Trinity in Early Adventism: Some Corrective Notes
koot van wyk (DLitt et Phil; ThD)
Sangju Campus
conjoint lecturer of
8 October 2009
As we speak, there are forces in the
George R. Knight is not a professor of Theology although he was used in that capacity for some years at the Seminary. He has a strong background in Education with his doctoral degree from the
"Knight joined the Adventist church through the ministry of Ralph Larson. He completed a BA at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_R._Knight
A new book or series came out by Knight in 2008 (George Knight, Lest we forget : daily devotionals [
One of his series deals with the topic of the Trinity in Adventism. It is a very welcome and relevant topic for these days in the light of the misunderstanding of the topic in some circles in other denominations, like the Calvinist Dutch Reform Church in South Africa with views recently published in a newspaper by the proffessor emeritus in Systematic Theology, Adrio Konig, a student of G. Berkhouwer at the Free University of Amsterdam, Netherlands. He was heavily criticized for this views.
There are some points that Knight mentioned in his devotional thoughts on the subject that may need added explanation. The reason we need added information is that a more complete picture of what happened in the pioneer years will guard us from jumping to conclusion too hastely about them.
Anyone who has not yet purchased the book by Dr. Eric Claude Webster, Crosscurrents in Adventist Christology (Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 1984 reprinted in 1992), should do so. Webster was my teacher as well as his wife, at
1. Arianism was not the majority view of early Adventism but the minority view
Webster also went over the data regarding the Trinity in early Adventism (Webster 1984: 33-47). He used quite a variety of interesting sources but indicated "The Christological stance of most of these proponents of the message [early Adventist message in the Millerite Movement] was trinitarian but in some cases the position advocated on Christ and the Holy Spirit was unorthodox" (Webster 1984: 34 citing L. E. Froom, The Prophetic Faith of our Fathers, Vol. IV, [Washington D.C.: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1954], 148-182) . After reading an online article on one of the founders of the
2. Uriah Smith did not remain a classical Arianist
Uriah Smith was an Arianist but did not remain one. In Movement of Destiny 1971: 157-174, Froom traces the semi-Arian views of Uriah Smith from 1865-1898. He compared Smith's Thoughts on the Revelation as the author discussed Revelation
3. James White changed his Arian view by 1877
James White was also one of the leaders of the Adventist movement and he came out of the Christian connection that held Arian views regarding Christ. In some early statements White showed his Arian bias (Froom 1954: 175-176) but in an article of 1877 one can see that he is not Arian (James White, "Christ equal with God" Review and Herald, November 29, 1877: 172).
4. Practical and logistic reasons for errors earlier
Webster pointed out "In the formative years of the movement the thrust of the message was eschatological and with the emphasis on the imminence of the second advent, time was not taken for definitive statements on Christology" (Webster 1984: 34).
5. Ellen White was not an Arian
In Ellen White's book, Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 1 (1858) Ellen White reveals that she was not an Arian but one who believed Jesus to be God:
"They [Satan and his angels] rebelled against the authority of the Son of God . . . " (E G White, Spiritual Gifts, The Great Controversy Between Christ and His Angels, and Satan and His Angels, Vol. I,
Was Ellen White saying in 1858 that Jesus is the highest angel and still the Son of God in that sense? Webster cancelled this possibility by drawing our attention to chapter III, "The Plan of Salvation" of Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 1: "The angels prostrated themselves before him. They offered their lives. Jesus said to them that he should by his death save many; that the life of an angel could not pay the debt. His life alone could be accepted of his Father as a ransom for man" (Spiritual Gifts 1858: 24).
6. How strong was Arianism in early Adventism? Froom versus Gane
Leroy E. Froom gave evidence in the revised edition of Movement of Destiny (1978): 148-187 of the early views of Adventists on Arian and semi-Arian ideas. Froom indicated that the Arian view was in a minimal position among the early pioneers in 1958. Erwin Roy Gane differed from Froom in 1963 by thinking that the number were much higher than Froom thought. Gane has an article or overview of his views online at http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/trinity/gane-thesis/e-gane02.htm.
Gane wrote a thesis for Master of Arts at the SDA Theological Seminary, Andrews University, Michigan, USA, with the title: The Arian or Anti-Trinitarian Views Presented in Seventh-day Adventist Literature and the Ellen G White Answer, 1963. Webster made an analysis of Gane's position and said: "While Gane comes out in strong support of Ellen White's anti-Arian views against this background it should be noted that his evidence is taken mainly from the period 1890 and beyond (see Gane's thesis pp. 67-101). Gane has also compared Ellen White's presentation of Christ in The Spirit of Prophecy (Vol. 1 [1870]) with that in Patriarchs and Prophets (1890) as [Webster] has done in [his] dissertation. But it should be noted that Gane overlooked the germinal statement of 1858 in Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 1" (Webster 1984: 72 footnote 25). The result is thus that Gane did not investigate early enough on the issue as far as Ellen White's views are concerned. Webster concluded on Ellen White: "It is quite remarkable that while a form of semi-Arianism was evident in Adventism up to the end of the 19th century that Ellen White was able to avoid the pitfall" (Webster 1984: 72). What grew about Ellen White's understanding of the subject, is not a swing from Arianism to Trinity but from writer less clearer to more clearer (see also Webster 1984: 72 at footnote 26).
End item