Trinity of The Seventh-Day Adventists and The Roman Catholic Churches Compared

Mountain View College
School of Theology
A COMPARISON OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC
AND THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST TRINITARIAN VIEWS
A Research Paper
Presented in Partial Fulfilment
of the Requirements for the Course
Research Methods in Theology
by
Jeason S. Montera
October 2014
OUTLINE
Chapter
I. INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Statement of the Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Purpose of the Research. . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Significance of the Research . . . . . . . . . . 6
Limitations and Delimitation of the Study. . . . 7
Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
II. BIBLICAL TRINITY
Godhead: One yet Three. . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Equality of the Deity . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
III. TRINITARIAN VIEWS AND THEIR DEVELOPMENT
Roman Catholic Doctrine of Trinity . . . . . . 21

Doctrine Development History . . . . . . . . 22
Seventh-day Adventist Doctrine of Trinity . . . 34
Doctrine Development History . . . . . . . . 34
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
IV. EVALUATION AND THEOLOGICAL IMPLICATION
Variation on Doctrine Development . . . . . . . 42

Subordination of the Son . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Procession of the Holy Spirit . . . . . . . . . 48
Theological Implication . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A great and interesting field of study is that of
doctrines. Doctrine is defined as a body of beliefs about
God, man, Christ, the church, and other related concepts
considered authoritative and thus worthy of acceptance by
all members of the community of faith.1 God is defined by
the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Dictionary in three areas
namely philosophy, religion, and religious philosophy. The
first pronounces that God equates with first cause,
natural law, cosmic force, or ultimate reality. The
second explains that God has a personality and describes
Him as creator, the One who sustains, lawgiver, judge,
ruler, and father according to the Bible. The latter
describes God as omnipotent, omniscient, and
1Herbert Lockyer, Sr., ed., Illustrated Dictionary

of the Bible (IDB) (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson
Publishers, 1986), s.v. Doctrine.
omnipresent.2 In one occasion, Bruce L. Shelley wrote in his
Church History in Plain Language that there is a most
distinctive comment Christians can say about God. It is
that God is three persons.3 This is affirmed by Lockyer in
the dictionary of which he is the editor as it defines
trinity as the coexistence of the Father, the Son, and the
Holy Spirit in the unity of the Godhead (divine nature or
essence). It continues to say that the doctrine of trinity
means that within the being and activity of the one God
there are three distinct persons.4
Since the scope of this study involves the
understanding of the Roman Catholic Church and the Seventh-
day Adventist Church, it is fit to note their official
statement on the Godhead. The Roman Catholic Church has it
that they believe in one God in three persons.5 The
statement of fundamental beliefs of the Seventh -day
Adventist Church states that There is one God: Father,
2Siegfried
H. Horn, Seventh-day Adventist Bible
Dictionary(SDABD), rev. ed., ed. Don F. Neufeld, Commentary
Reference Series, vol. 8. (Washington, DC: Review & Herald,
1979), s.v. God.
3Bruce L. Shelley, Church History in Plain Language,
2nd ed. (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1995), 99.
4Lockyer, IDB, s.v. Trinity.
5Philip
Schaff, Creeds of Christendom, [e-Sword
Version 10.2.1 CR-ROM] Franklin, TN: Rick Meyers, 2000-
2013, vol.1, chap.2, 10; chap.4, 24, 25.
Son, and Holy Spirit. Further it spells out that the
Godhead is a unity of three co-eternal Persons.6
Pfandl underscores the Adventist View with the
following statement: This has not always been so.7 The
earliest Seventh-day Adventists were not united in being
Trinitarian during the formative years of the Church.8
Regarding the Doctrine of Trinity, Denis Fortin wrote in
his paper that it is now universally recognized and
accepted that many of the early pioneers of the Seventh-day
Adventist Church were even anti-Trinitarian.9 They were not
really united in their stand on the Doctrine of Trinity.
6General Conference, Ministerial Association,

Seventh-day Adventists Believe: A Biblical Exposition of
Fundamental Doctrines, 2nd ed. (Silver Spring, MD:
Ministerial Association of the General Conference of
Seventh-day Adventists, 2005), 23.
7Gerhard Pfandl, The Doctrine of the Trinity among
Seventh-day Adventists. Journal of the Adventist
Theological Society 17/1 (Spring 2006): 160.
8Erwin R. Gane, "The Arian or Anti-Trinitarian Views
Presented in Seventh-day Adventist Literature and the Ellen
G. White Answer" (M.A. Thesis, Andrews University, 1963),
mentioned in Jerry Moon, The Adventist Trinity Debate Part
1: Historical Overview. Andrews University Seminary
Studies 41 (2003): 113.
9Denis Fortin, God, the Trinity, and Adventism: An
Introduction to the Issues, Journal of the Adventist
Later on with the progressive and corrective nature
of the development of Adventist biblical theology,10 the
church reshaped its understanding of the Godhead. They
moved toward a traditional Trinitarian view.11 Burt, in
his History of Seventh-day Adventist Views on the Trinity,
mentions that Wilcox and some others viewed this
traditional view as an orthodox12 view on Trinity.13
Some Adventist authors cited by Gerhard Pfandl are
making reference to the Trinitarian understanding of the
Seventh-day Adventist Church at present as the Roman
doctrine of Trinity.14 It seems so specially that the Roman
10MerlinD. Burt, History of Seventh-day Adventist

Views on the Trinity, Journal of the Adventist Theological
Society 17/1 (Spring 2006): 139.
11Fortin,God, the Trinity, and Adventism: An
Introduction to the Issues, 9 (italics mine).
12Theword orthodox or orthodoxy is the English
equivalent of the Greek orthodoxia, meaning right belief,
as opposed to heresy or heterodoxy. This word means right
belief. It expresses the idea that certain statements
accurately embody the revealed truth content of
Christianity and are therefore in their own nature
normative for the universal church. See James I. Packer,
Orthodoxy, Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, ed. Walter
A. Elwell (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1984),
1:808.
13Burt,History of Seventh-day Adventist Views on
the Trinity, 137.
14Pfandlcited in his paper the names of Fred
Allaback, Lynnford Beachy, Rachel Cory-Kuehl, and Allen
Stump who were authors of No New Leaders . . . No New Gods!
(Creal Springs: Fred Allaback, 1995), Did They Believe in
Catholic Church recognizes the only-begotten Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father, light from light, true
God from true God, begotten not made, consubstantial with
the Father.15 And the Holy Spirit, the third person of the
Trinity, is God, one and equal with the Father and the Son,
of the same substance and also of the same nature.16 The
study deals with the parallels and variances of the Roman
Catholic and Seventh-day Adventist Views on the subject of
Trinity.
Statement of the Problem
In the apparent discussion of the Doctrine of the
Trinity within the Adventist faith,17 this paper will
address the following questions: What are the similarities
and differences between the present understanding of the
Roman Catholic Church and the Seventh-day Adventist Church
the Trinity (1996), The Persons of God (Albuquerque:

Aggelia, 1996), and The Foundation of Our Faith (Welch:
Smyrna Gospel Ministries, 2000) as Adventist writers
opposing the doctrine of Trinity today. They also argue,
Pfandl cited, that the church should forsake this doctrine.
See Gerhard Pfandl, The Doctrine of the Trinity among
15United
States Catholic Conference, Catechism of
the Catholic Church, 64.
16Ibid, 65.
17Moon,
The Adventist Trinity Debate Part 1:
Historical Overview.
on the Trinity? In addition, what are the theological
implications of the Doctrine of Trinity?
Purpose of the Research
This paper primarily aims to do a comparison on the
Trinitarian understanding of the Roman Catholic Church and
the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Further, it aims to see
differences between both views. Hence, this paper also
determines whether the Seventh-day Adventist view is in
consonance with the Roman Catholic view on the subject.
While it endeavors to see both views in evaluation by
comparison, this paper also heads to see theological
implications presented by the message of the Doctrine of
Trinity.
Significance of the Research
Upon arrival at the solution of the problem,
benefit will be extended to those who seek clarity of mind
in their endeavor to settle or see differences and
uniqueness from other faith. This will even extend benefit
to those who are thinking that the Doctrine of Trinity of
the Seventh-day Adventist Church had its origin from the
Roman Catholic Church. They will have enlightenment
concerning the distinction in some areas of both stands on
the matter.
Further, they will have a picture of how the
doctrine developed among early members of the Seventh-day
Adventist Church. Clergy and laity of the Seventh-day
Adventist Church will also have an advantage upon reading
this paper. They will see common grounds with the Roman
Catholic Church more clearly on the subject of Trinity and
establish a relationship which will lead to a preparation
of acceptance of the truths preached from the Seventh-day
Adventist pulpits and even from personal evangelism.
Limitations and Delimitation of the Study
The scope of this research is bound only within the
history of the development of the Doctrine of Trinity both
in the Roman Catholic Church and the Seventh-day Adventist
Church. However, this paper is not an exhaustive and
detailed presentation of its history. In addition, it will
have a discussion on the comparison of the understanding of
both religious bodies on the matter. To be fair in the
treatment of the matter, the research is not only done in
the Ellen G. White Library of Mountain View College which
is an Adventist educational institution. It will be
extended to the library of Saint John Vianney Theological
Seminary, an institution in Cagayan de Oro City, which

offers Seminary Studies for the Roman Catholic
denomination.
Methodology
This comparative study keeps an eye on the
following method: In Chapter One, the problem is
introduced, as well as the purpose and significance of the
study. Presented in the same chapter are the limitations,
delimitation, and the methodology employed. Following this
chapter is a discussion of the biblical layout of the
Trinitarian thought.
The third chapter of this paper is surveying the
history of the development of the understanding on the
Doctrine of Trinity of the Roman Catholic Church. The
ecumenical council of Nicea will be briefly surveyed to
view the development of their understanding. Overview of
some of their Creeds primarily related to the Trinity such
as the Nicene-Constantinopolitan and the Athanasian Creeds
will be given. Review on the creed settlement from the
Council of Trent will be presented. The latter part of the
same chapter deals with the review of the development of
the Trinitarian stand among the pioneers of the Seventh-day
Adventist Church. Discussion will be done on the
Trinitarian aspect of their view on the Doctrine of God.

Following this is the fourth chapter which is a comparison
done to see the similarities and differences. The paper
will not be an exposition of the doctrine, yet it will be
contrasting both views on areas where there are differences
that it may be presented as clear as possible. Theological
implications will also be presented. Summary and
conclusions are drawn in Chapter Five.

CHAPTER II
BIBLICAL TRINITY
The use of Trinity, while an extra-biblical term,
is for the presentation of the biblical teaching of the
oneness and plurality of God. This Trinity is noticeably
described throughout the Holy Writ. The oneness of God is
demonstrated to the extent in the Old Testament. The
plurality of God, on the other hand, is made explicit in
the New Testament. Even so, both the Old and New Testaments
give unanimous support to the oneness and plurality of the
Godhead. While the oneness of God brings out no arguments
on His deity, threeness brings to the surface a question on
the deity of the Three. For the establishment of the
Trinity, discussion on the equality of the Three follows
the discussion of the oneness yet threeness of the Godhead.
Godhead: One yet Three
Among the Pentateuch, Deuteronomy gives a classical
statement concerning the oneness of God. Moses, upon the
hearing of a great number of people, declared, Hear, O

Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one (6:4, ESV18).
Prior to that public pronouncement of the oneness of God
was a testimonial that the LORD is God in heaven above and
on the earth beneath; there is no other (4:39, italics
supplied).
The narration of Creation conversely gives a
varying way of presenting the oneness of God. This
chronicle portrays a God who created the heavens and the
earth (Gen. 1:1). The very first verse of the narrative
maintains suggestion on the Godheads oneness.19 On the
other hand, the narrative gives a picture of the
participation of a plurality of God on account of the use
of the words in verse 26 saying, Then God said, Let us
make20 man in our image, after our likeness." Bryan Murphy
18English
Standard Version is used throughout the
document unless otherwise stated.
19It
is concluded that in this verse the plural of
majesty is ascribed to God. The use of Elohim in this text
is not an indication of the Trinity. This is discussed more
fully and liberally on Bryan Murphy, The Trinity in
Creation, The Masters Seminary Journal 24/2 (Fall 2013):
168-172.
word
20The ( naeh) here is actually a verb
in the volitional, or specifically, cohortative, first
person, plural form; thus rendering Let us make. See
Genesis 1:26 in Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (Germany:
Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1997). For the grammatical
identification, see Genesis 1:26 on John Joseph Owens,
concludes that the grammar demands a plurality to be
involved in the actual creation of man.21 The concept of
plurality is further supported by the conjugation in the
original Hebrew text: Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the
man has become like one of us22 in knowing good and evil.
(3:22). Still another reference in the OT states, And the
LORD said, Behold, they are one people, and they have all
one language. (11:6). . . Let us go down,23 and there
confound their language. (v.7, KJV). These are references
that illustrate the plurality of God in its oneness.
While God purposed to do something and uttered
them, He could not have been speaking to angels who are
inferior to Him. God could not have made man in the image
Analytical Key to the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI:

Baker Books, 1989), s.v. naeh.
21Bryan Murphy, The Trinity in Creation, 172-177.
22The ( mimenn) has a first person, plural

suffix rendering it as like one of us, including
(kaa). See Genesis 3:22 in Biblia Hebraica
Stuttgartensia. For the parsing, see Genesis 3:22 on John
Joseph Owens, Analytical Key to the Old Testament (1989),
s.v. mimenn.
clause is from ( nerh) which is also

23This
cohortative, first person, plural form. It is rightly

rendered as Let us go down. See Genesis 11:7 in Biblia
Hebraica Stuttgartensia. For the parsing, see Genesis 11:7
on John Joseph Owens, Analytical Key to the Old Testament
(1989), s.v. nerh.
of God and angels, His prior creation. So God created man
in his own image, in the image of God he created him.
(1:27). The word His in the verse is a reference to
Themselves as the Ones who created man.
Examining closely this Shema24 of Deuteronomy 6:4, a
word brings the obvious oneness into a blend of
multiplicity or what may be said as corporate unity. The
use of (echad)25 gives the implication of unity,
uniqueness, and monotheism in view of using one as an
adjective of quality. In elucidation, this is not so
much an abstract monotheism.26 Moses could have used
another word which could refer to one in singularity.
However, he chose to employ the word which could be, at
best, portraying how the Godhead is revealed to him. He
24Shema
means Hear. Charles Dyer and Eugene
Merrill, Nelsons Old Testament Survey (Canada: Word
Publishing, 2001), 139. It is the foundational core of
Israels faith and declares the unity and uniqueness of
God. This is a theological confession, the credo par
excellence of Judaism. See Marvin R. Wilson, Shema, New
International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology &
Exegesis. Ed., Willem A. VanGemeren (Grand Rapids, MI:
Zondervan, 1997), 4:1217.
25See
Genesis 11:7 in Biblia Hebraica
Stuttgartensia.
Jenson, , New International Dictionary

26P.P.
of Old Testament Theology & Exegesis. Ed., Willem A.

VanGemeren (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1997), 1:350.
also employed this very same word as he penned the second
chapter of Genesis. This is a reference to the union of two
individuals which God created. Two became one (echad)27
flesh (Gen 2:24).
Isaiah wrote, Before me no god was formed, nor
shall there be any after me. (Isa 43:10). This
demonstrates the oneness of God. However, prior to that, he
had seen the Lord in His temple and had heard Him asking,
Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?" (Isa 6:8).
This is another staging of the plurality of the Godhead.
The New Testament is explicitly vocal on the
subject of the Godhead, not just its oneness but even the
threeness of God. It is in the New Testament that we see
clear reference to the doctrine of Trinity. Although the
very word appears nowhere else in the Holy Writ,
trinitarian formulas are brought up in the Testament.
The oneness of God we see in the OT is maintained
and mentioned in the NT. Jesus, in Mark 12:29, said, Hear,
O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. This is a
clear excerpt from what Jesus had learned from their
present scriptures then, a reference to the very first text
27SeeGenesis 2:24 in Biblia Hebraica

Stuttgartensia.
mentioned from Deuteronomy.28 Two other references mention
positively that God is one (Gal. 3:20; James 2:19).
Definite expressions on the plurality of God are
also found in the New Testament. At the onset of the Book
of Matthew, in the commencement of the ministry of Jesus
which was His baptism, we see a demonstration of the
distinction of the Son from the Spirit and the Father, the
Spirit from the Son and the Father, and the Father from the
Spirit and the Son. The Son was baptized and stood blessed
with the rite of baptism. Hovering above Him was the Spirit
in His form descending like a dove. Then the Father spoke
in His tender yet majestic manner, This is my beloved Son,
with whom I am well pleased. (Matt. 3:17).
These three Personalities were mentioned also
together at the conclusion of the Book of Matthew. Jesus
words declared, Go therefore and make disciples of all
nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of
the Son and of the Holy Spirit. (Matt. 28:19). This is a
remarkable reference of the great Three as one in name and
this was written in singular name.29 This suggests that the
28ClintonE. Arnold, ed., Zondervan Illustrated

Bible Backgrounds Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan,
2002), 1:276.
29Ibid, 1:190.
Persons in the Godhead are not just distinct from each
other but one. Together with the first NT reference it,
nevertheless, denies the presentation of the Persons as
modes30 of God. Everyone in the Godhead exists at the same
time, not in modes of God at a point in time within
history. Everyone in the Godhead, while possessing
otherness, holds the same character as signified by bearing
a single name.
This is an explicit presentation of the Godhead
consisting three distinct Persons yet having one nature and
character.
Equality of the Deity
The teaching of Trinity demonstrates God as three
yet one. However, this plurality of the Godhead denies the
subordination of one or the superiority of the other. In
the Godhead, the Father is God, the Son is God, and the
Spirit is God. All in the same way enjoy the same quality
of being divine and God.
Modes is a term used by those who advocate

30
Modalist Monarchianism to refer to the Son and Spirit as

temporary self-revelation of God. The Father, Son, and
Holy Spirit were . . . attached to one being. Thus God as a
single monad is manifest in three distinct and successive
operations of self-revealing. H.D. McDonald,
Monarchianism, New Dictionary of Theology (Leicester,
England: Inter-Varsity Press, 1988), 440, 441.
The Son, whose life is revealed and narrated in the
NT, was referred to as a Deity.31 There are times that even
Jesus Himself claimed to be just as the Father on many
prerogatives. One is the forgiving of sins. None but God
alone can forgive sins (Mark 2:5, 10, 11; cf. 2:7). He
also talked about judging and raising the dead (John 5:21,
25, 29). Jesus assumes these same attributes that only God
has (1 Sam 2:6; Psalm 2:7; Deut 32:36). He also declared
that honor belongs to Him as it belongs to the Father (John
5:23).
A noteworthy statement also of Jesus is the I am
in the Gospel of John. When He told the people that Abraham
rejoiced upon seeing Jesus, the Jews were puzzled and asked
how He could have seen Jesus when He was yet younger than
fifty years old. He answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you,
before Abraham was, I am." (John 8:56-58). Notice how the
Jews reacted when Jesus uttered the I am. They picked up
stones having the intention to throw those at Him. They
understood right away that Jesus was claiming pre-existence
31John 1:1, 18; 20:28; Heb. 1:8, 9; 2 Peter 1:1; 1

John 5:20.
dating back before Abraham. He was identifying Himself with
the great I AM of the Old Testament (Exo. 3:14).32
Aside from those claims of Jesus and some more, the
disciples also made acknowledgment of His divinity. He was
considered God and Lord.33 Along with those are references
that Jesus was attributed designations of divine being.34
His name and the Holy Spirit were also associated with the
name of the Father. These associations are what most
recognize as the trinitarian formula.
One is the great gospel commission, Go therefore
and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the
name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.
(Matt. 28:19). Another is in 2 Corinthians 13:14, The
grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the
fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all. The last
mentioned here is saying, Elect according to the
foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of
the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of
Jesus Christ. (1 Pet. 1:2).
32JohnMacArthur, The MacArthur Bible Commentary

(Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, Inc., 2005), 1387.
33John 20:28; Rom. 9:5; Col. 2:9; 13; Heb. 1, 8, 10.
34Rev. 1:17; John 1:9; 1 Pet. 5:4; Titus 2:13, 14.
The Holy Spirit is included in those references due
to the gravity of the Bible attesting His deity. He is
described as holding divine attributes being holy,
omniscient, of truth, life and wisdom, power and eternity.35
The performance of creating the world, act of redeeming
humanity, manifestation of Gods power through miracles,
and giving of spiritual gifts are also credited to Him. In
addition to that are the inspiration of the Scriptures,
illumination, renewal and rebirth, and sanctification.36
A compelling comparison of the Father and the
Spirit as of the same nature being God is recorded in
Hebrews 3:7-9 as compared with Psalm 95:7-11. The words
uttered by God in that OT text recorded by the psalmist is
deemed as articulated by the Spirit in the letter to the
Hebrews. By this the author of the NT epistle is
identifying the Spirit with the OT God. The same
identification is done in Acts 28:25-27 and Isaiah 6:8-10.
The writer of the narrative of Acts records Pauls use of
the words from Isaiah. While Isaiah reveals his written
35Matt.
1:20, 1 Cor. 2:10, 11; 1 Cor. 2:11; Luke
1:35; Rom. 15:19; Heb.9:14. Rom. 8:2; John 16:13; 5:7
36Gen.
1:2; Job 33:4; Eph. 4:30; Isa. 63:10, 11;
Gal. 3:2-5; 1 Cor. 12:4-11; 2 Pet. 1:21; John 15:26; John
3:7, 8; Rom. 8:11; 2 Thess. 2:13.
statement as from the Lord, Paul uses it as from the
Spirit.
Chapter Summary
The Bible implicitly advocates the oneness yet
threeness of the Godhead. Though the very word is on no
occasion mentioned, Scripture references from both Old and
New Testaments array in reference to the Trinity. OT and NT
writers give education on the subject by emphasizing the
doctrine through their use of words. This they did as
according to how God revealed Himself to them.
Simultaneously, the Bible writers also communicate
through their own expression and through the witness and
acknowledgement of other biblical individuals the deity of
the Son and the Spirit as well as of the Father. Gospel
authors also emphasize well the prerogatives attributed to
Jesus as strongly suggestive of His divinity. Even the Holy
Spirit is credited of acts and deeds unique and solitary to
God alone. In this way, canonical authors attest and show
the equality of the three Persons.

CHAPTER III
TRINITARIAN VIEWS AND THEIR DEVELOPMENT
Prior to discussing the commonalities and the
similarities of both understanding of the doctrine of
Trinity, this chapter presents a survey of the history of
the development of the Trinitarian views of the Roman
Catholic Church and the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Both
fall into the first and second parts of this chapter
respectively.
Roman Catholic Doctrine of Trinity
Philip Schaff gives information on this subject and
stated that before having articulated the Doctrine of
Trinity into a creed, the church had a sense of an
economic or transitive trinity. This is defined in the
trinity in the revelation of God in the threefold work of
creation, redemption, and sanctification.37 In view that
sense of the church, the development of the doctrine of
37PhilipSchaff, History of the Christian Church,

[e-Sword Version 10.2.1 CR-ROM] Franklin, TN: Rick Meyers,
2000-2013, vol.2, chap.12, 149.
Trinity is dealt with below as looking at the doctrine
frame.
The first part of the section explores the molding
of the Trinitarian view in the Early Century Christianity.
This is brought out for the significance it plays on the
establishment of the belief system of the Roman Catholic
Church.
Doctrine Development History
The Trinitarian view of the Godhead was an assumed
truth centuries ago. From the time when the clergy turned
their attention to it until the close to the middle ages,
great has been the influence of Greek minds on the
doctrinal development during the early and medieval
Christian history.38
Polycarp, who was said to be a student of Jesus
apostles, and Ignatius, wrote mentioning their certainty on
the relation of Father and Son in the Godhead. Justin
Martyr, who was an early apologist right after the
apostles, was also noted concerning his affirmation on the
Trinity39 considering the prophetic Spirit besides the
38Moon,
Historical Overview, 117.
39Norman
L. Geisler, Systematic Theology
(Bloomington, MN: Bethany House Publishers, 2003) 2:298.
Father and the Son. Theirs was a concept not wholly
unfamiliar on this area. Clement of Rome during the final
decade of the first century wrote witnessing to God the
Father, to the Son, to the Spirit, and mentions all three
together. Only in the late part of the second century did
questions arise.40
In defense of the heresy posted by Gnosticism41,
Irenaeus proved an assertion of the Godhead. His was that
the Bible depicts Jesus as the Anointed, both real God and
real human.42 His claim and understanding of the Godhead,
before Tertullian, is the most comprehensive and the most
unambiguously Trinitarian.43 This Tertullian is an apologist
40R.L.Richard, Holy Trinity, New Catholic

Encyclopedia (NCE), (Washington, DC: The Catholic
University of America, 1967), 14:296.
41Gnosticismor Gnostic view stands that Christ was
one of the emanations from God that made up the population
of the heavenly realms, and was not par with God the
Father, the ultimate and transcendent God. See Woodrow
Whidden, Jerry Moon, and John Reeve, The Trinity:
Understanding God's Love, His Plan of Salvation, and
Christian Relationships (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald,
2002), 122.
42Whidden, Moon, and Reeve, Trinity, 133.
43J.N.D.Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines (London:
Adam & Charles Black, 1968), 107.
and theologian from Africa and is the one who first used
the word Trinity in relation to the Godhead.44
A Bible interpreter who was committed to personal
morality and spirituality, named Origen, wrote an
unambiguous statement on this subject. He reckoned the
Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit as the most excellent
Trinity.45
A little later, deviations arose as some persons
harbor and gave a grounding in what Christendom identify as
heresies or heterodoxies. One of those is known in the
theological realm as Dynamic Monarchianism. This holds the
idea that God is not a multiplicity of Persons. As a
replacement for that, Dynamic Monarchianism holds that God
is one sovereign and eternal being and is linked with the
man Jesus Christ on the grounds of Adoptionism, by way of
impersonal spiritual power.
Another heretical teaching is that of Modalistic
Monarchianism. This heresy affords God as one, the Father.
Further, it affirms that Jesus is a distinct mode
44Geisler, Systematic Theology, 2:299.

45Ibid, 2:300.
of revelation in history. Spirit is another word to
designate the Father.
Lastly is Arianism which maintains that the Son is
still a created being though the most exalted among the
creatures. Further it endorses that the Son is a creator
himself of the world. For Arius, the prime mover of the
concept, the Holy Spirit is a created being and subordinate
and outranked by the Son. Arianism then is a blend of
Monarchianism and Subordinationism.46
Due to these heresies, esp. that of Arius, an
ecumenical council held A.D. 325 at the town of Nicaea near
Constantinople, now Turkey, was attended by 318 bishops.
One of the drives of the council was to settle the Arian
controversy.47
At the completion of the council, the commonly
known as Creed of the 318 Fathers was made ready. This
creed states:
46FernandoL. Canale, Doctrine of God, Handbook of

Seventh-day Adventist Theology, ed. Raoul Dederen. Seventh-
day Adventist Bible Commentary Reference Series
(Hagerstown, MD: Review & Herald Publishing Association,
2000), 12:142.
47PhilipSchaff, Creeds of the Christendom [e-
Sword Version 10.2.1 CR-ROM] Franklin, TN: Rick Meyers,
2000-2013, vol.1 chap.2, 8.
We believe in one God, the Father almighty, Maker
of all things visible and invisible;
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God,
begotten from the Father, only begotten, that is, from
the substance of the Father, God from God, light from
light, true God from true God, begotten not made, of
one substance with the Father, through whom all things
came into being, things in heaven and things on earth,
who for us men and because of our salvation came down
and became incarnate, becoming man, suffered and rose
again on the third day, ascended to the heavens, and
will come to judge the living and the dead;
And in the Holy Spirit.48
It had an abrupt close but an anathema or a formal
ecclesiastical curse was added at the end which was noted
by Schaff.
But those who say: 'There was a time when he was

not;' and 'He was not before he was made;' and 'He was
made out of nothing,' or 'He is of another substance'
or 'essence,' or 'The Son of God is created,' or
'changeable,' or 'alterable'they are condemned by the
holy catholic and apostolic Church.49
A word put into use in this creed describing a
commonality between the Father and the Son is that which
means of the same substance or of one substance. This
word in particular is homoousios. This Nicene expression of
48PeterToon, Yesterday, Today, and Forever: Jesus

Christ and the Holy Trinity in the Teaching of the Seven
Ecumenical Councils (Swedesboro, N.J.: Preservation Press,
1996), 20.
2000-2013, vol.1 chap.2, 8.
the nature of the Godhead facilitated the doctrine of
Trinity to be equidistant from Tritheism50 and
Sabellianism51.
More than half a century later, emperor Theodosius
who was committed to the homoousios formula on the Trinity
convened a hundred and fifty bishops, all from East, for
the second ecumenical Council at Constantinople. They were
called together to deal with the fighters against the
Spirit or Pneumatamachoi. The resulting Nicaeo-
Constantinopolitan Creed shows some added clauses to the
articles about the Father and the Son and a number of
clauses to the abruptly ended Nicene Creeds last article
about the Holy Spirit. Thus rendering:
We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker

of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and
invisible.
50Tritheismis the belief in three gods, as

distinguished from belief in Trinity. Tritheists argue that
there are three substances in the Trinity. See George
Thomas Kurian, Nelsons Dictionary of Christianity
(Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2005), s.v. Tritheism.
51Sabellianism,third-century heresy propounded by
Noetus of Smyrna and his disciples, was an attempt to solve
the contradictory problem posed in maintaining both the
unity of God and the divinity of Christ. It held that there
were not really three persons in the Trinity, but the Son
and Holy Spirit were only temporal modes or manifestations
of the one God, who may reveal himself as one or the other.
See Kurian, Nelsons Dictionary of Christianity, s.v.
Sabellianism.
And in one Lord Jesus Christ , the only-begotten
Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds
(ons), Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten,
not made, being of one substance with the Father; by
whom all things were made; who for us men, and for our
salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by
the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, and was made man; he
was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and
suffered, and was buried, and the third day he rose
again, according to the Scriptures, and ascended into
heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father;
from thence he shall come again, with glory, to judge
the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no
end.
And in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of life,
who proceedeth from the Father, who with the Father and
the Son together is worshiped and glorified, who spake
by the prophets. In one holy catholic and apostolic
Church; we acknowledge one baptism for the remission of
sins; we look for the resurrection of the dead, and the
life of the world to come. Amen.52
Aside from the additional phrases, the anathema
was detached. This further makes clarification and declares
that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.53
A creed adopted at the fourth ecumenical council at
Chalcedon dated 451 A.D. still covers an essential aspect
of the doctrine of Trinity. For Schaff it completes the

2000-2013, vol.1 chap.2, 8 (italics are the added clause
during the Council).
53PhilipSchaff, History of the Christian Church,

2000-2013, vol.6, chap.2, 18.
orthodox Christology of the ancient Church. The Creed of
Chalcedon embodies the following principal ideas:
1. A true incarnation of the second person in the
Godhead.
2. The defined description between person and
nature.
3. Incarnation resulted to the God-Man Christ.
4. The duality of nature; divine ever divine and
human ever human in one common life.
5. The unity of the person.
6. The whole work of Christ is to be attributed to
his person, and not to the one of the other
nature exclusively.
7. Christ's human nature had no independent
personality of its own, besides the divine, and
that the divine nature is the root and basis of
his personality.
With these leading ideas, Nestorianism54 and
Eutychianism55 were counterbalanced as they put the Godhead
of Christ in a false relation to his humanity.56
54Itis a condemned heresy that rejects the theology

that holds Jesus as a single person, truly man and God and
that the two natures remain fused in their union within one
person. For Nestorius, the conceiver, Jesus combined in
himself two distinct elements, the divine and the human,
A rather direct and advance creed about the
doctrine of the Trinity and Incarnation is the Athanasian
Creed, the last creed considered in this chapter. This has
been ascribed to Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria. The
author Athanasius was the chief defender of the divinity of
Christ and the doctrine of Trinity.
While the second part of the symbol discusses the
person of Christ having a rational soul, the first part of
its content dealt with the Trinity in its Augustinian form.
This is due to the observation that the creed is a
reflection of the influence of Augustines theology of the
Trinity.
Augustine made the oneness of God the starting
point of his theology and progressed into the threeness of
the Godhead. By oneness he meant consubstantiality of the
persons or being regarded as the same in substance or
and the result was a conjunction, not a union, in the

person of Jesus Christ. See Kurian, Nelsons Dictionary of
Christianity, s.v. Sabellianism.
55A
heresy put forth by Eutyches that there was only
one divine nature in Christ after the Incarnation, his
human nature being swallowed up in the divine nature. See
Kurian, Nelsons Dictionary of Christianity, s.v.
Sabellianism.
56Philip
Schaff, The Creeds of the Christendom,
2000-2013, vol.1, chap.2, 9.
essence. Accordingly the simple and timeless essence of God
is the ultimate ground of His oneness. The terms eternal
generation and procession were viewed by Augustine as
according to the relations of the persons in the Godhead.
With him the persons are unchangeable, original, subsistent
relations.57
The Athanasian Creed asserts that God is one in
three persons or hypostases, each person conveying the
whole fullness of the Godhead, with all his attributes.
Each person has all the divine attributes which are

inherent in the divine essence, but each has also a
characteristic individuality or property, which is
peculiar to the person, and cannot be communicated; the
Father is unbegotten, the Son begotten, the Holy Ghost
is proceeding. In this Trinity there is no priority or
posteriority of time, no superiority or inferiority of
rank, but the three persons are coeternal and coequal.58
Along with those cited above, the church also give
credits to the medieval Fathers who gave standpoints on the
Trinity, viz. Anselm and Thomas Aquinas aside from
Augustine mentioned earlier.
Anselm adds to the then-developed theology on the
Trinity. He stated that all three together are one supreme
57Canale,Doctrine of God, Handbook of Seventh-day

Adventist Theology, 144.
58PhilipSchaff, The Creeds of the Christendom,
2000-2013, vol.1, chap.2, 10.
essence as each is perfectly the supreme essence as well.
None of them is greater than, or can exist without, the
others. Further Anselm stresses that the Father, as a
complete whole, exists in the Son and in their mutual
Spirit, the Son in Father and in Spirit, and Spirit in
Father and in Son.59
Thomas Aquinas in his way expressed the relation of
the person and essence of the Godhead. He stated that there
is one essence of the three persons and three persons of
the one essence; in God the persons are multiplied and
the essence is not multiplied.60 He furthered saying that
if there were any inequality in the divine persons, they
would not have the same essence at all and thus would not
be one God.61
As to the present, the Catholic Church adapted the
Nicene Creed on Trinity at the Council of Trent dated 1543-
1563.62 The Church articulated that the dogmatic formulation
59Geisler, Systematic Theology, 2:303.

60Ibid, 2:304
61Ibid.
Nicene Creed is stated earlier in Chapter Three.

62
See Philip Schaff, The Creeds of the Christendom, [e-

2000-2013, vol.1, chap.2, 10; chap.4, 24, 25.
one God in three Persons stood forth as the principal
researched factual information of Christian revelation and
the place from which launched exposition of Christian
doctrine.63 This is brought and taught to the laity and
expressed in their prayer, the summational act of faith,
with words O my God, I believe that you are one God in
three Divine Persons. . . I believe these and all truths
which the Holy Catholic Church teaches, because you have
revealed them. . . 64
The doctrine of Trinity is discussed is such a way
as there are three Persons in the one divine substance or
nature. By persons is meant the who I am and by nature is
intended the what I am. The three Persons in the Trinity
each totally possessing the divine nature. Each is truly
God, therefore infinite, eternal, and coequal; yet each is
distinct from the other. Wilfrid F. Dewan testifies:
If we could ask each what He is, each would say

God, for each possesses the one same divine nature . .
. But if we would ask who He is, each would answer
separately, Father, Son, or Holy Spirit, indicating
that They are three distinct Persons.65
63R.L. Richard, Holy Trinity, NCE, 14:295.

64Ibid.
65WilfridF. Dewan, Trinity, The Catholic

Encyclopedia for Home and School, (1965), 11:72.
Seventh-day Adventist Doctrine of Trinity
Scholars in the church have agreed to say that there
is a relative theological neglect in the subject of the
Godhead. Accordingly, the church has far and wide accepted
the Trinity, but reflected minutely upon the theology for
many years.66 This doctrine deserves a fresh look.
Doctrine Development History
The twenty-ninth day of December 1930 was noteworthy
for the General Conference Committee and the body of
believers then. It was on this day that the group voted to
appoint a committee of four, including the editor of the
Review and Herald and the General Conference president. The
groups task was to prepare a statement of beliefs.
Concerning the Trinity, the fundamentals dated 1931
states,
That the Godhead, or Trinity, consists of the

Eternal Father, a personal, spiritual Being,
omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, infinite in wisdom
and love; the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Eternal
Father, through whom all things were created and
through whom the salvation of the redeemed hosts will
be accomplished; the Holy Spirit, the third person of
the Godhead, the great regenerating power in the work
of redemption. Matt.28:19.67

671931
Year Book of the Seventh-day Adventist
Denomination, Prepared by H.E. Rogers (Washington, DC:
Review & Herald, 1931), 377.
This is worth mentioning as the trace of its
development is laid.
At the outset of the movement of Adventists, a
number of people at rest yet with words alive are extrovert
on the anti-trinitarian milieu. Merlin Burt mentioned
several persons who either spoke in contradiction to the
Trinity and/or dismissed form consideration the deity of
Christ.68 In conjunction with Burt, other sages in Adventist
theology at the present time mentioned a number of SDA
pioneers who were really non-Trinitarian, viz. Joseph
Bates, James White, D.T. Bourdeau, R.F. Cottrell, and S.B.
Whitney, Uriah Smith, J.N. Loughborough, etc.69
The early Adventist treatment on the doctrine of
Trinity may well be traced as caused by the religious
groups from which they came forth to join the movement
cognizant of the soon return of the Son of God. Immediate
religious faction from which people seceded to add to the
number of forerunners in the Adventist movement were
Christian Connexion, Seventh-day Baptists, and Methodism.
68BurtHistory of Seventh-day Adventist Views on

the Trinity, 4.
69Whidden,Moon, and Reeve, Trinity, 190-192 and
Gerhard Pfandl, The Doctrine of the Trinity among Seventh-
day Adventists (Journal of the Adventist Theological
Society 17/1, Spring 2006): 161.
Christian Connexion, for example, from which James
White and Joseph Bates came was an American Restorationist.
This was a group founded to gather people who came out of
Methodism, Presbyterians, and Baptist groups. They were led
by Alexander Stone who was non-Trinitarian, though the
leader did not urge his followers to be such.70 After a
couple of decades, the group became composed of members
mostly anti-trinitarian resultant to the attempted merging
of the assembly to the Disciples of Christ.
The early Adventists set forth six reason why they
rejected Trinity. First was that they did not comprehend
promptly the threeness of persons in the oneness of God as
set forth in the biblical literature. Another reason was
the misconception of the Father and Son as identical due to
the belief of Trinity, which actually was leading to the
idea of Modalist Monarchianism. Third was inclination to
Tritheism which they reject, seemingly presenting the
existence of three Gods. Fourth in the list of reasons was
that belief in Trinity would diminish the value of the
atonement. Fifth was that, according to Revelation 3:14,
Jesus is called the beginning of the creation of God
putting him of more recent origin than God the Father.
70Ibid., p186
Lastly reason was about the Holy Spirit being argued as
could not be considered a person due to Romans 5:5 and Joel
2:28.71
Few years before the expiration of the nineteenth
century, a growing dissatisfaction on the post of anti-
Trinitarianism crept among the pioneers. This was
consequential to the focus on the righteousness and the
redemptive power of Christ during the 1888 GC Session. It
was Ellet J. Waggoner who appealed to the necessity of
placing Christ in a rightful position of equality with the
Father for the better appreciation of His redeeming,
saving power.72
This event which took the interest of people
concerning the equality within the Godhead was pushed
forward as after few years the book Desire of Ages was
published authored by Ellen G. White who was a very
influential person in her time. Her influence through her
sermons and literature was due to the peoples respect and
confidence of the source of her messages.
71Moon,
Historical Overview, 116-118.
72E.J.
Waggoner, Christ and His Righteousness
(Oakland, CA: Pacific Press, 1890), 19.
Due to the giving of uncompromising statements about
the Son and the Holy Spirit, some in the theological
leadership of the Adventist Church was driven to a fresh
consideration and examination of the evidence of the
Godhead in the Holy Scriptures. This made a shift in the
generally accepted perspective and systematic arrangement
of their theology of the Godhead. This was made evident in
the summary of Adventist beliefs published by F.M. Wilcox
stating that the Seventh-day Adventists have confidence in
the divine Trinity consisting the eternal Father, the Lord
Jesus Christ, and the third Person of the Godhead, the Holy
Spirit.73 Indeed a paradigm shift.74
Though there was a modification on the views widely
held by the pioneers, several years passed yet before the
theological dome in the Adventist Church settled in a
definite position. They had Ellen Whites statement but the
leadership were not content on taking those words as they
were without seeing what the Bible really says. They had a
Bible Conference dated 1919 and they exchanged ideas
concerning the Godhead. A select group of church leaders,
73F.M.Wilcox, The Message for Today, Review and

Herald, Oct. 9, 1913, 21.
74Moon,The Adventist Trinity Debate Part 1:
Historical Overview, 110-112.
editors, Bible teachers, and history teachers attended and
participated the symposium. Burt noted the division of the
group having their own opinions and outlined the positions
of those who attended the conference. Then was a growing
sentiment on trinitarian view of the Godhead as there as an
increased appreciation of the full deity of the Son of God.
Editorial entries on Trinity were tolerated.75
After the above stated 1931 Statement of Faith
published by the Adventist Church and recognized official
by 1946, there was an acceptance of the teaching of
Trinity. Moon noted LeRoy Edwin Froom as the most visible
champion of Trinitarianism among Seventh-day Adventists.76
Since then there has been a growing dominance of the
Trinitarian consensus (from 1946 up to present77).
Summary
Early Christian Church past established the view on
Trinity as they faced challenges called out by heretics on
the divinity and personhood of the Son and the Holy Spirit.
The Roman Catholic Church then adapted the creed from the
75Burt,History of Seventh-day Adventist Views on

the Trinity, 134.
ecumenical councils convened to discuss and defend the
matters of the Godhead, as evident above. The Trinitarian
description of one God in three persons stood unchanged
from early centuries to the present.
This same profession is true to the Seventh-day
Adventist Church. However, the Adventist Church had
undergone a dramatic change from an Anti-Trinitarian view
to a Trinitarianism sentiment and profession.

CHAPTER IV
EVALUATION AND THEOLOGICAL IMPLICATION
The previous chapter offers the development history
of the Trinitarian views of the Roman Catholic Church and
the Seventh-day Adventist Church. The present chapter deals
with further comparison of the Trinity subject between the
two bodies or systems of belief. However, points of
difference are given more accent as the comparison is done.
On the claim that there is one God in three persons,
both stand unison. As stated earlier, the Council of Trent
adapting the same Nicene Creed on the subject of Trinity,
states exactly just the same on the subject.78 Similarly the
Seventh-day Adventist Church chose those words, as it had
been a common trinitarian expression, to be their
declaration of how they believe on the doctrine of God.79
78PhilipSchaff, Creeds of Christendom, [e-Sword

Version 10.2.1 CR-ROM] Franklin, TN: Rick Meyers, 2000-
2013, vol.1, chap.2, 10; chap.4, 24, 25.
79GeneralConference, Ministerial Association,
Both of the views reject the concepts of Tritheism
and monotheism.80 They stand in unanimity on the view that
neither three gods nor one god exists in the Deity. The
belief that there is God the Father, God the Son, and God
the Holy Spirit is agreed between the two religious
systems, as maintaining only one God manifested in three
Persons. Both sides believe as according to the Scriptures
that the character and nature of the Three are equal. Even
in the roles of each Person both views plunk in agreement.
Nevertheless, from this agreement spring forth the
differences. The distinction rests on the views of the
subordination of the Son and the procession of the Holy
Spirit as well as the development of the stand each claims.
Variation on Doctrine Development
Greek minds influenced the formation of the beliefs
accepted by the Roman Catholic Church as they made up their
theology.81 It directly depended on Greek philosophical

80KarlRahner, The Trinity (London: Burns & Oates,
2001), 42. See also Jrgen Moltmann, The Trinity and the
Kingdom: The Doctrine of God (MN: Fortress Press, 1993),
131, 164, 189, 243.
presuppositions more than any of their doctrine.82 This
invites important consideration especially that Greek
philosophy on this respect is immersed with radical
dualism.83 The influence can be traced as the fact is
accepted that their belief system is according to the
ecumenical councils and perceptions of them that made
participation on it.84 Their Catechism of the Catholic
Church demonstrates that fact as this document explicitly
displays the Nicene Creed and many other Creeds in relation
83Radicaldualism perceives the whole universe as

shared by the existence of soul which is defined as
integrally eternal and good, and material things considered
as transient and in actual fact evil. It also involves
drastic contrast of these states of existence. This view
involves three aspects. (1) Soul and body. Human beings
comprise an immortal soul which is good and a mortal body
which is characteristically evil and must eventually die to
free the soul. (2) God and man. God is absolute perfection
and possesses impassibility and unable to enter history and
interact with human beings in space and time except through
human soul considered as spark from divine soul and
intrinsically immortal. (3) Time and timelessness. Gods
eternity is timeless, without past or future but only
eternal present, contrasting human life in time with past,
present, and future. The aspects of this radical dualism
are found by scholars past and present to be in direct
contrast with what is presented in Scriptures. See Whidden,
Moon, and Reeve, Trinity, 168-173.
84OurSunday Visitor, The Catholic Sourcebook

(Indiana: Our Sunday Visitor Curriculum Division, Our
Sunday Visitor, Inc., 2008), 57.
to their faith in Trinity and other doctrines.85
Implications of the leading dualism leads to the
consideration of other variance in the Trinitarian
understanding.
Quite the contrast, the Seventh-day Adventist Church
claims to be not dependent on Greek philosophy.86 They had
gone through a long progression on developing their stand
on Trinity. As the previous chapter illustrates the
development of the Adventist view, they rejected
Trinitarianism for a time. Yet after careful consideration
and study of Scriptures they were able to build up their
stand, apart from some tradition and human-dependent
speculation.
Subordination of the Son
Besides the development of the doctrinal views are
the differing perspectives on the relationship of the Son
to the Father. This pertains to the sonship to the Father
or being born of the Father. The Roman Catholic theology
holds fast that God the Son is begotten and not made out of
nothing but out of the same substance as that of the
85UnitedStates Catholic Conference, Catechism of

the Catholic Church (USA: Libreria Editrice Vaticana,
1997), 49-53.
86Whidden, Moon, and Reeve, Trinity, 202
Father.87 They see and confess belief on the only-begotten
Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, light from
light, true God from true God, begotten not made,
consubstantial with the Father.88 This makes the Son
different than other creation made ex nihilo or created
just out of nothing. This also makes the Son just coequal
and coeternal with the Father. This is the Sons procession
by eternal generation.89
This concept of procession is not innovative,
according to them, for it is common on the Son and the
Spirit as recorded on John 8:42 and 15:26.90 These verses
are the spring of their understanding of how the three
Divine Persons, while possessing one and the same divine
nature, are really distinct from one another.91 The Sons
origin is of preexistence as they see asserted in John 1:1-
3. Quoting from C. J. Peter, To speak of the Son as being
87Richard
P. McBrien, Catholicism: Study Edition
(NY: Harper & Row, 1981), 353.
88United
States Catholic Conference, Catechism of
89Paul
M. Collins, The Trinity: A Guide for the
Perplexed (NY: T & T Clark, 2008), 3. See also C.J. Peter,
Generation of the Word, NCE, 6:323.
90R.L. Richard, Holy Trinity, NCE, 14:301.
91L.J. Mc Govern, Trinitarian Procession, NCE,
11:821.
generated is to continue further the Biblically inspired
analogy of paternity-filiation in the Deity.92 Verses from
the written Scripture of Saint John93 give them reason for
this.
Speaking on filiation, L.J. Mc Govern expressed that
while the OT writers use the son of God in a figurative
sense denoting a friend or a servant of God, Jesus use of
Son of God to Himself is of literal sense. He meant,
therefore, that He was, in the fullest sense, the real,
actual Son of the Heavenly Father. Further, this term in
the NT is an expression of the Sons divinity and real
generation from the Father.94
Quite the reverse is the Seventh-day Adventist
theology believing that the sonship is but that of
metaphorical sense. The Seventh-day Adventist theology
addresses the sonship and the consequentially implied
subordination of Jesus in a completely different way.
The concept of sonship in the relationship of the
Father and the Son is remarkably considered as having the
purpose of the identification of the two divine Persons
92C.J. Peter, Generation of the Word, NCE, 6:323.

93John 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9
94L.J. Mc Govern, Filiation, NCE, 5:912 (emphasis
supplied).
concerned. Besides, the father-son relationship is used as
the revelation of the special relationship existing between
the concerned.95 It is viewing the sonship as not a
historical generation of God the Son from God the Father.
They believe that the existence of the Son is not derived
from the Father. Everyone in the Godhead share the same
coequality and preexistence.96 They deny the Arian
suggestion that there was a time when the Son was not.
The historical generation viewed by the Roman
Catholic Church is that eternal generation which brought
the Son to existence after the same substance of the
Father.97 However, when bringing out the matter of
historical generation, the Seventh-day Adventist Church
refers to the Incarnation. Aside from being coexistent with
the Father and the Holy Spirit, the Son was made incarnate
through Jesus of Nazareth. This incarnation was the reality
of the generation of the Son.98
95Canale, Doctrine of God, 125.

96Ibid, 124, 125.
98 Canale, Doctrine of God, 126.
The verses99 which seemingly present the Son as
really generated from the Father are only viewed as in
the figurative sense. Being first-born is an illustration
of superiority and preeminence. Being the only begotten
signifies uniqueness of the father-son relationship.100
Another thing brought out by the idea that the Son
was incarnated is that the Son is in subordination to the
Father. Adventist claim stands for this idea as true and
thus the correct nature of the Sons subordination.101 This
subordination began as the Son took the human form and was
therefore made seem like a step lower than the Father. Yet
this subordination is not in the sense of the inferior or
dependent existence of the Son within the Trinity. Rather,
it is to be taken as subordination being the result of
tasks performed in the plan of salvation.
The predicament lies between the differing or
clashing views of both faith groups concerning the
preexistence of the Persons in the Godhead. These
conflicting grounds on the Son stand also parallel with the
origin of the Holy Spirit.
99Beingthe only begotten Jesus of John 1:14, 18;

3:16, 18; and 1 John 4:9; and being the first-born of
Col. 1:15; Rom. 8:29; Heb. 1:26; Rev. 1:5
100Canale, Doctrine of God, 125.
Procession of the Holy Spirit
The Roman Catholic Church believes that the Holy
Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son as taught by
the Scriptures and their Tradition.102 Accordingly, this
procession of the Holy Spirit is based on the words of
Jesus on John 15:26. They recognize that the Father is the
source and origin of the whole divinity . . . The Holy
Spirit, the third person of the Trinity, is God, one and
equal with the Father and the Son, of the same substance
and also of the same nature.103 This procession is what
they call as belonging to spiration.
Basically, spiration is the life process in God that
allows the Holy Spirit to be acknowledged in its
personality.104 On the other hand, this life process should
be understood separately from begetting in order to
preserve the Catholic concept of Jesus being the only
begotten, avoiding the perception of the Father having two
Sons. This spiration, accordingly, is the sole factor of
101Ibid., 126
the Catholic Church, 64-66. See also J. Forget, Holy
Ghost, The Catholic Encyclopedia (New York: Robert
Appleton Company, 1910), 214.
104McBrien, Handbook of Catholic Theology, 726.
the existence of the identity of the Spirit or His
distinct hypostatic existence.105
In addition to that, this spiration is taken
actively as the act of love and passively as the love
proceeding, or the Holy Spirit.106 To expound, the Holy
Spirit is recognized as the love or the sanctity of both
the Father and the Son. This affection of the Father and
the Son is a mutual, complementary love, spirating the
Holy Spirit, who a proceeds eternally from the Father and
the Son as a separate Person in the immanent life of the
Trinity.107
Contrariwise, the Seventh-day Adventist Church
teaches that the Holy Spirit is equally self-existent with
the Father and the Son. Further the Holy Spirit is from
eternity being the third person of the Trinity.108 The
scriptural texts that seem to convey the impression that
the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son,109
105McBrien, Catholicism, 354.

106G.M. Greenewald, Spiration, NCE, 13:567.
107Ibid.568
108General Conference, Ministerial Association,

109John 15:26; 14:16, 26; Acts 2:33
are deemed as in the historical sense and made evident and
demonstrated at the Pentecostal coming.110 They repudiate
the idea that the procession of the Holy Spirit makes the
doctrine of Trinity complete. Rather, they have confidence
in the understanding that the procession of the Holy Spirit
is just a reference to His work in the salvation of man,
the objective of the activity of the Trinity.111
Theological Implications
Considering this Trinity leaves no little effect on
Christian Theology. A number of themes are affected by
having the correct understanding of the doctrine. The
matter affects points in the belief of a Christian
specially that the doctrine is deemed the most fundamental
of all principles of faith. It is the foundation where the
bricks and blocks that make up the edifice of Christian
theology rest. This chapter will discuss few important and
practical effects of Trinitarian understanding.
Calvary and Deity
The death of Jesus at the cross is influenced the
foremost among all the truth revealed in the Scriptures. It
110Canale,Doctrine of God, 132. See exposition on

the Pentecostal coming of the Holy Spirit in 130.
111Ibid.
just follows that when Gods law requires shedding blood
for the atonement or for the penalty of sin (Heb. 9:22), it
calls for the blood and person of someone who can surpass
the standard of the law. It necessitates someone sinless
who is not sought after by the law and whose innocent blood
can substitute for the blood of the accountable sinner.
This demand raises attention to the inquiry as to whether
that individual can be just anybody else or even the
originator of the law demanding consequence. This
originator refers to the one who created the law and
consequently the one who can come up and even higher than
the claims of the law.
Noting the Trinity in connection to this concern,
if Jesus was not of the Deity, He could not have
recompensed for the sake of humanity. Had He been apart
from membership of the Godhead, He could have been a
subordinate and in so doing be not God at all. His being
totally un-God could lead to falling short of the
standard of the law and therefore die for nothing at all.
Quite the opposite, Jesus is, de facto, the second
Person of the Godhead. This brings Him to the place of
being qualified to make atonement for the fallen race. An
author puts it similarly this way with the remark that the
divine Son of God was the only one of sufficient value to
satisfy the claims of God's perfect law.112 No other
individual can do the substitutionary sacrifice in place of
the sinners.
Interpersonal and Relational Deity
Another critical point on having a good, spot-on
understanding of Trinity is the concept of the reign of the
Deity. With the off beam concept of the Godhead leading to
monotheism and subordination of the rest of the Deity, the
God people expect to hear them as a Father and Lord would
be in actuality an emperor and tyrant, so to speak. That
kind of god would be evidence in a Godhead of only one
person distant from the personal and relationship-oriented
reign of the heavenly Trio.113
His sovereignty would not be what we know as of
love but as of control and power. Even the sending of Jesus
who is a subordinate in that view would only be motivated
not by love but by a necessity to maintain and preserve his
supremacy.
112EllenG. White, Redemption or the First Advent

of Christ with His Life and Ministry, (CA: Pacific Press,
1877), 9.
113EllenG. White, Special Testimonies, Series B,
no. 7 (Sanitarium: n.p., 1905), 6263, emphasis supplied.
This is due to the idea that on a Godhead of only
one person, there is a relative inexperience of loving
relationship. This loving relationship would be fictional
because of a lone God knowing only supremacy and
conceivably making use of this as instrument to maintain
relationship based on authority and subordination; thus
sending a subordinate to be incarnated in the person of
Jesus.
In contradiction of that is effect when humanity
has a triune God. There exists the Godhead that is not just
of sovereignty but of loving reign, oriented not with the
preservation of power alone but of safeguarding
relationships deemed with great value. The last verse of
the thirteenth chapter of Pauls second epistle to the
Corinthian believers demonstrate the refinements brought
about in the personality of the Godhead. The verse points
toward the relationship the Godhead wants to really
establish with the inhabitants of earth considered as
family (2 Cor. 13:14, cf. Eph. 3:15).
Entreating the Deity
A practical aspect in a Christians life which is
affected by the understanding of the Godhead is prayer. An
exact discernment on the Godhead gives influence to how a
Christian prays. Knowing the identity of the Being to whom

prayers are directed gives more assurance, more faith,
better understanding of the making of supplication,
peculiar intimacy and closer relationship, and greater and
more particular appreciation of the Deitys relationship to
and actions for the humanity. More assurance for prayers
can be gained for a Christian knows that the Deity is
concerned with the relationship and cared for the good of
those who love Him (Rom. 8:28). This entails more faith on
the side of the petitioner.
In affirmation to the next point, some say it is
reasonable and concrete or practical to address petitions
to any appropriate member of the Deity. Praying to the
Father for choicest blessings for His children goes well
along with praying to the Son for confession, forgiveness,
and repentance, as well as to the Holy Spirit directly for
development and bestowals of spiritual gifts and outpouring
of wisdom and guidance for personal affairs and for the
church concerning witnessing.114 Further, the development of
closer and more intimate relationship Deity and human.
Appreciation and gratitude develops more and more as the
Christian sees God as willing to establish closer
connection with him. A daily closer walk would mean much
114Whidden, Moon, and Reeve, Trinity, 272, 273.

more to an individual hungering for company and
relationship.
CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
The plurality of the Godhead is evident from
Scriptures. Witnesses of Gods self-revelation wrote in the
Old and New Testaments records to uphold such aspect of the
Godhead. This plurality explicitly and implicitly in the
creation, the time of Israel, the ministry of the prophets,
the life of Jesus, and the work of the apostles.
The equality of the Three in the Godhead is
likewise asserted throughout Bible. The writers of
Scriptures testify of the deity of Christ and of the Holy
Spirit throughout their literary works. Divine prerogatives
are ascribed to Them liberally. Biblical evidences,
however, repudiates the concept of subordination of one or
the superiority of the other within the realm of deity.
While the Holy Writ establishes the doctrine of Trinity in
an unambiguous fashion, the post-biblical times relate
several differing views on the subject. Before the end of
the second century, heresies aroused. Gnosticism posed
questions on the divinity of Christ. Monarchianism,
Subordinationism, and Arianism followed and made movements

which put the understanding of Trinity into investigation.
Ecumenical councils were then convened to discuss matters
and settle issues.
The Council of Nicea produced the creed that has
been the established or widely recognized as a model for
the clarification on the Doctrine of Trinity. The following
council that made the Nicaeo-Constantinopolitan Creed
supplied some additional clauses and phrases and elucidated
the belief on the Holy Spirit. The later Council at
Chalcedon edified the Christology of the Church. The
succeeding rather direct and advance Athanasian Creed dealt
on the Trinity as well and asserted more comprehensively
that God is one in three persons.
The Roman Catholic Church viewed the doctrine of
Trinity in line with the Nicene Creed which they adapted
during the Council of Trent dated 1543-1563. They
considered and supported the belief on one God in three
Persons. They also disseminated this belief and taught
their laity the faith in Trinity.
A seemingly identical understanding of Trinity is
advocated by the Seventh-day Adventist Church. This body of
believers were, in earlier times, anti-Trinitarian.
Believing that there was no Trinity, prominent persons of

this group dismissed from consideration the deity of Christ
as evident in the previous discussion of their doctrine
development. A number of pioneers of this Church were
explicit on their elimination of the concept of the
plurality of God.
Well along, a growing dissatisfaction on the anti-
Trinitarian view of the Seventh-day Adventist Church was
impelled by the consideration of the righteousness and the
redemptive power of Christ. In due course, the group
summoned interest on the equality within the Godhead.
Modifications on their summary of beliefs was made a little
later affirming the equality of the three Persons.
Stability on this theological point happened settling the
paradigm shift. Until the present, the Seventh-day
Adventist Church defends the existence of three persons in
the Godhead bearing equality and unity of nature and
character.
This Seventh-day Adventist Trinitarian view sounds
similar to the Roman Catholic but a comparison of both
views are summarized in the following table which lays out
the similarities and differences.

TABLE 1
TRINITARIAN VIEW COMPARISON
Seventh-day Adventist View Roman Catholic View

Similarities
Trinity is one God in three Trinity is one God in three
persons. persons.
No three gods existing No three gods existing
Repudiation of monotheism Repudiation of monotheism
Distinct existence of God the Distinct existence of God the
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit Father, Son, and Holy Spirit
The Trinity is same in nature. The Trinity is same in nature.
Son is not created. Son is not created.
Son is coequal with the Son is coequal with the
Father. Father.
Holy Spirit is coequal with Holy Spirit is coequal with
the Father and Son. the Father and Son.
Differences
Development is not dependent Development is influenced by
on Greek philosophy Greek philosophy
The Son coexisted with the The Son proceeded from the
Father but did not proceed by Father by eternal generation
any kind of generation. being the real, actual only
Father-son relationship was begotten and firstborn Son.
metaphorical of their special The procession completes the
relationship and functionally Trinity.
for identification of two
divine Persons aside from the
divine third addressed as the
Holy Spirit. The historical
generation of the Son was on
Jesus birth, the incarnation
of the Son. The expressions
only begotten and
firstborn are respective
illustrations of unique
father-son relationship and
superiority and pre-eminence
over all creation.
Table 1-Continued
Differences
Seventh-day Adventist View Roman Catholic View
The Holy Spirit proceeded The Holy Spirit proceeded
from the Father and Son only from the Father and the Son
on Pentecost but no by spiration which is the
procession or generation life process in God that
occurred for the Holy Spirit allows the Holy Spirit to be
to exist. acknowledged in its
personality. This led to the
composition of the Trinity.
Conclusion
From the result of the comparative study, it is
concluded that similarities between the Roman Catholic and
Seventh-day Adventist views on Trinity include (1) the
confession that there exists not three gods but one God in
three persons, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; (2) there
is neither tritheism nor monotheism; and (3) all the same
in nature and character. Similarities also include the
views (4) that the Son is not a created Being, and that (5)
the Son is coequal with the Father just as the Holy Spirit
is coequal with the Father and the Son.
The study also concludes that the Roman Catholic
view has explicit differences from the Seventh-day
Adventist view. One of these variances is that while the
Roman Catholic view on Trinity derives its actuality from

the formation of creeds during the fourth and fifth
centuries of the early church greatly influenced by Greek
philosophical presuppositions, the Seventh-day Adventist
view on Trinity as their history evidently shows is neither
derived from the Roman Catholic understanding nor from the
concept from which the Roman Catholic understanding is
framed. The Adventist view sprang forth from the
theological considerations among themselves with the Bible
as sole authority.
Another variation is that of the relationship of
the Son to the Father. Both understanding consider the
father-son relationship. However, the Roman Catholic
consideration is that this relationship makes up the
Trinity. The Son experiences eternal generation and
contributes to the formation of Trinity. The Seventh-day
Adventist view, on the other hand, sees this father-son
relationship only in the plan of salvation and not in the
formation of the Godhead.
The last dissimilarity lies on the procession of
the Holy Spirit. The Roman Catholic view defends that the
Holy Spirit is the result of the activity between the
Father and the Son. Hence the Holy Spirit is proceeding
from the Father and Son by spiration. This procession of

the Spirit makes the Trinity complete. Inversely, the
Seventh-day Adventist theology views that the Spirit is
self-existent and is not generated to complete the Trinity.
With the Father and Son, the Holy Spirit existed eternally.
The historical procession of the Spirit from both the
Father and the Son occurred only in Pentecost.
The study is further conclusive that views on
Trinity will affect theological points which include,
first, the Sons redemptive act at the cross of Calvary and
the validity of the sacrifice. If the Son is placed on a
subordinate position, or viewing Him as a God whose
existence is only derived, He would not avail redemption
for humanity and the sacrifice would be vain. Secondly, if
the existence of the Son and the Holy Spirit is derived,
then there is an inherent subordination and there is only
one truly God. This the interpersonal and relational
character of God welcoming humanity into the relationship
would be undervalued. However, if there exist one God in
three persons, this interpersonal and relational character
of God edified. Lastly, there would be improvement on a
Christians understanding of prayers offered to the Deity
for praise and thanksgiving, care, blessings, confession,
enlightenment, empowerment, and spiritual growth. Prayers
of confession and pleading for intercession are rightly

directed to the divine Son and prayers for enlightenment,
empowerment and spiritual growth are suitably focused to
the Holy Spirit, as well as praise and thanksgiving and
fatherly care towards the Father.

EXTENDED LIST OF REFERENCES
Bromiley, Geoffrey W. Historical Theology: An

Introduction. Michigan: William B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 1978.
Burt, Merlin D. History of Seventh-day Adventist Views on
the Trinity, Journal of the Adventist Theological
Society 17/1 (Spring 2006): 125-139.
Canale, Fernando L. Doctrine of God. Handbook of Seventh-

day Adventist Theology. Edited by Raoul Dederen.
Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary Reference
Series. Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing
Association, 2000.
Christensen, Otto H. Getting Acquainted With God.
Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1970.
Collins, Paul M. The Trinity: A Guide for the Perplexed.
NY: T & T Clark, 2008.
Dewan, Wilfred F. Trinity. The Catholic Encyclopedia for
School and Home. 1965. 11:69-73.
Forget, J. Holy Ghost, The Catholic Encyclopedia (New
York: Robert Appleton Company, 1910.
Fortin Denis. God, the Trinity, and Adventism: An
Introduction to the Issues, Journal of the Adventist
Theological Society 17/1 (Spring 2006): 4-10.
Gane, Erwin R. "The Arian or Anti-Trinitarian Views

Presented in Seventh-day Adventist Literature and the
Ellen G. White Answer." M.A. thesis, Andrews
University, 1963.
Geisler, Norman L. Systematic Theology. 3 vols.
Bloomington, MN: Bethany House Publishers, 2003.
General Conference, Ministerial Association. Seventh-day
Adventists Believe: A Biblical Exposition of
Fundamental Doctrines, 2nd ed. Silver Spring, MD:
Seventh-day Adventists, 2005.
Gibbons, James Cardinal. The Faith of Our Fathers. 110th
ed. New York: P.J. Kennedy & Sons.
Greenewald, G.M. Spiration, New Catholic Encyclopedia.
Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America,
1967.
Heick, Otto W. A History of Christian Thought. 2 vols.
Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1965.
Horn, Siegfried H. Seventh-day Adventist Bible Dictionary.
Rev. ed., Edited by Don F. Neufeld. Commentary
Reference Series, vol. 8. Washington, DC: Review &
Herald, 1979. S.v. God.
Kelly, J.N.D. Early Christian Doctrines. London: Adam &
Charles Black, 1968.
Kurian, Thomas. Tritheism. Nelsons Dictionary of
Christianity. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2005.
Lockyer, Herbert Sr., ed. Illustrated Dictionary of the
Bible. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1986.
S.v. Doctrine, Trinity.
Mc Govern, L.J. Filiation, New Catholic Encyclopedia.

1967.
Mc Govern, L.J. Trinitarian Procession, New Catholic
Encyclopedia. Washington, DC: The Catholic University
of America, 1967.
McBrien, Richard P. Catholicism: Study Edition. NY: Harper
& Row, 1981.
McBrien, Richard P. Handbook of Catholic Theology. Edited
by Wolfgang Beinert and Francis Schssler Fiorenza.
NY: Crossroad Publishing Company, 1981.
Moltmann, Jrgen. The Trinity and the Kingdom: The Doctrine
of God. MN: Fortress Press, 1993.
Moon, Jerry. The Adventist Trinity Debate Part 1:
Historical Overview. Andrews University Seminary
Studies 41 (2003): 113-129.
Neuner, Josef, and Heinrich Roos. The Teaching of the

Catholic Church. Cork: The Mercier Press, 1967.
Our Sunday Visitor. The Catholic Sourcebook. Indiana: Our
Sunday Visitor Curriculum Division, Our Sunday
Visitor, Inc., 2008.
Packer, James I. Orthodoxy. Evangelical Dictionary of
Theology. Edited by Walter A. Elwell. Grand Rapids,
Michigan: Baker Book House, 1984. 1:808.
Peter, C.J. Generation of the Word, New Catholic
Encyclopedia. Washington, DC: The Catholic University
of America, 1967.
Pfandl, Gerhard. The Doctrine of the Trinity among
Theological Society 17/1 (Spring 2006): 160-179.
Rahner, Karl. The Trinity. London: Burns & Oates, 2001.

Reid, George W., ed., Handbook of Seventh-day Adventist
Theology. MD: Review and Herald Publishing
Association, 2000.
Reymond, Robert L. A New Systematic Theology of the
Christian Faith. 2nd ed. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson
Publishers, 1998.
Richard, R.L. Holy Trinity. New Catholic Encyclopedia.
1967.
Schaff, Philip. Creeds of the Christendom. [e-Sword Version
10.2.1 CD-ROM] Franklin, TN: Rick Meyers, 2000-2013.
Schaff, Philip. History of the Christian Church. [e-Sword
Version 10.2.1 CD-ROM] Franklin, TN: Rick Meyers,
2000-2013.
Schwarz, Richard W., and Floyd Greenleaf. Light Bearers: A
History of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Idaho:
Pacific Press Publishing Association, 2000.
Shelley, Bruce L. Church History in Plain Language. 2nd ed.
Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1995.
Spalding, Arthur W. Origin and History of Seventh-day
Adventists. 4 vols. D.C.: Review and Herald Publishing
Association, 1961.
Toon, Peter. Yesterday, Today, and Forever: Jesus Christ
and the Holy Trinity in the Teaching of the Seven
Ecumenical Councils. Swedesboro, NJ: Preservation
Press, 1996.
United States Catholic Conference, Catechism of the
Catholic Church. USA: Libreria Editrice Vaticana,
1997.
Waggoner, E.J. Christ and His Righteousness. Oakland, CA:
Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1890.
Whidden, Woodrow W., Jerry Moon, and John W. Reeve. The
Trinity: Understanding Gods Love, His Plan of
Salvation, and Christian Relationships. Hagerstown,
MD: Review and Herald, 2002.
White, James R. The Forgotten Trinity. Minnesota: Bethany
House Publishers, 1998.
Wilcox, F.M. The Message for Today. Review and Herald,
Oct. 9, 1913.
Year Book of the Seventh-day Adventist Denomination.
Prepared by H.E. Rogers. Washington, DC: Review and
Herald, 1931.

Trinity of The Seventh-Day Adventists and The Roman Catholic Churches Compared

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Trinity of The Seventh-Day Adventists and The Roman Catholic Churches Compared

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Mountain View College

A COMPARISON OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC

AND THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST TRINITARIAN VIEWS

Presented in Partial Fulfilment

of the Requirements for the Course

Research Methods in Theology

Statement of the Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

II. BIBLICAL TRINITY

Godhead: One yet Three. . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

III. TRINITARIAN VIEWS AND THEIR DEVELOPMENT

Roman Catholic Doctrine of Trinity . . . . . . 21

IV. EVALUATION AND THEOLOGICAL IMPLICATION

Variation on Doctrine Development . . . . . . . 42

V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

A great and interesting field of study is that of

doctrines. Doctrine is defined as a body of beliefs about

God, man, Christ, the church, and other related concepts

considered authoritative and thus worthy of acceptance by

all members of the community of faith.1 God is defined by

the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Dictionary in three areas

namely philosophy, religion, and religious philosophy. The

first pronounces that God equates with first cause,

natural law, cosmic force, or ultimate reality. The

second explains that God has a personality and describes

Him as creator, the One who sustains, lawgiver, judge,

ruler, and father according to the Bible. The latter

describes God as omnipotent, omniscient, and

1Herbert Lockyer, Sr., ed., Illustrated Dictionary

Church History in Plain Language that there is a most

distinctive comment Christians can say about God. It is

that God is three persons.3 This is affirmed by Lockyer in

the dictionary of which he is the editor as it defines

trinity as the coexistence of the Father, the Son, and the

Holy Spirit in the unity of the Godhead (divine nature or

essence). It continues to say that the doctrine of trinity

there are three distinct persons.4

Since the scope of this study involves the

understanding of the Roman Catholic Church and the Seventh-

day Adventist Church, it is fit to note their official

statement on the Godhead. The Roman Catholic Church has it

that they believe in one God in three persons.5 The

statement of fundamental beliefs of the Seventh -day

Adventist Church states that There is one God: Father,

Godhead is a unity of three co-eternal Persons.6

Pfandl underscores the Adventist View with the

following statement: This has not always been so.7 The

earliest Seventh-day Adventists were not united in being

Trinitarian during the formative years of the Church.8

Regarding the Doctrine of Trinity, Denis Fortin wrote in

his paper that it is now universally recognized and

accepted that many of the early pioneers of the Seventh-day

Adventist Church were even anti-Trinitarian.9 They were not

really united in their stand on the Doctrine of Trinity.

6General Conference, Ministerial Association,

of the development of Adventist biblical theology,10 the

church reshaped its understanding of the Godhead. They

moved toward a traditional Trinitarian view.11 Burt, in

his History of Seventh-day Adventist Views on the Trinity,

mentions that Wilcox and some others viewed this

traditional view as an orthodox12 view on Trinity.13

Some Adventist authors cited by Gerhard Pfandl are

making reference to the Trinitarian understanding of the

Seventh-day Adventist Church at present as the Roman