Hello MM,

Micah states it better than I:

"...whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting." margin ~ the days of eternity. Micah 5:2.

Solomon states it better than I:

"The LORD possessed me...I was set up from everlasting (same Heb. word as above), from the beginning, or ever the earth was...I was brought forth...before the hills was I brought forth...Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight..." Proverbs 8:22-30.

Ellen White states it better than I:

"The Sovereign of the universe was not alone in His work of beneficence. He had an associate - a co-worker who could appreciate His purposes, and could share His joy in giving happiness to created beings." Patriarchs & Prophets 34.

E.J. Waggoner echoes the same:

"The Word was "in the beginning." The mind cannot grasp the ages that are spanned in this phrase. It is not given to men to know when or how the Son was begotten; but we know that He was the Divine Word, not simply before He came to this earth to die, but even before the world was created...We know that Christ "proceeded forth and came from God" (John 8:42), but it was so far back in the ages of eternity as to be far beyond the grasp of man." Christ and His Righteousness, p. 9, 1892.

For these reasons I believe Christ is the Only Begotten Son of God, brought forth in the days of eternity.

Gordon

The above is an excerpt from the referenced article.

Has this turned into a topic of the Godhead, or is the power of Christ included in this aspect of the topic?

Anyway, we studied Psalms 23 in Sabbath School last Sabbath.

Do you get the connection between the Shepherd of Psalms 23:1 and John 10:11?
Jesus Christ, a separate entity in the Godhead, is none other than Jehovah Himself.

John says it better than I:

"In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God. All things were made by Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made." (John 1:1)

Paul says it better than I:

"But to the Son He says: 'Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom." (Hebrews 1:8).

Ellen White says it better than I:

"He had announced Himself to be the self-existent One, He who had been promised to Israel, "whose goings forth have been from of old, from the days of eternity." (DA 469)

E. J. Waggoner echoes the same:

"In many places in the Bible Christ is called God" (Christ and His Righteousness 9)

Hello Tom,

EGW says: first fifty years built upon Rock-solid foundation. (1904)

Moon says: complete doctrinal reversal in 1898.

Moon vs. the Prophet and all leading SDA Pioneers. ?

This is the modern writing to which I earlier referred. It requires a covering-up of her works, or alterations as noted in DA 530. But few today read her work, so Moon's logic will prevail over many. This she also prophesied in 1904:

"Our religion would be changed. The fundamental principles that have sustained the work for the last fifty years would be accounted as error. A new organization would be established. Books of a new order would be written. A system of intellectual philosophy would be introduced. The founders of this system would go into the cities, and do a wonderful work." 1 Selected Messages 204

Perhaps Micah, Solomon & EGW should bow before Mr. Moon's reasoning? If there truly had been a reversal of our most fundamental doctrine, there would have been a cry for repentance from the Prophet. She herself would require repentance, as would all the SDA writers alive in 1898. In essence, she would have been a false prophet from 1844-1898. But she was not. There was no call to repentance on this issue. None. Instead, she boldly affirms in 1904 that the past fifty years are true, fully established by the Lord.

"Not one pin is to be removed from that which the Lord has established." Evangelism 224. (R&H May 25, 1905)

Mr. Moon may claim a continental divide, but that does not make it so. Only God can make such changes. Moon's testimony bears false witness to the ministry of EG White, seeking to make of none effect her life's work. With what authority does he procede?

Gordon

TH: I admit that when certain statements are singled out and the rest of what she says is ignored it can look as though she is saying that the Son is co-eternal (coeval) with the Father but this is not the way that I use her writings.

MM: "... the Son is co-eternal (coeval) with the Father ..." In other words, you do not believe the Son is eternal like the Father? I'm not asking you to put a date on when Jesus was "begotten", but I am asking if you believe there was a time when Jesus did not exist. If Jesus is not co-eternal with the Father, then it stands to reason there was a time, an eternity, when He did not exist. Do you see what I mean?

G: For these reasons I believe Christ is the Only Begotten Son of God, brought forth in the days of eternity.

MM: Thank you for stating your position plainly. Most people who believe there was an eternity when the Father was alone, when Jesus did not exist, are hesitant to admit it publicly.

What about the Holy Spirit? Is He an independent person the same as the Father?

MM

I do know what you mean (honest)but I am not prepared to say what I cannot prove from Scriptures. You can reason from what I say that I am saying that there was a time when AS A PERSONALITY CHRIST did not exist (not His divinity) but I am still not saying it. You may think that this is just a cop out but I cannot go any further than what I say. If I do then I shall go beyond the sacred page. I think we must admit that there is much about the being of God that has not been revealed and perhaps we could not understand even if God did reveal it. I think we should just leave it there.

Regards

Terry

Hi again Tom

Re your post 92182

With all due respect (and please do not think that I am just being argumentative), I did say to you that I had seen many claims that Ellen White’s ‘Desire of Ages’ brought about a shift in theology when it was published in 1898 but in our history records I cannot find evidence of such a thing ever happening. I have researched this for years and have found nothing. What Moon says here (as quoted by you) is one of the claims that I have come across but where is the evidence of it actually happening?

Anyone can make this type of claim but without the evidence to back it up it is impotent. Can you provide the evidence please? I say this to establish what is the truth. If there is evidence of it I would like to see it. I would then write it into the history I am compiling.

I hope that you will understand. I just do not want people to be led astray by false claims. I think that is very important as I am sure that you do as well.

Let me share this with you (a little bit long I know but it may help. In the main I have cut it from the history I spoke of)

At the 1905 General Conference session during a talk in the afternoon of Tuesday May 16th before the conference began, Ellen White said (this was when our denomination was still decidedly non-trinitarian, also when the Godhead crisis was taking place)

“God has given me light regarding our periodicals. What is it? -- He has said that the dead are to speak. How? -- Their works shall follow them. We are to repeat the words of the pioneers in our work, who knew what it cost to search for the truth as for hidden treasure, and who labored to lay the foundation of our work. They moved forward step by step under the influence of the Spirit of God. One by one these pioneers are passing away. The word given me is, Let that which these men have written in the past be reproduced.” (Ellen G. White, Review and Herald, 25th May 1905, ‘The work for this time’, a pre-conference address at the 1905 General Conference, May 16th 1905)

She said later

“Let the truths that are the foundation of our faith be kept before the people. Some will depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils.” (Ibid)

She also said

“We are now to understand what the pillars of our faith are, -- the truths that have made us as a people what we are, leading us on step by step.” (Ibid)

She then related to the delegates the early experiences of Seventh-day Adventists.

She said that at times when she and the other pioneers could not understand the passages of Scripture that they had been studying (and this is an important part of the ‘how’ our faith had been established and confirmed)

“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.” (Ibid)

Notice what the light concerned. She then added

“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.” (Ibid)

This was not temporary light but permanent light.

At this conference, Ellen White stressed that because of what she regarded as his false theories concerning the sanctuary, Albion Ballenger was leading God’s people to deny what she claimed was the truth that God had revealed to His remnant people.

In this address and after warning of Ballenger’s teachings she said

“Let not any man enter upon the work of tearing down the foundations of the truth that have made us what we are.” (Ellen G. White to the delegates at the 1905 General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, Takoma Park, Washington D. C., May 24th 1905, "A Warning against False Theories," MR 760)

She then added

“God has led His people forward step by step, though there are pitfalls of error on every side. Under the wonderful guidance of a plain "Thus saith the Lord," a truth has been established that has stood the test of trial. When men arise and attempt to draw away disciples after them, meet them with the truths that have been tried as by fire.” (Ibid)

Here at the 1905 General Conference, whilst the Seventh-day Adventist Church was still a non-trinitarian denomination, Ellen White was telling Seventh-day Adventists that their faith (beliefs) as they held it then was the truth that “step by step” God Himself had given to them. She also said that it had “stood the test of trial” and had “been tried as by fire”.

Many may try to say that Ellen White was only making reference here to what was believed by Seventh-day Adventists concerning the sanctuary but this is far from being the truth. We shall see this now.

After appropriately quoting from God’s message to the church at Sardis with respect to ‘holding fast’ to the faith that they then had, Ellen White said

“Those who seek to remove the old landmarks are not holding fast; they are not remembering how they have received and heard.” (Ibid)

In principle, this is exactly what God said to the believers at Sardis (see Revelation 3:1-6). Just as they were told to ‘hold on’ to their faith, so too were Seventh-day Adventists being told to ‘hold on’ to what they then believed, which then of course was non-trinitarianism.

She then added

“Those who try to bring in theories that would remove the pillars of our faith concerning the sanctuary or concerning the personality of God or of Christ, are working as blind men. They are seeking to bring in uncertainties and to set the people of God adrift without an anchor.” (Ibid)

Here can be seen that what Ellen White included in the pillars of our faith is what we then believed regarding not only the sanctuary but also what we believed about God and Christ. Note the differentiating between the two divine personalities.

Later that same year (remember this was 7 years after the ‘The Desire of Ages’ was published in 1898) she said

“The past fifty years have not dimmed one jot or principle of our faith as we received the great and wonderful evidences that were made certain to us in 1844, after the passing of the time.” Ellen G. White, Special Testimonies series ‘B’ No. 7. ‘Standing in the way of God’s Messages’, page 58, December 4th 1905)

She also said in the same paragraph

“Not a word is changed or denied. That which the Holy Spirit testified to as truth after the passing of the time, in our great disappointment, is the solid foundation of truth. Pillars of truth were revealed, and we accepted the foundation principles that have made us what we are--Seventh-day Adventists, keeping the commandments of God and having the faith of Jesus” (Ibid)

As can be seen, Ellen White would not agree with the claim that her book ‘The Desire of Ages’ (1898) had brought about any theological change within Seventh-day Adventism, at least not whilst she was alive.

I think Merlin Burt got the closest when he said with reference to such statements in ‘The Desire of Ages’ as “In Christ is life, original, unborrowed, underived” etc (this was in a paper he completed for Andrews University in 1996)

“Curiously, for years after the publication of Desire of Ages, the church generally ignored these statements” (Merlin D. Burt, ‘Demise of Semi-Arianism and anti-trinitarianism in Adventist theology, 1888-1957 page 1, Chapter 1, ‘Background: Adventist views on the deity of Christ and the trinity until about 1888’, 1996)

In reality, there is nothing curious here at all. Seventh-day Adventists did not ignore these statements. They just accepted them as being in keeping with what many people call today their ‘semi-Arian’ faith. Burt is claiming they were ignored because no one regarded them as promoting God as a trinity.

All that Burt is really saying is that there is no evidence for the claim that when it was published in 1898, Ellen White’s Desire of Ages’ brought about a theological change. This is also what I am saying. There is an abundance of claims but no actual proof of it.

It must be admitted that there is evidence that some wanted this change and did actively seek it but here Ellen White is denying that her book was intended to bring about any such happening. As she said herself in 1905 regarding the past 50 years of faith of Seventh-day Adventists, “Not a word is changed or denied”. Does this sound like a major theological change had recently taken place or was taking place from non-trinitarianism to trinitarianism? Ellen White obviously did not think so. Do you see my point? In the light of the evidence of our history, regardless of the claims, I cannot reason any differently. Can you?

Regards and have a good Sabbath.

Terry

Hello MM,

Thank you for your reply. True, it is not a popular position, but I can only repeat what I understand from inspiration. Somewhat ironic that the SDA Church is so eager for new members. But when one joins and starts studying the Bible, SOP, SDA history and the Protestant Reformation, suddenly one is fanatic, even heretical. Less and less SDAs are familiar with EGW's books. Some may have compilations or CDs to make a search and prove a point, but they are unable to detect God's voice in the warp and the woof of her work, to establish the tone and context of her message.

Even then, EGW has not the final word. If we are Christians, the Bible alone will be our source to establish Truth.