The Trinity Doctrine and the Adventist Church - (Page 6)



INTRODUCTION

This page is for Seventh day Adventists and those who follow the Spirit of Prophecy. Most Christians are not aware that history and the Bible reveal that the Adventist Church was specifically raised by God to restore a lost Commandment, teach end time Bible prophecy and prepare the world for the upcoming mark of the beast. However, in so saying, it is tragic that Satan slowly over time succeeded in bringing the trinity doctrine into the Adventist Church.

People from the Vatican have also found their way into the Adventist Church and some have even been caught. Jesuit priest Alberto Rivera testified on video that the Jesuit Order was instructed by the Black Pope to infiltrate the SDA Church and bring it over to Rome.

This is not something members want to hear, but it is something that they should expect since God said that Satan would make war with His remnant. (Revelation 12:17) It is up to Adventists to research this and take back the truth they once had, not just deny that it has happened.

What is the Trinity Doctrine as accepted by Seventh-day Adventists?

This was explained by Ekkehardt Mueller who is an Associate Director of the Adventist Biblical Research Institute. Mueller's explanation of the trinity doctrine is the same as the basics of the Athanasian Creed. This is the creed upon which the entirety of the Roman Catholic faith is built. The Athanasian Creed (Roman Catholic Creed) says that the one God is three divine personalities in one indivisible substance or essence. This is now the official faith of Seventh day Adventists.


Note that some Adventist Trinitarians try and defend their belief by attempting to discredit the above facts. They do this by saying, “non-Trinitarians use the reasoning that the trinity doctrine comes from Catholic theology and therefore must be false.” But saying that it is Catholic and “therefore” must be false is not what is claimed. The facts are that the trinity doctrine is Catholic and it is “also” a false doctrine. The three in one god idea came from Athanasius whose teacher was Origen who “believed in the doctrine of Purgatory, transubstantiation, transmigration of the soul and reincarnation of the soul. The Scriptures were not literal.” — (See Dr. Ken Matto, Origen's Gnostic Belief System). I trust that no one will claim that just because these things are Catholic that it does not mean they are false! They are Catholic and they are just as false as the trinity doctrine that came from the same source.

The continued response to hide the facts is to claim the Catholic doctrine of the trinity has differences from the Seventh day Adventist doctrine, which is not totally incorrect, but is also not the full truth. On some points the Adventist Church does differ from orthodoxy, but regarding the basic premise and pagan part of this doctrine, meaning that the one God is three persons in one and that the Holy Spirit is another literal being, it is exactly the same and they fail to mention this significant fact. The image above shows the Shield of the Trinity for the Catholic Church and for the Adventist Church and they are exactly the same in this respect.

Mueller wrote “There is only one God (Deut. 6:4), however, Father, Son and Holy Spirit are all called God (Matthew 27:46, John 20:28: Acts 5:3-4). Consequently, we do not worship three Gods, but one God who reveals Himself in and consists of three “persons”.” — (Ekkehardt Mueller, Biblical Research Institute, Reflections newsletter, July 2008, p. 9, 'Scripture Applied, - A Bible Study'). He then added “The three persons share one indivisible nature.” — (Ibid)

The Scriptures quoted by Mueller do not state that the Holy Spirit is God and are eisegesis. And in regards to Christ, Paul said, “there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.” 1 Corinthians 8:6. And John said “And this is life eternal, that they might know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.” John 17:3. Either of these verses alone reveal the error as they both exclude Christ when they say there is only one God. So the only contradiction is a belief in the trinity. It is this one indivisible nature part of the teaching which is problematic. This is because it is maintained that this constitutes the one God, (1+1+1=One). That is, the Father is God, Jesus is God, the Holy Spirit is God, and yet there are not three gods but one God, and that's the Trinity! Where did this originate? After God confused the languages at Babel, the sun began to be worshipped in three stages as three gods. That is, the rising sun was god, the midday sun was god, the setting sun was god, and yet there were not three gods but one god! In other words, 1+1+1=One! So it first came from sun and Satan worship and then entered the Church much later through Greek philosophy in the council of Nicea 325 AD. What scripture did they have? None! At least not until our adversary succeeded in adding his support to the Bible. So what is the true origin? Satan!

There is unending evidence that the text “the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.” was added to 1 John 5:7. The Adventist Biblical Research Institute also admits it. Their final conclusion was “...you should not use this text.” So the Adventist Church acknowledges the added text and say it should not be used, and yet I constantly hear Adventists and their key organizations using this verse. So they are not following their own advice and need this verse to support what they now believe. Because without this added text, the trinity doctrine does not exist in the Bible. It is simply an assumption based on human logic. There is also not one scripture in the Bible that states that the Holy Spirit is God, not one! Hover your mouse here for the SDA Bible Commentary on 1 John 5:7.

See page one for the implications of the trinity doctrine, page two for the pagan origins and page five for more on the added text to 1 John 5:7-8. The Site Pages menu is up and to the right of this text.

The History of How the Trinity Doctrine Got Into the Adventist Church

In 1931 the word trinity appeared in the Adventist statement of beliefs for the first time but it was not official. It was not for another 50 years before the trinity doctrine was officially accepted as being part of the doctrinal beliefs. It is interesting to see what was written in the Review about this issue shortly after its acceptance at the Dallas Convention in 1980.

“While no single Scripture passage states the doctrine of the Trinity, it is assumed as a fact... only by faith can we accept the existence of the Trinity.” — (Adventist Review, Vol. 158, No. 31, p. 4)

Is there any other doctrine that Seventh-day Adventists hold as truth that they have to take by faith? Is there any other doctrine that they have no definite Scripture that they can point to in proving their belief? No! Shouldn't it make Adventists question whether these things are true? People like Doug Batchelor have always stated that we must have a “Thus saith the Lord!” for what we believe and yet not so in this case. If God was truly a trinity and this was as important as it is made out, then why is there no Scripture that specifically states this? Let's begin by taking a closer look at how this all happened.

It is surprising how many Seventh day Adventists who have no knowledge of how the Church came to believe in the trinity and think that this doctrine was one of the Fundamental beliefs of our founding pioneers and of Ellen White herself. But not so! Some claim that the Adventist Church found progressive truth but in fact it was progressive error brought about primarily by one deceived man. This man searched over one hundred thousand pages of Ellen White's writings and managed to find a handful of quotes that could easily be misinterpreted as Trinitarian, but only if you chose to read them as such and only if you did not take the time to read what else she wrote that would reveal that she could in fact never have been a Trinitarian.

The pioneers of the SDA Church, R.F. Cottrell, Sr., and Jr., D.T. Bordeau, D.M. Canright, J.N. Andrews, Loughborough, John Matteson, A.C. Bordeau, A.T. Jones, W.W. Prescott, E.G. White, James White and Uriah Smith, were all in agreement that it was that “old Trinitarian absurdity” perpetrated from Rome. Adventist P.S. Cottrell wrote in the July 6, 1869, issue of Review and Herald, “To hold to the doctrine of the Trinity is not so much an evidence of evil intention as of intoxication from that wine of which all nations have drunk. The fact that it was one of the leading doctrines, if not the very chief, upon which the bishop of Rome was exalted to the popedom, does not say much in its favor ... This should cause men to investigate it for themselves, as when the spirits of devils working miracles undertake the advocacy of the immortality of the soul.”

Note that Ellen G. White (1827–1915) is the author of many popular books such as Desire of Ages and that most Adventists believe she was an end-time prophet. She was a humble woman and the most translated female author in the world. One of her books is the second biggest seller next to the Bible. I cannot prove or disprove whether or not she was a true prophet, but her books exalt Christ and the Word of God, and as a result they have brought people to the Lord by the thousands, so I would never consider saying anything negative about her. The countless people being drawn to the Lord through her books would certainly explain Satan attacking her. You can find more about end-time prophets and Ellen White by watching the last half (30 minutes) of this YouTube video. I will be writing as if she was a true prophet as the Adventist Church believes.

The Catholic Church says, “The mystery of the trinity is the central doctrine of the Catholic faith. Upon it are based all the other teachings of the church.” — (Handbook for Today's Catholic, p. 16). So this doctrine is also essential for unification of all Churches under Rome. As Roman Catholic Graham Greene wrote, “Our opponents sometimes claim that no belief should be held dogmatically which is not explicitly stated in scripture ... But the Protestant Churches have themselves accepted such dogmas, as the Trinity, for which there is no such precise authority in the Gospels,” — (Assumption of Mary, Life magazine, October 30, 1950, p. 51)

So the Catholic Church say that all their other teachings are based upon the doctrine of the trinity. This means that all the doctrines held by the Papal Church that Adventists consider erroneous all have their basis in the doctrine of the trinity. This is something Adventists should be giving careful consideration. And while their understanding is not exactly the same, the basic principles are the same, meaning trinity essentialness (three co-eternal divine personalities in the one being of God).

So how did the central doctrine of the Catholic Church end up as a doctrine of the Seventh day Adventist faith? It may come as a surprise to many that LeRoy Froom was primarily responsible for introducing the Trinitarian doctrine to the Seventh day Adventist Church, and purposefully set about to promote its acceptance and institute it into the beliefs of the Church.

In his book “Movement of Destiny”, which was published in 1971, he tells us how he came to write about the Holy Spirit and believe in the trinity. He states that what he calls the “Truth of the Trinity” was an inevitable evolution in our theology stemming from the 1888 Conference and message. He concludes his brief account by claiming that the book “The Desire of Ages” presented an “inspired depiction” of the trinity doctrine and because of this it has become our denominations' “accepted position.”

LeRoy Froom boasts that the “Desire of Ages” was even publicized in a prominent Catholic journal. Here are his own words, “...The Desire of Ages, of course, presented an inspired depiction, and was consequently destined to become the denominationally accepted position.... The Desire of Ages.... is one of the most highly esteemed books of the Denomination-a recognized classic, even publicized in such a Catholic journal as the “Universal Fatima News” for September 1965.” — (Movement of Destiny; pp. 323-324). As a professed Seventh day Adventist, why would he be so proud of its endorsement and publicity in a Catholic Journal?

The video Jesuits in the SDA Church has a testimony stating LeRoy Froom and Roy Anderson were seen working as Catholic Priests. This would explain Froom's enthusiasm about the Catholic journal. Then we have the issue of the book Truth Triumphant written by Adventist theologian Dr. B.J. Wilkinson. This book is an exhaustive study of the history of God’s Church in the wilderness and contained statements against the Catholic Church. Froom was angry about the book and ordered the destruction of the original offset press plates so the book could not be reprinted. Wilkinson was 80 years of age at this point and could not afford to have the plates made again. Why would an Adventist do such a thing unless of course he was truly a Catholic? Something is very wrong here and I am inclined to believe the testimony.

As for the Desire of Ages being a Trinitarian book. This reveals how easily so many Adventist Christians and Pastors have being deceived. Is it a Trinitarian book? Not a chance! Below is one of the quotes LeRoy Froom used from the book of Desire of Ages to convince the Adventist Church that Ellen White became a Trinitarian. This was occurring many years after her death and so we are supposed to believe that she never told anyone she had become a Trinitarian apparently.

“Jesus declared, “I am the resurrection, and the life.” In Christ is life, original, unborrowed, underived. “He that hath the Son hath life.” The divinity of Christ is the believer's assurance of eternal life.” — (Desire of Ages, p. 530) — Evangelism p. 616


This is one of the quotes that changed the Adventist Church to the trinity doctrine. But is this even a Trinitarian quote? Did Christ have this life all on His own or was it given to Him? In a later writing of this quote she gave more clarity. “I lay it down of myself” (John 10: 18), He said. In Him was life, original, unborrowed, underived. This life is not inherent in man. He can possess it only through Christ. He cannot earn it; it is given him as a free gift if he will believe in Christ as His personal Saviour.” — (E.G. White, Signs of the Times, April 8, 1897 and Selected Messages Book 1, pp. 296-297)

Did you notice that this original, unborrowed and underived life can also be given to man? The life of Christ was original, unborrowed and underived as it was given to Him by His Father. “For as the Father has life in Himself; so has He given to the Son to have life in Himself;” John 5:26.

How many things did Christ receive from His Father? “All things Christ received from God, but He took to give.” — (Desire of Ages, p. 21). And of course “all things” means everything! And John 5:26 further confirms this includes His life as you would expect. Ellen White said we can possess this same life through Christ.

All things means that God gave not only His life but even His own Spirit to His Son.

“He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?” The Father gave his Spirit without measure to his Son, and we also may partake of its fulness. Jesus says: “If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your Heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?” — (E.G. White, Review and Herald, November 5, 1908)

So the Father gave this life to His Son and through Christ it can be given to us also. Hence this quote is actually non-Trinitarian and yet this was one of the main quotes that convinced the Church she was a Trinitarian! This aided greatly in the Adventist Church becoming Trinitarian and yet it was all based on a deception from LeRoy Froom.

So what about the rest of the Desire of Ages? Are there any other non-Trinitarian quotes that would leave no doubt? Note the following quotes and the gray comment behind each one. Everyone of these quotes below are non-Trinitarian.

“All things Christ received from God, but He took to give. So in the heavenly courts, in His ministry for all created beings: through the beloved Son, the Father's life flows out to all; through the Son it returns, in praise and joyous service, a tide of love, to the great Source of all.” — (Desire Of Ages, p. 21) — Christ received everything from His Father including His life.

“The dedication of the first-born had its origin in the earliest times. God had promised to give the First-born of heaven to save the sinner.” — (Desire of Ages, p. 51) — Jesus was the Son of God before He came to Earth. The trinity doctrine teaches all three are one god and that the Father sent Himself to die playing the role of the Son.

“Satan well knew the position that Christ had held in heaven as the Beloved of the Father. That the Son of God should come to this earth as a man filled him with amazement and with apprehension. He could not fathom the mystery of this great sacrifice.” — (Desire of Ages, p. 115) — Same comment as above.

“While Jesus ministers in the sanctuary above, He is still by His Spirit the minister of the church on earth. He is withdrawn from the eye of sense, but His parting promise is fulfilled, “Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.” Matt. 28:20. While He delegates His power to inferior ministers, His energizing presence is still with His church.” — (Desire of Ages, p. 166) — It is the Holy Spirit of Christ here on Earth working in us, not another being as per the trinity doctrine which is Satan's counterfeit for the Godhead.

“The Saviour had spoken through all the prophets. “The Spirit of Christ which was in them” “testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.” — (Desire of Ages, p. 234) — The Holy Spirit in the Old Testament was also the Holy Spirit of Christ and not another literal being as per the trinity doctrine.

“It was Gabriel, the angel next in rank to the Son of God, who came with the divine message to Daniel.” — (Desire of Ages, p. 234) — The Holy Spirit should be the highest being next to the Son of God according to the trinity doctrine, but not so.

“When He should come forth from the tomb, their sorrow would be turned to joy. After His ascension He was to be absent in person; but through the Comforter He would still be with them, and they were not to spend their time in mourning.” — (Desire of Ages, p. 278) — Christ by His Holy Spirit is the Comforter, not another being as per the trinity doctrine. Note also: “This refers to the omnipresence of the Spirit of Christ, called the Comforter.” — (E.G. White, 14MR 179.2)

“In the beginning, the Father and the Son had rested on the Sabbath after their work of Creation.” — (Desire of Ages, p. 769) — The trinity doctrine teaches that the word “us” in Genesis 1:26 is the Father, Son and Holy Spirit as three beings that are only one. But it was only the Father and Son which other Scripture also reveals.

“And when He had said this, He [Christ] breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: ... Before the disciples could fulfill their official duties in connection with the church, Christ breathed His Spirit upon them. He was committing to them a most sacred trust, and He desired to impress them with the fact that without the Holy Spirit this work could not be accomplished.” — (Desire of Ages, p. 805) — The Holy Spirit given by Christ to His disciples and at Pentecost was His OWN Spirit. Not another literal being as per the trinity doctrine. John 20:22 quoted.

“Christ gives them the breath of His own spirit, the life of His own life. The Holy Spirit puts forth its highest energies to work in heart and mind.” — (Desire of Ages, p. 827) — The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ, not another being as per the trinity doctrine which was a teaching that begun 348 years after the cross and hence never came from Christ or the disciples. Note also: “The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ, which is sent to all men to give them sufficiency,” — (E.G. White, 14 Manuscript Releases, p. 84)

This is only a small sample of what could be given. Hence the teaching that Ellen White had become a Trinitarian by the time she wrote the Desire of Ages is a deception.

If a prolific writer such as Ellen White believed in the doctrine of the trinity, then why is it that she never used the terms “god the son”, “god the holy spirit”, “trinity”, “triune” or the pagan 1+1+1=1 formula to describe the Godhead in any of her one hundred thousand pages of writings? Also, her writings contain far more distinct non-Trinitarian phrases in comparison to the handful of Trinitarian sounding phrases that Froom had to search for to try and convince others that she was a Trinitarian. Were her writings contradictory? Of course not. So some claim she changed to a Trinitarian before she wrote the Desire of Ages, but as we have already seen, this is an outright lie and deception. She also wrote material which is unmistakably non-Trinitarian six years after the quotes that LeRoy Froom used which further proves they were abused and misunderstood.

It is also notable that LeRoy Froom did not start with the Bible and then move on to the writings of Ellen White. Instead he did the exact opposite! He actually began with the writings of Ellen White in order to try and find support for his belief. The fact is that Froom's belief in the trinity and the Holy Spirit came from outside of the Seventh day Adventist faith, and he set out to try and support it with statements from the Spirit of Prophecy. The reason LeRoy Froom had to go to outside sources, rather than use writings from our Pioneers, is because none of the early pioneers were Trinitarians and therefore did not agree with Froom's opinions. This is also why Froom had to wait until Ellen White and the pioneers were all dead and gone before he could try and achieve his goal. So how could this be a greater light as they called it a hundred years later?

And what about the Spirit of Prophecy. God had 70 years to instruct His remnant Church through Ellen White if He wanted to inform them that He was a trinity as believed in paganism. But God never said they were wrong, but He did tell Ellen White that He had already given them truth but they would discard it and account it as error. “The principles of truth that God in His wisdom has given to the remnant church, would be discarded. Our religion would be changed. The fundamental principles that have sustained the work for the last fifty years would be accounted as error...” — (E.G. White, 1 SM 204.2). And yet we are expected to believe that the Church was in serious error while they had a prophet to correct them but came into truth decades after she was gone. Does this sound right? It not only sounds wrong, it is wrong.

It is also notable that going from non-Trinitarian to Trinitarian could never be called progressive truth as that it is a total back flip and admits that the Adventist Church at one stage was in extremely serious error. The trinity doctrine teaches that there are three gods that are really only one god and that it is not a real father and son and that they are role playing. The non-Trinitarian view teaches there is a real Father and Son. One is a counterfeit from Satan to steal your salvation by not knowing who the Father and Son really are as your only access to the Father is through the Son. And if the trinity doctrine is wrong, the Holy Spirit is really a creation of Satan instead of being the Spirit of the Father and Son. Remember that Ellen White said that the Father gave his Spirit without measure to his Son and that the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ. One view came from the Catholic Church and one is what the Bible teaches. So which view is the counterfeit to steal your salvation?

“That most of the leading SDA pioneers were non-Trinitarian in their theology has become accepted Adventist history, surprising as it sounded to most Adventists 40 years ago when Erwin R. Gane wrote an M.A. thesis on the topic.” “More recently, a further question has arisen with increasing urgency: was the pioneers' belief about the Godhead right or wrong? “As one line of reasoning goes, either the pioneers were wrong and the present church is right, or the pioneers were right and the present Seventh-day Adventist Church has apostatized from biblical truth.” — (Jerry Moon, The Trinity, Chapter, Trinity and antitrinitarianism in Seventh-day Adventist history, page 190)

In 1969, Russell Holt did a study on the introduction of the trinity teaching into the Adventist Church as part of the requirements of his studies in Adventist history for Dr Mervyn Maxwell. He produced a term paper called, “The Doctrine Of The Trinity In The Seventh Day Adventist Denomination: Its Rejection And Acceptance.” Russell Holt divides the Seventh day Adventist denominational history on the trinity into three periods. During the first period, which he delineates as 1844-1890, he said, “the field was dominated by those who saw the trinity as illogical, unscriptural, pagan and subversive of the atonement. ... anti-Trinitarianism is the evident denominational stance.”

He next refers to the time period of 1890-1900 saying, “Roughly within this period, the course of the denomination on the trinity was decided by statements from Ellen G. White.” — (Ibid)

And finally, he states of the period between 1900-1930, “This period saw the death of most of those pioneers who had championed and held the anti-Trinitarian position. Their places were being taken by men who were changing their thinking, or had never opposed the doctrine...”

So Russell Holt says the Adventist Church still held their anti-Trinitarian stand until at least 1930. But how did the world see the Adventist Church in regards to the trinity before then, because most of the early pioneers had died just prior to 1930 including Ellen White? Note that James M. Gray, D.D. published a book in 1913 entitled Bible Problems Explained.

On page 81 James Gray answers a question regarding what Seventh day Adventists believe. So we find in 1913 that it was understood by the world that the SDA Church had not accepted the trinity doctrine. Since Ellen White was a key figure in the Church, this means James Gray and the world never saw Ellen White as a Trinitarian either and she died just two years later in 1915. But what happened after her death?


J.S. Washburn (1863-1955) was a retired Adventist minister and he and his wife were dear friends of Ellen and James White. He cites his interview with Ellen White at Ottawa, Kansas as being the turning point of his life. He was converted by J.N. Andrews at age 11, Baptized by James White at 12 and began preaching Adventism at age 21. This man knew his Bible very well in more ways than one. By 1918 he could recite Revelation, Romans, James and 2 Peter. By 1948 he had memorized the entire New Testament and was starting on Isaiah!

In 1921, he wrote a letter to F.M. Wilcox decrying the acceptance of the doctrine of the trinity as a serious setback to the Church. As you will soon see, it was Wilcox who was the first person responsible for introducing the word trinity into the Fundamental Beliefs of the Church. We can see from this letter, that since the death of Ellen White in 1915, things were starting to take place in private to bring about changes into the Adventist Church, one of which was the doctrine of the trinity.

“You were in that secret Bible Council which I believe was the most unfortunate thing our people ever did, and it seemed to me you were losing the simplicity of your faith.” — (Washburn to F.M. Wilcox letter, July 3, 1921)

Washburn repeated the same thoughts in a letter to General Conference President A.G. Daniells the following year.

“Under the authority, and sanction or permission at least of this so called Bible Institute, teachers were undermining the confidence of our sons and daughters in the very fundamentals of our truth, while the parents were not allowed to inquire into the sacred secrets of this private council. ... One of our most faithful workers said the holding of this Bible Institute was the most terrible thing that had ever happened in the history of this denomination.” — (J.S. Washburn, “An Open Letter to Elder A. G. Daniells and an Appeal to the General Conference,” 1922, pp. 28-29)

In 1926, the first wrong step was made toward ecumenical concessions by the General Conference voting that, “We recognize every agency that lifts up Christ before man as a part of the divine plan for the evangelization of the world, and we hold in high esteem the Christian men and women in other communions who are engaged in winning souls to Christ.” — (Relationship To Other Societies, General Conference Executive Committee, 1926)

In 1928, a second wrong step was made toward ecumenism by the acceptance of a new Bible, the American Revised version, above the Authorized King James version. (See Art., Wilkinson, Benjamin George, Seventh day Adventist Encyclopedia, Revised Edition, 1976, p. 1609)

In 1930, at the General Conference session, the Committee took a third wrong step, in a succession of wrong steps toward ecumenism by voting to publish a Church Manual and an official new Statement of Fundamental Beliefs.

LeRoy Froom played a major role in the three wrong steps in a succession of wrong steps toward ecumenism. Froom came to the General Conference to serve as secretary of the Ministerial Association in 1926, the year the first wrong step was voted in. The SDA Encyclopedia states, “Leroy Edwin Froom ... was called to the General Conference headquarters, where he was first associate secretary and then secretary of the Ministerial Association from 1926 to 1950.” And “During this time he founded The Ministry magazine and was its editor for 22 years.” — (Seventh day Adventist Encyclopedia, Second Revised Edition, 1995, Review and Herald Publishing Association)

In the second wrong step toward ecumenism, articles were published promoting a new Bible translation. These articles first appeared in The Ministry magazine founded and edited by Froom in 1928. The Seventh day Adventist Encyclopedia says, “Shortly after the death of Ellen G. White the leadership of the Seventh-day Adventist Church began to publish articles in the Signs of the Times and Ministry magazines promoting the American Revised Version of the Bible.” Who was the editor of The Ministry magazine in 1928 when these articles promoting the American Revised Version began to appear? LeRoy Froom!

Notice that the time was not long after the death of Ellen G. White. This event in 1928 took place 13 years after her death. It was much easier to change doctrine and policies without a living prophet to rebuke wrong moves by Seventh day Adventist Church leadership. Ellen White always corrected the leadership on major errors, and yet she never corrected her husband or any of the early pioneers for their anti-Trinitarian teaching. “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.” — (E.G. White, Review and Herald, May 25, 1905). The differences between the two teachings are extreme and serious, and so there would never have been silence on something with such major significance. God would have never have let the Church spend decades wrong on the most important of all doctrines.

In the third wrong step made toward ecumenism, Froom narrates in his own words the role he played in the formulation of a Creed and the first Seventh day Adventist Church Manual. Because of this ecumenical background, LeRoy Froom would later become the most important figure in the ecumenical, Evangelical conferences of 1955-1956. (LeRoy Edwin Froom, Movement of Destiny, pp. 469-470)

So why was it now possible in 1930 to write a new Fundamental Statement of Beliefs? Why was it now possible since 1928 to promote a new version of the Bible, inspired by the Jesuits of Rome, on a par with the Authorized Bible of pioneer Seventh day Adventists?
1.Uriah Smith became silent when he died in 1903.
2.Daniel Bordeau became silent at his death in 1905.
3.Ellen G. White became silent at her death in 1915.
4.Ellet J. Waggoner and Dr. David Paulson became silent when they died the following year in 1916.
5.Stephen N. Haskell became silent at his death in 1922.
6.Alonzo T. Jones became silent at his death in 1923.
7.John Norton Loughborough became silent at his death in 1924.

By the end of the 1930's the last remaining “old guard” pioneers had died and a new generation of Adventist leaders was coming into prominence. The timing was possible for the change in 1930 because certain individuals would not be able to sound an alarm. Their voices were now silent. Their writings could still speak but this would not be as effectual as a live pioneer speaking in protest to the changes that began in 1926. For many years the writings of pioneer Adventists were eliminated from the shelves of Adventist Book Centers. The writings of E.J. Waggoner and A.T. Jones had been virtually impossible to find until recent years. “Leaves Of Autumn Books” and other independent ministries are responsible for the restoration of pioneer Adventist writings being restored including to Adventist Book Centers.

LeRoy Froom was responsible for books being removed and eventually having them edited. This was because there is a tremendous amount of anti-Trinitarian material written by her husband and these pioneers and yet Ellen White wrote the following ten years after it is claimed she had become a Trinitarian.

“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.” — (E.G. White, Review and Herald, May 25, 1905, 'The work for this time', address at the 1905 General Conference, May 16)

Despite the strong anti-Trinitarian statements from the pioneers, Ellen White clearly had no trouble with anything they wrote. So from this alone we have two choices. Either she was a false prophet and had no trouble with people teaching serious error on something as important as who the Father and Son are. Or she never became a Trinitarian! Considering God would never ask for false doctrines to be reproduced, the answer once again is obvious.

Froom said, “The time had come, he [Edson Rogers] felt, for a suitable Statement of Faith to appear in our Yearbook,” — (lbid., Froom, Movement of Destiny, p. 418, Emphasis). Why did Edson Rogers, LeRoy Froom, and other Seventh day Adventist Church leaders feel that the old Fundamental Principles, published in the Yearbook from 1874 through 1914, were no longer suitable? Was there an error or heresy in the old Fundamental Principles? No! Leadership wished to change the old doctrines on:
1.“The Doctrine of the Trinity as Taught by Evangelicals.”
2.“The Human Nature of Jesus Christ,”
3.“The Place of Scripture and Prophecy in the Church,”
4.“The Final Atonement in Heaven,”

From their beginnings in the 1840's, Adventists opposed the adoption of a statement of beliefs arguing that the Bible was their only creed. “The Bible, and the Bible alone, is to be our creed, the sole bond of union; all who bow to this Holy Word will be in harmony. Our own views and ideas must not control our efforts. Man is fallible, but God's Word is infallible. Instead of wrangling with one another, let men exalt the Lord. Let us meet all opposition as did our Master, saying, “It is written.” Let us lift up the banner on which is inscribed, The Bible our rule of faith and discipline.” — (E.G. White, Review and Herald, December 15, 1885)

When Uriah Smith wrote his 25 statements of faith in 1872, he said that the document was only to provide information to inquirers and was not to be viewed as a creed. But after requests from Adventist missionaries in Africa who needed to provide information to other mission agencies, the General Conference executive committee requested Charles H. Watson, who was the GC president to appoint a committee to write a statement of beliefs. Review and Herald editor Francis M. Wilcox wrote the statement of 22 fundamental beliefs that now included the word Trinity which was accepted by the committee and first appeared in the 1931 Yearbook. This was the first time this Catholic word was seen in any Adventist Statement of Beliefs. So the Adventist Church did not begin to openly incorporate the trinity doctrine into its beliefs until 1931 being after the death of the pioneers, including Ellen White.

Commenting on Froom's publication of “The Coming of the Comforter” and the subsequent writing of others. Russell Holt states that, “The trinity began to be published, by 1931 it had triumphed, and had become the standard denominational position. Isolated stalwarts remained who refused to yield, but the outcome had been decided.”

In 1932, this Trinitarian Statement of Beliefs was added to the first “Church Manual” and all succeeding “Adventist Yearbooks” and began to appear in nearly all the Church books. It had not been voted on by the Church at large, or by the General Conference, nor even by a representative body of the leaders of the Adventist Church.

It was revealed to Ellen White that the Fundamental Principles they had were correct as they were God given, which includes their non-Trinitarian view of the Godhead. But the day would come where they would regard them as error. Thus changes to the Fundamental Principles that came after she died were wrong which would include the change to the trinity. Many of their books were also rewritten as you will soon see. “The enemy of souls has sought to bring in the supposition that a great reformation was to take place among Seventh-day Adventists, and that this reformation would consist in giving up the doctrines which stand as the pillars of our faith, and engaging in a process of reorganization. Were this reformation to take place, what would result? The principles of truth that God in His wisdom has given to the remnant church, would be discarded. Our religion would be changed. The fundamental principles that have sustained the work for the last fifty years would be accounted as error. A new organization would be established. Books of a new order would be written. A system of intellectual philosophy would be introduced.” — (E.G. White, Selected Messages Book 1, p. 204)

This is also supported by the following, “The past fifty years have not dimmed one jot or principle of our faith as we received the great and wonderful evidences that were made certain to us in 1844, after the passing of the time. ... Not a word is changed or denied.” — (E.G. White, Special Testimonies series B No. 7)

Since the Fundamental Principles of truth that God in His wisdom gave to the remnant church deny the trinity doctrine, then for Ellen White to be a Trinitarian, she would have had to be opposed to some of these truths they had believed for the first fifty years (1844-1904), and be disagreeing with God Himself and the Spirit of Prophecy. Adventist Trinitarians will claim that the Godhead is not one of the Pillars of faith but that is not so. Remember that the trinity doctrine teaches the Father and the Son are co-eternal and hence the same age, which means Jesus cannot truly be the Son of God. Thus the Father is not a literal Father and Jesus is not the literal Son of God. It is typical claimed they are just role playing or that it is spiritualized. This is why the trinity doctrine destroys the personality of the Father and the Son and the truth on the Godhead. So is their personality that of one person? Or do we have the personality of a real Father and Son?

There can be no doubt that the truth on the Godhead defines the personality of God and Christ and that the trinity doctrine destroys it as the pioneers and Ellen White both state. “The doctrine of the Trinity which was established in the church by the council of Nice, A.D. 325. This doctrine destroys the personality of God, and his Son Jesus Christ our Lord.” — (J.N. Andrews, Review and Herald, March 6, 1855, p. 185). Ellen White's husband said. “Here we might mention the Trinity, which does away [with] the personality of God, and of his Son Jesus Christ,” — (James White, Review and Herald, December 11, 1855). Note what Ellen White said about her husband and his writings. “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.” — (E.G. White, Testimonies for the Church, 3:502, 1875)

The following letters were written to Dr. Kellogg on March 16, 1903 in regards to his book the Living Temple which was at least eight years after it was claimed that Ellen White had become a Trinitarian. Adventist Trinitarians claim Kellogg was only teaching pantheism, but he was also teaching the trinity doctrine. See letter from A.G. Daniells to W.C. White. It is the trinity doctrine that affects the personality of God and who He is and this is also what Ellen White is rebuking Kellogg for in these following two letters that she sent to him on the same day. “You are not definitely clear on the personality of God, which is everything to us as a people. You have virtually destroyed the Lord God Himself.” — (E.G. White, Letter 300, 1903). “Your ideas are so mystical that they are destructive to the real substance, and the minds of some are becoming confused in regard to the foundation of our faith. If you allow your mind to become thus diverted, you will give a wrong mold to the work that has made us what we are—Seventh-day Adventists.” — (E.G. White, Letter 52, 1903). How can Trinitarians say that the truth on Pantheism was a foundation of their faith and exclude the Godhead? Who the Father and Son are is far more important. So here Ellen White reveals that the Godhead was one of the foundations of the faith of the Adventist Church.

This final quote could not be clearer and leaves no doubt that the non-Trinitarian view was one of the pillars of faith of the Adventist Church that was God given. “Those who seek to remove the old landmarks are not holding fast; they are not remembering how they have received and heard. Those who try to bring in theories that would remove the pillars of our faith concerning the sanctuary or concerning the personality of God or of Christ, are working as blind men. They are seeking to bring in uncertainties and to set the people of God adrift without an anchor.” — (E.G. White, MR760 9.5, 1905)

There is a reason Ellen White included the Godhead and the sanctuary together. Many do not realize that the trinity doctrine destroys the sanctuary message. Note the following non-Trinitarian quote. “While Jesus ministers in the sanctuary above, He is still by His Spirit the minister of the church on earth. He is withdrawn from the eye of sense, but His parting promise is fulfilled, “Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.” — (E.G. White, Desire of Ages, p. 166)

So of course God gave the Adventist Church the non-Trinitarian view as one of the pillars of faith. It would be very foolish to say otherwise. It does not get more important than knowing who the Father and Son truly are. Our salvation depends on this and why Satan works so hard to stop Christians from looking into this and seeing the extreme importance.

The apostle John called those who were teaching that three were one was antichrist because it denies there is a literal Son of God. Ellen White confirms this also. “Here the apostle has pointed out one of the marked characteristics of spiritualist teachers. They refuse to acknowledge Christ as the Son of God. Concerning such teachers the beloved John declares: “Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father.” 1 John 2:22, 23. Spiritualism, by denying Christ, denies both the Father and the Son, and the Bible pronounces it the manifestation of antichrist.” — (E.G. White, Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 686.1)

Ellen White also said, “Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father; [but] he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also. (Par. 17) ... He who denies the personality of God and of his Son Jesus Christ, is denying God and Christ. “If that which ye have heard from the beginning shall remain in you, ye also shall continue in the Son, and in the Father.” — (E.G. White, Review and Herald, March 8, 1906, Par. 19)

So what wrong belief denies the personality of God and His Son which is denying God and Christ? Her husband said, “Here we might mention the Trinity, which does away [with] the personality of God, and of his Son Jesus Christ,” — (James White, Review and Herald, December 11, 1855). While Ellen White did not use the word trinity, her husband did.

So if you accept the trinity doctrine then you deny the personality of God and His Son which Ellen White says denies God and Christ, which both the Apostle John and Ellen White said is antichrist. No longer is their personality that of a true Father and Son. To be called antichrist is serious!

Ellen White also said, “What constitutes the sin against the Holy Ghost? It is willfully attributing to Satan the work of the Holy Spirit.” — (E.G. White, 5T 634.1, 1889)

So the unpardonable sin and blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is attributing the work of the Holy Spirit to Satan. The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God, not another being which was a creation of Satan 348 years after the cross. So if you have this wrong belief, and said, look at the wonderful work of the Holy Spirit which was genuine, what are you doing? You are attributing the work of the Holy Spirit to Satan in fact which is the unpardonable sin!

This is clearly a serious salvation issue!

Most Christians are not interested in studying this topic as they as they assume the issue of the trinity doctrine is not important, which is what Satan wants you to believe. But I pray you can now see that the truth on the Godhead is by far the most important of all truths to know and understand. Despite this, we are expected to accept that it was progressive truth that took the Adventist Church from the non-Trinitarian view to the trinity doctrine. That is not progressive truth but a total reversal on the most important of all doctrines. So it seems we are supposed to believe that God gave many important truths to the Adventist Church but never told the Adventist Church what the correct view was on the Godhead which is a salvation issue. I cannot think of anything more absurd. The truth on the Godhead is just as important as the truth on the Sabbath as you cannot have true worship with the Father and Son if you have this wrong!

Are we expected to believe that God instructed Ellen White to go around correcting those with false doctrines while allowing the Adventist Church to believe the worst possible false doctrine of all being who the Father and Son and Holy Spirit truly are for many decades? That is plain foolishness. “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.” — (E.G. White, Review and Herald, May 25, 1905)

So God supposedly sent Ellen White from place to place rebuking those with false doctrines but never once told her that the Adventist Church was seriously wrong on who the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are. God would have corrected such a serious error in an instant. But He did not have to as He gave the truth as one of the Pillars of Faith from the beginning as you would expect. The change to the trinity doctrine took place very slowly over many decades. It did not get into the fundamental beliefs for 87 years which most did not even know had happened, and it was not official until 136 years after the Church began! There is only one spirit that does things slowly over time so as not to be noticed. That is the spirit of Satan!

God also sent Ellen White to correct those teaching false ideas in regards to God. “After the passing of the time in 1844, we had fanaticism of every kind to meet. Testimonies of reproof were given me to bear to some holding spiritualistic theories. There were those who were active in disseminating false ideas in regard to God. Light was given me that these men were making the truth of no effect by their false teachings. I was instructed that they were misleading souls by presenting speculative theories regarding God. I went to the place where they were and opened before them the nature of their work. ... This is only one of the instances in which I was called upon to rebuke those who were presenting the doctrine of an impersonal God pervading all nature, and similar errors.” — (E.G. White, 3TT 270.4, 271.2)

So don't ever let anyone try and tell you that the change to the trinity doctrine was progressive truth. God did not have Ellen White correcting others who were wrong on their ideas about God while allowing His own remnant Church to remain in error on the very same issue. And how could Ellen White correct others on false theories about God if she did not have the truth herself? God's remnant Church had the God given truth the entire time Ellen White was alive. It was not until after her death and that of the pioneers that error was able to be brought into the Adventist Church.

Some Adventists go into denial and claim that God would never allow error to get into His Church. But Ellen White in fact informed us that serious errors would enter the Adventist Church as seen previously. You continually find such statements being perpetuated in the Adventist Church. God would never allow that to happen, or just because it is Catholic, that does not mean it is wrong, or Ellen White was a Trinitarian and then became non-Trinitarian and then became Trinitarian again. Many such lies are constantly being taught and perpetuated to keep Adventists stuck in a serious lie from Satan.

Ellen White wrote this at least eleven years after it was claimed she had become a Trinitarian. Note the year 1846 is highlighted. “And now, after half a century of clear light from the Word as to what is truth, there are arising many false theories, to unsettle minds. But the evidence given in our early experience has the same force that it had then. The truth is the same as it ever has been, and not a pin or a pillar can be moved from the structure of truth. That which was sought for out of the Word in 1844, 1845, and 1846 remains the truth today in every particular.” — (E.G. White, Letter 38, 1906). What do you think the false theories related to that Ellen White said was one of the pillars from 1844-1846? “The way spiritualizers have disposed of or denied the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ is first using the old unscriptural Trinitarian creed, viz., that Jesus Christ is the eternal God, though they have not one passage to support it, while we have plain scripture testimony in abundance that he is the Son of the eternal God.” — (James White, The Day Star, January 24, 1846)

Adventist Trinitarians claim that Ellen White had become a Trinitarian by the time she wrote the Desire Of Ages which was finished in 1895. A handful of misunderstood Ellen White quotes that LeRoy Froom searched for are used to try and prove this. We have already seen that is just one of the many Trinitarian deceptions. Regardless of this, does Ellen White agree with this claim? Not a chance! This first quote was written 10 years after 1895.

“That which I have written is what the Lord has bidden me write. I have not been instructed to change that which I have sent out. I stand firm in the Adventist faith; for I have been warned in regard to the seducing sophistries that will seek for entrance among us as a people. The Scripture says, 'Some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils.' I present before our people the danger of being led astray as were the angels in the heavenly courts. The straight line of truth presented to me when I was but a girl is just as clearly presented to me now.” — (E.G. White, Review and Herald, January 26, 1905)

“The leading points of our faith as we hold them today were firmly established. Point after point was clearly defined, and all the brethren came into harmony. The whole company of believers were united in the truth. There were those who came in with strange doctrines, but we were never afraid to meet them. Our experience was wonderfully established by the revelation of the Holy Spirit.” — (E.G. White, Manuscript 135, 1903)

“That which was truth in the beginning is truth now. Although new and important truths appropriate for succeeding generations have been opened to the understanding, the present revealings do not contradict those of the past. Every new truth understood only makes more significant the old.” — (E.G. White, Review and Herald, March 2, 1886)

So everything Ellen White wrote is what God bid her to write and nothing she ever wrote was wrong and any new truths given to her never contradicted the old but just made them more significant. So how could a total back flip from non-Trinitarian to Trinitarian have ever happened? That would be going from truth to serious error or vice-versa depending on your view. So it is impossible for her to have become a Trinitarian based on this alone also. There is no avoiding the real truth.

It is also notable that the 25 Fundamental Principles, written by Uriah Smith in 1872, were printed in every Yearbook from their first print in 1874 through to 1914. These are the Fundamental Principles used for those fifty years that the Spirit of Prophecy declared to be of truth which were non-Trinitarian. Publication of these Fundamental Principles ceased the very year Ellen White died in 1915 which is not likely a coincidence. These Fundamental Principles that were printed in the Adventist Yearbook represented the official beliefs of the Seventh day Adventist Church, and so the Church had not only not accepted the trinity doctrine before the death of Ellen White, but did not do so for another 17 years in 1931, which most were unaware of for several more years including Ellen White's son. Since it is claimed she was a Trinitarian before the Desire of Ages was finished in 1895. How long do you think it would take for her to have the Church change if she really had become a Trinitarian? Because 20 years after her death and 36 years in total is clearly beyond a joke if this were so and especially on something as important as who the Father and Son truly are which is a salvation issue. Below is how the Fundamental Principles have changed from what Uriah Smith wrote to what the Adventist Church has today.

Here are the first two of the 25 Fundamental Principles on the Godhead, first published in the first edition of Signs of the Times, June 4, 1874, page 3.
1.“That there is one God, a personal, spiritual being, the creator of all things, omnipotent, omniscient, and eternal, infinite in wisdom, holiness, justice, goodness, truth, and mercy; unchangeable, and everywhere present by his representative, the Holy Spirit. Ps 139:7.”
2.“That there is one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Eternal Father, the one by whom God created all things, and by whom they do consist;”

Now note fundamental belief #2 from the 22 fundamental beliefs and the change that now says Godhead, or Trinity, first published in the Seventh day Adventist Yearbook in 1931, Washington, D.C. Review and Herald, page 377.
2.“That the Godhead, or Trinity, consists of the Eternal Father, a personal, spiritual Being, omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, infinite in wisdom and love; the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Eternal Father, through whom all things were created and through whom the salvation of the redeemed hosts will be accomplished; the Holy Spirit, the third person of the Godhead, the great regenerating power in the work of redemption. Matt. 28:19.”

Note fundamental belief #2 from the 1980 27 fundamental beliefs which has now removed the Biblical word Godhead and just says The Trinity, a word not found in the Scriptures and courtesy of our Catholic friends. This is how our adversary often achieves his goals. By slow and gradual change over time just as he did with the Sabbath.
2.“THE TRINITY – There is one God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, a unity of three co-eternal Persons. God is immortal, allpowerful, all-knowing, above all, and everpresent. He is infinite and beyond human comprehension, yet known through His selfrevelation. He is forever worthy of worship, adoration, and service by the whole creation.”

And below is fundamental belief #2 from the 28 fundamental beliefs of the Seventh day Adventist Church today that now just says Trinity.”
2.“TRINITY There is one God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, a unity of three co-eternal Persons. God is immortal, all-powerful, all-knowing, above all, and ever present. He is infinite and beyond human comprehension, yet known through His self-revelation. He is forever worthy of worship, adoration, and service by the whole creation.”

Comparison of Uriah Smith's 1874 Fundamental Principles and the 1931 Fundamental Beliefs by Francis M. Wilcox.

1874 25 Fundamental Principles 1931 22 Fundamental Beliefs
The Godhead or Trinity (2)
That there is one God, a personal, spiritual being, the creator of all things (1)
That there is one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Eternal Father, the one by whom God created all things (2) That Jesus Christ is very God, being of the same nature and essence as the Eternal Father (3)
Holy Scriptures (3) Holy Scriptures (1)
Baptism is an Ordinance (4) Baptism is an Ordinance (5)
New Birth (5) New Birth (4)
Prophecy is a part of God's revelation to man (6)


World history fulfills Bible prophecy (7)
Millennium (8)
2300 day prophecy of Daniel 8:14 Prophetic period of Daniel 8:14 terminated in 1844 (13)
Sanctuary of the New Covenant is the Tabernacle of God in Heaven (10) True sanctuary in heaven was a type (14a)
Ten Commandments (11) Ten Commandments (6)
Seventh day Sabbath (12) Seventh day Sabbath (7)
Papacy Changed the Sabbath (13)
Repentance and Conversion (14)
Grace to keep God's Law (15)
Perpetuity of Spiritual Gifts (16)
Perpetuity of spiritual Gifts (19)
Three Angels of Revelation 14 (17)
Work of threefold message of Revelation 14 (15
Cleansing of the Sanctuary coincides with the Investigative Judgment (18) True sanctuary corresponds with judgment phase of Christ's ministry in heaven (14b)
Time of the threefold message corresponds with the investigative judgment (16)
The Grave is a Place of Darkness (19) Condition of man in death is one of unconsciousness (10)
Human beings are reduced to a state of unconsciousness (20) Humans are mortal. Only God is immortal.
Bodily resurrection at Second Advent of Christ (21)
Resurrection of the just and unjust at second coming of Christ (11)
At the Second Coming the Living Righteous are changed in a moment (22)
These immortalized ones are taken to heaven for millennium (23) Millennial reign of Christ (21)
Final Destruction of wicked at end of millennium (24) Impenitent ... reduced to a state of nonexistence (12)
New heavens and new earth (25) Restoration of earth at end of Millennium (22)
Body is the temple of God (17)
Divine principle of tithes and offerings (18)
Second Coming of Christ is the great hope of the church (20)

So the 1931 Fundamental Beliefs were influenced by the 1874 Fundamental Principles. But theological priorities had definitely changed between the death of Ellen White and 1931. Russell Holt commenting on the change to the fundamental beliefs notes, “A comparison of statements of faith issued at various times by the denomination shows a marked change in the opinion of the church concerning the trinity...” He observes that, “... Separate statements appeared in 1874, 1889, 1894 and 1931. The first three of these are, for all practical purposes, identical in the articles dealing with the deity. A comparison of the statements of 1874 and 1931 shows the change.”

Benjamin G. Wilkinson (1872–1968) was an Adventist missionary, educator and theologian who wrote the book “Truth Triumphant.” He was also the Dean of Theology at the Seventh day Adventist Washington Missionary College. In 1936, he wrote a letter to Dr. T.S. Teters saying, “Replying to your letter of October 13 regarding the doctrine of the Trinity, I will say that Seventh-day Adventists do not, and never have accepted the dark, mysterious, Catholic doctrine of the Trinity.”

As mentioned earlier, J.S. Washburn had previously written letters to F.M. Wilcox and the Conference objecting to the secret meetings that were taking place in an attempt to introduce the trinity doctrine prior to 1931. This is the man who was close friends of Ellen and James White and had memorized the entire New Testament.

In 1939, Judson S. Washburn wrote an objection letter to the Conference. A sermon delivered by W.W. Prescott that year inspired him to send a lengthy letter denouncing the invasion of the Trinitarian doctrine into the Adventist Church. Noting that “The doctrine of the Trinity is regarded as the supreme test of orthodoxy by the Roman Catholic Church,” he proceeded to state why it should be rejected. “Satan has taken some heathen conception of a three-headed monstrosity, and with deliberate intention to cast contempt upon divinity, has woven it into Romanism as our glorious God, an impossible, absurd invention. This monstrous doctrine transplanted from heathenism into the Roman Papal Church is seeking to intrude its evil presence into the teachings of the Third Angel's Message...”

Washburn goes on to say, “If we should go back to the immortality of the soul, purgatory, eternal torment and the Sunday Sabbath, would that be anything less than apostasy? If, however, we leap over all these minor, secondary doctrines and accept and teach the very central root, doctrine of Romanism, the Trinity, and teach that the son of God did not die, even though our words seem to be spiritual, is this anything else or anything less than apostasy, and the very Omega of apostasy?”

Mr. Washburn continues with words that every Adventist should carefully heed, “However kindly or beautiful or apparently profound his sermons or articles may be, when a man has arrived at the place where he teaches the heathen Catholic doctrine of the Trinity, and denies that the Son of God died for us, is he a true Seventh-day Adventist? Is he even a true preacher of the Gospel?” — (The above are portions of a letter written by J.S. Washburn in 1939. This letter was liked by a conference president so much that he distributed it to 32 of his ministers). Here is the entire letter from J.S. Washburn on the trinity doctrine if you would like to read it.

In 1941 the Baptismal Vow was revised to include the Trinitarian statement. (Froom was involved in this action as well). So in order to become a Seventh day Adventist, you now had to agree with the trinity doctrine. A new hymnal was also released which was further updated in 1985 and now includes a section on the trinity and hymns with Catholic teachings! See the Trinity and Catholicism in the SDA hymnal for detail that will shock.

In a letter written to Roy Allan Anderson, J.L. Schuler, Denton Reebok, A.W. Peterson, W.G. Turner and J.E. Weaver on November 22, 1966, LeRoy Froom said, “I am writing to you brethren as a group for you are the only living members of the original committee of 13, appointed in 1931 to frame a uniform baptismal covenant. Elder Branson was the chairman and I was Secretary. The task of this committee was to formulate a uniform baptismal covenant and vow based on the 1931 Fundamental Beliefs statement in the yearbook and Manual...to point up a bit more sharply, the first, second and third persons of the Godhead.” (Emphasis)

In 1945, all the standard Adventist books were edited, and all the anti-Trinitarian statements were taken from them. In his book Movement of Destiny, LeRoy Froom states, “The next logical and inevitable step in the implementing of our unified fundamental beliefs, involved revision of certain standard works, so as to eliminate statements that taught, and thus perpetuated erroneous views on the Godhead. Such sentiments were now sharply at variance with the accepted fundamental beliefs set forth in the Church Manual.” — (Movement of Destiny, p. 422)

And speaking of one such example related to and continuing from the above quote. General Conference session minutes for January 16, 1940 recorded the discussion of editing of Uriah Smiths' Daniel and the Revelation.

Froom continues, “The first and most conspicuous of these involved certain erroneous theological concepts that had long appeared in Thoughts on Daniel and the Revelation by Uriah Smith, who had died in 1903.” — (lbid)

But Ellen White had said she found no fault with Uriah Smith. “God used the author of this book as a channel through which to communicate light to direct minds to the truth.” — (E.G. White, 1MR 63.1, 'Thoughts on Daniel and the Revelation,' MS 174, 1899). And not forgetting, “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.” — (E.G. White, Review and Herald, May 25, 1905, 'The work for this time', address at the 1905 General Conference, May 16)

So what God approved of and said was to be reproduced, Froom tampered with opposing the will of God.

Warren Eugene Howell, chairman of the committee was assigned the task of editing Daniel and the Revelation, and included in his report a brief history of the book noting it had begun its life as a series of articles in the 1862 Review and Herald.

Froom ignored the continued endorsement of Uriah Smith and his books by Ellen White a decade after his death. He ignored the plea from Ellen White in 1905 that their fundamental beliefs which had unified them as a people for the previous 50 years, specifically regarding the sanctuary and the personality of God should not be abandoned.

After the 1944 editing, Uriah Smith's material in the section of his book commenting on Revelation was reduced by two pages and 710 words. The two pages at the centre of the crosshairs were pages 400 and 430 of the pre-1944 editions.

So which is worse? Including additional words in a book that belongs to someone else yet attributing them to the author, or removing words that belong to the author himself? The first implies that the author is in agreement with the added words, and the second would suggest to the uninformed reader that the author denied his original convictions. Such is the result of censorship. It changes history and makes it say something quite different from reality.

The official acceptance of the trinity doctrine into their fundamental beliefs did not come until 1946. According to Dr. Jerry A. Moon (in “Andrews University Seminary Studies, Vol. 41, No. 1, 113-129”), when the statement had gained general acceptance, the General Conference session of 1946 made it official, voting that “no revision of this Statement of Fundamental Beliefs, as it now appears in the [Church] Manual, shall be made at any time except at a General Conference session.” — (Fifteenth Meeting, General Conference Report No. 8, Review and Herald, June 14, 1946, Emphasis)

In 1946, the book Evangelism was compiled from Ellen White's writings. Editors LeRoy Froom and Roy Allen Anderson, and others were instrumental in the choice and compilation of statements from her, which appeared to support their Trinitarian viewpoint. When people set out to intentionally search a person's writings to try and find anything that could be misinterpreted as supporting their belief, then we should know this dishonest approach is not from God but our adversary. This is no different from those who intentionally search the Scriptures for verses that on their own seem to support what they have chosen to believe. Froom's book contains the quotes most often used to support the Trinitarian doctrine within the Adventist Church. Perhaps it was a coincidence, but Froom wrote his book after a return from a trip to the Vatican! But considering it has been said he was a Catholic Priest, probably not.

The following letter from Froom reveals his agenda was to try and convince others that Ellen White was a Trinitarian for the sole purpose of getting the Church to follow his direction. Here is the letter to Roy Allen Anderson revealing its intent and purpose. The abused quotes from Ellen White are still being used to avoid truth today.

“I am sure that we are agreed in evaluating the book, Evangelism as one of the great contributions in which the Ministerial Association had a part back in those days. You know what it did with men in the Columbia Union who came face to face with the clear, unequivocal statements of the Spirit of Prophecy on the Deity of Christ, personality of the Holy Spirit, the Trinity, and the like. They either had to lay down their arms and accept those statements, or else they had to reject the Spirit of Prophecy.
I know that you and Miss Kleuser and I had considerable to do with the selection of these things under the encouragement of men like Elder Branson who felt that the earlier concept of the White Estate brethren on this book Evangelism was not adequate.” — (Letter to Roy A. Anderson, January 18, 1966)

In 1955 there were meetings of the leaders of the Adventist Church (primarily Roy Allan Anderson and LeRoy Froom) with Dr. Walter Martin and Dr. Barnhouse, two evangelical theologians who felt that the Seventh day Adventist Church was a cult.

In 1957 as a result of these meetings the book “Questions on Doctrine” (a book in which LeRoy Froom played a leading role) was published at the request of evangelicals Barnhouse and Martin, who were preparing to write their book, Kingdom of the Cults, where they were going to call the SDA Church a cult. In these meetings they attempted to show that they were not a cult and that the Adventist Church was quite mainstream in its beliefs including the doctrine of the trinity. This avoided being labeled a cult as Barnhouse and Martin would label all non-Trinitarians. This book also contained statements that Adventists do not believe the atonement is taking place in Heaven right now, that Christ came with an “unfallen” human nature, and other untrue and misleading statements regarding Adventist beliefs.

In 1980, the General Conference voted on a new set of “27 Fundamental Beliefs” in which the trinity doctrine was upheld. Fundamental belief number 2 now read, “2. The Trinity. There is one God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, a unity of three co-eternal Persons.” (Emphasis). The concept delineated here is that there are “three co-eternal Persons” and this part is in complete harmony with the Catholic Church's pagan teaching regarding the trinity.

In 1981, SDA General Conference President, Neal C. Wilson, announced to the General Conference meeting in Dallas, Texas, that the Church had officially adopted the trinity doctrine, which was now number 2 in the Church's “27 Fundamental Beliefs.” Wilson said, “There is another universal and truly catholic organization, the Seventh-day Adventist Church,” — (Adventist Review, March 5, 1981, p. 3)

I for one cannot disagree with his statement. As far as the three-in-one part of the trinity doctrine goes that says, the Father is God, Jesus is God, the Holy Spirit is God, and yet there are not three gods but one God, they are now on par with the Catholic Church just as the Papacy and Satan had no doubt planned.

Comparison of 1931 and the 1980 statements of Fundamental Beli

1931 22 Fundamental Beliefs 1980 27 Fundamental Beliefs
Holy Scriptures (1) Holy Scriptures (1)
The Godhead, or Trinity (2)
The Trinity (2)
God the Father (3)
That Jesus Christ is very God, being of the same nature and essence as the Eternal Father (3) God the Son (4)
God the Holy Spirit (5)

Creation (6)

New Birth (4)
Baptism is an ordinance (5)
Baptism and (13a)
Lord's Supper (13b)
Ten Commandments (6) Ten Commandments (18)
Seventh-day Sabbath (7) Sabbath (19)
The Ten Commandments points out sin (8)
Experience of Salvation (10)
Humans are mortal. Only God is immortal (9) Nature of Man (7)
Condition of man in death is one of unconsciousness (10) Death and Resurrection (23)
Resurrection of the just and unjust at second coming of Christ (11)
Death and Resurrection (23)
Impenitent ... reduced to a state of nonexistence (12)
Prophetic period of Daniel 8:14 terminated in 1844 (13) Heavenly Sanctuary and the Judgment (24)
True sanctuary corresponds with judgment phase of Christ's ministry in heaven (14)
Work of threefold message of Revelation 14 (15) (included in 16)
Time of the threefold message corresponds with the investigative judgment (16) (included in 24)
Body is the temple of God (17) Style of Life (21)
Divine principle of tithes and offerings (18) Stewardship (20)
Perpetuity of spiritual gifts (19) Spiritual Gifts (14)
Spirit of Prophecy (15)
Second Coming of Christ is the great hope of the church (20) The Second Advent of Christ (25)
Millennial reign of Christ (21)
The Millennium and the End of Sin (26)
Restoration of earth at end of Millennium (22) New Earth (27)
Great Controversy (8)
Death of Christ (9)
Second Coming of Christ is the great hope of the church (20)
Unity in the Body of Christ (12)

Mission of the Remnant Church (16)
Ministries of the Church (17)
Marriage and the Family (22)

In 1988, the book “Seventh-day Adventists Believe...A Biblical Exposition of 27 Fundamental Beliefs” was published and included the doctrine of the trinity. This book was highly promoted for use as an evangelistic tool to explain to non-Adventists what we believe our core doctrines to be.


When you study the history of the change to Trinitarianism by the Adventist Church, it becomes abundantly clear that something went seriously wrong. A jump from non-Trinitarian to Trinitarian can never be called progressive truth as it was a total back flip from a Biblical doctrine to a pagan doctrine that was primarily brought about by one man. Progressive truth is where the majority are learning and accepting new truths, not the minority pushing for a change and waiting for the majority to die to achieve their goal. And not forgetting that Ellen White said that the truth never changed and new truths never contradicted the old. Many refuse to accept that there was a change but the evidence says otherwise. Even the following two conference magazines admit it. They say that the early pioneers held a semi-arian view, which is a Trinitarian opinion that relates to Jesus being begotten of God. Regardless of this, the change to a three-in-one God was a major change to a doctrine that does not exist in Scripture, and this part of the doctrine is purely pagan and Catholic in origin.

“Adventist beliefs have changed over the years under the impact of “present truth.” Most startling is the teaching regarding Jesus Christ, our Saviour and Lord. ... the Trinitarian understanding of God, now part of our fundamental beliefs, was not generally held by the early Adventists. Even today a few do not subscribe to it.” — (Adventist Review, Jan 6, 1994. p.10)

“Most of the founders of Seventh-day Adventism would not be able to join the church today if they had to subscribe to the denomination's Fundamental Beliefs. More specifically, most would not be able to agree to belief number 2, which deals with the doctrine of the Trinity.” — (Ministry, October 1993, p. 10)
Has the Seventh-day Adventist Church Taken on Error?

Starting with a statement from a well-known Adventist Trinitarian called Jerry Moon, which is correct?

“That most of the leading SDA pioneers were non-Trinitarian in their theology has become accepted Adventist history, surprising as it sounded to most Adventists 40 years ago when Erwin R. Gane wrote an M.A. thesis on the topic.” “More recently, a further question has arisen with increasing urgency: was the pioneers' belief about the Godhead right or wrong? “As one line of reasoning goes, either the pioneers were wrong and the present church is right, or the pioneers were right and the present Seventh-day Adventist Church has apostatized from biblical truth.” — (Jerry Moon, The Trinity, Chapter, Trinity and antitrinitarianism in Seventh-day Adventist history, page 190)

Those without prejudice and an open mind will have no trouble discovering that every deception used to keep people trapped in Satan's counterfeit for the Godhead can easily be exposed and the real truth seen. I am going to give one simple example that can be easily seen and exposed from Scripture, Ellen White and theologians who reveal the true meaning of the word Elohim from the Hebrew people and not the lie from deceived Trinitarians. The following is taken from the official Seventh day Adventist web site (http://www.adventist.org) from their page titled “God in Three Persons” which states:

Three-in-Oneness
“God refers to Himself both as “He” and “Us.” In the Old Testament the plural form of one of the nouns for God (’elohim) is quantitative: “Let Us make man in Our image.” The plural appears both with the verb “Let Us make” and the possessive suffix “Our” (Gen 1:26)”

The Trinitarian argument here is that the Hebrew word Elohim for God is plural and so must mean that God is more than one and therefore the one God is three in one. It is further argued that since the pronoun “us” is used in Genesis 1:26 that this also confirms that God must be three and that the trinity did the creating. Did anyone in the Church ever stop to think that “us” is the Father and Son? No! Than they could not use this as one of the many false arguments to support a belief in a doctrine that is a deception from Satan to steal your salvation by not knowing who the Father and Son truly are.

Starting with the dishonest argument of Elohim. The Greek Old Testament (Septuagint) which Jesus and the apostles quoted from was written before the birth of Christ. The Hebrew Old Testament was not done until the 15th century. The Greek word for God is “Theos” rather than the Hebrew word “Elohim.” Now note that the Greek word “Theos” is singular and “only” the Hebrew word for God is plural. This because the Hebrew people pluralized nouns to donate greatness and this is called a “Plural of majesty.” They did this to say that God is great. I am sure that no one will say that God is a trinity in the Hebrew language while being one God in the Greek language. See page one for a lot more on the true meaning of Elohim.

Here is one dictionary that not only explains the truth but also informs us that no intelligent scholar uses this deception anymore because the truth is so easily found and the deception exposed. Hence no one with any sense uses this argument unless they are ignorant and deceived. Yet the Adventist Church has used this argument as most Trinitarians have!

“Elohim is the plural of Eloah ... The fanciful idea that it referred to the trinity of persons in the Godhead hardly finds now a supporter among scholars. It is either what grammarians call the plural of majesty, or it denotes the fullness of divine strength, the sum of the powers displayed by God. Jehovah denotes specifically the one true God, whose people the Jews were, and who made them the guardians of his truth.” — (Smith's Bible Dictionary)

Now for the Bible. Ephesians 3:9 says, “God, ... created all things by Jesus Christ:” God in this verse is obviously someone other than Jesus Christ, and Hebrews 1:2 says God created all things by His Son. So who is speaking in Genesis 1:26 and who is He speaking to? God the Father said to His Son, “let us make man in our image.” Christ is “the express image” of the Father, so anyone created in the Father's image is also created in His Son's image.

Now for the Spirit of Prophecy. Why did the Adventist Church also ignore the Spirit of Prophecy that would have shown them in serious error? Genesis 1:26 says, “And God said, Let us make man in our image,” So again, who is speaking and who is He speaking to? Does this mean the one God is three or that God is speaking to His Son? Who did the creating? Was it a trinity or was it the Father and Son as the Bible reveals which is very obvious unless you have believed the lie?

“The Father and the Son engaged in the mighty, wondrous work they had contemplated, of creating the world. ... After the earth was created, and the beasts upon it, the Father and Son carried out their purpose, which was designed before the fall of Satan, to make man in their own image. They had wrought together in the creation of the earth and every living thing upon it. And now God said to His Son, “Let us make man in our image.” — (E.G. White, The Spirit of Prophecy, vol. 1, pp. 24-25)

So from three sources the error and deception is easily exposed. Elohim is referring to the one true God only who is speaking to His Son. The Father and Son did the creating. Ellen White on her own reveals this and yet the Seventh day Adventist Church has ignored the true meaning of Elohim, Scripture and their own prophet. Why? That is the nature of deception. When you are deceived you do not see the obvious truth. All the other arguments for the trinity doctrine are just as easily exposed if your eyes open and have a love of the truth.

Ellen G. White and the Spirit of Prophecy

Most Seventh day Adventists are unaware of the above historical facts. Some who become aware deny it, while others search for quotes from Ellen G. White and often put their trust in her above the Word of God. And others refuse to even examine the evidence and just say that the Church cannot be wrong. The Bible says, “He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.” Proverbs 18:13. Note that Ellen White never used the words trinity or triune or used the Trinitarian three-in-one formula in any way. She also never used the Catholic phrases god the son or god the holy spirit.

Note also that Ellen White said, “The spirit in which you come to the investigation of the Scriptures will determine the character of the assistant at your side. Angels from the world of light will be with those who in humility of heart seek for divine guidance. ... But if the heart is filled with prejudice, Satan is beside you, and he will set the plain statements of God's Word in a perverted light.” — (Testimonies to Ministers and Gospel Workers, p.108)

Adventist Trinitarians claim that Ellen White was Trinitarian when she wrote the Desire of Ages which was released in 1898. White Estate Document File #508 says, “Miss Marian Davis, who was entrusted with the preparation of Desire of Ages, frequently came to me in 1895 and 1896 asking help in the arrangement of the material which she gathered from Sister White's various manuscripts.” So the material was written by 1895 and was sent to the publisher in 1897. We have already seen that the Desire of Ages is full of non-Trinitarian statements and yet the truth can still be proven working with this lie. So any non-Trinitarian quotes from Ellen White after 1895 would just further confirm she was never a Trinitarian.

Further below are the main quotes LeRoy Froom used to imply that she was a Trinitarian, which was possible because of the wrong perception some have of certain words and phrases. And yet these are actually non-Trinitarian which is only seen when you understand how she wrote of the Holy Spirit for one example. Below is a quote from Ellen White where she says Christ has existed from eternity. The first part of this quote has also been used to lead people from the truth. So what did she mean when she said Christ existed from eternity or from everlasting? Here is the full quote that reveals the truth.

“The Lord Jesus Christ, the divine Son of God, existed from eternity, a distinct person, yet one with the Father. He was the surpassing glory of heaven. He was the commander of the heavenly intelligences, and the adoring homage of the angels was received by him as his right. This was no robbery of God. “The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way,” he declares, “before his works of old. I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was. When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water. Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth; while as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world.” — (E.G. White, Review and Herald, April 5, 1906)

Ellen White quotes Proverbs 8:23-26 above and equates eternity with everlasting, meaning before the earth was created. So when she said eternity, she did not mean that Christ had always existed. She confirms this twice when she says that Christ was “brought forth,” which means she is also saying that Christ had a beginning. Interestingly enough, the following two GC approved Sabbath School lessons confirm this also, which is before the Adventist Church became fully Trinitarian and were still teaching Biblical truth. The letter to W.C. White further below also reveals that many were still non-Trinitarian five years after 1931 and had no idea what had happened.

“The direct statement of Jesus, “I came forth from the Father,” reads literally, “I came out of the Father.” Putting with this, His testimony in John 10:38, “The Father is in Me, and I in Him,” we have His personal witness that He truly was “begotten of the Father,” as John says in 1:14.” — (SDA Sabbath School Lesson Quarterly, Lesson 4, October 24, 1936, p. 12)

“In the few passages we have studied here, we find that Christ was with the Father “before the world was,” “from, the days of eternity,” “before the foundation of the world,” “before all things.” He was therefore no part of creation, but was “begotten of the Father” in the days of eternity, and was very God Himself.” — (Ibid, p. 13)

So “the days of eternity” also mean the days before the creation of all things and does not mean forever ago. The days of eternity are the days before time was born and measured by revolving spheres as it was in our beginning. Our Bible writers who did not understand science as we do saw that time began when Christ created all things, and that He was born of God before this. As Proverbs 8:23 says, “I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or before the earth was.” The Septuagint, also called the LXX, which is the Greek Old Testament that was always quoted from by Christ and His Apostles says, “He established me in the beginning, before time was, before He made the earth.”

Other factors determine how the Hebrew word for “Everlasting” in Proverbs 8:23 should be translated in Scripture. It can mean “the vanishing point”, “time out of mind - past or future”, “ancient time” and “beginning of the world” for example. And all of these basically mean the same thing. That is, as far as one can see in time, which is the beginning of creation and the earth in this case. The same applies to other verses such as Micah 5:2. So the phrases “from eternity”, “from everlasting”, “before time was”, “the days of eternity”, “from the beginning” and “before the earth was” all mean the same thing. Quite simply, before the earth and all things were created. Not from forever as many erroneously believe today.
Leroy Froom and the Evangelism Quotes

The claim that Ellen White became a Trinitarian before completing the Desire of Ages is based on a handful of quotes that LeRoy Froom had to search for that he rightly figured would be misunderstood. It is notable that Froom and those who helped him had to search over one hundred thousand pages that Ellen White wrote just to find the handful of statements from her that on the surface appeared to fit the Trinitarian concept on the Holy Spirit. But only if you choose to read them as such and at the expense of the thousands of non-Trinitarian statements she wrote.

We have already seen that God instructed Ellen White to correct others who had false ideas in regard to God. And considering these quotes from Froom are what caused the Adventist Church to eventually accept the trinity doctrine decades after the death of Ellen White. Then this also means she never told anyone she became a Trinitarian. This is clearly a ludicrous thought. Ellen White never told anyone she became a Trinitarian because she never became one!

The quotes from LeRoy Froom are able to be abused and misunderstood because the majority do not know who Ellen White says the Holy Spirit is. So most Adventist Pastors and Christians instantly assume that she is referring to another literal being as the Holy Spirit as per the trinity doctrine. But once you know who Ellen White says the Holy Spirit is, you will then read them and know in fact that they are non-Trinitarian quotes. So before we look at the misunderstood quotes from LeRoy Froom, consider carefully the following quotes from Ellen White, which reveal what she taught on the Holy Spirit.

“This refers to the omnipresence of the Spirit of Christ, called the Comforter.” — (E.G. White, 14MR 179.3) — The Spirit of Christ is the Comforter.

“When trials overshadow the soul, remember the words of Christ, remember that He is an unseen presence in the person of the Holy Spirit,” — (E.G. White, DG 185.2, 1897) — Christ is the unseen presence in the person of the Holy Spirit.

“The holy Spirit is the Comforter, in Christ's name. He personifies Christ, yet is a distinct personality.” — (E.G. White, Manuscript Releases Volume 20 MR No. 1487) — The Holy Spirit is the Comforter as the person of Christ with a distinct personality.

“The holy Spirit is the comforter, as the personal presence of Christ to the soul.” — (E.G. White, Review and Herald, November 29, 1892) — The Holy Spirit is the Comforter which is the personal presence of Christ in you.

“The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ, which is sent to all men to give them sufficiency, that through His grace we might be complete in Him.” — (E.G. White, 14 Manuscript Releases, p. 84) — The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ!

“Let them be thankful to God for His manifold mercies and be kind to one another. They have one God and one Saviour; and one Spirit--the Spirit of Christ--is to bring unity into their ranks.” — (E.G. White, Testimonies Volume 9, p. 189, 1909) — The three persons of the Godhead are the one God, one Saviour (Christ) and one Holy Spirit, which is the Spirit of Christ.

From the above quotes we find the following points:

1. The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ, which is also the Comforter.
2. She refers to the Holy Spirit of Christ as a person with a personality.
3. She says the Holy Spirit is a person since it is effectively Christ though through His Spirit.
4. She shows the first, second and third person of the Godhead to be the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit of Christ.
5. She reveals that the Godhead therefore has three living personalities but the third is the Spirit of Christ.
6. Hence there are three powers in the Godhead but the third person is the Spirit of Christ and not another literal being.
7. So the third person being the Holy Spirit is not another literal being but the Spirit of Christ.

Some Adventists are so prejudiced against the truth on the Holy Spirit that when you attempt to share the truth, they often quote Ellen White out of context saying that she says when it comes to the Holy Spirit that silence is golden. They usually back down when you tell them that would also mean they cannot state anything in regards to the Holy Spirit either. Satan has many such foolish means to try and silence the truth from being spoken.

These following quotes from LeRoy Froom's book Evangelism pages 615-617 were compiled posthumously with the intent to deceive. Note that there are two sources listed. The first is from Ellen White and the second is from LeRoy Froom.

“The prince of the power of evil can only be held in check by the power of God in the third person of the Godhead, the Holy Spirit.” — (Special Testimonies, Series A, No. 10, p. 37, 1897) — Evangelism p. 617

Ellen White says the third person of the Godhead [is] the Holy Spirit. Therefore the third person is whoever the Holy Spirit is. She said, “The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ, which is sent to all men to give them sufficiency,” — (14 Manuscript Releases, p. 84). So the Spirit of Christ is the third person that she also calls the person of the Holy Spirit. And why not call the Spirit of Christ a person since Christ is a person even if it is by His Spirit. “When trials overshadow the soul, remember the words of Christ, remember that He is an unseen presence in the person of the Holy Spirit,” — (E.G. White, DG 185.2, 1897). She also said, “Christ gave His representative, the third person of the Godhead, the Holy Spirit.” — (E.G. White, CTr 301.4). So who is Christ's representative which is the Holy Spirit and the third person of the Godhead? Here is the unmistakable answer. “The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ; it is His representative. Here is the divine agency that carries conviction to hearts. When the power of His Spirit is revealed through the servants of God, we behold divinity flashing through humanity.” — (E.G. White, 13MR 313.3, 1895). Here is the Godhead according to Ellen White and note once again who the third person is. “They have one God and one Saviour; and one Spirit--the Spirit of Christ--is to bring unity into their ranks.” — (E.G. White, Testimonies Volume 9, p. 189, 1909). Ellen White also used lower case to show that she did not mean a literal divine being, but after her death, others were responsible for capitalizing “Third Person” in her writings giving the reader the wrong idea. It is dishonest and wrong to misrepresent the thoughts of a writer.

Ellen White also referred to the Holy Spirit as “it” which something she never did in reference to God or Christ. Below is another example of the changing her writings. Compare the following paragraph first published in The Signs of the Times 1899, with the second paragraph which is how it was republished in Ye Shall Receive Power in 1995.

“The Lord would have every one of His children rich in faith, and this faith is the fruit of the working of the Holy Spirit upon the mind. It dwells with each soul who will receive it, speaking to the impenitent in words of warning, and pointing them to Jesus, the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world. It causes light to shine into the minds of those who are seeking to co-operate with God, giving them efficiency and wisdom to do His work.” — (E.G. White, ST, September 27, 1899)

“The Lord would have every one of His children rich in faith, and this faith is the fruit of the working of the Holy Spirit upon the mind. He dwells with each soul who will receive Him, speaking to the impenitent in words of warning, and pointing them to Jesus, the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world. He causes light to shine into the minds of those who are seeking to cooperate with God, giving them efficiency and wisdom to do His work.” — (Ye Shall Receive Power, page 59)

Deliberately changing the Word of God carries severe penalties such as having your name removed from the Lamb's book of life. So what are the penalties for changing the words of a prophet that were given by God Himself? God used the word “it” in reference to His Spirit while some Trinitarian decided to change the meaning to imply a literal being which was their belief and not hers! This could never be from God and is the handiwork of Satan to facilitate his deception.

“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 baptised.” — (Special Testimonies, Series B, No. 7, pp. 62-63, 1905) — Evangelism p. 615



The third living person and third great power is the Holy Spirit. And she says, “The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ,” — (E.G. White, 14 Manuscript Releases, p. 84) so it is not another being! And not that it matters but the original handwriting reveals that it should have been published as “three living personalities” and not persons. Ellen White often borrows from other writers and borrowed from a Trinitarian called W. Boardman here. He had written “three persons” and Ellen White changed it to “three living personalities.” Note the reinsertion of the word “three” and a line through the upper part of the original word “three,” and the word “persons” changed to “personalities.” Ellen White calls the Spirit of Christ the person of the Holy Spirit with a distinct personality and why she says three living personalities. “remember that He [Christ] is an unseen presence in the person of the Holy Spirit,” — (E.G. White, DG 185.2, 1897). Christ of course is a person with a personality even if it is by His Spirit. “The Holy Spirit is the Comforter, in Christ's name. He personifies Christ, yet is a distinct personality.” — (E.G. White, Manuscript Releases Volume 20 MR No. 1487). As for “heavenly trio,” it is a phrase used by non-Trinitarians. See W.C. White letter for an example. Ellen White understood precisely what the term trinity meant, being that the Father is God, Jesus is God, the Holy Spirit is God, yet there are not three gods but one God, and that's the trinity. Whereas a trio is three functioning harmoniously to effect one common goal, which is Biblical and non-Trinitarian. So we do have a heavenly trio but not a heavenly trinity. Here is the heavenly trio according to Ellen White. One + one + one = three. “They have one God and one Saviour; and one Spirit--the Spirit of Christ--is to bring unity into their ranks.” — (E.G. White, Testimonies Volume 9, p. 189, 1909). So who is the third person in the heavenly trio?

“We are to co-operate with the three highest powers in heaven,--the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost,--and these powers will work through us, making us workers together with God.” — (E.G. White, Special Testimonies, Series B, No. 7, p. 51) — Evangelism p. 617

Many assume that because Ellen White wrote “three highest powers” and “three great powers” that she means the Holy Spirit is a literal being. But she does not say “three highest beings.” She says powers! The following quotes reveal that she saw the Holy Spirit, which is the Spirit of Christ, as a “power” which is the presence and “power” of God. “Christ has given his Spirit as a divine power.” — (E.G. White, Review and Herald, November 19, 1908). “The divine Spirit that the world's Redeemer promised to send, is the presence and power of God.” — (E.G. White, Signs of the Times, November 23). So she is not implying that the Holy Spirit is a literal being at all. For further evidence, Ellen White says the Father, the Son and Holy Spirit are the three highest powers or three great powers. But note she says the third power in question being the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ and not another literal being! “Let them be thankful to God for His manifold mercies and be kind to one another. They have one God and one Saviour; and one Spirit--the Spirit of Christ--is to bring unity into their ranks.” — (E.G. White, Testimonies Volume 9, p. 189, 1909). Note that she reveals the three highest powers are different to the three highest beings in Heaven. She revealed the third highest being in Heaven before sin was Lucifer. (Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 35). And after the fall she revealed Gabriel was the third highest being in Heaven. (Desire of Ages, p. 234)

Some claim she used the phrase “three holiest beings” once but the White Estate tells us that this statement comes from an “edited” stenographer's report of a sermon she preached on October 20, 1906 at the Congregational Church of Oakland, California. The date of release by the White Estate is “March 16, 1976, Manuscript Releases, Vol. 7.” So this was not her handwriting but a typed report from a stenographer that was first published 70 years after her lecture which can never be authenticated. This is what Ellen White wrote about unauthenticated reports, “And now to all who have a desire for truth I would say: Do not give credence to unauthenticated reports as to what Sister White has done or said or written. If you desire to know what the Lord has revealed through her, read her published works.” — (E.G. White, 5T 696.1). So those who quote these words are going against the Spirit of Prophecy. We also know that it is impossible for those words to be from Ellen White as they contradict all her other writings including those from the same time period of this sermon. It is also a known and easily proven fact that in later years the Church changed many of her words like this, and those responsible will one day have to account for why they allowed Satan to inspire them to do such dishonest acts.

“We need to realize that the Holy Spirit, who is as much a person as God is a person, is walking through these grounds.” — (E.G. White, Sermons and Talks Volume 2, pp. 136-137, 1899) — Evangelism p. 616

Here is the entire quote that needs to be read in its wider context. “The Lord [Jesus] says this because He knows it is for our good. He would build a wall around us, to keep us from transgression, so that His blessing and love may be bestowed on us in rich measure. This is the reason we have established a school here. The Lord [Jesus] instructed us that this was the place in which we should locate, and we have had every reason to think that we are in the right place. We have been brought together as a school, and we need to realize that the Holy Spirit, who is as much a person as God is a person, is walking through these grounds, unseen by human eyes; that the Lord God is our Keeper and Helper. He hears every word we utter and knows every thought of the mind.” — (E.G. White, Sermons and Talks Volume 2, pp. 136-137, 1899)

We now know that the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ who is as much a person as God is a person but what else reveals this? The context also reveals that it is the Lord Jesus Christ through His Holy Spirit who walks through these grounds as our Keeper and Helper. He is the one who hears every word we utter and knows every thought of the mind. He is the only one who can renew our mind and transform us into His image through the power of His Spirit. Thus the close unity between God, who is a person, and the Holy Spirit, who is as much as a person, is clearly demonstrated here. And who does Ellen White say is walking through our streets unseen by human eyes by His Holy Spirit? “Christ walks unseen through our streets. With messages of mercy He comes to our homes.” — (E.G. White, The Ministry of Healing, p. 107). And who does Ellen White say hears every word we utter and knows every thought of the mind? “Remember that Jesus is beside you wherever you go, noting your actions and listening to your words. Would you be ashamed to hear his voice speaking to you, and to know that he hears your conversation?” — (E.G. White, The Youth's Instructor, February 4, 1897). The answer is Christ through His Spirit. And considering a Spirit cannot be seen, then why does Ellen White state the obvious by saying unseen by human eyes? Because it is Christ who is an actual physical being that can normally be seen but by His Spirit cannot be. So how does Christ walk unseen through our streets? By His Holy Spirit. And how was Christ walking unseen through the Avondale school grounds? By His Holy Spirit. So we need to realize that it is Christ, who is as much a person as God is a person, walking through these grounds, unseen by human eyes. Why is He unseen? Because He is doing so by His Holy Spirit. Ellen White was explaining omnipresence to the students at Avondale school in this talk.

The truth on this quote should be very clear by now but let's cover it again anyway. Those who do not know that Ellen White says “The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ, which is sent to all men to give them sufficiency,” — (14 Manuscript Releases, p. 84) assume she means the Holy Spirit is another literal being. But based on her words here alone, Ellen White is referring to Christ through His Spirit and not another literal being. She also said, “Cumbered with humanity, Christ could not be in every place personally; therefore it was altogether for their advantage that He should leave them, go to His father, and send the Holy Spirit to be His successor on earth. 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.” — (Ellen G. White, 14MR 23.3, 1895). Note that she refers to the Spirit of Christ as a person. “When trials overshadow the soul, remember the words of Christ, remember that He is an unseen presence in the person of the Holy Spirit,” — (Ellen G. White, DG 185.2, 1897). So is Christ as the unseen person of the Holy Spirit as much a person as God is a person? Again, of course! So this quote could be written as follows and it would still mean the same thing. “We need to realize that Christ, who is as much a person as God is a person, is walking through these grounds by His Holy Spirit, unseen by human eyes.”

The trinity doctrine would make the Holy Spirit the third highest being in heaven, but according to Ellen White in the first chapter of Patriarchs and Prophets (p. 35), the third highest being in Heaven before the entrance of sin was Lucifer. And after the fall Ellen White says Gabriel was the next in line. “It was Gabriel, the angel next in rank to the Son of God, who came with the divine message to Daniel.” — (Desire of Ages, p. 234). But Satan devised a clever scheme to regain his position and the worship he craves. By Satan creating the trinity doctrine which creates a non-existent third literal being, Lucifer steps into that position he has created and not only receives the worship he desires, but he also effectively regains the position he lost as the third highest being in heaven. Very cunning! This is known as worship by representation and is what Satan has also done with Sunday worship.

“Speaking of Satan, our Lord says that “he abode not in the truth.” He was once the covering cherub, glorious in beauty and holiness. He was next to Christ in exaltation and character. It was with Satan that self-exaltation had its origin. He became jealous of Christ, and falsely accused him, and then laid blame upon the Father. He was envious of the position that was held by Christ and the Father, and he turned from his allegiance to the Commander of heaven and lost his high and holy estate. ... He intercepts every ray of light that comes from God to man, and appropriates the worship that is due to God.” — (E.G. White, Review and Herald, October 22, 1895)

In The Desire of Ages and other writings, Ellen White penned many statements that can only be termed as non-Trinitarian (some would even say anti-Trinitarian). Admittedly a handful of her statements, as just seen, on the surface appear to fit the Trinitarian concept of God but only if you choose to read them as such, and at the expense of the hundreds of non-Trinitarian statements. This would be a very deceitful way to treat her writings if that was done, and certainly would be a dishonest way to determine what she believed. This should never be done with Scripture, so why do it with Ellen White?

The YouTube video below reveals that Ellen White rebuked Kellogg not just for Pantheism but for trying to bring the trinity doctrine into the Church. Ellen White stopped Kellogg but was not around to stop LeRoy Froom and those who assisted him. Would she have if she was still alive? I hope and pray that you can now see that she would have!



Questions That Need Answers

1. Why didn't she rebuke the two messengers of the 1888 Message during the 1890's for their views on the Sonship of Christ, the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the Latter Rain and the Loud Cry, as they clearly differed from the Trinitarian position? Instead we find that God told her in 1905 that the works of the pioneers were to be reproduced.

2. For a prophetess who borrowed some terms, expressions and sometimes whole sentences from other writers, why was she meticulously careful never to even once borrow the term trinity, or to state it in no uncertain terms?

3. Why is there no record of a vision or dream from the Lord telling Ellen White to change her views, and to correct the views of the denomination to accept the trinity doctrine? Instead we find that God told her the opposite. In 1905, which is ten years after it is claimed she had become a Trinitarian, God told her to reproduce the works of the pioneers that were anti-Trinitarian. She also said that God had not instructed her to change anything that she ever wrote since she was a girl.

4. As the prophetess to the last days remnant Church, wouldn't she have been duty bound to go to the leaders of the Adventist denomination at the time, and explain to them their error? Why didn't she call a meeting of the leaders and scholars of the Church at the time and do this?

5. Why didn't she write private testimonies to any of the Church leaders, clarifying the necessity to change to Trinitarianism? Was it Ellen White's way to allow people to continue to believe and teach error, and then just publish a book, and leave it to gradually change the mind of whoever might read it, without even saying to anybody “we were wrong on this matter?”

6. Why did she choose to publish her supposed new views in an evangelistic book designed for the general public, as if she wanted the world to think the Adventist Church was Trinitarian? Would not this be deceptive on her part, and against Gospel order (Matthew 18:15-17)? The method she chose to employ on this issue opened the whole Church to public embarrassment, scandal and controversy. But nothing came of it at the time. Why is this so?

7. Why did Ellen White pen these words five years after the publication of The Desire of Ages in 1903? “In Desire of Ages, Patriarchs and Prophets, The Great Controversy, and in Daniel and the Revelation, there is precious instruction. These books must be regarded as of special importance, and every effort should be made to get them before the people.” — (E.G. White, 21MR 440.4 and Letter 229, 1903). Ellen White saw no problem between Uriah Smith's non-Trinitarian 'Daniel and the Revelation' and her supposedly Trinitarian 'Desire of Ages.' Here she recommends books that were unmistakably non-Trinitarian and a Trinitarian would never do that yet alone highly promote them. It was in 1945 that LeRoy Froom had two pages (710 words) of non-Trinitarian statements removed from the book 'Daniel and the Revelation' which she said was of special importance and every effort should be made to get it before the people! LeRoy Froom said that out of all the books he had edited, 'Daniel and the Revelation' by Uriah Smith was the worst. So either she was not a Trinitarian or she strongly promoted a false doctrine to the world, which would make her a false prophet!

8. Why didn't Ellen White organize in the 17 years after the Desire of Ages was published, to re-edit her books as Froom had done, to remove the many non-Trinitarian thoughts, thus aiding the Church along the supposed path of truth? Perhaps God made a bad choice and LeRoy Froom should have been the chosen prophet since he did what she did not do.

9. It is a known fact that The Desire of Ages was largely compiled from her existing writings, put together by herself and her assistant. It was also a book which took some years to compile. There was no reaction when these so called “Trinitarian statements” were first published in the years prior to 1898. Why then in more recent years do scholars make such strong statements about the importance of the book in changing the direction of the whole denomination? And yet these statements made very little impact on the minds of leaders, scholars and teachers within the Church for many years. Why is this so?

10. If Ellen White was a Trinitarian when she finished writing the Desire Of Ages in 1895, why were the “official beliefs” of the Seventh day Adventist Church, that were printed in every Yearbook, still non-Trinitarian when she died in 1915, being 20 years after the release of this book, and 36 years before the first “fundamental beliefs” even contained the word Trinity? How can this be? The Church should have been Trinitarian before 1900. As stated many times already, Trinitarians claim that her writings changed to Trinitarian by the time she wrote the Desire Of Ages which was finished in 1895. But as we have seen, the Desire of Ages is in fact full of non-Trinitarian statements. And not forgetting that Ellen White said ten years after this book was finished that the truth never changed and new truths never contradicted the old.

In the February 1983 Ministry magazine, Adventist leadership published a statement on “The inspiration and authority of the Ellen G. White writings.” Under the heading “Denials” we read:

“3. We do not believe that the writings of Ellen White function as the foundation and final authority of Christian faith as does Scripture.
4. We do not believe that the writings of Ellen White may be used as the basis of doctrine.
6. We do not believe that Scripture can be understood only through the writings of Ellen White.
7. We do not believe that the writings of Ellen White exhaust the meaning of Scripture.”

So it appears we are faced with something of a contradiction. It's one thing to profess something, but if your actions deny your profession, what is the profession worth? In my experience, in every article, sermon and discussion on the trinity doctrine, when scriptural references are lacking, the weight of the argument is determined by quotations from Ellen White.

The above thoughts and questions demand answers. And I am yet to find one Trinitarian who deals with this topic in a satisfactory way. The Adventist Pioneers had clear doctrinal exegesis for all of their beliefs, and yet when it comes to the trinity, a very recent addition to the Fundamentals, no one as yet has found one clear text in Scripture to prove this doctrine. By this I mean one text that shows that God is composed of three co-equal, co-eternal persons or beings that are composed of the same substance. Scholars around the world have acknowledged for years that the trinity doctrine is not found in Scripture but is a later addition. And yet people take sides, arguing theology from a few Ellen White statements, ignoring the Word of God, and the vast majority of her statements over the whole length of her lifetime that reveal she never became a Trinitarian and that the non-Trinitarian view was God given from the very beginning. The weight of evidence is overwhelming.

Here are the facts so far.
1.Ellen White never used the word Trinity or Triune God or the pagan three in one formula in any form whatsoever.
2.She also never used the Catholic phrases God the Son or God the Holy Spirit used by Trinitarians.
3.She states that God sent her from place to place to rebuke those who were teaching false doctrines.
4.She never corrected her husband or the early pioneers for their anti-Trinitarian teaching.
5.Since 1844 God also had her correct those teaching false ideas about God but how can she do that if she is in error?
6.In 1905, Ellen White wrote that God told her to reproduce the works of the pioneers that were anti-Trinitarian.
7.The above points make sense because the non-Trinitarian view was God given and one the Pillars of Faith.
8.Ellen White corrected Kellogg not just for Pantheism but for trying to bring in the trinity doctrine.
9.The world saw the Adventist Church and Ellen White as being non-Trinitarian two years before her death.
10.The Church stopped printing their official stand of no Trinity in the Yearbook the year Mrs. White died.
11.Ellen White never requested that her books be re-edited and the non-Trinitarian thoughts removed.
12.In 1905, Ellen White wrote that God never told her to change anything that she ever wrote since she was a girl.
13.It is claimed Ellen White became a Trinitarian before 1895 but in 1905 she wrote that she never changed anything.
14.It is claimed she was Trinitarian when she wrote the Desire of Ages and yet this book is full of non-Trinitarian quotes.
15.After this she wrote that what was truth in the beginning was truth now and that new truths never contradicted the old.
16.Well after the Desire of Ages she strongly promoted non-Trinitarian books to the world that Froom later had edited.
17.The change and so called greater light originated from sources outside of the Seventh day Adventist Church.
18.LeRoy Froom deliberately set out to compile anything Ellen White wrote that could be mistaken as Trinitarian.
19.Froom had to search over 100,000 pages of Ellen White's writings to find that handful of misunderstood quotes.
20.The quotes are misunderstood because most do not know that Ellen White says the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ.
21.Ellen White never told anyone she was a Trinitarian and so this was only wrongly assumed years after her death.
22.The only Biblical support for the trinity doctrine was not from God but was added by our adversary to pervert the truth.

Ellen White gave three very similar warnings to the one below in the year she died in February, May and this one just before she died on July 16, 1915, but they were all ignored!

“I tell you now, that when I am laid to rest, great changes will take place. I do not know when I shall be taken; and I desire to warn all against the devices of the devil. I want the people to know that I warned them fully before my death.” — (Ellen White Shortly before her death, Manuscript 1, 1915)

She warned the Church that right after she died that major changes would happen and they did. And one was LeRoy Froom bringing the trinity doctrine into the Church that originated from sun and Satan worship. The evidence is clear. Satan is wroth with the Church and has made war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus. Did Satan attack the early Christian Church and lead them from the truth? Most definitely! Do Adventists really think that Satan has not attacked the remnant Church and brought in error? Because Scripture says he would!

In the image below we see that Ellen White seven years after she had supposedly become a Trinitarian still declares that Jesus is the literal Son of God. A Trinitarian cannot and would not say this. Compare what Ellen White said on the right with what the Adventist Church now believes on the left. Note that the trinity doctrine denies that there is a literal Son and a literal Father. It is said they are just role playing. With these facts in mind, consider the following Scriptures very carefully and ask yourself if this affects your eternal life by not knowing who the Father and Son truly are. Considering the trinity doctrine is from Satan, it is not hard to see what his plan is if your eyes are wide open.

“Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: but he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.” 1 John 2:22-23

“And this is life eternal, that they might know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.” John 17:3


I know who the Father and Son truly are and who I worship, do you? Or are you worshipping three gods that are really only one god that is just role playing?

Seventh-day Adventists have always believed that all their teachings should be based on the Scriptures. Yet in the 1980 General Conference session at Dallas, Texas when they officially adopted the Trinity as a teaching of Adventism they stated, “While no single Scripture passage states the doctrine of the Trinity, it is assumed as a fact... only by faith can we accept the existence of the Trinity.” — (Special Edition of the Review and Herald)

There is no other doctrine that Adventists hold that they cannot prove from Scripture. The truth about the Godhead is that it is very clear who the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are. While there are areas that one cannot understand because the Lord has chosen not to reveal that information, who we are to worship is plainly shown in God's Word. This is not a mystery.

There is one God the Father! There is one begotten Son, Jesus Christ who is the express image of the Father and possesses all the attributes of His Father. Jesus is the Divine Son of God. There is one Spirit, the shared Spirit of the Father and the Son. We see two Divine beings who share a common Spirit making them one in purpose, thought and action.

Adventists need to remember that to be a remnant, they must be like the original. The founders of Adventism were strong Bible students who took the word of God as it read. They did not spend their time trying to philosophise away the plain and simple teachings found in the Scripture. The Trinitarian view is confusing, nebulous and contradictory to Scripture.

1) The Trinitarian tells us that we must understand that when the term Son of God is used in talking of Christ prior to His birth in Bethlehem, this term is used only in the sense of pointing forward to the time He would be called the Son because of the incarnation. This would apply both to the Scriptures and to the Spirit of Prophecy. However, nowhere does the Bible or the Spirit of Prophecy make such a statement. This is pure supposition. The fact is that both speak plainly that Jesus is God's very own Son and existed as such before He ever came to this earth.

2) The Trinitarian view asserts that it was not really God's Son who came to die for you and me, but the member of the Godhead who was playing the role of the Son. However, the Scripture clearly says “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son...” John 3:16

3) The Trinitarian tells us that three persons make up one God and because each is God in their own right, each is worthy of praise and worship, and that each may be prayed to. However, the Scripture tells us there are only two beings worthy of worship and praise, the Father and the Son. It also tells us we are to pray to the Father through the Son.

4) The Trinitarian calls the Holy Spirit, “God the Spirit”, but Ellen White or the Scriptures nowhere use this terminology.

Have Adventists philosophised away the plain and simple teachings of the Scriptures and adopted in their place man's ideas of what is right and wrong? The trinity has come into God's Remnant Church gradually. Today it is widely accepted to the point that when someone is confronted about its validity the response is always the same. They never even thought of questioning it. Were the Adventist pioneers truly the remnant? If they were, then Adventists must believe that they had come out of Babylon in their teachings because that is the mark of the Remnant Church. They could not call others out of Babylon if they themselves were still in “confusion.”