Early Adventist Views on the Trinity and Divinity

Prior to 1888, the Seventh-day Adventist pioneers maintained a non-trinitarian position in their writings, as they explicitly rejected the traditional Trinitarian creeds of their day while simultaneously upholding the full divinity of Jesus ChristATO 149.1+2. They believed that the Trinitarian view degraded the value of the atonement because it implied that only a human nature died on the cross, whereas they maintained that the sacrifice for sin was truly divineATO 149.1+2.

Rejection of Traditional Trinitarianism

The pioneers found the traditional doctrine of the Trinity to be unscriptural and contradictory to the biblical account of the sacrifice of ChristAERS 164.2+1.

• Atonement concerns: Leading writers argued that if Christ was the "second person in the trinity" who could not suffer or die, then only a mere human body died for the sins of the worldATO 149.1+1. They viewed a human offering as insufficient to meet the claims of God's violated law and provide redemption for the human raceATO 149.1+1.

• Human inventions: Many pioneers associated the trinitarian faith with the Roman Catholic Church and the Council of Nice, viewing it as a human opinion and invention rather than a scriptural factAMS January 16, 1890, page 19.2+3.

• Jargon and confusion: Some writers described the controversies surrounding the Trinity as "interminable jargon" and a "bitter contention over words to no profit"TOB 179.2.

The Relationship Between the Father and the Son

While the pioneers were non-trinitarian, they were not Unitarians; they rejected the Unitarian view that Christ was merely a good man or a prophet without pre-existenceATO 149.1+2.

• Derived life: They taught that while Christ is divine and perfect, his life was given to him by the Father John 5:26ATO 131.1.

• Self-existence: The Father alone was viewed as supremely and absolutely self-existent, making every other being, including the Son, dependent upon Him for life and beingATO 131.1.

• Divine unity: The Father and the Son were understood to be one in attributes, power, and purpose, but not one numerically or in personalityTTA 18.3+2.

Ellen G. White’s Perspective

Ellen G. White consistently emphasized the pre-existence and full deity of Jesus Christ, yet her language also highlighted the distinct personalities within the Godhead20MR 94.2+2.

• Christ’s Divinity: She taught that Christ was the "divine Son of God" and "the Word made flesh," in whom dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily Colossians 2:91SM 246.1+1. She maintained that Christ was equal with the Father in dignity and glory20MR 94.2+1.

• The Three Heavenly Powers: She frequently referred to the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit as the "three great Worthies," the "three heavenly authorities," and the "three holiest beings in heaven"7MR 267.2+3.

• Personalities: She described the Father and the Son as "two distinct individuals" who are united in their work for the salvation of manSITI June 19, 1884, page 377.5+1.

• The Holy Spirit: She identified the Holy Spirit as the "Third Person of the Godhead" and a regenerating agent who carries out the work of the RedeemerHLv 450.3.

Ultimately, the pioneers sought to avoid what they called "Socinianism"—the belief in a merely human Christ—while also avoiding Trinitarian definitions they felt were philosophically confusing and undermined the reality of the divine death of the Son of GodAERS 164.2+2. They chose to rely on the "plain common sense" of the scriptures to define the relationship between the Father, the Son, and the Holy SpiritARSH March 12, 1857, page 146.23+1.