Maranathamedia.com

John MacArthur has been a popular author and speaker for the California-based Grace to You radio programs since 1969.  However, recently he has been featured throughout the blogosphere as a one-time proponent of the Incarnational Sonship of Christ. He first expressed his convictions on this issue in 1983 when he published his commentary on Hebrews. His intention, like that of Walter Martin, was to negate the force of Jehovah Witnesses’ argument for a Son of God created before his incarnation. Heavily influenced (if not pressured) by Martin to take the same position, the Seventh-day Adventist Church leaders who met with Martin and Barnhouse in the 1950s also adopted an incarnational Son of God.

But soon MacArthur was being criticized by those who championed Christ’s Eternal Sonship for attacking the deity of Christ and questioning His eternality.  For them, an Incarnational Sonship sounded too much like Unitarianism.

In 1991 he published a booklet entitled “The Sonship of Christ” in which he further defended his view that, while Christ existed prior to his incarnation as a divine being, he was the Word of God who became the Son of God when he was “born of a woman” in Bethlehem. He confessed that he held an “admittedly a minority opinion” on the topic, but didn’t consider it in any way “rank heresy.”

The differences between these two opposing views on the Sonship of Christ can be demonstrated in the following table:

But MacArthur was still zealously committed to “the biblical truth that Jesus is eternally God.” MacArthur is a trinitarian. It is interesting to hear him tell his own story:

My earlier position arose out of my study of Hebrews 1:5, which appears to speak of the Father's begetting the Son as an event that takes place at a point in time: "This day have I begotten thee"; "I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son" (emphasis added).
That verse presents some very difficult concepts.  “Begetting” normally speaks of a person's origin. Moreover, sons are generally subordinate to their fathers. I therefore found it difficult to see how an eternal Father-Son relationship could be compatible with perfect equality and eternality among the Persons of the Trinity. "Sonship," I concluded, bespeaks the place of voluntary submission to which Christ condescended at His incarnation (cf. Phil. 2:5-8; John 5:19).

My aim was to defend, not in any way to undermine, Christ's absolute deity and eternality. And I endeavored from the beginning to make that as clear as possible.

MacArthur was bound by his trinitarian theology to preserve absolute equality and absolute eternality among what he believed to be three co-equal, co-eternal members of a triune God.

However, with further Bible study, MacArthur changed his position shortly after 1998.

It is now my conviction that the begetting spoken of in Psalm 2 and Hebrews 1 is not an event that takes place in time. Even though at first glance Scripture seems to employ terminology with temporal overtones ("this day have I begotten thee"), the context of Psalm 2:7 seems clearly to be a reference to the eternal decree of God. It is reasonable to conclude that the begetting spoken of there is also something that pertains to eternity rather than a point in time. The temporal language should therefore be understood as figurative, not literal.

Rather than the “birth language” being understood as figurative—the norm within SDA theological circles—MacArthur was now convinced that it was the temporal language, “this day,” that was to be regarded as metaphoric.  The “begotten Son” was therefore literal, real, actual.  And there was a second reason for his conversion:

I am now convinced that the title "Son of God" when applied to Christ in Scripture always speaks of His essential deity and absolute equality with God, not His voluntary subordination. The Jewish leaders of Jesus' time understood this perfectly. John 5:18 says they sought the death penalty against Jesus, charging Him with blasphemy "because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God."

He discovered the biblical definition of divine equality in John 5:18.  And how did Christ say that God was his Father?  Verse 17: “Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.”  What did that have to do with making himself equal with God?  Jesus was using Creation language.

The Jewish leaders sought his death for breaking the Sabbath. But Jesus said that both he and his Father worked during the six days of creation.  “And on the seventh day God ended His work…He rested on the seventh day from all His work…And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it He had rested from all His work…” Genesis 2:2.  By describing his Father as the Creator who worked until the seventh day, and stating that he worked as well, he was identifying himself as the Son of the Creator. "The Father wrought by His Son in the creation of all heavenly beings." PP p. 34.

In that culture, a dignitary's adult son was deemed equal in stature and privilege with his father. The same deference demanded by a king was afforded to his adult son. The son was, after all, of the very same essence as his father, heir to all the father's rights and privileges—and therefore equal in every significant regard. So when Jesus was called "Son of God," it was understood categorically by all as a title of deity, making Him equal with God and (more significantly) of the same essence as the Father. That is precisely why the Jewish leaders regarded the title "Son of God" as high blasphemy.

MacArthur, like the “majority of Christian commentators throughout history”, realized that the Son coming from the Father, as the Nicene Creed had long ago proclaimed “begotten of the Father before all creation, God of God…begotten not made”, must by necessity be of the same nature, the same essence, the same divine substance as his Father.  This is expressed in Scripture by such images as the BRANCH sprouting out from the Root, the Stone cut out of the Mountain without hands, the rib taken out of man.

Scripture refers to Christ as "the only begotten of the Father" (John 1:14; cf. v. 18; 3:16, 18; Heb. 11:17). The Greek word translated "only begotten" is monogenes. The thrust of its meaning has to do with Christ's utter uniqueness. Literally, it may be rendered "one of a kind"--and yet it also clearly signifies that He is of the very same essence as the Father. This, I believe, is the very heart of what is meant by the expression "only begotten."
To say that Christ is "begotten" is itself a difficult concept. Within the realm of creation, the term "begotten" speaks of the origin of one's offspring. The begetting of a son denotes his conception--the point at which he comes into being. Some thus assume that "only begotten" refers to the conception of the human Jesus in the womb of the virgin Mary. Yet Matthew 1:20 attributes the conception of the incarnate Christ to the Holy Spirit, not to God the Father. The begetting referred to in Psalm 2 and John 1:14 clearly seems to be something more than the conception of Christ's humanity in Mary's womb.
And indeed, there is another, more vital, significance to the idea of "begetting" than merely the origin of one's offspring. In the design of God, each creature begets offspring "after his kind" (Gen. 1:11-12; 21-25). The offspring bear the exact likeness of the parent. The fact that a son is generated by the father guarantees that the son shares the same essence as the father.

I believe this is the sense Scripture aims to convey when it speaks of the begetting of Christ by the Father. Christ is not a created being (John 1:1-3). He had no beginning but is as timeless as God Himself. Therefore, the "begetting" mentioned in Psalm 2 and its cross-references has nothing to do with His origin.

But it has everything to do with the fact that He is of the same essence as the Father. Expressions like "eternal generation," "only begotten Son," and others pertaining to the filiation of Christ must all be understood in this sense: Scripture employs them to underscore the absolute oneness of essence between Father and Son.

Here, MacArthur struggles with concern over any implication that a begotten Son might have a beginning before which he “was not.”  Without saying it, he might be thinking of the Son being in the bosom of the Father, as Levi was in the loins of Abraham, invoking an eternal pre-existence even before the begetting. Scripture is silent on such speculations and it certainly has nothing to say about the Catholic concept of a continuous begetting throughout all eternity!

My previous view was that Scripture employed Father-Son terminology  anthropomorphically --accommodating unfathomable heavenly truths to our finite minds by casting them in human terms. Now I am inclined to think that the opposite is true: Human father-son relationships are merely earthly pictures of an infinitely greater heavenly reality. The one true, archetypical Father-Son relationship exists eternally within the Trinity. All others are merely earthly replicas, imperfect because they are bound up in our finiteness, yet illustrating a vital eternal reality.

This is an extremely important observation. Rather than projecting our human, earthly relationships based on procreation onto the divine Father-Son, as if we are the real and they are the shadow, “the opposite is true”!  The only true God (John 17:3) is also the only true Father; and His only true Son, the “Son of his love” Col 1:13, are the vital eternal reality after whom Adam and Eve were created in Their image--not a trinity, but two who are one flesh, even as the Father and His Son are one spirit.

MacArthur concludes with advice that would be well taken,

I therefore affirm the doctrine of Christ's eternal sonship while acknowledging it as a mystery into which we should not expect to pry too deeply.

Comment (5)

Some quotes I found about Christ, the Word of God (the living Word), who is the tree of life, the fountain of life, the source of our life.  One day soon, we will taste of the tree of life in Paradise, and be with Christ and His Father in Heaven - I like the last quote, "the definition of heaven is the presence of Christ."  May we all be there soon.

From Revelation:

Rev 2:7  He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.

Rev 22:1,2  And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.  In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.

From the pen of Ellen White:

The tree of life is a representation of the preserving care of Christ for His children. As Adam and Eve ate of this tree, they acknowledged their dependence upon God. The tree of life possessed the power to perpetuate life, and as long as they ate of it, they could not die. The lives of the antediluvians were protracted because of the life-giving power of this tree, which was transmitted to them from Adam and Eve (RH Jan. 26, 1897).  {7BC 988.9}

After the entrance of sin, the heavenly Husbandman transplanted the tree of life to the Paradise above; but its branches hang over the wall to the lower world. Through the redemption purchased by the blood of Christ, we may still eat of its life-giving fruit.   Of Christ it is written, "In him was life; and the life was the light of men." He is the fountain of life. Obedience to Him is the life-giving power that gladdens the soul.   Christ declares: "I am the bread of life; he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst" [John 6:57, 63; Revelation 2:7, last part, quoted] (ST March 31, 1909).  {7BC 989.1,2,3}

Christ . . . was the tree of life to all who would pluck and eat (MS 95, 1898).  {7BC 989.6}

...The Word of God is to us the tree of life. ...The Holy Spirit will bring to remembrance the words of Christ. He will enlighten the mind, and guide the research (Letter 3, 1898).  {7BC 989.7}

Christ is the source of our life, the source of immortality. He is the tree of life, and to all who come to Him He gives spiritual life (RH Jan. 26, 1897).  {7BC 989.8}

Christ is the truth of all that we find in the Father. The definition of heaven is the presence of Christ (Und. MS 58).  {7BC 989.9}

 

Comment (8)

Looking unto Jesus we see that it is the glory of our God to give. "I do nothing of Myself," said Christ; "the living Father hath sent Me, and I live by the Father." "I seek not Mine own glory," but the glory of Him that sent Me. John 8:28; 6:57; 8:50; 7:18. In these words is set forth the great principle which is the law of life for the universe. All things Christ received from God, but He took to give. So in the heavenly courts, in His ministry for all created beings: through the beloved Son, the Father's life flows out to all; through the Son it returns, in praise and joyous service, a tide of love, to the great Source of all. And thus through Christ the circuit of beneficence is complete, representing the character of the great Giver, the law of life" Desire of Ages p. 21.

Not only is the Father the fountain of life (Ps 36:9, Jer 2:13; Jer 17:13), but we are told that as Christ lives by the Father (John 6:57), so also

From Jesus is our life derived. In Him is life that is original,–unborrowed, underived life. In us there is a streamlet from the fountain of life. In Him is the fountain of life." RH Aug 6, 1914 from a letter written Nov 1, 1905 to a sanitarium manager

It is the life which was in Jesus and the fountain of life that is in Him. Also notice that it is the life which is underived. This is quite different from saying that the person of Jesus is underived or that Jesus is the fountain of life.

Where is the fountain of life? Is it in Jehovah, the great Giver, the great Source of all? or is it in Jesus, the Son of Jehovah? It's in both!

Since we know that the Father has given all things to the Son (Matt 11:27; 28:18; John 3:35; 13:3), the Son also becomes a fountain of life. And, as he said to the woman at the well, whoever he gives the water of life to, it becomes a well of water in THEM, springing up into everlasting life (John 4:14), Which is what Jesus also said in John 7:38, "He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of HIS belly shall flow rivers of living water."

Therefore, both Jehovah and the Son of Jehovah have the fountain of life; but Jehovah is the great Source of all fountains.

Some dispute that Jesus is the Son of Jehovah, insisting instead that Jesus is Jehovah. They take note of Isaiah 43:10-14

"Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me."

"I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour. I have declared, and have saved, and I have shewed, when there was no strange god among you: therefore ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, that I am God." verses 11, 12.

"Yea, before the day was I am he; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand: I will work, and who shall prevent it? Thus saith the LORD, your redeemer, the Holy One of Israel;" verses 13,14.

A very interesting connection with Isaiah 43:10-14 is made with the 43rd book of the Bible, chapter 10.

"the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me. But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. I and my Father are one." John 10:25-30

• Here Jesus speaks of bearing witness (In Isaiah, Jehovah says that we are His witnesses).
• In Isaiah, Jehovah says that "there is none that can deliver out of my hand" (Jesus says that no one can "pluck them out of my hand," and because his "Father is greater than all," they can't be plucked out of his Father's hand either!)
• The one who is named Jehovah in Isaiah is the one who works in his Father's name in John.

But when He claims to be one with his Father, the Jews accuse him of blasphemy! And Jesus asks why.

"because I said, I am the Son of God? If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him." John 10:36-38

Jesus explains that when he said that he was one with his Father, it was the same as saying he was the Son of God. He was not saying that he was the Father, but that being the Son of God made him one with God. In Isaiah he expressed the same thing by saying he was the only God formed: there was none before him and none after. He was "brought forth" from the LORD Jehovah (Prov 8:24), the Son of the One "who established all the ends of the earth" (Prov 30:4)--the Son of Jehovah who had his Father's name in him (Ex 23:21), who had his Father, the fountain of life, in him, and who came in the name of his Father (John 6:57), speaking the words of his Father (John 8:38).

In volume 3 of the Testimonies for the Church, Ellen White contrasts the self-indulgent behavior of a "brother B" who forsook his responsibilities to "gratify his own pleasure." She then said,

In what marked contrast with this is the life of Christ, our Pattern! He was the Son of Jehovah, and the Author of our salvation. He labored and suffered for us." 3T p. 18 1871.

This was the only time she said, "Son of Jehovah" but she often spoke of Jehovah's Son.

The heart of God yearns over His earthly children with a love stronger than death. In giving up His Son, He has poured out to us all heaven in one gift. Through that gift there comes to us day by day the unfailing flow of Jehovah's goodness." Our Father Cares (1991) p. 65; RH Jan. 21, 1873

The life of the Father flows through His Son; the goodness of Jehovah flows through His Son, His one Gift.

The presence of Jesus Christ, enshrouded in the pillar of cloud by day and the pillar of fire by night, followed this people in their wilderness wandering. The Angel of the covenant came in the name of God, as the invisible leader of Israel. The Son of God over His own house is higher than Moses, higher than the highest angel. He bears the name of Jehovah upon His miter, while on His breastplate is written the name of Israel." 7BC p. 928, letter 97, 1898.

Jesus, the Angel of the covenant, the Son of God, came in the name of God, bearing the name of Jehovah, his Father.

Notwithstanding the Son of God was clothed with humanity, yet Jehovah, with his own voice, assures him of his sonship with the Eternal. In this manifestation to his Son, God accepts humanity as exalted through the excellence of his beloved Son." 2SP p. 60

Jehovah, God, the Eternal, assures his beloved Son, the Son of God, of his sonship.

Adam will tell you, It is the seed of the woman that shall bruise the serpent's head. Ask Abraham, he will tell you, It is Melchisedek, King of Salem, King of Peace. Jacob will tell you, He is Shiloh of the tribe of Judah. Isaiah will tell you, Immanuel, Wonderful, Counsellor, the Mighty God, the everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace. Jeremiah will tell you, The Branch of David, the Lord, our righteousness. Daniel will tell you, He is the Messiah. Hosea will tell you, He is the Lord God of Hosts, the Lord is his memorial. John the Baptist will tell you, He is the Lamb of God who taketh away the sin of the world. The great Jehovah has proclaimed from his throne, This is my beloved Son. We, his disciples, declare, This is Jesus, the Messiah, the Prince of Life, the Redeemer of the world. And even the Prince of the powers of darkness acknowledges him, saying, "I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God."" 2SP p. 395

He (the prince of this world) misrepresented the Lord Jehovah, and the high Commander of heaven." RH April 25, 1893

Jehovah is God the Father; Jesus, the Son of Jehovah, is the high Commander of heaven, the Captain of the Lord's host (Judges 5:15).

The Lord Jehovah is the Benefactor of the universe. He is of tender compassion, full of goodness, and his love is toward suffering humanity. The Psalmist says: "The eyes of all wait upon Thee; and Thou givest them their meat in due season. Thou openest thine hand, and satisfiest the desire of every living thing." The only begotten Son of God, who was the exalted Commander of heaven, who received the adoration of the angels, though he was rich, yet for our sakes he left the royal throne, departed from the heavenly courts, laid aside his royal robes, and for our sakes became poor, that we through his poverty might be rich." ST July 2, 1894

The Son of God, heaven's glorious Commander, was touched with pity for the fallen race. He entered into a covenant with God to save man, and to vindicate His Father's character as expressed in the law. He came to the earth in the form of man to refute Satan's lie, that God had given a law which man could not keep. He came to give Himself as a sacrifice for sin, thus revealing to the heavenly universe that the law is as changeless and eternal as is Jehovah Himself." ST, July 23, 1902

Jehovah suffered the glory of his Son to be veiled that the fallen race might be redeemed." RH July 15, 1909

We have every reason to believe that the Lord Jehovah and the angels of heaven were looking upon Christ as he began his work of mercy for the lost world. At the beginning of his public labors, the heavenly indorsement was stamped upon his work and mission; but when he was baptized, the heavenly host knew that Jesus had placed his feet in the blood-stained path that led to Calvary. When his mission began, the heavens were opened, and the glory of God encircled the Son of God; but when it ended, he hung upon Calvary's cross, and even the sun which he had created, refused to shine upon the scene of his agony. Darkness, denser than that of midnight, enshrouded the Son of God." YI, June 23, 1892

As we follow the flow of the living water, from the throne, through the tree of life, to those who respond to the invitation of the Spirit of Christ (the Bridegroom) and the Bride (his church) to "Come and drink of the water of life freely" (Rev 22:17) we understand that the Gift of eternal life is given to each fountain in succession. As the Father has life in Himself, so has He given to the Son to have life in himself (John 5:26); and as the Son has life in himself, "even so the Son gives life to whom he will" (John 5:21) that we may become the sons of God (John 1:12).

Comment (1)

Gray: Erwin   Blue: My words Black: Bible and Ellen White Purple: Pioneer quotes Red: Other(Trinitarian) generally Green: Other(non-trinitarian) generally

CHRIST EQUAL WITH THE FATHER BEFORE THE INCARNATION

Erwin: The two fundamental questions to be answered are, (1) did Ellen G. White support the view of the Adventist Arians that there was a time when Christ did not exist and, (2) did she concur with their teaching that Christ as God, was, and is, subordinate to the Father?

Erwin: There are many statements in the writings of Ellen G. white which effectively contradict any suggestion that prior to the incarnation Christ was in any sense subordinate to the Father. Repeatedly she stressed that Christ was equal with the Father in power, position and authority, that in fact He was God in the highest sense:

I agree with most of what he said above other than submission… From what I have seen many Trinitarians would not agree with Erwin in this section of his paper… I have seen many Trinitarians claim Christ was submitted to the Father but only for the plan of salvation… Erwin wouldn’t agree with them on this…

Christ's time to show His divine power had not yet come. He was fully aware of the glory He had with the Father before the world was. But then He willingly submitted to the Divine will, and He was unchanged now.   {BEcho, July 23, 1900 par. 6}

In this passage to do with Satan tempting Christ we see Satan’s failure from the fact that Christ was unchanged in His submission…When did Christ willingly submit to the Divine will? “before the world was,”…  We clearly see Christ submission to the Divine will goes all the way back to before the world was and was unchanged even under the temptations of Satan…

Yet the Son of God was the acknowledged sovereign of Heaven, one in power and authority with the Father. In all the counsels of God, Christ was a participant, while Lucifer was not permitted thus to enter into the divine purposes. “Why,” questioned this mighty angel, “should Christ have the supremacy? Why is he thus honored above Lucifer?”  {GC88 495.1}

Why is the Son of God the “acknowledged” sovereign of Heaven?

The great Creator assembled the heavenly host, that He might in the presence of all the angels confer special honor upon His Son. The Son was seated on the throne with the Father, and the heavenly throng of holy angels was gathered around them. The Father then made known that it was ordained by Himself that Christ, His Son, should be equal with Himself; so that wherever was the presence of His Son, it was as His own presence. The word of the Son was to be obeyed as readily as the word of the Father. His Son He had invested with authority to command the heavenly host. Especially was His Son to work in union with Himself in the anticipated creation of the earth and every living thing that should exist upon the earth. His Son would carry out His will and His purposes but would do nothing of Himself alone. The Father's will would be fulfilled in Him.  {LHU 18.3}

Answer: wherever was the presence of His Son, it was as His own presence. His Son He had invested with authority to command the heavenly host.

Christ’s submission in the above quote: “His Son would carry out His will and His purposes but would do nothing of Himself alone. The Father's will would be fulfilled in Him.”

John 5:19 Then Jesus answered and said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He sees the Father do; for whatever He does, the Son also does in like manner.

Even though Christ’s authority is equal to God, God is still absolute authority: The Son of God was next in authority to the great Lawgiver. He knew that his life alone could be sufficient to ransom fallen man. He was of as much more value than man as his noble, spotless character, and exalted office as commander of all the heavenly host, were above the work of man. He was in the express image of his Father, not in features alone, but in perfection of character.  {RH, December 17, 1872 par. 1}

1 Cor 11:3 But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.

1 Timothy 6:14-16 That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ:  ¹⁵Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; ¹⁶Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.

The thing I’ve noticed in his article is Erwin is trying to use equality quotes to show there is no submission… Equality has nothing to do with submission and if anyone feels it does they should go home and try telling their wife that she isn’t their equal because of her submission to them… Another thing we have to keep in mind is in the perfect environment of Heaven with perfect natures and perfect love submission is natural just like God’s law of love is natural… These things have to be pointed out to us because of sin…It is no longer natural for us to submit because of sin… In the case of the Son of God we can go even further because He knows the Fathers will perfectly which no other being in the universe can claim… Just as it was on earth even in Heaven it is “Not My will but Your will be done”…

Erwin: Some have regarded this equality with the Father as having been conferred upon Christ. His is said to be a delegated authority, hence He is not the supreme God in the same sense as is the Father. This, of course, could not be true since "Christ was God essentially, and in the highest sense."l2 But those who have propagated this view find what appears to be support for it in The Spirit of Prophecy, Volume 1:

SOP Vol. 1 is the same quote I quoted above{LHU 18.3}…. Also I covered Christ was God “essentially” in pt.3  of these articles…You would never hear anyone say the Father is God “essentially” but it is true Christ is God “essentially” and in the highest sense… Christ was invested with authority at His birth otherwise nearly that entire quote has no meaning…Of course this is something that is impossible for a Trinitarian as Christ would have had all power and authority anyhow…

They clearly set forth that Jesus was the Son of God, existing with him before the angels were created; and that he had ever stood at the right hand of God and his mild, loving authority had not heretofore been questioned….(SOP Vol 1 1870)

He then says:

Erwin: There are two interpretations to this whole passage. One is that of the Arians who would contend that the Father had conferred supreme power and authority equal to His own upon Christ. The other is that the passage refers to an announcement to the angels of a situation that had existed from the ages of eternity. According to this latter interpretation Christ had always been in the position of complete equality with the Father as the supreme Sovereign of heaven, but because of the defection of Lucifer and because of his subtle insinuations a special reiteration of Christ’s exalted position was necessary. The very fact that the loyal angels urged the unchanged status of Christ as an argument for accepting the Father’s announcement proves that the announcement was not the inauguration of something new, but a definition and declaration of the position which Christ had always sustained.

Erwin: That this is the only tenable interpretation of the passage is effectively demonstrated by reference to a parallel passage in Patriarchs and Prophets:

There had been no change in the position or authority of Christ. Lucifer's envy and misrepresentation and his claims to equality with Christ had made necessary a statement of the true position of the Son of God; but this had been the same from the beginning. Many of the angels were, however, blinded by Lucifer's deceptions.  {PP 38.1}

I completely agree with Erwin on this other than what he says we believe…I’m sure there are some if not many non-trinitarians who may believe Christ was invested with authority at a later date than His birth… In Erwin’s case the position of the Father is the exalted position that Christ also occupies where from my understanding the position of Christ’s birth is the exalted position above all creation… He had ever been at the right hand of God and as before in the eternal question this simply means Christ has always been in this position since His birth…At His birth is when he was invested with authority from His Father…Erwin is correct that there was a special reiteration of Christ’s position because of Lucifer’s rebellion… In the Trinitarian sense Christ could not receive authority from His Father like the quote and scriptures say… I have been unable to tell from Erwin’s writings if he believes Christ took on the role of a Son or became a Son at the incarnation… In either case Erwin takes the position that Christ has never been subordinate to the Father because he views submission as inequality…

Moses passed through death, but Michael came down and gave him life before his body had seen corruption. Satan tried to hold the body, claiming it as his; but Michael resurrected Moses and took him to heaven. Satan railed bitterly against God, denouncing Him as unjust in permitting his prey to be taken from him; but Christ did not rebuke His adversary, though it was through his temptation that the servant of God had fallen. He meekly referred him to His Father, saying, "The Lord rebuke thee." {EW 164.2}

This is well before the incarnation and we clearly see the submission of Christ in relying on His Father…

CHRIST EQUAL WITH THE FATHER DURING THE INCARNATION

Erwin: There is no intimation in the writings of Ellen G. White that when He took on human nature, Christ ceased to be God equal with the Father. On the contrary she abundantly testifies to Christ’s complete equality with the Father at every stage of His earthly existence. As a babe in the manger He was still the mighty God:

How wide is the contrast between the divinity of Christ and the helpless infant in Bethlehem’s manger! How can we span the distance between the mighty God and a helpless child? And yet the Creator of worlds, He in whom was the fullness of the Godhead bodily, was manifest in the helpless babe in the manger. Far higher than any of the angels, equal with the Father in dignity and glory and yet wearing the garb of humanity! Divinity and humanity were mysteriously combined, and man and God became one.(ST July 30 1896)

Erwin: As a child Christ was still the mighty God equal with the Father:

What opposites meet and are revealed in the person of Christ! The mighty God, yet a helpless child! The Creator of all the world, yet, in a world of His creating, often hungry and weary, and without a place to lay His head! The Son of man, yet infinitely higher than the angels! Equal with the Father, yet His divinity clothed with humanity.(ST April 26 1905)

I must say I completely agree with what Erwin and Ellen are saying her: There is no intimation in the writings of Ellen G. White that when He took on human nature, Christ ceased to be God equal with the Father. As a child Christ was still the mighty God equal with the Father:

There is no one who can explain the mystery of the incarnation of Christ. Yet we know that He came to this earth and lived as a man among men.”  “The man Christ Jesus was not the Lord God Almighty, yet Christ and the Father are one. (Ellen G. White, Manuscript 140, 1903, see also Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary Volume 5 page 1129)

Christ did not cease being the Lord God Almighty at His incarnation because He was not the Lord God Almighty before either…That is His Father… He was begotten of the Lord God Almighty…

Christ declared, I have pledged myself, as the only begotten Son of the Lord God Almighty, to carry out God's plan to win souls from Satan. The Saviour alone can defeat the enemy. He works in man's behalf to uncover his plans, that souls may be led to turn from the arch-deceiver.  {RH, November 10, 1910 par. 3}

Rev 21:22 But I saw no temple in it, for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple.

A Trinitarian could never claim Christ even while on earth was not the Lord God Almighty… Christ is still the “man Christ Jesus” even to this day… He was just as much God while on earth as He was in heaven…

1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus,

He then quotes:

But although Christ’s divine glory was for a time veiled and eclipsed by His assuming humanity, yet He did not cease to be God when He became man. The human did not take the place of the divine, nor the divine the human. This is the mystery of godliness. The two expressions "human" and "divine" were, in Christ, closely and inseparably one, and yet they had a distinct individuality. Though Christ humbled Himself to become inn, the Godhead was still His own. His deity could not be lost while He stood faithful and true to His loyalty. Surrounded with sorrow, suffering, and moral pollution, despised and rejected by the people to whom had been entrusted the oracles of heaven Jesus could yet speak of Himself as the Son of man in heaven.(ST May 10 1899)

God was manifest in the flesh. He humbled Himself. What a subject for thought, for deep, earnest contemplation; so infinitely great that He was the Majesty of heaven, and yet He stooped so low without losing an atom of His dignity or glory! Christ stooped to poverty and to the deepest abasement and humiliation among men. "For our sake He became poor, that we through His poverty might be made rich." "The foxes have holes," He said, "the birds of the air have nests, but the Son of man hath not where to lay His head."  {16MR 115.4}

There is nothing wrong with calling Christ God so long as you understand why He is God and you know He truly is the Son of God… Also these quotes clearly show us that Christ didn’t cease to be what He was in Heaven at His incarnation…

“The Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of the Father, is truly God in infinity, but not in personality.” (Ellen G. White, Manuscript 116, Dec. 19, 1905, ‘An Entire Consecration’, see also The Upward Look, page 367)

From what I have read Erwin doesn’t seem to deny submission during the incarnation but here are a couple of quotes on that topic anyhow…

Jesus refused to go outside the path of obedience. He would not force Providence to come to His rescue, and thus fail of giving us an example of trust and submission. Never did He work a miracle in His own behalf. His wonderful works were all for the good of others. Jesus declared to Satan, “It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.” God will preserve all who walk in the path of obedience, but to depart from it is to venture on Satan’s ground. There we are sure to fall. . . . {CTr 194.2}

Christ declared to the tempter, “Get thee behind me, Satan.”. . . So we may resist temptation and force Satan to depart from us. Jesus gained the victory through submission and faith in God, and by the apostle He says to us, “Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you—Manuscript 15, 1908. {CTr 219.6}

 

DID CHRIST USE HIS OWN DIVINE POWER DURING THE INCARNATION?

I read through this section but I didn’t really find anything alarming to disagree with him on until I came to his final sentence… The debate on did Christ use His Divine power is not something I’ve studied deeply but I do agree that He did not give  up His Divine power for the incarnation…This was a major part of His temptation while on earth… If He didn’t have it then there was no Divine temptation and Matthew 4 would be ridiculous…

Erwin: At all events the evidence is overwhelmingly opposed to the view of the Adventist Arian that the divine in Christ during the incarnation was an inferior divinity entirely subordinate to that of the Father.

I know there are non-trinitarians that believe Christ gave up His Divine power during the incarnation but I am not one of them… I also do not believe Christ Divinity has ever been nor ever will be inferior to His Father but I do believe He has been and always will be submissive to His Father…

WHAT HAPPENED TO CHRIST’S DEITY WHEN HE DIED?

I touched on this in the first article and as I said then Terry Hill has done excellent research on this topic with articles explaining it so I won’t go into it…Especially till I understand if Trinitarians are saying Christ was or was not conscious in the grave… It would be ridiculous for me to debate this topic with a Trinitarian if he believes the same thing I am saying… That is His Divine nature didn’t die but the Son of God as a person was dead and unconscious… Although I don’t see how a Trinitarian can accept that Christ was unconscious as we wouldn’t have three persons that make up one God during that time…

CHRIST EQUAL WITH THE FATHER AFTER THE INCARNATION

Erwin: There is no intimation that as God He resigned forever any of the prerogatives of God when He died for the sins of man. On the contrary, in unmistakable language it is stated that Christ was restored to His former position in heaven.

I completely agree with Erwin on this point and the next point below…

Erwin: Today Christ stands in precisely the same relationship to the Father as He did before the incarnation:

He then quotes:

God is the Father of Christ; Christ is the Son of God. To Christ has been given an exalted position. He has been made equal with the Father. All the counsels of God are opened to his Son. . {8T 268.3}

I totally agree with him on this one although I don’t believe he accepts this quote literally like I do…The context of the quote is clearly literal… He then quotes:

These are wonderfully solemn and significant statements. It was the Source of all mercy and pardon, peace and grace, the self-existent, eternal, unchangeable One, who visited His exiled servant on the isle that is called Patmos (MS 81, 1900).

Erwin: Of course these verses in Revelation have obvious reference to Christ. He then is the "self-existent, eternal, unchangeable one." That being so, a change in His status as God is manifestly an impossibility.

Erwin is correct that this is Christ being referenced to in this section and clearly He has not given up His Divinity which I agree with… We showed earlier Christ is self-existent, eternal, and He is unchangeable: Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever. However this cannot be taken to the extreme during His incarnation saying that it was impossible for Christ to sin… Christ could have sinned and He would have perished with man had He done so… This is something that isn’t possible for the trinity as God must always be a trinity…

“To the honor and glory of God, His beloved Son -- the Surety, the Substitute -- was delivered up and descended into the prisonhouse of the grave. The new tomb enclosed Him in its rocky chambers. If one single sin had tainted His character the stone would never have been rolled away from the door of His rocky chamber, and the world with its burden of guilt would have perished.” (Ellen G. White, Ms. 81, 1893, p. 11, Diary entry for Sunday, July 2, 1893, Wellington, New Zealand)

“Satan in heaven had hated Christ for His position in the courts of God. He hated Him the more when he himself was dethroned. He hated Him who pledged Himself to redeem a race of sinners. Yet into the world where Satan claimed dominion God permitted His Son to come, a helpless babe, subject to the weakness of humanity. He permitted Him to meet life's peril in common with every human soul, to fight the battle as every child of humanity must fight it, at the risk of failure and eternal loss.” (Ellen G. White, The Desire of Ages, Page 49, ‘Unto you a Saviour’)

“Could Satan in the least particular have tempted Christ to sin, he would have bruised the Saviour's head. As it was, he could only touch His heel. Had the head of Christ been touched, the hope of the human race would have perished. Divine wrath would have come upon Christ as it came upon Adam. Christ and the church would have been without hope.” (Ellen G. White, Signs of the Times, June 9^th 1898, see also Selected Messages Book 1 page 256)

“Those who claim that it was not possible for Christ to sin, cannot believe that He took upon Him human nature.” (Ellen G. White, Bible Echo 1^st November 1892, ‘Tempted in all points like as we are’)

CHRIST EQUAL WITH THE FATHER AFTER THE END

Erwin: Some of the Adventist Arians used 1 Corinthians 15:24-28 as evidence that at the end Christ assumes a subordinate position to the Father. Unfortunately Ellen G. White makes no comment on the central problem of the passage, but nowhere does she give any hint that a change in the status of the Son will be effected at the end of time. On the other hand, she does say much about the exalted position Christ will occupy at the conclusion of the millennium:

 

We do not believe He takes a subordinate position at the end but has always been in that position…What happens at the end is just the final time Christ is brought before creation declaring Him as the Son of God…

In the presence of the assembled inhabitants of earth and heaven takes place the final coronation of the Son of God. And now, invested with supreme majesty and power, the King of Kings pronounces sentence upon the rebels against His government, and executes upon those who have transgressed His law and oppressed His people.(SOP vol. 4 1884)

Erwin: There can be no reasonable doubt that the King of Kings who at the conclusion of the Millennium is invested with supreme majesty and power before the assembled hosts of the saved and the unsaved is Jesus Christ the Son of God:

As if entranced, the wicked have looked upon the coronation of the Son of God. They see in His hands the tables of the divine law, the statutes which they have despised and transgressed. They witness the outburst of wonder, rapture, and adoration from the saved; and as the wave of melody sweeps over the multitudes without the city, all with one voice exclaim, "Great and marvelous are Thy works, Lord God Almighty; just and true are Thy ways, Thou King of saints" (Revelation 15:3); and, falling prostrate, they worship the Prince of life. {DD 56.1}

Erwin; Nowhere in the writings of Ellen G. White is there any suggestion that Christ adopts a position subordinate to the Father at any time subsequent to His coronation.

Erwin: As a suggested interpretation of 1 Corinthians 15:28 the present writer would offer the following. The text cannot refer to the subordination of the human in Christ to the Father. According to 1 Corinthians 15:24 the change that takes place comes at "the end." The human in Christ is subordinate now just as it has always been since the birth of the Saviour. This change does not occur at the "end" or "when all things shall be subdued unto Him." Since the Son is co-equal with the Father, "in the Father," and the "express image of the Father," He is included in "God" who is "all in all." God cannot be subject to God. Therefore Christ cannot be subject to the Father, in the ordinary sense. The Son becomes "subject unto Him" in the sense that the Son ceases to carry out a distinct mediatorial work for man, and all that He bought back by the vicarious sacrifice is now entirely subordinate to God—Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The distinctive work of the Son ceases and God becomes "all in all." The Son is no longer a separate functionary within the Deity and the plan of redemption is acknowledged to have been the achievement of a unified God.

As Erwin has said there is no doubt about the exalted position Christ holds from the beginning to the end… He has never had a change of position and never will… Erwin interprets the passage of 1 Cor 15 splitting Christ humanity and Divinity… In the Corinthians passage the person of  “God”  is the Father in the entire passage but right at the very end Erwin says that Christ is included in the word "God"… You could say that the last time the word “God” appears in the passage it suddenly refers to the trinity and not the Father…This is typical of the trinity doctrine to be able to pick and choose when the word God refers to the Father only or to the trinity… Read the passage for yourself as it speaks plainly:

1 cor 15:24-28  Then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power. ²⁵ For He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet. ²⁶ The last enemy that will be destroyed is death. ²⁷ For “He has put all things under His feet.” But when He says “all things are put under Him,” it is evident that He who put all things under Him is excepted. ²⁸ Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.

1 Cor 11:3 But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.

Phil 2:9-11 Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, ¹⁰ that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, ¹¹ and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

John 5:26-30 For as the Father has life in Himself, so He has granted the Son to have life in Himself, ²⁷ and has given Him authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of Man. ²⁸ Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice ²⁹ and come forth—those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation. ³⁰ I can of Myself do nothing. As I hear, I judge; and My judgment is righteous, because I do not seek My own will but the will of the Father who sent Me.

Adventism has the same problem with Christ that Israel had as they and we do not want a humble submissive Christ but someone who is the Lord God Almighty Himself… His equality is based on Sonship and not position or power…

John 5:18-20 Therefore the Jews sought all the more to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God. ¹⁹ Then Jesus answered and said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He sees the Father do; for whatever He does, the Son also does in like manner. ²⁰ For the Father loves the Son, and shows Him all things that He Himself does; and He will show Him greater works than these, that you may marvel.

I want to talk about dual authority for a minute as this may help some understand this issue…

1 Cor 11:3 But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.

Notice the parallel in the above verse between the human family on earth and the Divine family in Heaven… As I mentioned earlier woman is still equal to man even though there is submission… She also has equal authority with the children as Christ has equal authority with creation…Her word is her husband’s word just as Christ is the Word of God… There is a clear parallel of  the human family and the Divine family… Why is this? The reason is because we were made in their image after their likeness… We are a copy of the Divine Heavenly family which is made up of the Father and Son and their creation… The Father is the “source” just like man has the “seed” and Christ is the “actuator” just as woman is the ”nurturer”… The Father through Christ created all creation while Adam through Eve spawned the human race…Just as the Father and Son have dominion over all creation so Adam and Eve were to have dominion over the earth… Just as woman was taken out of man so Christ was taken out of God… Just as woman has the same nature as man so the Son has the same nature as the Father… Adam and Eve are “one” even so The Father and Son are “One” in the sense of their equality, character, purpose, authority, and nature… Now let’s look at this biblically…

Romans 1:20   For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse….

Genesis 1:26-27 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” ²⁷ So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

Who is referred here when it says “Let Us make man”?

Satan was once an honored angel in heaven, next to Christ. His countenance, like those of the other angels, was mild and expressive of happiness. His forehead was high and broad, showing great intelligence. His form was perfect; his bearing noble and majestic. But when God said to His Son, "Let us make man in our image," Satan was jealous of Jesus. He wished to be consulted concerning the formation of man, and because he was not, he was filled with envy, jealousy, and hatred. He desired to receive the highest honors in heaven next to God.  {EW 145.1}

Genesis 2:21-24 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept; and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place. ²² Then the rib which the LORD God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man. ²³ And Adam said: “This is now bone of my bones And flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, Because she was taken out of Man.”

²⁴ Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.

Genesis 3:20 And Adam called his wife’s name Eve, because she was the mother of all living.

There we have it; the human family is the image of the Divine family… We get our submission principle from our Lord Jesus Christ because we are to ultimately display on earth who they are… The best way to do this is through our families mirroring the Heavenly family… See ladies God is not arbitrary in commanding your submission to your husbands as it is a Heavenly principle… Satan has twisted submission into something that degrades another to deceive us…

There is one more section in Erwin’s paper covering the Holy Spirit that I will not be going over… It is a short section that I mostly covered in the first article of this series… I also have a very detailed paper covering this issue called: Majority of EGW three person quotes understood in context of the big picture… If there is anything that I should address further in these articles I ask for someone to point them out as it is highly likely that I have missed or overlooked something in Erwin’s article…

 

 

 

 

 

Comment (0)

Gray: Erwin  Blue: My words Black: Bible and Ellen White Purple: Pioneer quotes Red: Other(Trinitarian) generally Green: Other(non-trinitarian) generally

ELLEN G. WHITE ON THE ABSOLUTE DEITY OF CHRIST

Erwin: The two fundamental questions to be answered are, (1) did Ellen G. White support the view of the Adventist Arians that there was a time when Christ did not exist and, (2) did she concur with their teaching that Christ as God, was, and is, subordinate to the Father?

Erwin: Ellen G. White stated categorically many times that there never was a time when Christ did not exist. He was not brought into existence by the Father either by a process of creation or of eternal generation. He has always been with the Father. He did not have a beginning. The following are just a few of the many quotations that could be cited as proof that this was her view:

But the life of Christ was unborrowed. No one can take this life from Him. "I lay it down of Myself." (John 10:18), He said. In Him was life, original, unborrowed, underived.

This is probably the most famous quote used by Trinitarians to prove Christ did not come out of the Father… I will add context to the quote and other quotes to explain…

Still seeking to give a true direction to her faith, Jesus declared, "I am the resurrection, and the life." In Christ is life, original, unborrowed, underived. "He that hath the Son hath life." 1 John 5:12. The divinity of Christ is the believer's assurance of eternal life. {DA 530.3}

But turning from all lesser representations, we behold God in Jesus. Looking unto Jesus we see that it is the glory of our God to give. "I do nothing of Myself," said Christ; "the living Father hath sent Me, and I live by the Father." "I seek not Mine own glory," but the glory of Him that sent Me. John 8:28; 6:57; 8:50; 7:18. In these words is set forth the great principle which is the law of life for the universe. All things Christ received from God, but He took to give. So in the heavenly courts, in His ministry for all created beings: through the beloved Son, the Father's life flows out to all; through the Son it returns, in praise and joyous service, a tide of love, to the great Source of all. And thus through Christ the circuit of beneficence is complete, representing the character of the great Giver, the law of life. {DA 21.2}

"In him was life; and the life was the light of men" (John 1:4). It is not physical life that is here specified, but immortality, the life which is exclusively the property of God. The Word, who was with God, and who was God, had this life. Physical life is something which each individual receives. It is not eternal or immortal; for God, the Life-giver, takes it again. Man has no control over his life. But the life of Christ was unborrowed. No one can take this life from Him. "I lay it down of myself" (John 10:18), He said. In Him was life, original, unborrowed, underived. This life is not inherent in man. He can possess it only through Christ.He cannot earn it; it is given him as a free gift if he will believe in Christ as His personal Saviour. "This is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent" (John 17:3). This is the open fountain of life for the world.  {1SM 296.2}

I don’t believe this quote has anything to do with where the life came from, whether it came from the Father or is self-originated in Christ as it could work for either (although I believe Christ was born with it)... The phrase original, unborrowed, underived is to show us that it is Divine Immortal life and not physical human life that is in Christ… Man cannot take this life from Him…By believing in Christ we can become partakers of this Divine life for the assurance of salvation... (With this explanation read the three quotes again and watch how clear it is)...The way Trinitarians believe in this verse they are saying the Father has His very own Life, the Son has His very own life, and the Holy Spirit has His very own Life which are all original, unborrowed, underived in themselves making three different life sources for the universe... This is tritheism... That being said if a triune God were real the three would share one life source…There is only one source of "Life" in the universe and it comes through Christ from the great Source of all, the Father...

Who was in Christ reconciling the world? 2 Cor 5:19... The Father.... It is the Fathers life that flows through Christ... Even man can possess this life...

Take and fill a bowl up with water, place a smaller bowl in that bowl (only an example and not meant to degrade Christ)... The Father is represented by the big bowl, the Son by the small bowl and the water is the life, original, unborrowed, underived... Now take the small bowl out with water still in it, notice that the water that is in the small bowl is still the same water that is in the big bowl... Both bowls have the same water (life) that is original, unborrowed, underived... I believe this is the correct understanding of “in Him is life, original, unborrowed, underived”...

John 5:26 For as the Father has life in Himself, so He has granted the Son to have life in Himself,

Trinitarians will claim the above verse is only in reference to the incarnation… This is a private interpretation used because it doesn’t fit the Trinitarian creed… Yet when the term original, unborrowed, underived is used in DA which clearly is during a time of incarnation they say this quote has to do with His eternal existence… I agree with them that it has to do with His eternal existence but I believe John chapter 5 overall clearly has to do with who Christ is as the Son of God … His before, during, and after incarnation are all the same…

The term “In Him was life, original, unborrowed, underived” was borrowed from John Cumming, D.D., F.R.S.E. of London who originally penned these words in his Sabbath Evening Readings on the New Testament – St. John published by the John P. Jewett Co., Cleveland, OH in 1856. On page 5 Cumming writes:
“’In him was life,’—that is, original, unborrowed, underived. In us there is a streamlet from the Fountain of Life; in him was the Fountain of Life. Our life is something we receive, something that the Giver takes back again to himself, —over which we have no control, and for which we must give God the account and the praise. But in Jesus was life underived, unborrowed;”

Bobby B: Cumming was a clergyman for the Church of Scotland.  The church of Scotland is a Presbyterian church that uses THE WESTMINSTER CONFESSION OF FAITH as its doctrinal standard.  The Westminster creed defines the Trinity by the following: "In the unity of the Godhead there be three persons, of one substance, power, and eternity: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost. The Father is of none, neither begotten nor proceeding; the Son is eternally begotten of the Father; the Holy Ghost eternally proceeding from the Father and the Son."

Bobby B: All, Presbyterians, in common with non-trinitarian SDA's (and classic Trinitarians for that matter) believed the Son WAS DERIVED from the Father because he is the only one who "is of none, neither begotten nor preceeding".  Cumming believed the Son was "eternally" or continually derived. Early SDA's believed the Son was derived from his Father by a mysterious one-time event.  Modern SDA's believe that Father and Son have NO ontological relationship whatsoever.

Eternal and self-existent

"The Word existed as a divine being, even as the eternal Son of God, in union and oneness with His Father. From everlasting He was the Mediator of the covenant, the one in whom all nations of the earth, both Jews and Gentiles, if they accepted Him, were to be blessed. "The Word was with God, and the Word was God." Before men or angels were created, the Word was with God, and was God".--Review and Herald, April 5, 1906.

How should we understand Eternity? Is it to be viewed as a linear line of time? Is it to be viewed as "time out of mind" that is behind a veil?

H5769 ‛ôlâm  (o-lawm) From H5956; properly concealed, that is, the vanishing point; generally time out of mind (past or future), that is, (practically) eternity;

H5956 ‛âlam (aw-lam) A primitive root; to veil from sight, that is, conceal

“When the idea of eternity is searched in the Biblical record, however, the first facet that comes into view is that the words usually translated “eternity” have a clear, temporal meaning.”“In the OT ‘olam and in the NT aion basically mean “a long time or duration” referring to a limited or unlimited period of time.” (Fernando Canale, Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopaedia, Volume 12, page 109, ‘The doctrine of God’)

Most Adventist should understand how God uses words like eternal as we have to deal with it when explaining hell frequently… Jesus is eternal because He is “from” eternity…

“Here Christ shows them that, altho they might reckon His life to be less than fifty years, yet His divine life could not be reckoned by human computation.”“The existence of Christ before His incarnation is not measured by figures.” (Ellen G. White, Signs of the Times. 3^rd May 1899 ‘The Word made flesh’)

The above quote would be a terrible way for someone to try and explain that somebody has always existed… The context is saying the same thing that E.J. Waggoner says below…

"But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall He come forth unto Me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from the days of eternity." Micah 5:2 , margin. There was a time when Christ proceeded forth and came from God, from the bosom of the Father (John 8:42 ; 1:18), but that time was so far back in the days of eternity that to finite comprehension it is practically without beginning." E.J Waggoner, Christ and His Righteousness, 1890 p 21, 22

John 17:3 And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.

A billion years from now it will be said we have eternal life but yet we clearly had a beginning...

In fact this quote that Christ is the eternal Son of God is very non-trinitarian... The reason is Trinitarians generally believe eternal used in context of the Godhead is without beginning and without end... If that were true then that means Jesus has always been the Son of God and always will be... Unfortunately Trinitarians believe Christ took on the role of a Son for the plan of salvation meaning He hasn’t always been the Son of God but took on the role of a Son...In reality it is saying that He isn’t truly the Son of God…The other option is he didn’t become the Son of God till His incarnation… He hasn't always been the eternal Son of God which goes against their very own understanding of eternity...

“A plan of salvation was encompassed in the covenant made by the Three Persons of the Godhead, who possessed the attributes of Deity equally. In order to eradicate sin and rebellion from the universe and to restore harmony and peace, one of the divine Beings accepted, and entered into, the role of the Father, another the role of the Son.” “The remaining divine Being, the Holy Spirit, was also to participate in effecting the plan of salvation. All of this took place before sin and rebellion transpired in heaven.” By accepting the roles that the plan entailed, the divine Beings lost none of the powers of Deity. With regard to their eternal existence and other attributes, they were one and equal. But with regard to the plan of salvation, there was, in a sense, a submission on the part of the Son to the Father." (Gordon Jenson, Adventist Review, October 31, 1996, p.12 Week of Prayer readings, ‘article ‘Jesus the Heavenly Intercessor’)

He is the eternal self-existent Son.

Christ is the pre-existent, self-existent Son of God. . . . In speaking of his pre-existence, Christ carries the mind back through dateless ages. He assures us that there never was a time when he was not in close fellowship with the eternal God.

The above quote was cut out of it context from the quote below...

"Before Abraham was, I am." Christ is the pre-existent, self-existent Son of God. The message He gave to Moses to give to the children of Israel was, "Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you." The prophet Micah writes of Him, "But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, tho thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of Thee shall He come forth unto Me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting." {ST, August 29, 1900 par. 13}

Through Solomon Christ declared: "The Lord possessed Me in the beginning of His way, before His works of old. I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was. When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water. Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth. . . . When He gave to the sea His decree, that the waters should not pass His commandment; when He appointed the foundations of the earth; then I was by Him, as one brought up with Him; and I was daily His delight, rejoicing always before Him." {ST, August 29, 1900 par. 14}

In speaking of His pre-existence, Christ carries the mind back through dateless ages. He assures us that there never was a time when He was not in close fellowship with the eternal God. He to whose voice the Jews were then listening had been with God as one brought up with Him. {ST, August 29, 1900 par.

First I will go over pre-existent, self-existent Son of God... Pre-existent simply means the Son of God existed before anything was created and it also proves that Christ did not become the Son of God at His incarnation... Jesus Christ is the self-existent Son of God because at His birth He inherited the same life that is in His Father "John 5:26 For as the Father has life in Himself, so He has granted the Son to have life in Himself,"... The Father and Son are the only beings in the universe with “life” in themselves... As with the eternal question above Trinitarians do not believe Jesus has always been the Son of God but took on the role of a Son at some point... In their view he could not be the self-existent Son of God... Notice how EGW has Proverbs chapter 8:22-25 in the original quote... Our pioneers along with the early church fathers of the apostolic days used these verses to show when Christ was begotten or came out of God... Ellen White used Proverbs chapter 8 to describe Christ numerous times in her writings... When the context is added back in the quote is simple to understand....

"The Lord possessed Me in the beginning of His way…. This word possessed is the same Hebrew used in Genesis 4:1 Now Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain, and said, “I have acquired a man from the LORD.” ² Then she bore again, this time his brother Abel. The context in both cases has to do with birth…

“I was set up from everlasting” ---Christ was setup(anointed) as our Mediator before all creation…

God and Christ knew from the beginning, of the apostasy of Satan and of the fall of Adam through the deceptive power of the apostate. The plan of salvation was designed to redeem the fallen race, to give them another trial. Christ was appointed to the office of Mediator from the creation of God, set up from everlasting to be our substitute and surety.Before the world was made, it was arranged that the divinity of Christ should be enshrouded in humanity…{RH, April 5, 1906 par. 13}

What about brought forth? ”I was brought forth” Here are some clear examples in the scriptures that indicate this is birth or begotten language(check the Hebrew):

Deut 32:18 Of the Rock that begat thee thou art unmindful, and hast forgotten God that formed thee.

Job 15:7 Art thou the first man that was born? or wast thou made before the hills?

Psalm 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.

Isaiah 45:10 Woe unto him that saith unto his father, What begettest thou? or to the woman, What hast thou brought forth?

Isaiah 51:2 Look to Abraham your father, And to Sarah who bore you; For I called him alone,  And blessed him and increased him.”

Isaiah 54:1 “Sing, O barren, You who have not borne! Break forth into singing, and cry aloud,  You who have not labored with child!  For more are the children of the desolate Than the children of the married woman,” says the LORD.

Job 39:1 “Do you know the time when the wild mountain goats bear young? Or can you mark when the deer gives birth?

Proverbs 8:22-25 is clear birth language that is applied to Christ…

Now I will go over "there never was a time"...This is what it does not say:

In speaking of His pre-existence, God carries the mind back through dateless ages. He assures us that there never was a time when He was not in close fellowship with the eternal Christ.

Also notice how this would be a true statement:

Gabriel is an angel of God...in speaking of His existence; Gabriel carries the mind back through the ages. Gabriel assures us that there never was a time when He was not in close fellowship with the Son of God.‟

I can say this same thing concerning myself and my parents… Do a search on EGW writings typing in "never was a time"and you will see how this is very common statement she uses that has nothing to do with eternity... Simply by changing the source of the quote reveals to us that this passage isn't saying Christ has had no beginning... Also the proper context of Proverbs chapter 8 gives us the true understanding that since Christ was brought forth He has always existed at the Fathers side as one brought  up with Him...

Erwin: The Adventist Arians had seen the Trinitarian position as destructive of the truth of the atonement, but in 1898 Ellen G. White demonstrated that their own view produced that unfortunate result. She wrote:

In consenting to become man, Christ manifested a humility that is the marvel of the heavenly intelligences. The act of consenting to be a man would be no humiliation were it not for the fact of Christ’s exalted pre-existence.(YI October 13 1898)

Erwin: Thus it was "Christ’s exalted pre-existence" that rendered the incarnation a humiliation and qualified Christ to atone for human sin. Beings whose existence was purely derived could never have paid the price of human redemption.

This is only an issue for Erwin because of his misconception that we do not believe Christ is equal with His Father… In fact Christ’s exalted position is an issue for Trinitarians… If Christ is co-equal co-eternal in the Trinitarian sense how can He ever have an exalted position in heaven? He would hold the same position as His Father and His Father could never have exalted Christ in any sense…The Father couldn’t give Him anything either as he would have always had everything… Every statement and verse that has to do with Christ’s inheritance is meaningless…

I want to clear something up here concerning “exalted position”… We do not believe Christ was born and then later upgraded to this exalted position… He was born into this exalted position which is at the right hand of God above all creation… Christ is King because His Father said to Him “You are My Son, Today I have begotten You.”… This phrase is a decree that God gave to His Son at his birth… We see Christ brought before the Angels because of Lucifer’s rebellion and this “old decree” had to be declared again to set the true position of His Son and their relationship… I believe this was again done upon Christ returning to Heaven after His resurrection and it will be done one last time in the grand finale…Simply put Christ is King because He is the Son of God…He is not symbolically the Son of God because He is King as some may use this for the time when Christ took on the role of a Son…

But the Son, the anointed of God, the "express image of His person," "the brightness of His glory," "upholding all things by the word of His power," holds supremacy over them all. Hebrews 1:3. "A glorious high throne from the beginning,"was the place of His sanctuary (Jeremiah 17:12); "a scepter of righteousness," the scepter of His kingdom. Hebrews 1:8. "Honor and majesty are before Him: strength and beauty are in His sanctuary." Psalm 96:6. Mercy and truth go before His face. Psalm 89:14.  {PP 34.2}

When was this beginning?

Proverbs 8:22 "The Lord possessed Me in the beginning of His way, before His works of old.

We showed earlier this has to do with his birth or being brought forth from God…

The King of the universe summoned the heavenly hosts before Him, that in their presence He might set forth the true position of His Son and show the relation He sustainedto all created beings. {PP 36.2}

The exaltation of the Son of God as equal with the Father was represented as an injustice to Lucifer, who, it was claimed, was also entitled to reverence and honor. (PP 37)

If Christ was in the same exalted position as the Father this makes no sense that Satan would have this issue with Christ alone… If Christ was the second God being of the Trinity Satan would have no reason to single out Christ as far as I can see… I cannot understand this next quote from a Trinitarian context:

He was beloved and reverenced by the heavenly host, angels delighted to execute his commands, and he was clothed with wisdom and glory above them all. Yet the Son of God was exalted above him, as one in power and authority with the Father. He shared the Father's counsels, while Lucifer did not thus enter into the purposes of God. "Why," questioned this mighty angel, "should Christ have the supremacy? Why is He honored above Lucifer?" {PP 36.3}

Christ has held His exalted position since He came forth from God:

There had been no change in the position or authority of Christ. Lucifer's envy and misrepresentation and his claims to equality with Christ had made necessary a statement of the true position of the Son of God; but this had been the same from the beginning. Many of the angels were, however, blinded by Lucifer's deceptions.  {PP 38.1}

We showed earlier this beginning has to do with his birth or being brought forth from God… Christ was begotten of the Father as His Son… Notice the context of this next quote is “method of becoming a son”…

“A complete offering has been made; for "God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son,"-- not a son by creation, as were the angels, nor a son by adoption, as is the forgiven sinner, but a Son begotten in the express image of the Father's person, and in all the brightness of his majesty and glory, one equal with God in authority, dignity, and divine perfection. In him dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.” (Ellen G. White, Signs of the Times, 30^th May 1895, ‘Christ our complete salvation’)

“The Eternal Father, the unchangeable one, gave his only begotten Son, tore from his bosom Him who was made in the express image of his person, and sent him down to earth to reveal how greatly he loved mankind.” {EGW, RH, July 9, 1895 par. 13}

 

Begotten cannot simply mean “unique” as Trinitarians say because “unique” is a noun and the above quotes are using verbs to express Christ… Trinitarians may claim the birth language from Proverbs 8 and psalm 2:7 is symbolic for Christ taking the position of Mediator or being Kinged… As I said earlier these things did happen but they happened because Christ is God’s Son and are only a reiteration of what His position has always been……

 

It is claimed that the Greek word “monogenes” means “unique” instead of the translated “only begotten”… Hebrews 11:17 is used as proof because Isaac wasn’t Abraham’s only Son… Strong’s concordance breaks down the root words into Monos: “only” and Ginomai: “caused to be” … As we know Isaac was the child of promise who was a miracle “caused to be” by God… So yes Isaac is the only begotten of Abraham… Here are a few verses where monogenes is applied to an only child:

 

Luke 7:12 And when He came near the gate of the city, behold, a dead man was being carried out, the monogenes son of his mother; and she was a widow. And a large crowd from the city was with her.

 

Luke 8:42 for he had an monogenes daughter about twelve years of age, and she was dying. But as He went, the multitudes thronged Him.

 

Luke 9:38 Suddenly a man from the multitude cried out, saying, “Teacher, I implore You, look on my son, for he is my monogenes.

Monogenes is always applied to a parent child relationship so why would it be suddenly different when applied to Christ?

 

In the next article I will cover his comments on submission…

 

 

Comment (0)

Rev 13:8  And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

Yesterday I was meditating on this verse in the light of the fact that Christ is our Life; we live moment by moment by his power (I am the Life John 14:6).

I was moved by the thought that the Son of God took the human race  (from Adam downwards) into His arms and essentially gave us mouth to mouth resuscitation! He was forced to hold close to Him a humanity that hated him and had expelled Him from their hearts.

This holding of humanity was not a picture of a grateful and appreciate person that should have died, this person (humanity) continued to try to kill Him and crucify Him daily at every opportunity. Every time we chose hate over love, every time we chose self over others, every time we choose frustration, anger and depression over joy, we seek to kill the spirit of Him who fills all in all.

Our Saviour seeks companionship with us as He carries us, yet we slumber and sleep while He carries the world on His shoulders. He comes to hear our earnest prayers and words of love towards him and we are silent and slumbering as if in silent protest for our troubles and trials!

As I thought on these things I was moved by the thought that all through this world's history there has in one sense only been one set of footprints. We have no life of our own, it only comes from Him and He must carry us the whole distance.

I don't want any part of me to resist Him, I want Him to hear my words of praise and affection, I want Him to hear of my appreciation for all He has created and done for me. If in some small way this will lighten His burden in carrying me towards the kingdom.

What a wonderful Saviour, Friend and Comforter is Jesus!

Comment (5)

We are just a few months away from the birth date of Jesus, that is, December 25.

Is December 25 really the day on which He was born when He took humanity upon Himself? Turning to the Bible we see that:

(a) Numbers 4:43 says the Levitical priests began their service in the tabernacle of the congregation when they turned thirty years old. The Levitical priesthood was a shadow or type of the reality - Jesus Christ, and so Luke 3:23 says that Jesus began His public ministry at the age of thirty.

(b) Daniel 9:27 says that Christ's ministry was to last for one week (seven years). However, in the midst of the week (three and one-half years according to the reckoning of prophetic time - Ezekiel 4:6), He was to cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease by the sacrifice of His life (type meeting anti-type - see 1 Corinthians 5:7, Luke 23:44-46). So then, three and one-half years from the commencement of His public ministry He would be crucified for the sins of the world at the age of thirty three and one-half.

(c) The document titled; "The Passover, Pentecost, and Easter" on page 28 of The Ellen G. White North Pacific Union Gleaner Articles states that the time of the passover just preceding Jesus' betrayal and crucifixion occurred March 29, A.D. 31. Jesus was thirty three and one-half years old when He gave His life for us on Calvary, March 30, A.D. 31.

(d) If we then calculate six months backward or forward from this date we can know the day of His birth. As the Jews reckoned months by periods of thirty days, six months of thirty days backward or forward from March 30 would equal September 30. Jesus was born September 30 and not December 25 as we have been previously taught in the world by precept and example.

Comments and corrections to this reckoning welcomed,

Russell.

Comment (8)

 

“You call Me Teacher and Lord, and you say well, for so I am” John 13:13

My Lord never insists on having authority over me, He never says, “you WILL submit to Me”. No, He leaves me perfectly free to choose - e.g. In Elijah’s call to King Ahab, the prophets and the people of Israel, The Lord had him (Elijah) say “how long halt ye between two opinions? if (choice) the LORD be God, follow him: but if (choice) Baal, then follow him”. 1 Kings 18:18-21 (brackets and underlining mine). And Jesus stated “If (choice) ye love me, keep my commandments”. (John 14:15), “ye are my friends, if (choice) ye do whatsoever I command you” (John 15:14). –

 

In fact I am so free to choose, that I can spit in His face or I can put Him to death (crucify Him afresh), as others have done; and yet He will never say a word (Isa 53:7), He will only love me more and strive harder to serve me.

 

If my Lord insisted upon my obedience, He would simply be a taskmaster thereby ceasing to have any real authority. He never insists on obedience, but when I truly see Him for who He is, The Only Begotten (unique and literal) Son of The Almighty God, I will instantly and willingly obey Him. Therefore my growth in grace is revealed by the way I look at obedience.

 

Obedience is only possible between people who are equals in their relationship to each other and who feel safe in their relationship; like the relationship between father and son (earthly), not that of master and servant.

 

Jesus showed this type of relationship with His Father by saying, “And he that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please him” (John 8:29). “I and My Father are one” (John 10:30). “But go to My brethren and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father and your Father; and to My God, and your God”. (John 20:17) and further, it is written of Him, “though He were a Son, yet learned He obedience by the things which He suffered”. (Heb 5:8) (Emphasis mine)

 

 

The Son was obedient as our Redeemer, because He was already the Son of The Almighty God and felt safe and assured in that fact, NOT in order to become God’s Son.

 

He (Christ Jesus) is our example. 1 Pet 2:21; YRP 367

 

Oh my Father God, help me to learn by Your Son’s example, is my sincere prayer in His Holy Name!

 

Comment (2)

Just wanted to share this conclusive quote from the Spirit of Prophecy showing very plainly (once again) that sister White understood Christ to be the only begotten Son of His Father BEFORE coming to earth in humanity to effect the plan of salvation:

If God could have changed his Law to meet man in his fallen condition, would he not have done this, and retained his only-begotten Son in heaven?--He certainly would. But because his Law was as changeless as his character, he gave his beloved Son, who was above Law, and one with himself, to meet the penalty which his justice demanded.  {ST, February 25, 1897 par. 3} 

Comment (11)

In this article we are gonna take a look at the scenes in Patriarchs and Prophets chapter one and try and see what Lucifer saw that could have lead to his self exaltation... Keep in mind that if there is a trinity we should see at least two beings that would appear nearly identical... I personally  would think it would need to be three but I've  learned that some (maybe most?) trinitarians see the Holy Spirit not having a form and would be absent from these scenes...  Of course I think this reasoning seems strange seeing that we have 3 co-equal co-eternal beings so I would think they would all appear the same... But, hey, this article is not about the Holy Spirit so I won't be going into that area...

"But imagine a situation in which the Being we have come to know as God the Father came to die for us, and the One we have come to know as Jesus stayed back in heaven (we are speaking in human terms to make a point)." "Nothing would have changed, except that we would have been calling Each by the name we now use for the Other." "That is what equality in the Deity means." (Seventh-day Adventist Sabbath School Quarterly, page 19, Thursday April 10^{th 2008,} ‘The Mystery of His Deity)

There was one who perverted the freedom that God had granted to His creatures. Sin originated with him who, next to Christ, had been most honored of God and was highest in power and glory among the inhabitants of heaven. Lucifer, "son of the morning," was first of the covering cherubs, holy and undefiled. He stood in the presence of the great Creator, and the ceaseless beams of glory enshrouding the eternal God rested upon him. {PP 35.1}

Satan dwelled in the presence of the Father and Son to behold their glory... He was next in honor to the Son of God... In the very next paragraph we see:

Little by little Lucifer came to indulge the desire for self-exaltation. The Scripture says, "Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness." Ezekiel 28:17.{PP 35.2}

Now if I were to exalt myself because of my beauty and brightness I would need to have someone to compare myself with in order to do this... He was already highest in power and glory among the inhabitants of heaven so he must have been looking above him to the Father and Son...

Though all his glory was from God, this mighty angel came to regard it as pertaining to himself. Not content with his position, though honored above the heavenly host, he ventured to covet homage due alone to the Creator. Instead of seeking to make God supreme in the affections and allegiance of all created beings, it was his endeavor to secure their service and loyalty to himself. And coveting the glory with which the infinite Father had invested His Son, this prince of angels aspired to power that was the prerogative of Christ alone. {PP 35.2}

Lucifer coveted the position that was the prerogative of Christ alone... In the next couple of quotes we will see that it was clearly Christ that Lucifer began comparing himself with...

Lucifer allowed his jealousy of Christ to prevail, and became the more determined.  To dispute the supremacy of the Son of God, thus impeaching the wisdom and love of the Creator, had become the purpose of this prince of angels.{PP 36.1}

He was beloved and reverenced by the heavenly host, angels delighted to execute his commands, and he was clothed with wisdom and glory above them all. Yet the Son of God was exalted above him, as one in power and authority with the Father. He shared the Father's counsels, while Lucifer did not thus enter into the purposes of God. "Why," questioned this mighty angel, "should Christ have the supremacy? Why is He honored above Lucifer?" {PP 36.3}

Here we clearly see Lucifer comparing himself to Christ... Could Lucifer see something about Christ's external appearance that made him feel he should be equal with him? Notice the issue is over the Son of God and not the Father... If Christ was equal to the Father why shouldn't I be honored the same Lucifer was thinking... Lucifer wanted to be part of a three person equality system...  So did he see a difference between the Father and Son?

The King of the universe summoned the heavenly hosts before Him, that in their presence He might set forth the true position of His Son and show the relation He sustained to all created beings. The Son of God shared the Father's throne, and the glory of the eternal, self-existent One encircled both.{PP 36.2}

Here we see that the Glory of the Father encircled Himself and His Son...

I saw a throne, and on it sat the Father and the Son. I gazed on Jesus' countenance and admired His lovely person. The Father's person I could not behold, for a cloud of glorious light covered Him. I asked Jesus if His Father had a form like Himself. He said He had, but I could not behold it, for said He, "If you should once behold the glory of His person, you would cease to exist." {EW 54.2}

Now some may say this is a vision after the cross, so here is a vision before the cross...

Sorrow filled heaven, as it was realized that man was lost and that world which God had created was to be filled with mortals doomed to misery, sickness, and death, and there was no way of escape for the offender. The whole family of Adam must die. I saw the lovely Jesus and beheld an expression of sympathy and sorrow upon His countenance. Soon I saw Him approach the exceeding bright light which enshrouded the Father. Said my accompanying angel, He is in close converse with His Father. The anxiety of the angels seemed to be intense while Jesus was communing with His Father. Three times He was shut in by the glorious light about the Father, and the third time He came out from the Father, His person could be seen. His countenance was calm, free from all perplexity and doubt, and shone with benevolence and loveliness, such as words cannot express. {SR 42.1}

Clearly from an external appearance Lucifer saw a difference in the Father and Son... Now I do not know how close Lucifers appearance was to Christ but clearly Lucifer must have felt his own beauty and brightness was equal to that of Christ in some way..."Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness." Ezekiel 28:17... Had God been a trinity Lucifer could have never seen this difference and compared himself to Christ... Does equality in God's kingdom have anything to do with appearance? 1 Samuel 16:7 But the LORD said to Samuel, “Do not look at his appearance or at his physical stature, because I have refused him. For the LORD does not see as man sees; for man looks at the outward appearance, but the LORD looks at the heart.”

How often do we compare ourselves externally or in any manner for that? It originated with Lucifer...

God Bless!!!

 

Comment (1)