The One who was made in the express image of the Father:

You know brothers, as I stop and consider the charges I receive from some of the brethren, I rejoice! I am convinced that many who make these charges are fighting against the pricks. The evidence for a pre-incarnate begotten Son is evident. Here is a bit more.

“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. {RH July 9, 1895, par. 13}

Note: In this quote Mrs. White describes God the Father’s “only begotten Son” as “Him who was MADE in the express image of His [the Father’s] person.” This is parallel to the ST May 30, 1895 quote wherein she defines the “only begotten Son” as:

“–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 {ST May 30, 1895, par. 3}

Note: Notice also in the RH, July 9, 1895 quote that inspiration does not say that God tore from His bosom in order to make Him into the express image of His Person (future tense) but rather He tore from His bosom “Him who was made” (past tense) in the express image of His Person.

This language tends to make the adherents of unbegottenism very uncomfortable and, sadly, what I am about to share can make it even worse for them if they cling to that view yet I pray that all readers will desire truth as it is in Jesus, no matter where it leads. We must not let cherished views blind us to the truth. Let’s keep reading from the pen of inspiration.

The One who was made one with God:

“The rebellion against God’s law was begun by Satan in heaven. By this rebellion sin was brought into existence. There is only one definition of sin. “Sin is the transgression of the law.” {17LtMs, Ms 1, 1902, par. 1}

“JESUS WAS MADE ONE WITH GOD. His exaltation created envy and jealousy in Satan’s heart. Satan insisted that God had not dealt with him justly. He criticized God’s plan of government. He declared the divine law to be arbitrary, detrimental to the interests of the heavenly universe, and in need of change {17LtMs, Ms 1, 1902, par. 2}

“Vital interests were at stake in the worlds that God had created. Would these supposed defects be made so apparent that the inhabitants of the heavenly universe would be justified in claiming that the law could be improved? Would Satan succeed in undermining their confidence in the law? {17LtMs, Ms 1, 1902, par. 3}

“God in His wisdom did not use measures of force to suppress Satan’s rebellion. Such measures would have aroused sympathy for Satan, strengthening his rebellion rather than changing his principles. If God had summarily punished him, many would have looked upon him as one who had dealt with unjustly, and he would have carried a much larger number with him in his apostasy {17LtMs, Ms 1, 1902, par. 4}

“It was necessary to give Satan time to develop his principles. He has had every opportunity to present his side of the question. He has been artful. As often as his position has been seen in its true light, he has changed to some other position. By making false charges, and by misstating the purposes and declared will of God, he has secured sympathizers. {17LtMs, Ms 1, 1902, par. 5}

Note: I have included a fair amount of the literary context because oftentimes our friends who adhere to unbegottenism try to make quotes like these about the incarnated Son of God. Yet the context shows that to be false. And look at the opening sentence of paragraph 2. It tells us that the Jesus WAS MADE one with God. This sentence is, once again, troubling to unbegottenism.

Perhaps that is why when the White Estate published this manuscript, as a part of “Christ Triumphant,” they left out the part about Jesus having been made one with God. And even when the full manuscript was released they added a bracketed portion to Mrs. White’s statement, presumably because of what the word “made” clearly suggests.

Christ Triumphant:

“The rebellion against God’s law was begun by Satan in heaven. By this rebellion sin was brought into existence…. Satan insisted that God had not dealt with him justly. He criticized God’s plan of government. He declared the divine law to be arbitrary, detrimental to the interests of the heavenly universe, and in need of change.{CTr 289.2}

Manuscript Release:

“The rebellion against God’s law was begun by Satan in heaven. By this rebellion sin was brought into existence. There is only one definition of sin. “Sin is the transgression of the law. [1 John 3:4.] {17LtMs, Ms 1, 1902, par. 1}

“Jesus was made one with God. [See Patriarchs and Prophets, 37, 38.] His exaltation created envy and jealousy in Satan’s heart. Satan insisted that God had not dealt with him justly. He criticized God’s plan of government. He declared the divine law to be arbitrary, detrimental to the interests of the heavenly universe, and in need of change. {17LtMs, Ms 1, 1902, par. 2}

You see if the statement is read how Mrs. White wrote it then the reader is left with the impression that the pre-incarnate Christ was made one with God. That is something that unbegottenism opposes and SDAs today adhere to unbegottenism. Thus the White Estate inserted a bracketed reference from the SOP that they think negates a pre-incarnate begotten Son. Yet let’s keep reading some more from the pen of inspiration. We will see, quite clearly, that Mrs. White held to a pre-incarnate Christ who was “begotten” or “made” in God’s express image and likeness.

The One made in the likeness of God:

“In order that man might be placed on vantage ground with God, Christ, The only begotten Son of God, MADE IN HIS EXPRESS IMAGE, came to this world AND IN THE LIKENESS OF HUMANITY lived a perfect life. “God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.”…{Ms127-1905.14}

“Christ was the Lord of heaven and earth, yet for our sake He became poor, that we through His poverty might be made rich. HE WAS MADE IN THE LIKENESS OF GOD, yet He humbled Himself and took upon Him the form of a servant, that He might save us. {20LtMs, Lt 133, 1905, par. 6}

Note: My brethren who continue to fight against the pre-incarnate begotten Son are tenacious but their efforts are worthy of a better cause. They cannot honestly refute the truth here. When the Son of God was incarnated He was made in the likeness of men so they can’t go that route with thE Lt 133, 1905 quote. Also, the quote is clearly speaking about Him before He humbled Himself to take human form. The word “yet” carries the meaning of “in spite of” here and indicates a change from one thing to the other. Let’s break it down.

1) He was the Lord of heaven and earth YET (or in spite of this) for our sake He became poor.

Here we see the pre-incarnate Lordship of Christ and the change is that He became poor for our sake.

2) He was made in the likeness of God YET (or in spite of this) He humbled Himself and took upon Himself servant form to save us.

Here we see the pre-incarnate Christ was made in God’s likeness and the change is that He humbled Himself to take on the form of a servant to save us.

I do not see how anyone can honestly deny these things but some will continue to deny them anyway. It’s quite a marvel to behold but God knows their hearts and He is Judge.

Now if you’ve been following along we have seen several usages of the word “made” about the pre-incarnate Christ. He “was made in the express image of the Father.” He “was made one with God.” He “was made in the likeness of God.”

If our brethren were consistent in their logic then they would say about Ellen White what they frequently say about those of us who believe in a pre-incarnate begotten Son. They would say that she has just made Him into a created being. Very few of them will actually say that though. It is amazing to me how they give Mrs. White a pass but accuse their non-trinitarian brethren when we say the exact same thing. However this does beg the question, how in the world is she using such language about the pre-incarnate Christ? The pre-incarnate Christ was made?

The answer is once again found in the usage of language from her time. You see in Egw’s day the word “made” did not have to mean “created.” Just like we have shown, time and time again, that a Son “begotten” is NOT a son “created” the same thing is true here about the Son who was “made” one with God, “made” in the express image of the Father, and “made” in the likeness of God. Let’s demonstrate this now.

If you look at the definitions for the word “make” in the 1828 dictionary you will see the first definition is “to compel; to constrain” but that really doesn’t concern us here. It’s the second definition that is key

“2. To form of materials; to fashion, to mold into shape; to cause to exist in a different form; or as a distinct thing.”

Now please pay attention here because we are going to see something very intriguing in the sentence that is in the 1828 dictionary that illustrates this particular definition. It reads:

“God not only made, but created; not only made the work, but the materials”

Here we see an usage of “made” that is distinct from “created” because that latter verb has to be included. God not only made but created! Did you catch it?

Here we find a harmonizing factor in how Mrs. White can speak of the pre-incarnate Son of God as “made” without making Him into a created being. We already know that she viewed Him as “a Son begotten” and NOT “a son by creation” like the angels but now she speaks of Him as “made” but even this does not mean created.

“He is the faithful and true Witness, “the beginning of the creation of God,” whose throne is of old, from everlasting. [Revelation 3:14] Behold Him, the mighty, UNCREATED Lord, the all-glorious Redeemer. {16LtMs, Lt 185, 1901, par. 9}

So then why would she use the word “made.” The answer is because of her begotten theology. The begotten faith of Mrs. White and the early Seventh-day Adventist church is that God begot His Son of His substance.

Mrs. White understood and taught that the Son of God’s “material” was “a part of [God] Himself.” {Lt36a-1890.11} He was “of one substance” {ST Nov 27, 1893, par.5} with the uncreated God. Or, to explain it using one of the other verbs she used when speaking about the oneness that Christ had with God, He was “assimilated” to the image of God.

“Lucifer was the most beautiful angel in the heavenly courts next to Jesus Christ, but Christ was one with God, ASSIMILATED TO THE IMAGE OF GOD to do the will of God. Satan, knowing that Christ had the first place next to God, began to insinuate to the angels that he should be next to God…. {Ms90-1910.4}

That quote is clearly talking about the pre-incarnate Christ. It is describing what occurred when satan was still in heaven stirring up rebellion among the angels. So it is back then that Christ was “assimilated to the image of God.” Now to assimilate means “to bring to a likeness; to cause to resemble; to convert into like substance.” Here we can see the semantic cross over with the definition of “make” as given above under meaning # 2 from Webster’s 1828 dictionary.

Now let’s look at the next definition of “make” in the 1828 dictionary.

“3. To create, to cause to exist; to form from nothing.”

And here is the sentence used to explain this one.

“God made the materials of the earth and of all worlds.”

So the verb “make” back in Egw’s day had two different usages (well, actually it has many more than that but only # 2 and # 3 were pertinent for this comment).

When we take into the picture the range of meaning and usage of this word, according to the contemporary meaning of its time, then we can see that Mrs. White used “made” of the Son of God with the same meaning as “begotten” or “assimilated” which is not “creation.” He is the only begotten Son, brought forth of God’s uncreated substance and thus is not a created being. He is actually a Divine Being, One who stands as the Father’s ontological equal. He is no less God in His nature than the Father Himself. This is why He is the only Son who is equal with the Father and the only Son who can be worshiped without sin. This is also the reason why the rebellious angels sought to hide this fact. It is the proof that their rebellion against God and Christ was unjustified.

“Angels were expelled from heaven because they would not work in harmony with God. They fell from their high estate because they wanted to be exalted. They had come to exalt themselves, and they forgot that their beauty of person and of character came from the Lord Jesus. This fact the [fallen] angels would obscure, that Christ was the only begotten Son of God, and they came to consider that they were not to consult Christ {TDG 128.2}

Hopefully you now see the truth and will not join in with the fallen angels in obscuring the truth about God and His only begotten Son.