“The days are fast approaching when there will be great
perplexity and confusion. Satan, clothed in angel robes, will deceive,
if possible, the very elect. There will be gods many and lords many.
Every wind of doctrine will be blowing ….” (5T – 80)
So
prophesied the messenger of the Lord, and all who have the faintest idea
of what is presently happening within the ranks of Seventh-day
Adventism can testify that Ellen White truly was inspired by the Spirit
of prophecy when she wrote that statement.
“God does not
destroy,” “God and Jesus must be called by the Hebrew names, Yahweh and
Yashua,” “The feast days ought to be still observed,” “there is no
investigative judgement etc. etc. And so the list goes on. I don’t know
what it is like in the other churches, but something about Seventh-day
Adventism seems to breed a thirst for new, and strange doctrines. It is
not surprising that there are some people who conclude that the safest
course is to stick with the fundamentals as defined by the organised
church and to leave to the church theologians the task of sorting
through the mass of rubble which is flying around.
This widespread confusion and the abundance of these “winds
of doctrine,” is perhaps the main reason why the truth about the
godhead is so difficult for some people to accept and perhaps even to
examine with an open mind. For many, it is simply, “oh no! Here comes
another fanatical offshoot idea!”
Is the truth about God and
His Son, simply one of a dozen wild ideas flying about, or, are there
some vital factors about the godhead message which separate it from the
others? There are indeed such factors. Let us examine some of them.
The godhead message is not a new message to Adventism. The message as
we are now proclaiming it, was accepted and taught by the entire
Seventh-day Adventist Church from its beginning until the early part of
the 20th century. A period of at least 71 years which covered the
lifetime of God’s messenger, Ellen White. What we are seeking to do
therefore, is not to introduce a new doctrine, but to restore one which
was an integral part of the SDA movement until after the death of the
prophet. Is there any one of the other doctrines which are floating
around which was also a part of the teaching of the Adventist Church in
the past? The answer is no. Not a single one. They are all “new”
doctrines. A highly significant fact.
Here is what Ellen White had to say about the doctrines which were believed and taught by the early SDA church:
Selected Messages Book 1 – 206
Many of our people do not realize how firmly the foundation of our
faith has been laid. My husband, Elder Joseph Bates, Father Pierce,
Elder {Hiram} Edson, and others who were keen, noble, and true, were
among those who, after the passing of the time in 1844, searched for the
truth as for hidden treasure. I met with them, and we studied and
prayed earnestly. Often we remained together until late at night, and
sometimes through the entire night, praying for light and studying the
Word. Again and again these brethren came together to study the Bible,
in order that they might know its meaning, and be prepared to teach it
with power. When they came to the point in their study where they said,
“We can do nothing more,” the Spirit of the Lord would come upon me, I
would be taken off in vision, and a clear explanation of the passages we
had been studying would be given me, with instruction as to how we were
to labor and teach effectively. Thus light was given that helped us to
understand the scriptures in regard to Christ, His mission, and His
priesthood. A line of truth extending from that time to the time when we
shall enter the city of God, was made plain to me, and I gave to others
the instruction that the Lord had given me.
SM1: 208
“Messages of every order and kind have been urged upon Seventh-day
Adventists, to take the place of the truth which, point by point, has
been sought out by prayerful study, and testified to by the
miracle-working power of the Lord. But the waymarks which have made us
what we are, are to be preserved, and they will be preserved, as God has
signified through His word and the testimony of His Spirit.”
T8: 297
“Let none seek to tear away the foundations of our faith–the
foundations that were laid at the beginning of our work by prayerful
study of the word and by revelation. Upon these foundations we have been
building for the last fifty years. Men may suppose that they have found
a new way and that they can lay a stronger foundation than that which
has been laid. But this is a great deception. Other foundation can no
man lay than that which has been laid.”
Does this imply that
the pioneers were absolutely correct on every single point which they
taught? Not necessarily. God did not give to Ellen White or to any other
person a full explanation of every verse in the Bible. In some cases
their understanding of certain prophecies may have been inaccurate in
some details. However, it is evident that on the issues which are vital
to salvation and to the mission of the Advent movement, God did give to
Ellen White and the pioneers a line of truth which was untainted by
false concepts. It is undeniable that this truth included a proper
concept of who God is (T8-292-3) as well as an accurate understanding of
Jesus, “His mission and His priesthood.” (SM1-206)
Any new
doctrine which is now being promoted as “vital” and which was not taught
by the pioneers cannot be important. While the Bible is the basis of
all our doctrines and the authority for all reforms (GC-595), yet God
saw fit to give a prophet to the Advent movement. “And by a prophet the
LORD brought Israel out of Egypt, and by a prophet was he preserved.”
Hosea 12:13.
Was this gift really necessary? Who would dare to
question the wisdom of God who saw our need and gave the gift? Are we
wiser than God? Yet, if we do not accept Ellen White as an authoritative
source, what is this but a rejection of the gift which God has given?
It is the same as saying, “God, I appreciate your gift, but I really
think I can do better without it.” The truth is that our understanding
of Bible truth will always be in harmony with God’s revelations through
Ellen White, if we truly accept that she was God’s messenger. What would
be the good of God sending a messenger who was so unreliable that we
could not have confidence in her? Therefore, Ellen White justifiably
states:
“Men may get up scheme after scheme, and the enemy
will seek to seduce souls from the truth, but all who believe that the
Lord has spoken through Sister White, and has given her a message, will
be safe from the many delusions that will come in these last days.” (3SM
– 83 )
So back to our main point: Any true call for a return
to “Historic Adventism” must be a call to return to the beliefs of our
pioneers. Likewise, any “new” truth which was not a part of the package
which God gave to the pioneers cannot be of major significance. Early in
the history of the movement, Ellen White and the pioneers already had
the truth which was necessary to take us into the kingdom (SM1-206). The
problem was not a shortage of truth, or the presence of false
doctrines. The problem was a failure to appreciate and receive the truth
they already had.
There is only one doctrine once embraced by
the SDA church, which has been officially rejected by the denomination
since the time of Ellen White and the pioneers. This is the doctrine
that Jesus is truly the begotten Son of God, and that the Holy Spirit is
not a third Being in a trinitarian God, but is rather an extension of
the Father’s personality. This is what makes the godhead controversy
different from all the others. It is a restoration of the original
package, while all the others are an attempt to introduce something
completely new.
