Trú frumherja Aðvent kirkjunnar

Hérna vil ég fara yfir sögu Aðvent kirkjunnar með tilliti til hverju þau trúðu í sambandi við hver Guð er. Það eru spurningar eins og er Jesú raunverulega sonur Guðs eða er um að ræða myndlíkingu eða hlutverkaleik. Spurning eins og hvort Heilagur Andi er sér persóna eins og Guð og Kristur.

Aðvent kirkjan á sínar rætur í því sem hefur verið kallað "Vonbrigðin miklu" sem var atburður sem gerðist 1844 þegar hópur sem kenndur hefur verið við William Miller trúði því að Kristur myndi koma 1844. Úr þeim atburði myndaðist lítill hópur sem vildi skilja hvað gerðist og síðan vilja vita hvað Biblían kennir og losna við hvaða mannasetningar sem höfðu blandast við trú þeirra. Á þessum tíma byrjaði ung stúlka að nafni Ellen White að fá sínir og hún tók þátt í þessum rannsóknum.
Ellen White lýsir þessu tímabili svona:

1844-1846

“I do not wish to ignore or drop one link in the chain of evidence that was formed as, after the passing of the time in 1844, little companies of seekers after truth met together to study the Bible and to ask God for light and guidance. . . . The truth, point by point, was fastened in our minds so firmly that we could not doubt. . . .The evidence given in our early experience has the same force that it had then. The truth is the same as it ever has been, and not a pin or a pillar can be moved from the structure of truth. That which was sought for out of the Word in 1844, 1845, and 1846 remains the truth in every particular.” (Letter 38, 1906, pp. 1,2 [MS])

Ég ætla nú að fara yfir það sem þessir frumherjar kirkjunnar skrifuðu þegar þeir vildu deila með heiminum, það sem þeir höfðu uppgvötað við þeirra rannsóknir á Biblíunni.

1849
Eftir þessar rannsóknir þá stofnaði þessi litli hópur tímarit sem þeir kölluðu "Present truth" sem síðan seinna meir fékk nafnið "Review and Herald" og var þeirra aðal tímarit aalveg til dagsins í dag en í dag gengur það undir nafninu Adventist Review.

1851

Stuttu eftir að tímaritið var stofnað þá skrifaði James White, eiginmaður Ellen White og einn aðal leiðtogi kirkjunnar alla hans ævi. Greinin fjallaði um þeirra skilning á hver Guð er. Í þessari grein fjallar James White um mikilvægi þess að sjá Jesú sem raunverulegan Son Guðs en það fer á móti Þrenningunni því að samkvæmt henni er einn guð og hann er með þrjár persónur sem eru allar jafnal og eilífar svo það að kalla Jesú son Guðs er aðeins titill en ekki það sem Jesú raunverulega er.

“The Most Holy, containing the Ark of the ten commandments, was then opened for our Great High Priest to enter to make atonement for the cleansing of the Sanctuary. If we take the liberty to say there is not a literal Ark, containing the ten commandments in heaven, we may go only a step further and deny the literal City, and the literal Son of God. Certainly, Adventists should not choose the spiritual view, rather than the one we have presented. We see no middle ground to be taken.” — James White, Second Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, June 9, 1851, The Parable – Matthew XXV, 1-12

1852
Ári seinna, skrifaði James White þar sem hann fjallar um Þrenninguna og kallar hana fáránleika sem gerir Jesú að Guði sjálfum í staðinn fyrir Son Guðs.

“We are told by those who teach the abolition of the Father's law, that the commandments of God mentioned in the New Testament, are not the ten, but the requirements of the gospel, such as repentance, faith, baptism and the Lord's supper. But as these, and every other requirement peculiar to the gospel, are all embraced in the faith of Jesus, it is evident that the commandments of God are not the sayings of Christ and his apostles. To assert that the sayings of the Son and his apostles are the commandments of the Father, is as wide from the truth as the old trinitarian absurdity that Jesus Christ is the very and Eternal God. And as the faith of Jesus embraces every requirement peculiar to the gospel, it necessarily follows that the commandments of God, mentioned by the third angel, embrace only the ten precepts of the Father's immutable law which are not peculiar to any one dispensation, but common to all.” — (James White, Review and Herald, August 5, 1852, p. 52)

Ekki nóg með að Ellen White var gift James White heldur sagði hún einnig að Guð hefði leiðbeint honum sérstaklega, hún skrifaði eftirfarandi:

“He (James White) received a commendation that few others have attained. God has permitted the precious light of truth to shine upon His word and illuminate the mind of my husband. He may reflect the rays of light from the presence of Jesus upon others by his preaching and writing.” (E.G. White, Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 3, p. 502)

1854

Árið 1854 skrifaði James White þar sem hann fjallaði um Þrenninguna sem hluta af heiðninni sem kom með Kaþólsku kirkjunni.

“As fundamental errors, we might class with this counterfeit sabbath other errors which Protestants have brought away from the Catholic church, such as sprinkling for baptism, the trinity, the consciousness of the dead and eternal life in misery. The mass who have held these fundamental errors, have doubtless done it ignorantly; but can it be supposed that the church of Christ will carry along with her these errors till the judgment scenes burst upon the world? We think not.” — James White, Review and Herald, September 12, 1854, p. 36

Hið sama ár þá var skrifuð grein í Review and Herald af J.N.Stephenson sem fjallaði um friðþæginguna og hvernig Þrenningin gerir að engu friðþæginguna því þá það sem gerðist á krossinum var aðeins mannfórn. Greinin útskýrði þetta svona:

"This, this, is the sacrifice, the “only begotten of the Father” offered as an atonement for the sins of the world; this is the being who was actually sacrificed, and this the price the Son of God actually paid for our redemption. Hence, in reference to its dignity, it is the sacrifice of the most exalted and dignified being in the vast empire of God; nay, the sacrifice of the King's only begotten Son. In reference to its intrinsic value, who can estimate the worth of God's darling Son? It is, to say the least of it, an equivalent for the dignity, the lives, and eternal interests of the whole world; nay further, it is equal in value to all the moral interest of the whole intelligent creation, and equal in dignity and honor to the moral government of the Supreme Ruler of the Universe. In reference to its nature, it is Divine; hence we have a Divine sacrifice, in contradistinction to the Trinitarian and Unitarian views, which make it only a human sacrifice. In reference to its fullness, it is infinite, boundless. Yes, thank God, there is enough for each, enough for all, enough for ever more; enough to save an intelligent Universe, were they all sinners; and lastly, in reference to its adaptation to man's conditions and necessities, it is absolutely perfect.” — J.M. Stephenson, Review and Herald, November 21, 1854, p. 114

1855

Árið 1855 skrifaði James White grein þar sem hann fjallar um það sem honum finnst vera aðal gallinn við Þrenninguna sem hann sá að kenningin tortýmdr persónuleika Guðs.  Hunn orðaði þetta svona:

“Here we might mention the Trinity, which does away the personality of God, and of his Son Jesus Christ, and of sprinkling or pouring instead of being “buried with Christ in baptism,” “planted in the likeness of his death:” but we pass from these fables to notice one that is held sacred by nearly all professed Christians, both Catholic and Protestant. It is, The change of the Sabbath of the fourth commandment from the seventh to the first day of the week.” — James White, Review and Herald, December 11, 1855, p. 85

1855

J.N.Answers var einn af stofnendum Aðvent kirkjunnar og er Andrews háskólinn nefndur eftir honum. Árið 1855 skrifaði hann grein í Review and Herald þar sem hann fjallar um eðli Guðs þar sem hann bergmálar það sama og James White um að Þrenningin, eyðileggur persónuleika Guðs. Hann skrifaði eftirfarandi:

“The doctrine of the Trinity which was established in the church by the council of Nice A. D. 325. This 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 6, 1855

1856
Árið 1856 þá skrifaði James White grein þar sem hann flokkar Þrenninguna sem hluta af villutrú Kaþólsku kirkjunnar

“The “mystery of iniquity” began to work in the church in Paul's day. It finally crowded out the simplicity of the gospel, and corrupted the doctrine of Christ, and the church went into the wilderness. Martin Luther, and other reformers, arose in the strength of God, and with the Word and Spirit, made mighty strides in the Reformation. The greatest fault we can find in the Reformation is, the Reformers stopped reforming. Had they gone on, and onward, till they had left the last vestige of Papacy behind, such as natural immortality, sprinkling, the trinity, and Sunday-keeping, the church would now be free from her unscriptural errors.” — James White, Review and Herald, February 7, 1856, p. 148

 

Uriah Smith var einn af aðal frumherjum Aðvent kirkjunnar. Hann var aðal ritstjóri Review and Herald meira en hálfa öld. Ellen White haðfi mjög hátt álit á Uriah Smith og sagði að það var Guðs vilji að hann gengdi þessari mikilvægu stöðu en að vera ritstjóri Review and Herald var mjög nálægt því að vera hin opinbera rödd kirkjunnar. Ellen White skrifaði þetta um Uriah Smith:

"I feel very tender towards Elder Smith. My life-interest in the publishing work is bound up with his. He came to us as a young man, possessing talents that qualified him to stand in his lot and place as an editor. How I rejoice as I read his articles in the Review--so excellent, so full of spiritual truth. I thank God for them. I feel a strong sympathy for Elder Smith, and I believe that his name should always appear in the Review as the name of the leading editor. Thus God would have it. When, some years ago, his name was placed second, I felt hurt. When it was again, placed first I wept, and said, "Thank God." May it always be there, as God designs it shall be, while Elder Smith's right hand can hold a pen. And when the power of his hand fails, let his sons write at his dictation." - Ellen G. White, letter 47, Feb. 5, 1902. {20MR 220.2}

Árið 1856 skrifaði Uriah Smith grein þar sem hann hafnar Þrenningunni og fjallar um hvernig Guð hefur ákveðið form sem er eins og við mennirnir.

“In 1 Cor. 15, I find that it is not the natural man that hath immortality; yet Paul assures the Romans that by patient continuance in well doing all could obtain immortality and eternal life. The doctrine called the trinity, claiming that God is without form or parts; that the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, the three are one person, is another. Could God be without form or parts when he “spoke unto Moses face to face as a man speaketh unto a friend?” [Ex. 33:11] or when the Lord said unto him, Thou canst not see my face; for there shall no man see me and live? And it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth by, that I will put thee in a cleft of the rock, and will cover thee with my hand while I pass by; and I will take away my hand and thou shalt see my back parts; but my face shall not be seen. Ex. 33:20, 22, 23. Christ is the express image of his Father's person. Heb. 1:3.” — Uriah Smith, Review and Herald, July 10, p. 87, 1856

1858
Árið 1858 skrifaði James White grei þar sem hann endurtekur hið sama og Uriah Smith hafði skrifað um að Guð hefur form.

"What is God? He is a material, organized intelligence, possessing both body and parts. He is in the form of man. What is Jesus Christ? He is the Son of God, and is like his Father, being “the brightness of his Father’s glory, and the express image of his person.” He is a material intelligence, with body, parts and passions; possessing immortal flesh and immortal bones." – James White – Review and Herald, August 19, 1858

Kannski var James að byggja þetta á Jóhannesar guðspjalli 5:37 eða kannski það sem Ellen White skrifaði:

"In the beginning, man was created in the likeness of God, not only in character, but in form and feature." EGW - Great Contraversy p. 645

1860
Árið 1860 þá skrifaði Uriah Smith grein þar hann fjallar um muninn á milli hins eina sanna Guðs og sonar Hans. Til að lesa alla greinina þá er hana að finna hér: http://documents.adventistarchives.org/Periodicals/RH/RH18600612-V16-04.pdf

"DECLARATIONS CONCERNING THE SON.

He. is the beginning of the creation of God. Rev. iii, 14.
The first born of every creature. Col. i, 15.
The only begotten of the Father. John i, 18 ; iii, 18.
The Son of the Living God." Matt. xvi, 16. Existed before he came into the world. John viii, 58 ; Micah v, 2 ; John xvii, 5, 24.
Was made higher than the angels. Heb. i, 14.
He made the world and all things. John i, 1-3 ; Eph. iii, 3, 9.
Was sent into the world by God. John iii, 34.
In him dwells all the fullness .of the Godhead bodily. Col. ii, 9.
He is the resurrection and the life. John xi, 25.
All power is given to him in heaven and earth. Matt. xxviii, 18.
He is the appointed heir of all things. Heb. i, 2.
Anointed with the oil of gladness above his feows. ll H ob. i, 9. hasordained himjudgeikII. tobe ofquick and dead. Acts xvii, 31.
Reveals his purposes through him. Rev. 1, 1.
The head of Christ is God. 1 Cor. xi, 3.
Jesus had power to lay down his life and take it aga.in. John x, 18. lie received this commandment from the Father. John x, 19.
God raised him from the dead. Acts ii, 24, 34 ; iii, 15 ; iv, 10 ; x, 40 ; xiii, 30, 34 ; xvii, 31 ; Rom. iv, 24 ; viii, 11 ; 1 Cor. viii, 14 ; xv, 15 ; 2 Cor. 1777 14 ; Gal. i, 1 ; Eph. i, 20 ; Col. ii, 12 ; 1 Thess. i, 10 ; Heb. xiii, 20 ; 1 Pet. 1, 21.
Jesus says he could do nothing of himself. John v, 19.
That the Father which dwelt-in him did the works. John xiv, 10.
That the Father which sent him, gave him a commandment what he should say and what he should speak. John xii, 49.
That he came not to do his own will, but the will of him that sent him. John vi, 38. And that his doctrine was not his, but the Father's which sent him. John vii, 16 ; viii, 28 ; xii, 49 ; xiv, 10, 24. Dar

With such inspired declarations before us, ought we to say that Jesus Christ is the Self-existent, Independent, Omniscient and Only True God; or the SON of GOD, begotten, upheld, exalted and glorified BY THE FATHER ? ” — Uriah Smith, The Bible Students Assistant, pp. 42-45, 1858. Also found in Review and Herald, June 12, p. 27, 1860

1861
Árið 1861 skrifaði J.N. Loughborough langa grein sem var svar við spurningu sem var send til Review and Herald. Hann fjallar um það sem Aðventistar þá höfðu á móti þegar kemur að Þrenningunni. Loughborough var einn af aðal prestum kirkjunnar sem Ellen White sjálf, kallaði til að verða predikari og vinna fyrir kirkjuna.

"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.

These positions we will remark upon briefly in their order. 1. It is not very consonant with common sense to talk of three being one, and one being three. Or as some express it, calling God “the Triune God,” or “the three-one-God.” If Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are each God, it would be three Gods; for three times one is not one, but three. There is a sense in which they are one, but not one person, as claimed by Trinitarians.

2. It is contrary to Scripture. Almost any portion of the New Testament we may open which has occasion to speak of the Father and Son, represents them as two distinct persons. The seventeenth chapter of John is alone sufficient to refute the doctrine of the Trinity. Over forty times in that one chapter Christ speaks of his Father as a person distinct from himself. His Father was in heaven and he upon earth. The Father had sent him. Given to him those that believed. He was then to go to the Father. And in this very testimony he shows us in what consists the oneness of the Father and Son. It is the same as the oneness of the members of Christ's church. “That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one.” Of one heart and one mind. Of one purpose in all the plan devised for man's salvation. Read the seventeenth chapter of John, and see if it does not completely upset the doctrine of the Trinity.

To believe that doctrine, when reading the scripture we must believe that God sent himself into the world, died to reconcile the world to himself, raised himself from the dead, ascended to himself in heaven, pleads before himself in heaven to reconcile the world to himself, and is the only mediator between man and himself. It will not do to substitute the human nature of Christ (according to Trinitarians) as the Mediator; for Clarke says, “Human blood can no more appease God than swine's blood.” Com. on 2 Sam. 21:10. We must believe also that in the garden God prayed to himself, if it were possible, to let the cup pass from himself, and a thousand other such absurdities.

Read carefully the following texts, comparing them with the idea that Christ is the Omnipotent, Omnipresent, Supreme, and only self-existent God: John 14:28; 17:3; 3:16; 5:19, 26; 11:15; 20:19; 8:50; 6:38; Mark 8:32; Luke 6:12; 22:69; 24:29; Matt. 3:17; 27:46; Gal. 3:20; 1 John 2:1; Rev. 5:7; Acts 17:31. Also see Matt. 11:25, 27; Luke 1:32; 22:42; John 3:35, 36; 5:19, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26; 6:40; 8:35, 36; 14:13; 1 Cor. 15:28, &c.

The word Trinity nowhere occurs in the Scriptures. The principal text supposed to teach it is 1 John 5:7, which is an interpolation. Clarke says, “Out of one hundred and thirteen manuscripts, the text is wanting in one hundred and twelve. It occurs in no MS. before the tenth century. And the first place the text occurs in Greek, is in the Greek translation of the acts of the Council of Lateran, held A. D. 1215.”—Com. on 1 John 5, and remarks at close of chap.

3. Its origin is pagan and fabulous. Instead of pointing us to scripture for proof of the trinity, we are pointed to the trident of the Persians, with the assertion that “by this they designed to teach the idea of a trinity, and if they had the doctrine of the trinity, they must have received it by tradition from the people of God. But this is all assumed, for it is certain that the Jewish church held to no such doctrine. Says Mr. Summerbell, “A friend of mine who was present in a New York synagogue, asked the Rabbi for an explanation of the word 'Elohim'. A Trinitarian clergyman who stood by, replied, 'Why, that has reference to the three persons in the Trinity,' when a Jew stepped forward and said he must not mention that word again, or they would have to compel him to leave the house; for it was not permitted to mention the name of any strange god in the synagogue.”(Discussion between Summerbell and Flood on Trinity, p. 38) Milman says the idea of the Trident is fabulous. (Hist. Christianity, p. 34)

This doctrine of the trinity was brought into the church about the same time with image worship, and keeping the day of the sun, and is but Persian doctrine remodeled. It occupied about three hundred years from its introduction to bring the doctrine to what it is now. It was commenced about 325 A. D., and was not completed till 681. See Milman's Gibbon's Rome, vol. 4, p. 422. It was adopted in Spain in 589, in England in 596, in Africa in 534.—Gib. vol. 4, pp. 114, 345; Milner, vol. 1, p. 519.” — J.N. Loughborough, Review and Herald, November 5, 1861"

1863
Árið 1863 var Aðvent kirkjan formlega stofnuð af Ellen White, James White, Joseph Bates og J.N.Andrews. Það var orðið skýrt að með þeirra skilningi á þessum tíma þá gátu þau ekki tilheyrt neinni af þeim kirkjum sem voru þá til. 

Þetta sama ár þá skrifaði einn af frumherjum kirkjunnar, J.H.Waggoner, faðir hins betur þekkta, E.J.Waggoner, bók sem fjallaði um friðþæginguna. Einn af köflunum í þeirri bók fjallar um hvernig Þrenningin eyðileggur friðþæginguna því út frá henni þá var kross dauði Krists, aðeins manna fórn. Hluti af þeim kafla var birtur í Review and Herald og hérna er brot af því: 

“We trust that we have shown to the full conviction of every one who “trembles at the word” of the Lord, that the Son of God, who was in the beginning, by whom the worlds were made, suffered death for us; the oft-repeated declarations of theological writers that a mere human body died are, by the Scriptures, proved untrue. These writers take the doctrine of a trinity for their basis, and assume that Christ is the second person in the trinity, and could not die. Again, they assume that death is not a cessation of life; and between the two unscriptural assumptions they involve themselves in numerous difficulties, and load the doctrine of the Atonement with unreasonable contradictions. We would not needlessly place ourselves in opposition to the religious feelings of any class, but in order to clear the doctrine of the Atonement from the consequences of these assumptions, we are compelled to notice some of the prominent arguments presented in favor of the doctrine of a trinity.

...
The first of the above quotations says the Word was God, and also the Word was with God. Now it needs no proof—indeed it is self-evident—that the Word as God, was not the God whom he was with. And as there is but “one God,” the term must be used in reference to the Word in a subordinate sense, which is explained by Paul's calling the same pre-existent person the Son of God. This is also confirmed by John's saying that the Word “was with the Father.” 1 John 1:2; also calling the Word “his Son Jesus Christ.” Verse 3. Now it is reasonable that the Son should bear the name and title of his Father, especially when the Father makes him his exclusive representative to man, and clothes him with such power—“by whom he made the worlds.” That the term God is used in such a sense is also proved by Paul, quoting Ps. 45:6, 7, and applying it to Jesus. “But unto the son, he saith, Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever,… therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.” Heb. 1:8, 9. Here the title of God is applied to the Son, and his God anointed him. This is the highest title he can bear, and it is evidently used here in a sense subordinate to its application to his Father." - Review and Herald, November 10, 1863, vol. 22, p. 189)

Hérna er greinin í heild sinni: http://documents.adventistarchives.org/Periodicals/RH/RH18631027-V22-22.pdf

1867
Árið 1867 þá skrifaði maður að nafni D.M.Canright grein í Review and Herald um hver Jesús er. Hann fjallar um í hvaða skilningi Jesús er eingetni sonur Guðs, bergmála hið sama og James White skrifaði þar sem Jesús er raunverulega sonur Guðs.

“'For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son,' &c. According to this, 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. 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,'...Heb.1:1-8 quoted." — D.M. Canright, Review and Herald, June 18, 1867

1868
Joseph Bates, einn af stofnendum Aðvent kirkjunnar, skrifaði eftirfarandi um Þrenninguna.

“My parents were members of long standing in the Congregational church, with all of their converted children thus far, and anxiously hoped that we would also unite with them. But they embraced some points in their faith which I could not understand. I will name two only: their mode of baptism, and doctrine of the trinity. My father, who had been a deacon of long standing with them, labored to convince me that they were right in points of doctrine... Respecting the trinity, I concluded that it was an impossibility for me to believe that the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father, was also the Almighty God, the Father, one and the same being. I said to my father, “If you can convince me that we are one in this sense, that you are my father, and I your son; and also that I am your father, and you my son, then I can believe in the trinity.” — Joseph Bates, The Autobiography Of Elder Joseph Bates, 1868, p. 204

Hið sama ár þá skrifaði James White grein þar sem hann hafnar hugmyndinni um þrír í einum guð.

“Jesus prayed that his disciples might be one as he was one with his Father. This prayer did not contemplate one disciple with twelve heads, but twelve disciples, made one in object and effort in the cause of their master. Neither are the Father and the Son parts of the “three-one God.” They are two distinct beings, yet one in the design and accomplishment of redemption. The redeemed, from the first who shares in the great redemption, to the last, all ascribe the honor, and glory, and praise, of their salvation, to both God and the Lamb.” - James White, 1868, Life Incidents, page 343

1869
Árið 1869 þá skrifaði einn af fyrstu meðlimum Aðvent kirkjunnar tvær greinar þar sem hann fjallaði um Þrenninguna. Í fyrstu greininni fjallar hann um hvernig hinn þríeini guð er hvergi finnanlegur, hann skrifaði:

“The Trinity, or the triune God, is unknown to the Bible; and I have entertained the idea that doctrines which require words coined in the human mind to express them, are coined doctrines.” — R.F. Cottrell, Review and Herald, June 1, 1869

Seinna, þetta sama ár, þá skrifaði Cottrell aðra grein þar sem hann fjallar um hvernig Þrenningin er vín Babýlónar og tengdi hana við spiritisma.

"But to hold the doctrine of the Trinity is not so much an evidence of evil intention as of intoxication from that wine of which all the nations have drunk. The fact that this was one of the leading doctrines, if not the very chief, upon which the bishop of Rome was exalted to popedom, does not say much in its favor. This should cause men to investigate it for themselves; as when the spirits of devils working miracles undertake the advocacy of the immortality of the soul. Had I never doubted it before, I would now probe it to the bottom, by that word which modern Spiritualism sets at nought.…

Revelation goes beyond us; but in no instance does it go contrary to right reason and common sense. God has not claimed, as the popes have, that he could “make justice of injustice,” nor has he, after teaching us to count, told us that there is no difference between the singular and plural numbers. Let us believe all he has revealed, and add nothing to it.” — R.F. Cottrell, Review and Herald, July 6, 1869

1869
Árið 1869, þá skrifaði J.N.Andrews grein þar sem hann fjallar um hvernig Jesús er raunverulega sonur Guðs, hvernig einhverntíman í eilífðinni þá var Hann getinn. 

“And as to the Son of God, he would be excluded also, for he had God for his Father, and did, some point at the eternity of the past, have beginning of days. So that if we use Paul's language in an absolute sense, it would be impossible to find but one being in the universe, and that is God the Father, who is without father, or mother, or descent, or beginning of days, or end of life.” — J.N. Andrews, Review and Herald, September 7, 1869

John Matteson var einn af fyrstu meðlimum Aðvent kirkjunnar, áður en hann gerðist aðventisti þá var hann baptisti. Hann var fyrsti trúboði Aðvent kirkjunnar í Skandinavíu. Hann sannfærði nærri því alla meðlimi kirkjunnar sem hann tilheyrði til að gerast meðlimir Aðvent kirkjunnar. Þetta ár þá skrifaði hann grein í Review and Herlad þar sem hann bergmálar sömu skoðun og James White um hvernig Jesús er bókstaflega sonur Guðs.

“Christ is the only literal son of God. ‘The only begotten of the Father.’ John 1:14. He is God because he is the Son of God; not by virtue of His resurrection. If Christ is the only begotten of the Father, then we cannot be begotten of the Father in a literal sense. It can only be in a secondary sense of the word….” - John Matteson Review and Herald, Oct. 12, 1869

1871
Árið 1871 skrifaði James White grein þar sem hann fjallaði um atburð þar sem hann og Ellen White hittu kristniboða. Þau áttu gott spjall en þegar trúboðinn komst að því að þau höfnuðu hinum þríeina guð þá var hann ekki sáttur. Hérna er útdráttur úr greininni:

"This missionary seemed very liberal in his feelings toward all Christians. But after catechizing us upon the trinity, and finding that we were not sound upon the subject of his triune God, he became earnest in denouncing unitarianism, which takes from Christ his divinity, and leaves him but a man.
...

The simple language of the Scriptures represent the Father and Son as two distinct persons. With this view of the subject there are meaning and force to language which speaks of the Father and the Son. But to say that Jesus Christ "is the very and eternal God," makes him his own son, and his own father, and that he came from himself, and went to himself. And when the Father sends Jesus Christ, whom the Heavens must receive till the times of restitution, it will simply be Jesus Christ, or the eternal Father sending himself.

We have not as much sympathy with Unitarians that deny the divinity of Christ, as with Trinitarians who hold that the Son is the eternal Father, and talk so mistily about the three-one God. Give the Master all that divinity with which the Holy Scriptures clothe him." - James White, June 6, 1871 issue of the "Advent Review and Herald of the Sabbath"

Þetta sama ár þá skrifaði James White grein þar sem hann fjallar um hvernig þeir sem aðhyllast Þrenninguna hafna skrifum Ellen White því að hennar skrif eru ekki í samræmi við Þrenninguna.

“We invite all to compare the testimonies of the Holy Spirit through Mrs. W., with the word of God. And in this we do not invite you to compare them with your creed. That is quite another thing. The trinitarian may compare them with his creed, and because they do not agree with it, condemn them. The observer of Sunday, or the man who holds eternal torment an important truth, and the minister that sprinkles infants, may each condemn the testimonies' of Mrs. W. because they do not agree with their peculiar views. And a hundred more, each holding different views, may come to the same conclusion. But their genuineness can never be tested in this way.” — James White, Review and Herald, June 13, 1871

1872

Níu árum eftir að kirkjan var stofnuð, þá var þörf á því að gefa út yfirlýsingu um hvað það væri sem þessi nýja kirkja trúði. Þessi yfirlýsing var kölluð "A Declaration of the Fundamental Principles Taught & Practiced by The Seventh-Day Adventists". Aðvent kirkjan í dag hefur "28 Fundamental beliefs" sem koma frá þessu upprunalega skjali en margt hefur breyst. Í þessari trúaryfir lýsingu sjáum við skilning á Guði sem er ekki í samræmi við Þrenninguna. Svona orðuðu þau þeirra skilning á hver Guð er.

"I – That there is one God, a personal, spiritual being, the creator of all things, omnipotent, omniscient, and eternal, infinite in wisdom, holiness, justice, goodness, truth, and mercy; unchangeable, and everywhere present by his representative, the Holy Spirit. Ps.
139:7."

"II – That there is one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Eternal Father, the one by whom God created all things, and by whom they do consist; that he took on him the nature of the seed of Abraham for the redemption of our fallen race; that he dwelt among men full of grace and truth, lived our example, died our sacrifice, was raised for our justification, ascended on high to be our only mediator in the sanctuary in Heaven, where, with his own blood he makes atonement for our sins; which atonement so far from being made on the cross, which was but the offering of the sacrifice, is the very last portion of his work as priest, according to the example of the Levitical priesthood, which foreshadowed and prefigured the ministry of our Lord in Heaven. See Lev. 16; Heb. 8:4, 5; 9:6,7"

Hérna getur þú lesið trúarlýsinguna í heild sinni: https://7thdayhomechurch.org/Resources/1872_-_Statements_of_Belief.pdf

1878
Árið 1878, þá skrifaði maður að nafni D.M.Canright grein í Review and Herald þar sem hann fjallaði um hvernig aðventistar skldu hver Jesús er og hver Guð er. Það urðu vinaslit milli Canright og Ellen White mörgum árum seinna og hann yfirgaf Aðvent kirkjuna en þarna sjáum við grein í aðal tímariti kirkjunnar, þeirra afstöðu gagnvert Þrenningunni.

“The Bible says nothing about the trinity. God never mentions it, Jesus never named it, the apostles never did. “Now men dare to call God, Trinity, Triune, etc.” — D.M. Canright, Review and Herald, August 29th 1878, ‘The Personality of God’

Í sömu grein þá fjallaði Canright um hver Guð er og hver Jesús er og hvernig Guð er uppspretta alls, einnig Jesús. 

“How carefully Paul distinguishes between the Father and the Son. He says, 'The Father, of whom are all things,' and 'Jesus Christ, by whom are all things.' The Father is the source of everything. Jesus is the one through whom all things are done. All the authority, the glory, and the power of Christ he received from his Father...

“A belief in this doctrine is very important. Indeed, it cannot be too strongly insisted upon. Jesus even declares that the knowledge of this truth is necessary to eternal life. 'And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou has sent.' John 17:3. “We must know the Father as the only true God. Then there is no true God besides the Father. But we must also know his Son Jesus Christ, whom he has sent. How simple and plain is this doctrine, and how abundantly sustained by the Holy Bible.” — D.M. Canright, Review and Herald, August 29, 1878

1879
Maður að nafni A.J.Dennis, skrifaði í eitt af aðal tímaritum kirkjunnar á þessum tíma grein þar sem eftirfarandi kom fram:

“What a contradiction of terms is found in the language of Trinitarian creed: “In unity of this head 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 22, 1879

1882

Árið 1882, þá gaf Uriah Smith út bókina "Thoughts on the book of Daniel and the Revelation". Ellen White skrifaði að Guð hefði sýnt henni að það voru þrjár bækur sem innihéldu mikilvægan boðskap fyrir kirkjuna og þeirra á meðal, var bók Uriah Smith. Hún skrifaði:

"The light given was that Thoughts on Daniel and The Revelation, The Great Controversy, and Patriarchs and Prophets, would make their way. They contain the very message the people must have, the special light God had given His people. The angels of God would prepare the way for these books in the hearts of the people.- Special Instruction Regarding Royalties, p.7 (1899) {CM 123.3}

Hún endurtók sömuskilaböð 1905 en þá skrifaði hún eftirfarandi:

"Instruction has been given me that the important books containing the light that God has given regarding Satan's apostasy in heaven should be given a wide circulation just now; for through them the truth will reach many minds. Patriarchs and Prophets, Daniel and The Revelation, and The Great Controversy are needed now as never before. They Should be widely circulated because the truths they emphasize will open many blind eyes. . . Many of our people have been blind to the importance of the very books that were most needed. Had tact and skill then been shown in the sale of these books, the sunday-law movement would not be where it is today.- Review and Herald, Feb. 16, 1905 {CM 123.1}

Í bókinni "Daníel og Revelation" þá skrifaði Uriah Smith eftirfarandi:

“…The Scriptures nowhere speak of Christ as a created being, but on the contrary plainly state that he was begotten of the Father. (See remarks of Rev. 3:14, where it is shown that Christ is not a created being.) But while as the Son he does not possess a co-eternity of past existence with the Father, the beginning of his existence, as the begotten of the Father, antedates the entire work of creation, in relation to which he stands as joint creator with God. John 1:3; Heb 1:2. Could not the Father ordain that to such a being worship should be rendered equally with himself, without its being idolatry on the part of the worshiper? He has raised him to positions which make it proper that he should be worshipped, and has even commanded that worship should be rendered him, which would not have been necessary had he been equal with the Father in eternity of existence. Christ himself declares that ‘as the Father hath life in himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself.’ John 5:26. The Father has ‘highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name.’ Phil. 2:9. And the Father himself says, ‘Let all the angels of God worship him.’ Heb. 1:6. These testimonies show that Christ is now an object of worship equally with the Father; but they do not prove that with him he holds an eternity of past existence.” (Thoughts on the Book of Daniel and the Revelation [1882], 430)

Þegar kom að því að kenna Þrenninguna í Aðvent kirkjunni þá þurfti að fjarlægja svona texta úr bók Uriah Smith en það er saga út af fyrir sig, sagan um Le Roy Froom og hvernig Þrenningin komst inn í Aðvent kirkjuna. 

1886
Það kom að því að kirkjan vilda hafa sína eigin sálma bók. Kirkjan passaði sig á því að sálma bókin innihéldi ekki villukenningar en meðal sálmanna var sálmur sem kenndi Þrenninguna en í því tilfelli, þá breyttu þeir textanum til að fjarlægja Þrenninguna. Þeir breyttu sálminum "Holy, holy, holy", þeir breyttu textanum "God in three persons, blessed trinity" yfir í "God over all, who rules eternity". Þú getur lesið meira um þetta hérna: http://www.asitreads.com/blog/2018/7/3/doxology

1889
E.J.Waggoner er aðalega frægur fyrir sitt hlutverk á Aðalfundi kirkjunnar, árið 1888, þar sem hann og A.T.Jones deildu með kirkjunni þeirra skilningi á réttlætingu fyrir trú. Það var deila um þennan boðskap, leiðtogar kirkjunnar eins og George Butler og Uriah Smith voru ósammála E.J.Waggoner og A.T.Jones en Ellen White tók afstöðu með þessum tveimur ungu mönnum á móti leiðtogum kirkjunnar. Ári seinna, tók E.J.Waggoner saman þessa fyrirlestra sem hann hélt á þessum fundi í bók sem hann kallaði "Christ and His Righteousness" sem lauslega þýtt er "Kristur og Hans réttlæti". Útdráttur úr þessari bók var birtur í Aðvent blaðinu "Signs of the times". Í þeirri grein sjáum við Waggoner, bergmála það sama og James White hafði skrifað, um að Jesús er raunverulegur sonur Guðs en ekki aðeins titill. Hann skrifaði eftirfarandi:

“In arguing the perfect equality of the Father and the Son, and the fact that Christ is in very nature God, we do not design to be understood as teaching that the Father was not before the Son. It should not be necessary to guard this point, lest some should think that the Son existed as soon as the Father; yet some go to that extreme, which adds nothing to the dignity of Christ, but rather detracts from the honor due him, since many throw the whole thing away rather than accept a theory so obviously out of harmony with the language of Scripture, that Jesus is the only begotten Son of God. He was begotten, not created. He is of the substance of the Father, so that in his very nature he is God; and since this is so “it pleased the Father that in him should all fullness dwell.” Col. 1:19 ... While both are of the same nature, the Father is first in point of time. He is also greater in that he had no beginning, while Christ's personality had a beginning.” — E.J. Waggoner, Signs of the Times, April 8, 1889

Í bókinni "Christ and His Righteousness" þá skrifaði E.J.Waggoner mikið um af hverju við eigum að tilbiðja Jesú og hver Hann er en því til viðbótar þá fjallaði hann um að þrátt fyrir allt það, þá samt kom Jesús frá Guði og fékk allt frá Guði. Hann skrifaði:

“A word of caution may be necessary here. Let no one imagine that we would exalt Christ at the expense of the Father or would ignore the Father. That cannot be, for their interests are one. We honor the Father in honoring the Son. We are mindful of Paul’s words, that “to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him” (1 Cor. 8:6); just as we have already quoted, that it was by Him that God made the worlds. All things proceed ultimately from God, the Father; even Christ Himself proceeded and came forth from the Father, but it has pleased the Father that in Him should all fullness dwell, and that He should be the direct, immediate Agent in every act of creation. Our object in this investigation is to set forth Christ’s rightful position of equality with the Father, in order that His power to redeem may be the better appreciated.” -E. J. Waggoner, 1890, Christ and His Righteousness, pp. 19.1

Þetta ár var trúar yfirlýsing kirkjunnar gefin út aftur, en það hafði lítið sem ekkert breyst frá upprunalegu trúaryfarlýsingunni. Ef þú vilt lesa trúaryfirlýsinguna í heild sinni þá er hana að finna hérna: https://7thdayhomechurch.org/Resources/1889_-_Revised_Statements_of_Belief.pdf

1898
Árið 1898, skrifaði Uriah Smith athyglisverða bók þar sem hann fjallar um hver Guð er og hvernig Jesús er raunverulega sonur Guðs. Greinin sýnir skýrt skilning á Guði sem er ekki í samræmi við Þrenninguna. Uriah skrifaði eftirfarandi:

“God alone is without beginning. At the earliest epoch when a beginning could be, - a period so remote that to finite minds it is essentially eternity, - appeared the Word. ‘In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.’ John 1:1. This uncreated Word was the Being, who, in the fullness of time, was made flesh, and dwelt among us. His beginning was not like that of any other being in the universe. It is set forth in the mysterious expressions, 'his [God's] only begotten Son' (John 3:16; 1 John 4:9), ‘the only begotten of the Father’ (John 1:14), and 'I proceeded forth and came from God.’ John 8:42. Thus it appears that by some divine impulse or process, not creation, known only to Omniscience, and possible only to Omnipotence, the Son of God appeared….”  - Uriah Smith, Looking Unto Jesus [1898], 10

1899
A.T. Jones, skrifaði einnig um skilning kirkjunnar á hver Jesús er sem sonur Guðs.

“If Jesus Christ had never been born again, could you and I have ever been born again? No. But he was born again, from the world of righteousness into the world of sin; that we might be born again, from the world of sin into the world of righteousness. He was born again, and was made partaker of the human nature, that we might be born again, and so made partakers of the divine nature. He was born again, unto earth, unto sin, and unto man, that we might be born again unto heaven, unto righteousness, and unto God.” - A.T.Jones, Review and Herald Aug. 1, 1899, emphasis original

1890
Árið 1890, skrifaði Uriah Smith grein þar sem hann svaraði spurningu frá lesenda Review and Herald og Uriah svaraði fyrir hönd kirkjunnar til að útskýra skilning Aðvent kirkjunnar á Heilögum Anda. Uriah svaraði skýrt að skilningur kirkjunnar var að Heilagur Andi er andi Guðs og Krists.

Fyrst, spurningin sem var send á Review and Herald sem Uriah var að svara.

“J. W. W. Asks: “Are we to understand that the Holy Ghost is a person, the same as the Father and the Son? Some claim that it is, others that it is not.”

Svar Uriah Smith.
"Ans.—The terms “Holy Ghost”, are a harsh and repulsive translation. It should be “Holy Spirit” (hagion pneuma) in every instance. This Spirit is the Spirit of God, and the Spirit of Christ; the Spirit being the same whether it is spoken of as pertaining to God or Christ. But respecting this Spirit, the Bible uses expressions which cannot be harmonized with the idea that it is a person like the Father and the Son. Rather it is shown to be a divine influence from them both, the medium which represents their presence and by which they have knowledge and power through all the universe, when not personally present. Christ is a person, now officiating as priest in the sanctuary in heaven; and yet he says that wherever two or three are gathered in his name, he is there in the midst. Mt. 18:20. How? Not personally, but by his Spirit. In one of Christ's discoursed (John 14-16) this Spirit is personified as “the Comforter,” and as such has the personal and relative pronouns, “he,” “him,” and “whom,” applied to it. But usually it is spoken of in a way to show that it cannot be a person, like the Father and the Son. For instance, it is often said to be “poured out” and “shed abroad.” But we never read about God or Christ being poured out or shed abroad. If it was a person, it would be nothing strange for it to appear in bodily shape; and yet when it has so appeared, that fact has been noted as peculiar. Thus Luke 3:22 says: “And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him.” But the shape is not always the same; for on the day of Pentecost it assumed the form of “cloven tongues like as of fire.” Acts 2:3, 4. Again we read of “the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth.” Rev. 1:4; 3:1; 4:5; 5:6. This is unquestionably simply a designation of the Holy Spirit, put in this form to signify its perfection and completeness. But it could hardly be so described if it was a person. We never read of the seven Gods or the seven Christs.” — Uriah Smith, Review and Herald, October 28, 1890

Þennann sama skilning er auðveldlega hægt að sjá í skrifum Ellen White, hérna eru nokkur dæmi:

“Christ has given HIS Spirit as a divine POWER.” — (Ellen G. White, Review and Herald, November 19, 1908)

“We want the HOLY SPIRIT, which is JESUS CHRIST. If we commune with God, we shall have strength and grace and efficiency.” — (Ellen G. White, Lt66, April 10, 1894)

“God help us that we may be sanctified through the truth and that sanctification shall have its influence to leaven those that are around us—not the leaven of malice, not the leaven of jealousy, not the leaven of evil surmisings, but it is the leaven of the SPIRIT of JESUS CHRIST, which is sent down from heaven, called the HOLY GHOST, and that Spirit affects the heart and the character.” — (Ellen G. White, Ms36-1891)

“They have ONE God and ONE Saviour; and ONE Spirit--the Spirit of Christ--” — Ellen G. White, 9T 189.3, 1909

 

1891
Ári seinna þá hélt Uriah Smith ræðu á Aðalfundi kirkjunnar þar sem hann sagði mjög áhugaverða hluti. Hann útskýrir skilning kirkjunnar á hver Heilagur Andi er en síðan notar hann hugtök sem margir túlka sem stuðning við Þrenninguna.

"It may not then be out of place for us to consider for a moment what this Spirit is, what ITS office is, what ITS relation to the world and to the church, and what the Lord through this proposes to do for his people. The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God; IT is also the Spirit of Christ. IT IS THAT DIVINE, MYSTERIOUS EMANATION through which they carry forward their great and infinite work.
...
You will notice in these few verses the apostle brings to view the THREE GREAT AGENCIES which are concerned in this work: God, the Father; Christ, his Son; and the Holy Spirit…. (Uriah Smith, “The Spirit of Prophecy and Our Relation To It; Sermon delivered on March 14, 1891; The General Conference Bulletin No. 11; March 18, 1891 pg 146.6-147.4)

Þarna sjáum við hvernig einhver sér þrjá en samt sá skilningur að Heilagur Andi, er andi Guðs og andi Krists.

1898
Árið 1898, gaf Uriah Smith út bókina "Looking unto Jesus" þar sem hann fjallaði um hvernig Jesús gat dáið fyrir syndir mannkyns. Hvernig gat ódauðleg vera dáið og hvað gerðist á krossinum.

“When Christ left heaven to die for a lost world, he left behind, for the time being, his immortality also. but how could that be laid aside? That it was laid aside is sure, or he could not have died; but he did die, as a whole, as a divine being, as the Son of God, not in body only, while the spirit, the divinity, lived right on; for then the world would have only a human Saviour, a human sacrifice for its sins; but the prophet says that “his soul” was made “an offering for sin.” Isa. 53:10.” — Uriah Smith, Looking Unto Jesus, pp. 23, 24, 1898

1898
Árið 1898, skrifaði J.N. Loughborough grein þar sem hann útskýrir skilning Aðvent kirkjunnar á Heilögum Anda.

“We learn from this language that when we speak of the Spirit of God we are really speaking of his presence and power.” — (J.N. Loughborough, Review and Herald, September 20, 1898)

1901
Árið 1901, skrifaði Ellen White nokkuð áhugavert um bók Uriah Smith "Daniel and Revelation" og kallaði hana "hjálparhand Guðs". 

"Daniel and Revelation, Great Controversy, Patriarchs and Prophets, and Desire of Ages should now go to the world. The grand instruction contained in Daniel and Revelation has been eagerly perused by many in Australia. This book has been the means of bringing many precious souls to a knowledge of the truth. Everything that can be done should be done to circulate Thoughts on Daniel and Revelation. I know of no other book that can take the place of this one. It is Gods helping hand.--MS 76, 1901. {PM 356.2}

1902
Þetta ár skrifaði E.J.Waggoner grein þar sem hann fjallaði um hvernig þúsundir hafa verið myrtar fyrir að ekki viðurkenna trú á Þrenningunni og svo fjallar hann um hvernig Biblían sýnir okkur hver Guð og Jesús er og hvernig við eigum að reyna að halda okkur við málfar Biblíunnar og forðast kenningar og sérstök orð, fundin upp til að útskýra einhverjar kenningar.

“If I knew what you meant by the term, I might tell you; but from the day of Athanasius until now all discussion about the Trinity has been an attempt to define the indefinable and the incomprehensible. Thousands have been put to death for not professing belief in a formula which even its professors could not comprehend, nor state in terms that anybody else could comprehend. The Scriptures reveal 'One God and Father of all,' our Lord Jesus Christ, who is the brightness of the Father's glory, and 'the eternal Spirit' through whom Christ offered Himself and was raised from the dead; but we do not profess any knowledge of them beyond what the Scriptures give us. In teaching and preaching the Gospel we always confine ourselves strictly to Scripture terms and language; those who manufacture terms must be looked to for definitions of them. It is safest not to presume to define what the Bible has not defined, nor to attempt to explain infinity.” — E.J. Waggoner, The Present Truth for 1903, Vol. 19 - No. 31, p. 4

1904
Árið 1904 blossaði upp deila í Aðvent kirkjunni sem byrjaði með því að frægasti meðlimur kirkjunnar, Harvey Kellogg, skrifaði bók sem hann kallaði "The living temple". Í þessari bók þá komu fram kenningar sem voru ekki í samræmi við það sem kirkjan kenndi. Fyrst var það hugmynd Kelloggs að Guð væri í náttúrunni en svo þróaðist deilan yfir í hver Heilagur Andi er. Í bréfi til Kelloggs þar sem einn leiðtogi kirkjunnar, George Butler, þá sjáum við hann reyna að útskýra fyrir Kellogg, skilning kirkjunnar á hver Heilagi Andi er. Hann skrifaði eftirfarandi:

"God dwells in us by His Holy Spirit, as a Comforter, as a Reprover, especially the former. When we come to Him we partake of Him in that sense, because the Spirit comes forth from Him; it comes forth from the Father and the Son. It is not a person walking around on foot, or flying as a literal being, in any such sense as Christ and the Father are – at least, if it is, it is utterly beyond my comprehension of the meaning of language or words.” - Letter: G I Butler to J H Kellogg. April 5. 1904.

Í þessari deilu þá skrifuðu bréf sín á milli þar sem þau glímdu við hugmyndir Kelloggs og mjög forvitnilegt að sjá hvað þau skrifuðu, sjá: http://www.asitreads.com/kellogg-files

1905
Líklega vegna Kelloggs og fjaðrafokinu sem hann olli þá skrifaði Ellen White margar viðvaranir við að yfirgefa trúana sem kirkjan hafði verið byggð á og vísar til "Fundamental Principles". Hún fjallar um hvernig Guð lagði þennann grunn í upphafi kirkjunnar og að kirkjan ætti ekki að yfirgefa þennann grunn. Hún endurtók þennan bókskap oft á mismunandi hátt en í eitt skiptið orðaði hún þetta svona:

“Many of our people do not realize how firmly the foundation of our faith has been laid. My husband, Elder Joseph Bates, Father Pierce, [Older brethren among the pioneers are here thus reminiscently referred to. “Father Pierce” was Stephen Pierce, who served in ministerial and administrative work in the early days.] 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. {EW xxii.4} (RH, May 25, 1905 par. 24)

“As a people, we are to stand firm on the platform of eternal truth that has withstood test and trial. We are to hold to the sure pillars of our faith. The principles of truth that God has revealed to us are our only true foundation. They have made us what we are. The lapse of time has not lessened their value. . .” — Ellen G. White, 1 Selected Messages - 1SM p. 201

Hún skrifaði einnig þetta sem er kveikjan að þessari grein en þar segir hún að Guð gaf henni ljós sem var að raddir frumherja kirkjunnar ættu ekki að deyja út, heldur ætti að endurgefa út það sem þeir skrifuðu því Guð gaf þeim ljós sem ætti ekki að deyja út.

"When men who come in who would move one pin or pillar from the foundation which God has established by His Holy Spirit, let the aged men who were pioneers in our work speak plainly, and let those who are dead speak also, by the reprinting of their articles in our periodicals. Gather up the rays of divine light that God has given as He has led His people on step by step in the way of truth. This truth will stand the test of time and trial. — Manuscript 62, 1905, 6." (“A Warning Against False Theories,” May 24, 1905.) {1mr 55.1}

1906
Ári seinna endurtók Ellen White viðvaranir varðandi árásir á grunn kenningar kirkjunnar en hún skrifaði eftirfarandi:

“I do not wish to ignore or drop one link in the chain of evidence that was formed as, after the passing of the time in 1844, little companies of seekers after truth met together to study the Bible and to ask God for light and guidance. . . . The truth, point by point, was fastened in our minds so firmly that we could not doubt. . . .The evidence given in our early experience has the same force that it had then. The truth is the same as it ever has been, and not a pin or a pillar can be moved from the structure of truth. That which was sought for out of the Word in 1844, 1845, and 1846 remains the truth in every particular.” - Letter 38, 1906, pp. 1,2 [MS])

Til að lesa allar þessar viðvaranir þá eru þær að finna í þessari grein hérna:  http://www.asitreads.com/trinity-in-adventist-history

1911
Árið 1911 var gefin út bókin "Questions and Answers". Í henni voru samtals 270 spurningar sem höfðu verið sendar inn til blaðsins "Signs of the Time". Í bókinni svaraði Aðventisti að nafni M.C.Wilcox þessum spurningum í bók, gefin út af kirkjunni. Í þeirri bók, skrifar hann eftirfarandi sem bergmálar sama skilning á Heilögum Anda og við höfum séð marg oft hjá frumherjum kirkjunnar.

"The Holy Spirit IS THE MIGHTY ENERGY OF THE GODHEAD, THE LIFE AND POWER OF GOD FLOWING OUT FROM HIM to all parts of the universe, and thus making living connection between His throne and all creation. As is expressed by another: “The Holy Spirit is the breath of spiritual life in the soul. The impartation of the Spirit is the impartation of the life of Christ.” [Desire of Ages, page 805] IT THUS MAKES CHRIST EVERYWHERE PRESENT. To use a crude illustration, just as a telephone carries the voice of a man, and so makes that voice present miles away, so the Holy Spirit carries with it all the potency of Christ in making Him everywhere present with all His power..."

Til að lesa spurningarnar og svörin í heild sinni þá getur þú fundið það hérna: http://www.asitreads.com/blog/2018/9/16/excerpt-from-questions-and-answers

1935

W.C.White var einn af sonum Ellen White. Hann var ekki aðeins alinn upp af Ellen White heldur seinna meir samstarfsmaður hennar í hennar útgáfu starfi. Allt hans líf þá starfaði hann við útgáfu í tenglsum við rit Ellen White og var einnig leiðtogi í Aðvent kirkjunni. Þegar Ellen White dó þá var W.C.White í kringum sextugt. Allt hans líf hafði hann starfað við hlið móður sinnar. Ellen White hafði þetta að segja um son sinn.

“It was also shown me that my son, W. C. White, should be my helper and counselor, and that the Lord would place on him the spirit of wisdom and of a sound mind. I was shown that the Lord would guide him, and that he would not be led away, because he would recognize the leadings and guidance of the Holy Spirit.” {1SM 54.3}

Það er eftirtektarvert að hún skrifaði að sonur hennar yrði ekki afvegaleiddur því að hann myndi þekkja leiðsögn Heilags Anda.

Árið 1935, þá skrifaði H.W.Carr bréf til W.C.White, þar sem hann biður W.C.White um hjálp. Hann segir að hann er að berjast á móti þeirri hugmynd að Heilagur Andi sé persóna eins og Faðirinn og Sonurinn eru persónur. Hann bendir á setningu sem Ellen White hafði skrifað  um að Heilagur Andi sé þriðja persónan og hvort að W.C.White gæti hjálpað sér að skilja þessa setningu.

W.C.White skrifaði til baka og hérna er smá útdráttur úr því bréfi:

"The statements and the arguments of some of our ministers in their effort to prove that the Holy Spirit was an individual as are God, the father and Christ, the eternal Son, have perplexed me and sometimes they have made me sad. One popular teacher said “we may regard Him, (the Holy Spirit) as the fellow who is down here running things.” My perplexities were lessened a little when I learned from the dictionary that one of the meanings of personality, was characteristics. It is stated in such a way that I concluded that there might be personality without bodily form which is possessed by the Father and the Son."
There are many Scriptures which speak of the Father and the Son and the absence of Scripture making similar reference to the united work of the Father and the Holy Spirit or of Christ and the Holy Spirit, has led me to believe that the spirit without individuality was the representative of the Father and the Son throughout the universe, and it was through the Holy Spirit that they dwell in our hearts and make us one with the Father and with the Son.
- Letter from W. C. White to H. W. Carr

Þarna sjáum við sama skilning og oft áður hjá frumherjunum, eins og Uriah Smith og E.J.Waggoner. Það má segja að enginn þekkti rit Ellen White betur en W.C.White og Ellen White sjálf, sagði að Heilagur Andi myndi leiðbeina honum svo við höfum góða ástæða til að trúa að hans skilningur var réttur. Hægt er að lesa bæði bréfin hérna:  https://theprophetstillspeaks.co.uk/Articles(others)/White-Carrletters.htm

1939
Árið 1939 þá var J.S.Washburn einn af fáu sem voru á lífi sem hafði þekkt Ellen White persónulega. Hann kynntist Ellen White á fundinum fræga, 1888 þar sem hann tók afstöðu með Uriah Smith á móti Waggoner og Ellen White en eftir aö rökræða við Ellen White þá skipti hann um skoðun. Þegar svo Uriah Smith sá villu síns vegar þá skrifaði Ellen White bréf til Washburn þar sem hún segir honum gleði tíðindin. Árið 1939 þá skrifaði Washburn bréf til leiðtoga kirkjunnar á aðal fundi kirkjunnar þar sem hann ræðst harkalega gegn Þrenningunni. Sá sem var formaður kirkjunnar á þeim tíma tók bréfinu mjög vel og dreifði því meðal presta innan kirkjunnar.  Hérna er smá útdráttur úr þessu bréfi.

“The doctrine of the Trinity is regarded as the supreme test of orthodoxy by the Roman Catholic Church,” he proceeded to state why it should be rejected. “Satan has taken some heathen conception of a three-headed monstrosity, and with deliberate intention to cast contempt upon divinity, has woven it into Romanism as our glorious God, an impossible, absurd invention. This monstrous doctrine transplanted from heathenism into the Roman Papal Church is seeking to intrude its evil presence into the teachings of the Third Angel's Message...
If we should go back to the immortality of the soul, purgatory, eternal torment and the Sunday Sabbath, would that be anything less than apostasy? If, however, we leap over all these minor, secondary doctrines and accept and teach the very central root, doctrine of Romanism, the Trinity, and teach that the son of God did not die, even though our words seem to be spiritual, is this anything else or anything less than apostasy, and the very Omega of apostasy?...
However kindly or beautiful or apparently profound his sermons or articles may be, when a man has arrived at the place where he teaches the heathen Catholic doctrine of the Trinity, and denies that the Son of God died for us, is he a true Seventh-day Adventist? Is he even a true preacher of the Gospel?” — J.S. Washburn in 1939.

Hérna getur þú lesið bréfið í heild sinni: http://www.trinitytruth.org/jswashburntrinityletter.html

Ég vona að þessi grein sýni skýrt hvernig Aðvent kirkjan hafði skilning á hver Guð er sem var ekki í samræmi við Þrenninguna. Þetta var ekki einn og einn meðlimur með einhverja einkennilega skoðun heldur aðal leiðtogar kirkjunnar og trúaryfirlýsing kirkjunnar með mjög skýra afstöðu varðandi hvaða Guð þau tilbáðu.