Speaking of “God in personality”, I think its important to qualify the word, “personality”.

The word “personality” has a range of meaning. In contemporary English “personality” primarily refers to the combination of traits, behaviors, emotions, and other personal characteristics that make an individual unique and distinguishable from others (e.g., “She has a bubbly personality” or “introverted vs. extroverted personality”). This usage is largely descriptive and psychological, focusing on observable or internal qualities like temperament, quirks, or social appeal. It does not inherently denote separate existence or identity.

In describing God and Christ’s personality, Ellen G. White’s usage however employs “personality” almost interchangeably with “person” or “individuality” to mean: Distinct personal identity or separate personal existence (a unique “personage” or being capable of relational interaction) wherein “personality” affirmed God (and Christ) as tangible, personal beings with form and individuality, opposing pantheistic or impersonal views of God as diffused essence pervading all nature.

Based on the provided quotations from Ellen G. White, her use of the term “personality” in describing God (the Father) and Christ (the Son) emphasizes their distinct, individual existences as separate Beings or “personages,” even while affirming their profound unity in other aspects. For example, take a look at the following statements (numbered in brackets for referencing purposes):

[1] “The Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of the Father, IS TRULY GOD in infinity, BUT NOT IN PERSONALITY.” — (E.G. White, MS116, December 19, 1905) (emphasis in caps added throughout)

[2] “Christ IS ONE with the Father, but Christ and God are TWO distinct personages. Read the prayer of Christ in the seventeenth chapter of John, and you will find this point clearly brought out. How earnestly the Saviour prayed THAT HIS DISCIPLES MIGHT BE ONE WITH HIM AS HE IS ONE WITH THE FATHER. But the unity that is to exist between Christ and His followers DOES NOT DESTROY THE PERSONALITY of either. They are to be one with Him AS He is one with the Father.” (The Review and Herald, June 1, 1905)

[3] “The burden of that prayer was that His disciples might be one AS He was one with the Father; the oneness so close that, ALTHOUGH TWO DISTINCT BEINGS, THERE WAS PERFECT UNITY OF SPIRIT, PURPOSE, AND ACTION. THE MIND OF THE FATHER WAS THE MIND OF THE SON.” {Lt1-1882.}

[4] “The Scriptures clearly indicate the relation between God and Christ, and they bring to view as clearly the personality and individuality of each…. The personality of the Father and the Son, also the unity that exists between Them, are presented in the seventeenth chapter of John, in the prayer of Christ for His disciples… The unity that exists between Christ and His disciples does not destroy the personality of either. THEY ARE ONE IN PURPOSE, IN MIND, IN CHARACTER, BUT NOT IN PERSON. It is thus that God and Christ are one.” (The Ministry of Healing, p. 421, 422)

[5] “Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord. (THERE ARE THE TWO PERSONALITIES, but GOD AND CHRIST ARE ONE IN ‘PERFECTION OF CHARACTER’).” (Ms116-1905.15)

[6] “My brethren and sisters, study the thirteenth, fourteenth, fifteenth, sixteenth, and seventeenth chapters of John. The words of these chapters explain themselves. “This is life eternal,” Christ declared, “that they might know Thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom Thou hast sent.” [John 17:3.] In these words the personality of God and of His Son is clearly spoken of. The personality of the one does not do away with the necessity for the personality of the other.” {Lt 232, 1903, par. 48}

In the first quote, Christ is described as “TRULY GOD in infinity, BUT NOT IN PERSONALITY.” This suggests Christ shares the Father’s infinite divine nature (essence or divinity) but differs in “personality,” meaning He is not the same personal Being as the Father. “Personality” here denotes a distinct personal form or existence within the Godhead, affirming full divinity without implying identical personhood. The reference to John 17 (2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 6th statements) reinforces this: Christ’s prayer for unity among disciples mirrors the Father-Son relationship—harmonious and aligned, yet without erasing individual personalities.

White clarifies that God and Christ are “one” in specific ways—”IN PURPOSE, IN MIND, IN CHARACTER” (3rd, 4th and 5th statement)—but explicitly “NOT IN PERSON” or in personality. This shows “personality” as the boundary that preserves separation, preventing unity from becoming a fusion of identities highlighting that unity that the Father has with His Son does not necessarily merge or eliminate these distinctions.

Ellen G. White’s use of “personality” in describing God the Father and Christ, therefore, is distinctly ontological, differing markedly from the conventional modern understanding of the word.

In her quotes, she emphasizes that unity between Father and Son (or believers and Christ) does not erase separate personalities—i.e., they remain two distinct entities, not merged into one person.

Overall, White’s view of God’s “personality” underscores a relational dynamic in the Godhead where unity is spiritual and functional (e.g., shared will and character) rather than a literal merging of persons. This protects against views that might see God and Christ as a single person.

The difficulty with the Trinity (at least the SDA version-e.g., “One God: unity of three co-eternal persons” and describing a group of multiple Persons-Father, Son, Holy Spirit-using singular pronouns such as He, Him, His), is that it conflates the personality of God with the nature of God (the Godhead or divinity), wherein the doctrine obfuscates the unity of function (PURPOSE, IN MIND, IN CHARACTER) and nature with unity of identity. In other words, just because each Persons of the Godhead are united in purpose or that they are God “in nature” does not necessarily make all Persons involved into a single being or a single identity. Consequently, the doctrine also prevents God the Father’s unique identity from being recognized as the “only true God” of Scripture (John 17:3) in an exclusive, quantitative sense, while still fully affirming the divinity of Christ as well as the functional unity between Them. Instead, it mistakenly defines the “one God” of the Bible only as a “unity of three coeternal Persons.”

The Bible consistently presents “God” as a uniquely singular and personal Being, primarily referring to God the Father. Yet this raises a puzzling question, because Scripture also ascribes this divine identity to more than one Person. How can there be only one God while more than one Person is described as God in the Bible? Does the doctrine of the Trinity offer the most coherent explanation? Let’s explore this further.

In the Bible God is always addressed using singular personal pronouns (You).

God is always spoken of using singular personal pronouns (He, His, Him).

God, almost always speaks using singular personal pronouns except the four “us texts” in which God is including others in an action. Following are the 4 “us” texts:

• Gen 1:26 “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness”
• Genesis 3:22 “Then the LORD God said, Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil…”
• Gen 11:7 “Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language…”
• Isa 6:8 “voice of the Lord, saying, Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?”

The four “us texts” are generally used by trinitarians to infer that the plural languages shown in these aforementioned texts are referring to multiple divine Persons conversing amongst themselves but the texts themselves do not necessarily offer that conclusion. Some even have suggested that the Hebrew word for God-Elohim means God in plurality. To learn more about Elohim click HERE

The expressions such as ‘us’ does not necessarily indicate that there is a triune God but instead, it could also be that God, namely the Father, is speaking of Himself in the plural when He is addressing another person, namely His Son or the angels or other heavenly hosts in His heavenly council, or as a form of majestic plural.” In fact, we may be able to find some evidences in which God the Father is speaking with other individuals including His Son and Angels:

Let’s consider the following statements by Ellen White:

“And God said, Let us make man in our own image, after our likeness.” Whom did He address?—The Lord Jesus Christ” {Ms43-1906.6}

“But when God said to His Son, “Let us make man in our image,” Satan was jealous of Jesus.” {EW 145.1}

“They had built their tower to a lofty height, when the Lord sent two angels to confound them…the angels confounded their language”  {ST March 20, 1879, par. 19}

“Angels were sent to bring to naught the purpose of the builders.” {PP 119.2}

It is quite reasonable to suggest therefore that “us” in Genesis 11:7 may refer to God speaking to the angels for the reason that it was the very angels that went down to confound the language.

In addition, 1 Kings 22:19-22 also illustrates how God is conversing with heavenly hosts to determine the future of King Ahab. “I saw the LORD sitting on His throne, and all the host of heaven standing by Him… He said, ‘Who will entice Ahab…?’”

Again, in Job 1:6–12 “Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came among them.”

Here we are presented with God interacting with angels and other heavenly hosts and even Satan in a council-like setting, showing that plural language will likely occur in context.

Moving on,

Again, when the Bible speaks of “God”, it primarily speaks of God, not as a theological concept as in Trinity-made up of 3 gods, but rather as a singular, personal Being who is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. Below are some examples:

Matthew 16:16 “And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.”

“the living God” is one singular Person, primarily referring to the Father and “Christ” is the Son of that “living God”.

John 1:18“No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.”

“God” in this passage refers to the “Father” only. Jesus’ unique position with the Father (“which is in the bosom of the Father”), distinguishes Him from any created being in that Jesus is the One Who knows and has seen God and is therefore qualified to declare Who He is.

John 3:16 “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”

The God Who “so loved the world” is the Father of Jesus who sent His “only begotten Son” into this world.

John 14:1 “Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me.”

Jesus distinguishes “God” in an exclusive sense and further distinguishes Himself from this “God” by stating, “believe also in me”. If “God” in this passage included Jesus, he wouldn’t have added “believe also in me”

*John 17:1, 3 “Father…And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the ONLY TRUE GOD, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

According to Jesus, “The only true God,” refers to the Father exclusively and Jesus did not include Himself as being part of that distinction. Only true God and Jesus the one who was sent by the “only true God” is distinguished as two separate individuals. This is emphasized by the use of the word “and” in “the only true God AND Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent”

Consider the following statements:

“The world is not improving. Evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived. By rejecting the SON OF GOD, THE PERSONIFICATION OF THE ONLY TRUE GOD, who possessed goodness, mercy, and untiring love, whose heart was ever touched with human woe, and choosing a murderer[Barabbas] in his stead, the Jews showed what human nature can and will do when the restraining power of the Spirit of God is removed, and men are under the control of the apostate. Those who choose Satan as their ruler will reveal the spirit of their chosen master.” {RH January 30, 1900, Art. A, par. 6}

“Thousands have a false conception of God and His attributes…. GOD IS A GOD OF TRUTH. Justice and mercy are the attributes of His throne. He is a God of love, of pity and tender compassion. THUS HE IS REPRESENTED IN HIS SON, OUR SAVIOUR. He is a God of patience and long-suffering. IF SUCH IS THE BEING WHOM WE ADORE AND TO WHOSE CHARACTER WE ARE SEEKING TO ASSIMILATE, WE ARE WORSHIPING THE TRUE GOD.” {OFC 204}

Moving on,

*Acts 3:13, 26 “The GOD OF ABRAHAM, and of ISSAC, and of JACOB, THE GOD OF OUR FATHERS, HATH GLORIFIED HIS SON JESUS; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him go.”

According to the above passage, God of Abraham, and of Issac, and of Jacob is not a trinitarian God made up of 3 Persons but rather a single Being, namely the Father, who has a Son named Jesus. Peter apparently declared this after he healed the lame man at the temple gate. Does this passage make any sense if “God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, and the God of our fathers” is a God of Trinity, made up of Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost? Then according to this passage, that would make the Son [Jesus] and the Holy Spirit to have a son who is also Jesus. It seems pretty obvious that God mentioned here refers to the Father only. Note: there is no mention of the Holy Spirit being the father of Jesus nor having a son any where in Scripture. 

Roman 5:1 “Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:”

Note: The way that we can have peace with God is through our Lord Jesus Christ. God and Jesus, therefore are two distinctly separate and different Persons.

*Romans 15:6“That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

To the Romans, Paul identifies for us that “God” is the “Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

*1 Corinthians 8:4-7 “ . . . For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) BUT TO US THERE IS BUT ONE GOD, THE FATHER, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.  Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge: . . .”

Again, Paul, in his letter to the Corinthians, explicitly stated that there is one God, and qualifies who this one God is, “THE FATHER.” Thus, according to Paul “one God” is not a unity of three separate individual Persons of God nor is “one God” a single God Being composed of three undivided, consubstantial persons. Paul, in an unambiguous manner distinguishes “one God” as the Father.

“Christ is the One THROUGH WHOM God has AT ALL TIMES revealed Himself to man. “BUT TO US THERE IS BUT ONE GOD, THE FATHER, of whom are all things, and we in Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by Him.” 1 Corinthians 8:6. “This is he [Moses], that was in the church in the wilderness with the Angel which spake to him in the Mount Sinai, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us.” Acts 7:38. This Angel was the Angel of God’s presence (Isaiah 63:9), the Angel in whom was the name of the great Jehovah (Exodus 23:20-23). THE EXPRESSION CAN REFER TO NO OTHER THAN THE SON OF GOD.” {PP 761.4}

1Corinthian 11:3 “But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.”

Note: In this passage, Christ has another Person as a head over Him. Head of Christ is God (the Father). God, in this passage clearly refers to someone other than Christ.

1 Corinthians 15: 24-28 “Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. And when all things shall be subdued unto him, THEN SHALL THE SON ALSO HIMSELF BE SUBJECT UNTO HIM that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

Note: Here we see that it is God (the Father) who put all things under Christ, but that He (Father) Himself is not subject to Christ. Rather, even though Christ rules over all, He is still subject to the Father.

2 Corinthians 1:3 “Blessed be God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies, and the God of all comfort.”

2 Corinthians 11:31 “The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ…”

Note: God is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ; if “God” in these noted verses refer to a unity of 3 co-eternal persons, then that would make Jesus a father of Himself.

*Gal 3:20 “Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, BUT GOD IS ONE.”

Ephesians 1:3 “… the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ…”

Ephesians 3:14 “For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, 15 Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named, 16 That he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man;”

*Ephesians 4:6 “One God and Father of all…who is above all, and through all, and in you all.”

*1 Thessalonians 1:9, 10 “For they themselves shew of us what manner of entering in we had unto you, and how ye turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God; AND TO WAIT FOR HIS SON FROM HEAVEN, whom he [Father] raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come.”

Note: The Thessalonians turned from their idol worship to worship God, also named here “the living and true God.” And they were waiting for His Son. The living and true God has a Son. This means the living and true God is the Father of His Son. God is one person, not three. He is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. And Christ is not the true and living God (in personality) but the Son of the true and living God.

*1 Timothy 2:5 “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;”

Note: Paul taught that there is only one God and Jesus is the only mediator between us and that one God. If Jesus is included in the “one God,” then that would make Jesus a mediator of Himself and men. This is clearly not the case.

*James 2:19 “Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.”

“The statement is made that the devil believed and trembled. ‘WHILE HE WAS IN HEAVEN, HE BELIEVED THAT CHRIST WAS THE SON OF GOD’, and when upon this earth he was in conflict with Him here on the field of battle.” {CTr 220.3}

Note: James taught that there is only one God and says even the devils believe this and tremble! Moreover, in reference to this very passage, the inspired Testimony tells us that the devils also believes that Christ is the Son of that one God.

1 Peter 1:3 “… the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ…”

When we get to heaven, who are we going to serve?

Revelation 22:3“And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him.”

Note: the “God” is clearly distinguished here as the Father, who is on the throne and the Lamb representing Christ.

(See Mt 16:16; John 1:18; John 3:16; John 14:1; John 17:3; Acts 3:13, 26; Rom. 5:1; Rom. 15:6; 1 Cor. 3:23; 1 Cor. 8:6; 1 Cor. 11:3; 1 Cor. 15:24-28; 2 Cor. 1:3; Gal 3:20; Eph 1:3, 3:14, 4:6; 1 Thess 1:9,10; Tim 2:5; James 2:19; 1 Pet 1:3; 1 John 4:8-11; Rev 22:3)

God Is Love-1 John 4

The Bible declares in 1 John 4:8 and verses 16 through 19 that God is love—not merely that God loves, but that love is His very essence and nature.

Here’s one inspired statement echoing 1 John 4: “God is love; God is, in Himself, in His essence, love.”— Testimonies to Ministers (TM 265.1)

Scripture expands this in 1 John 4:8-11 (KJV):

1John 4:8-11 “He that loveth not knoweth not God; for GOD IS LOVE. In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him. HEREIN IS LOVE, NOT THAT WE LOVED GOD, BUT THAT HE LOVED US, AND SENT HIS SON TO BE THE PROPITIATION FOR OUR SIN. Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another.”

And further in 1 John 4:16-19:

“And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him. Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: because as he is, so are we in this world. There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love. We love him, because he first loved us.”

These passages use singular personal pronouns (“He,” “Him”) to describe the God whose essence is love. The immediate context identifies this God as the One who sent His only begotten Son as the propitiation for our sins (1 John 4:9-10).

Question: Who is this God who first loved us and is declared to be “love”? Is this a triune God? And how is this love demonstrated?

John clarifies: The love of God is manifested because God sent His only begotten Son into the world so we might live through Him. True love is defined not by our initiative toward God, but by His initiative toward us—sending His Son to atone for our sins. Therefore, we ought to love one another in response.

In this context, the “God” declared to be love is presented as distinguished from the Son He sent, with the Father’s initiating this divine love as the central focus. The sending of the Son vividly reveals the self-giving, sacrificial nature of this divine love. The passage emphasizes the Father as the primary source of this love, demonstrated supremely through the gift of His Son for humanity’s redemption.

This distinction prompts important theological reflection on the identity of this one God who is love. While some interpret these verses as reflecting the eternal, relational love shared within the Godhead (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit), these verses actually highlight Father’s unique role—using singular pronouns and portraying Him as the One who is love wherein that love is expressed by sending a distinct Son. Accordingly, rightly knowing this God as the source of sacrificial love—manifested through His Son—draws us into a transformative relationship with Him, freeing us from fear and empowering us to love others. The concept of a triune God, therefore, cannot meet these words in the way John has described it.

One God in Personality

God the Father being the one true God of the Bible in an exclusive or quantitative sense does not negate the fact that the Son of God is also God in a qualitative sense.

Whenever a non-trinitarian would assert that the title of the “one true God of the Bible” belongs exclusive to God the Father, the immediate push back is, “Are you saying that Jesus is not God?” “What about the Holy Spirit?”

This is an understandable response, for clearly, there is no denying that Jesus is “God” in a qualitative sense in that He is truly a divine Being equal to His Father’s divine nature. 

So then, how can there be only one God of the Bible and that one God is exclusively referring to the Father and not in an inclusive combination of both the Father and the Son or even the Holy Spirit? Well, the following passages may shed some light.

Genesis 1:27 “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.”

We are told that “God created man in HIS own image” and that “in the image of God created he him” (referring to Adam)

Hence, we can say that there was ONE quantitative “Adam” in the exclusive sense. This Adam was the first man God created, Eve’s husband, the progenitor of the human race, whereby the name or the title belongs to him exclusively.

So, if the question is asked, “how many Adams are in the Bible?” We would aptly reply, “only one,” (numerically) if we are referring to Eve’s husband or the first man that God ever created. 

However, in Genesis 5:2, we read, “Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called THEIR NAME ADAM, in the day when THEY were created”

Did you catch that? Adam and Eve together were called “Adam.” It says, “called THEIR name Adam” [singular], NOT “Adams.” The word “Adam” in this sense means “Adam-kind” or we would say “mankind.” Eve therefore is Adam in the qualitative sense in that her substance/nature or the “material” is the same as her husband-Adam. In other words, Eve is a human being, not unlike her husband, Adam is a human being. That being said, Eve’s identity as a separate individual should not be confused with Adam’s (her husband) identity. They are two distinct and separate individuals or two entirely different personalities.

Keep in mind, Gen 5:2 says, “called THEIR name Adam [singular], NOT “Adams.” Thus, in the qualitative sense there is just ONE “Adam-kind” or one man-kind but the posterity of Adam is now made up of billions of people at the present moment.

*In a similar sense, there are two ways we can view “one God” of the Bible: in personality (quantitatively) or in nature (qualitatively).

The term “God” functions much like the name “Adam” in Scripture—it can denote a specific individual or refer to the shared nature of those described. The Father is uniquely “God” in personality and identity, the one supreme Being. In contrast, Jesus Christ, as the Son of God, possesses the same divine nature fully (“God” in essence) while remaining distinct in personality as the Son.

Just as there is one human-kind (mankind), shared by Adam and Eve without merging them into a single person, so there is one God-kind (divinity) shared by the Father and His Son without merging them into a single triune “God”. The fact that Adam and Eve both belong to humanity does not make them one individual or one identity; similarly, the fact that both Father and Son are divine in nature does not make Them into one God in identity.

Thus, we can rightly identify the Father as the one true God of the Bible—the supreme source and personality—without denying that His only begotten Son also fully partakes of the divine nature and may therefore be called God in that sense. Distinguishing between personality and nature preserves both the oneness of persons of the Godhead (divinity) and the real, distinct identity of both the Father and the Son.

For example, when we say “God,” as in, “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son” (John 3:16), “God” in this sense should only refer to the Father exclusively and not to the Son nor to the idea of a triune God. If “God” in John 3:16 is referring to a god of Trinity, the passage would appear absurd, for it would read, “For God (the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit) so loved the world, that They gave Their only begotten Son”. In this scenario, it would make all three Persons into a God and would also make the Son Himself into the very God who had a Son to give and basically gave Himself as the only begotten Son, etc. It would also make the Holy Spirit to have a Son, etc. which would also make Him a Father of Jesus, etc.

Similarly, while Adam (Eve’s husband) is “Adam” in personality, Eve is “Adam” qualitatively-in nature… Eve is NOT Adam in personality. That is to say, if they are in a room together, and if you are specifically referring to Adam (Eve’s husband), it would be entirely correct to say that there is only one Adam in the room. More importantly, in saying that there is only one Adam (Eve’s husband), it should not in any way negate the fact that Eve is also truly “Adam” (mankind) but in the qualitative sense.

Again, we are simply distinguishing “Adam” as an individual who happens to be the husband of Eve and his name/title also happens to be the same word used to describe his nature-“Adam.”

Likewise, God the Father can rightly be identified as the “one God” of the Bible in the quantitative or exclusive sense. This refers to the Father’s personhood—a singular, personal Being. Importantly, this in no way denies the Son’s right to be called God, whether by inheritance of the Father’s name (Heb. 1:4, 8) or by His full and equal participation in the divine nature in the qualitative sense.

The challenge with the Trinitarian doctrine is that it conflates God’s personality (His identity as a personal Being) with His nature (His divine substance—divinity or Godhead). As a result, the doctrine fails to acknowledge the Father as the “one God” of Scripture in the exclusive sense—analogous to how Adam (Eve’s husband) is recognized in the exclusive sense.

For example, we would never define the word “Adam” (Eve’s husband) only as a unity of two persons—Adam and Eve—simply because both are called “Adam” (Gen. 5:2) and share the same human nature. Doing so would erase the personal identity of Adam as a distinct individual. Though Eve is equally “Adam”-human being, she is not Adam in personality.

Likewise, it is a serious error to define the one God of the Bible—explicitly identified as the Father of Jesus Christ—solely as a composite unity of three Persons. Such an approach overlooks Scripture’s clear and consistent portrayal of the Father as the one true God in a uniquely personal and exclusive sense. The Trinitarian redefinition risks diminishing the Father’s distinct personhood and effectively depriving His unique individual identity as the supreme, singular source of all—the one true God whom Jesus Himself addressed and revealed.

Again, What is evident in Scriptures is that when it refers to God being “one,” it is primarily referring to the exclusive identity or the personality of God the Father; not a union of more than one God. 

To illustrate this further let’s take a look at John 1:1

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”

1. “THE WORD WAS WITH GOD”

Greek: ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν

• ὁ λόγος = the Word
• ἦν = was
• πρὸς = literally toward, implying relationship or face-to-face orientation
• τὸν θεόν = “the God” (with the definite article)

Meaning:

• This phrase grammatically signals two distinct entities.
• The article (τὸν) marks “God” here as a specific person, not just the divine nature in general.
• πρὸς indicates relationship, communion, or intimate association.
• So this clause illustrates distinction:
• The Word is not the same person as “the God” He is with.

2. “THE WORD WAS GOD”

Greek: θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος

• θεός (God) appears WITHOUT the article (anarthrous).
• θεὸς appears before the verb for emphasis.

Why no article?

Greek grammar often uses an anarthrous noun to describe a quality, not to introduce a second separate being.

If John wrote:

ὁ λόγος ἦν ὁ θεός
“the Word was the God,” that would equate the Word with the Father — collapsing distinction. John avoids modalism by not writing it that way.

But if John wanted to say the Word was a god in the sense of one lesser deity alongside Jehovah (as the NWT does), Greek normally would use:

ὁ λόγος ἦν θεός τις
“the Word was a certain god,”

or

ὁ λόγος ἦν ἕτερος θεός
“the Word was another god.”

He does not use those forms.

So what does the anarthrous “θεὸς” mean here?

It signals quality or essence:

• “the Word was divine”
• “the Word has the nature of God”
• “what God was, the Word also was”
• This keeps distinction from the Father but unity of nature

Thus, the God that the “Word” was with is a different Person-God the Father. The Word that was “God” is Jesus who has the same quality of nature as God the Father, who is “the God”

To illustrate this idea further, now let’s substitute Eve for “the Word” and Adam for “God.”

With the words inserted, the passage would read,

“In the beginning was Eve, and Eve was with [the] Adam [first male, Eve’s husband], and Eve was Adam [a human being or a mankind].”

Hope you are seeing it! Eve, who was “with [the] Adam” (first male, Eve’s husband) should not be confused with Eve, who “was Adam” (mankind). There is a distinction in Personality but unity in nature.

Similarly, the Word who was “with [the] God” (referring to the Father in an exclusive/quantitative sense) should not be confused with the Word who “was God” (referring to the Word/Son in a qualitative sense-a divine being who is ontologically equal with the Father.)

Again, consider the following statement:

“The Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of the Father, IS TRULY GOD in infinity, BUT NOT IN PERSONALITY.” — (E.G. White, MS116, December 19, 1905) (emphasis in caps added throughout)

Note: Jesus IS “TRULY God” (in nature) and yet he is NOT “God” (the Father) in personality; they are two separate individuals

“CHRIST WAS GOD ESSENTIALLY, AND IN THE HIGHEST SENSE. He was WITH God from all eternity, God over all, blessed forevermore.” —Review and Herald, April 5, 1906 par. 6

Note: Christ “WAS GOD essentially…” and yet He was also “WITH GOD.” Again, we are dealing with “personality” of God vs. the “nature” of God.

“The world is not improving. Evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived. By rejecting the SON OF GOD, THE PERSONIFICATION OF THE ONLY TRUE GOD, who possessed goodness, mercy, and untiring love, whose heart was ever touched with human woe, and choosing a murderer[Barabbas] in his stead, the Jews showed what human nature can and will do when the restraining power of the Spirit of God is removed, and men are under the control of the apostate. Those who choose Satan as their ruler will reveal the spirit of their chosen master.” {RH January 30, 1900, Art. A, par. 6}

“The world that could reject the divine, PERSONIFICATION OF THE INFINITE GOD, are repeating the same history as transpired when Jesus was in the world, refusing Jesus but choosing Barabbas.” {Lt93-1893.}

Note: Jesus is the personification of His Father-the only true God/infinite God but He is not the same God in personality.

“After the fall, Christ became Adam’s instructor. HE ACTED IN GOD’S STEAD toward humanity, saving the race from immediate death. He took upon Him the work of MEDIATOR BETWEEN GOD AND MAN.” (Ellen G. White, Signs of the Times. 29th May 1901, ‘God’s purpose for us’, see also Letter 91 1900)

Note: Jesus “ACTED IN GOD’S STEAD;” which is to say, Jesus assumed the role of His Father (who is the only true God in the quantitative sense) when it came to dealing with the human race. But that does not make the combination of Jesus and the Father, ”one God of the Bible.”

Conclusion:

Both Scripture and the writings of Ellen G. White carefully distinguish between God’s personality (His personal identity) and God’s nature (His divine essence). Confusing these two categories results in the common Trinitarian error. The John 1:1 statement that “the Word was with God” establishes personal distinction, while “the Word was God” describes shared divine nature, not shared personal identity.

Again, in describing God and Christ’s personality, Ellen G. White employs “personality” almost interchangeably with “person” or “individuality” to mean: Distinct personal identity or separate personal existence (a unique “personage” or being capable of relational interaction) wherein it affirms God (and Christ) as tangible, personal beings with form and individuality, occupying local space, opposing pantheistic or impersonal views of God as some kind of diffused essence pervading all nature.

This article further maintains that Scripture consistently identifies the Father as the “one God” of the Bible in an exclusive or quantitative sense, meaning a numerically singular personal Being. At the same time, Christ is affirmed as fully divine in a qualitative sense, sharing the Father’s infinite divine nature without sharing His personal identity. A wide range of noted biblical passages demonstrate that references to the “one God” point specifically to the Father, who has a Son, sends the Son, etc. and is clearly distinguished from Him in role and identity.

An analogy is drawn from Adam and Eve: Adam (Eve’s husband) is one person in a quantitative sense, yet both Adam and Eve are “Adam” qualitatively—that is, they are both human by nature.

“Adam” who is Eve’s husband, is Adam in personality as well as “Adam” (human) in nature.

Eve is “Adam” in nature but she is not “Adam” in personality.

In the same way,

God the Father is uniquely “God” both in personality (as the supreme personal Being) and in nature (possessing the fullness of divinity). In contrast, the Son is fully God in nature—sharing the same divine essence—yet distinct in personality as the begotten Son, not the “God” in personal identity.

Just as Scripture rightly speaks of “one Adam” (referring specifically to Eve’s husband as the original man) without in any way denying Eve’s full participation in human nature, so too the biblical declaration of “one God” primarily identifies the Father in His unique personal role as the source and sovereign. This in no way diminishes or invalidates the full divinity of His Son, Jesus Christ, who possesses the very nature of God.

Trinitarian theology mistakenly conflates unity of nature and purpose with personal identity, thereby obscuring the Father’s unique identity as the one God of the Bible.

Additional Notes