In many minds when the Christ is said to be the literal Son of God it is understood to mean that He is a created being. And if a created being then not divine, and if not divine then not God, and saying Jesus is not God raises up all the defences of a Christian that many would not want to hear anything more of it. These are assumptions made from the one statement, that, “Jesus is the literal Son of God”, and those assumptions are not true. In fact that statement proves quite the opposite as it confirm and reaffirms Jesus’ divinity.
To start of this article I would like to present the case of the early Seventh Day Adventist who had to face this misconception from the people they were trying to evangelize and also to hear from their writings what they believed. Please pay attention to the dates of the articles
W. H. LITTLEJOHN
Question: “Will you please favor me with those scriptures which plainly say that Christ is a created being? (Question No. 96, Review and Herald, April 17th 1883, The commentary, Scripture questions, ‘Answers by W. H. Littlejohn’)
Answer: “You are mistaken in supposing that S. D. Adventists teach that Christ was ever created. They believe, on the contrary, that he was “begotten” of the Father, and that he can properly be called God and worshiped as such.” (Ibid)
E. G. WHITE
“In this country [New Zealand], the denominational ministers tell the most unblushing falsehoods to their congregations in reference to our work and our people.” (Ellen G. White, Review and Herald, 5th December 1893, ‘An appeal for the Australasian field’)
“For instance, an effort was made to obtain the use of the hall at a village four miles from Hastings, where some of our workers proposed to present the gospel to the people; but they did not succeed in obtaining the hall, because a schoolteacher there opposed the truth, and declared to the people that Seventh-day Adventists did not believe in the divinity of Christ.” (Ibid)
E. J. WAGONNER
“But when the doctor [Briggs] states that Seventh-day Adventists deny the divinity of Christ, we know that he writes recklessly.” (E. J. Waggoner. Signs of the Times, March 25th 1889, article ‘The Divinity of Christ’)
“We are fully persuaded in our own mind that he [Briggs] knows better; but be that as it may, the statement has been made so often by men who professed to know whereof they were speaking, that many have come to believe it; and for their sakes, as well as for the benefit of those who may not have given the subject any thought, we purpose to set forth the truth.” (Ibid)
Having given three instance where the early Seventh Day Adventist people were often misunderstood to teach that Christ was not divine we are going to turn and hear what they actually taught about Jesus.
E. J. WAGONNER
“We have no theory to bolster up, and so, instead of stating prepositions, we shall simply quote the word of God, and accept what it says.” (Ibid)
“We believe in the divinity of Christ, because the Bible says that Christ is God.” (Ibid)
“The Word was “in the beginning”. The mind of man cannot grasp the ages that are spanned in this phrase.” (E. J. Waggoner, ‘Christ and His Righteousness’, page 9, 1890)
“It is not given to men to know when or how the Son was begotten; but we know that He was the Divine Word, not simply before He came to this earth to die, but even before the world was created.” (Ibid)
“There was a time when Christ proceeded forth and came from God, from the bosom of the Father (John 8:42 and 1:18) but that time was so far back in the days of eternity that to finite comprehension it is practically without beginning. But the point is that Christ is a begotten Son and not a created subject.” (Ibid pages 21-22)
“This name [God] was not given to Christ in consequence of some great achievement but it is His by right of inheritance.” See Heb 1:4(Ibid page 11)
“A son always rightfully takes the name of the father; and Christ, as “the only begotten Son of God,” has rightfully the same name. A son, also, is, to a greater or less degree, a reproduction of the father; he has to some extent the features and personal characteristics of his father; not perfectly, because there is no perfect reproduction among mankind. But there is no imperfection in God, or in any of His works, and so Christ is the “express image” of the Father’s person. Heb. 1:3. As the Son of the self – existent God, He has by nature all the attributes of Deity.” (Ibid)
“It is true that there are many sons of God, but Christ is the “only begotten Son of God,” and therefore the Son of God in a sense in which no other being ever was or ever can be.” (Ibid page 12)
“Christ “is in the bosom of the Father;” being by nature the very substance of God and having life in Himself, He is properly called Jehovah, the self existing one …” (Ibid page 23-24)
“The angels are sons of God, as was Adam (Job 38:7; Luke 3:38), by creation; Christians are the sons of God by adoption (Rom. 8:14, 15), but Christ is the Son of God by birth.” (Ibid)
E. G. WHITE
“A complete offering has been made; for “God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son,”– not a son by creation, as were the angels, nor a son by adoption, as is the forgiven sinner, but a Son begotten in the express image of the Father’s person, and in all the brightness of his majesty and glory, one equal with God in authority, dignity, and divine perfection. In him dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.” (Ellen G. White, Signs of the Times, 30th May 1895, ‘Christ our complete salvation’)
“The Eternal Father, the unchangeable one, gave his only begotten Son, tore from his bosom Him who was made in the express image of his person, and sent him down to earth to reveal how greatly he loved mankind.” (Ellen G. White, Review & Herald 9th July 1895 ‘The Duty of the Minister and the People’)
A. T. JONES
“who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped; But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:” {Phil 2:6}
“He who was born in the form of God took the form of man.” In the flesh he was all the while as God, but he did not appear as God.” “He divested himself of the form of God, and in its stead took the form and fashion of man” “The glories of the form of God, he for awhile relinquished.” (A. T. Jones, General Conference Bulletin, March 4th 1895, ‘The Third Angel’s Message – No. 23’)
For those familiar with Seventh Day Adventist History, these statement were made, and these beliefs we held during the 1888 period when the latter rain was beginning to be poured out through the message of Christ our righteousness brought to the people by E.J. Wagonner and A.T. Jones.
These were not in any way new beliefs, it was what had been believed by the people upto that time. Observe…
D M CANRIGHT
“According to this,(John 1:1, John 1:18 and John 3:16) Jesus Christ is begotten of God in a sense that no other being is; else he could not be his only begotten Son. Angels are called sons of God, and so are righteous men; but Christ is his Son in a higher sense, in a closer relation, than either of these.” (D. M. Canright, Review and Herald, June 18th 1867, ‘The Son of God’)
“God made men and angels out of materials already created. He is the author of their existence, their Creator, hence their Father. But Jesus Christ was begotten of the Father’s own substance. He was not created out of material as the angels and other creatures were. He is truly and emphatically the “Son of God,” the same as I am the son of my father.” (Ibid)
J. WHITE
“The Father was greater than the Son in that he was first. The Son was equal with the Father in that he had received all things from the Father.” (James White, Review and Herald, 4th January 1881, ‘The Mind of Christ’)
Having given their testimonies now let us turn to the Scriptures to see what Scriptures informed their understanding…
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God…And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.” {John 1:1,2,14}
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” {John 3:16}
“And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” {Matthew 3: 16-17}
“Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God…” {John 8:42}
“The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, 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.
When he prepared the heavens, I [was] there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth: When he established the clouds above: when he strengthened the fountains of the deep: When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth: Then I was by him, [as] one brought up [with him:] …” {Proverbs 8:22-30}
“And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God…” {Rev 3:14}
“Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature” Col 1:15
“Who being the brightness of [his](God’s) glory, and the express image of his(God’s) person and upholding all things by the word of his power…Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
For unto which of the angels said he(the Father) at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son? And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him” {Heb 1:3-6}
“My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any [man] pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave [them] me, is greater than all” {John 10:27-29}
“If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.” {John 14:28}
With this delineation of their understanding: namely;
- Christ is the literal only begotten Son of God.
- The Father has pre-eminence over the Son because He begat the Son.
- The Son is divine in nature by virtue of the being literally begotten of the Father.
- The Father is God, even of the Son.
Now, let us turn to hear what they understood about the doctrine of the trinity and also what they said about it..
D. M. Canright
“And then the Bible never uses the phrases, “trinity,” “triune God,” “three in one,” ” the holy three,” “God the Holy Ghost,” etc. But it does emphatically say there is only one God, the Father. And every argument of the Trinitarian to prove three Gods in one person, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost, all of them of one substance, and every way equal to each other, and all three forming but one, contradicts itself, contradicts reason, and contradicts the Bible.” (D. M. Canright, Review and Herald, August 29th 1878, ‘The personality of God’)
Notice that Canright says that every trinitarian argument is to prove three Gods in one person. Essentially, three people merged into one. I guess one could think of a three headed dog for an analogy. This destroys the distinction of persons. I.e. the Father being seperate from the Son. This they had a problem with because they maintained the personality of each. The Father being a person and the Son being a person.
Just like we have a husband and wife being two seperate people yet the bible identifying them as one after marriage, so is the relationship of the Father and the Son (See John 10:30). Similarly, in the ‘oneness’ relationship of the husband and wife the husband has headship in the relationship. In like manner, in the relationship of the Father and the Son, the Father is the Head of the Son (See 1st Cor 11:3). And again just like in the original relationship of Adam and Eve, or husband and wife, the wife came and proceeded forth from Adam’s body, being of the same nature as Adam, so did Son come and proceed forth from the Father, being of the same substance and nature as the Father.
In the order of creation and created beings, and the relationships ordained of God are found lessons to be learned, even about the Godhead. Even as Paul states, “For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, [even] his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse” Rom 1:20
It is in an effort to maintained this order and uphold bible truth that the pioneers rejected any notion of the trinity that would destroy the seperate and distinct personality of the Father and the Son by merging the two, or three, into some kind of a three-headed being which was indeed a pagan deity.
James White
“The inexplicable Trinity that makes the Godhead three in one and one in three, is bad enough; but that ultra Unitarianism that makes Christ inferior to the Father is worse. Did God say to an inferior, “Let us make man in our image?” (James White, Review and Herald November 29th article ‘Christ Equal with God’ 1877)
Notice that saying Christ is inferior to the Father was not also an acceptable position to them, but even worse. But let us continue to hear of their testimony concerning the effects of the trinity doctrine
J. N. Andrews
“This doctrine [the trinity doctrine] destroys the personality of God and his Son Jesus Christ our Lord. The infamous, measures by which it was forced upon the church which appear upon the pages of ecclesiastical history might well cause every believer in that doctrine to blush.” (J. N. Andrews, Review and Herald, March 6th 1855, ‘The Fall of Babylon’)
J. N. Loughborough
“Question 1. “What serious objection is there to the doctrine of the trinity?”
Answer. “There are many objections which we might urge, but on account of our limited space we shall reduce them to the three following: 1. It is contrary to common sense. 2. It is contrary to scripture. 3. Its origin is Pagan and fabulous.” (Review and Herald, November 5th 1861 ‘Questions for Brother Loughborough’)
A. J. Dennis
“What a contradiction of terms is found in the language of a trinitarian creed: “In unity of this Godhead are three persons, of one substance, power, and eternity, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.” There are many things that are mysterious, written in the word of God, but we may safely presume the Lord never calls upon us to believe impossibilities. But creeds often do.” (A. J. Dennis, ‘Signs of the Times’ May 22nd 1879, page 162 article ‘One God’)
J. H. Kellogg
“Our reviewer seems to be somewhat displeased at our reference to the doctrine of the trinity, a doctrine which is confessedly in the highest degree unphilosophical, unreasonable, and unreconcilable with common sense…” (J. H. Kellogg, Review and Herald, August 19th 1880, ‘The soul – no 2. Reply to Dr. Kellogg’s rejoinder’)
R. F. Cottrell
“This [the trinity doctrine] has been a popular doctrine and regarded as orthodox ever since the bishop of Rome was elevated to the popedom on the strength of it. It is accounted dangerous heresy to reject it; but each person is permitted to explain the doctrine in his own way. All seem to think they must hold it, but each has perfect liberty to take his own way to reconcile its contradictory propositions; and hence a multitude of views are held concerning it by its friends, all of them orthodox, I suppose, as long as they nominally assent to the doctrine.
For myself, I have never felt called upon to explain it, nor to adopt and defend it, neither have I ever preached against it. But I probably put as high an estimation on the Lord Jesus Christ as those who call themselves Trinitarians. This is the first time I have ever taken the pen to say anything concerning this doctrine.” (R. F. Cottrell, Review and Herald 1st June 1869 ‘The Doctrine of the Trinity’)
Thus, I find that the issue with the trinity doctrine, according to the pioneers, is that it destroyed the personalities of the Father and the Son and it muddied the conception relative to the order laid forth in the Scriptures concerning the Father and the Son. It also contradicted the testimony of the created works of God.
Nonetheless, the current official position of the Seventh Day Adventist people is such:
BELIEF 2: THE TRINITY
“There is one God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, a unity of three coeternal 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. God, who is love, is forever worthy of worship, adoration, and service by the whole creation. (Gen. 1:26; Deut. 6:4; Isa. 6:8; Matt. 28:19; John 3:16 2 Cor. 1:21, 22; 13:14; Eph. 4:4-6; 1 Peter 1:2.)
Quite a statement. It sounds more like the one A.J. Dennis denounced.