TWO MAJOR GODHEAD MISCONCEPTIONS AMONG SOME IN ADVENTISM!!

By Derrick Gillespie There are two major historical points of contention, which concerns the history of Trinitarianism in Adventism that I would like to shed some light on in this presentation, hoping that it will open some eyes, and put to silence the charges of certain dissidents in Adventism. These two points of contention surround the propositions of certain antiTrinitarian dissidents in the S.D.A. Church today who declare: 1. That Dr. Kelloggs Living Temple (1903) heresy was all about Trinitarianism and the false teaching that the Holy Spirit is a person as God is a Person

2. That the views of Willie White on the Holy Spirit reflected the correct position of the majority of Adventists after 1915, since he was closest to his mother, E.G. White, and should have been best able to say what his mothers inspired position was on the matter I will deal candidly with these two questions one after the other, in a two-part presentation, with the hope that things will be seen more clearly.

WHAT WAS KELLOGGS ALPHA HERESY ALL ABOUT?

Seventh-day Adventist pioneer, Dr Kellogg (the cornflakes and veggie-meat inventor), before being eventually dis-fellowshipped in 1907, wrote an independently published book called the Living Temple (1903), which taught a spurious doctrine concerning God and the Spirit of God, which was akin to pantheism. Basically the book taught that God, by way of the personal Holy Spirit, was actually and literally an essence within everything, both living and non-living (i.e. trees, rocks, flowers, wind, man, etc.); this doctrine, of course, would lead to the indirect worship of the creature, instead of the Creator who is above and beyond his creation as a distinct personal being. Some in Adventism, who believed Kellogg, began to see God present even in the water they bathed with, or the food they ate. Ellen White called this pantheistic doctrine the Alpha of heresies and warned of the soon coming Omega. Today, there are dissidents in SD Adventism who are teaching that because Kellogg argued that His views were closely linked to the omnipresent Holy Spirit being a person (Kellogg argued that this was then being taught by E.G. White), and because Mrs. White 1

opposed his teachings, then, according to these dissidents, the essence of Kelloggs alpha heresy was a support of Trinitarianism itself; a heresy which they argue was to be fully introduced later as the omega heresy within Adventism. However these dissidents usually fail to remember that tailored Trinitarianism (i.e. the Godhead consisting of three separate beings; not one indivisible substance) was already being published and endorsed in Adventism by several Adventist pioneers, and through both of the main Adventist publishing houses (i.e. through Review and Herald and Pacific Press between 1892 and 1900), even before Kelloggs pantheistic teachings and his independently published book arrived. Thus Trinitarian sentiments to be so-called introduced in Adventism after 1903 (according to the anti-Trinitarian dissidents) could not be the future omega! *If since the 1892 endorsement of Spears Bible doctrine of the Trinity article for instance, tailored Trinitarianism was already being endorsed and published years before Kelloggs pantheistic heresies, then both the alpha and the omega heresies coming in published form after 1900 must therefore be something else; not the recognition of a Godhead trinity per se. Notice Mrs. Whites words very carefully to determine what the problem with Kelloggs teachings was: "In the [one] book, Living Temple, there is presented the alpha of deadly heresies. The omega will follow, and will be received by those who are not willing to heed the warning God has given [page 200, par 1]. Living Temple contains the alpha of these theories. I knew that *the omega would follow in a little while; and I trembled for our people. -E. G. White, Selected Messages Book 1, page 203. In response to Kelloggs alpha heresies Mrs. White not only identified what exactly was wrong with his views, but also held up in its place what is the real essence of God and the Godhead, and hence made it clear what the future omega heresy could not be: I am instructed to say, the sentiments of those [like Kellogg] who are searching for advanced *scientific ideas [about how to represent the Godheads nature and presence] are not to be trusted. Such representations as the following are made: The Father is as the light invisible; the Son is as the light embodied; and the Spirit is the light shed abroad All these spiritualistic representations are simply nothingness. They are imperfect, untrue. They weaken and diminish the Majesty, which no earthly likeness can be compared to. God cannot be compared with things His hands have made. [*This writers insert-IF THE ESSENSE OF GOD WAS HER SUBJECT WHY DID SHE NOT STOP AT THE FATHER? BUT SHE SAID] The Father can not be described by the things of earth. The Father is all the fullness of the Godhead bodily, and is invisible to mortal sight. The Son is all the fullness of the Godhead manifested. The Word of God declares Him to be "the express image of His person." "God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life." Here is shown the personality of the Father. The Comforter that Christ promised to send after He ascended to heaven, is the Spirit in all the fullness of the Godhead, making manifest the power of divine grace to all who receive and believe in Christ as a personal Savior. There are three LIVING [literal, real, genuine]*PERSONALITIESS [same as 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 baptized, and these powers will co-operate with the obedient subjects of heaven in their efforts to live the new life in Christ. --E.G White, Special Testimonies, Series B, No.7, pgs. 62, 63

COMMENTS
It was being argued by Kellogg, and his followers (with great enthusiasm) that the actual presence of God is in trees, flowers, sunshine, air, and human beings (humans being the prime living temple), etc. Round about that time too, it just so happened that since about 1888, and especially 1892, there was, for the first time in Adventism, a new thrust by Ellen White herself and others, to now give recognition to the Holy Spirit being more than just an impersonal influence, or power, but rather as a living person, or NUMERICALLY the third person of the Godhead among three living persons. And naturally because of resistance to that newly emerging thought there were differing degrees of acceptance and also differing degrees of resistance among SDA pioneers at the time (leaders and all). But in the 1890s and early 1900s Mrs. White (the visionary) was way ahead of many in Adventism in championing this new approach to the Spirits distinct personhood, despite resistance by most; just as she was way ahead of many in supporting the new views about Jesus Godhead that were established at the controversial 1888 General Conference by E.J. Waggoner, despite resistance from most in Adventism at the time (including leaders). No wonder in 1892, the same year the Spears Trinitarian article was published (and later glowingly endorsed) by Adventisms Pacific Press, Mrs. White wrote: There is no excuse for anyone in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation. We are living in perilous times, and it does not become us to accept everything claimed to be truth without examining it thoroughly; neither can we afford to reject anything that bears the fruits of the Spirit of God; but we should be teachable, meek and lowly of heart. There are those who oppose everything that is not in accordance with their own ideas, and by so doing they endanger their eternal interest as verily as did the Jewish nation in their rejection of Christ. The Lord designs that our opinions shall be put to the test, that we may see the necessity of closely examining the living oracles to see whether or not we are in the faith. Many who claim to believe the truth have settled down at their ease, saying, "I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing." --E.G. White, Review and Herald, December 20, 1892. Thus by 1899, Mrs. White was, for the first time, making the following kind of neverbefore-said statement about the Holy Spirits personhood, and other less resistant pioneers were candidly admitting the following too in the same period: We [Adventists] need to realize that the Holy Spirit is as much a person as God is a person -E.G. White, Manuscript 66, 1899; Avondale College speech in Australia It seems strange to me now [in 1898], that I ever believed that the Holy Spirit was only an influence, in view of the work he does. But we want the truth because it is 3

truth, and we reject error because it is error, regardless of any views we may formerly have held, or any difficulty we may have had, or may now have, when we view the Holy Spirit as a person. Light is sown for the righteous. Satan's scheme is to destroy all faith in the personality of the Godhead, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost,also in his own personality... Let us beware lest Satan shall lead us to take the first step in destroying our faith in the personality of this person of the Godhead,the Holy Ghost. -R.A. Underwood The Holy Spirit a Person, Review and Herald, Vol. 75, May 17, *1898, pg. 310 Obviously in the late 1890s early 1900s (including 1903) there was not yet full unity on or agreement on the matter of the Spirits personhood, and so naturally you expect differences of opinion. Now, because right about that same time Kellogg tried to argue that his thesis can be simmered down to whether the omnipresent Holy Spirit is a person (as the newly emerging thought from E.G. White on the Spirit suggested), and because he was opposed by some in Adventism on that point, some Adventist dissidents today argue that this therefore means that any tailored form of Trinitarianism which argues for the Holy Spirit being a person, in the true and living sense, is likewise heretical. Well, if that were true, then we would find E.G. Whites emphasis hitting out against this point on the Holy Spirits personhood that Kellogg made. But please consider the following very carefully from the further testimony of Mrs. White, who gave the most potent report as to what Kelloggs heresy was all about. Note carefully that she not only NAMED, but also DESCRIBED what aspect of Kelloggs teaching was heresy, despite she herself admitted it was a mixture of some truths (obviously she herself endorsed) as well as error she had to speak out against: "Separate from the influence exerted by the book Living Temple; for it contains specious sentiments. There are in it sentiments that are entirely true, but these are mingled with error. Scriptures are taken out of their connection, and are used to uphold erroneous theories" -E.G. White, August 7, 1904, Selected Messages, Vol. 1, pg. 199 Pantheism pictures God, not as a great personal Being, but a mysterious essencean impersonal influence pervading all nature. God is seen in all naturein trees, flowers, sunshine, air, and human beings. The power of God in nature is confused with the personality of God. -Ellen G. White: The Early Elmshaven Years Volume 5 1900-1905, page 281. Pantheistic theories are not sustained by the word of God. The light of His truth shows that these theories are soul-destroying agencies. -E.G. White- Review and Herald, Jan. 21, 1904, pg. 9 I am authorized to say to you that some of the sentiments regarding the personality of God, as found in the book Living Temple [Kelloggs 1903 book] are opposed to the truths revealed in the Word of God. ... Had God desired to be represented as dwelling personally in the things of naturein the flower, the tree, the spear of grasswould not Christ have spoken of this to His disciples? Letter 230, 1903. Ellen G. White: The Early Elmshaven Years Volume 5 1900-1905, page 303. 4

In other correspondences against the heresy accepted by some, Ellen White wrote: Dr. Paulsons mind is becoming confused.... Extreme views of *God in nature undermine the foundation truths of the personality of God and the ministration of angels. A confused mass of spiritualistic ideas takes the place of faith in a personal God.... Let Dr. Paulson take heed that he be not deceived. He may say, Sister Whites own words are repeated in Dr. Kelloggs teachings. True; but misinterpreted and misconstrued. Letter 271b, 1903. Ellen G. White: The Early Elmshaven Years Volume 5 1900-1905, page 303. Let no one teach things that the Redeemer, He who owns man, body, soul, and spirit, has not taught. We need not any fanciful teaching regarding the personality of God. What God desires us to know of Him is revealed in His word and His works. The beautiful things of nature reveal His character and His power as Creator. They are His gift to the race, to show His power and to show that He is a God of love. But no one is authorized to say that God Himself in person is in flower or leaf or tree. These things are Gods handiwork, revealing His love for mankind. -Medical Ministry, page 94. He [Christ] represented God not as an essence that pervaded nature, but as a God who has a personality. - S.D.A. Bible Commentary Vol. 7, page 921, paragraph 9. The new theories in regard to God and Christ, as brought out in The Living Temple, are not in harmony with the teaching of Christ. The Lord Jesus came to this world to represent the Father. He did not represent God as an essence pervading nature, but as a personal being. Christians should bear in mind that God has a personality as verily as has Christ. - Spalding and Magan Collection, page 324. The theory that God is *AN ESSENCE PERVADING ALL NATURE [pantheism] is received by many who profess to believe the scriptures; but however beautifully clothed this theory is a most dangerous deception. It misrepresents God, and is a dishonor to His greatness and majesty. And it surely tends not only to mislead, but to debase men The result of accepting it is separation from God. -E.G. White-Ministry of Healing, 1905, pg. 248

KELLOGGS STORY BEING MISUSED TODAY:

Remembering that every dictionary defines pantheism and trinitarianism differently, this gives us the first clue that to Mrs. White herself Kelloggs REAL heresy had nothing to do with tailored trinitarianism per se, which was being endorsed in Adventism since the 1892 Spears article. What was so hard for Mrs. White to just name trinitarianism if that was the REAL issue or was even part of the real issue in Kelloggs alpha heresy, and would have been the future omega heresy as well? Lest we misinterpret this omega prophecy of Adventism's leading pioneer, let us be reminded that Mrs. White wrote most of her clear statements on the Three LIVING Persons" or three great personal Dignitaries of the Godhead or, better yet, of the 5

"three holiest beings in heaven" after the pantheism crisis had developed within the Adventist Church, led by Dr. Kellogg through his 1903 book, "Living Temple". It was as if she was expressing what the antidote to this insidious pantheistic poison from Kellogg should be, i.e. express the person-hood of the Godhead in threefold but distinct or separate terms of the beings involved. One only has to note the years of her manuscripts that especially mentioned the divine Heavenly Trio or three living persons, or the Three personal Dignitaries or three holiest beings, etc., and this truth becomes clear, very clear. But some would want to muddy the waters with speculation and oppose, in Kelloggs beliefs, more than what Mrs. White herself did. Why would Mrs. NAME pantheistic theories as the nature of Kelloggs heresy, but some today ignore that, and label it otherwise? The answer is found in them REMARKABLY believing Kelloggs deceptive words (i.e. of the matter simmering down to the Holy Spirit being a person) over that of the inspired prophetess who declared the crux of the matter to be otherwise!! Who would you rather believe? Gods take on an issue (through his servant E.G. White) or that of the Devil? I ask again, what was so hard for Mrs. White to just name trinitarianism if that was the issue? Remember our first parents (Adam and Eve) got into a lot of trouble choosing to believe the Devils deceptive words over that of Gods (see Genesis 3:1-5). Kellogg, the architect of the alpha of apostasy (according to Mrs. White), used a certain tool to give the impression that His pantheistic teachings were related to that of Mrs. White, with the Devil secretly knowing that today, as we look back on the historical happenings, if we reject Kelloggs proposition (because he was a heretic) we would have SOME in the future going a step further, in not just rejecting his pantheism, but also discounting certain other truths just being established in Adventism at the time (truths that Kellogg admittedly endorsed to some degree before some of his SDA brethren). Crafty Devil indeed!! Before I address his most deceptive ploy, which has captured SOME in Adventism today, let us see what Mrs. White taught about this crucial issue of the Holy Spirits personhood (shedding light on the TRUE Biblical teaching). Emphases and inserts are mine. The Holy Spirit has a personality; else He could not bear witness to our spirits and with our spirits that we are the children of God. He must also be a divine person [being], else He could not search out the secrets, which lie hidden in the mind of God Ms 20, 1906. Evangelism, page 617. Entire Ms. Manuscript Releases Volume Twenty, page 69. You are baptized in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. You are raised up out of the water to live henceforth in newness of life--to live a new life. You are born unto God, and you stand under the sanction and the power of THE THREE HOLIEST *BEINGS IN HEAVEN, who are able to keep you from fallingWhen I feel oppressed, and hardly know how to relate myself toward the work that God has given me to do, I just *CALL UPON THE THREE GREAT WORTHIES, and say; You know I cannot do this work in my own strength And this is the prayer that every one of us may offer. . . -E.G. White, Manuscript Release, Vol.7, pgs. 267, 268; (Ms. 95, 1906, pp. 8-12, 14-17; "Lesson from Romans 15," October 20, 1906.)

We [Adventists] 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, Manuscript 66, 1899; Avondale College speech in Australia The foregoing is unmistakable. All three words, person, personality and being are effectively synonymous in meaning. All dictionaries (objective sources) prove the synonymous nature of all three words in primary meaning. And Mrs. White knew this very well, and so chose to use all three. In addition, some of the same phrases/expressions Mrs. White used to describe God the Father, and Jesus, to express them as separate and personal beings, she likewise used the very same expressions when describing the Spirit, whether by Himself, or in a group with the Father and Son. She said plainly that the Spirit has a personality in just the same way God, the Father, and Christ are separately said elsewhere to have a personality, i.e. to mean they are separate personal beings. Any other explanation of him being a person or having a personality makes the Spirit a personal non-entity; just the same way that this principle applies to the Father and the Son. Hence her reason for using words like three living persons to say exactly what kind of person she meant the Holy Spirit is. So to her the Spirit is obviously not just a living person of three in the Godhead, just as God the Father and Christ are presented as living persons of three (otherwise why chose the words three living persons?), but Mrs. White went a step further and said all three are three great personal Dignitaries, or the three holiest BEINGS in heaven; not just two. How someone can be described as a living person among three, as one who has a personality among three, and one who is a personal dignitary among three, and (according to the minority dissidents in the SDA Church) not be a being himself among three is beyond me, or beyond the common sense God has blessed me with. That view/definition certainly is found nowhere in any dictionary of reputeonly in the minds of some who do devilish semantic hopscotching and somersaulting. How sad. No other words in the English language could be any clearer as to what E.G. White meant about all three being living beings; and not some omnipresent essence found in the universe of living and non-living matter as Kellogg tried to insinuate before he left the Church. Now in the following quote, notice how Kellogg played upon Mrs. Whites words to use a sleight of hand tactic to shift focus from what his real heresy was all aboutPANTHEISM (as NAMED by Mrs. White). Also notice how the differences of opinion on the person-hood of the Holy Spirit, which existed in the maturing Adventist Church at the time, can be easily misused to lead some astray today. Kellogg wrote to a leader in the maturing SDA Church: As far as I can fathom the difficulty which is found in the Living Temple [my book]the whole thing may be simmered down to this question: Is the Holy Spirit a Person? You [G.I. Butler] say NoI had supposed the Bible said this for the reason that the personal pronoun he is used in speaking of the Holy Ghost. Sister White uses the pronoun he, and has said in so many words that the Holy Ghost that the Holy Ghost is the third person of the Godhead. How the Holy Ghost can be the third person and not be a person at all is difficult for me to see.

-Letter of J.H. Kellogg, to G.I. Butler, Oct. 28, 1903, Adventist Heritage Center, Andrews University NOW IT IS VERY CLEAR THAT MRS. WHITE DID BELIEVE, AND EXPRESSED IN THE CLEAREST WORDS POSSIBLE IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE, THAT THE HOLY SPIRIT IS ONE OF THREE HOLIEST BEINGS IN HEAVEN, OR IS A PERSON AS GOD IS A PERSON, THAT IS, A DIVINE PERSON OF THREE (A TRIO THAT ARE INDEED LIVING PERSONS), AND THAT THE SPIRIT DEFINITELY HAS A PERSONALITY, A DISTINCT PERSONALITY, OF HIS OWN OBVIOUSLY. HOWEVER, G.I.
BUTLER WAS ONE SDA PIONEER (ALONG WITH A.G. DANIELS, AND OTHERS) WHO WAS EVIDENTLY NOT YET FULLY CONVINCED ABOUT THIS MATTER OF THE SPIRITS TRULY DISTINCT PERSONHOOD (IN 1903), EVEN WHILE CONTENDING WITH KELLOGG THROUGH LETTERS. This reality has been totally missed, overlooked or denied by

certain dissidents and accusers of the [Trinitarian] brethren, and they instead seek today to give the impression that Kellogg (or even G.I. Butler, or A.G. Daniels) had a better insight into what Kelloggs heresy was all about than Mrs. White. If true heresy is usually coupled with self-deception, why should one believe the Kellogg, the heretic, concerning what he thinks the matter is all about? Isnt it far better, and SAFER to go with the one who has visionary eyes? I do think so. *Mrs. White never once opposed Kelloggs insistence on the Holy Spirit being a person, because she herself taught that very clearly (a matter not all Adventists had yet come to grips with in 1903). And she herself already admitted Kelloggs teachings had certain sentiments which are entirely true but mixed with error. Thus whatever she did not single out and oppose was clearly correct, but what she named, described and opposed clearly is erroneous in her eyes. She singled out pantheism as what was wrong. Period. That is so clear that I must say that the blindest person is he who will not seethose who will NOT see are those probably who would unwittingly be (or are today) part of the omega heresiesheresies that would deny a REAL Heavenly Trio of THREE living persons, even while insidiously spreading (by whatever means necessary) the teaching that there are only two (2) REAL or living persons or holiest beings in heaven; not really a living Trio after all. Hmmm. How dangerous deceptions can really be. Now, in closing on part one of this presentation, let me ask the following very searching questions, which, if are honestly answered would immediately clear up certain misconceptions. But I do fear that some idolize their opinions so much, more than a desire to humbly embrace the truth when it becomes evident, that the questions may be lost on them. But they are potent and must be asked: CRUCIAL QUESTIONS TO PONDER AFTER READING THIS ARTICLE:

A] If while Mrs. White was away in Australia she was able to keep abreast of happenings in the SD Adventist church headquartered in the U.S., even regarding Dr Kelloggs pantheistic teachings (according to Mrs. White), upon which she could, in her absence, directly name or label it, describe it, and warn about the danger of this alpha [beginning] of apostasy, then is it reasonable to see her not knowing about the Trinity articles and expressions endorsed and published, not independently, but by the main 8

publishing houses of the church *between 1892 and 1913, that is, with some even coming and being glowingly endorsed before Dr Kelloggs independent publications?

B] If certain trinity endorsements, publications, and expressions came years before the pantheistic teachings of Dr Kellogg, in his book, The Living Temple (1903), is it logical to see Mrs. White seeing the new/tailored Trinity teachings and publications in Adventism as the omega [closing] heresy to come shortly, that is, after 1915 when she died? Why did she not name directly Trinitarian teachings, just as she did regarding Dr Kelloggs pantheistic teachings, if this was such a danger? Would this be like her, as the prophet of God, to ignore this issue, and remain so silent on an issue being published twenty-three (23) years (1892-1915) before her death? Or did the omega heresy (or trinitarianism, as seen by some) begin to operate within the church before the alpha heresy came on the scene, but slipped by Mrs. White (the chief watchman on the walls of Zion) all this time? Is this logical reasoning? What do you honestly think?

CONCLUSION:
Tailored Trinitarianism showed its head in Adventism from as early as 1892, long before 1931, and was never condemned by Mrs. White until her death in 1915. NEVER!! For example, the following 1913 declaration by pioneer F.M. Wilcox appeared in an article in the Review and Herald just next to some of Mrs. Whites writings before her death (on the same page in the magazine!!). Should we think that she did NOT see it? Or did she, but then still appointed its author (a supposed heretic by some today) as one of the first members of the E.G. White Estate to guard and publish her works upon her death? Certainly not!

WILCOX HAD DISTINCTLY DECLARED IN 1913:

Seventh-day Adventists [not just myself] believe [now] in ... the Divine *TRINITY. This Trinity consists of the Eternal Father the Lord Jesus Christ[and] the Holy Spirit, the third Person of the Godhead -F. M. Wilcox (editor of Review and Herald), *Review and Herald, October 9, 1913 Do you catch the import of the words Seventh Day Adventists? I did. Do you notice that Kellogg never admitted he was a pantheist, but F.M. Wilcox came right out and said, in effect, WE SDAs (a reasonable or growing majority, obviously) ARE NOW TRINITARIANS (despite that scenario, admittedly, was not the reality in the earlier days of Adventism)? Who is to say what Butler and A.G. Daniels eventually came to believe in 1913 (i.e. 10 years after 1903), after they had earlier showed a resistance to seeing the Holy Spirit as a person as God is a person when contending against Kellogg in 1903? No wonder Mrs. White insisted in those days that we [Adventists] need to realize that the Holy Spiritis a person as God is a person to show that the newly emerging teaching on the Spirit(after 1888 and 1892) did not sit well with several in Adventism at the time. 9

Mrs. White completely refused to name and speak out against basic Trinitarianism in all of her writings; only speaking regularly against the mode of unity of the Godhead in traditional Trinitarianism (i.e. to her the Godhead is not one tri-personal indivisible substance, as traditional Trinitarianism contends; but rather three persons united as separate beingsin her words as three holiest beings in heaven). Even after F.M. Wilcoxs 1913 tailored Trinitarian statement of belief was published (in Review and Herald, Oct. 9, 1913), for example, she still appointed him as one member of the first board of governors of the E.G. White Estate, entrusted with preserving and publishing her writings after her death. Her treatment of him, a self-declared Trinitarian (the unorthodox type) in full view of everyone before 1915 (including Mrs. White), and her treatment of Kellogg and his pantheism mixed-in with his Trinitarian views shows what the heresy issues really were for Mrs. White. Clearly F.M. Wilcox was not an apostate introducing the omega heresy (as some would and DO contend today) if Mrs. White willed him (without recanting) to be placed in such a position of trust after her death. He was suitable because he was a pioneer on the scene before 1888, and up to 1915, and knew all that took place in Adventism before, up to and after the change in Adventist thinking on critical issues like what aspects of traditional Trinitarianism Adventism was willing to eventually accept. Also Mrs. White never saw trinitarianism as, the mother of all heresies (as expressed by some), because, apart from clearly showing another issue (abandoning the Ten Commandments) to be the chief heresy in Christendom, she never once even spoke against the Trinity having three persons, not even mentioning the word in order to condemn it! That is indisputableand instructive! HERE NOW IS WHAT I DO BELIEVE IS THE TRUTH ABOUT GOD FOR THE TRUE ADVENTIST:
There is one God, the Father Almighty, but He cannot be known, and has not been made known apart from His Eternal Son, and Eternal Spirit. Only by way of and through the Son can He be worshipped or served, and only by the unction of, and through the Holy Spirit can we accept Him and serve him. In serving the Father it automatically means you MUST serve the Son, who is God (divine) equally, and obviously you are automatically serving the Holy Spirit, who is God (divine) also. However, the unity does not destroy the Personality of neither, because there are three living [literal] personalities of the Heavenly Trio, said the leading pioneer in Adventism, Mrs. White (who sheds clear light on the Word of God).

END OF PART ONE.

Dont miss Part 2, which will look at Willie White saying in a 1935 letter, You asked me to say what is my mothers position on the Holy Spirit. This I cannot do. Then he proceeded to give his personal take on the matter. Why was this? Look out for the answer in Part 2. Your eyes will be opened. God bless you for now. For a full discussion of these historical facts in Adventism, please request my recently concluded research entitled The Omega Heresy Explored For more: (e.g. a fresh perspective on the Omega Heresy related to the Godhead doctrine)Call (876) 539-4734 or 385-5982 E-mail: ddgillespie@live.com, or Write: Derrick Gillespie, Munro College, St Elizabeth, Jamaica, West Indies

10