My Vision on Revelation 14:1-5

Rev 14:1 And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads.

Rev 14:2 And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps:

Rev 14:3 And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth.

Rev 14:4 These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb.

Rev 14:5 And in their mouth was found no guile: for they are without fault before the throne of God.

Click to go to our Home Page

Recently, my mind has been much exercised by the false teachings of men like Walter Veith, Vance Ferrell, and Andrew Henriques (and many others) who are teaching in effect, that the bride of Christ can remain in an apostate new movement we were never to join, and still remain undefiled with women (apostate churches.) On November 19, 2018, I entreated the Lord concerning this matter, and He gave me the following vision.

I was instructed that the Bible and more specifically, the response of Christ and His followers to apostasy, was a PREFIGURE for us to follow. I was shown that being undefiled by women means not being melded and molded by ANY apostate church. I was shown that it means that the bride is taken from her father’s house (Satan’s Synagogue) to Christ’s own house, by faith, and that in Christ’s day, that involved being “gathered out” of the apostate church of His first “chosen people,” and that the same response by Christ applies to our day.

I was shown that the only subjects of God’s Kingdom that Walter Veith’s teachings on overcoming apply to is the Great Multitude, and the Martyrs; that these two groups are indeed judged according to their trend, as being onward and upward. Walter Veith does not teach that the bride, the 144,000 transcend a trend experience for they arrive at full overcoming and are found WITHOUT FAULT. Walter Veith and his friend Francois du Plessis, stop short of teaching that we can overcome all known sin this side of glorification, and du Plessis has some personal opinion theory about overcoming being a participle in the English language.

I checked all the references to being perfect that overcoming, and found nothing involving a participle. I also checked Thayer’s Greek/English Lexicon on the New Testament. I found adverbs and adjectives, but nothing referring to participles. The instruction is clear from God’s Word, and I don’t believe God would leave such instruction to oblique language structure in grammar. The bride of Christ is quite obviously distinguished from the great multitude and the martyrs regardless of any language structure or grammar. Nor did Jesus leave anything associated with His proper response to apostasy to obscure grammar and/or semantics. Nor did Ellen G. White. It would be of high disdain for God and the Spirit of Prophecy to instruct us to do the impossible, but that is what Veith and du Plessis are teaching.

You may use this Bible program to check out all references to overcoming and being perfect. http://www.blbclassic.org/index.cfm

Rev 14:1 And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads.

Rev 14:2 And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps:

Rev 14:5 And in their mouth was found no guile: for they are without fault before the throne of God.

Jesus’ Response to the Apostasy Abominations of His Day, Was to Gather Out Those Who Would Take the Gospel to the World

The entire Bible was written as an example (prefigure) so that we need not be in the least confusion as to the correct response to any serious issue befalling Christendom. God would never let serious issues go without a clear precedent for us to follow. In spite of that clear example, errant teachers who remain members of the new movement we were never to join, are essentially instructing that the bride of Jesus Christ can remain undefiled while being a MEMBER of a new movement that has removed God and pillar doctrines on the Godhead and the human nature of Christ, while any error on those doctrines constitutes antichrist teachings.

I was shown that God would never leave a proper response to such serious abominations to the varying opinions of men, and that His Word is very precise in providing a correct course for us to follow. Seven years before the Daniel 9 (490 years probation granted to Israel), was ended in A.D. 34, Jesus “gathered out” His bride who would take the gospel to the world, to wit:

"The Sanhedrin had rejected Christ's message and was bent upon His death therefore Jesus departed from Jerusalem, from the priests, the temple, the religious leaders, the people who had been instructed in the law, and turned to another class to proclaim His message, and to gather out those who should carry the gospel to all nations. As the light and life of men was rejected by the ecclesiastical authorities in the days of Christ, so it has been rejected in every succeeding generation. Again and again the history of Christ's withdrawal from Judea has been repeated. When the Reformers preached the word of God, they had no thought of separating themselves from the established church but the religious leaders would not tolerate the light, and those that bore it were forced to seek another class, who were longing for the truth. In our day few of the professed followers of the Reformers are actuated by their spirit. Few are listening for the voice of God, and ready to accept truth in whatever guise it may be presented. Often those who follow in the steps of the Reformers are forced to turn away from the churches they love, in order to declare the plain teaching of the word of God. And many times those who are seeking for light are by the same teaching obliged to leave the church of their fathers, that they may render obedience." E.G. White, Desire of Ages, p. 232.

The above statement is a clarion example of Christ’s response to the prevailing apostasy of His day. The first act of His ministry was to “gather out” His bride from the apostate organized Jewish church. Were the disciples His bride? Yes.

“John had by nature the faults and weaknesses common to humanity, but the touch of divine love had transformed him. He dwelt in an atmosphere uncontaminated with selfishness and ambition, and far above the miasma of jealousy. He manifested no sympathy with the dissatisfaction of his disciples, but showed how clearly he understood his relation to the Messiah, and how gladly he welcomed the One for whom he had prepared the way. {DA 179.2}

He said, "A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven. Ye yourselves bear me witness, that I said, I am not the Christ, but that I am sent before Him. He that hath the bride is the bridegroom: but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom's voice." John represented himself as the friend who acted as a messenger between the betrothed parties, preparing the way for the marriage. When the bridegroom had received his bride, the mission of the friend was fulfilled. He rejoiced in the happiness of those whose union he had promoted. So John had been called to direct the people to Jesus, and it was his joy to witness the success of the Saviour's work. He said, "This my joy therefore is fulfilled. He must increase, but I must decrease." Desire of Ages, 179.

John the Baptist prepared the bride for Jesus. Then Jesus “gathered out” that bride from the apostate church organization:

“Christ was a protestant...The Reformers date back to Christ and the apostles. They came out and separated themselves from a religion of forms and ceremonies. Luther and his followers did not invent the reformed religion. They simply accepted it as presented by Christ and the apostles.” E.G. White, Review and Herald, vol. 2, 48, col. 2.

Definition of The Bully Pulpit https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=bully%20pulpit

“An alternate definition of "bully" as a noun means someone who harasses or intimidates. The modern definition of "bully pulpit" reflects the misuse of the church pulpit by unenlightened preachers to bully followers into submitting to their twisted views.”

The ultimate application of the bully pulpit is hypnosis, which Ellen White said SDA ministers would use as they departed from the faith. That has occurred under Neuro Linguistic Programming (NLP), which hundreds of Adventist ministers were sent to Babylon by the General Conference, to learn. The GC lies about them learning hypnosis, but other reliable sources say that BOTH Lab 1 and Lab II teach hypnosis methodologies.

Let the GC deny this all they wish! Ellen White said a long time ago, that ministers who would depart from the faith would use hypnosis, and ministers have been departing from the faith since the mid 1950’s per the abominable apostasies of the new movement we were never to join.

Hypnosis and Mind Control

Hypnotism Hypnosis "The time has come where even in the church and in our institutions, some will depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils. But God will keep that which is committed to Him. Let us draw near to Him, that He may draw near to us. Let us bear a plain, clear testimony right to the point, that HYPNOTISM is being used by those who have departed from the faith and that we are not to link up with them. Through those who depart from the faith, the power of the enemy will be exercised to lead other astray." E.G. White, Selected Messages, Bk. 3, pp. 411, 412.

One does not have to depart from the church to depart from the faith. Since 1955, SDA leaders have steadily departed from the faith by removing pillar doctrines. (1SM 204-205).

“To study this science is to pluck the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. God forbids you or any other mortal to preach or to teach such a science . . Cut away from yourselves everything that savors of hypnotism, the science by which Satanic agencies work.” (2 MCP 716.1 2M) (The Omega Rebellion, Rick Howard, p. 142, 143).

“Men and women are not to study the science of how to take captive the minds of those who associate with them. This is the science that Satan teaches. We are to resist everything of the kind.” (SpM 464.8).

God Forbids the Learning or Teaching of Hypnosis. --"Neither one of you should study the science in which you have been interested. To study this science is to pluck the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. God forbids you or any other mortal to learn or to teach such a science. The fact that you have had anything to do with this science ought alone to be sufficient to show you, Brother N, the inconsistency of your being the leading physician in the sanitarium. . . ." {2MCP 716.1}

“So long as they refuse to heed the warnings given them, the spell that is upon them cannot be broken. God has a work that must be carried forward purely and intelligently, in his own way, entirely separated from the influence of seducing spirits that some have communion with.” (SpM 464.8).

“Through the channel of phrenology, psychology, and mesmerism, he [Satan] comes more directly to the people of this generation, and works with that power which is to characterize his efforts near the close of probation.” (ST, Nov. 6, 1844 par. 2).

Andrew Henriques’ Solution THAT IS NO SOLUTION

Andrew Henriques says sort of quietly and under his breath-like, after enumerating some of the abominations, “Come here,” meaning go to his church or tune in to his sermons online. But that DOES NOT solve the problem, because ALL MEMBERS of the new movement are corporately responsible for all the abominations, and Andrew Henriques DOES NOT call MEMBERS out of that new movement. Like Vance Ferrell, he simply advises his hearers to try to find a church within the organization that they deem okay. Again, that is NO SOLUTION because of the clearly stated Bible and Spirit of Prophecy statements on the principle of corporate responsibility, whereby EVERY MEMBER is as stated; CORPORATLY RESPONSIBLE for open sin apostasy in the new movement that professes to be the Seventh-day Adventist church and which new movement has hi-jacked the name Seventh-day Adventist by legally incorporating it.

New movement Adventism is a classic example of a Bully Pulpit. Why? Because Ellen White said that it would allow nothing to stand in its way! It won’t even permit pure truth to stand in its way!

“The enemy of souls has sought to bring in the supposition that a great reformation was to take place among Seventh-day Adventists, and that this reformation would consist in giving up the doctrines which stand as the pillars of our faith, and engaging in a process of reorganization. Were this reformation to take place, what would result? The principles of truth that God in His wisdom has given to the remnant church, would be discarded. Our religion would be changed. The fundamental principles that have sustained the work for the last fifty years would be accounted as error. A new organization would be established. Books of a new order would be written. A system of intellectual philosophy would be introduced. The founders of this system would go into the cities, and do a wonderful work. The Sabbath, of course, would be lightly regarded, as also the God who created it. Nothing would be allowed to stand in the way of the new movement. The leaders would teach that virtue is better than vice, but God being removed, they would place their dependence on human power,which, without God, is worthless.” Selected Messages, book 1, pp. 204, 205.

It is not strange that so-called “independent ministries” that operate within the auspices of the new movement, use the same tactics because THEY ARE ALSO PART OF THE NEW MOVEMENT. They also are a bully pulpit that will allow NOTHING, not even clear as day evidence, to stand in their way.

· I refer to the clear evidence I have presented above which involves Christ’s response to the abomination apostasy of the organized church of His day.

· Men like Veith, Ferrell, Henriques, Batchelor, and a host of others are, by not calling for separation, are instructing you to remain MEMBERS of a new movement whose ministers are using hypnosis to persuade you to remain with an apostate new movement no matter what it does. This is demonic beyond words.

· I refer to the teachings of the Bible on Corporate Responsibility for the open sins in the church.

· I refer to those who teach that MEMBERS of the new movement can be part of the bride of Christ, while being a MEMBER of an OMEGA OF APOSTASY NEW MOVEMENT that has removed God and pillar doctrines, and not be corporately responsible for said OPEN SIN APOSTASY, in light of the Biblical example of Achan, and the following counsel from the Spirit of Prophecy:

When open sin is not separated from the church, the members become corporately responsible for it.

"The plain straight testimony must live in the church, or the curse of God will rest upon His people as surely as it did upon ancient Israel because of their sins. God holds His people, as a body [corporately], responsible for the sins existing in individuals among them." Testimonies, Vol. 3, p. 269.

The church has never recognized the principle of corporate responsibility. But it is for this reason that true Christians ever separated from any apostate body--as well as the following reasons:

"It is IMPOSSIBLE for you to unite with those who are corrupt, and still remain pure. (II Corinthians 6:14-15 quoted). God and Christ and the heavenly host would have men know that if he unites with the corrupt he will become corrupt." E. G. White, Review and Herald, Vol. 4, p. 137.

Christ cannot be the Head of any body that unites with the corrupt lest He be corrupt as well.

The plainest example of corporate responsibility taught by Scripture is that Christ is the head and we are the body of His Church. The head of the body cannot endure sin in the body. Thus, Christ Himself would be corporately responsible if He permitted sin in His body, His church.

“God regards as his enemies those who will by any act of negligence shield the guilty. They are in his sight partakers in the evil deeds of the sinner.{ST January 20, 1881, par. 15}

Here are lessons which God’s people at the present day should take to heart.

"We should never give sanction to sin by our words, our deeds, our silence or our presence." Desire of Ages, 152.

We give sanction to a sinful new movement by being joined to it as a MEMBER.

“There are grievous sins indulged by individual members of the church,—covetousness, over-reaching, deception, fraud, falsehood, and many others. If these sins are neglected by those who have been placed in authority in the church, the blessing of the Lord is withheld from his people, and the innocent suffer with the guilty. The officers in the church should be earnest, energetic men, having a zeal for God, and they should take the most prompt and thorough measures to condemn and correct these wrongs. In this work they should act, not from selfishness, jealousy, or personal prejudice, but in all meekness and lowliness of mind, with a sincere desire that God may be glorified. Inhumanity, false dealing, prevarication, licentiousness, and other sins, are not to be palliated or excused; for they will speedily demoralize the church. Sin may be called by false names, and glossed over by plausible excuses and pretended good motives, but this does not lessen its guilt in the sight of God. Wherever it may be found, sin is offensive to God, and will surely meet its punishment.” {ST January 20, 1881, par. 16}

"We should never give sanction to sin by our words, our deeds, our silence or our presence." Desire of Ages, 152.

"The names of those who sin and refuse to repent should not be retained on the church books, lest the saints be held accountable for their evil deeds. Those who pursue a course of transgression should be visited and labored with, and if they then refuse to repent, they should be separated from church fellowship, in accordance with the rules laid down in the Word of God." {11MR 208.3}

What happens when the culprits are the leaders who brought the apostasy in “among” us via a new movement? Andrew Henriques regularly cites some of the abominations, but he NEVER tells his supporters that they are accountable for their evil deeds via the bible principle of corporate responsibility. This is the worst form of pulpit bully tactics that affect the very salvation of his patrons. Refraining from giving the full truth about corporate responsibility for all the abominations of apostasy on the part of the leaders of the new movement, so as to gain numbers and monetary support, is a bully pulpit tactic of the worst kind and constitutes spiritual crime because the salvation of others is at stake:

Indifference and Neutrality in a Crisis: "If God abhors one sin above another, of which HIS PEOPLE are guilty, it is of doing nothing in a case of emergency. Indifference or neutrality in a religious crisis is regarded of God as a grievous crime and equal to the very worst type of hostility against God." E.G. White, Review and Herald, vol. 1, p. 136. Also, Testimonies, Vol. 3, p. 281.

Walter Veith, Andrew Henriques, Vance Ferrell, Doug Batchelor, and a host of other “watchmen,” are committing indifference and the worst type of hostility against God, for not teaching their MEMBERS of their NEW MOVEMENT the principle of corporate responsibility for the abominations of that NEW MOVEMENT we were never to join.

I received the following email from a friend in the United Kingdom, regarding Andrew Henriques’ teaching on the Godhead.

https://youtu.be/1uHeoMCp3F8

At.min.49.50,A. Henriques,saying :"WE CANNOT SEPARATE THE HUMAN NATURE OF JESUS CHRIST, FROM HIS DIVINE NATURE! !!!!!"

BUT.....EXACTLY HERE.....IT'S THE KEY! !!!

GOD BLESS YOU, DEAR BROTHER RON, GOD BLESS YOU!

PRAISE THE LORD, FOR HIS PUR,PUR THRUTH! !!!!!!

Attachments area

Preview YouTube video PROTEST împotriva doctrinei Trinitătii

PROTEST împotriva doctrinei Trinitătii

It is pure, undiluted heresy to say that “we cannot separate the human nature of Jesus Christ, from His Divine Nature.” If the human nature personality of Christ was not separated from His Divine Nature, the following serious implications would accrue:

· If :"WE CANNOT SEPARATE THE HUMAN NATURE OF JESUS CHRIST, FROM HIS DIVINE NATURE” as Andrew Henriques opines, then the Divine Nature would have had to die on the cross, and Ellen White said that is impossible. Thus, Andrew is not speaking according to the Testimonies and the Bible Isa. 8:20. Neither is he speaking according to the Testimonies on the serious issue of corporate responsibility.

· There would have been NO ATONEMENT resulting in the HUMANITY of the Son of God, ANOTHER PERSON, MAKING THREE PERSONS.

· There would have been no permanent form of “death,” paying the penalty of man’s wages for sin, which are eternal death, because Divinity cannot die. The “death” part was Jesus “dying” to His former existence as “divine Holy Spirit only,” to become incarnated into humanity forever—says the Bible and the SOP. That is the FOREVER payment for man’s wages of sin which is eternal death.

· Before the Atonement, there were only TWO PERSONS. There was NO HUMANITY involved with the Godhead before the Atonement. Therefore the THIRD PERSON added to the Godhead via the Incarnation, was NOT co-ETERNAL, as the Trinity Doctrine blasphemically teaches, thus, in effect, voiding the Incarnation Atonement Sacrifice whereby a THIRD PERSON was added to the Godhead.

· The Divine Nature would have had to die on the cross, and Ellen White said that it didn’t because Divinity cannot die.

· In John Chapter 13, Jesus says that He is the Comforter and that the Comforter and the Father BOTH come to us, verse 23. If there was no separation between the Son’s Holy Spirit and His INDEPENDENT HUMAN PERSONality, ALL THREE PERSONS WOULD HAVE TO COME TO US. In John 14, Jesus’ humanity is speaking to Thomas, Philip and Judas (not Iscariot) while He was on earth.

· Jesus could not have come in our human nature, and the Bible says that all who say that He did not come in sinful human nature flesh are antichrist. Andrew’s teaching is ANTICHRIST. It is the worst form of pride and being a pulpit bully, to keep this important salvific truth from his patrons.

· Jesus did not possess the 3 omni’s in His humanity. He said only the Father knew the time of His coming. He said He could do nothing without the Father.

· Jesus told Nicodemus face to face on this earth, that no man had ascended into heaven but the Son of Man which is in heaven. So this depicts a separation between the humanity of Jesus and the Son of Man which was in heaven at the time Jesus spoke to Nicodemus face to face.

· “And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.” John 3:13.

Ellen White clearly stated that Christ’s HOLY SPIRIT HIMSELF was divested of the personality of His humanity and INDEPENDENT THEREOF:

“Cumbered with humanity Christ could not be in every place personally, therefore it was altogether for their advantage that He should leave them to go to His Father and send the Holy Spirit [THE COMFORTER--THE SOUL OF HIS PRE-INCARNATED LIFE] to be His successor on earth. The Holy Spirit is Himself divested of the personality of humanity and independent thereof. He would represent Himself as present in all places by His Holy Spirit.” E.G. White, (Manuscript Releases Volume 14 (No’s 1081-1135) MR No.1084.

FMfcgxvzLhhSrHCkDDTDSWBgxVBcFzDx

[dih-vest, dahy-]

See more synonyms for divest on Thesaurus.com

verb (used with object)

1. to strip of clothing, ornament, etc.:The wind divested the trees of their leaves.

2. to strip or deprive (someone or something), especially of property or rights; dispossess.

3. to rid of or free from:He divested himself of all responsibility for the decision.

"The apostle would call our attention from ourselves to the Author of our salvation. He presents before us His two natures, divine and human. . . . He voluntarily assumed human nature. It was His own act, and by His own consent. He clothed His divinity with humanity. He was all the while as God, but He did not appear as God. He veiled the demonstrations of Deity which had commanded the homage, and called forth the admiration of the universe of God. He was God while upon earth, but He divested Himself of the form of God, and in its stead took the form and fashion of a man. He walked the earth as a man. For our sakes He became poor, that we through His poverty might be made rich. He laid aside His glory and His majesty. He was God, but the glories of the form of God He for awhile relinquished. . . . He bore the sins of the world, and endured the penalty which rolled like a mountain upon His divine soul. He yielded up His life a sacrifice, that man should not eternally die. He died, not through being compelled to die, but by His own free will." E.G. White, SDA Bible Commentary, Vol. 7a, p. 446.

Note: HIS FORM AS GOD ONLY WAS HIS PRE-INCARNATION STATE OF BEING AS HIS HOLY SPIRIT DIVINE (ONLY) NATURE, VS. HIS COMBINATION WITH HUMANITY AT HIS INCARNATION WHICH CUMBERED THAT DIVINE ONLY NATURE. Though there was a combination by way of the Holy Ghost being the sire of Jesus into the womb of Mary, yet His Holy Spirit HIMSELF was divested (separate) from His humanity and INDEPENDENT THEREOF. So Andrew is contradicting Ellen White on the Godhead.

My ministry has promoted some of the teachings of Henriques, Veith, and others of the new movement ilk, but they won’t accept clear evidence from my ministry. That is bully pulpit tactics.

"7. Made himself of no reputation. Literally, 'emptied Himself.' This emptying was voluntary (see on John 10:17, 18). It was not possible for Christ to retain all the tokens of divinity and still accomplish the Incarnation. The outworking of this emptying is detailed in the remainder of Phil. 2:7 and in v. 8. See Vol. 5, p. 918." SDA Bible Commentary, Vol. 7, p. 155, col. 1.

“5. The Subordination of Christ. Voluntarily assuming the limitations of human nature at the incarnation, the Lord Jesus Christ thereby subordinated Himself to the Father for the duration of His earthly ministry (see ps. 40:8; Matt. 26:39; John 3:16 4:34; 5:19, 30; 12:49; 14:10; 17:4, 8; 2 Cor. 8:9; Phil. 2:7, 8; Heb. 2:9; see on Luke 1:35; 2:49; John 3:16; 4:34; Phil 2:7, 8).

‘Laying aside His royal robe and kingly crown’ (DA 22, 23). “He voluntarily assumed human nature. It was His own act, and by His own consent.” (EGW ST Jan 20, 1890; cf 5T 702). “He humbled Himself, and took mortality upon Him.” (EGW RH Sept. 4, 1900).

“The Son of God was surrendered to the Father’s will, and dependent upon His power. So utterly was Christ emptied of self that He made no plans for Himself. He accepted God’s plans for Him, and day by day the Father unfolded His plans” (DA 208; cf. 664. ‘While bearing human nature, He was dependent upon the Omnipotent for His life. In His humanity, He laid hold of the divinity of God’”{EGW, ST, June 17, 1897 par. 8}

"The Incarnation of Christ was an act of self-sacrifice; His life was one of continual self-denial. The highest glory of the love of God to man was manifested in the sacrifice of His only-begotten Son, who was the express image of His person. This is the great mystery of godliness. It is the privilege and the duty of every professed follower of Christ to have the mind of Christ. Without self-denial and cross bearing we cannot be His disciples." E.G. White, Selected Messages, Book 2, p. 185.

Incarnation Taxes Highest Powers of Mind

"This earth has been honored and blessed with presence of the Son of God. In the Scriptures we read of His INCARNATION, His teaching, His miracles, His death, and His resurrection. The effort to understand these wonderful subjects puts to the tax the highest powers of the mind, and then there is an infinity beyond which can not be exhausted. The oftener the mind is called to this study, the stronger and clearer it will become. In the daily life will be revealed the mysteries of godliness, which may be experienced, but can not be explained. Throughout the ceaseless ages of eternity the redeemed will study these subjects, ever gaining from them a deeper and clearer knowledge of God and of Christ." E.G. White, The Signs of the Times, 04-26-05, Pr. 01.

"It requires considerable effort to climb hills, to get upon the rock. And so we find that it will require the exercise of all our abilities, of every spiritual nerve and muscle, to get upon the Living Rock, the Saviour of mankind. It will require all our mental and spiritual power to understand the Word of God, to understand the INCARNATION of Christ, to understand the great plan of redemption. The mind may faint beneath the effort, and yet, there is an infinity beyond. You have only then touched the surface." E.G. White, Manuscript Releases Volume Nine, pr. 3, P. 68.

Mental Ability—Constant Mental Progress

“No other creature that God has made is capable of such improvement, such refinement, such nobility as man. . . . Man cannot conceive what he may be and what he may become. Through the grace of Christ, he is capable of constant mental progress.” (Maranatha, p. 229).

"(See EGW on John :1-3, 14). The Son of God in a NEW SENSE.--Christ brought men and women power to overcome. He came to this world in human form, to live a man amongst men. He assumed the liabilities of human nature, to be proved and tried. In His humanity He was a partaker of the divine nature. In His incarnation He gained in a NEW SENSE the title of the Son of God. Said the angel to Mary, 'The power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.' While the Son of a human being, He became the Son of God IN A NEW SENSE. Thus He stood in our world--the Son of God, yet allied by birth to the human race." E.G. White Comments, SDA Bible Commentary, Vol. 5, p. 1114.

“He came to this world in human form, to live a man amongst men. He assumed the liabilities of human nature, to be proved and tried. In His humanity He was a partaker of the divine nature. In His Incarnation He gained in a new sense the title of the Son of God.”--The Signs of the Times, Aug. 2, 1905. {7ABC 449.3}

One of the greatest evidences that Christ laid aside His Son of God DIVINE ONLY life at His Incarnation, and that it remained in heaven while Christ was on earth, is John 3:13. Jesus is speaking face to face with Nicodemus, yet He says the Son of Man is in heaven:

"And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven." John 3:13.

Conclusions:

John Chapter 14 teaches THREE PERSONS to the Godhead. The human PERSON of Christ is speaking to Thomas, Phillip and Judas (Not Iscariot). The Incarnation Atonement sacrifice produced the GOD/MAN humanity of Christ, which cumbered His former Holy Spirit PERSON. Ellen White said that the two are INDEPENDENT personalities of one another.

In John, Chapter 14, the Humanity of Christ DOES NOT COME TO US. His former Holy Spirit PERSON comes to us with the Father’s Holy Spirit, verse 23, for they share the ONE ETERNAL SPIRIT, and that is what makes them ONE GOD. This proves as clearly as anything could, that there was a divestation, separation, between the Holy Spirit of Christ and His humanity. Christ’s humanity was adopted into the Godhead, but His humanity DOES NOT come to us. If they are not SEPARATE PERSONS, they both would have to come to us, and that would make THREE PERSONS coming to us, for in verse 23, both the Father and the Son’s Holy Spirit come to us.

In the Name of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob,

R. William Beaulieu