR her statements have been misunderstood.   We can't really know, because she NEVER SAID that the Lord had "shown" her anything concerning this issue.  She DID CHANGE.  Her writings CHANGED. 

Which is WHY I personally must go to the Bible only, as my guide. 

 

 

[APL]

It is not essential for us to be able to define just what the Holy Spirit is. Christ tells us that the Spirit is the Comforter, "the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father." It is plainly declared regarding the Holy Spirit that, in His work of guiding men into all truth, "He shall not speak of Himself." John 15:26; 16:13. {AA 51.3}

 

The nature of the Holy Spirit is a mystery. Men cannot explain it, because the Lord has not revealed it to them. Men having fanciful views may bring together passages of Scripture and put a human construction on them, but the acceptance of these views will not strengthen the church. Regarding such mysteries, which are too deep for human understanding, silence is golden. {AA 52.1}