“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.” — “Christ our Complete Saviour”, Signs of the Times {ST May 30, 1895 par. 3}

Ellen White wrote the above statement just five years after E. J. Waggoner, a Seventh-day Adventist pioneer, wrote this statement below in 1890 in his book, “Christ and His Righteousness.” Notice the striking similarity in the language used:

“It is true that there are many sons of God, but Christ is the “only begotten Son of God,” and therefore the Son of God in a sense in which no other being ever was or ever can be. The angels are sons of God, as was Adam (Job 38:7; Luke 3:38), by creation; Christians are the sons of God by adoption (Rom. 8:14, 15), but Christ is the Son of God by birth. The writer to the Hebrews further shows that the position of the Son of God is not one to which Christ has been elevated but that it is one which He has by right. He says that Moses was faithful in all the house of God, as a servant, “but Christ as a Son over His own house.” Heb. 3:6. And he also states that Christ is the Builder of the house. Verse 3. It is He that builds the temple of the Lord and bears the glory. Zech. 6:12, 13. “ (E. J. Waggoner, 1890, Christ and His Righteousness, pp. 11-13)

Note: E. J. Waggoner was Ellen White’s contemporary and she was very much familiar with his writings. In fact, the very statement comes from a book she highly endorsed. Thus, when she wrote the statement, “A SON BEGOTTEN IN THE EXPRESS IMAGE of the Father’s person…”, it is most reasonable to assume that her contemporaries understood her as speaking of Christ’s pre-incarnate begetting for this was the view of most of her contemporaries.

Here’s the question: Is the expression, “A SON BEGOTTEN IN THE EXPRESS IMAGE OF THE FATHER’S PERSON” applicable ONLY to Christ’s incarnation?

If He had never been born of a virgin and become the Son of Man, would He still have been the SON BEGOTTEN IN THE EXPRESS IMAGE OF THE FATHER’S PERSON? Or is this expression only a reflection of His humanity as some (Trinitarians ) claim?

Orthodox Trintiarians, in general, believe Christ is God’s Son because of eternal generation. Seventh-day Adventist Trintiarian scholars, however, do not believe this and thus they make His pre-incarnate Sonship a metaphor, a prophecy or role-playing by means of decree. The general opinions of most SDA scholars is that the Bible’s references to Jesus being the Son of God are anticipatory and are all in light of His incarnation or His ressurection. In other words, Jesus was not (literally) God’s Son until He came to earth as an incarnate human/divine being. Or “begotten” Son is attributed to Christ’s resurrection, the “first begotten of the dead” (1 Corinthians 1:18, Revelation 1:5).

But do these explanations consistent with the context of the ST May 30, 1895 par. 3 statement’s usage?

Express Image

Bible says Jesus bears the image of His Father and this idea is supported in the following passages:

“Who being the BRIGHTNESS OF HIS GLORY, and the EXPRESS IMAGE (χαρακτήρ-khä-räk-tā’r) of his person (ὑπόστασις- hü-po’-stä-sēs), and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high:” — Hebrews 1:3

“In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, WHO IS THE IMAGE OF GOD, should shine unto them.” — 2 Corinthians 4:4

“WHO IS THE IMAGE OF THE INVISIBLE GOD, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.” — Colossian 1:15-17

What is an image? An image is never the original but always a likeness or duplication of the original, but according to Thayer’s Greek Lexicon, the term, “express image” refers to “the EXACT expression (the image) of any person or thing, marked likeness, PRECISE REPRODUCTION IN EVERY RESPECT”

Furthermore, it would be incorrect to say that the Father is the image of His Son because the Father is consistently portrayed as the original. In like manner, it would be incorrect to refer to Christ as the true or original God since He is the image of the True God. The Bible consistently portrays the Son as the image of the Father and never the other way around.

Notice again Ellen White’s usage of the phrase, “express image” in the statement under consideration (Emphasis in caps added through out):

It states that Jesus was “A SON BEGOTTEN IN THE EXPRESS IMAGE OF THE FATHER’S PERSON….” But she doesn’t just stop there but added, “AND IN ALL THE BRIGHTNESS OF HIS MAJESTY AND GLORY, ONE EQUAL WITH GOD IN AUTHORITY, DIGNITY, AND DIVINE PERFECTION.” Meaning, the person who was begotten in this statement should manifest “ALL” the ensuing attributes; In the pre-incarnate existence Christ was manifesting God’s glory in an external (physical) sense as well as an internal (character) sense.

In the same year when Ellen White wrote the previous statement, she also wrote:

“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.” — Review & Herald 9th July 1895 “The Duty of the Minister and the People” 

The above statement clearly indicates that Christ was the Father’s only begotten Son, “who was made in the express image of his person,” BEFORE He was sent “down to earth.”

Did incarnate Jesus come to earth in “all the brightness of the Father’s majesty and glory?”

We would have to say no. For, if He had, sinners would not have been able to endure His presence.

In fact, Isaiah prophesied that,

“he [Christ] hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.” ( Isaiah 53:2)

Apostle Paul also stated,

“Who, being in the FORM OF GOD, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him THE FORM OF A SERVANT, and was made IN THE LIKENESS OF MEN:” — Philippians 2:6-7

“majesty and glory” was veiled under humanity

“CHRIST COULD NOT HAVE COME TO THIS EARTH WITH THE GLORY THAT HE HAD IN THE HEAVENLY COURTS Sinful human beings could not have borne the sight. He veiled His divinity with the garb of humanity, but He did not part with His divinity…” {RH June 15, 1905, par. 12}

“CHRIST CAME, BUT NOT IN THE BRIGHTNESS OF HIS DIVINE GLORY. He laid aside his royal robe and kingly crown, clothed his divinity with humanity, and came to live upon the earth as a man among men. HAD HE COME IN THE FULL POWER AND GLORY OF HIS DIVINITY, SINNERS COULD NOT HAVE STOOD IN HIS PRESENCE WITHOUT BEING DESTROYED. He came to meet humanity in its most sinful and corrupt form. Thus divine love was manifested toward erring mortals. {RH September 13, 1906, par. 5}

“HAD CHRIST COME IN HIS DIVINE FORM, HUMANITY COULD NOT HAVE ENDURED THE SIGHT. The contrast would have been too painful, THE GLORY TOO OVERWHELMING. Humanity could not have endured the presence of one of the pure, bright angels from glory; therefore Christ took not on Him the nature of angels; He came in the likeness of men.” {5BC 1131.1}

“BEFORE CHRIST LEFT HEAVEN AND CAME INTO THE WORLD to die, HE WAS TALLER THAN ANY OF THE ANGELS. He was majestic and lovely. But when his ministry commenced, he was but little taller than the common size of men then living upon the earth. HAD HE COME AMONG MEN WITH HIS NOBLE, HEAVENLY FORM, HIS OUTWARD APPEARANCE would have attracted the minds of the people to himself, and he would have been received without the exercise of faith. {2SP 39.2}

“Jesus Christ, the Majesty of Heaven, was not discerned in the disguise of humanity. He was the divine teacher sent from God, the glorious treasure given to humanity. He was fairer than the sons of men, but HIS MATCHLESS GLORY WAS HIDDEN under a cover of poverty and suffering. HE VEILED HIS GLORY in order that divinity might touch humanity” {Youth Instructor, August 22, 1895 par. 4}

“The King of glory stooped low to take humanity. Rude and forbidding were His earthly surroundings. HIS GLORY WAS VEILED, THAT THE MAJESTY OF HIS OUTWARD FORM MIGHT NOT BECOME AN OBJECT OF ATTRACTION…”{CSA 5.3}

“They gave evidence that He had come direct from the most excellent glory; BUT THE GLORY ITSELF WAS CONCEALED.” {ST December 14, 1904, par. 1}

“Christ made it possible when He LAID ASIDE His royal robes, His royal crown, stepped down from His royal throne, clothed His divinity with humanity that humanity might touch humanity. He could not with His glory and majesty take His position among men. The glory must be LAID ASIDE. {RH January 7, 1902, Art. B, par. 2}

“Christ, the Light of the world, VEILED THE DAZZLING SPLENDOR OF HIS DIVINITY and came to live as a man among men, that they might, without being consumed, become acquainted with their Creator. No man has seen God at any time except as He is revealed through Christ.” {CCh 75.4}

“This Saviour WAS the brightness of His Father’s glory and the express image of His person. He possessed DIVINE MAJESTY, PERFECTION, AND EXCELLENCE. HE WAS EQUAL WITH GOD. ‘It pleased the Father that in Him should all fullness dwell.’ ‘Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: BUT made Himself of no reputation, and TOOK UPON HIM THE FORM OF A SERVANT, AND WAS MADE IN THE LIKENESS OF MEN: and BEING FOUND AS A MAN, HE HUMBLED HIMSELF, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.’” { 2T 200.1}

“The apostle would call our attention from ourselves to the Author of our salvation. He presents before us HIS TWO NATURES, divine and human. HERE IS THE DESCRIPTION OF THE DIVINE: “Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God.” He was “the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person.” {5BC 1126.7} “NOW, OF THE HUMAN: He “was made in the likeness of men: and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death.” He voluntarily assumed human nature. It was His own act, and by His own consent. He clothed His divinity with humanity. He was all the while as God, but HE DID NOT APPEAR AS GOD. HE VEILED THE DEMONSTRATIONS OF DEITY, which had commanded the homage, and called forth the admiration, of the universe of God. He was God while upon earth, but HE DIVESTED HIMSELF OF THE FORM OF GOD, AND IN ITS STEAD TOOK THE FORM AND FASHION OF A MAN. He walked the earth as a man. For our sakes He became poor, that we through His poverty might be made rich. HE LAID ASIDE HIS GLORY AND HIS MAJESTY. HE WAS GOD, BUT THE GLORIES OF THE FORM OF GOD HE FOR A WHILE RELINQUISHED…” {5BC 1126.8}

“As a personal being, God has revealed Himself in His Son. Jesus, the outshining of the Father’s glory, “and the express image of His person,” Hebrews 1:3, WAS ON EARTH FOUND IN FASHION AS A MAN. As a personal Saviour He came to the world. As a personal Saviour He ascended on high. As a personal Saviour He intercedes in the heavenly courts. Before the throne of God in our behalf ministers “One like unto the Son of man.” Revelation 1:13.” {CCh 75.3}

“Christ came to this world as the expression of the very heart and mind and nature and character of God. He was the brightness of the Father’s glory, the express image of His person. BUT HE LAID ASIDE His royal robe and kingly crown, and STEPPED DOWN from His high command to take the place of a servant.” {MM 19.1}

“Christ took upon Himself human nature, A NATURE INFERIOR TO HIS HEAVENLY NATURE.” (The Review and Herald, April 5, 1906). {5BC 1130.6}

What do these statements reveal about Christ’s humanity?

• “Christ came to earth, BUT NOT IN ”ALL THE BRIGHTNESS OF HIS MAJESTY AND GLORY,”

• Jesus, as a man, “had no form or majesty that we should look at him, and no beauty that we should desire him.” (Isaiah 53:2)

• “Before Christ came in the likeness of men, He existed in the express image of His Father.”

• He divested Himself of the FORM of God, and in its stead took the form and fashion of a man.

• He laid aside His glory and His majesty. He was God, but the glories of the form of God He for a while relinquished.

• Christ was born in the LIKENESS OF MEN; in the LIKENESS OF SINFUL FLESH (Romans 8:3). — Father gave up His Son who, in his pre-incarnation, WAS “made in the express image of his person”

• “He lived out the CHARACTER OF GOD but through his human body”

• His human nature was inferior to His Heavenly nature.

What this tells us is that while Jesus lived out the CHARACTER of God (express image of the Father’s character), His earthly personage did not fully manifest “ALL the brightness of his majesty and glory, one equal with God in authority, dignity, and divine perfection.”

Christ’s pre-incarnate personage

The following statements describe how pre-existent Christ bore the Father’s express image, not just in His character but also in His features (likeness in His physical appearance).

“God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth” (John 4:24)

“And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his SHAPE (John 5:37)

“Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the FACE of my Father which is in heaven (Matt 18:10)

The Pen of Inspiration tells us that God is a Spirit, and yet He is a tangible, personal Being with shape. That said, if Jesus is the express image of His Father (Heb 1:3), then it would stand to reason that Jesus existed as a Spirit but also had tangible form.

“….God is a spirit; YET HE IS A PERSONAL BEING, for man was made in His image. As a personal being, God has revealed Himself in His Son. Jesus, the outshining of the Father’s glory, “and the express image of His person” (Hebrews 1:3)…. {Ed 131.5}

“BEFORE Christ came in the likeness of men, HE EXISTED IN THE EXPRESS IMAGE OF HIS FATHER. He thought it not robbery to be equal with God. NEVERTHELESS HE VOLUNTARILY EMPTIED HIMSELF, AND TOOK THE FORM OF A SERVANT. He was the incarnate God, the light of heaven and earth.” {YI December 20, 1900, par. 4}

“Christ alone was able to represent the Deity. He who had been in the presence of the Father from the beginning, He who was the EXPRESS IMAGE OF THE INVISIBLE GOD, was alone sufficient to accomplish this work. No verbal description could reveal God to the world. Through a life of purity, a life of perfect trust and submission to the will of God, a life of humiliation such as even the highest seraph in heaven would have shrunk from, God Himself must be revealed to humanity. In order to do this…” {1SM 264.2}

“I had often been shown the lovely Jesus, THAT HE IS A PERSON. I HAD ASKED HIM IF HIS FATHER WAS A PERSON, AND HAD A FORM LIKE HIMSELF. Said Jesus, ‘I am in the express image of my Father’s person.’ I had often seen that the spiritual view took away the glory of heaven, and that in many minds the throne of David, and the lovely person of Jesus had been burned up by the fire of spiritual interpretation.” {LS80 230.3}

“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.'” (Letter From Sister Harmon, Day-Star, March 14, 1846, par. 7) {EW 54.2}

“From eternity there was a complete unity between the Father and the Son. THEY WERE TWO, YET LITTLE SHORT OF BEING IDENTICAL; two in individuality, yet one in spirit, and heart, and character.” (The Youth Instructor, Dec. 16, 1897 par. 5)

“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.” (Spirit of Prophecy, vol. 2, p. 91)

“BEFORE CHRIST LEFT HEAVEN AND CAME INTO THE WORLD TO DIE, HE WAS TALLER THAN ANY OF THE ANGELS. He was majestic and lovely. But WHEN HIS MINISTRY COMMENCED, HE WAS BUT LITTLE TALLER THAN THE COMMON SIZE OF MEN THEN LIVING UPON THE EARTH. HAD HE COME AMONG MEN WITH HIS NOBLE, HEAVENLY FORM, HIS OUTWARD APPEARANCE would have attracted the minds of the people to himself, and he would have been received without the exercise of faith. {2SP 39.2}

“Adam, who stands among the risen throng, is of lofty height and majestic form, in stature BUT LITTLE BELOW THE SON OF GOD.”  {GC 644.3}

Note: After sin the Man Christ Jesus, the new corporate Head of humanity, stands taller than our original head and father (Adam). It would appear that in the sinless realm those who hold headship or leadership roles are taller. The servant of the Lord also mentions each heavenly legion having “a tall commanding angel at their head” {EW 168.1}

“Christ is the express image of His Father’s person, and the angels could see in the Son a perfect representation of God…{Lt55-1903.15}

“The apostle Paul speaks of our Mediator, THE ONLY-BEGOTTEN SON OF GOD, WHO IN A STATE OF GLORY WAS IN THE FORM OF GOD, the Commander of all the heavenly hosts, and who, when He clothed His divinity with humanity, took upon Him the FORM OF A SERVANT.” {1SM 243.2}

Christ’s Glorified human stature after His ascension

“On each side of the cloudy chariot were wings, and beneath it were living wheels; and as the chariot rolled upward, the wheels cried, “Holy,” and the wings, as they moved, cried, “Holy,” and the retinue of holy angels around the cloud cried, “Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty!” And the saints in the cloud cried, “Glory! Alleluia!” And the chariot rolled upward to the Holy City. Before entering the city, the saints were arranged in a perfect square, with Jesus in the midst. HE STOOD HEAD AND SHOULDERS ABOVE THE SAINTS AND ABOVE THE ANGELS. His majestic FORM and lovely countenance could be seen by all in the square.” Early Writings {EW 287.2}

“ALL COME FORTH FROM THEIR GRAVE THE SAME IN STATURE AS WHEN THEY ENTERED THE TOMB. Adam, who stands among the risen throng, is of lofty height and majestic form, in stature BUT LITTLE BELOW THE SON OF GOD.” -EGW, Darkness Before Dawn pg. 50.2 {GC 644.3} {DD 50.2}

“But when he ascended up on high, and led a multitude of captives, escorted by the heavenly host, and was received in through the gates of the city, with angelic songs of triumph and rejoicing, I beheld with admiration and wonder, that HE POSSESSED THE SAME EXALTED STATURE THAT HE HAD BEFORE HE CAME INTO THE WORLD TO DIE FOR MAN. Said the angel, God, who wrought so great a miracle as to make Christ flesh to dwell among men, and will with his almighty power lift up fallen, degenerate, and dwarfed man, and after they are redeemed from the earth, make them “grow up as calves of the stall,” COULD IN HIS INFINITE POWER RETURN TO HIS DEAR SON HIS OWN EXALTED STATURE, WHICH WAS HIS BEFORE HE LEFT HEAVEN, and humbled himself as a man, and submitted to the death of the cross. Spiritual Gifts {4aSG 119.2}

It is no marvel with the angelic host that their loved Commander, after he had carried out the plan of salvation, and ascended up to Heaven, SHOULD TAKE HIS OWN EXALTED STATURE, and be clothed with majesty and glory, which was his before he left Heaven. But it was a marvel with all heaven, that the Father suffered the Son of his bosom to lay aside his glory, and come down to earth, and submit to humiliation, and the agonizing death of the cross to save fallen man.” Spiritual Gifts {4aSG 119.3}

Original man was created in God’s image

“So God created man IN HIS OWN IMAGE, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” — Genesis 1:7

“And God said, Let us make man in our IMAGE, AFTER OUR LIKENESS…” —Genesis 1:26

Inspiration also tell us that,

“Man was to bear God’s image, BOTH IN OUTWARD RESEMBLANCE AND IN CHARACTER. Christ alone is ‘the express image’ (Hebrews 1:3) of the Father; but man was formed in the likeness of God” (PP 45) and spoke of Adam as having “his mind and body created in GOD’S OWN SIMILITUDE” (YI January 31, 1901).

“Eve was not quite as tall as Adam. Her head reached a little above his shoulders.” {1SP 24.2}

Note: The personality of the Father and the Son is the bases for how man was created. Please note that the original man was created in the image of God and in His likeness, (”both in outward resemblance and in character”). Therefore when Ellen White speaks of Christ alone being “the express image” of the Father, she is referring to both outward resemblance and in character.

Lucifer’s personage before the fall:

“Had not the Lord made the covering cherub so beautiful, SO CLOSELY RESEMBLING HIS OWN IMAGE; had not God awarded him special honor; had anything been left undone in the gifts of beauty and power and honor, then Satan might have had some excuse…{GCDB, March 2, 1897 par. 33}

“Evil originated with Lucifer, who rebelled against the government of God. Before his fall he was a covering cherub, distinguished by his excellence. GOD MADE HIM good and beautiful, AS NEAR AS POSSIBLE LIKE HIMSELF….{RH September 24, 1901}

How near is “as near as possible” in terms of God’s ability? I would say it is very close wouldn’t you? Thus the conclusion follows that if we were able to observe heaven back then and see the pre-incarnate Son of God and Lucifer side by side we might actually be tempted to think they were brothers! Inspiration does tell us that Christ was taller though.

Note: Inspiration tells us that Christ “existed in the express image of his Father”, “not in features alone, but also in perfection of character” BEFORE he came to earth. This is significant for when Ellen White speaks of Christ being “express image” of the Father” “in ALL the brightness of His majesty” she is describing not just the character of Christ but also the outward appearance.

Clearly, when Jesus was born of a virgin, he was not “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.” Instead, He “hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.” (Isaiah 53:2) There is are obvious contrasts (as you shall see more) between the Begotten Son in his pre-incarnation compared to His incarnation.

Was Jesus “EQUAL WITH GOD IN AUTHORITY” on earth?

“HE STEPPED DOWN FROM THE THRONE OF HONOR, LAID OFF HIS ROYAL ROBE AND HIS ROYAL CROWN, GAVE BACK INTO HIS FATHER’S HAND THE SCEPTER, and veiling divinity with humanity, humbled himself, and came to a world all seared and marred with the curse. “For your sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be rich.” Although he was the Majesty of heaven, he bore the cross of shame. {YI May 27, 1897, par. 3}

Note: When the Son stepped down from the throne of heaven, He actually handed the scepter BACK into the hand of God (which, by the way, shows you where He first got it from but that’s another study) Thus what is happening here, in this giving back of the scepter into the Father’s hand, is that the Son temporarily gave up His rights and status that previously belonged to Him-this must be understood in the sense of Him voluntarily not using it.

Again the following quote clarifies:

“When Jesus was awakened to meet the storm, He was in perfect peace. There was no trace of fear in word or look, for no fear was in His heart. BUT HE RESTED NOT IN THE POSSESSION OF ALMIGHTY POWER. It was not as the “Master of earth and sea and sky” that He reposed in quiet. THAT POWER HE HAD LAID DOWN, and He says, “I can of Mine own self do nothing.” John 5:30. He trusted in the Father’s might. It was in faith—faith in God’s love and care—that Jesus rested, and the POWER OF THAT WORD WHICH STILLED THE STORM WAS THE POWER OF GOD.” (Ellen White, Desire of Ages, pg. 336)

This shows how Man Christ did not have equal authority with the Father during His time here on earth. That power He had voluntarily laid down. He was not manifesting His full glory which he had prior to His virgin birth. He put all the affairs of heaven in God’s hands.

“Father,” He says, “I will that they also, whom Thou hast given Me, be with Me where I am.” And then the Father declares, “Let all the angels of God worship Him.” The heavenly host prostrate themselves before Him, and raise their song of triumph and joy. Glory encircles the King of heaven, and was beheld by all the heavenly intelligences. No words can describe the scene which took place as THE SON OF GOD WAS PUBLICLY REINSTATED IN THE PLACE OF HONOR AND GLORY WHICH HE VOLUNTARILY LEFT WHEN HE BECAME A MAN. {ST May 10, 1899, par. 17}

“Thus the prayer of Christ was answered. HE WAS GLORIFIED WITH THE GLORY WHICH HE HAD with His Father before the world was. But amid this glory, Christ does not lose sight of His toiling, struggling ones upon earth. He has a request to make of His Father. He waves back the heavenly host until He is in the direct presence of Jehovah, and then He presents His petition in behalf of His chosen ones. {ST May 10, 1899, par. 16}

Some considerations for the following statements, which seems to suggest that Christ had the same authority on earth.

“Then look beneath the disguise, and whom do we see?—Divinity, the eternal Son of God, JUST AS MIGHTY, JUST AS INFINITELY GIFTED WITH ALL THE RESOURCES OF POWER, and He was found in fashion as a man. {Lt37-1887.22}

“His divinity was veiled beneath humanity. HE HID WITHIN HIMSELF THOSE ALL-POWERFUL ATTRIBUTES WHICH BELONGED TO HIM AS ONE EQUAL WITH GOD. At times his divine character flashed forth with such wonderful power that all who were capable of discerning spiritual things pronounced him the Son of God. {3SP 259.1}

“The WORLD’S REDEEMER WAS EQUAL WITH GOD. HIS AUTHORITY WAS AS THE AUTHORITY OF GOD. He declared that He had no existence separate from the Father. THE AUTHORITY BY WHICH HE SPOKE, and wrought miracles, WAS EXPRESSLY HIS OWN, yet He assures us that He and the Father are one.” { 5BC 1142.2 }

It is true that Christ retained all the attributes of divinity even as a Man, but the authority/power which He exercised on earth ultimately came from the Father, for Christ laid all that aside and was bound by humanity and the task that was laid out before Him only afforded Him to do what His Father dictated. If Christ had the same authority as the Father on earth in the absolute sense then why did He say, “I can of Mine own self do nothing?” (John 5:30) There would have been no need to exercise His faith, nor to seek power from on high through His prayer; He would have just relied upon Himself to perform it. The “authority by which He spoke, and wrought miracles” being “expressly His own,” therefore must be understood as, the Father giving Christ, the permission to utilize Father’s authority, as though it was Christ’s own authority. Christ “trusted in the Father’s might. It was in faith—faith in God’s love and care—that Jesus rested, and the POWER OF THAT WORD WHICH STILLED THE STORM WAS THE POWER OF GOD.” (Desire of Ages, pg. 336)

Son in a New Sense

“The more we think about Christ’s becoming a babe here on earth, the more wonderful it appears. How can it be that the helpless babe in Bethlehem’s manger is STILL THE DIVINE SON OF GOD? Though we cannot understand it, we can believe that He who made the worlds, for our sakes became a helpless babe. Though higher than any of the angels, though as great as the Father on the throne of heaven, He became one with us. In Him God and man became one, and it is in this fact that we find the hope of our fallen race.“ (Selected Messages 3:127, 128). {LHU 75.5}

Note: To be STILL the divine Son of God means He was already the Son of God before
taking on humanity.

“Christ brought men and women power to overcome. He came to this world in human form, to live a man amongst men. He assumed the liabilities of human nature, to be proved and tried. In His humanity He was a partaker of the divine nature. IN HIS INCARNATION HE GAINED IN A NEW SENSE THE TITLE OF THE SON OF GOD. Said the angel to Mary, ‘The power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God’ (Luke 1:35). While the Son of a human being, HE BECAME THE SON OF GOD IN A NEW SENSE. Thus He stood in our world–the Son of God, yet allied by birth to the human race.” (Signs of the Times, August 2, 1905) {5BC 1114.10}

Note: Unless Christ was already a Son before He came to our world, He could not be a Son “in a new sense.”

Begotten vs. Creation-comparing 2 statements

1) “As God He could not be tempted: but as a man He could be tempted, and that strongly, and could yield to the temptations… HIS HUMAN NATURE WAS CREATED; IT DID NOT EVEN POSSESS THE ANGELIC POWERS. It was human, IDENTICAL WITH OUR OWN.” {6MR 111.1}

2) “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.” {ST May 30, 1895 par. 3}

A few questions to consider for our trinitarian brothers who say pre-incarnate Christ was not begotten before He came down to earth.

1. In the statement #2, Why would Ellen White insist that Christ was “not a son by creation” but “a son begotten” if “creation” and ”begotten” carry essentially the same meaning as some (trinitarian brothers) claim?

2. Why would Ellen White say Christ’s “human nature was created”(#1) referring to His incarnation and yet she insists Christ was “not a son by creation” but begotten (#2), if she is referring to Christ’s incarnation in both statements?

Note: At the time of His incarnation the Son of God actually became a creature of dust just like us! He took on real human substance! And He did this in order to actually become the new Adam! Now the first Adam was a created son of God but he fell. The pre-incarnate, only begotten Son of God became a “created” Son Himself; He took part of the same nature as the Bible teaches and statement #1 clearly affirms it.

In light of these facts, when Ellen White said (in statement #2) that Christ was “NOT a son by creation” (as was Adam) but a “Son begotten”, she cannot be referring to Christ’s incarnation. Thus the most logical deduction would be that it is referring to Christ’s pre-incarnate begetting.

3. If begotten Son is only in light of Christ incarnation, and if the nature of Christ’s incarnation was such that “IT DID NOT EVEN POSSESS THE ANGELIC POWERS” then when or how is it that Christ was “made” (G1096 γεννάω gennaō) SO MUCH BETTER than the angels and obtained a more excellent name [Heb 1:4]?”

vs 1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,

vs 2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us BY HIS SON, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

vs 3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person…

vs 4 Being made [γεννάω gennaō come into existence] SO MUCH BETTER THAN THE ANGELS, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.” — Hebrews 1:1-4

Note: Reasonable deduction here is that Christ’s pre-incarnate personality was “SO MUCH BETTER THAN THE ANGELS,” (referring to Christ’s “express image of his [Father’s] person” in verse 3 just prior) for Christ’s incarnate personality “DID NOT EVEN POSSESS THE ANGELIC POWERS.”

Here’s what one of the church pioneers had to say about Hebrews 1:4,

“He is better than the angels, because HE IS UNCREATED, BEGOTTEN SON, THE CREATOR. To Him, and not to the angels, has it been said, “Sit on My right hand, until I make Thine enemies – Thy footstool.” Nevertheless the angels are not insignificant beings, since they have the speed and strength of the winds, and the brightness and swiftness of the lightning. These glorious beings are content to be servants to mortals who are heirs of salvation, since it is the will of the Master.” E. J. Waggoner {PTUK August 26, 1897, p. 531.1}

Son of God vs Son of Man

Consider the following quotes:

“In Christ were united THE DIVINE and THE HUMAN—THE CREATOR and THE CREATURE. THE NATURE OF GOD, whose law had been transgressed, and THE NATURE OF ADAM, the transgressor, meet in Jesus—THE SON OF GOD, and THE SON OF MAN…” {EGW, Manuscript 141, 1901}

Compare and contrast between the pre-incarnate Christ vs the incarnate based on the above statement:

Pre-incarnate Christ
Divine
Creator
Nature of God
Son of God

vs.

Incarnate Christ
Human
Creature
Nature of Adam
Son of man

Are you catching it? Read closely! How was “the nature of Adam” met in Jesus? Through Him being “the Son of man.” (by a miracle birth through the virgin Mary). So, how then was “the nature of God” met in Him? Though Him being what? Read the quote! The Son of Whom? The Son of God! The pre-incarnate Christ, the divine creator, possessing the nature of God because He is the real Son of God, became the Son of Man—a human, a creature, partaking the nature of Adam.

Furthermore, please note that the incarnation of Christ is characterized above as Christ becoming a “creature” from being the “creator.” Why is this significant? If you recall, Ellen White specifically referred to Christ being “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..” {ST May 30, 1895 par. 3} Thus, the “Son begotten in the express image” statement cannot be referring to incarnation.

“IT WAS THE ONLY BEGOTTEN SON OF GOD WHO STEPPED DOWN. He gave himself for us. Leaving his splendor, his majesty, his high command, and clothing his divinity with humanity, that humanity might touch humanity, and divinity lay hold upon divinity, he came to this earth, and in our behalf suffered the death of the cross.” {EGW, GCB April 23, 1901, Art. B, par. 3}

“THE SON OF GOD BECAME THE SON OF MAN. He was born of a woman. To Mary the angel said, “Thou shalt call his name Jesus, for he shall save his people from their sins.” [Matthew 1:21.] For thirty years Jesus lived a quiet, busy life at His home in Nazareth. His hands were hardened with toil, and His brow was wet with sweat. He lived among the sorrowing and the poor and was one with them. He knows how to pity the poorest and the most sorrowful. THOUGH HE WAS THE SON OF GOD, the maker of the worlds and all things, YET HE TOOK THE PART OF THE SERVANT, so that we might believe that He loved us and gave Himself to us and for us. {EGW, Ms45-1892.2}

“Our redemption was wrought out, NOT BY THE SON OF GOD’S REMAINING IN HEAVEN, BUT BY THE SON OF GOD’S BECOMING INCARNATE—taking humanity upon Him and coming to this world. Thus eternal life was brought to us. That which authority, commands, and promises could not do, God did by coming to this world in the likeness of sinful flesh.” {Lt253-1903.29}

The ONLY BEGOTTEN SON OF GOD BECAME A HELPLESS BABE in Bethlehem. It was He who was now speaking to the Jewish people, but they knew Him not. From the mount He had spoken, saying, “I am the Lord thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.” [Exodus 20:2.] He was now standing before them in His assumed humanity, giving them a lesson that they would never forget, whether they heeded it or disregarded it. {Ms117-1903.16}

It was to save us that the SON OF GOD BECAME A MAN OF SORROWS and acquainted with grief…. Let a sense of the infinite sacrifice made for our redemption be ever with you, and the ballroom will lose its attractions. {TMK 311.3}

“IN HIS DIVINE NATURE Jesus was declared to be the SON OF GOD.” (EGW, ST August 5,  1889, par. 3)

Note: It is not too difficult for us to see from the statements above that Jesus existed as the only begotten Son of God BEFORE He “stepped down” and “became the Son of Man” by being “born of a woman;”

Although Jesus experienced being the Son of God “in a new sense” (as a creature of dust), He did not become the Son of God through incarnation, He was already the Son of God; the condescension made Him become the Son of Man.

But didn’t Christ had all the attributes of “express image of the Father” while on earth?

Take a look at the following statements that indicate that Christ, while on earth possessed the express image of the Father:

“Looking upon Christ IN THE FLESH, we look upon God in humanity, and SEE IN HIM THE BRIGHTNESS OF DIVINE GLORY, THE EXPRESS IMAGE OF GOD THE FATHER.” (Selected Messages 3:127, 128). {LHU 75.5}

“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. It is in this union that we find the hope of our fallen race. LOOKING UPON CHRIST IN HUMANITY, we look upon God, and SEE IN HIM THE BRIGHTNESS OF HIS GLORY, THE EXPRESS IMAGE OF HIS PERSON.” —The Signs of the Times, July 30, 1896. { 7ABC 443.4}

As noted previously, “express image” has both physical and spiritual meaning. She makes it very clear in the aforementioned statements that He was divested of His physical glory when He came to this world and that it was restored to Him post-ascension. When she mentions “in the flesh” and that we “see in Him THE BRIGHTNESS OF DIVINE GLORY, THE EXPRESS IMAGE OF GOD THE FATHER,” She is clearly not referring to the external personality of Christ but to His character.

Notice the following statements:

“Man was to bear God’s image, BOTH IN OUTWARD RESEMBLANCE AND IN CHARACTER. Christ alone is ‘the express image’ (Hebrews 1:3) of the Father; but man was formed in the likeness of God” (PP 45) and spoke of Adam as having “his mind and body created in GOD’S OWN SIMILITUDE” (YI January 31, 1901).

“Jesus, the EXPRESS IMAGE OF THE FATHER’S PERSON, the effulgence of His glory; the self-denying Redeemer, throughout His pilgrimage of love on earth, WAS A LIVING REPRESENTATION OF THE CHARACTER OF THE LAW OF GOD. In His life it is made manifest that heaven-born love, Christlike principles, underlie the laws of eternal rectitude.” {MB 49.2}

“…our SAVIOUR CLOTHED HIS DIVINITY WITH HUMANITY. He employed the human faculties, for only by adopting these could He be comprehended by humanity. Only humanity could reach humanity. HE LIVED OUT THE CHARACTER OF GOD THROUGH THE HUMAN BODY which God had prepared for Him. He blessed the world by living out in human flesh the life of God, thus showing that He had the power to unite humanity to divinity.” – {1SM 264.2}

Note: When we speak of Christ, being the express image of His Father, it can refer to either His character or the outward appearance or both. In the statements above, she is describing the condition of man before sin, and how “man was formed in the likeness of God” and yet she declares, “Christ ALONE is the express image of the Father.” The “express image,” in this context, refers to how Christ ALONE expresses the Father’s divine substance as well as Christ outward appearance and His inward traits (character) so perfectly, in ways that distinguishes Him from any created being, including Lucifer who was created “AS NEAR AS POSSIBLE LIKE [God] HIMSELF.” Referring back to our original statement under consideration, Christ was begotten of the Father in “ALL the brightness of His majesty and glory…” {ST May 30, 1895 par. 3} “ALL” denotes the idea that Christ was begotten with the express image of God the Father in all respects-His nature, His features, as well as His character. Again, Christ’s human birth cannot equate this description.

Summary

Jesus was not begotten in God’s full glory or majesty as a Man Christ; it was veiled. Yes, Jesus was born with the express image of the Father’s character but not in “ALL THE BRIGHTNESS OF HIS MAJESTY AND GLORY.” Nor did He have the equal authority with the Father while on earth.

However, Sister White says, “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.”

Thus, in ST May 30, 1895 par. 3 statement, Ellen White is clearly referring to pre-incarnate Jesus being begotten in the very express image of God in the fullest sense.

The Real Issue

Here is the real issue. the view of “begotten” sonship if understood as ontological sonship rests upon a real, solid, literal, sonship, whereas the view of the “anticipatory/convenant only sonship, floats, suspended upon **arbitrary** chosen “roles.” There is no explanation as to why the Father became Father and why the Son became the Son; no reason
able explanations as to why Christ, being an independent, ingenerate God being, without a real ontological-filial relationship, is the very express image of His Father. Whereas it makes perfect sense why an ontological son would have a spitting image of his Father and why a real Father can command preeminence over his son even though they are ontological equals. To me the latter just makes more sense to my simple mind.

The view of the “only a covenant/anticipatory son” if followed to its ultimate conclusion, is that the plan of salvation devolves to a theatrical exercise. There is no real “Father” and “Son”, these are just roles entered into to eventually bring about salvation only in the event of sin occurring. This conclusion is inescapable in an “anticipation Son” view without an ontological, eternal Father-Son relationship as its foundation. The Son came to earth to reveal the Father but if Father is not his real father then who is he or what is he before he decided to take on the roll of a “father”??? And is this a role He will continue to assume even after the “covenant relationship” expires? Or does it expire? It just leaves more questions than answers…

There’s an even more disturbing conclusion that this leads to… Under this idea, Christ chose to enter into the role of a “Son”. He did this in anticipation of a plan of salvation for if/when sin arose. Sin arose with Lucifer who was jealous of Christ’s ROLE as the “Son”. If you read the first chapters of Patriarchs and Prophets, Spirit of Prophecy, Volume 1 or Story of Redemption or any of the other places Ellen White talks of this apostasy in heaven, she speaks of Lucifer being jealous specifically of Christ’s “position”.

So, according to this reasoning, Christ, role-playing the part of “Son” for the purposes of eventual salvation from eventual sin, was in doing so become catalyst for the very sin that required the plan of salvation in the first place? I don’t see any way around this reasoning.

“CHRIST WAS THE ONLY BEGOTTEN SON OF GOD, AND LUCIFER, THAT GLORIOUS ANGEL, GOT UP A WARFARE OVER THE MATTER, until he had to be thrust down to the earth. {Ms86-1910 (August 21, 1910) par. 30}

Furthermore, the inspired testimonies reveal that the plan of redemption was kept confidential only between the Father and the Son, even Lucifer was not privy to know. If the role (of Father and Son) was to be assumed for the purpose of eventual sin and redemption, why would God and Christ prematurely or preemptively act out the eventual roles before sin?

To my mind, if a Person Who took the role of “Father” and a Person Who took the role of “Son” had no discernable difference before taking these roles, why deliberately create the grounds for questioning their position in the first place? Why create a potential for jealousy? If They just appeared together everywhere as exactly the same with exactly the same authority and rank there would have been no room for questioning at all?

Statements by SDA Pioneers

Below statements by SDA pioneers clearly show that they understood the difference between “creation” and “begotten” and distinguished them as such.

“When in consider the Scripture statements concerning him,— that he was the “Son of God,” made in the express image of his Father; he “thought it not robbery to be equal with God;” is One whom it is right and proper to call God in addressing him, since he takes his Father’s name, is made of his substance; One who sits on the same throne with the Father; One to whom the Father has entrusted all authority and power, and by whom the Eternal God made the worlds above; the very personation of wisdom itself, …” — G. I. Butler, “Learning Obedience by the Things He Suffered,” Review & Herald December 10, 1889

“NOT AN ATTRIBUTE OR POWER HAS THE DIVINITY OF THE FATHER WITHHELD FROM THE SON. WHEN HE BEGAT HIM OF HIS OWN SUBSTANCE, the infinite majesty, glory, and excellence, the supreme wisdom, omnipotence, omniscience, and SELF SUPPORTING EXISTENCE from which all the powers of the universe take their origin, was as A NECESSARY CONSEQUENCE CONVEYED TO HIM. Though TWO BEINGS, DISTINCT IN INDIVIDUALITY AND PERSON, they are one in all else, perfectly united in methods, character, love and goodness, power, prescience, and might. — G. I. Butler, August 22, 1893, “Our Saviour, Divine,” Adventist Review & Herald

“TO BE THE ONLY BEGOTTEN SON OF GOD MUST BE UNDERSTOOD IN A DIFFERENT SENSE THAN TO BE A SON BY CREATION; for in that sense all the creatures he has made are sons…His being the only begotten of the Father supposes that NONE EXCEPT HIM WERE THUS BEGOTTEN; hence he is, in truth and verity the only begotten Son of God; and as such he must be Divine; that is, be a partaker of the Divine nature. This term expresses his highest, and most exalted nature…BUT ALL THE WORKS OF CREATION ARE ASCRIBED TO HIM as the “first born of every creature;’ hence the birth spoken of, MUST HAVE BEEN PREVIOUS TO THE EXISTENCE OF THE FIRST CREATURE IN HEAVEN OR IN EARTH…This gives “the only begotten of the Father” (see verse 14) intelligent existence BEFORE THE FIRST ACT OF CREATIVE POWER was put forth, and proves that it is his Divine nature here spoken of; ” — J.M. Stephenson Review and Herald Nov 14, 1854

“According to this, Jesus Christ is begotten of God IN A SENSE THAT NO OTHER BEING IS; else he could not be his only begotten Son. Angels are called sons of God, and so are righteous men; but CHRIST IS HIS SON IN A HIGHER SENSE, IN A CLOSER RELATION, than either of these. God made men and angels out of materials already created. He is the author of their existence, their Creator, hence their Father. But JESUS CHRIST WAS BEGOTTEN OF THE FATHER’S OWN SUBSTANCE. HE WAS NOT CREATED OUT OF MATERIAL AS THE ANGELS AND OTHER CREATURES WERE. He is truly and emphatically the “Son of God,” the same as I am the son of my father. This will appear more plain as we proceed” — D.M. Canright, RH June 18, 1867

Note the similarity between Canright’s language here in 1867 and EGW’s language in the 1895 quote shared above. Canright continued on in this article to say the following:

“If he was the “beginning” of God’s creation, he must be a created being. This interpretation may be correct, YET IT IS MY OPINION THAT IT IS NOT. 1. It is the only text in the Bible from which this idea can be drawn. 2. IT SEEMS TO CONTRADICT MANY OTHER TEXTS WHICH MOST DEFINITELY STATE THAT CHRIST HIMSELF CREATED ALL THINGS. 3. If he is a created being, he cannot be worthy of worship of other created beings. 4. I SEE NOT HOW HE COULD BE THE “ONLY BEGOTTEN SON OF GOD” IF HE WAS CREATED BY GOD THE SAME AS OTHER CREATURES …At least THERE IS NO SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE IN THE TEXT TO PROVE THAT CHRIST IS A CREATED BEING” (Ibid)

“It is true that there are many sons of God; but Christ is the “only begotten Son of God,” and therefore the Son of God in a sense in which no other being ever was or ever can be. The angels are sons of God, as was Adam (Job 38:7; Luke 3:38), by creation; Christians are the sons of God by adoption (Rom. 8:14, 15); but Christ is the Son of God by birth. The writer to the Hebrews further shows that the position of the Son of God is not one to which Christ has been elevated, but that it is one which He has by right. He says that Moses was faithful in all the
house of God, as a servant, “but Christ as a Son over His own house.” Heb. 3:6. And he also states that Christ is the Builder of the house. Verse 3. It is He that builds the temple of the Lord, and bears the glory. Zech. 6:12, 13.” — E. J. Waggoner, Christ and His Righteousness p. 11-13

“That this very person, who was BORN BEFORE EVERY CREATURE, is the same as afterward appeared unto men upon this earth, in the land of Palestine, the beloved apostle John demonstrates beyond all possible doubt. — J. G. Matteson Review and Herald, April 10, 1866

Here Matteson articulates his view that Christ was “born before EVERY creature.” This makes Christ Himself something other than a creature. In another article from that same decade he taught:

“3. Christ is THE ONLY LITERAL SON OF GOD. “The only begotten of the Father. He is God because he is the Son of God; not by virtue of his resurrection. If Christ is THE ONLY BEGOTTEN OF FATHER, then we cannot be begotten of the Father in a literal sense. It can only be in a secondary sense of the word… (J. G. Matteson, Review and Herald, October 12th 1869, ‘Children of God’)

Even Uriah Smith, who had previously asserted that Christ was a created being in 1859, 1865 and 1878 started to change his tune in the 1880s. Quoting him now:

“Moreover, he is “the beginning of the creation of God.” Some understand by this language that Christ was the first created being, dating his existence far back before any other created being or thing, next to the self-existent and eternal God. BUT THE LANGUAGE DOES NOT NECESSARILY IMPLY THIS; for the words, “the beginning of the creation,” may simply signify that the work of creation, strictly speaking, was begun by him. And it is expressly declared that “without him was not anything made that was made.” Others, however, take the word ἀρχή to mean the agent or efficient cause, which is one of the definitions of the word, understanding that Christ, is the agent through whom God has created all things, but that THE SON CAME INTO EXISTENCE IN A DIFFERENT MANNER, AS HE IS CALLED “THE ONLY BEGOTTEN” OF THE FATHER. IT WOULD SEEM UTTERLY INAPPROPRIATE TO APPLY THIS EXPRESSION TO ANY BEING CREATED IN THE ORDINARY SENSE OF THAT TERM.” — Uriah Smith, 1881, Thoughts, Critical and Practical on the Book of Revelation, pg 73, 74

Note: In a later edition of this same book Uriah Smith calls the idea that Christ was a created being an “error” and asserts that:

“The Scriptures NOWHERE SPEAK OF CHRIST AS A CREATED BEING, BUT ON THE CONTRARY PLAINLY STATE HE WAS BEGOTTEN OF THE FATHER.” — 1897 Uriah Smith, Daniel and Revelation, p. 430

“Will you please favor me with those scriptures which plainly say that Christ is a created being?

Answer: “YOU ARE MISTAKEN IN SUPPOSING THAT S.D. ADVENTISTS TEACH THAT CHRIST WAS EVER CREATED. THEY BELIEVE, ON THE CONTRARY, THAT HE WAS “BEGOTTEN” OF THE FATHER, AND THAT HE CAN PROPERLY BE CALLED GOD AND WORSHIPED AS SUCH.” — W.H. Little John Question No. 96, Review and Herald, April 17, 1883, The commentary, Scripture questions, ‘Answers by W. H. Littlejohn

“It is for the well-being and happiness of God’s creatures that some of his intelligences should receive “gifts” and “powers” which others do not. Upon Christ, THE ONLY BEGOTTEN OF THE FATHER (ALL OTHER BEINGS WERE CREATED BY CHRIST) was bestowed creative, life-giving, and law-making power. In these he was made equal with the eternal Father. Upon no other being were bestowed such gifts. With this power Christ not only created all things, but he up-holds all life in this and every shining world. We read of him, “In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins; who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: for by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers; all things were created by him and for him: and he is before all things, and by him all things consist.” Colossians 1:14-17. — GCDB February 2-4, 1893, p. 99.11

“Elder Porter then said that IN SPEAKING OF CHRIST HE SHOULD NOT HAVE SAID CREATED, BUT “BEGOTTEN.” Begotten is the exact language of the Scripture. The new birth which we must experience to become the children of God is a new creation. We are born of the Spirit of God. This is beyond our comprehension. NEITHER CAN WE TELL HOW CHRIST WAS BEGOTTEN OF THE FATHER. This is one of the “deep things of God.” — General Conference and Daily Bulletin February 2-4, 1893, p. 120.5

“HE WAS BEGOTTEN, NOT CREATED. HE IS OF THE SUBSTANCE OF THE FATHER, SO THAT IN HIS VERY NATURE HE IS GOD; and since this is so “it pleased the Father that in him should all fullness dwell.” — E. J. Waggoner, The Signs of the Times, April 8, 1889

“This name [God] was not given to Christ in consequence of some great achievement, but it is His by right of inheritance. Speaking of the power and greatness of Christ, the writer to the Hebrews says that He is made so much better than the angels, because “He hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.” Heb. 1:4. A son always rightfully takes the name of the father; and Christ, as “the only begotten Son of God,” has rightfully the same name. A son, also, is, to a greater or less degree, a reproduction of the father; he has, to some extent, the features and personal characteristics of his father; not perfectly, because there is no perfect reproduction among mankind. But there is no imperfection in God, or in any of His works; and so Christ is the “express image” of the Father’s person. Heb. 1:3. As the Son of the self-existent God, He has by nature all the attributes of Deity. — E. J. Waggoner “Christ and His Righteousness pg 11, 1890

Again please note the similarity in language between Waggoner’s 1890 quote here and EGW’s 1895 quote up at the top. Here is yet another quote from Waggoner.

“CHRIST WAS BEGOTTEN, NOT CREATED; Satan was created, not begotten. As THE ONLY BEGOTTEN SON Christ could enter fully into the councils of God. Because he could not do this as Christ did, envy sprang up in the heart of Satan, and he began to determine, I will exalt myself. He began to stir up rebellion, to say, God is arbitrary, and he began also to get his sympathisers. “We are in slavery, and I have a better plan of government. Choose me as leader, exalt me, and then I will exalt you.” Do you not see the same principle that has been in the world ever since the fall? You exalt me and I will exalt you,-perhaps. — E.J. Waggoner Bible Echo and Signs of the Times February 17, 1896, p. 52.12

“THE ANGELS, therefore, ARE CREATED BEINGS, necessarily of a lower order than their Creator. CHRIST IS THE ONLY BEING BEGOTTEN OF THE FATHER.” — James Edson White [Son of Ellen White], Past Present and Future, p. 52

Note the contrast between the angels who are “created beings” and Christ who is “the only begotten begotten of the Father.”

More statements by pioneers:

“This is indeed a divine trio, but THE CHRIST OF THAT TRINITY WAS NOT A CREATED BEING such as His angels – HE WAS THE “ONLY BEGOTTEN” OF THE FATHER, and He came to the earth as the one with the Father FROM THE “DAYS OF ETERNITY” Micah 5:2 (margin). His goings forth were of old, and He came full of “grace and truth” to reveal God to man. John 1:14, 17 — R Hare, “The Trinity” Australian Union Conference Record July 19, 1909

“Adam was A SON OF GOD BY CREATION (Luke 3:38), being made in the image of God (Gen. 1:26). He was in fellowship with the life of the Creator. Through sin, he became “alienated from the life of God” (Eph. 4:18), and lost his place as a son of God. ONLY ONE WHO STOOD IN THE RELATION OF DIVINE SON COULD RESTORE MAN TO HIS PLACE AS A SON (Gal. 4:4, 5), and bestow upon him the privilege of being once more in the true sense a child of God. Our hope of salvation from sin, and restoration to permanent fellowship with God, finds a sure foundation in the fact that God sent HIS ONLY-BEGOTTEN SON to be our Saviour.” — SS Lesson Quarterly, 1st quarter 1921, Our Personal Saviour Jesus Christ, page 18, 19, lesson 6 for February 5th 1921, ‘The Son of God’

“Since CHRIST IS BEGOTTEN OF THE FATHER, he must therefore be of the same substance as the Father; hence he must have the same divine attributes that God has, AND THEREFORE HE IS GOD.” — O, A. Johnson, Bible Doctrines, page 34, Lesson IX, ‘God the Father’ 1917

“As the absolute Son, He, who ‘in the beginning was with God, and was God,’ WAS BEGOTTEN BEFORE TIMES ETERNAL; as the Son, who was the-God-man, He was begotten by the resurrection from the dead. So shall we be ‘sons of God, being sons, of the resurrection.’ Luke 20:26.” — W.W. Prescott Signs of the Times, Jan 8, 1929

He also made it equally clear, in the 1919 minutes, that He rejected the idea that this begotten Son was a created being.

“We believed a long time ago that Christ was a created being, IN SPITE OF WHAT SCRIPTURE SAYS. — W.W. Prescott, 1919 Minutes July 6, 1919 pg. 62

“…ANY IDEA THAT THE SON IS PART OF THE CREATION ITSELF IS UTTERLY FOREIGN TO PAUL’S CONCEPTION. See Colossians 2:9; 1 Corinthians 8:6; Philippians 2:6-8. Moffatt makes the expression, “the first-born of all creation,’ plainer by translating the Greek: “born first before all the creation;” and with this Goodspeed is in substantial agreement.
“THE WORD “BORN” IS USED BECAUSE, IN CONTRASTING THE CREATOR* WITH HIS CREATION, IT POSTULATES THE NATURE OF THE LORD’S ORIGIN. HE WAS NOT CREATED AS WERE CREATURES, BUT WAS BORN OUT OF GOD AS GOD; AND SO IS OF THE SAME NATURE AS THE FATHER. Just as a human son is born human by nature because his father is human, so the divine Son of God is by nature “born” God because His Father is God” — William G. Wirth “The ‘Signs” Question Corner” Signs of the Times, August 5th, 1930

“In our text in Hebrews we find revealed our Lord’s unique relation to God, the Father, and also His unique mode of derivation from the Father. In another place Paul calls Jesus, “His own Son (Rom. 8: 8),” THUS SEPARATING HIM FROM ALL CREATED INTELLIGENCES BY AN INFINITE GULF.” — G. F. Enoch [editor], Eastern Tidings, June 1st 1934, ‘This day have I begotten thee’

“CUMULATIVE EVIDENCE that the Son existed with the Father before creation is abundant in the Scriptures. In the few passages we have studied here, we find that Christ was with the Father “before the world was,” “from, the days of eternity,” “before the foundation of the world,” “before all things.” HE WAS THEREFORE NO PART OF CREATION, BUT WAS “BEGOTTEN OF THE FATHER” IN THE DAYS OF ETERNITY, AND WAS VERY GOD HIMSELF. — Sabbath School Lesson Study, 4th quarter 1936, Lesson 4, October 24th, 1936, pg. 12 “The Godhead”

“THE terms “Son of God” and “God the Son” are equivalent expressions in the mind of Jesus. HIS SONSHIP RESTED UPON A DIFFERENT BASIS FROM OURS. We are “sons of God,” being the product of His creation and redemption. HE WAS NEITHER CREATED NOR REDEEMED, but His Sonship comes by virtue of His derived power and attributes. This thought has been well expressed by another in the following quotation:” — Raymond Bullas, Australian Signs of the Times, 25th March 1935, ‘The Authority of Apostolic Teaching – Truth or tradition?

“We have only one perfect photograph of God, and this is Jesus Christ — Ellen White, Ms 70, 1899

“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.” — Ellen G. White, Review & Herald 9th July 1895 ‘The Duty of the Minister and the People’

“But while God’s Word speaks of the humanity of Christ when upon this earth, it also speaks decidedly regarding his preexistence. The Word EXISTED AS A DIVINE BEING, EVEN AS THE ETERNAL SON OF GOD, in union and oneness with his Father.” — Ellen White, The Review and Herald, April 5, 1906

Note: “Eternal Son of God” is not Man Christ

“In order that fallen man might be identified with the Son of God, the Son of God identified himself with humanity. He who was the Son of God became the Son of man. He who was equal with God in the courts of heaven, who was a begotten Son and not a created being, left his station there, and identified himself with a totally different order of beings.” — L. A. S., Review & Herald – October 15, 1903, “The Humanity of Christ”

“The greatest difficulty encountered in the plan of salvation is the fact that it is so natural for men to forget God and all His manifold benefits. Multitudes, multitudes, hardly realize that there is a living God in the universe. THE WHOLE TENDENCY OF MODERN THOUGHT IS IN THE DIRECTION OF IGNORING THE EXISTENCE OF A REAL, VERITABLE LIVING GOD, WHO HAS A FORM AND AN ACTUAL PERSONAL EXISTENCE, WHO RESIDES IN A REAL HEAVEN, HAS A THRONE, AND SITS IN JUDGMENT.
Many believe in an essence disseminated through space, everywhere in general, and nowhere in particular.” God is everywhere, and everything living is God. This is pantheism, Hinduism, Brahmanism, Buddhism, Theosophy, Christian Science, sublimated and imaginary. This is becoming the modern conception of the GREAT GOD WHO RULES ALL WORLDS, THE FATHER OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST, WHO WAS HIMSELF MADE IN HIS IMAGE, THE EXPRESS IMAGE OF HIS FATHER’S PERSON.” — G. I. Butler, The Signs of the Times, February 22, 1909 “Man’s Relation to God,”