JESUS, TWICE BEGOTTEN!!

A Revisiting of the Fundamental SDA Doctrine About

Jesus’ Begetting Before, At, and After Bethlehem!
By Derrick Gillespie

“Proverbs 8:24-25 When there were no depths,

I [Jesus] was brought forth….Before the mountains
were settled, before the hills was I brought forth”
“John 3:16 God so loved the world that He
gave His only begotten Son…”

This free eBook is best read with a live Internet Connection.

____________________________________________________
 INTRODUCTION
On the cover of this booklet are some of the most debated words of Scripture which are related
to Jesus’ Sonship, i.e. as seen in Proverbs 8:1, 22-31 and John 3:16.

“Proverbs 8:22 The LORD possessed me [wisdom or Jesus; see 1 Cor. 1:24] in the beginning of
his way, before his works of old.
Pro 8:23 I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was.
Pro 8:24 When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains
abounding with water.
Pro 8:25 Before the mountains were settled, before the hills
was I brought forth:
Pro 8:26 While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the
fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world.
Pro 8:27 When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when
he set a compass upon the face of the depth:
Pro 8:28 When he established the clouds above: when he
strengthened the fountains of the deep:
Pro 8:29 When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his
commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth:
Pro 8:30 Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing
always before him;
Pro 8:31 Rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth; and my delights were with the sons of
men.” ----KJV (Bible)

“John 3:16 God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever
believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” ----KJV (Bible)

But as seen captured in the Ellen G. White picture-quote, the true SDA doctrine recognizes (or
should recognize) that Jesus the Messiah (or Yeshua ha Masiach) when given to the human race
as a Son he was neither an adopted nor created Son, but he was One who was already
begotten (or “brought forth” or fathered) before he was given by God, the Father!!

“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. John said, “We have seen, and do testify that the
Father *sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world.” The Son of God
*took upon him human nature,—“the Word was made flesh, and dwelt
among us.” “God was manifest in the flesh.” The union of divinity with
humanity brings to the fallen race a value which we scarcely
comprehend." ----E.G. White, Signs of the Times, May 30, 1895

Standard pioneering SDA teaching on this matter, and what remained unchanged throughout
the lifetime of the SDA pioneers, as affirmed by Mrs. White’s own, was that it was after the
pre-incarnately begotten Jesus was “given” and “sent” that, as part of his humbling
incarnation process, he assumed a nature that was created at his human birth---hence
mysteriously uniting a divine uncreated nature with a created human nature in one person, the
God-Man! Thus the pioneers unanimously and always taught (as will be proven hereafter) that
Jesus, as God’s true and literal Son, was begotten twice, i.e. from eternity or from everlasting
before his incarnation, and AGAIN while he was a human…thus making him two types of Son
(the divine Son of God and the incarnate Son of Man) having two natures! In both instances
he was the “Son of God”, but with two differing natures and two differing sets of
experiences---one from eternity as later manifested in Heaven before his incarnation, and the
other after Bethlehem and his incarnation, as manifested on earth and even upon his
ascension to Heaven afterwards.

Today however, the vast majority of SDAs (who are Trinitarian members) now teach (with only
minor exceptions; *click link) that Jesus was NOT the “only begotten” (Greek, “monogenes”)
Son, but rather a “unique” Son, and that he was NOT “begotten” or “brought forth” of God’s
own substance before his incarnation, but only at his incarnation and throughout his life
thereafter was he ever “begotten” in differing incarnational senses as an “anointed” and
“metaphorical” Son of God----not a literal one. Also today, most SDAs (leaders and laymen
alike) teach that Jesus being called God’s “begotten” or “bought forth” “Son” before his
incarnation it was only anticipatory or proleptic-style language (prolepsis) relating to what he
was to become and experience at/after his incarnation (in fulfillment of prophecies), and not
what he was in reality from eternity (and they often quote Romans 4:17 and Revelation 13:8 in
support of that teaching).

Why are modern SDA Trinitarians (except for the very minor exceptions) teaching what no SDA
pioneer, including Mrs. White, ever taught on this subject of Jesus’ Sonship? And why did this
author (yours truly) have no choice but to honestly and humbly recant in the year 2000,
abandon that teaching, and revert to the SDA pioneering version, despite I remain a
Trinitarian even today? As a Trinitarian SDA, for years I defended this ‘modern’ (or more
recent) doctrine of Jesus’ so-called “incarnational” and “metaphorical” Sonship, with he
experiencing only an earthly “begetting”…until I met compelling counter-evidence that
stopped me in my tracks! I have already laid out several “compelling reasons” in a recent 2017
publication (click this link to read that publication) showing why I had to be true to my own
conscience. You will now discover, at the end of reading this new 2019 booklet, even more
reasons why I had to correct my earlier position. Keep reading.

THE PIONEERS’ UNITED TESTIMONY ABOUT JESUS THE SON OF GOD, BEGOTTEN TWICE

Too many SDAs today are unwilling to face the truth that even as the SDA pioneers changed
their views to adopt a certain version of the Trinity (click link for proof), they remained
UNCHANGED in their teaching (including Mrs. White herself) that Jesus was begotten of God,
and begotten BEFORE coming to earth. Why did they remain unchanged? Because even
historic Trinitarians in Church history taught this common truth that the eternal Jesus was
begotten of the Father’s own substance from eternity or “before all ages” (see proof in the
Trinitarian Nicene Creed). Notice in the following quotes the years of the pioneering
confessions before and after 1888, and even after 1915 when by then several of the SDA
pioneers had long accepted the non-Catholic version of “the Trinity”. Notice too in later years
what the pre-incarnately "begotten Sonship" meant to the pioneers in relation to his eternal
existence "from all eternity":
1867

"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, that 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 [this was from eternity
because on earth Jesus only adopted the substance of humanity]. 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 [possessing his own substance literally]. "
----Review and Herald, June 18, 1867

1869

“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 [or only by way of his incarnation]. If Christ is
the only begotten of the Father, then we cannot be begotten of the Father in a literal sense. It
can only be in a secondary sense of the word "

---Review and Herald, October 12, 1869

1883

"You are mistaken in supposing that S. D. Adventists teach that Christ was ever created [i.e.
from eternity]. They believe, on the contrary, that he was "begotten" of the Father, and that
he can properly be called God and worshiped as such."

---- Uriah Smith, Question No. 96, Review and Herald, April 17, 1883
[*In the above quoted article Uriah Smith had taught that Jesus had a beginning, or was
brought into existence out of non-existence in eternity, or he was not from all eternity, but
fortunately this teaching the pioneers themselves eventually changed later on, despite still
teaching his begetting from eternity]

1889

“He was begotten, not created [from eternity]. 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

1890

"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 [from eternity]. Heb. 1:3. As the Son of the self-existent God, He has by nature
all the attributes of Deity....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."

---E.J. Waggoner , Christ and His Righteousness, 1890, pg. 12

[*Note: Mrs. White affirmed the same truth as expressed by Waggoner, by saying that:
“[It was] BEFORE CHRIST CAME in the likeness of men, [that] 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." — E.G. White, Youth
Instructor, December 20, 1900]

1890

“It is not given to men to know when or how the Son was begotten [thus it was not on earth
this begetting took place]; but we know that he was the Divine Word [i.e. the self expression of
God’s nature+, not simply before He came to this earth to die, but even before the world was
created…The Scriptures declare that Christ is “the only begotten son of God.” He is begotten,
not created. As to when He was begotten, it is not for us to inquire, nor could our minds grasp
it if we were told.”

---E. J. Waggoner, Christ and His Righteousness, 1890, page 9

1895

"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 [or as
when Jesus was created as the Son of man and lower than 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."

---E.G. White, Signs of the Times, May 30, 1895

[Note: when Jesus was begotten on earth he was begotten as a slave/servant to God, begotten to
have the substance of humans, and begotten then with not even the powers of angels, as he assumed
the place of one with “no reputation” and with no external brightness and majesty and glory:

"His *Christ’s+ human nature was CREATED; it did not even possess the angelic powers. It was
human, identical with our own."
—E.G. White, Selected Messages, Vol. 3, pg. 129.
Thus when Mrs. White spoke of Jesus’ begetting in the above 1895 quote it was clearly his
begetting from eternity when he was begotten in God’s express image to be exactly like him in
substance, glory, majesty, co-equal authority, etc., and not when he was begotten on earth to
be the opposite of that divine form; Philippians 2:5-11]
1895

“He [Jesus] who was born [or begotten] in the form of God took the form of man. “In the flesh
he was all the while as God, but he did not appear as God.” “He divested himself of the form
of God, and in its stead took the form and fashion of man.” “The glories of the form of God,
He for a while relinquished.”

---A. T. Jones, General Conference Bulletin, 1895, page 448

1896

“Christ was twice born, once in eternity, the only begotten of the Father, and again here in
the flesh, thus uniting the divine with the human in that second birth, so we, who have been
born once already in the flesh, are to have the second birth, being born again of the Spirit, in
order that our experience may be the same, the human and the divine being joined in a life
union.

---W. W. Prescott, Review & Herald, April 14, 1896, page 232

[*Note: W.W. Prescott was an SDA pioneer who became a Trinitarian, and yet he never
abandoned the teaching that Jesus was begotten twice, since that is also what Trinitarians in all
history have always taught, both before Nicea, at Nicea, and after Nicea (see again the
Trinitarian Nicene Creed). Prescott later made plain that Jesus’ begetting in eternity,
paradoxically, it does not take away from he being still co-eternal with God, or he existing “from
all eternity”, as Mrs. White expressed it. Prescott said:
“…the Son is co-eternal with the Father. That does not prevent His being the
only-begotten Son of God….There is no contradiction to say that the Son is co-eternal with the
Father, and yet the Son is the only-begotten of the Father.” ----W. W. Prescott, Report of the
1919 Bible Conference for July 2nd, pg. 20]

1897

“The Scriptures nowhere speak of Christ as [initially] a created being, but on the contrary
plainly state that he was begotten of the Father.”

---Uriah Smith, Daniel and Revelation, 1897, p. 430

[*Note: Uriah Smith had started to make certain interesting changes to his theology before his
1903 death, but he, unlike W.W. Prescott, remained a semi-Arian who still taught that Jesus
was begotten before his incarnation; which is a truth taught by BOTH historic Trinitarians and
semi-Arians…so Jesus’ pre-incarnate begetting is not an anti-Trinitarian doctrine as some
incorrectly assume, but can be held by both a Trinitarian and a non-Trinitarian. However only a
historic Trinitarian teaches that Jesus existed from all eternity despite begotten from eternity]

1905
“Christ is declared in the Scriptures to be the Son of God. From all eternity He has sustained
*THIS [Sonship] relation to Jehovah. Before the foundations of the world were laid, He, *THE
only begotten Son of God [an ETERNAL past tense reality], pledged Himself to become the
*Redeemer of the human race should men sin. [Note: he pledged to become our *Redeemer;
not to become the God's Son for the first time on earth]”
— E.G. White, Manuscript 22, 1905

1905

“If Christ made all things, He existed before all things. The words spoken in regard to this are
so decisive that no one need be left in doubt. Christ was God essentially, and in the highest
sense. He was *with God from *all eternity [thus always in existence], God over all, blessed
forevermore. The Lord Jesus Christ, the divine Son of God, existed from eternity, a distinct
person, yet one with the Father. He was the surpassing glory of heaven. He was the
commander of the heavenly intelligences, and the adoring homage of the angels was received
by Him as His right. This was no robbery of God. “The Lord possessed me in the beginning of
his way,” He declares, “before his works of old. I was set up from everlasting *but like God’s
own wisdom he always was with and possessed by God; not originating after “the all-wise
God”+, 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: while as yet he had not made the earth, nor the
fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world… Proverbs 8:22-27”
–E.G. White, Selected Messages, pg. 247

1906

"Christ was God essentially, and IN THE HIGHEST SENSE. He was with God from *all eternity,
God over all, blessed forevermore. The Lord Jesus Christ, the divine Son of God, existed from
eternity, a distinct person, yet one with the Father. He was the surpassing glory of heaven. He
was the commander of the heavenly intelligences, and the adoring homage of the angels was
received by him as his right. This was no robbery of God. “The Lord POSSESSED me in the
beginning of his way,” he declares, “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; while as yet he had not made the earth, nor
the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world. When he prepared the heavens, I was
there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth.” There are light and glory in the
truth that Christ was one with the Father before the foundation of the world was laid. This is
the light shining in a dark place, making it resplendent with divine, original glory. This truth,
INFINITELY MYSTERIOUS in itself, explains other mysterious and otherwise unexplainable
truths, while it is enshrined in light, unapproachable and INCOMPREHENSIBLE. “Before the
mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even
FROM EVERLASTING TO EVERLASTING, THOU [Jesus] ART GOD.”
---E.G. White, Review and Herald, April 5, 1906

[The foregoing quotes from Mrs. White express what all historic Trinitarians in general Church
history have always taught about Proverbs 8:22-31…applying it to Jesus’ pre-incarnate
begetting, but still accepting he was from all eternity, or still teaching that from everlasting to
everlasting he is God. Notice Mrs. White does not say Proverbs 8 is a prophecy of Jesus’ future
earthly begetting. She never did anywhere else either; neither did any of the SDA pioneers
apply it that way. Only recent SDA pastors and seminarians have re-interpreted Proverbs 8 to
teach a new doctrine on Jesus’ Sonship that is far removed from what the pioneers taught
and what Trinitarians in history have always taught about Proverbs 8:22-31]

1909

"From a reading of John 1:1-3, 10, it will be seen that the world, with all it contains, was
created by Christ (the Word), for "all things were made by Him; and without Him was not
anything made that was made." The angels, therefore, being created, are necessarily lower
than Christ, their Creator. Christ is the only being begotten of the Father."

----James Edson White, Past, Present, and Future, 1909 (1914 edition), page 52

1909

“There is indeed a divine trio, but the Christ of that Trinity is not a created being as the
angels- He was the “only begotten” of the Father...”

----Robert Hare, Australasian Union Conference Record, July 19, 1909

1910

“This fact the [fallen] angels would obscure [in heaven], that Christ
was [past tense] *THE only begotten Son of God, and they came to
consider that they were not to consult Christ. One angel [LUCIFER]
began the controversy and carried it on until there was rebellion in the
heavenly courts among the angels…. [This all happened before Jesus
was begotten again on earth as the Son of Man]”

--- E.G. White, April, 1910

[*NOTE CAREFULLY: To deny that Jesus is God’s begotten Son from eternity is to carry out the
same warfare against Jesus’s Sonship that Lucifer carried out in heaven before Jesus’
incarnation…. a prime reason why I had to abandon my earlier position that Jesus was not
God’s begotten Son till this incarnation. I CANNOT lie to my conscience and assist the schemes
of Lucifer himself. I hereby appeal to my fellow SDA brethren to re-examine your position in
light of this arresting “Spirit of prophecy” revelation. And to try to lamely say that since Rev.
13:8 says Jesus was slain from the foundation of the world, then even before he was a Son he
was prophetically deemed to be such (Rom. 4:17), that is to play falsely with the evidence that
Jesus was begotten TWICE in two differing senses, yet slain only once on earth. Jesus was never
slain twice, but because his future Sacrifice was so assured (to John writing in hindsight) it was
AS IF he was already slain from the foundation of the world. There is a total difference here
compared to Jesus’ Sonship, and it’s only sophistry and dishonesty which ignores the stark
difference when it is made plain]

1910

"Christ *WAS [an ETERNAL past tense reality] 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." [*This all happened BEFORE Jesus came to earth]

--E.G. White, On John 15, Manuscript 86, 1910

1911

“...Christ is understood and portrayed by all the Old Testament writers....not a Christ whose
beginning dated from his birth in human form amid the humble surroundings of a Judean
stable, but one who was everlasting, all-powerful, and co-existent with the Father; not a son
merely of Joseph the carpenter, but the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth."

---The Oriental Watchman, Vol.14, January, 1911; No. 1; pgs. 13-14

1917

"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, 1917, page 34

[*Remember on earth Jesus was begotten to adopt the substance of humans; his begetting
from eternity had him being of one substance with God the Father]

1919

“…the Son is co-eternal with the Father. That does not prevent His being the only-begotten
Son of God….There is no contradiction to say that the Son is co-eternal with the Father, and
yet the Son is the only-begotten of the Father.”

----W. W. Prescott, Report of the 1919 Bible Conference for July 2nd, pg 20

“Evidently in an Eternal Father and an Eternal Son the ideas of older and younger can have no
place. As we lift up the conception of Sonship out of time into eternity, these elements of it,
ever present in human fathers and sons, at once disappear. When they fall away, does any
conception essential to our idea of son ship remain? Yes.... plainly embodied in John 5:26, and
in other express assertions from the lips of Christ describing his own relation to God.”

---W. W. Prescott, The Doctrine of Christ: A Series of Bible Studies for Use in Colleges and
Seminaries, 1920, page 20,
1929

“As the absolute Son, He, who 'in the beginning was with God, and was God,' was begotten
before times eternal...."

---W.W. Prescott, Signs of the Times, Jan 8, 1929

[*The forgoing testimony by the Trinitarian pioneer, W.W. Prescott, is self-explanatory]

1930

"The word "born" is used because, in contrasting the Creator* with His creation, it postulates
the nature of the Lord's origin [see Micah 5:2 regarding Jesus' "origins", "descent" or "goings
forth" being "from everlasting]. 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"

--- Signs of the Times, August 5, 1930, The 'Signs" Question Corner"

1936

"It was Satan's scheme to become equal with Christ; but this could never be, for Christ was [in
his pre-incarnation] the only begotten of the Father, the same essence as God, and hence God
the Son. Lucifer, although created next to Christ in position, was nevertheless a created being
and did not and could not partake of the essence of the Godhead. Christ was the one who
brought Satan into existence. Satan's great enmity is against Christ, and he falsely accuses
the Son, his own creator, for all the misfortune that he has brought upon himself by his own
pride and rebellion."

--- Signs of the Times, July 14, 1936, Vol. 63, pg. 12

1946

“In the third verse of the first chapter of Hebrews, Christ is spoken of as “being the brightness of
His *Father’s+ glory.” The participle “being” is an expression of eternal, timeless existence and
has the same sense as “was” in John 1: 1: “In the beginning was the Word.” The Word is
Christ. (Verse 14) He did not come into existence in the beginning. In the beginning He was.
He did not become the brightness of the Father’s glory. He always was. **Just as God’s
wisdom has always existed along with him, never having a beginning after God, Proverbs 8:1,
22-31] This constitutes the essential and eternal ground of His personality. “Brightness” is
variously translated “outshining,” “outraying,” “reflection.” It has the same relation to God’s
glory as the rays of the sun have to the sun. The rays cannot be separated from the sun, nor
the sun from its rays. The two are inseparable. So with the Father and the Son.”

—M. L. Andreasen, “Christ, the Express Image of God,” Review and Herald, Oct. 17, 1946, p. 8
 MY APPEAL TO TRINITARIAN SDA READERS:
IT’S TIME TO COME CLEAN WITH OURSELVES AS SDAs AND FACE UP TO OUR OWN DOCTRINAL HISTORY AND
TRUE TEACHING AS A CHURCH!! AFTER ALL, ALL *TRINITARIANS IN ALL HISTORY TAUGHT THE SAME BASIC
TRUTH (BEFORE NICEA, AT NICEA, AND AFTER NICEA), AND IT WAS COMPATIBLE WITH THE FACT THAT THERE IS
A TRINITY OR TRIO OF "LIVING PERSONS". OUR PIONEERS ONLY INSISTED THAT THE TRUE TRINITY SHOULD BE
COMPRISED OF SEPARATE BEINGS (IN CONTRAST TO THE COUNTERFEIT ROMAN CATHOLIC VERSION), BUT THEY
NEVER REJECTED THE TRINITARIAN TEACHING THAT JESUS WAS BEGOTTEN “BEFORE ALL AGES”.

TO DENY THE FOREGOING TESTIMONIES WOULD BE HEARTBREAKING!! WHY?

"When I read in the Bible of how many refused to believe that Christ was the Son of God,
sadness fills my heart. We read that even His own brethren refused to believe in Him. We
must present an unbroken front in union and in faith."

---E.G. White, Letter 398, Dec. 26, 1906

“The Jews of old said we believe in Moses and the prophets, we worship God the Father, we
keep the law, but as for this fellow Jesus of Nazareth, away with him …they could not worship
the Father acceptably and refuse his representative, his only begotten Son.... We [SDA
pioneers in the year 1900] make a like mistake today. We cry “Jesus only,” “Christ in you,” We
worship the Father and the Son, but we do not give the place of power and authority to their
representative, the blessed Holy Ghost…we preach fear for our creed and the truth if he is
made known and received…God help us if to-day we are no wiser than were those Jews...”

---Review and Herald, January 16, 1900, Vol. 77, No. 3, pg. 35, 36

As I obverse the very many Trinitarian SDAs in "The Remnant Church" today (FROM PASTORS
RIGHT DOWN TO LAYMEN) who constantly deny that Jesus is truly God's ONLY BEGOTTEN Son,
it is truly heartbreaking to see how much they constantly deny/twist plain Scripture (and Spirit
of prophecy reaffirmations) on the matter....just as much as the dissident anti-Trinitarians in
Adventism today deny that the Holy Spirit is a person (like the early pioneers did, but before
they corrected themselves), and just as much as they deny that there are truly three living
persons of the Godhead who are to be worshipped by true believers. SDAs have been led by
our pastors and seminarians in the last 50-60 years to abandon the most basic truth in Scripture
that Jesus is God's "only begotten Son", and is his true Son in the Godhead sense (i.e. it’s a
Sonship that does not conform to all the “ways” of man; Romans 11:33).

Because the dissident anti-Trinitarians have misrepresented what it means for Jesus to be God's
true Son, his "only begotten Son" (i.e. in effect using that to deny his full eternal existence)
unfortunately most Trinitarian SDAs today are totally unwilling to accept that Jesus has always
been God's Son; not just on earth when he became man. But notice again the real truth being
echoed via the Spirit of prophecy reaffirmations:

“Christ is declared in the Scriptures to be the Son of God. From all eternity He has sustained
*THIS [Sonship] relation to Jehovah. Before the foundations of the world were laid, He, *THE
only begotten Son of God [an ETERNAL past tense reality], pledged Himself to become the
*Redeemer of the human race should men sin. [Note: he pledged to become our *Redeemer;
not to become the God's Son for the first time on earth]”
— E.G. White, Manuscript 22, 1905

“[It was] BEFORE CHRIST CAME in the likeness of men, [that] 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."

— E.G. White, Youth Instructor, December 20, 1900

“This fact the [fallen] angels would obscure [in heaven long before Jesus incarnation], that
Christ *WAS [past tense] *THE only *BEGOTTEN Son of God, and they came to consider that
they were not to consult Christ. One angel [LUCIFER] began the controversy and carried it on
until there was rebellion in the heavenly courts among the angels….”

---E.G. White, April, 1910

Today we have so many SDAs who find it so hard to accept the plain truth as testified to in the
above quotes through the Spirit of prophecy!!! They read it but they can’t accept it, and so
every single time they see the Bible calling Jesus God's Son, immediately they think it's not a
true Sonship but a "metaphorical" one (simply regurgitating the thoughts of our recent Church
leaders). But who says it has to be sonship totally like human sonship, i.e. Jesus being brought
into existence out of non-existence, BEFORE he is properly deemed a "literal" Son in God's own
way? Do we have any experience of how God's divine Fatherhood and
Jesus' divine Sonship works ontologically at the divine level? No!! We
don't because:

"Job 11:7 Canst thou by searching find out God? canst thou find out
the Almighty unto perfection? Job 11:8 It is as high as heaven; what
canst thou do? deeper than hell; what canst thou know? Job 11:9 The
measure thereof is longer than the earth, and broader than the sea."

All we have been told in Scripture is that God reveals Jesus' Sonship as being like his own
wisdom (Proverbs 8:1, 22-31; 1 Cor. 1:24,) in which God's wisdom is of him ("brought forth"),
but obviously was always in existence along with himself "from everlasting" or "from all
eternity", and hence Jesus is "eternal" and "self existent" just like God himself and like his own
wisdom and power. For God to use his own co-eternal “holy arm” (Isaiah 53:1), and his eternal
wisdom and power (i.e. divine attributes always in existence with himself) to be the parables to
illustrate Jesus’ existence from everlasting, it tells us much, since at no time was God’s wisdom
(or his power, or “holy arm”) brought into existence out of non-existence ….just that in the
beginning it became active on God’s behalf to be the creating agent (as the eternal Wisdom or
Word; see Proverbs 3:19 and Psalm 33:6), just as “the eternal, self-existent Son” did actively
create the universe (see Heb. 1:1-2, 8, 10-12).

There is no need to reject any of the truth on both sides of the issue, but declare both and leave
it as is!! God's way of Fathering an “only begotten Son” of his own substance from eternity is
not our human version of having a son from both a mother and a father, and them bringing him
into existence out of non existence. Humans who never always existed can only have a son who
also never always existed...that's being human. But God, who always existed, him having a
truly divine Son must have one who also always existed, because that is what it means to be
God or divine, even as the Son (and remember it’s the Son who created all time, and all
beginnings). A divine Son who inhabits eternity and has no beginning of days (Heb. 7:3) truly
reflects the nature of his divine Father (Heb. 1:3) who too has no beginning of days and inhabits
eternity. No wonder both the Father and Son are equally called "the first and the last" who are
both “from everlasting”; see Rev. 2:8, Micah 5:2. That's why Jesus is God (capitalized), even co-
equally called “the I AM” or “Jehovah”. Only Jehovah God or One who is truly “the I AM” in
truest nature is “THE first and the last” and exists “from everlasting” or “from all eternity” past.

It breaks my heart that the dissident anti-Trinitarians today in Adventism correctly accept Jesus'
begotten Sonship, but reject his full eternal existence (a prerequisite for his true divinity),
while the vast majority of Trinitarian SDAs reject his true Sonship in the "only begotten" and
“brought forth" sense, while accepting he is fully eternal. It's time for that ‘great divide’ to be
destroyed and we accept both sides of the truth!! Full time, my brethren!! It was as an
ALREADY "begotten Son", but as one in existence "from all eternity", that Jesus was GIVEN to us
(John 3:16):

“God so loved the world that he *GAVE his only begotten Son [i.e. he gave someone *already a
Son and already "begotten"] – not a son by creation, as were the angels, nor a son by
adoption, as is the forgiven sinner, but a Son [already] *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....”

----E.G. White, Signs of the Times, May 30, 1895

AN INESCAPABLE REALITY!! ACCEPT IT!! CORRECT YOUR THEOLOGY IF IT’S IN ERROR FELLOW SDA MEMBERS.
THE PIONEERS HUMBLY DID WHEN THEY RECOGNIZED ERROR, AND MOVED ON. WE CAN DO THE SAME TODAY
AS A CHURCH. PASTORS AND LEADERS BE HUMBLE AND CORRECT YOUR ERRORS REGARDING JESUS’ SONSHIP!!

But of course, some may say they have good reasons to teach otherwise. Well, let’s now
explore the oversights, fallacies and weaknesses in those arguments that I myself defended
years ago, and had no choice but to abandon them. Read on.

IS THE EXPRESSION “ONLY BEGOTTEN” IN JOHN 3:16 UNWARRANTED?

The common but newly formulated pastoral and seminarian argument among SDAs since the
1960s and 1970s (or there about) is that the Son of God cannot be literally begotten from
eternity since [a] true divinity has no creator, [b] divine life is “original, unborrowed and
underived” and begetting would suggest being derived, [c] Jesus is self-existent and eternal or
exists “from all eternity”, and [d] eternal means to have no beginning, therefore Jesus is best
described as a “unique” Son and not an “only begotten” Son from the Greek expression
“monogenes”. Now, despite Proverbs 8 is rejected by some SDAs as being applicable to Jesus, it
is also argued by many SDAs that Proverbs 8 is best seen as a Messianic prophecy (like the
prophecy in Psalm 2) regarding the future “anointing”, kingly “begetting” and “setting up” of
the incarnational Son, but One depicted as such from eternity (just like his past proleptic or pre-
incarnational Priesthood) because of it’s future surety from God’s standpoint. I used all these
arguments years ago (up to about the year 2000). The problem though is that:

1. The Christian apologists of the first three centuries, who were closest to the apostles and
who spoke Greek, they overwhelmingly deemed Jesus as the “begotten” Son or divine
offspring from eternity, and they saw him as “the only begotten” when they used the word
“monogenes”, and they did so long before the fourth century (380 A.D.) Vulgate or Latin
translation of the Bible came out, mind you. They too separately described Jesus as being
begotten AGAIN through Mary in a separate sense

2. The Christians of the first three centuries who believed in the Trinity also spoke of Jesus
being “begotten” from eternity when they commented on Proverbs 8 (never, as far as I know,
applying it to the future incarnational experiences of the Son)

3. The SDA pioneers, as we have seen earlier, always spoke of Jesus as the “only begotten
Son” from eternity (using the language of John 3:16), and none of them (including Mrs.
White) ever interpreted Proverbs 8 as a prophecy of a future incarnational Son, but rather as
a past description of the Son from eternity, but expressed in Hebraic poetry. Mrs. White even
described Jesus’ separate divine Sonship in heaven, and how God the Father (in order to
debunk Lucifer’s lies about His Son) assembled the angels to make it known that Jesus was his
royal Son (their rightful Commander and Sovereign, or supreme ruler); One specially invested
from “the beginning” (better yet, from all eternity past) with his authority, his creative power,
his co-equal nature, and, as their Creator (on his behalf), he was due the same honor as he, and
his Son’s presence was just as if he the Father himself was present. Jesus’ earthly begetting and
Sonship on earth the pioneers described separately, with Mrs. White making plain that on
earth Jesus “gained the title Son in a new sense”, and the pioneers applied Psalm 2 separately
(in contrast to Proverbs 8) to the future Messianic experiences as related to his resurrection,
his re-ascension to heaven, his re-glorification and his Priestly and Kingly enthronement as
“the LORD” (or Jehovah) after he became Man. They never mixed up Proverbs 8 with Psalm 2.

4. Not just Greek lexicons and pre-Nicene writings from Greek speaking apologists proved that
“monogenes” can and does mean “only begotten” (i.e. in addition to it meaning “one of a
kind”, or “one only”), but even today, the word “monogenes” in the Greek speaking country
of Greece means primarily “only begotten” (a matter I was able to prove via the Google
Translator online --a translator with no religious agenda or biases to support-- as well as I
proved it via reports from certain Greek scholars who presently dialog with modern people in
Greece). In addition, though the word “monogenes”, from which we get “only begotten”, can
mean, in context, “one of a kind” or “one only”, or “unique”, yet there is a separate word for
“unique” in Greek and that word is “monadikos”, and it was never used in the Bible when it
was speaking either of Jesus or of a ‘special’ offspring like Isaac, Abraham’s “son of promise”
(Heb. 11:17). In every case in which the word “monogenes” referred to children or the
offspring of their parents in the Bible, they were truly of the same substance of their parents,
even when they might be “special” or “unique” as a son among other sons (and that included
Jesus who, as the “monogenes” or “only begotten” of His divine Father, he had his Father’s
own substance, or they--Father and Son-- are “of one substance”, as affirmed by all of the
writers mentioned in points Nos. 1-3). Thus the word “monogenes” does legitimately mean
both an “only begotten” and a begotten child that is “special” or “unique”, as well as it can
mean just “one of a kind” or “special” or “unique” (I will supply concrete proofs shortly).

5. The Bible itself gives credence to the term “only begotten” not being an unwarranted
translation of “monogenes”, because despite Jesus is eternal, and exists from everlasting as
God, yet the Bible itself shows in parable how an eternal thing such as God’s wisdom ---which
can/does represent Jesus (1 Cor. 1:24)--- it/he can still be deemed as “possessed” (owned),
“brought forth” (manifested) and “set up” (or invested with attributes of divinity) “from
everlasting” (i.e. from as long as God himself has been in existence), and yet still that
wisdom/ Son remains beginningless (since God always must have had his wisdom with him,
just as an eternal Father would always have had his eternal Son with him “from all eternity”
past, despite the Son being “of” him). Thus there is no incompatibility between the notions of
co-eternality with God, yet still being “of” him. With God all things are possible!!

6. Even the very expression “in Christ was life original, unborrowed, underived”, it was
borrowed by Mrs. White from a Trinitarian author (John Cumming), and that Trinitarian
author who accepted the Nicene Creed, he equally deemed Jesus as God’s “only begotten”
Son “before all ages”, and hence saw no incompatibility between the two divine truths.

7. None of the SDA pastors and seminarians and writers has ever been able to disprove the
foregoing points in Nos. 1-6 above.

And it was on that basis that I had no choice but to accept that the expression, “only begotten”
in the King James Version (KJV) was not unwarranted, and in fact is the truth of the matter, and
if Mrs. White herself referred to Jesus as “the only begotten Son” thousands of times, and if
she was not wrong as an “inspired” agent to deem him such, then how could I be a true SDA
member and be opposed to the “Spirit of prophecy” writings I deem to be “inspired insights”?

Let’s now delve into concrete proofs of the validity of “monogenes” equally meaning both “only
begotten” and also “one of a kind”.

PROOFS OF THE MEANINGS OF “MONOGENES”

As both a scholar and a student of History and Social Science (am a trained Social Studies,
History and Geography teacher), after years of unbiased research, I have learned that the word
"monogenes" in Greek (as used in John 3:16) has shades of meaning, and has, over time in
history, been used by Greek speakers/writers to mean BOTH "sole", "only" or "unique" as well
as "only begotten", and it can be easily demonstrated. Here are reliable sources (A-D) telling of
it being used thus:

A. Thayer's Greek Definition:

monogen s

Thayer Definition:

1) single of its kind, only

1a) used of only sons or daughters (viewed in relation to their parents)

1b) used of Christ, denotes the only begotten son of God

Part of Speech: adjective"

B. Strong's Hebrew and Greek Dictionary:

monogen s

mon-og-en-ace

only born, that is, sole: - only (begotten, child)."

C. Online Greek Dictionary:

--monogenes: "only begotten"

-- Source, Google translate

Note: By the way, the Google language translator online (with no *biased agenda to defend any
church doctrine or version of Christology) shows plainly that "monogenes" in Greek UP TO THIS
DAY *still means both "only begotten" (the primary meaning), and (in a secondary sense) "one
of a kind"; and remember that this online language translator has no agenda!! In fact, regular
Greek speakers from Greece, to this very day, understand the word or monogen s in
their own modern language to mean "only begotten". Who are we to tell them otherwise?
D. Christian writers of the first three centuries BEFORE the Latin Bible or the Vulgate was
written:

“We have also a physician, the Lord our God, Jesus Christ, the only begotten [MONOGENES]
Son and Word, before time began…” – Ignatius, Letter to the Ephesians, 100 A.D.

“…the beginning of generation [of the Son] is not separated from the beginning of the
Creator. For when he [John] says: ‘what was in the beginning [1 John 1:1]’, he touches upon
the *GENERATION [begetting] without beginning of the Son, who is co-equal with the Father.
[The word] ‘Was’ therefore is indicative of an eternity without a beginning, just as the Word
Himself, that is, the Son, being one with the Father, in regard to equality of substance, is
eternal and uncreated. That the Word always existed is signified by the saying: ‘ In the
beginning was the Word’ [John 1:1]”

- Clement of Alexandria (*190 A.D.), Fragment in Eusebius History, Book 6, Chapter 140

"If any one, therefore, says to us, “How then was the Son produced by the Father?” we reply
to him, that no man understands that production, or GENERATION, or calling, or revelation, or
by whatever name one may describe His generation, which is in fact altogether indescribable.
Neither Valentinus, nor Marcion… [possess this knowledge], but the Father only who BEGAT,
and the Son who was BEGOTTEN."

--- Irenaeus (*180 A.D.), Against Heresies, Book II, Chap. XXVII, Point 6, Ante-Nicene Fathers,
Vol. 1).

Note: This demonstrates how Christian apologists and writers closest to the bible apostles
understood Jesus’ pre-incarnate Sonship. Note too that despite they clearly were familiar with
the idea of BEGETTING related to Jesus’ Sonship from eternity, yet it is futile for us today to try
and compare this BEGETTING with conception in the body of a pregnant mother on earth, as
some try to do, since it is clear it has no such comparison!! In fact, remember that the Godhead
(including Jesus himself) invented motherhood via the female on earth, so the Godhead is not
bound by what divinity invented, and remember that to "BEGET" simply means to "father" or
"sire" (as the Father divinely "fathered" Jesus His Son); it doesn't mean to be pregnant as a
mother is!! Notice how another Greek speaking Christian apologist saw the issue:

“You perceive, my hearers, if you bestow attention, that the Scripture has declared that this
OFFSPRING [i.e. Jesus] was *BEGOTTEN by the Father *before all things created; and that that
which is begotten is *numerically distinct from that which beget, ...”

---Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, *150 A.D., chapter 129

“God begot before all creatures …a certain rational [self willed] power from himself, and
whom the Spirit calls…sometimes the Son, sometimes Lord and Word… this Offspring who
was truly brought forth from the Father, was with the Father before all the creatures, and the
Father communed with him… Someone [the pre-incarnate Jesus] *numerically distinct from
Himself, and also a rational being…”
- Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, *150 A.D, Chapters 61 and 62
COMMENT: The Greek speaking Christian authors quoted above (and many more can be cited)
all spoke of Jesus being "BEGOTTEN" or "GENERATED" by the Father BEFORE creation of
anything in the universe, and all were users of the word "monogenes" in their writings before
the Latin Vulgate came after 380 A.D., and all used it elsewhere in their writings to mean "only
begotten" as it relates to Jesus in his pre-incarnation. Notice too that they are equally speaking
of "GENERATION" and "OFFSPRING" (as it relates to Jesus) before even the creation of anything
in the universe began, and all emphasized in their writings that Jesus is eternal and without a
beginning despite saying he was "BEGOTTEN" or "GENERATED" by the Father before all time.
Irenaeus, another Greek writer/speaker in 180 A.D. is even on record speaking of Jesus and the
Father being "eternally co-existent", or always existing together before time began, despite
admitting that Jesus was "BEGOTTEN" even then. Notice more of Justin Martyr's testimony:

150 A.D. – Justin Martyr

“…our Physician is the only true God, the *UN-BEGOTTEN and unapproachable, the Lord of all,
the Father and *BEGETTER of the *ONLY BEGOTTEN [MONOGENES] Son. We have also as a
Physician the Lord our God, Jesus the Christ, the ONLY BEGOTTEN [MONOGENES] Son and
Word, *before time began, but who afterwards became also man, of Mary the virgin. For "the
Word was made flesh."

COMMENT: Here we see Justin Martyr, a Greek speaking writer, surrounding the very word
"monogenes" with clues as to its usage in his time. By contrasting the Father as
"UN-BEGOTTEN" and the "BEGETTER" with His Son as the "MONOGENES" (translated as "only
begotten"), we know he is not using the word “monogenes” in this instance only in the sense of
just "sole" or "only" or "unique", but he was capturing the other shade of meaning as well, i.e.
"ONLY BEGOTTEN" or the Jesus being the only ontological "OFFSPRING" of the Father!! In fact,
way BEFORE the Latin Vulgate was written after 380 A.D. here is how Alexander, another Greek
speaker, underscored the above point I made by saying:

"The Son is immutable and unchangeable, all-sufficient and perfect, like the Father, differing
only in this one respect, that the Father is UNBEGOTTEN. He is the exact image of his Father.
Everything is found in the image which exists in its archetype; and it was this that our Lord
taught when he said, `My Father is greater than I.' And accordingly we believe that the Son
proceeded from the Father; for he is the reflection of the glory of the Father, and the figure of
his substance. But let no one be led from this to the supposition that the Son is UNBEGOTTEN,
as is believed by some who are deficient in intellectual power: for to say that he was, that he
has always been, and that he existed before all ages, is not to say that he is UNBEGOTTEN."

--- Source---Theodoret's "Ecclesiastical History," book i, chap. iv.

And here’s another testimony long before the Council of Nicea and the Trinitarian Nicene
Creed:
“There is one God, the Father of the living Word, who is His subsistent Wisdom and Power
and Eternal Image: perfect Begetter of the perfect Begotten, Father of the only-begotten
[MONOGENES] Son. There is one Lord, Only of the Only, God of God, Image and Likeness of
Deity, Efficient Word, Wisdom comprehensive of the constitution of all things, and Power
formative of the whole creation, true Son of true Father, Invisible of Invisible, and
Incorruptible of Incorruptible, and Immortal of Immortal and Eternal of Eternal. And there is
One Holy Spirit, having His subsistence from God, and being made manifest by the Son, to wit
to men: Image of the Son, Perfect Image of the Perfect; Life, the Cause of the living; Holy
Fount; Sanctitifier, the Supplier, or Leader, of Sanctification; in whom is manifested God the
Father, who is above all and in all, and God the Son, who is through all. [And] There is a
perfect *Trinity, in glory and eternity and sovereignty, neither divided nor estranged.
Wherefore there is nothing either created or in servitude in the Trinity; nor anything super-
induced, as if at some former period it was non-existent, and at some later period it was
introduced. And thus neither was the Son ever wanting to the Father, nor the Spirit to the
Son; but without variation and without change, the same Trinity abideth ever.”
--- Gregory Thaumaturgus (of Nazianzus), 265 A.D.

That's clear, coming from experts at their own Greek language which they fluently spoke then!!
And remember, if the word "monogenes" never had any shade of meaning related to
"generation" or "begetting" or being "begotten" then why do we find so many ancient Greek
speakers before the Vulgate Bible showing it to be otherwise? But of course, its is also true that
the word "monogenes" can at times be translated as simply "unique" or "only" or "one of a
kind" WITHOUT having anything to do with begetting of generation, and the following quotes
from Greek speaking writers proves the other shade of meaning as well:

"There is a certain bird which is called a phoenix. This is the only one of its kind [or
MONOGENES], and lives five hundred years." ---Clement of Rome, Epistle to the Corinthians,
Chapter XXV

"Moses, not allowing altars and temples to be constructed in many places, but raising one
temple of God, announced that the world was only-begotten [or MONOGENES; i.e. unique], as
Basilides says, and that God is one, as does not as yet appear to Basilides." ---Clement of
Alexandria, The Stromata, Or Miscellanies, Book V, Chapter XI

"Very much, since unborn and indestructible He [God the Father] is, Whole, only-begotten [or
MONOGENES; i.e. unique], and immoveable, and unoriginated. ---Clement of Alexandria, The
Stromata, Or Miscellanies, Book V, Chapter XIV,

CONCLUSION? History demonstrates adequately that the word "monogenes" has been used in
BOTH the senses of "only begotten" as well as "sole", "only" and "unique" or "one of a kind"
(depending on the context), and when John used it of Jesus in John 3:16 and John 1:18 there is
nothing to discount the reality that he probably used it in both senses. Christian Greek speakers
and writers of the first three centuries, before the Latin Vulgate came on the scene, showed
clearly that they understood the word "monogenes" as used by John to have both meanings. As
an honest researcher I can’t deny the obvious!!
 MRS WHITE CLARIFIES THE TWO DIFFERING BEGETTINGS AND SONSHIPS OF JESUS

"His *Christ’s+ human nature was CREATED; it did not even possess the angelic powers. It was
human, identical with our own." —E.G. White, Selected Messages, Vol. 3, pg. 129.

"Christ [when begotten on earth] veiled His divinity beneath the garb of humanity. This was
the only way in which He could approach men. Had He not done this, He could not have
conversed with men, and gathered them around Him to hear the grand and elevating truths
which were to be to them eternal life. It was a part of the plan that He should hide the
*brightness of His glory, that, during His earthly life, He should humble Himself to man’s
estate [i.e. become a servant lower than even the angels in estate]...."

— Ellen G. White, Signs of the Times, July 7, 1898

For those SDAs who think Jesus' begetting was only earthly, here AGAIN is the contrast in
heaven from all eternity past (since Jesus had no beginning of days as God's Son; Heb. 7:3):

“God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son [i.e. he gave someone *already a
Son and already "begotten"] – 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....”

---E.G. White, Signs of the Times, May 30, 1895

That's plain fellow SDAs!! Jesus' heavenly begetting (or he being 'fathered' by God the Father)
was NOT to be his future earthly begetting being fulfilled or unfolded at some specific point
called "this day" in earthly time, since they are total opposites, and since his earthly begetting
was a NEW and SEPARATE type of Sonship....not the fulfilment of Proverbs 8:22-31 as so many
SDAs have mistakenly taught for years (myself included)!! As the divinely BEGOTTEN Son of God
he is the Creator, and as the BEGOTTEN son of Man he is a creature! Total CONTRAST!!

“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”. While the Son of a human being, He
became the Son of God IN A *NEW SENSE [it was not just a prophetic fulfilment for the first
time]. Thus He stood in our world—the Son of God, yet allied by birth to the human race.”
---E.G. White, Special Testimonies, August 2, 1905

"Creator and Creature United in Christ—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. ”

---E.G. White, Manuscript 141, 1901

On earth Jesus was NOT begotten "in all the *brightness of His [God's] *majesty and *glory",
but as a humble human *servant he came without these glorious externals (see Philippians 2:5-
8) when HE GAINED IN A NEW SENSE THE TITLE SON OF GOD". These he had laid aside or
"veiled", and, as Isaiah 53:2 makes plain, "there's [was] no beauty [externally] that we should
desire him". Thus there is absolutely no way we should confuse the two instances of Jesus'
"begetting"...i.e. between him being initially God's "ONLY BEGOTTEN SON" from all eternity
(bearing *all the *majesty and *glory of God), and when he was BEGOTTEN AGAIN in a new
form, and gaining in a new sense the title "Son of God", by laying aside all that majesty and
glory while begotten on earth!! Ultimately, in none of the instances in which Jesus is depicted
as "BEGOTTEN" or 'fathered' (whether from eternity or again on earth) does it mean it was
the beginning of him as a person, since he is eternal (1 John 1:1-3) or is from everlasting
exactly like God is (Micah 5:2), and he is without beginning as Hebrews 7:3 makes plain!!

JESUS AS THE DIVINE-HUMAN SON WAS TWICE "SET UP", OR APPOINTED, OR INVESTED
WITH AUTHORITY AS HEAVEN’S SOVEREIGN!!!

Those SDA members bent on using Proverbs 8 to make Jesus only begotten (or fathered) once
on earth, or invested with authority once after his incarnation, or "set up" or appointed once as
King by the Father only after his earthly sojourn, they run into a major roadblock when they
confront Mrs. White's writings, because she like the other pioneers described Jesus as TWICE
begotten, TWICE invested with authority, and TWICE made King by his Father; first in heaven
from all eternity past as His divine Son, and then again after his earthly sojourn. Proof? Notice
now the reality BEFORE Jesus came to earth:

"The great Creator [the Father] assembled the heavenly host, that he might in the presence of
all the angels confer special honor upon his Son [because of Lucifer’s misrepresentations of
Jesus’ real status+. 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. " ---E.G. White, The Story of Redemption, pg. 13

"The King of the universe [the Father] 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 *because of Lucifer’s misrepresentations of Jesus’ real status+. The Son of
God shared the Father’s throne, and the glory of the eternal, self-existent One encircled both.
About the throne gathered the holy angels, a vast, unnumbered throng—“ten thousand times
ten thousand, and thousands of thousands” (Revelation 5:11.), the most exalted angels, as
ministers and subjects, rejoicing in the light that fell upon them from the presence of the
Deity. Before the assembled inhabitants of heaven the King declared that none [as a son] but
Christ, the Only Begotten of God, could fully enter into His purposes, and to Him it was
committed to execute the mighty counsels of His will. The Son of God had wrought the
Father’s will in the creation of all the hosts of heaven; and to Him, as well as to God, their
homage and allegiance were due. Christ was still to exercise divine power, in the creation of
the earth and its inhabitants. But in all this He would not seek power or exaltation for Himself
contrary to God’s *PLAN, but would exalt the Father’s glory and execute His purposes of
beneficence and love....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 [i.e. from all eternity past]. Many of the angels were, however, blinded
by Lucifer’s deceptions."

---E.G. White, Patriarchs and Prophets, , pgs. 36-38

COMMENTS:

While the pre-incarnate Jesus is, IN HINDSIGHT, being called "Christ" or Jesus as a means of
identifying the person who became the Messiah to us, yet notice he is being recognized as
God's "Son" long before the incarnation by reason of the relationship he bears to the Father
from all eternity; not so much just the relationship he bears to us humans as the future
Messiah. Notice in heaven he is being called THE eternal Son. Why? He was the Son acting for
the Father from the very creation of the universe, invested with authority by the Father even
before coming to earth, i.e. from all eternity, and in all eternity he has his Father's name,
substance and nature as sons naturally do. In and from all eternity he was not the Father's
brother, or wife, or but simply his Son in actuality, in the divine sense!! Note the following
carefully:

"Proverbs 30:4 Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended [i.e. ride the skies, as it
were]? who hath gathered the wind in his fists? who hath bound the
waters in a garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth?
what is his name, and what is [present tense] HIS SON'S NAME, if
thou canst tell?" [this was before Jesus came to earth]

“Christ is declared in the Scriptures to be the Son of God. From all

eternity He has sustained *THIS [Sonship] relation to Jehovah. Before
the foundations of the world were laid, He, *THE only begotten Son of God [an ETERNAL past
tense reality], pledged Himself to become the Redeemer of the human race should men sin.”

— E.G. White, Manuscript 22, 1905

“When Christ first announced to the heavenly host His mission and work in the world, He
declared that He was to leave His position of dignity and disguise His holy mission by
assuming the likeness of a man, WHEN IN REALITY HE WAS THE SON OF THE INFINITE GOD…"

---E.G. White, Letter 303, 1903

So he pledged to BECOME Man's Redeemer as a human or a "son of Man", but in actuality was
always God's divine Son!!! He always was in *actuality and always will be God's Son....try as
some might to relegate it to only the earth after the incarnation. On earth the divine Son
changed his form and became the human Son of Man while remaining the divine Son of
God....or GAINING the title “Son” in a new sense; not becoming so for the first time!! True,
Psalm 2 was prophetic regarding Jesus’ future Messianic Sonship as the second Adam (re: his
resurrection-type begetting, and re his later re-glorification and enthronement-type begetting
as “Jehovah” --“the Lord”-- in heaven as a glorified Man). True, Jesus was from eternity past
designated “the Mediator of the covenant” with man—a future covenant that was to come---
which was a proleptic/anticipatory designation because of its future surety, just like he being,
in that certain propleptic sense (because of it’s future surety), the “the Lamb slain from the
foundation of the world”(Roman 4:17). But this should not be confused with his two differing
types of begettings and Sonships which were actual realities in their own spheres, and in in
total contrast to each other (one connected to his divinity from eternity, and the other
connected to his humanity since Bethlehem)! Notice again Mrs. White's 1905 statement below
after the SDA pioneers had already begun to accept and preach the Trinity from in the late
1890s:

“In His incarnation He [Jesus] 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”. While the Son of a human
being, He became the Son of God IN A *NEW SENSE [it was not just a prophetic fulfilment for
the first time]. Thus He stood in our world—the Son of God, yet allied by birth to the human
race.”

---E.G. White, Special Testimonies, August 2, 1905

It’s really hard to kick against the pricks, and as a Trinitarian SDA who fully accepts Mrs. White’s
“inspired insights”, I will not kick against the pricks, but simply accept the truth and walk in the
light; not deny it so as to have my own idolized views be more important than what God has
revealed.

WHY DO MOST SDAs TODAY TEACH AN “UNBEGOTTEN” SONSHIP OF JESUS

The SDA leadership in the 1950s up to the present, they mistook, AND CONTINUE TO
MISTAKE, the meaning of the expression "in Christ is life original, unborrowed and
underived", thinking that it meant that Jesus is not "begotten", when the truth is that Mrs.
White BORROWED that Trinitarian expression from the *Trinitarian author John Cumming who
himself was a firm believer in the Nicene Creed teaching that Jesus was "BEGOTTEN" before all
time, and that there was never a time when he did not exist, yet he is God's truly BEGOTTEN
Son. That's historic Trinitarianism, paradoxical as it may sound!!

The problem is that the SDA leaders (after the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s) were seeking to
'PROTECT' the full eternal existence of Jesus from the anti-Trinitarians by seeking to explain
away his "begetting" as only just an earthly fulfillment, when in fact Mrs. White taught that
Jesus was begotten twice!! The dissident anti-Trinitarians in Adventism opposing the Church’s
acceptance of a/the Trinity of separate Godhead beings (in contrast to the Catholic Trinity),
they have always sought to limit Jesus' eternal existence when speaking of his "begetting",
and the SDA probably leaders felt that the best way to "PROTECT' his full eternity was to
deny he was begotten from eternity (only on earth as a man), when in reality they end up
denying the truth that he was BEGOTTEN or "BROUGHT FORTH" of the Father from all
eternity past, yet still has no beginning just like God's wisdom (Heb. 7:3)!! Today their
teaching has caused a whole modern generation of SDA members to deny Jesus' "begotten"
nature, and that he was always God's TRUE Son from all eternity, and its time for the truth to
be known and we return to the truth we are denying as Trinitarians. It’s not impossible to do
so, since even the SDA pioneers admitted areas they were misguided in as the Remnant Church,
and humbly made adjustments when it was discovered. We must be humble as biblical
“Bereans”; following in their footsteps to test all beliefs by the Word, and we must avoid the
“Laodicean” notion that we are "increased with goods and in need of nothing"!!

Remember, every parable used of Jesus in relation to the Father shows he was "OF" the Father
but fully co-eternal or coeval with him "from all eternity" (yes, "from *ALL eternity):

1. He’s the Wisdom and Power *OF God (1 Cor. 1:24; Proverbs 8:22-31)

2. He’s the eternal Word *OF God who created all time and all beginnings (John 1:1-3, 14 and 1
John 1:1-3 )

3. He’s the Arm *OF the Lord (Isaiah 53:1)

Someone’s wisdom, power, and arm are neither inferior to nor comes after the owner of it, but
exist along with him, and is FROM him and EQUAL in nature to, and is POSSESSED by him as his
property, hence the same truth applies to Jesus IN IMAGERY in relation to His Father from all
eternity!!

Keep in mind too that the image of God in Man in Genesis had one person (Eve, who in imagery
corresponds to Jesus) coming from the being of the other (Adam, who corresponds to the
Headship of the Father) and yet they were both fully and co-equally Man, and they
remained/were the same age, since both originated on the sixth day of Creation. Romans 1:19-
20 makes plain what that means in terms of understanding the Godhead. Likewise, despite
Jesus is “of” the Father (which is the only way it could be said that he, the “begotten Son” (and
Word) and the Father are "of one substance". But notice now that he and the Father are both
fully God, and both are "from all eternity" or both are "the first and the last", meaning they
TIED in terms of the length of their eternal existence (i.e. same in age as Adam and Eve were)
and they both are infinite or timeless beings, since it was Jesus who created time, and hence is
not limited by time. BOTH sides of the truth must be accepted equally. Its one of the mysteries
of the Godhead which Mrs. White makes plain is "enshrined in light unapproachable" and is
"incomprehensible"!! Both sides of the controversy in Adventism are therefore denying an
aspect of the truth, and that is why my ministry is agitating for BOTH sides to come clean with
themselves!!

BOTTOMLINE?

"Beget" means to father a son!! "Begotten" means to be fathered!! And no power on earth can
refute that reality. See again 1 John 5:1 with John 3:16. If ANYONE denies Jesus has a Father,
you also are denying the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ; the Father who has a Son...a
*beginningless or eternal Son existing "from everlasting" (Heb. 7:3; 1 John 1:1-3; Micah 5:2),
which the Father "possessed" and "brought forth” in an *incomprehensible way from all
eternity past (see Proverbs 8:22-31 with Proverbs 30:4 and 1 Cor. 1:24)!! God the Father then
(in the Abraham and Isaac fashion) gave to us his ONLY BEGOTTEN Son WHICH HE HAD AS HIS
GREATEST *POSSESSION, as an indication of how much he loves us!! John 3:16. That's the
truth of the gospel. To fight that truth is to fight against the gospel!!

Too many SDAs want the truth of the true Trinity (i.e. "three living persons" of "the eternal
Godhead", united in nature, aim, and in action; but who are not one person) but want to reject
the Sonship of Jesus and the Fatherhood of God the Father, by denying the BEGOTTEN Son
truth!! And too many want and are presenting the BEGOTTEN Son truth, but want to reject the
full eternal nature of that Son....i.e. One who’s without beginning of days, or who is equally the
first and the last (see Rev. 2:8) just like the Father (he is not the 'second'); just as they want to
reject the "threefold" Godhead truth (see Matthew 28:19 with 1 Cor. 12: 4-6, 11).

The SDA pioneers gradually harmonized BOTH truths, indicating that true Christianity accepts
BOTH sides of the story AS GIVEN IN THE SCRIPTURES, and harmonizes both as true, even if we
cannot explain all the "incomprehensible" mysteries of divinity, of which Job 11:7-9 tells us we
CANT!! Let's be humble and consistent in declaring all the truths of the Bible; not just some!!

FINAL COMMENTS AND MY INTERCESSORY PRAYER FOR MY SDA BRETHREN

Too many SDAs try to 'escape' the reality of Jesus being "begotten" (fathered) or "brought
forth" from eternity by trying to say that Proverbs 8 is simply a prediction or prophecy about
the future coming of the incarnated Son. Both Mrs. White and the rest of the SDA pioneers
(both before and after they accepted the Trinity) debunk this fallacy. And they do this
effectively by teaching Jesus being BEGOTTEN TWICE; and not just once in fulfillment of the so-
called Proverbs 8 "prophecy"!! Thus we are to try to avoid the following fallacies:

1. Firstly, we are to avoid the fallacy of thinking that "begotten" or "brought forth" only/always
means to be literally born of a mother or born biologically by some cloning process, or to have
an origin at some specific time after God the Father. First, note carefully that Paul in Philemon
1:10 called a close spiritual associate his "begotten", yet Paul was unmarried and did not have
any biological sons. So a "begotten" don't have to be brought forth biologically. Also' if in
Proverbs 8:1, 22-31, God's wisdom is deemed as "brought forth" of the Father from everlasting
(or from all eternity past), yet that wisdom has always existed along with the Father as long as
he himself has been in existence, then Proverbs 8 is not about the origin of the Son after the
Father sometime in eternity past or about what was to happen sometime in the future, but is
simply about Jesus being always with the Father, yet intimately related to him in substance, and
is from him and possessed by him!! It's the mystery of all mysteries "enshrined in light
unapproachable", Mrs. White told us SDAs, and which is NOT explained by his earthly begetting
through Mary, since it was all in eternity past!!

2. Secondly we are to avoid the fallacy of thinking that since Jesus was begotten on earth then
Proverbs 8 must be interpreted as a prophecy. That's making assumptions that's not provable.
It is argued by many SDAs ----who deem Proverbs 8 as a prophecy of the future Son to be
brought forth or begotten through Mary, then later anointed, and set up on God's throne as
King in heaven after his earthly sojourn----that there was only one occasion on which Jesus was
"begotten", "annointed", and "set up" in so-called fulfillment of Proverbs 8. But now that we
see our own prophetess (E.G. White) along with the rest of the SDA pioneers declaring he was
begotten TWICE, and invested with authority as King TWICE, i.e. both before and after he came
to earth, then the issue is more complex than many SDAs would like to think. The
BEGINNINGLESS Jesus was TWICE begotten (or fathered from eternity past, as Proverbs 8:22-31
makes plain, and again on earth as Psalm 2 predicted he would be), and he was TWICE invested
with Kingly authority by his Father; not just once after his earthly sojourn!!! And we MUST
accept both sides of the truth, even if our logic cannot wrap itself around it!! Eternity in
Paradise will still have us trying to grapple with these awesome truths, so let Job 11:7-9 be true,
since we CANNOT explain the mysteries of God here and now!!

3. Thirdly, we must resist the fallacy of misapplying Romans 4:17 to Jesus' divine Sonship, and in
effect saying Jesus was not God's begotten Son until the incarnation, but God only deemed it so
until it became a reality!! That's a falsehood, since Jesus was in actuality God's divine uncreated
Son of God BEFORE he became the created Son of man; the nature of one was from all eternity
past, while the other was from Bethlehem nearly two thousand years ago....total opposites of
each other in nature!! Proverbs 30:4 is inescapable, and hence tells what Jesus was in actuality
before becoming the son of Man.

We should now SEE CLEARLY the contrast of Jesus' nature as two types of "Son" (but as one
person). As the CREATED human "Son" he was not even equal with angels, and was God's
"servant" or slave, but as the BEGOTTEN divine Son he is all that God is in divine nature. Thus
by no stretch of the imagination can we say that CREATED and BEGOTTEN should mean the
same thing as it relates to Jesus!!! The Trinitarians in history debunked Arius by saying
“begotten” does not mean the same thing as being created (READ OVER THE HISTORY OF THE
TRINITARIAN NICENE CREED), and Mrs. White also debunked both Arians and semi-Arians in our
midst by saying this BEGOTTEN (NOT created) divine Jesus was always in existence “from all
eternity”, despite "begotten" and despite "brought forth". True SD Adventism taught/teaches,
and should teach today, that Jesus was BOTH begotten and created, but as contrasting realities
meant to express his BEGOTTEN divinity and his CREATED humanity….yet still as a person he
(paradoxically) has always been in existence, just like his Father who’s described as eternal or
existing “from all eternity”, self-existent, and rightfully bearing the name and full nature of “the
I AM” or “Jehovah” (as our pioneers, correctly observed):

“…when Jesus declared Himself to the Jews to be I AM, He revealed Himself as the
Jehovah of the Old Testament, the God of Abraham manifested in human flesh. This is quite in
harmony with the name announced by the prophet Isaiah to be given to the virgin-born son,
and by Inspiration applied to Jesus of Nazareth; "They shall call His name Immanuel; which is,
being interpreted, God with us." Matt. 1:23. But the fact that the Jesus of the New Testament
is the Jehovah of the Old Testament must not be understood as eliminating the Father, or as a
denial of the Godhead-- Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Since the finite cannot comprehend the
infinite, it were vain to attempt an analysis of the Godhead, or to liken the perfect union of
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit to a triumvirate of men or even of angels. Neither must we think
of the three distinct persons of the Godhead as subject to any of the limitations to which men
are subject. To Nicodemus the Saviour said, "No one hath ascended into heaven, but He that
descended out of heaven, even the Son of man, who is in heaven." John 3:13.
There was the divine Word made flesh, subject to the limitations of humanity, as a
man just as dependent upon the Father as we are dependent upon Him; and yet, as a
divine Being, still one with the Father in heaven, as declared in John 17:23. Believe it
we must, but explain it, or even fully comprehend it, we cannot; and until we can, we should
tread reverently as we approach the subject of the being and nature of the triune God. This
identification of Jesus of Nazareth with Jehovah of the Old Testament opens up a fertile field
of study and encouragement. …When we are tempted to doubt the power of Jesus to save us
from sin and from sinning, we may call to mind that it was as Jehovah that He delivered His
people from the bondage of Egypt and brought them into the Promised Land.”
---W.W. Prescott, The Saviour of the World, pg. 17

“...God’s great plan is clear and logical. There is *A TRINITY, and in it there are three
personalities [or three individuals]…. These divine persons are associated in the work
of God…But this union is not one in which *individuality is lost…There is indeed a
divine trio, but the Christ of that Trinity is not [initially] a created being as the angels- He was
the “only begotten” of the Father…”
-----Robert Hare, Australasian Union Conference Record (SDA pioneering periodical,
July 19, 1909

“It was the Son of God alone who could present an acceptable sacrifice. GOD HIMSELF
became man, and bore all the wrath that sin had provoked….”
---Ellen G. White, Youth’s Instructor, 31st August, 1887

“He says to us, I [Jesus] AM THE LORD [or Jehovah] THY GOD [see John 20:28-29]; walk with
Me, and I will fill thy path with light. Jesus, the Majesty of heaven, proposes to elevate to
companionship with Himself those who come to Him with their burdens, their weaknesses,
and their cares.” ---E.G. White, Lift Him Up, pg. 98
"...let Jesus, in His love and mercy, be revealed as the crucified Saviour, and from many once
unwilling lips will be heard the acknowledgment of Thomas, “My Lord and *my God.”
---E.G. White, Desire of Ages, 1898, pg. 808
**It’s logical since only Jehovah God himself is our Saviour, the Saviour, as said plainly in Isaiah 4
3:10-11, and Jesus is plainly called THE Saviour all over the Scriptures]

“Represent before a world laden with corruption the blessedness of true education. The
weary, the heavy-laden, the broken-hearted, the perplexed--point them to Christ, the source
of all strength, *all life, all hope.” ---E.G. White, Review and Herald, January 16, 1913

"The crowning glory of Christ´s [Jesus] attributes is His holiness. The angels bow before *Him
[Jesus] in adoration, exclaiming, "Holy, holy, holy, Lord *God Almighty." Revelation 4:8.
*It’s only logical, since that’s what it mean’s to be “co-equal” with God+. He is declared to be
glorious in His holiness. Study the character of God. By beholding Christ, by seeking Him in
faith and prayer, you may become like Him.”
---E.G. White, Counsels to Parents, Teachers, and Students pg. 402

"It was Christ who spoke the law from Mount Sinai [commanding us to have no other God
before him]. The authority by which He spoke was expressly His own; yet it was the authority
of the Father *also. The Son of God cannot be separated from His Father.... “I and my Father
are one.” — E.G. White, Manuscript 58, 1900, pg.33

"One name ALONE is to be exalted by us—the name of Christ. He who bears this name has
visited this earth...His name shall be called, Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The
everlasting Father, The Prince [Ruler] of Peace.” I have plain messages to bear. The name of
the Lord must be exalted among His people." ---E.G. White, Letter 347, 1904

Compare her saying: “Jehovah, the eternal, self-existent, uncreated One, Himself the source
and sustainer of all, is alone entitled to supreme reverence and worship. Man is forbidden to
give to any other object the first place in his affections or his service.”
---E.G. White, Sons and Daughters of God, pg. 56

[*Note: Never forget that Jesus himself said: Matt 4:10… Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God
and him only shalt thou serve”. Since Jesus is called our Jehovah God by title alongside the
Father, then, just like the Father, only Christ Jesus is to be exalted as our UNCREATED God
(despite he is the created human Messiah). The “oneness” of divinity applies in this instance
too, i.e. as it applies to the first commandment regarding who we are to see as our God— i.e.
the Father and the Son, and their sent personal Holy Spirit who represents them to us as the
Uncreated!!

"...let us [SDAs] consecrate to *Him ["the Lord" our God] all that we
are, and all that we have, and then may we all unite to swell the songs,
“Praise God, from whom all blessings flow; Praise *him, all creatures
here below; Praise *him above, ye heavenly host; Praise Father, Son,
*AND Holy Ghost ---E.G. White, Review and Herald, January 4, 1881
As I close, I bow my head humbly before my God, our God, and I pray:

Dear God, my God, I pray that truth being neglected by your

people (on BOTH sides of the Godhead controversy in
Adventism), that truth will eventually find logdement in the
hearts of those who are your true sheep, so that we can stand
clean in our ministry before you to finish the work of the
"three angels". In Jesus' name I pray. Amen!!

---THE END---

Derrick Gillespie is a trained teacher in the Social Sciences, History, and Geography, and
remains a member of the SDA Church in Jamaica and a lay evangelist for SDAs.
(Contact Info: ddgillespie@live.com OR https://www.facebook.com/derrick.gillespie

____________________
---A PUBLICATION OF DERRICK GILLESPIE’S “REMNANT RESISTANCE” ONLINE MINISTRIES---