The Development of Trinity Theology Within the Seventh-Day Adventist Church
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Development of Trinity Theology within the Seventh-day Adventist Church Part 2 - The Father and the Son By Terry Hill This is Part 2 of a study on how trinity doctrine theology developed within the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Here we shall be taking a detailed look at what SDA’s once taught, through their various denominational publications, about the Father and the Son. We shall then compare this with what is being taught today, which, as we shall see, is something entirely different. Part 1 of this study can be found here https://theprophetstillspeaks.co.uk/History/Development_of_SDA_Trinity_Theology_ 1.pdf Overview and introduction From their very beginnings as a denomination, right through until decades after the death of Ellen White, SDA’s believed and taught that Christ, in His pre-existence, was begotten of God therefore He is truly the Son of God. God therefore, according to early SDA’s, was truly the father of Christ. During my research, I have not found anywhere, at least not during the time of Ellen White’s ministry, where this was disputed. Christ therefore, according to early Seventh-day Adventism, was truly a son – and the Father was truly a father. The article you are now reading is not simply meant to debate certain theological positions. Its intent is to show, as time has progressed, the development of theology, within Seventh- day Adventism, regarding the Father and the Son. Having said that, this author takes the view that what was believed and taught by SDA’s, during the time of Ellen White’s ministry, also for decades after her death (that God is truly a father, and Christ is truly a son), is the truth concerning these two divine personalities. Context is always very important. For this reason, I have not only quoted those things I would bring to your attention but have also included enough of the surrounding wording to show that it has not been removed from its original setting. This allows the reasoning behind the beliefs of these early SDA’s to be clearly shown. As this has made some of the quotations lengthy, I have, in red, highlighted the relevant part. I hope this adds to making this study easier to follow. This part of the study (Part 2) is divided into 2 sections. Section A reveals that the belief of these early SDA’s (that God really is the Father of Christ, and that Christ really is the Son of God) was still being taught, in our publications, even through to the 1970’s, although by then, a ‘new theology’ was fast becoming established within Seventh-day Adventism. We shall discover this ‘new theology’ in Section B. May you be blessed as you read. First published 5th February 2020 Last edited 5th February 2020 Email: [email protected] Copyright © Terry Hill 2020 1 Index Section A: Past Seventh-day Adventist Father and Son theology Period: 1850-1859 General publications …………….................................................... Page 3 Period: 1860-1869 General publications …………….................................................... Page 10 Period: 1870-1879 General publications …………....................................................... Page 18 Period: 1880- 1889 General publications …………....................................................... Page 23 Period: 1890-1899 General publications ……………………………………...………….. Page 38 E. J. Waggoner’s, ‘Christ and His Righteousness’ ……………… Page 56 The Samuel Spear article …………………………………………….. Page 61 Ellen White endorses the beliefs of SDA's concerning Christ ... Page 64 Period: 1900-1909 General publications ….………....................................................... Page 68 Period: 1910-1919 General publications ………............................................................ Page 85 The 1919 Bible Conference …………………………………………... Page 100 Period: 1920-1929 General publications ………............................................................ Page 115 Period: 1930-1939 General publications ………............................................................ Page 127 The official 1936 Godhead beliefs of SDA’s ………………………. Page 142 Period: 1940-1949 General publications …………........................................................ Page 152 Charles Longacre’s ‘Deity of Christ’ paper (1947) …………..…... Page 161 Period: 1950 onwards General publications …………........................................................ Page 165 Section B: Current (2020) Father and Son SDA theology The underlying problem ................................................................ Page 171 A role-playing trio ……………………………………………………... Page 174 Christ not begotten (not a true son) ……………………………….. Page 177 A metaphorical Father and Son …………………………………….. Page 182 Metaphors or not metaphors? ……………………………….……… Page 188 Conclusions and closing comments …………………….…………. Page 192 2 Section A: Past Seventh-day Adventist Father and Son theology Period: 1850-1859 General publications: In the Youth’s Instructor of June 1854, Uriah Smith spoke of the evils of spiritualism. “Antichrist is one that denies Christ, or opposes the doctrines of christianity; now these mediums and believers in spirit teachings do this openly. They teach that the soul is immortal; a doctrine which is not taught in the Bible; and they positively deny the divinity of Christ. So they answer exactly the description given by Peter, when he says that they "shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them." (Uriah Smith, Youth’s Instructor, June 1854, ‘The Last Time’) It is evident that Uriah Smith believed in “the divinity of Christ” (that Christ is divine). Those who did not believe this he described as “antichrist”. He also described the belief that Christ was not divine, as one of the “damnable heresies’ spoken of by Peter. This gives an indication of what the early SDA’s (although not yet officially a denomination) then believed about Christ. Notice that this was being brought to the attention of the youth. The Youth’s Instructor was launched in the August of 1852. Its first editor was James White. Its intent, which should not be necessary to explain, was to cater for the spiritual needs of the young people. Ellen White is said to have made a contribution of over 500 articles to the Youth’s Instructor. Her first was in the very first issue. It was called Communications. In this article she wrote (after explaining that Adam and Eve had forfeited eternal life by eating of the forbidden fruit) “But the Son of God, who was with the Father before the world was, took pity upon us in our lost condition, and offered to step in between us and the wrath of an offended God. Said Jesus, I will give my life for them. I will take the burden of the sins of the world upon me, and will make a way possible for these transgressors to find pardon, and enjoy thy favor again, that they may repent and keep thy commandments. and again have access to the tree of life. God consented to give his only Son to die for lost man.” (Ellen White, Youth’s Instructor, August 1852, ‘Communications’) In this very first issue of the Youth’s Instructor, an explanation was given for its production “The young, at this day, are exposed to many evils and dangers, and they must have right instruction to enable them to know how to shun them. And although the world never was so full of books and papers as at the present time, yet there is but very little written that is calculated to lead the youth to feel the need of the Saviour, and to impress them with the importance of shunning vice, and living a virtuous, sober and holy life. The young are receiving impressions, and forming characters for Eternal Life or for Death, in an unfortunate age of the world, when spiritual darkness, like the pall of death, is spread over the earth. Pride is fostered; self-will, anger and malice are not timely and faithfully rebuked.” (James White, The Youth’s Instructor, August, 1852, ‘Address’) 3 In 1854 (this was the same year as the above Uriah Smith article was published in the Youth’s Instructor), J. M. Stephenson had a book published by the Advent Review. It was called The Atonement. It was also, between August and December of the same year, published in sections in the Review and Herald. In the November 7th issue, Stephenson had this to say about Christ (this was after extensive coverage in previous sections of the meaning and the purpose of the atonement) “The pre-existence of the Son of God claims our attention. The testimony on this point is so clear and explicit, that comment will be almost unnecessary.” (J. M. Stephenson, Review and Herald, 7th November 1854, ‘The Atonement’) Stephenson then goes on to show that the Scriptures provide abundant evidence that Christ had a pre-existence with the Father (too much to quote here). Following this he says “In reference to his dignity, he is denominated the Son of God, before his incarnation. Hear his own language: "He that speaketh of himself, seeketh his own glory: but he that seeketh his glory that sent him, the same is true." John vii, 18. "Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God." Chap. x, 36. "In this was manifest the love of God toward us, because God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him. Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. I John iv, 9, 10. The idea of being sent implies that he was the Son of God antecedent to his being sent. To suppose otherwise is to suppose that a father can send his son on an errand before that son has an existence, which would be manifestly absurd. "To say that God sent his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh," is equivalent to saying that the Son of God assumed our nature; he must therefore have been the Son of God before his incarnation.” (Ibid) Some may say that this is reasonably apparent, but not everyone believes that Christ, prior to the incarnation, was a son.