In the autumn of 1861, a small gathering in Battle Creek laid the groundwork for the first steps toward formal Adventist organization. Two pioneers—John N. Loughborough and James White—spoke forcefully against adopting a creed. Modern readers often quote only a fragment of White’s remarks (“making a creed is setting the stakes”) and conclude that he defined a creed as an unchangeable text. In fact, White agreed with Loughborough’s sharper point that a statement of beliefs becomes a creed the moment it is wielded as an authoritative test. His illustration about “barring up the way to all future advancement” was offered to show why human devised creeds are dangerous, not to define what a creed is.
Regarding creeds, John Loughborough had this to say:
“The first step of apostasy is to get up a creed, telling us what we shall believe. The second is, to make that creed a test of fellowship. The third is to try members by that creed. The fourth is to denounce as heretics those who do not believe that creed. And, fifth, to commence persecution against such.” {ARSH October 8, 1861, page 149.7}
James White responded:
“On the subject of creeds, I agree with Bro. Loughborough…. Let us suppose a case: we get up a creed… and say that we will believe the gifts too; but suppose the Lord, through the gifts, should give us some new light that did not harmonize with our creed—then, if we remain true to the gifts, it knocks our creed all over at once.” {ARSH October 8, 1861, page 149.9}
White’s reason for opposing creeds was their power to silence the prophetic voice. Whenever believers exalt a human document, subsequent revelations—whether from Scripture rightly understood or from the gift of prophecy—must fight their way past the printed fortress.
Why “immutability” fails as a definition
Creeds have, in fact, been revised whenever church authorities believed circumstances demanded it.
• The Nicene text of 325 was enlarged at Constantinople in 381 with whole articles on the Holy Spirit, the church, baptism, and eschatology (Niceno-Constantinopolitan_Creed - Wiki; First_Council_of_Constantinople - Wiki ).
• Presbyterians in the United States rewrote the Westminster Confession in 1903, adding new chapters and a conciliatory “Declaratory Statement” (Westminster_Confession_of_Faith - American_revision - Wiki).
• Southern Baptists overhauled their Baptist Faith and Message in 1963 and again in 2000—each time reshaping articles and inserting fresh material to face contemporary controversies (https://bfm.sbc.net).
Immutability is, therefore, not what makes a statement of beliefs a creed; authoritative enforcement is. On that point, Loughborough and White spoke with one voice.
The prophetic gift versus a modern creed
The clash foreseen by James White surfaced dramatically when Walter Martin interviewed Adventist Review editor William Johnsson on national television in 1985. Pressed to name Adventism’s doctrinal authority, Johnsson repeatedly appealed to the 27 (now 28) Fundamental Beliefs, even when confronted with direct Ellen White statements. The full program is available (start at 49:00) on the John Ankerberg Show archive: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DU-J9Frw1yA&t=2940s. James White’s prediction had come true: a printed statement was allowed to overrule the prophetic gift.
“Bible only” in theory—creed in practice
The preamble to the Fundamental Beliefs still assures readers that “Seventh-day Adventists accept the Bible as their only creed” (Official Fundamental Beliefs). Yet the 2022 Church Manual lists, as the very first ground for discipline, “Denial of faith in the fundamentals of the gospel and in the Fundamental Beliefs of the Church” (SDA Church Manual). Once members are tried by that standard, the statement functions exactly as Loughborough warned: definition, test, trial, denunciation, and—in some cases—exclusion.
Conclusion
History vindicates the pioneers. A creed is not merely an unalterable formula; it is any human statement elevated to police the boundaries of fellowship. By that measure, the 28 Fundamental Beliefs have already crossed the line from “descriptive” to “prescriptive.” If Seventh-day Adventists truly mean for the Bible to be their only creed, they must resist using any subordinate statement as a disciplinary litmus test. The remedy is not to redefine “creed” but to heed the united counsel of Loughborough and James White.
John Witcombe
pastorjcw@gmail.com