Is Jesus An Angel? We Caught the SDA Church Lying

So when I hear you know people get all oh somebody so and so said that you’re an a cult okay I I mean it literally doesn’t move the needle at all for me it is interesting to hear and I’ve listened to a little bit of the rational and Ty you’ve interacted with this a little bit but it’s all kind of funny in that oh you believe that Jesus is the head of the angels and that Michael is one of the is like the name for Jesus as the the the uh leader of the Angelic host yeah yeah I I believe that’s true I believe that possesses fantastic explanatory power both the Old and New

Testaments it’s not the most important thing to me it’s not even in the top 10 or 20 the identification of Michael but you think that makes what I believe cultic okay well greetings and thank you for being here so that was a clip from a Q&A last year that SDA pastors Ty Gibson and David asri from lightbearers did I responded to a portion of that at that time but I wanted to play that clip because we heard something that’s very common regarding the Seventh Adventist teaching on Jesus being Michael the Archangel which is that the SDA teaching is simply that Jesus is the leader of

The angels and Michael is simply another name for him and there was sort of an attitude of if you think the SDA teaching on this area makes them a cult you’re clearly the one in the wrong you’re the weird one that sort of thing well I hope David watches tonight because more than likely he is unaware of what we are about to look at which as I will show without question when looked at comprehensively what the SDA Church claims in this area is absolutely cultic not just cultic but dambly heretical and the Adventist Church has not been entirely forthright in this area as I

Will demonstrate now tonight’s presentation has been in the works for quite some time time and that’s because it has required a copious amount of reading and preparation if you are a channel member you knew that this was coming a while back as you all got a behind the scenes Peak at some of the research along the way now we are going to be looking at a mountain a mountain of primary source documentation that quite frankly is going to probably blow your mind whether you’re a Christian that’s just trying to educate yourself a former Adventist or even currently

Identify as an Adventist I want to encourage you to watch this whole presentation even if it is an all-in-one sitting it’s going to be long but the juice will absolutely be worth the squeeze I can guarantee you that no clickbait no clickbait you need to fasten your seat belt because you are going to be blown away because what we’re going to look at is a rabbit hole that I went down last year and I was absolutely shell shocked at what I found and the role that this Doctrine plays in the bigger theological picture and namely the great controversy world view

I also need to note that I am greatly greatly greatly indebted to two individuals in particular who were of serious help in the research and presentation for this presentation um or the research and preparation for this presentation excuse me one of uh is one of our YouTube members who will go unnamed and the other is Jim from Academy apologia so I do want to publicly thank them for their help as we storm the Gates of Hell tonight and beat those suckers down which reminds me I’m going to be speaking very direct tonight it’s going to be one of those nights and

I will probably be somewhat animated at times I’m going to try and keep it rained in but y’all know how it goes so if that offends you consider this your heads up okay because what we’re about to look at should righteously anger every person who loves the true Christ okay this is a Blasphemous Doctrine from the pit of Hell that this organization needs to go on public record to denounce and apologize for the untold amount of people that they have led astray by teaching this that is unless they still stand by all of it which as we’re going to to see they have

To because the bigger role this plays in the great controversy Paradigm which is the heartbeat of adventism I want to remind everyone of what God tells us through Paul the Apostle in 2 Corinthians 11 specifically verses 1-4 where we read I hope you will put up with me in a little foolishness yes please put up with me I am jealous for you with a Godly jealousy I promised you to one husband to Christ so that I might present you as a pure virgin to him but I’m afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent cunning your minds may be somehow be led astray from your

Sincere and pure devotion to Christ for if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached or if you receive a different Spirit from the spirit you received or a different gospel from the one you accepted you put up with it readily enough thus the reading of God’s holy word so what this evidences is that there are false jesuses out there simply using the name Jesus is not enough Paul’s concern for the the churches at Corinth was that if someone came leading them after a different Jesus a different Spirit different gospel that they would put up with such

And be led astray like Eve was with the serpent and in his Godly jealousy for them remaining pure to the Jesus that Paul introduced them to he was afraid that that would be their end that they’d be led after an idol so this is a serious matter okay and it will be shown beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Jesus of seventh day adventism is a false Christ who is not real he cannot save you he is an idol but before getting into it if you like what we are doing here please consider becoming a channel member you’ll gain access to not only our members only live streams as well as

Our video library but you will also gain access to our new behindth curtain Discord server where you can connect with answering adventism community members including myself you can ask questions get behind the scenes looks at what’s coming up and much much more if you want to join simply visit the link in the description box down below or click the little join button down below this video as a disclaimer you may have to do so on a desktop computer for it to work if you don’t see the button if you’re on mobile but thank you thank you thank you all so much for for your

Support all right so to start we have to look at a couple of foundational standard claims that one can expect to hear from the SDA Church regarding their teaching on Michael the Archangel a couple of which we heard put forth by David in that intro clip although brief but I also need to dispel an errant objection that some incorrectly believe about the SDA position on this this is vital absolutely vital so please pay very close attention it is often assumed that because the Seventh Adventist Church teaches that Jesus is Michael the Archangel that

Means they believe the same thing as the Jehovah’s Witnesses that Jesus is a created Angelic being but this isn’t correct kind of so in the book questions on Doctrine I have an OG copy of it here question number eight deals with this subject and we’re going to use that as the source to show you what these standard claims on this subject are but a little backstory on that source for those who are unaware questions on Doctrine was a book published by the SDA Church in 1957 they put it together after conversations that leaders had with Evangelical apologists Walter Martin and

Donald barnhouse this was in preparation for the writing of Walter Martin’s Infamous book The Kingdom of the Colts which was published eight years later later in 1965 so knowing that Martin was looking into 7th Day adventism the SDA Church wanted to try and clear up misconceptions about their beliefs especially on topics like the nature of Christ the atonement and salvation their goal was to show that adventism is Christian and not a cult this is the working definition of cult that Martin was operating off of so in Kingdom of the Cults he writes

Quote in his study of modern American Cults and minority religious movements as found in his text these also believe Dr Charles Braden Emirates professor of Northwestern University and co-author John C schaer and visiting professor at scrips College made a number of observations with which the uh this writer agrees so talking about himself in regard to this term cult for instance Dr Braden says the following by the term cult I mean nothing derogatory to any group so classified a cult as I Define it is any religious group which differ significantly in one or more respects as

To belief or practice from those religious groups which are regarded as the normative expressions of religion in our total culture I may add to this that a cult might also be defined as a group of people gathered about a specific person or person’s interpretation of the Bible for example Jehovah’s Witnesses are for the most part followers of the interpretations of Charles T Russell and JF Rutherford although founder Russell and his successor Rutherford are long since dead Jehovah’s Witnesses today still look to the watchtowers organ the Watchtower organization and its

Governing body to understand the Bible in fact Jehovah’s Witnesses are taught that they cannot understand the Bible without the organization explaining it to them close quote this is the definition I have utilized in the past as well the term cult is not being used for the sake of being derogatory or nasty but for specificities sake a cult is a group that claims to be a part of the whole in this case Christianity but they deny one or more of the fundamental biblical foundational aspects of the Christian religion and Walter added that they also tend to be rallied around a specific

Person’s misinterpretations of the Bible teaching that one can’t really understand the Bible without this individual well the Adventist Church absolutely fits the bill for Martin’s additional claim as can very plainly be seen in their statement of confidence in the writings of Ellen G white where they tell us that her writings uplift the normative character of scripture and correct inaccurate interpretations of it uplifting the normative character of scripture is just another way of saying that without them you can’t really know what the Bible is

Saying you need her and her infallible interpretation and this is why when he was invited onto the John Ankerberg Show after the publishing of the kingdom of the Colts and he discussed with William Johnson who was the representative from the SDA Church Martin’s Focus was on the authority of Ellen White within adventism he obviously came across information that he wasn’t privy to when doing his investigation the internet did not exist in his day for him to Simply bring up what we just saw but tonight we’re going to be focusing on the former half of that

Definition about doctrine that departs from Orthodoxy and we are going to see if they strike out on both parts of Martin’s working definition so that is some of the background on questions on Doctrine the goal was to present advinus theology in such a way that sounded in line with Biblical Christian Orthodoxy where they softened or in some cases reinterpreted some of their more controversial doctrines like the investigative judgment and the nature of Christ and while this helped Adventists gain more acceptance from evangelicals it also sparked a lot of internal

Controversy many Adventists felt like it compromised core teachings and it led to a deep division within the denomination that still lingers to this day so since the goal of questions on Doctrine was to try and present problematic adven teachings in such a way that an Evangelical wouldn’t be suspicious of it makes it the perfect example for us to look at to see how they do this with Michael the Archangel afterward I will show you how they are veiling the full belief and the larger role that this plays in the Adventist system of theology where we

Will look at a span of 70 years worth of claims 70 years folks that’s almost half the lifetime of this short movement and we will see if it fits the definition of a cult so question eight from the book reads as follows quote it has been charged this is the question it has been charged that seventh day Adventists hold the same belief as do the Jehovah’s Witnesses concerning Michael that Michael the Archangel was Jesus Christ prior to his incarnation and that he was a created being is this accusation valid if Michael is Christ how do you explain Jude

Nine they then respond to the question or begin the response we emphatically reject the idea set forth in this question and the position held by the Jehovah’s Witnesses we do not believe that Christ is a created being we as a people have not considered the identification of Michael of sufficient prominence to dwell upon uh to dwell upon it at Great length in uh either in our literature or in our preaching but we do have clear views on the subject and are prepared to set them forth and our views concerning Michael it might be added have been held by

Various eminent Scholars through the centuries we are therefore not alone in our understanding we believe that the term Michael is but one of the many titles applied to the Son of God the second person of the godhead but such a view does not in any way conflict with our belief in his full deity and eternal pre-existence nor does it in the least disparage his person and work close quote so the positioning of the question is from the framework of the Jehovah’s Witnesses and if the SDA belief is the same the answer they give which goes on Beyond this focuses on

That and no they don’t teach the same thing as the Jehovah’s Witnesses namely that Jesus is a created Angelic being at least by this point they did not however understand that early on some of the SDA Pioneers did teach that Jesus was a created being just like the Jehovah’s Witnesses such as Uriah Smith in his book thoughts critical and practical on the Book of Revelation which is from 1865 where he writes quote these things saith the amen this is then the final message to the churches uh air the close of Probation and though the description he

Gives to the indifferent leod deans of their condition is fearful and startling nevertheless it cannot be denied for the witness is faithful and true moreover he is the beginning of the creation of God not the beginner but the beginning of the creation the first created being dating his existence far back before any other created being or thing next to the self-existent and eternal God close quote so yes they were indeed teaching at one point that Jesus was a created being first created being just like the Jehovah’s Witnesses even if they had pivoted off

Of such belief by the time questions on Doctrine was being published some of the Pioneers were full-blown Aryans like Smith others were semiarians but they were supposedly the Commandment keeping Church raised up in the last days to restore the true church Apostolic Christianity restored teaching Aryan heresy an idol violating the first commandment some of the clearest evidence that this is not true but this is why you have multiple camps within present day 7th Day adventism and there’s a growing Push by some of them to go back to the Pioneers in this

Area but back to questions on Doctrine included in the question is if they teach that Michael the Archangel was Jesus Christ prior to his incarn as a man to which the first the first sentence says they emphatically reject the idea set forth in this question which is slippery and you will see why because the question includes more than just the idea that their belief is an identical onetoone with the Jehovah’s Witnesses but they chose to focus their answer on making sure that they emphasized what is true that they don’t teach the same thing as the Jehovah’s Witnesses

Thinking that if they demonstrated this well then they’re in the clear and their teaching in this area isn’t cultic nice try but stick around secondly notice how they claim that they as a people have not considered the identification of Michael of significant prominence to dwell upon at length either in their PR literature or preaching so remember that that’s

Two thirdly you see the claim that their view has been held by various eminent Scholars through the centuries it’s what they told us later on in that later paragraph this is the other approach you will hear some of them take that they’re not alone in their View and people like some of the Protestant reformers believe the same thing this is supposed to be one of those things where they are trying to add theological Street credit to their belief and imply that if you take umbrage with their view in this area then you have to take umage with all those people

Too so that’s three fourthly notice how they say well actually I need to I guess go back to this one notice how they say the name Michael is but one of many names applied to the Son of God and they make sure to include that he is a part of the godhead has full deity Eternal pre-existence seeking to convey that the name Michael is more or less one name among many that’s just applied to Jesus it just signifies he’s head of the Angels like we heard David asri say in that intro clip just a name to convey a title or role then lastly they finished that

Section by saying that their belief about Michael in no way disparages Jesus’s person or his work I’m going to say that again they say that they’re teaching on Jesus being Michael in no way disparages the person and work of Christ so to summarize remember these

Claims was Michael the Archangel Jesus prior to his Incarnation they don’t explicitly deny this but they make it sound like they do to to this point 1857 they didn’t dwell upon this subject at length either in their printed literature or preaching three their view has been held by lots of well-respected Christian Scholars which is supposed to lower your guard on their teaching four the name Michael is just one of many names applied to the Son of God and five their Doctrine in this area in no way disparages the person and work of Jesus so remember these Central claims

Tonight I will periodically be referencing back to them because this is the summation of what you can plan to hear from lots of Adventists including present– day leaders whether they are aware of it or not they have simply inherited the defenses that that are put forth in that book I also want to remind you that this was published in 1857 that will become important with regards to the claim that this subject was never a point upon which they spent a great deal in their literature as we will see it is true they do not hold the same view as the Jehovah’s Witnesses and I’m sure the

Folks behind this book loved that the question was focused upon that because it allowed them to then Focus their answer upon that and that if they don’t believe identically to the witnesses specifically to the idea that Jesus is a created angelic being well then that gets them off the hook but with that said we’re now going to begin looking at a large volume of sources from their own printed literature the same literature that the book tells us they didn’t spend a lot of time discussing we’re going to begin in 1885 and we’re going to work our way all

The way up to 1954 a mere three years before the publishing of questions on Doctrine a spectrum of almost 70 years worth of quotes coming from the SDA Church’s own Publications periodically we’re going to look at Ellen White along the way okay beginning in 1885 in the April 21st issue of review and Herald they published a a short section titled the Archangel and it poses a number of questions followed by six points but notice five quote the question was who is the Archangel answer Michael the proof Jude n who is Michael answer the Lord Jesus Christ proof one Michael is a prince

Then they list out their proof text Daniel 10:13 and 21 so is Christ Daniel 9:25 acts 3:16 and 531 and then answer five bullet point five that they give Michael was an angel a chief Angel Archangel so was Christ Exodus 23:20 and 21 the angel that went before Israel had God’s name in him and the power to Pardon transgressions Christ has his father’s name Isaiah 9:6 and Hebrews 1:8 and the power to forgive sins Mark 2:10 the Apostle says in 1 Corinthians 10:9 that some in the wilderness tempted Christ and were destroyed was not this the angel with

God’s name whom the people were warned not to provoke because he would not pardon their transgressions Exodus 23:21 close quote so here they very clearly called Jesus an angel to which Adventists are going to AR argue this isn’t saying he’s an angel like the created angels the word Angel is being used to refer to a role here that as Archangel he’s the leader of the Angels but he isn’t an Angelic being with an Angelic nature we also see their equation with the angel of the Lord in the Old Testament with Michael I’ve talked about this elsewhere and shown how this is

Fallacious we’ll get into some of that later but these are two totally different figures the angel of the Lord in the Old Testament is indeed Yahweh the almighty God they are right when they point out that he is worshiped and he forgives sins something that only the almighty God can do according to scripture but the angel of the Lord is not Michael but the point being this is the first instance that I could find where they mention Michael in their Publications and within the teaching Jesus is indeed called an angel so let’s see if they continue to expound upon

This more as we move along moving forward to the October 29 1896 issue of signs of the times another official publication of the SDA Church they published an article titled the controversy of the Ages which is a part of a larger series of articles in number four of that series they talk about Michael and give further clarification around what they mean that Jesus is an Angel and the role this plays within the great controversy par Paradigm and storyline quote preeminently he who afterward became Jesus had been declared to be the Son of God before the world was he was

One with the father possessing Glory with the Father John 175 of the very image of his father’s substance Hebrews 1:3 but his claim to the Eternal sunship and equality in counsel and work and honor had been disputed by that being who stood next to the son the one above all others who in himself sealed up the sum of all created wisdom and Beauty Ezekiel 28:12 he not only disputed the right of the word of God to his position but he led others to do the same and a third of Heaven’s spirits of light revolted the universe became divided by the entrance

Of sin so before proceeding this is the proof that their view is not the same as the Jehovah’s Witnesses but that does not get them off the hook there are other potential ditches that they can fall into and they do make sure you catch the difference that we’re about to see but also remember that less than 30 years before this people like Uriah smith top teachers and leaders in the movement were indeed teaching that Jesus was the first created being of the Eternal God by this point they had pivoted however you’ll also see here the spin that they try to give to Ellen

White’s claiming Jesus was exalted to be made equal with God the father in the pre-earth existence of Heaven Satan was supposedly next to the Son of God and Authority something scripture nowhere claims or teaches folks Jesus is Yahweh the almighty we’re going to get into that later as well Satan’s Creator and judge but go and read Spirit of Prophecy volume 1 beginning on page 17 and you’ll see how what this paragraph is saying is being altered Spirit of prophecies from 1858 alen was claiming that Lucifer became jealous of Jesus after he was exalted to be made equal with God the

Father and was given an authority that he didn’t previously have as well as access to counsels that he wasn’t previously brought into that’s what triggered Lucifer becoming Satan supposedly leading to him being jealous that this wasn’t done to him and starting the Great controversy or war against God and His law yet here in 1896 they’re trying to claim nothing ever changed about Jesus Lucifer just started disputing what had always been the case and this is what started the controversy which is the modern defense that you’re going to hear from them on

This to this day I hear it all the time which is why I always use Spirit of Prophecy volume one beginning on page 17 when discussing this because they’re engaging in what is called anacron is M where you read back into the past something from your present vantage point they try and read back into Ellen’s 1858 writings their post 1890 christology even though Scholars like Jerry moon are on record admitting that the post 1890 view is different than the early teachings you have to remember that by the 1890s the movement had pivoted off of its Aryan roots with the help of

Ellen White Vision supposedly confirming the new direction that they would go in Desire of Ages was published in the 1890s and that’s when their historians and Scholars claim that they finally got the Trinity right and embraced a trinitarian concept we’ve looked at all of that exhaustively before if you’re curious on that the link will be in the description box down below but moving forward quote but the doubts of Satan and his M madans did not affect the fact of the sunship of the word he was the Eternal Son of God still to him the father said let us make Etc his

Omnipotent power his Divine Majesty might have been Vindicated when Lucifer rebelled by the instant destruction of all the rebel host but such a course would have swn doubts in the minds of beings who were on probation but were yet loyal neither was it God’s power that was alone called in question question but God’s character meaning the Ten Commandments of the law it is that which the adversary has persistently and unremittingly assailed from the beginning of sin if God’s creatures could be led to believe that God is not love that he’s unjust partial implacable

Unmerciful they will not serve him they fall in easy prey to Satan close quote so before moving forward make sure you’re following along with what is being said here the revisionism of the original claims about Jesus being exalted put aside they say that God would have uh could have just destroyed Satan immediately upon his Rebellion but this would have communicated to all the other angels and beings on other worlds that Satan was right in his charges against God and his character that he’s a tyrant Etc that would have only further soed doubts in

The minds of the angels that were on a probation period so this is the SDA Church’s answer to the question and problem of evil what is called theodicy in Christian theology the problem of evil why does evil exist if God is good Etc I can’t tell you how many Adventists reach out to us and tell me that the reason they Embrace this great controversy storyline is because they personally feel like it provides the best solution to the problem of evil but nevertheless what I is the building blocks of their Central claim that God and His law are on trial because of

These pre-earth accusations from Satan and now he’s vindicating both himself and his law from those accusations which as I’ve shown numerous times before is what they claim is the Central purpose of their understanding of the Gospel the Vindication of God from the accusations of Satan so make sure you’re following along with the flow here now this article moves to the next section which has the subheading of efforts to save efforts to save quote for the reasons that God is merciful loving kind just he did not destroy Lucifer and the rebellious hosts

He gave him and them the opportunity to repent and turn he pleaded with them as only God could plead to restore them to righteousness and life how do we know this yeah great question we know it because it is thus that God pleads now and he is eternally the same with whom is no variableness nor shadow of turning the Son of God did not aspire to be equal with God did not meditate a usurpation to the throne of the universe while Li saw uh Lucifer plotting for Eternal Dominion I should say he sorry while he saw Lucifer plotting for Eternal Dominion

Philippians 2 5-7 but he emptied himself gave himself then and there for Sinners he took the form of a servant became an angel among the angels that he might redeem Angels but they would not and when they rejected the righteousness and life so freely offered he came lower still to those duped by Satan Fallen men stooping even to death that he might redeem the Fallen who wish to be redeemed and vindicate to the universe to all eternity the character of God that was the work of the Son of God the Eternal logos when he became Michael when he became Jesus the man of Nazareth

When he was anointed the Christ when he died our sacrifice on Calvary and during all this time all the host of evil with all the baleful deception cruel devices of sin were brought against him that God’s character might be marred that the great Vindicator might fail close quote wow catch that for starters notice we see Philippians 2 being appealed to to support this keep a mental note on that but what you heard word is supposed to be about something taking place prior to the Earth even existing this is in their pre-earth narrative since God is merciful they say

That he gave an opportunity to repent to the angels that fell with Satan he pleaded with them as only God could and they claimed that we can know this because God is immutable and doesn’t change since he’s merciful that has to mean that he pleaded with the angels to repent and he gave them opportunity for such but how did God do this pleading supposedly well just like Jesus came to Earth to plead for the reconciliation of Fallen man he did the same thing with the angels before incarnating as a man he took the form of a servant as an angel that he might redeem the Angels but they

Would not and not a single one of them took Jesus up on his pleading and his offer and it was after this pleading with the angels as an angel that Jesus then sunk even lower down to Fallen humans taking on a human nature to do the same thing on our plane and both of these Incarnation events as an angel and as a human were to ultimately do

What vindicate God from Satan’s accusations which is what they claim as I’ve shown in other Publications is the core of the gospel for them God vindicating himself from Satan’s accusations which means this teaching around Michael is not at all secondary folks it is integral to the entire Paradigm in order for their God to be Vindicated they’re Gods as we’re going to see Jesus had to prove to both classes of Fallen creatures humans and angels that Satan is a liar the law can be kept it’s fair it can’t change Etc remember how one of the points in

Questions on Doctrine was that the the name Michael simply one of the many for Jesus and it really doesn’t go beyond that no that’s not true here they claim that he became Michael the Archangel when he was sent on a mission to try and save the apostate Angels who all rejected him by becoming an angel himself and in a little bit you’re going to see that they expound upon this identical article further where they reward some things and it gets even worse this fiction is not compatible with the scriptures folks Jesus never became an angel to try and save Angels God being

Merciful does not prove this this is whole cloth fiction from their pre-earth origin narrative which is not coming from scripture it’s coming from Ellen White Hebrews 2 is clear Jesus came to save The Offspring of Abraham that’s human beings it explicitly says he doesn’t help Angels but the spring of Abraham notice the tail end of Hebrews TW of Hebrews 2 the whole chapter is about Jesus being superior to the angels and better than them but at the end of the chapter the author cites from the Old Testament and explains how Jesus wasn’t ashamed to

Call us his brother because this was foretold in the Old Testament in bringing many sons and daughters to Glory humans verse 10 Jesus was not ashamed to share in flesh and blood with us to make that a reality aka the Incarnation was foretold in the Old Testament but more specifically notice verse 16 for surely It’s Not Angels he helps but Abraham’s descendants for this reason he had to be made like them fully human in every way in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God and that he might make atonement

For the sins of the people furthermore it’s ironic that the SDA Church will appeal to Jude n regarding the claim that it proves Jesus as Michael when Jude 6 tells us the Angels who didn’t keep their positions of authority but abandon their proper dwelling these he has kept in darkness bound with Everlasting chains for judgment on the great day which lets us know that their fate was sealed upon Rebellion unlike humans Angels had full knowledge of God’s glory and they still chose to Rebel making their fault irreversible and again in second Peter 2 specifically verse four Peter is

Explaining here how false teachers would creep into the church teaching destructive heresies he goes on later in the chapter to explain that he’s about to be taken to his death his martyrdom and so he’s writing this to leave them with his final words and he warns them there’s going to be false teachers that creep in here and they’re going to be teaching destructive heresies like great controversy theology but within the flow of that Peter explains how God will eventually judge these deceivers but before explaining that he gives examples to support this claim

Where he refers to other instances where God did exactly this and he starts by pointing to the fallen angels as an example their High status dignity even their pre Fallen Holiness it didn’t stop them from being cast into hell so his point is if God dealt with them harshly then false teachers have no chance of escaping judgment either that’s his point but what does he tell us about the angels that fell that God did not spare them when they sinned but cast them into hell committing them to chains of gloomy Darkness to be kept until judgment catch

That they sinned and were committed committed to chains bondage bound up in darkness until the day of judgment they’re in the equivalent of jail awaiting their sentencing to to then be cast into Eternal prison totally consistent with Jude and not at all compatible with this great controversy fiction furthermore Jesus himself tells us in Matthew 25:41 that the Eternal fires of hell were prepared for Satan and his angels this would be rather bizarre for Jesus to say unless hell was prepared between him becoming an angel and then becoming a man because if it was prepared for

Satan and the angels it would make no sense that Jesus would then become one to try and save them after preparing hell for them nevertheless three strikes and you’re out Hebrews Jude and second Peter all refute this false teaching so God did not seek to help and save Angels sending Jesus who took on the nature of an Angel to plead with them and try and save them but every single one of them rejected him so then he sunk even lower down to humans to try and save them and if you think that’s not what’s being claimed here buckle up as I will show you this wording

Verbatim that in the controversy between Jesus and Satan Jesus went to the angels as an angel himself among the Angels possessing their Natures to prove that Satan is a liar the law can be kept angels can do it Etc but I will save my other thoughts for that when we uh you know get to expounding upon this more we’re we’re only two two sources in so buckle up it’s going to be a long night moving ahead to the March 19 1902 issue of signs of the times in this issue there’s an article titled the measure of God’s love which is telling the reader about

All about how much the Son of God loves them followed by outlining the steps that Jesus Took to show that love within that they speak of him as Michael the Archangel and how just like he showed this love to humans through the Incarnation so too he did with the angels quote God’s purpose in Christ Jesus was a perfect one in the beginning What followed in the humiliation of his son were but steps in the Eternal purpose and revealings of that love adapted to the understanding and apprehension of the sin blinded minds of his creatures meaning angels and

Humans note the successive steps as revealed by the Apostle who being originally in the form of God counted it not a thing to be grasped to be on an equality with God but emptied himself taking the form of a bonder servant becoming in the likeness of men and being found in fashion as a man he humbled himself becoming obedient even unto death yay the death of the Cross Philippians 2 6-8 so pause again before moving forward notice again the abuse of Philippians 2 in every single one of these quotes they’re using this as a proof text to support the notion that prior to

Incarnating as a man the Son of God supposedly incarnated as an angel on the plane of angels to seek and save Angels no differently than he did with Humanity I have shown this before this is from the SDA Church’s own website presently on article talking about their teaching on Jesus’s life death and Resurrection notice they claim to teach that Jesus is 100% man and 100% God what’s called the hypothetic Union in Christian theology they even bold it to make sure you really see it and it stands out this is all lip service and the evidence for such is in the bottom

Paragraph where only a few sentences later we see Philippians 2 mentioned and it says the same thing these articles have been saying regarding Jesus setting aside his divinity they say that even though he was God he set his divine nature aside and took on human nature for those that do not know this is what’s called the kosis interpretation of this text and it is a heresy that is not what Paul is claiming here Paul is using Christ humbling himself as a man as an example for us to serve one another that’s the context and he explains how Christ being God did not

Have to do or um yeah he explains how Christ being God did not have to do that he did not have to Humble himself under the law Galatians 4:4 and suffer at the hands of Sinners bearing our iniquities but he freely chose to do this he set aside that rightful status and he humbled himself to suffer for our sakes therefore as his followers we should imitate that and not think to highly of ourselves but humbly serve one another this will give rise to all sorts of AVST complaining but so be it notice what Augustine points out in this text in his commentary on Philippians yes

Adventist I know he isn’t infallible that’s not the point just listen to what he explains I’m so beyond the adventis Bible onlyism this nonsense they try to equate as solos scriptura now solos scriptura doesn’t mean you just completely attach the Bible from everyone that came before us Augustine holds for for Protestants actual classical Protestants Augustine holds what holds what’s called ministerial Authority yes he’s an authority he’s not infallible but that doesn’t mean he’s not an authority you need to consult these individuals but he what he says

Here comports perfectly with the context notice what he says quote commenting on Philippians 2:7 he said to have emptied himself in no other way than by taking the form of a servant not by losing the form of God for that nature by which he’s equal to the father in the form of God remained immutable while he took our mutable nature through which he was born of the Virgin he did not take on his Humanity in the simple way that a person puts on clothes as something exterior to him rather he took on human form in a manner inexpressibly more excellent and more intimate than

That the Apostle has made it sufficiently clear what he meant he was made to appear in human likeness he was not exhaustively reduced to being a man he rather assumed the true human estate when he put on the man close quote exactly correct there has been virtually zero disagreement on this in the entire life of the New Testament church across the board regarding less of theological tradition the kosis interpretation is a modernist one that goes back to Godfrey tasus and other German theologians in the 19th century and it was picked up by sectarian groups like The Seventh Day

Adventist because it fits with their framework and in the SDA case you’re seeing how the kinosis interpretation is not compatible with the hypostatic Union which is why I said it’s just lip service on their website or they’re confused or or something because that’s a big part of why it hasn’t become accepted Christian interpretation without creating serious christological heresy but back to the quote and specifically the context of Michael how does all of this support Jesus as Michael the Archangel when Philippians 2 says nothing about that folks that’s the proof that they’re

Saying that what Jesus did on Earth by incarnating as a man and taking on a human nature he did identically so only to the angels meaning he added unto himself an Angelic Nature by becoming an angel and setting his divinity aside which is what they outright go on to say and why they use Philippians 2 to try and support this as being Biblical quote the first thing was the unselfish Divine Purpose of emptying himself which included all the sacrifice for the Redemption of the lost the fruitage of infinite love the first step the first step was The Taking of

The form of a bonder servant with no will but his Masters to serve and not to rule we Behold Him thus as an angel with the angels He was Michael the Archangel Chief only because he was the chief servant of God the most devoted of all he partook of their nature and his Angelic Ministry may be traced from the time that sin entered throughout the record of the Old Testament the Second Step the second step in the manifestation of the purpose was becoming in the likeness of men Those whom sin had made lower than the angels He took the form to retain it

Forever he will never be in outward form form what he was in the beginning he gave up all the ineffable glory of the godlikeness for man’s sake he lived for man suffered for man died for man and will ever bear the prince of the scars forever glorified which sin made the sacrifice was eternal close quote Mercy this is a different Jesus a Jesus that became an Angel With An Angel Nature by taking on the name Michael and this was the first step in the process of humiliation they claim and before moving to the Second Step which included sinking even lower

And incarnating as a man to try and save humans too so in Christian theology the term humiliation is not a negative term it is referring to the Incarnation of Christ God condescending down to us to save us so again they’re claiming that the Adventist Jesus before coming to the Earth to save humans as a man himself sunk down by becoming an angel his name in doing this was Michael the head of the Angels only because because he was the chief servant of God more devoted than all he partook of their nature and engaged in Angelic Ministry which can be traced from the

Time that sin entered throughout the record of the Old Testament so that means that when Lucifer rebelled and became Satan the adversary and after God held his council meeting to determine the solution that would be carried out in this problem part of that included Jesus becoming an angel to try and save the apostle at angels that was step one of Christ’s humiliation they’re claiming but all the Angels rejected him every single one of them and he was seeking to do this from the time of Satan’s sinning throughout the Old Testament in which case they point to

The angel of the Lord to try and claim that figure is synonymous with Michael the Second Step then included him sinking even lower down to our level where he took on the nature of a man and that nature he will retain forever so he just gave up the angel nature he becomes an angel setting his divinity aside but then you’re going to see a quote later where they say well he was God with the angels so he was God as an angel but then he gives up his Angelic nature to become a man but then he’ll remain a man forever but notice what they all said in taking on the form of humanity

He will never again be in the outward form like he was in the beginning he gave up all the ineffable glory of the godlikeness for man’s sake and this sacrifice was eternal meaning they are saying that something Jesus had prior to incarnating he’ll never get back what you will see referred to throughout Ellen White’s writings as his eternal humiliation for example notice Ellen White in Desire of Ages page 48 quote it would have been an almost infinite humiliation for the Son of God to take man’s nature even when Adam stood in his innocence in Eden but Jesus accepted Humanity when

The race had been weakened by 4,000 years of sin like every child of Adam he accepted the results of the working of the Great Law of heredity what these results were is shows uh in the history of his Earthly ancestors he came with such a heredity to share our sorrows and temptations and to give us the example of a sinless life close quote and this is all the evidence one needs to understand that the SDA system of theology doesn’t understand what it means that Jesus is the second Adam he’s not in the Fallen posterity of the first adom like the rest of us this

Is part of why the Virgin birth is a cardinal doctrine of the Christian faith but without rabbit trailing off you know other aspects of their errant understanding of Jesus’s human nature this is an example of where this idea regarding infinite humiliation is coming from that upon assuming a human nature Jesus forever sacrificed things that he had prior to doing such and will never get those back folks the humiliation of Christ ended after the resurrection and his Ascension yes he will retain his human nature forever he will forever be the God man but he did not set his divinity

Aside in the Incarnation or lose Divine attributes forever he simply added unto himself true human nature when we look at the full spectrum of what Jesus did we see that Christ was in his lofty Abode he then sinks down to our level adds unto himself a human nature to experience his Creation With Us reconciling the world to himself by suffering at the hands of Sinners thinking to the lowest regions Possible only to then rise and go back to where he was in glory he comes down to go right back up and the Transfiguration is only a small glimpse that Jesus lost zero of

His Divine Glory attribution Etc upon incarnating his flesh simply veiled That Glory for a season it’s like if he walked down the street in all his glory before Sinners they would have fallen over dead so his flesh for a season veiled That Glory but once he returned to his throne at the Ascension That Glory is no longer veiled and includes his glorified human body which we will also share in one day now of course I have to show the receipts on this because it will be said that I’m lying I’m misrepresenting stating my own opinion Etc notice the fundamental beliefs book which is the

Official exposition of their 28 fundamental beliefs on the belief about Jesus they write quote Jesus asserted his omnipresence with the assurances Lo I’m with you always even to the End of the Age Matthew 28:20 and where two or three are gathered together in my name I am there in the midst of them Matthew 18:20 although his divinity has the natural ability of omnipresence the Incarnate Christ has voluntarily limited himself in this respect he’s chosen to be omnipresent through the Ministry of the Holy Spirit John 141 16-18 close quote they openly claim that while his

Divinity has the natural ability of omnipresence the Incarnate Christ has voluntarily limited himself in this respect and has chosen to be omnipresent through the means of the Holy Spirit well what did we just read in signs of the times regarding Christ’s Humanity they said he will forever retain his Humanity as a part of the Eternal sacrifice that he made which means he will never regain truly being omnipresent because they are yielding to Ellen White’s claims here not John 14 John 14 doesn’t say anything about Jesus not being omnipresent upon incarnating

And that he set this aside it’s where Jesus is explaining that the holy spirit will be sent to the church and poured out at Pentecost nothing about Jesus nature or ontology but this is what they are paraphrasing Ellen White Desire of Ages page 669 quote the holy spirit is Christ representative but divested of the personality of humanity and independent thereof cumbered with Humanity Christ could not be in every place personally therefore it was for their interest that he should go to the father and send the spirit to be his successor on Earth no one could then have any

Advantage because of his location or his personal contact with Christ by the spirit the Savior would be accessible to All in This sense he would be nearer to them than if he had not ascended on high close quote and this shows why terms matter for those in the know you’ll know what they mean when they use the term person which is someone’s physical tangible form so since Christ is cumbered with Humanity he can’t be omnipresent she says but the Holy Spirit isn’t therefore can can be omnipresent so that’s how Christ has chosen to be such for those that want to see a

Plethora of biblical proof that Jesus is indeed omnipresent while incarnate never set this aside and demonstrated as much in his ministry check out this article on our website where I go into a number of examples and also link to all of the SDA Source documentation on this so you can check it out for yourself the link is in the description box down below but folks this ain’t the Trinity this is not the one true God that has revealed himself to us in the Incarnation and scripture there is no salvaging this and I wish the SDA Church would just be forthright about that and

Not try and act like those of us who are critical can’t read that we’re misrepresenting things it’s Etc all of this tonight has been Crystal Clear nothing’s being misrepresented anyone that just cares about the truth can see that this is a very different Jesus than the Jesus of the Bible and you can’t be the alleged commandment keeping church when you have an idol codified in your teaching documents including the exposition of your own fundamental beliefs not some pre1 1900s document or something this is also insight for you Christian that this organization does

Not use basic words like God Divinity Etc the same way that we do they’ll say Jesus is God and in the next breath they’ll say he set his divinity aside and permanently permanently lost omnipresence same with words like person and personality of humanity but just to recap so far they are consistently teaching over the course of multiple decades that it was necessary for God to vindicate his character from accusations that Satan made which SED seeds of Doubt amongst the Angels this put God in a bind because if he would have just extinguished Satan

Then and there it would have communicated to the angels that Satan was right God is a tyrant So the plan of action that God the father and the son came up with was that Satan would be permitted to exist the seeds that he SED would grow and God would vindicate himself along with his character I.E the law through demonstrating that he truly is loving Etc and this involved Jesus taking on the nature of an Angel becoming Michael the Archangel where he sought to try and save apostate angels that rebelled with Satan but not a single one of them accepted the gift that was

Offered while on that plane of angels as an angel Michael kept the law perfectly as an angel showing that it can be done which also silenced Satan’s accusation that angels can keep the LA can’t keep the law it needs to change Etc this was taking place from the time that Satan sinned and throughout the Old Testament period as we’re going to see later they say for 4,000 years Jesus was an angel after that was complete Jesus then moved on to the second step in Sinking even lower this time down to humans where he incarnated as a man and he’ll retain

That nature forever in doing this he eternally surrendered certain things that he had prior to doing so such as his omnipresence and this was all to demonstrate that God is love which is the exact thing they say the Great controversy is over the law which is a transcript of God’s character this is abject heresy there’s no spin that can make this biblical no amount of proof texting and twisting of the Bible is going to prove that this is the one true God the Triune God of both scripture and reality this is demonic Doctrine veiled behind trying to make you focus on how

Sweet and loving the idol sounds but at the end of the day it’s still an idol remember questions on Doctrine they emphatically asserted what we teach in this in this regard no no way diminishes or degrades the work of Christ yes it does when you add things to the work of Christ and claim that he did stuff he didn’t do you entirely warp the work of Christ you attribute false things to him that he did not do what if I said all Adventists are are serial killers yeah you wouldn’t like that being attributed to you claiming Jesus did things he didn’t

Actually do is not loving furthermore in the case of what they’re claiming regarding Michael it results in talking about a completely different figure than the god of the Bible resulting in an idol so no this is not secondary this is not me making a big deal out of nothing this is dangerous teaching Adventist need warned about this and until this organization is ready to go on record and denounce this as heresy well it’s safe to assume they still stand behind this we’re just getting started we’re three sources in it’s G to be a long night folks it’s gonna be about three

More hours probably buckle up it gets worse it gets worse we’re just setting the ground still seriously buckle up they will not be able to distance themselves from this because as you’re going to see this is intimately connected with the larger Claim about God’s character being Vindicated which like I’ve shown before they say is the central core of their whole message the Vindication of God’s character I also want to point out that Ellen White was alive during all these statements thus far she died in 1915 and as we will see later part of her role is

To be the protector from doctrinal error but there is no weaseling out of this there’s no weaseling out of this okay moving ahead to the May 11 1904 issue of signs of the times in this issue we’re given even more details about the comprehensiveness of this teaching in the bigger great controversy storyline in Paradigm they have an article titled A A tried Stone where they talk about the testing trials and temptations that the Son of God experienced in both incarnating as an angel and as a man this is a consistent parallel that you’ll see them making that what he did

On one plane he also did on the other both as an angel and as a man only an angel he didn’t die like he did when he incarnated as a human this article has three subheadings titled the first test the second test and the third test in the first test they claimed Jesus was tested as creator that creation itself was a test of his power and he passed that test with flying colors with no failure but here’s what they write about the second test this is the whole whole section and it didn’t take that long quote Christ being the Son of God and being associated in all that perit uh

Pertain to the the position was God the word that was made flesh was God John 1114 or one uh 11114 and the father calls him God in Hebrews 1:9 but in passing from the bosom of the father to the nature of man he did not come the whole way at One Stop he did not come the whole way at One Stop he first became an angel and was tried or tested in that capacity in delivering Israel from Egypt the Lord went before them in a pillar of cloud Exodus 13:21 and he was the angel of God Exodus 14:19 God told the people that he would send his Angel before them to keep them

In the way he was one of whom God said my name is in him and he was one who could for for sins Exodus 23 he’s also called the presence of God Exodus 33 amid the angel of his presence Isaiah 63 as an angel he successfully delivered the people from bondage overcoming their enemies when the natural sources of water failed he brought water from a rock when food failed he fed them with bread from Heaven 40 years so successful was his career as angel that he was the chief or ar Angel close quote so remember they conflate the angel of the Lord or the angel of his

Presence who is found in the Old Testament with Michael this is false we will look at why in a moment but remember what else we’ve read the term Angels not just referring to the role of messenger or head of the Angels it is tied to having an Angelic nature and there saying that the Son of God endured various tests before he passed from the bosom of the father to taking on human nature he first became an angel and was tested as an angel and when they read about the angel of the Lord in the Old Testament they’re then seeing this as Jesus being tested

As an angel where he did various things like delivering Israel from Egypt going before the people in a pillar of cloud Etc since as an angel he successfully delivered the Israelites from bondage brought water forth from the rock um when there was none gave them food from heaven when they had none all of this was part of his career as an angel his Angelic Ministry supposedly demonstrating to them who God is in the controversy with Satan these were acts of God as an angel whatever that’s supposed to mean demonstrating to Angels that God is love Satan is a liar

Etc that’s the larger role of these Feats that they’re supposed to play in the great controversy worldview now with regards to the confusing of Michael with the angel of the Lord notice questions on Doctrine again they present their argument for this in there and this is the argument you’re going to still hear today from the same question as earlier question number eight they write quote the use of the expression the Lord rebuke thee is significant it’s found in but one other place in the Holy scriptures Zechariah 3:2 there the speaker is the Angel of

The Lord verse one but in verse two it is expressly the Lord who speaks here we find the angel of the Lord equated with Jehovah himself and it is he who says to Satan the Lord rebuke thee this is a unique expression the the first biblical use of it by the Lord in dealing with Satan the same expression is used in Jude might it not be then that the same Divine being is revealed here in Zechariah he was manifested under one of his titles the angel of the Lord in Jude under another of his titles Michael close quote Yeah we can know that this might be false by more closely paying

Attention to the two texts that are being appealed to so to make sure you get their thinking they claim that the phrase the Lord rebuke thee is significant to identify Michael as the angel of the Lord because the text is only found in or that phrase is only found in two places Jude n and Zechariah 3:2 in Jude n they say Michael uses this phrase and in Zechariah three the angel of the Lord does both times rebuking Satan thus Michael and the angel of the Lord must be the same Divine being false notice in Jude nine Michael doesn’t do the rebuking he

Leaves the rebuking to the Lord meaning Michael himself distinguishes himself from the Lord the same Jude has already said in Jude 5 four versus PR that Jesus is the Lord who led the Israelites out of slavery in Egypt then four verses later he tells us Michael distinguishes himself from that Lord that did that which is more evidence that Jesus is not Michael but nevertheless Michael and Jude doesn’t do the rebuking whereas in Zechariah 3 the angel of the Lord does do the rebuking they apparently didn’t read the text carefully enough because this

Actually shows they’re not the same figure and just so we are clear Ellen White herself commented on this and claimed that Jesus as Michael didn’t do the rebuking but left it to the Lord so even she distinguished Michael from the Lord who was the one doing the rebuking claim to be shown this in Vision spiritual gifts volume 1 page 43 quote I saw that Moses passed through death but Michael came down and gave him life before he saw corruption Satan claimed the body as his but Michael resurrected Moses and took him to heaven the devil tried to hold his body and railed out

Bitterly against God denounced him as unjust in taking from him his prey but Michael did not rebuke the devil although it was through his temptation and power that God’s servant had Fallen Christ meekly referred him to his father saying the Lord rebuke thee close quote so what was claimed in questions on Doctrine does not align with this alleged divinely inspired statement that they tell us in no way contradicts or adds to the Bible even though the Bible doesn’t teach that Michael resurrected Moses and took his body to Heaven they say this because they’ll point to the

Transfiguration to say see Moses was there so that must have meant he was resurrected no it doesn’t and in Matthew’s accounting of the Transfiguration he tells you it was a vision a vision furthermore it was historically known that Moses and elishah were representatives of the law and the prophets what Jesus was revealing revealing to the disciples in the Transfiguration was that the law and the prophets were in effect until Jesus’s resurrection when the New Covenant era would be ushered in that is a short summary of what’s going on there but nowhere does the bible tell us that

Michael resurrected Moses and in fact there’s been debate over this wording for a long time because in some instances the B the phrase the body of Moses has been phraseology that’s been used to refer to the pentat the writing of Moses the word of God and so there’s argument that this text could be referring to that being what was wrestled over but the book of Watchers or The Book of Enoch is more than likely what Jude was was appealing to which is not sacred scripture but if you go and read that accounting you’ll see how the author notes that Michael didn’t bring a

Charge against Satan because he knew that he was a formidable foe powerful and Michael knew his place so instead of rebuking Satan he trusted in God to take care of him which makes sense regarding Jude distinguishing Michael from the one Lord Jesus Christ the almighty God but they are stuck having to affirm that they are the same figure because Ellen White said so in Patriarchs and Prophets which they believe is is divinely inspired writings divine revelation from God himself she stated that Jesus was revealed to the prophets and Israel as the angel of

The Lord the captain of the Lord’s hosts and Michael the Archangel that all three are just Jesus but not just names remember that the name is also tied to him becoming an angel and taking their nature upon himself which is damnable heresy a false Christ the point being Michael’s not the angel of the Lord the angel of the Lord in the Old Testament is not a creature or an Angelic being having an Angelic nature it is indeed a title for the pre-incarnate Christ who was present all throughout the Old Testament and even manifested himself in physical form

Before actually incarnating as a man the angel of the Lord forgives sins he’s worshiped these are things the Old Testament says only God the almighty is worthy of and can do Michael is an Angelic created being two different figures and the angel of the Lord in the Old Testament was not Jesus incarnated with an Angelic nature being tested while also trying to save apostate Angels but they rejected him and again Ellen White was still alive at the time of writing this where’s her rebuke on this adous friend I’d love to see it now we get to the January 11 1905

Issue of signs of the times less than one year later they have an article titled consider him an angel talking about Jesus in this one we get a few more details that fill out the claim of Jesus as Michael more fully this particular article has several different subheads such as consider him consider him as a mouthpiece of God consider him as an angel Etc here’s what they say imploring you to consider Jesus as an angel quote consider him as an angel a mess Meer a servant of God Among the Angels Messengers servants himself the chiefest of Angel because the uh because

The greatest servant then known as Michael who is like God the Archangel by service preeminent therefore was he the special angel of Jehovah who spoke with Abraham who wrestled with Jacob who led Israel through the Red Sea and the Wilderness who spake the law from Heaven who gave unto Moses the Lively oracles speaking as the voice of God from deity crowned cyani he came as the angel of God’s presence of whom the Lord assures us my name is in him as the messenger of Jehovah he demonstrated the power of God over sin in the Angelic sphere fought the great

Spiritual battles with Satan the adversary brought Moses from the dead and bear witness of God’s salvation to the Fallen Angel host close quote so again as an angel that took on an Angelic nature Jesus served as a messenger as well and in doing so he fought great spiritual battles with Satan such as bringing Moses back from the dead and this was a testimony to the angels of God’s witness of Salvation and they want you to consider this yeah I’m I’m good thanks I don’t want to consider an idol Jesus that incarnated as an angel and tried saving Angels but none of them

Accepted so then he sunk even lower down to humans where he eternally sacrificed Divine attributes such as omnipresence so now he’s omnipresent through another person the holy spirit because he’ll forever be humiliated by eternally having a human body yet Jesus is human flesh is glorified his humiliation is done it was temporary that’s just simply referring to him coming down he won’t be eternally humiliated by having a body nor did he lose anything in the Incarnation he temporarily veiled his glory stepping down from his lofty Abode accomplished the work of the new

Creation redeeming what man broke and then he return to his rightful status as the God man to Forever Rule and reign as such Over All creation forever returning to that glorious state that he shared eternally with the father and the spirit but this paragraph also shows you how they will appeal to Revelation 12 and say that there was war in heaven and try and make that refer to something that took place before the Earth was even created I mean just reading the the chapter clearly shows this makes no sense it’s like it’s obviously talking about after Earth’s creation because it

Happens around the of the woman being caught up to heaven that’s Jesus at the Ascension yet some will try and use that to support the aous Jesus having a battle with Satan when he was an angel seven months later in the same year again signs of the times August 16 1905 they published a series of articles that were titled suggestive propositions on the priesthood of Christ the great controversy between good and evil in number two of that series they again talk about Jesus as Michael the Archangel remember questions on Doctrine said they weren’t even really talking

About this subject in their written literature yeah we once again see them proposing some more ideas around this subject quote as Michael the Archangel Christ fought the great spiritual warfare with Satan for 4,000 Years yet during all this time he brought no railing accusation against the adversary but met with him Jehovah rebuke thee Oh Satan Zechariah 3:2 and Jude 9 the Son of God had not yet met the fullest test he had not gone down to the lowest depths Ephesians 4:9 as Michael the Archangel he overcame and Lucifer and his host failed neither

Was their place found anymore in heaven Revelation 128 close quote Yeah except we already saw how they’re conflating Jude n with Zechariah 3 but once again see them say Jesus becoming an angel and taking on their nature taking on an Angelic nature as Michael the Archangel and this was part of a test where he overcame Satan as an angel himself and this spiritual warfare lasted 4,000 years supposedly and like I mentioned earlier Revelation 128 is appealed to to try and say this is biblical not even close but this article also proposes that by becoming an

Angel Jesus had not yet met the fullest test which was sinking even lower and becoming a man with a human nature this further affirms that the previous article was not a one-off they’re saying the same thing in the same year in the same publication and Ellen White is still alive and doesn’t correct it if someone can show us that happening that would be great but good luck one month later the same year September 27 1905 in signs of the times yet again they give more suggestions on the meisan priesthood just like in the previous month within that they say some stuff

About Michael they write quote When sin entered the universe of God the preeminent Son of God emptied himself of all his glory took upon himself the form of a servant and descended even to nothingness that he might vindicate the character of God to be love and to save all who would be saved in the early part of his humiliation he was Michael the Archangel the servant of God during this time he fought the great spiritual warfare with Satan yet bringing no railing accusation against him even meeting his attacks with the Lord rebuke thee Oh Satan close

Quote so remember the article earlier that talked about God’s character of love being displayed to the angels that included Jesus becoming an angel himself sharing their nature and Waring with Satan and he passed the test to demonstrate that God is who he says he is Satan’s a liar Etc this is what will ultimately vindicate God’s character of Love supposedly over and over and over again they’re saying the same things it’s not cryptic it’s not unclear they are very openly claiming that Jesus Took upon himself an angel nature to engage in Angelic Ministry to try and

Fight for the Salvation of angels they all rejected him though then he moved to the next step sinking down even lower to the Earth to take on a permanent human nature after 4,000 years of Waring with Satan as an angel yeah definitely not the Jesus of the Bible folks you would never get this from reading the Bible only when you get this world view from Ellen White’s books and then bring that story line to the Bible to try and fit this stuff in between the gaps and do the whole well it doesn’t contradict the Bible even if it’s not there yeah in all

Sorts of groups out there do that and it leads to deception there’s a lot of Truth here mixed in with error which is what makes it deceptive yes the angel of the Lord is the almighty God no he’s not Michael yes Jesus will forever be the God man and retain his physical glorified human body no he didn’t eternally sacrifice anything he had prior to incarnating as a man yes Jesus sought to seek and save lost Sinners human Sinners Not Angels is a very crafty deception as a brief aside I hope you’re seeing how this is not the same idea as the Jehovah’s

Witnesses what they say in question questions on Doctrine was carefully crafted to still allow for all this stuff that we’re that we’re reading to be affirmed without them having to get into all that because they don’t get into any of this in the in the question a of that book they focused strictly on their belief not being the same as the Jehovah’s Witnesses but they don’t get into any of these details because they know that had Walter Martin read such a thing his cult radar would have gone off this was before the internet so I don’t know how easily he

Could have accessed this info but those days are long gone and I’m going to sound the alarm on this as loud as I possibly can and seek to inform as many Christians as possible this is absolutely cultic it falls outside the bounds of Christian Orthodoxy regarding christology is not Christian teaching it’s not compatible with the god who has revealed himself in the Incarnation and the scriptures that’s what I mean by cultic so David asri take note text me call me let’s talk about this you have my number none of this stuff is compatible with what some of the Protestant

Reformers believed either not a single one of them believed that Jesus Took on an angel nature to try and save the Angels but they all rejected him it’s not at all compatible with orthodox trinitarianism and every single Protestant reformer was an orthodox trinitarian so don’t give me this nonsense that eminent Christian Scholars agree with our view no they don’t so the Adventist Church needs to stop trying to drag them into this mess to try and add legitimacy to this concept the great controversy theme makes every single Adventist teaching entirely unique because that extra

Biblical story line informs how they read teach interpret the Bible already we’ve seen that every point they mention from questions on Doctrine is false the Five Points that I showed at the beginning Jesus is not Michael the Archangel they did write about this a lot in their printed Publications eminent Christian scholarship did not and does not agree with this the name Michael isn’t just a name in their system but they’re tying it to Jesus actually be becoming an Angel With An Angel nature to do Angelic Ministry to try and save the apostate angels and what they are claiming when

Looked at comprehensively absolutely disparages the person and work of Christ it attributes things to the true Christ that he didn’t do it entirely Alters his person and work doesn’t even get into the fact that he entirely failed with every single Angel he didn’t get a single one of them not a single Angel was saved how pathetic what a weak pathetic Idol it’s like Elijah with the prophets of Baal he says your God sitting on the toilet is that why you can’t call fire down pathetic furthermore all of this contradicts God’s self-revelation in his holy

Word like I showed earlier and there’s more which is akin to calling God a liar when he’s told us one thing and they’re telling us something else just think about that folks what an abject failure not a single Angel was saved he apparently tried for 4,000 years he was pleading please please he’s this weak beggar gosh their God is just pathetic Tried by for 4,000 years to save the Angels couldn’t convince a single one to accept his offer because you know Free Will in their their model is basically God that’s the real God in their system the AVST Angel Jesus couldn’t convince a

Single Angel to use their free will to choose him Mercy but none of that disparages the work of Christ in their minds it apparently magnifies God’s love for the angels and humans and it vindicates his character moving six months ahead to the March 7 1906 issue of signs of the times in an article titled the crisis of the world they again bring up Michael and reiterate this same stuff in this article they claim that the Supreme crisis of the world did not occur at the cross of Calvary not when the Roman soldiers mocked Christ not when he was ridiculed

And blasphemed by the Jewish priests not even when God the father’s face was hidden from the Son and the awful dark Ness of sin rung from Christ’s lips while on the cross but the Supreme crisis of the universe they write took place in the Garden of Gethsemane after explaining this they write quote there had been other crises when he gave himself a lamb slain from the foundation of the world a crisis was passed when he took upon himself the form of a servant and became an angel among the Angels a crisis was passed when he was made in the likeness

Of man a crisis was passed when he met the mighty Temptations of the adversary at the beginning of his ministry and conquered by faith in the word of God a crisis was passed and there doubtless were other times but the Supreme crisis was met in the Garden of Gethsemane when alone with God Jesus Christ yielded himself again with renewed consecration facing all the suffering to become the Supreme and everlasting sacrifice for Humanity the crucifixion and the resurrection were but the demonstration in life of the submission of Gethsemane close quote so again they’re

Reiterating the previous article we saw where they talked about the various tests that Jesus allegedly underwent and that one of those was when he became an angel among the Angels which we saw what all that supposedly entailed once again I remind you Ellen White was still alive at this time and I know it sounds redundant but the point is is this isn’t one-offs they’re saying this over over and over and over and over again fast forward to May the following year May 15 1907 again sign signs of The Times They once again reiterate what we’ve already seen proving that none of

This is a one-off from an article titled the manner of Christ coming they write quote the work of Jesus Christ in the great scheme of Salvation is made up of different steps and acts he stepped down from the Throne of deity and gave himself for the Salvation of of his creatures he became an angel messenger of God Among the angels He Stoops lower and is incarnated a man among men he met the climax of his eternal Sacrifice by his death upon the cross he arose again he ascended on high he ministers as priest before God he comes again in glory Transcendent

Supernatural close quote yeah and now we as we saw all this you know becoming an angel messenger we already saw what all that entails taking on an angel nature to try and save Angels Waring with Satan as an angel for 4,000 years pleading with the angels to choose to be saved by him but every last one of them refused an abject failure then in the same month same publication the following week May 22nd 1907 they published a question question and answer where they answer things that Adventists were inquiring about one of which is regarding the Archangel so the

Questioner asked quote is not the Archangel Michael the executive of the Holy Spirit the one that overshadowed the Virgin Mary Etc to which the answer is given if you will read the account in the first chapter of Luke it was not the Angel Michael but the angel Gabriel Michael means who is like God Archangel means chief of all the Angels such was the son of God before he became a man he who is like God became the Archangel and then stepped lower down and became the Lord Jesus among men Jude 9 1 Thessalonians 4:16 and Daniel 121 show very clearly that Michael is Christ

Gabriel is doubt is doubtless his Angel Revelation 1 1-3 the one who instructed the prophets but as to saying that any one Angel is executive of the spirit of God that is limiting it to the capacity of that angel all God’s angels are ministers and All God’s Children upon whom and in whom is placed his Spirit are also ministers or servants just the same as every member of the whole body of man is the executive of the mind of man close quote so this further solidifies that by Angel they don’t just mean a role they once again affirmed that before incarnating as a man Jesus became an

Angel becoming Michael the Archangel followed by sinking even lower by taking on the nature of a man is all of this out of context advinus prove me wrong go show me that every single one of these quotes is out of context that I’m misrepresenting make my day we then have a break at least as far as I could find and we move up to February 1st 1910 this time in the publication the Oriental Watchmen this was an official SDA publication in India the first and only SDA Publishing House in India according to the SDA encyclopedia again we have a question

And answer section in this particular publication the entire section was on angs within that we find this quote question who’s the chief of the Angels answer Michael the Archangel Jude n note Michael the Archangel is none other than Christ he’s often spoken of by men as entirely distinct from our Lord sometimes the term is used in the plural the Bible however knows but one Archangel the term Arc means Chief when placed before a noun beginning with a vowel or vowel sound the CH takes the hard form when placed before a consonant the ordinary sound as in

Archbishop the Archangel is therefore the commander among the Angels Michael means who is like God therefore through all the past dispensations Christ is called the angel of Jehovah close quote so once again they conf Michael the Archangel with the angel of the Lord the reason they argue that Michael is the only Archangel is because they need that to be the case for Jesus to be Michael think about it if there are multiple archangels then that refutes this notion hence we see what is put forth here as well as countless other SDA sources like the SDA encyclopedia

And the SDA Bible dictionary however Ellen who is supposed to guide them into all truth and protect them from doctrinal error contradicts this over and over and over again because she claimed that Satan was an archangel too notice signs of the time September 14 1882 she writes quote Rebellion originated with Satan notwithstanding the exalted position which he occupied among the Heavenly Host he became dissatisfied because he was not accounted Supreme honor hence he questioned God’s purposes and imputed his Justice he bent all his powers to Allure the angels from their

Allegiance the fact that he was an archangel glorious and Powerful enabled him to exert a mighty influence his complaints against God’s government aka the law at first met with no favor yet being urged again and again they were finally accepted by those who had before been loyal and happy subjects of the king of Heaven close quote so she apparently contradicts the Bible then because the Oriental Watchmen told us the Bible only knows of but one Archangel yet Ellen White claims Satan was an archangel which is why he was able to deceive a third of the angels

And convince them to rebel against God and this very clearly further affirms and supports the thesis that there was a time where Jesus and Satan were both seen as archangels and one got a promotion the other didn’t so he became jealous of Jesus’s promotion leading to this great controversy over God and His law but again in sermons and talks volume one page 241 she said quote cherubims and seraphim Angels and Archangels plural are watching the battle that’s going on in this life between whom the Prince of Life and the power of Darkness close quote

Arch Angels plural in the great controversy between Jesus and Satan angels and Arch angels are watching the battle raging on supposedly again in the lngg white 1888 material she writes quote Angels and Archangels are looking upon God’s chosen ones with the most Earnest interest to see what influence the truth is having upon mind and character to see how much they appreciate the one who was CR crucified for them that they might have eternal life close quote Angels and Archangels plural this is allegedly divinely inspired information folks supposed to

Help shed light onto the Bible and help us really understand what the Bible s is teaching and saying correcting of inaccurate interpretations of the Bible like the inaccurate interpretation that there’s only one Archangel and it’s Michael again in Heavenly places we see her say the same thing plural archangels that all of Heaven is worshiping Jesus the lamb which includes Angels archangels plural seraphim and cherubim folks there is a reason that I call this system schizophrenic theology Whiplash theology just constant confusion contradictions Etc they can

Never keep the story straight it’s always changing always evolving the gold posts are always shifting and it’s just the present truth magic wand is pulled out and bonk it’s all fixed present truth ah how convenient right but this is supposed to be the movement that has the theological God Particle a special Insight that only they have that God gave them to help them be United unlike all of us doctrinally confused Babylon Protestants and Catholics and Orthodox and copics and yeah we’re apostates and rejected by God you know the True Body of Christ yeah we’re not the one making

Insane christological blunders like this our Creeds summarize biblical christology to a te and don’t result in this sort of Whiplash and actual confusion but notice this there’s another question in that same issue of the Orient to Watchmen so the question is asked after our Lord’s exaltation who took his place as the chief of the Angels huh a man after our Lord’s exaltation who took his place as the chief of the Angels the answer is then given Gabriel whose name means man of God sometimes called man coming to men in the form of men see Daniel 816 and Luke 1:19 and

26 close quote so hold up hold up hold up hold up read this carefully folks after Jesus was exalted who took his place as chief of the Angels well when was Jesus an angel to then be exalted so that Gabriel could take his place this would mean that Jesus was an angel was exalted to be made equal with God the Father leaving a vacancy resulting in God then exalting Gabriel to fill Jesus’s vacant spot yeah what a total mess of blasphemy none of these proof texts support this literally not a single one of them says anything about Gabriel being exalted it is amazing the the proof

Texting they will do and the inference that they will try and draw out of that to try and make all of this appear biblical now the biblical witness on this all of this stuff about the the Archangel being only one Archangel Etc alen white aside this publication claimed Archangel according to the Bible there’s only one yeah Archangel isn’t just a title folks it’s a type of an Angelic being a type of created Angelic being and Ellen White was correct to point out that there are multiple archangels because that’s what the biblical witness portrays forar starters we looked at

Hebrews 2 earlier well chapter 1 through two are dealing with how Jesus is entirely distinct and separate from the angels in every way he’s not comparable to them in any regard notice Hebrews 1 1 through five long ago at many times and in many ways God spoke to our fathers by the prophets but in these last days he spoke unto us by his son whom he appointed the heir of all things through whom also he created the world he’s the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature and he upholds the universe by the word of his power after

Making purification for sins he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on High having become as much Superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs for to which of the Angels did God ever say you are my son today I’ve begotten you or again I will be uh him a father and he shall be to me a son that’s Hebrews 1 the SDA sources have told us multiple times that the first step in the son of God’s humiliation was to First Take on the nature of an Angel among the rest of the angels and that he was God among them which is what a source is going to tell

Us here in a little bit yet Hebrews 1 explicit L states that God never called an angel his son so how could the Son of God have taken on the nature of an Angel as the Son of God before sinking even lower to take on human nature If This Were true it would mean that when the AVST Jesus Took on an Angelic nature to do Angelic Ministry to the angels He ceased being the Son of God because the holy spirit in Hebrews just told us that God the father was never called an angel or God the father is never called an angel his son sorry not just this but it also tells us

That Jesus is superior to the angels like we saw earlier in Chapter 2 it explicitly states that Jesus didn’t seek to save the Angels but The Offspring of Abraham human beings so that’s one but then we get the infamous Daniel 1013 passage which is on screen that they’ve tried to twist and contort to mean anything other than what it plainly says so Daniel in vision sees one who resembles the figure of a man who speaks to him and in the flow of what that figure tells him we read quote then he said to me fear not Daniel for from the first day that you set your

Heart to understand and humbled yourself before your God your words have been heard and I’ve come because of your words the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me 21 days but Michael one of the chief princes came to help me for I was left there with the kings of pers and came to make you understand what is to happen to your people in the latter days for the vision is for days yet to come thus the reading of God’s holy word so this figure tells Daniel that Michael is but one of the archangels or chief princes which indicates there are others like

Him so Archangel is a type of angelic creature it’s not simply a title for the sole head or leader of the angel there are multiple archangels and even in Jewish angelology they discuss they discuss this sub uh subject you know some avist love to try and appeal to Jewish understanding to support their views like that Satan is oaz Zeal therefore Satan must be a picture of the scapegoat in Leviticus 16 yeah they’ll appeal to Jewish apocryphal sources on this but not regarding Jewish angelology which understands Angels uh archangels as a type of angelic created

Beings now we get to the year 1911 and this is where they start to get a lot more specific again first in 1911 questions and answers volume one of the signs of the times which was a a essentially a book that they published where it was compiling all these different q&as from the the publication of signs of the times from number 14 which is titled made like unto his Brethren Hebrews 2:14-17 how ironic considering like we saw earlier this picape refutes this entire notion that he tried to save Angels but they refused so then he sunk lower beginning his next step in his

Humiliation to try and save mankind they write quote from the foundation of the world Christ gave himself emptied himself that he might break the power of sin unifying God’s broken creation and save men Revelation 13 1 Peter Philippians 2 again when he did this he gave up all counted not the being of an equality with God a thing to be grasped he emptied himself laying aside his deity taking the form of a servant he first in the carrying out of his sacrifice became an angel among the Angels Chief Angel Archangel only because he was the most devoted

Messenger of God in his position he is called Michael meaning who is like God close quote so again I know this is repetitive but the point is they’re publishing and saying this stuff over and over and over again to claim that they weren’t really talking about this in their printed work when they knew Walter Martin was examining their Doctrine for signs of being cultic was Classic slipperiness on their part don’t give me that this was regularly popping up in their Publications over the Spain of decades we’re not even we’re only halfway through almost they once again claim that the

Humiliation of Christ entailed more than just taking on human nature the first step involved becoming an angel among the Angels where he was the chiefest of such Michael the Archangel because he was the most devoted angel Messenger to God and he was given the name Michael upon doing this because he was like God yeah being Yahweh the almighty isn’t merely being like God it’s being God by very

Definition now we get to a source that I’ve shown before many times this is the one that sent me down this whole rabbit hole signs of the times June 6 1911 this is from an article titled the Son of God notes and comment in this section they’re providing clarification regarding what they teach about Satan’s accusations in this pre-earth controversy that started over Jesus’s exaltation to be made equal with God the father and in this section they write quote for that time that or or yeah for that time that moment that now the the ages had waited from the time that he who

Afterward became Jesus of Nazareth left his position in the godhead as the creator of Heaven and Earth and for the sake of his Fallen creatures plural risked all to save them the universe had been in suspense in the beginning he was one with the father in Supernatural Glory John 17 the very image of his is talking about the father substance Hebrews 1:3 but his position of equality his claim to Eternal sunship had been disputed by that being who stood next to him the one created being above all others who in himself sealed up the sum of bestowed

Wisdom and Beauty Ezekiel 28 Lucifer the son of the morning Isaiah 14 he not only disputed the position of the word of God but he led others to do the same a third part of Heaven’s spirits of light revolted the universe was divided broken diseased by the entrance of sin God’s power might have been Vindicated by utterly crushing the rebellion of Lucifer in the beginning but such a course would have swn doubt in the minds of beings who were on probation yet still loyal it was God’s character that was called in question his Justice his love if God’s creatures could be led to

Believe that God is not love that he’s unjust partial implacable unmerciful that would not serve him or they would not serve him would fall as easy prey to Satan’s deceptions close quote so this is just like the the the quote that we read back in the 1800s basically just repurposing that changing some words around so when the Son of God became Jesus of Nazareth he allegedly left his position in the godhead as the creator of Heaven and Earth and for the sake of Fallen creatures he risked it all to try and save them which left the universe in suspense notice it said for the sake of

His Fallen creatures plural not just humans but angels and like I mentioned earlier by this point they’d pivoted off of their original Aryan and semian Roots despite Ellen White claiming to receive Visions at that time which confirmed the semi semian teachings as being correct so by this point they’ve tried to spin it that Lucifer became jealous of something that had always been the case like we saw earlier Jesus was also equal with God the father and Satan made false charges against this as the one who was next to Jesus the son in

Authority like we saw earlier they reiterate the same thing from a few decades prior that instead of God just crushing Satan upon his Rebellion God allowed it to persist because if he would have done that by just crushing him out it would have communicated to the angels that Satan was right that God’s a tyrant Etc and it would have called into question God’s character which is the whole thing in question here again proving that this is this was a consistent teaching not some oneoff here they continue by saying quote but God is merciful kind loving

Just therefore God bore with Lucifer in his rebellious host therefore he gave them opportunity to repent and return therefore he pleaded with them as only deity could plead to restore them to righteousness and life how do we know this because it is thus that God pleads now and he’s eternally the same without variableness or shadow of turning the Eternal Word gave himself he did not aspire to be equal with God did not meditate a usurp of the Throne of the universe Philippians 2 but he emptied himself gave himself then and there for Sinners he took the form of a servant becoming

An angel among the angels that he might redeem Angels but they would not and when they rejected the righteousness and life so freely offered he descended lower still to those duped by Satan Fallen man stooping even to death that he might redeem of the Fallen all who desire to be redeemed and vindicate to the universe to all eternity the character of God that was the work of the word of God the Eternal logos when he became Michael the Archangel when he became Jesus the man of Nazareth when he was anointed the Christ when he died our sacrifice on

Calvary yet during all this time the hosts of evil with all the baleful deceptive cruel devices of sin were hurled against him that God’s character might be marred that the great Vindicator Redeemer might fall close quote so like I said they essentially republished here what we saw from a couple decades prior Jesus Took upon himself an angel nature to try and save the Angels this was the first step in his humiliation supposedly totally foreign to the Bible folks the Bible nowhere says that Jesus’s humiliation had multiple steps but every single angel that

Rebelled with Satan rejected this attempt by the son of God to save them so then he moved to step two where he sunk even lower down to our level and all of this was ultimately to vindicate the character of God which is on trial due to accusations made by Satan prior to the Earth even existing this is why they have a false gospel folks they are altering the work of Christ The Gospel is the person and work of Christ who is he what did he accomplish what did he do he never became an angel in his humiliation to try and save Angels but they all rejected

Him Christians do not believe this because the Bible does not teach this and it does disparage the Lord Jesus when you claim that he did things he didn’t do it’s called bearing false witness especially considering the claim is also made that he utterly failed to save even a single angel in the process like a pathe weakling this is after 1890 folks after the publishing of Desire of Ages which is when SDA scholarship tells us they finally had their christology ironed out and they embraced Christian Orthodoxy in this area insisting they believe the

Same thing Christians do Ellen White is still alive during this time and provides no rebuke or correction in fact fact she was published in this same issue of signs of the times where she wrote an article titled Plan of Salvation number four they’re talking about this Michael stuff in the same series of articles that she’s contributing to are we to think that she wasn’t aware of any of these that she’s being published alongside them and wasn’t on board first notice what they write in their fundamental beliefs book regarding doctrinal Unity quote Under The Heading

Unity of Faith they write diversity of spiritual gifts does not mean A diversity of beliefs however in the last days God’s church will be composed of people who share a common platform of the Everlasting gospel their lives characterized by the observance of The Commandments of God and the faith of Jesus Revelation 2412 together they Proclaim to the world God’s invitation to Salvation close close quote so they’re supposed to be doctrinally United unlike the rest of us and this is supposed to set them apart from the rest of us Babylonian confused

Protestants and Roman Catholics and Orthodox their doctrinal Unity is supposed to be part of what identifies them as God’s last day people well as we have seen they’re claiming this belief in Jesus coming as M you know becoming Michael and assuming the nature of an Angel to try and seek and save the Angels was step one in Jesus’s work of humiliation it was a necessary step for him to be tested as an angel before all of the angels to vindicate God and His law demonstrating that Satan is a liar which is absolutely Central to the entire great controversy storyline of

Theology so are they all United on this issue David asri told us in that intro clip this doesn’t even make the top 15 top 20 importance list of the doctrines for him I’d venture to bet 95% of Seventh Day Adventist Ley aren’t even aware of these sources and claims or the larger role that this plays within their belief system furthermore they also write that part of the role of a valid biblical prophit is to protect the flock from doctrinal error to protect them from being tossed to and fro by every wind of Doctrine quote prophets help to bring about the

Unity of Faith protect the church against false doctrines so Believers would no longer be infants tossed back and forth by the waves and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by every cunning and craftiness of people in their deceitful scheming close quote Yeah well numerous primary sources tell us that Michael is the only Archangel Ellen White repeatedly said there were multiple the primary sources are telling us that Jesus became an Angel With An Angel nature to do Angelic Ministry to try and save the Angels which contradicts scripture and yet Ellen

White doesn’t even correct it and is found being published alongside these same articles so how is that protecting from doctrinal error again when this isn’t something some side issue I know many Adventists think that’s the case many individual Adventists think that’s the case but as we are seeing you have to separate individual Ley from their own and their own private understandings from the organizational claims and statements I’m sorry most Adventists are just not learning on their own theological system okay doesn’t make them bad people it’s

Just the facts I’m sorry and I think most honest Adventists would agree with this the average Seventh Day Adventist is not getting into this level of research and study but this area is a Telltale sign Surefire sign that Ellen White was not a protector of error she was actually the cause of a lot of it and she’s the primary reason they’re in such a bind today moving ahead three weeks to the June 27 1911 issue of signs of the times again from the question Corner section where they’re answering questions from the leoty this questioner asked about the

Pre-existence of Christ get this folks so remember by this point they’ve moved past the aryanism of the early days and their postd Desire of Ages being published which was supposed to be when they arrived at trinitarianism Ellen White is still alive here she died four years later we read quote this Angel Jehovah bore a name among the Angels namely Michael the meaning of which is who is like God he’s represented as a person one who goes and comes greater and mightier than Gabriel Daniel 10:13 in fact he’s called Michael the Archangel the chief of all the

Angels Jude n it is his voice that raises the Dead 1 Thessalonians 4:16 but our Lord himself shows that it is his voice which will raised the dead John 528 and 29 therefore the personal Michael of the Old Testament is identified with the Christ of the new close quote so are you starting to see a pattern of assertions and appeals here that they just recycle the same stuff over and over and over and over again the same proof text the same assertions Etc none of these proof texts prove that the angel of the Lord in the Old Testament is Michael the only proof text we haven’t

Dealt with tonight is 1 Thessalonians 4:16 though we’ve done so elsewhere what’s funny about that text though is in relation to their claim that it proves Jesus is Michael that text says the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command with the voice of an archangel and with the sound of the trumpet of God and the dead in Christ will rise first it says an archangel not the Archangel which they made a big deal about as we saw earlier but notice their logic they read first Thessalonians to be saying the voice of an archangel is referring to Jesus’s voice they then

Appeal to John five where Jesus says his voice will be what raises the dead therefore Jesus is the Archangel in first Thessalonians got it but it does not say that Jesus is the Archangel but that there’s a loud announcement made upon the king’s return the phrase suggests that Jesus comes with the commanding authority of Heaven what you’ll find if you study this event in depth the second coming which they’re supposed to be Masters on the imagery we see used is the same as that of ancient cultures where a king would enter a city and a representative

Of the king would be sent ahead of the procession to announce the king’s arrival before he and the Entourage got there you even see this in pop culture like the Monty Python movies and it’s in Shrek too that’s what’s going on here angels will prede the Son of God and make an announcement they’re going to announce before he arrives yo the king is coming and he’s going to strut through like a boss and then he’s going to enter in with the Saints and the martyrs Etc and the dead are going to be raised and it’s going to be awesome the text does not say that the

Archangel is the one that raises people from the dead either that’s the other thing that they they conflate that this text says the voice of the Archangel is what raises the dead and only God can do that so therefore Jesus has to be the Archangel in this text no friend that’s not what it says that’s not what it says your worldview is being read into the text it simply says the Lord Jesus Will descend angels will announce this and Christ will raise the dead but they continue in the same article remember it’s focusing upon the pre-existence of the Son of God to his Incarnation as a

Man quote as a member of the great godhead our blessed Lord stepped down to live a servant of God an angel among the Angels A man among men filled all vacancies with his fullness of life and character and triumphed over uh or for every sinful soul but all the Mysteries we may not cannot understand anymore than we can understand the process of digestion or creation close quote so notice once again they parallel what Jesus did as a man to what he did as an angel as a man what did he do he allegedly set his divine nature aside and took on a human nature same

Thing happened when he took on an angel nature supposedly completely consistent with what they’ve been claiming in their other sources for nearly 30 years at this point but also notice that they say he filled all vacancies with his fullness of life in character and triumphed over every sinful Soul or for every sinful Soul sorry so just like they were previously publishing Jesus becoming an angel was a test that included Waring with Satan for the Salvation of angels and Jesus on the plane of Angels triumphed in vindicating God’s law before the Fallen Angels demonstrating

To them that Satan is a liar which is what he also then went on or or which is what he he then also went and did as a man in the second step of his humiliation they are saying this over and over and over again folks it’s not one thing here or there and again Ellen White was published in the same issue her article was titled the way of Christ then we get to October 24 1911 same publication again they published an article titled the revelation of Jesus Christ Christ a review and in that article they speak about how the Book of Revelation reveals various things about Jesus in part they

Write quote it is a revelation of Jesus Christ the son of God it shows to us his wonderful character his self-denial his sacrifice it reveals to us his work which is not only the Vindication of God’s character of love but which means also the Everlasting Triumph of his people and the utter blotting out of sin he’s the great hero of this great drama of the ages we see him with the father before the world was the creator of the heavens and the Earth we see him when the Great problem of sin entered the universe stepping down from that high State and becoming one with the

Creatures that he himself had brought into existence I’m going to read that again we see him when great problems of sin entered the universe stepping down from that highest state and becoming one with the creatures that he himself had brought into existence we find him as Michael the Archangel leading the angels of good against the forces of evil in the spiritual Realms we find him stepping down lower still and becoming one with the children of men the Son of God yet the son of man and even here he steps lower still and becomes obedient to death giving his

Very life in order that he might redeem men the Lamb of God slain in purpose from the foundation of the world but executed in fact on Calvary close quote so notice they said that Revelation teaches that When sin entered the universe Jesus stepped down from his highest state and became one with the creatures that he himself brought into existence including both humans and Angels the two classes of Fallen creatures and as Michael the Archangel he was head of the good angels in a battle against Satan and evil angels after this he stepped down stopped being an angel and became a

Man this is all out of context right none of these sources are teaching that Jesus was at one point an Angel With An Angel nature not just a messenger but actually possessed an Angelic nature like the created angels do they continue quote then follows the great Sevenfold spiritual controversy Sevenfold a controversy in the spiritual Realms between Satan and Michael Satan represented in the form of a dragon Michael the Archangel who becomes the son of the woman the woman the church the controversy for the destruction of the church chapter 12 this is where it

Gets really bizarre folks Satan’s agents are represented by the heads Babylonian son in nature worship Persian son in fire worship The Grecian Pantheon in art worship the iron monarchy of Rome a defiled State man and God Steed during the Dark Ages back to tradition following that and the full ripeness of apostasy and the persecuted Church the dragon still inspiring it all close quote so Revelation 12 is supposedly the biblical support that Jesus became Michael the Archangel taking on the nature of created angels to war with Satan what a mess but notice that they said that

Michael became the son of the woman the woman being the church where in the world does revelation 12 say this it it says Michael and his angels w with the dragon nothing about Michael the Archangel becoming the son of the church oh right because well through inference it says that the the the son of the woman the seed of the woman and because that’s referring to Michael because that’s Jesus and the woman represents the church oh oh it’s one of those and ah yes you guessed it Ellen White was also published in the same issue of signs as well an article titled Christ adjusts the

Claims between Earth and Heaven was she entirely ignorant that this is being published alongside her why no correcting for saying that Jesus became an angel like the Angelic creatures not just a title for the head of the Angels not just a name that’s given to Jesus then we get to April 2nd 1912 six months later they published an article titled signs in or studies in Daniel a vision of Empires number seven which was part of a larger series of articles that they published over time in this one they again bring up Michael the Archangel this is under the subheading of that

Article titled the need of teaching symbols where they talk about how Israel needed taught things through symbols and signs because they disregarded God’s law and needed to be taught like children are taught they write quote bit of a long one here they talking about Israel themselves needed object lessons and symbols and so a sanctuary was built the holy shakina of God’s presence was there in order to teach the nation which seem so slow to grasp his his great truth they could not grasp as did Moses that God was among them constantly that the great God who made Heaven and Earth was

Always near them and ready to help them that the word which he spoke was not in heaven AAR off that someone should climb up to bring it down that it was not in the deep that someone should go down into the deep and bring it up but it was nigh to them in their mouth and in their heart Deuteronomy 30 so God wanted to dwell with his people and each individual soul but they would not therefore he said let them make me a sanctuary that I may dwell among them Exodus 258 in this God would manifest his presence and His glory and there would be connected with that which would

Continually teach the children of Israel of God he sent his angels to minister to them nay More Than This the very Angel of the Covenant the Archangel Michael he who afterward became Jesus of Nazareth the angel in whom was God’s name became companion with them behold I sent an angel before thee to keep thee in the way and to bring thee in the place which I have prepared beware of him and obey his voice provoke him not for he will not pardon your transgressions for my name is in him but if Thou shalt indeed obey his voice and do all that I speak

Then I will be an enemy unto thine enemies and an adversary unto thine adversaries for mine Angel shall go before thee close quote so again they confused the angel of the Lord with Michael the Archangel but remember how question in questions on Doctrine asked whether or not Michael the Archangel was Jesus prior to his Incarnation this is about the 100 source that we’ve seen where they’re plainly saying this yet they didn’t bother to get into this in questions on Doctrine they ignored that part of the question and focused on making sure it was clear

That they don’t agree with the Jehovah’s Witnesses that Jesus is a created Angelic being you will not convince me that the people behind that book Leroy FR and others did not very carefully craft the answers to allow for the to remain off of them while at the same time they didn’t necessarily contradict all these sources that were looking at they just didn’t bring them up in the book and make Walter Martin aware of them and once again Mrs White was published in this issue of signs of the times as well an article titled looking unto Jesus why is she not correcting this if

She wasn’t on board with it when part of her role was to protect from doctrinal error and deception are we honestly to believe that she never read any of the publication she was published in had no clue about any of these statements which very clearly teach that for roughly 4,000 years Jesus became an Angelic being with an angel nature taking on the name Michael to do Angelic Ministry to the fallen angels to try and redeem them before then entering into the second step of testing and humiliation which involved stooping down even lower and becoming a man sheathing himself of his

Angel nature the next month may7th 1912 issue of signs of the times they published the concluding article in their studies on Daniel series from that previous issue from the last month and just in case there’s any confusion or Adventists that want to try and argue that last article didn’t say what I claimed in this one they recap the whole series and are outright explicit this is part of what they’re claiming can be concluded from Daniel 12 folks quote Michael it has been shown is none other than our Lord with Angel nature acting as an angel servant or messenger

And because chiefest servant the chief of all the Angels the Archangel the very name means who is like God and he is identified with our Lord by the expression who standeth for the children of thy people only Christ stands up against all usurpers and persecutors and deao persecuting powers of this world close quote Angel nature in Angel nature not just a role or title of authority friends they state that he had an angel nature along with the role of messenger and say that Michael the the Archangel was Jesus who had an angel nature acted as an angel servant and

Messenger who because he was the chiefest servant was the chief of all the Angels the archangels but folks do you see the glaring issue here what have they been telling us repeatedly is the first step of Jesus’s humiliation to become Michael the arc Angel taking on an angel nature he did this for roughly 4,000 years after those 4,000 years he ceased being an angel and became a man well Daniel 12 says Michael will stand up which they claim his future to us and is when he’s going to return at the second coming but he stopped being Michael when he became a man they told

Us the name Michael was tied to him taking on an angel nature which he abandoned when he became a man every step of the way this movement is in theological hot water at every turn they’re making serious blunders it’s not small blips here and there it’s large christological heresies outright contradictions to the plain words of scripture the the clear dactic passages too this is all at the behest of their worldview claiming to have knowledge and insight into what what was going on before the Earth was created they then bring those extra details not found in the Bible to the

Biblical text to try and find places to stick them in and claim well see it’s biblical and yes Ellen White was published in that article of signs as well she wrote an article titled feeding the 5000 I have all the same questions I did previously why is she not correcting this apparent it was an error the next month June 18 1912 God bless those that have been here this whole time we still got a long way to go folks we’re going up to the 1950s and it gets worse it gets worse you’re gonna want to stick around I know some of this is repetitive but it’s

Driving home the point this ain’t one-offs this is not one-offs and it I’m telling you it gets worse it gets worse I know you’re probably thinking how just stick around June 18 1912 once again from the question corner where they’re answering questions from advent’s Ley this time over the subject of war in heaven Revelation 12 7-9 someone asked the question make sure you get this can Revelation 12 7-9 be applied to Satan’s first fall can Revelation 12 7-9 be applied to Satan’s first fall aka before the creation of the earth to which they give the

Answer we think not the first fall is set before us in verses 3 and four when Satan fell our Lord himself stepped down from his highest state of reigning with the father and took upon himself the form of a creature in order to save and the first step in that downward career of sacrifice was to become an angel Michael the Archangel there began the spiritual warfare between our Lord as Angel and Satan and which continued until the time that Christ took the Second Step downward and died upon the cross a man this is perfectly harmonious with all that is taught

Elsewhere close quote I I mean it doesn’t get much clearer folks that was the entire answer to the question short direct to the point first step in the downward career of sacrifice was to become an angel our Lord as Angel battled Satan perfectly consistent with all we’ve taught elsewhere next time you hear an Adventist Source or individual try and cite Revelation 12 and they’re being war in heaven to try and support their pre-earth origin narrative remember this quote their Church says no no no you can’t use those verses to support that we think

Not but they very clearly claim that Jesus stepped down from his highest state ruling with God the Father something Ellen White early on said he was exalted to or given such a status and he took upon himself what the form of a creature in order to save first to try and save Angels by taking on an Angelic nature as Michael the Archangel this began the spiritual warfare between Jesus as an angel and Satan which continued until when when Jesus Took the second step in Sinking even lower than an angel becoming a man which resulted in him ceasing being an

Angel and this is perfectly harmonious with all that they’ve taught elsewhere so all those other signs articles that we’ve seen so far this is what they were teaching and putting forth is not answering adventism twisting the facts very clear not not cryptic not obscured clear as ice this shows that they do not at all understand basic Christian theology Jesus atoned for the sin of Adam Adam means man in Hebrew as the second Adam Jesus atoned for man’s sin there was no atonement made for Angels no in between phase where he was an Angel and now we come to the source that

I’ve primarily been using in past presentations the July 23rd 1912 issue of signs of the times this article is titled titled Our Savior and Lord and then under the subheading Christ as Michael the Archangel this one is important because of something I just got done mentioning and because of what’s going to be said by another source later I’ll read first and then I’ll explain quote he talking about Jesus Took the nature of angels to repeat the first step then in his humiliation in laying aside his divine nature was to put on the nature of angels and thus it

Is that we have Jesus brought to view as Michael the Archangel the commander of the hosts of Heaven the captain of the host of the Lord and as such the armies in heaven follow him when he became an angel he bore A fitting name even as when later he became a man his name befitted the nature which he took by virtue of his birth into our human family that name was Emmanuel God With Us his name as an angel is Michael which signifies the one who is like God so before proceeding make sure you catch what is being claimed here remember how David asri in the opening clip as well as

Questions on Doctrine they both claim that the name Michael is just a name given to Jesus among many names yeah here we see the full picture and that what they’re saying isn’t the full picture the name Michael is tied to Jesus becoming an Angelic creature taking on an angel ual nature he laid aside his divine nature like another article we saw earlier said he set his deity aside assumed an angel nature and was brought to view as Michael the Archangel and notice how they say that when he became an angel he bore A fitting name that befitted the nature

Upon which he assumed so as a man it was Emanuel which means god with us but as an angel it was Michael which means one who is is like God but the article continues whatever the name that he takes in crushing sin and rebellion in Redeeming the lost and in restoring Harmony to the universe that name must indicate that God is in him and with him on the very plane and in the very nature of the class of beings to whom he is sent by living the god life on the plane of angels of which Satan was one although Fallen he could neutralize the force of Satan’s accus

Ations thus when he became an angel the fact must not be lost sight of that he was God with the angels yet living on their plane possessing their natures and this thought is preserved in the name that he bears as an angel close quote so Jesus lived the god life on the plane of angels meaning he kept the law perfectly as an angel which knew naturalized Satan’s accusations in the great controversy he perfectly embodied the character of God remember what they claim that these pre-earth accusations from Satan are that the law is not fair it can’t be

Kept it needs changed Angels need no law Etc that’s what Ellen White tells us in spirit of Prophecy volume one so part of Jesus taking on an angel nature was to demonstrate to the angels that these charges Es are false and just like he was an example to humanity of the same thing so too he was for the angels and as we’ve seen in numerous other articles in the same publication he was also doing this to offer salvation to the angels and was trying to save them and this is what was required for God’s love to be demonstrated Satan’s accusations to be silenced and

Ultimately for God to be Vindicated from Satan’s accusations which is the whole Central thesis of their entire system and yes Ellen White was published in this issue of signs as well her article was titled Christ’s Victory through pain and death no correction from her no protection from this Blasphemous unbiblical teaching that contradicts the god of the word of God Etc you’re not the Commandment keeping church if you have an idol that’s step one we can’t even talk about the fourth Commandment when they don’t pass the first so remember that don’t get sucked

Into this distraction of arguing step four when the Adventist Church doesn’t even make it past step one I’m not granting the first three to them to then argue the fourth but they don’t they don’t pass the test of the fourth Commandment either because they have a false gospel and like Israel in Hebrews 3 and 4 who didn’t believe and failed to enter so too is the SD Church wandering around in the desert a stiff necked organization that refuses to repent believe the gospel and unless they do they’re going to perish in the wilderness of life if they don’t

Humble themselves and the author of Hebrews says that Israel missed truly entering into the true Promised Land because they didn’t believe it wasn’t just Canaan that they missed out on they didn’t believe the gospel so they didn’t go to the true Promised Land either see hav Church does even keep the fourth Commandment like they think only people who have the true gospel can actually keep the fourth Commandment properly nevertheless I encourage folks to go and read the entire article in particular in that one because what they teach here is truly

Astonishing it’s all about Jesus becoming an angel among the angels to war with Satan and manifest his true character of God to the fallen angels to try and save them and a battle breaks out and all sorts of other fic that’s nowhere found in sacred scripture sounds like an episode of Star Trek then in the next month August 13 1912 another one from the question Corner this time it’s titled Michael the question is asked could Michael have been properly called the only begotten Son of God except by personification before he was born of a human mother

To which the answer is given pay very close attention we do not understand that the expression this the only begotten Son of God refers to our Lord as a human

Being we do not understand that the expression the only begotten Son of God refers to our Lord as a human being it seem that as if John 3:16 would exclude this God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son the giving was not when he was born of a woman the giving was that he might be born of a woman the giving was not when he became Michael the giving was that he might become Michael that he might step down down down taking upon him first the nature of angels next the nature of humanity and so going clear down to the lowest step which could be taken death

That when he ascended he might fill all things what is implied in that only begotten Son of God we do not know we could not understand if it were told us that is a part of the great mystery of godliness but just how or why he is called that we do not know in some way in some sense the father is preeminent this is indicated in various scriptures and yet Jesus says I and my father are one read also 1 Corinthians 15 24-28 but this only begotten Son of God who proceeded forth and came from the father was given and given for Sinners given in the beginning the Lamb of God

Slain before the foundation of the world and true to that purpose when the fullness of time came God sent forth his son born of a woman born under the law that he might receive the adoption of sons and so the only begotten Son of God was truly Michael just the same as he was truly Jesus close quote totally bizarre folks so so the answer says they don’t understand the expression only begotten Son of God to refer to Jesus as a human being what and John 3:16 proves this but they said in the November 24 1914 issue of signs when Ellen White was still

Alive that he who was deity first took the form of an Angel and was Michael the AR Angel Chief among the Angels because Chief in service and yet he was the son of God and that same article was republished again years later so they can’t keep their theology straight this system is about as crooked as a $3 bill we also see them claim that in some sense the father’s preeminent to the son meaning he surpasses the son in some way so in 1912 three years before Ellen dies well after Desire of Ages is published and their christology is supposed to be cleaned up and finalized you know

They’re trinitarians now you still have it being taught that the father is superior to Christ like back in the early days the titles only begotten Son of God strictly refers to the father bringing Jesus forth as the preeminent one over him yeah make of that what you will but also that last sentence they cap it off by saying that the title of only begotten Son of God can rightly be applied to Michael the Archangel just the same as he was truly Jesus uh no it can’t because Jesus never became an Angel With An Angel nature and all this other heresy that they’re claiming is

Biblical Hebrews 1 explicitly refutes this without question God the father has never called an angel his son ever he was never an angel as the Son of God period to become an Angel With An Angel nature would mean he ceased being the Son of God because the father never called called an angel his

Son in the same issue this is from the Highlight section where they give highlights of what all is contained in the particular issue of the magazine regarding what we just read they write quote our Lord did not lose his divinity or identity when he became an angel among the Angels A man among men while he lived his own life by faith he possessed the power to Aid infinitely all who needed help he was potentially then all that he was afterward manifested to be he’s Jesus Christ the same yesterday today and forever close quote so he set his divinity aside they

Told us over and over but at the same time he didn’t lose it he was God on the plane of angels with the angels and lived the god life on the plane of angels

Except as we saw in previous issues along with Ellen White and Desire of Ages and the fundamental beliefs book of the present day as well as the SDA Church’s current website Jesus is omnipresent now through the holy spirit because encumbered with Humanity Jesus couldn’t be omnipresent despite Colossians 2 telling us he’s the fullness of the godhead bodily yeah f Divine attributes are not like light switches they aren’t just like you turn them on and off they’re a part of God’s actual Essence his being a part of what makes him who he is if Christ gave up omnipresence to

Incarnate as a man then he ceased to be God because omnipresence is part of what makes God who he is they can’t have it both ways like the article said he was God on the plane of angels so God Was An Angel With An Angel nature at one time but after 4,000 years discarded that angel nature and the name Michael to sink even lower as a man which brings forth Jesus of Nazareth who was given the name Emanuel where he also set his divine nature aside but he was still somehow God and man however in this act he eternally sacrificed certain Divine qualities

Which resulted in him being eternally humiliated never regaining that which he gave up to become a man totally bizarre folks not not just bizarre but heretical and I know adven are going to try and claim this is all a mystery we can’t know the inner workings of it all and this supposed to you know that’s supposed to to excuse all of this no no friend the problem is the Bible doesn’t teach this this is a different Jesus it has nothing to do with having perfect head knowledge around the mechanics of this stuff it has to do with just outright contradicting the

Bible and fitting the bill for a false Jesus that Paul warned the churches in Corinth about that Jesus himself warned about in Matthew 24:24 saying that there’ be many false christs in the last days the SDA church needs to come out and denounce this stuff as Blasphemous heresy that they’ve repented of teaching they need to acknowledge the error and apologize for teaching who knows how many people this Blasphemous stuff because all of these sources are in published works that were disseminated to people to read trust and believe I hope you all are locked in because

We’re still only about halfway through the pile yeah we’re going on three hours and believe it or not it gets worse I’m telling you it gets worse the reason we’re looking at all these ones that tend to repeats is because I want you to see it is over and over and over again they are bald-faced lying in this book they knew that they were lying you’re not going to convince me otherwise stick around because you’re in for a treat so now we go even deeper down the rabbit hole and this is where I start to become frustrated in the August 27 1912 issue of signs again in the question corner

Someone that was reading this nonsense read this and had a question from one of the previous issues about Jesus stepping down down down after becoming an angel and their god-given conscience kicked in and was like what in the heck am I reading and notice what they ask it’s a long question they ask quote I noticed that in your answer to question number 37 3783 you state that our Lord himself stepped down from his highest state of reigning with the father and took upon himself the form of a creature in order to save and the first step in that downward career of sacrifice was to

Become an angel Michael the Archangel please give me in your question Corner your scriptural Authority or text for making this St statement as it is a new thought to me that our Lord took two steps downward before he could become man’s Redeemer we have the scripture where he was made a little lower than the Angels Hebrews 2:9 but can find No statement where he was made an angel from a higher order of being also tell me whom was he to save in that first downward step and how yeah great question clearly this person’s using their brain well notice the answer

Given quote in the first place our Lord did not take two steps downward before he could become man’s Redeemer if man had been the only order of creation below God there would have been but the one step but there are other beings involved in Sin Sin had entered in among the angels and our God is no respector of persons we know that his mercy endureth forever and we know that he had the same tender care and solicitude towards the angels that sinned as he had toward man who sinned but the Bible is not a revelation to the angels but to us if it had been

God would have given us all the particulars with all the appeal which he must have made to them and we and he uh and we would have we would have told us the effort that he put forth to save them but he’s given us enough of the revelation of his character that we may know that he had angels in mind in the sacrifice of the Redeemer as truly as he did man read Ephesians 48 wherefore lie saith when he ascended on high he led captivity captive and gave gifts unto men now this he as uh now this he ascended what is it but that he also descended into the lower parts of the

Earth he that descended is the same also that ascended far above all the heavens that he might fill all things close quote yeah y’all don’t have a lick of support for this that’s what we read there a bunch of bloviating nonsense from an individual who goes what in the world is this article saying furthermore the Revelation from God that we do have in scripture tells us in Jude that the apostate Angels didn’t have an opportunity for Redemption the same thing in second Peter Hebrews tells us that Jesus didn’t come to save Angels but The Offspring of

Abraham human beings he was not ashamed to be called our brother because the Old Testament foretold that he would incarnate as a man no we may not know that God had the Ang angs in mind in the sacrifice of Christ just as he did man Ephesians 48 has nothing to do with Jesus trying to save angels in the Plan of Redemption more butchering of the Bible but they continue there is not one single vacancy which sin has made or can make in the universe of God but what will be filled with the fullness of the Lord Jesus Christ consequently there was salvation

Held out to the angels through Christ just as truly as there was to man read the article on Christ as Michael the Archangel in number three of this series by g w reer we have the facts set before us again and again that Christ the lord was the angel of God’s presence Michael the Archangel the angel of Jehovah the one who served through all the past in behalf of God’s children as example to Angels both good and evil and that this service continued until our Lord became human and took upon himself the nature of the other class that of man these suggestions with the article

Referred to we are sure will help our Inquirer to understand that the great Plan of Salvation was full enough to include every sinner in the universe whether that sinner be angel or man we do not need the statement that he was made an angel when we read that he was the creator of the heavens and the Earth and then read that he was an angel certainly somewhere the transformation took place but when he became flesh he continued not in the nature of angels He took upon himself the nature of man descended as low as death can carry one and by right of character

Ascended far above all things that he might fill all vacancies see all the same proof text we’ve heard from them previously close quote yeah give me a break we read that horrific article by George reer and that’s the exact one that I told you to go read this entire thing of signs of the times July 23rd 1912 it’s hyperlink on our website in the is Jesus the mik uh Michael the Archangel article go read it I’m not hiding anything I encourage you to do the same thing go read it nothing in that article from George reer provided biblical proof that Jesus first became

An Angel With An Angel nature to try and save Angels but they all rejected him so then after 4,000 years of Waring with the angels as an angel himself he passed that test sheathed himself of his Angel nature and Sh and sunk down even lower to the level of humans where he took on the nature of a human this being the second step in his humiliation we didn’t get any Bible there we got well you know just like they do today I know it doesn’t say that but you know but they only believe a plain thus sayeth the Lord Ted Wilson tells us no Jesus didn’t atone for Angels he

Didn’t try and redeem Angels Revelation tells us the fires of Hell or sorry Matthew tells us the fires of hell were prepared for the Angels they don’t provide a single shred of actual biblical support here because they can’t this was a great non-answer they just gave the same tired proof text they’ve used in every single one of these articles to support this and not a single one of them holds up you guys have squeezed that lemon dry and no juice came out no juice came out of that lemon not a single one of those proof Texs supports anything that they’ve been

Saying here notice they don’t actually need a statement that Jesus was made an angel when they read that Jesus is the creator of heavens and the Earth but then also that he’s an angel yeah except you don’t read that he’s an angel you guys do a bunch of flip-flopping gymnastics inference on this playing Bible pingpong you read precisely the opposite in the Bible that Jesus is an angel the exact opposite that God the father’s never called called an angel his son but this shows you folks they weren’t just claiming that the term angel only refers to a role or a

Title no they’re outright defending here the claim that Jesus became an Angel With An Angel nature I’m gonna keep saying this hopefully for some of you guys some of you Adventists it clicks at some point you hear us and think holy smokes I gotta get the hell out of here oh that’s old oh that’s back then stick

Around what verses are they referring to of Jesus being an angel oh the handful of Michael the Archangel texts yet none of those say what you guys claim but the point being this publication is recognizing in this answer well there’s two things that are actually seen here one is that they’re recognizing that Archangel isn’t just a title but it also refers to the nature of angels an Angelic creature but furthermore the person asking the question came to the same conclusion I did when reading these things which is why they’re asking about it and they

Didn’t say here no no no you’re misunderstanding that

Article then we jump ahead almost exactly one year to august 19 1913 once again signs of the times an article titled Bible study object lessons of God’s mercy an article that’s posing questions and giving answers a number of questions are asked regarding Jesus giving himself where they give answers but then they have a note for this section and within that we see them mention Michael and notice what they say quote it was love on the part of the Great Jehovah which moved him to give his son ah so the son isn’t Jehovah it was love on the part of the son which

Moved him to give himself offering his own life for a race of Sinners and so demonstrate the love of God to men and the Holiness the beneficience the perfect uh the Perfection of God’s government AKA his law the purpose of God as well as the sacrifice of Christ was all inclusive it embraced not only man and this Earth but all creation from the time of the Son of God gave himself in that far away beginning there began his self abnegation his Vindication of the Divine government his desire to save all therefore he became an angel among Angels Michael the Archangel Chief only

Because of more devoted service demonstrating that Angels could live for God God his next step brought him to the Human family where he went to the very lowest depths even death that death was the climax of the sacrifice of the ages but in all his experience he faltered not failed not and so became the author of Eternal salvation unto all them that obey him Hebrews 57-10 close quote so we see the same old claims being made except notice they say the purpose of God including the sacrifice of Jesus Christ was all inclusive the giving of Jesus was a

Demonstration of not just God’s character of love but it also showed the Perfection of God’s government AKA his law which is precis what their model of redemption proposes is Central God is on trial because Satan made accusations after becoming jealous of Jesus being exalted but then they write that from the time of the Son of God giving himself in that far away beginning he began his what self-abnegation and what does the word abnegation mean to renounce or reject something so for the Adventist Jesus to vindicate God’s character and his law against

Satan it required that Jesus reject something and they refer to him here as distinct from Jehovah this is another way of them saying he set aside his divinity he began doing this first by becoming an angel among the angels and he did this as their example he did this to to show them that Satan is a liar angels can keep the law of God his government’s good Etc just like they teach that Jesus was the great example for us as humans he supposedly did that same thing for fallen angels He then continued his self-abnegation by sinking even lower down to our level where he entered into

A permanent humiliation to never retain some of the things that he rejected in his self-abnegation and you guessed it alen white is published in the same issue with an article titled the touch of Faith why is this continually being published alongside her for years with no correction other than to say she saw no issues with these claims then we go ahead another year November 24 1914 same publication in the question Corner section once again someone asked a question about the personhood of the Holy Spirit within that article they transition into talking about

Jesus where they definitively assert we believe he was both God and man while on Earth he did not lose identity and they cite Philippians 2 exactly like we saw on their website to this day but once again they demonstrate that they can’t possibly mean this the way Christians do or have from the very beginning of the New Testament Church because they once again affirm that he became an angel and was simultaneously God as an angel somehow quote he who existed in the form of God yielded up all the glory and all the honors there were in heaven he took upon him the form of a servant

He was made in the likeness of man he humbled himself he became obedient to death he was raised from the dead he who was deity first took the form of an Angel and was Michael the Archangel Chief among all the Angels because Chief and service and yet he was the son of God of whom the father said behold I send an angel before thee to keep thee by the way and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared take ye heed before him and hearken unto his voice for my name name is in him Exodus 23 20 and 21 close quote no he wasn’t Hebrews 1 says God the father never said to an

Angel you are my son this is the constant conundrum they find themselves in and yet again we see them conflating the angel of the Lord in the Old Testament with Michael the Archangel so they’re wrong again and yep you guessed it Ellen White was published in the same issue with an article titled educating for successful service but it’s important that we look at one Ser uh uh One Source out of chronology here because it will help you better understand the terms in this quote okay notice it says he who was deity he who was deity first part of that highlighted part on screen he who

Was deity like Martin talks about in Kingdom of the Cults the key to understanding all of this is scaling the language barrier with these cult groups how are terms being used in the August 1st 1943 issue of the Watchman magazine get this folks in an article titled who is Christ we read in part quote God is the family name of the deity this family is composed of three members Father Son and Holy Ghost they are God the Father God the son Jesus Christ and God the Holy Ghost while we have here three distinct and separate members of the Divine family

Yet they are all one in purpose and all bear the name God therefore Isaiah prophesied that when Jesus should be born his name should be called Emmanuel and this when interpreted is God With Us he was God the son in the likeness of human form close quote how many times have I said exactly this and I can’t tell you how many Adventists I’ve had tell me you don’t know what you’re talking about you’re making stuff up you’re a liar this shows that when they use the term God they aren’t using it the same way that the Christian church is they’re using it like a familial

Title like a last name God is the family name and this family is composed of three distinct and separate members who are united in a purpose so therefore they all bear that family name of God so remembering questions on Doctrine when they say we believe that the term Michael is but one of the many titles applied to the Son of God the second person of the godhead understand the phrase godhead in light of what is laid forth here how they also said their view of Michael in no way conflicts with believing in Jesus’s full deity again understand that in light of

The definition set forth here as well as that last quote they said he who was deity first took the form of an Angel and was Michael the Archangel all that’s saying is that Jesus was a part of this God family he shared this last name if you will and it was that member of the family that decided to become an angel this is not the Trinity folks this is three different gods obviously they’re going to hem and ha at that but anyone that understands the doctrine of the Trinity knows this is not at all what was described there this is tritheism three distinct and separate

Members of a family and this is still how they describe their gods to this day they use this analogy of a team on their website adventist.org Trinity that each person in their godhead concept is like three team members who become get who come together in a mission and their Union in that mission is what makes them United is one this is not a good analogy whatsoever when discussing monotheism while it may work to describe the economic actions of the godhead they bring this analogy over to describe God’s actual being or ontology this is like saying three band

Members come together and play a song and three band members being totally in harmony doing their part creates the song which is a unified end goal you don’t have the the song without all of the members in harmony playing together but there’s still three different beings in the band the song doesn’t result in only one being well they are taking their team analogy here and applying that over to how they believe that there that there’s one God based on that quote we saw in the Watchman magazine a a family of three distinct and separate members who share in a

Common purpose or goal as a family and that’s supposed to make them one God this is why analogies like this need to be avoided this is not the Trinity the term God refers to the singular being that is the almighty father son and spirit refer to to the individual persons that that One Singular being is expressed through for the Adventists that might be trying to navigate how this differs from Orthodox Christianity what we just read on your Church’s website you might be confused at what Christians are saying and how it differs by personhood or persons the Christian church is in total

Agreement that this is referring to the conscious ability to will speak self-reflect exhibit emotions Etc it refers to the who who is god father son and spirit it’s not referring to having a literal physical tangible body or form like Ellen White claimed to confirm by directly talking face to face with Jesus we see that father son and spirit all possess the ability to speak be spoken to Etc yet at the same time like I will show momentarily in the in a chart scripture is overwhelmingly clear that there’s only one almighty God and scripture calls all three of these

Persons the one almighty God which is why we use the term being to refer to the Oneness of God persons refers to the plurality being refers to the singularity by being we’re talking about the mode or state of existence this can has being it doesn’t have personhood I have being and

Personhood now I want to look at how Augustine describes This and like I did earlier I have to preface because we’re going to get complaints well that’s not the Bible That’s B well yeah we know we know I’m simply showing a qualified source for the Christian position if Adventists want to dismiss Augustine as being wrong then thank you for proving my point you don’t affirm the same thing Christians do this is from his Masterpiece de trinitat on the Trinity which deals a lot with Aryan heresy of his day and age with in that he explains why the person and being distinction is

So important pay very close attention this book is a masterpiece a gold mind this is from chapter 2 book four quote the chief point then that we must maintain is that whatever that Supreme and divine Majesty is called with reference to itself is is Saint substance wise whatever it is called with reference to another is said not of substance but relationship wise I’m going to read that again the chief point then that we must maintain is that whatever that Supreme and divine Majesty is called with reference to itself is Saint substance wise whatever it is called with

Reference to another is said not of substance but relationship wise I actually have a typo in there folks the word Saint should not actually be in there it’s should say with reference to itself is substance wise sorry about that the chief point then that we must maintain is that whatever that Supreme and divine Majesty is called with reference to itself is substance wise whatever it is called with reference to another is said not of substance but relationship and that such is the force of the expression of the same substance in Father and Son and Holy Spirit that

Whatever is said with reference to self about each of them is to be taken as adding up in all three to a singular and not to a plural thus the father is God and the son is God and the Holy Spirit is God and no one denies that this is said substance wise and yet we say that this supreme Triad is not three Gods but one God so a quick note before continuing he’s describing here the difference between the actual nature Essence and being of God versus the economics or relational aspect of God relationally God is three the father’s not the son the son is not the

Father the holy spirit’s not the son Etc they relate with one another they talk commune Etc but at the same time God is one being one substance the three persons are one God they are the one the one being but he continues likewise the father is great the son is great the Holy Spirit too is great yet there are not three great ones but one great one it’s not after all about the father alone that scripture says you alone are the great gods Psalm 8610 as they talking about the Aryans perversely consider but about Father Son and Holy Spirit again the father is good the son

Is good the Holy Spirit too is good yet there are not three good ones but one good one of whom it is said no one is good but the one God Mark 10:18 Luke 18:19 when the Lord Jesus was accosted just as a man by the young man who said good master he did not want to be taken for just a man and so he significantly said not no one is good but the father alone but no one is good but the one God Mark 10:18 Luke 18:19 the name father signifies only the father in himself but the name God includes him and the Son and the Holy Spirit because the one God is a

Trinity close quote so in a moment we will look at more scripture for this but follow with what he explains it’s biblical friend you know I was just talking with an Adventist yesterday about the athonian Creed and he’s like well we just go with the Bible friend the athanasian Creed is the Aryans were appealing to the Bible the ultimate question becomes what is the Bible saying this is why you can’t just cut yourself off from the past you need to consult with people that came before you you’re not smarter than everyone else this is from one of Augustine

Sermons where he’s teaching on the Trinity and what’s in the background of his day is the Aryan heresy well the Aryan friends were appealing to the Bible to try and support their views they weren’t just up and saying things and then one side was like well we have the Bible and you don’t have the Bible they were abusing the the language of the Bible which is why Augustine begins this chapter by talking about the Greek phrases usia and hypostasis or hypostasis persons and substance these are Bible words the Bible uses these words and he notes how the reason these

Categories are vitally important is because it is how we can understand both the singularity and plurality of God without falling into either the ditch of aryanism or Unitarianism or modalism which is a unarian heresy or the other ditch of polytheism like tritheism which is what inevitably happens with all these groups that confuse these two categories or deny them and try and go oh it’s Greek and Pagan philosophy like the Jehovah’s Witnesses the socinians the modalist the unitarians and yes the seventh Adventists you’ll find their materials talking about three beings but also

Three persons confusing the two Ellen White herself did this constantly and because they don’t have a training wheel level understanding of trinitarian theology it’s why they make primitive level errors like this regarding Jesus becoming an angel the term God being a family name Jesus setting his divine nature aside Jesus being distinct from Jehovah Jesus not truly being omnipresent because cumbered with Humanity he couldn’t be and on and on and on we sail down the heresy River now I will save some of of some comments about Augustine’s scriptural

Support because like I said I’m going to have a chart on this shortly with a lot more examples but back in chronological order in the May 3rd 1915 issue of signs we see a perfect example of how Jesus is a lesser Divine being in this system many sdas are going to Hoot and Holler and try and OB uscate but Christians who understand basic Christian christology yeah you’re going to see the issue just fine in the questions and ansers section of the paper we see a section titled Michael the Archangel again quote in his work Christ never took up a railing accusation against any being

Whether man or devil he could pray for his enemies and when in conflict with Satan took the wise course of handing him over to Jehovah to be dealt with an ambassador never undertakes to fight his own battles the dispute is always referred to the power he represents for settlement close quote so notice they recognize here that Michael didn’t do the rebuking of Satan according to Jude n yet elsewhere you’ve seen how they try and say Jude n and Zechariah 3 Prov that Michael is the Angel of the Lord because they both said the Lord rebuke thee and they both did

The rebuking and this was during Christ’s work as an angel trying to save the Angels battling with Satan for 4,000 years as we saw earlier but also notice that they rightly recognize that Michael is distinguished from Jehovah by Jude and they clearly see no problem with this as it pertains to Jesus Jesus as an angel was only an ambassador for Jehovah say but he wasn’t Jehovah himself yeah this is heresy and it shows that when they say Jesus retained his identity as deity while both an angel and a man but also set it aside they’re tying thems in

Knots remember what we just saw regarding the phrase deity Jesus can somehow be divine but he’s also distinct from Jehovah even though scripture teaches Jesus is is Jehovah and the term God is just a an a family name for these three different beings these separate distinct beings let’s break down Jehovah because they sound like Jehovah’s Witnesses here let’s break down this phrase Jehovah Jehovah is the name of God in the Old Testament okay the sacred personal name of God in the Old Testament the Seventh Adventist Church insists that they are trinitarians like Christians no no

Brother we believe the same thing you do just like they insisted in questions on Doctrine well in trinitarianism when you ask who is Jehovah the answer Father Son and Holy Spirit that’s the one God there there’s no dividing them in essence substance nature being Etc Jehovah is the one being father son and spirit that one being is expressed in three persons now what is the biblical basis for this for Christians to say this this is only a small sampling folks I could give you hundreds I couldn’t even fit them all on the chart this is a chart that is on our

Website it shows only a handful of examples when we look at all of scripture and seek to harmonize it we find that father son and spirit are all called God they’re all said to be all- knowing all three are said to be Creator Eternal everywhere they see the hearts of men resurrect Jesus and so on yet at the same time scripture tells us for example in Isaiah 42 that Jehovah alone created all things Isaiah 42 says Jehovah alone created all things okay well I can show you where scripture also says that Jesus created all things the spirit created all things

And the father created all things yet also at the same time we know that the father didn’t incarnate and die on the cross neither did the spirit at Jesus’s baptism for example the spirit descended upon the son and anointed him not the father not the son descending upon himself the son is in the water the spirit descends on the Son and the Father pronounces the blessing over the son who’s in the water and speaks from Heaven Jesus said he’s going to ascend to the father not to himself he’s going to ascend to the father and him and the father are going to send the spirit not

Send themselves trinitarianism is the only way to be be able to explain this scripture says there’s only one Jehovah yet that one Jehovah is said to be father son and spirit at the same time there is a way in which they are not the same and that’s at the economic or relational level this is why Christians are trinitarians and if you’re not a trinitarian I’m sorry I know some of you listen to this channel you’re not a Christian just as bad as adventism because the Triune God is the only true God some of you guys blow me up and send me messages keep coming

You’re not going to convince me on this you have a false god friend I’m sorry but what the SDA church has tacitly admitted in this article is damnable heresy it shows they’re not trinitarians despite them trying to embrace that title and couch their position behind that word Jude n proves Michael isn’t Jesus because Jude distinguishes Michael from Jehovah the Lord yet the same Jude says in Jude 5 that Jesus is the one Lord Jehovah that led Israel out of Egypt and gave them the law that’s Jehovah that did that which means Jude didn’t believe that Michael

Was Jesus because he believed that Jesus was the Lord and distinguished Michael from the Lord distinguishing between father son and spirit by calling one Jehovah and saying the other isn’t is not a valid way to distinguish between them they’re all Jehovah a proper distinction would be father and son not Jehovah like like Augustine pointed out when Jesus says God is good he didn’t say the father is good that would have been him referring to distinctly the father but no he refers to Jehovah father son and spirit and Jehovah does not change and cannot change

Oh boy then skipping a few years ahead in 1918 this time though it’s the Sabbath School quarterly getting taught to the entire church globally alen white died in 1915 so she’s out of the picture now but again now it makes its way into the universal teaching document for the entire SDA Church globally whether or not this is the first instance I can’t confirm as I’ve not seen every possible Sabbath School quarterly out there but in 1918 they published a series of lessons on the great controversy in lesson n they talk about Jesus as Michael we once again read

Quote the combatants show that this Warfare which began in Heaven above was now containing in Heavenly or continuing in Heavenly places that is the spiritual realm Michael means who is like God Jude N9 all the same proof text show this Archangel to be identical with the Son of God Among the Angels even as he was Jesus the son of God among men and this conflict was waged from the time of sin’s entrance till the word became flesh close quote so they repurposed one of the articles that we read from signs of the times and now it becomes Incorporated in

Their worldwide teaching tool all the same proof text as usual and they reiterate that Michael is identical with Jesus among the angels in the conflict with Satan which began in heaven and this conflict waged on from the time of sin’s entrance into the universe until Jesus sunk lower and became a man worldwide Church teaching recognizing all of what was published in the signs articles so they can’t dismiss this as an individual opinion by individual people in those articles it’s being taught in the Sabbath School quarterly that Jesus was an angel and that his

Name was Michael not just that he had the role of an Angel as a messenger but was an angel among the Angels just like mountains of other quotes that we’ve looked at then in 1919 they republished The Identical articles from the August 13 1912 issues of signs as well as the November 24th 1914 issue that we looked at and in 1923 they republished another article about Daniel seeing a ram a goat and a little horn and simply mentioned Jesus being Michael in passing then on August 14 1928 they published an article in this issue of signs of the times titled chaining

Satan which is addressing what they claim will happen to Satan during the millennial Reign that they believe is future to us quote

In Jude 6 the fallen angels are represented as being reserved in Everlasting chains under Darkness under the Judgment of the great day they are bound over to the judgment and cannot Escape it the first link in the chain of events that ends Satan’s deceiving career for a thousand years is the coming of the mighty angel from heaven in fact the events that bind Satan happen in connection with this Angel’s Advent who is this Angel who has the power to lay hold of the great Rebel and bind and imprison him it’s none other than Michael the Archangel who defeated

Lucifer in the first battle around the Throne of God Revelation 12 7-9 and who contended with him over the body of Moses because Satan disputed his right to raise the dead Jude nine close quote so notice now we’re starting to see some new aspects being addressed that we didn’t see in the other articles they state that the first link in a chain of events that will result in ending Satan’s career as a deceiver was the coming of a mighty angel from heaven and The Binding of Satan happened in connection with this arrival of this Angel and who do they say the angel is

None other than Jesus as Michael who defeated the devil in their first battle around the throne citing Revelation 12 7-9 but hold up back in the June 18 1912 issue of signs someone asked the question can Revelation 12 7-9 be applied to Satan’s first fall and what was their response we think not the first fall is set before us in verses three and four yet here they are applying Revelation 12 7-9 to the first fall of Satan the first fall of Satan supposedly happened when the first battle happened which is what they mention here totally contradicted what they

Previously advised schizophrenic theology but amazingly they don’t site the verse but it appears as though they’re saying Revelation 20 verse1 is referring to Jesus as Michael the Archangel that verse saying then I saw an angel uh coming down from heaven holding in his hand the key to the bot was pit and a great chain what is this simply more proof that in 1928 folks they’re still teaching that Jesus was an angel having an Angelic nature that he tried to save angels as an angel and received the name Michael when he became an angel and in this instance apparently Jesus is the

Angel that comes down with a chain to bind Satan I mean which would make sense considering the literal title of the article is chaining Satan but then they continue in the same article the struggle for the supremacy of this world and man continued when Michael came to this earth clothed in human flesh and Satan the Fallen Angel attacked him with all his cunning and fury again the Archangel was Victorious and he triumphed death on the cross sounded the Doom of Satan’s revolt the next great act in the drama is the return of Michael the Archangel to chain

Imprison and finally destroy the arch Rebel and forever end his notorious career he alone has the right and the power to do this for he became flesh and blood that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death that is the devil Hebrews 2:14 Christ is to finish the task he began in heaven that of putting down the revolt and reconciling the universe to God God close quote so again they contradict the previous signs of the times articles which told us repeatedly that Jesus ceased being Michael upon incarnating in human flesh yet here they’re now saying he was

Still Michael when he be when he came to Earth clothed in human flesh and his battle with Satan as a man was simply an extension of his 4,000-year battle with him as an angel except the July 23rd 1912 issue of signs of the times the one I said to go and read the whole one George reeeer said that the name Michael was tied to the nature that he assumed in becoming an angel and that as an angel his name was Michael but as a man it was Emanuel the name being tied to the nature So based on that article and this one it would mean that Jesus was allegedly God an angel and a man at the

Same time because because he was Michael In the Flesh they say but they’ve repeatedly insisted he didn’t lose his identity as a as deity talk about a mess of Confusion And the fact that they’ll proof text Hebrews and Jude like we saw yeah Jude refutes this idea that he tried to seek and to save Angels the fact that they will proof text Hebrews to the detriment of the surrounding passages which utterly obliterate this entire narrative that they want us to believe is biblical I I mean my truly astonishing it goes to show how how not much has changed folks in the present

Day fast forward to the September 17 1929 issue folks buck up it gets even worse and an article titled when God spoke from Sinai they once again talk about Michael quote well they’re never talking about Michael though in their Publications hardly ever right no no we have it kind of worked out in our theology but in our printed Publications and our teaching yeah we’re not really talking about it that much quote but the perplexity may arise as to how any Angel could be called the Lord and God uh yeah in the book of Jude we read an account of a contention between the devil and

One called Michael the Archangel as to which of them should claim the body of Moses there is one Angel then who is called the Archangel which means head over all the Angels who’s known to the angels of heaven as their Commander or Michael but to God’s people on Earth he’s known as the Lord Michael is the Lord for he alone has the power to forgive sins and to raise the dead close quote qu except Jude distinguishes Michael from the Lord the previous publication and Ellen White already recognized this now they’re saying no Michael is the Lord I mean does it get any more

Obvious folks how many times will they blunder this if you’re an Adventist and you’re hearing in this Jude distinguishes Michael from the Lord different Jude nine says Michael didn’t rebuke Satan but left it to the Lord to do the rebuking Jesus is the Lord Lord means Almighty Jehovah that’s not a proper way to distinguish between Father and Son to say well Jesus left the rebuking to Jehovah no Jesus is Jehovah I don’t think they get this I’ve heard some of them make their they still make these same claims to this day it’s like folks you don’t understand what you’re

Talking about they already recognized multiple times as did Ellen White that Michael isn’t the Lord Lord is Jehovah there Michael left the rebuking of Satan to Jehovah every single turn they contradict themselves and the biblical text because we already saw two where Ellen White who holds more Authority than this author claim that there’s multiple archangels and she was allegedly divinely inspired and she was dead by this point so it’s set in stone but they contradict themselves again because at the end of the article they give a summary where they write in

Part quote summing up all the evidence of the question on who spoke and wrote the Ten Commandments upon Mount Si were led to the infallible conclusion

That Christ the son of God existed before the world began that he was the creator of all the worlds that before he came to this earth to die as a man he was the honored and beloved commander of all the angels of heaven and that his name as a captain of the Heavenly Host was Michael the Archangel which mean which means the head over the Angels only in this sense however is Christ referred to as an angel close quote wow wow come on man so they’re led to the infallible conclusion that Jesus is Michael who before coming to this Earth was beloved by the angels and known to them as

Michael who was head over the angels and only in this sense can he be referred to as an angel except they’ve repeatedly been telling us in this same publication for the last 40 years that the name Michael was tied to Jesus taking on an angel nature to do Angelic Ministry to try and seek and save the angels in the first step of his humiliation then after 4,000 years of Waring with Satan as an angel he sunk even lower sheathing himself of his Angel nature to assume the nature of a man yet now they’re saying he’s only an angel in the sense that he was a

Messenger and this is an infallible conclusion

A total mess of confusion this is supposed to be the organization that’s been given the theological God Particle the great controversy theme which is allegedly the antidote to theological Division and confusion it’s supposed to unite Adventists and their theology more than anyone else out there and help identify them as God’s Remnant people at the end of time who are united unlike anyone else yeah a pipe dream a a fantasy folks I know this is a lot but hang in there because it’s going to get worse I’m telling you yes the closer we approach to the

Publishing date of questions on Doctrine it gets worse now we come to Lifeboat magazine the January 1st 1932 issue where they published an article titled the chief Shepherd in there they talk about Michael again under the subheading of Christ the chief Shepherd of angels yeah pay very close attention there’s a lot that they say here tighten your jaws quote among angels He was known as Michael the Archangel the chief prince the prince of princes Michael was CH was Christ’s prehuman name he was of so many angels cherubim and seraphim that inspiration speaks to

Them as an innumerable company as an example do you remember the occasion long before Christmas when Joshua saw a man over against the wall of Jericho do you remember how Joshua rushed forward with a drawn sword and asked are you for us or against us do you remember the pl the reply from the Archangel Michael as captain of the Lord’s host I am now come take off thy shoes from thy from off thy feet for the ground whereon thou standest is Holy he indeed was the only one who could command the hundreds of millions that made up the armies of heaven so

Pause so Michael was his prehuman name yet they claim that Michael standing up in Daniel 121 is referring to Jesus standing up just before the second coming but we’ve already seen a mountain of sources that say he set his divinity aside and assumed the name Michael when he took on an angel nature to do Angelic Ministry to the angels and then sheathed himself of his Angelic nature to become a man but they continue the time has come when he the chief must leave heaven and his mighty Celestial host to bid them ad do though a shepherd of angels for

Eons and Junior partner and part owner with his father in his vast and opulent Estates he must lay aside his commission as Grand Marshal of Heaven which he held through all the celestial ages break with his associates and go he was willing to give up all prophecy had marked the hour of his departure from Heaven all the time of his going and emptying of himself Drew near Angels hovered about him they held him fast in their bonds of love and wept they would not let him go so Jesus was a junior partner and part owner with God the father of the Heavenly estate what bro what are you

Talking about man but he laid that aside to become an angel and be the head of the angels as Michael notice there’s no mention of the Holy Spirit here but yeah they’re totally trinitarians so he’s an angel with the angels for all these years and they’re clinging to them and they’re sad and his part owner a part associate it just yeah yeah totally trinitarians part owner Junior partner to God the father got it and when the time came for Jesus to cease being an angel they wept apparently and hovered around him holding fast to him because they didn’t want to let him cease being

An angel and becoming a man and sinking down to our level no attempt to provide a proof text of course but they continue through the Eternal ages the purpose of the Son of God had been to give up his glory life his God nature all as a ransom for one lost sheep do you think that God could give up his only son his darling son without a struggle never never was there a parting like this for never never was there a Shepherd like him in the midst of their sorrow he was overheard to say again in the tenderest tones of love I must go let us go in your stead cried out an

Unders sheeper wheither I go ye cannot answered the chief Shepherd the prince of his footsteps LED down down down from the precipitous Heights of the glory of where his struggling wounded lost Shea the scene changes close quote there you have it folks this is in 1932 through the Eternal ages it was always the purpose of the Son of God to what give up his glory life his God nature to become a man but in the other sources they insist he was God Among the angels and God among men he was God on their plane even though he set his divine nature aside

They told us numerous times before and now they’re saying he gave up his divine nature not just that he set it aside but that it was always the purpose of the Son of God to do this and this is why you’ll have sdas in the modern day that do indeed believe that Jesus forever gave up his divinity to save humans this Divinity that was the Divinity that was bestowed upon him by the father in this pre-earth exaltation and they see this as this Grand Act of love and this sort of whimsical the drama disgusting this is this like Jesus is my boyfriend type just so disgusting

This is why sources like this information like this floating around through the decades in this movement where they’re outright saying this this is why you have sdas in the present day movement that think this way because yes this is what they were teaching if you can remain in this movement after seeing all this may God have mercy on your

Soul yeah the true God give I hope he gives you eyes to see and ears to hear this is Blasphemous heresy it isn’t loving it isn’t true it contradicts the Scriptures it demotes Jesus Christ it’s insulting to the Lord Jesus Christ and this organization ought to be ashamed of itself for even publishing this heresy they need to come out and denounce all of this as heretical but it won’t happen because it’s at the core it’s at the core of the great controversy worldview it’s just buried in all these sources that they probably hoped that no one would find and bring up in the

Modern day well here we are and I’m not GNA let this die okay if you’re one of these guys up at Tacoma Park I know you guys watch because you contact me I’m not letting this die and neither is anyone else in this audience now now you’re all seeing why this took so long to get to get to get put together can hardly even talk wrapping my head around all this has taken months and let’s not even get into this silly dramatization of dialogue between the AVST Jesus and the father struggling to let the son sacrifice his divinity forever ever and to Incarnate as a man

To save humans and the angels and just like a bad Broadway skit it’s like obviously the Bible says nothing about this silliness they’re getting this from Ellen White they’re getting this from Ellen White it’s clearly built upon this quote from Ellen White who said her angel told her that the father struggled in yielding up his dearly beloved Son in is becoming a man to apparently give up his God nature according to that article despite the fact that again they told us numerous times and signs of at the times that Jesus was God with the angels and

God with man hence why he’s known to humans as Emanuel God With Us such a mess then in the June 1st 1932 issue of the Oriental Watchmen they published an article titled the war of a million worlds where they write quote read the history of that war in heaven that mightiest of all conflicts as narrated by a scribe of Jehovah greater than Cage’s History of the United States in 50 words it reads or or in in 50 words it reads only 68 are used to give us an account of that first great battle talking about Revelation and there was war in heaven Michael and his angels

Fought against the dragon and the dragon fought with his angels and prevailed not neither was their place found anymore in heaven and the Great Dragon was cast out that old serpent called the devil and Satan which deceiveth the whole world world he was cast out into the Earth and his angels were cast out with him Revelation 12 7-9 close quote but pause again this contradicts signs of the times once again the question Corner said Revelation 12 7-9 doesn’t refer to this first fall in battle with Satan in heaven yet we have another publication that’s using that text to support such

They continue later in the article by saying 6,000 years have passed since that tragedy in the garden Eastward 6,000 years of sickness misery sin and death Untold Millions have lived their miserable life uh lifespan of of life and passed into the grave a countless sea of humanity has tossed and billowed th Through the Ages discouraged numbed deadened no certainty of life beyond the grave no salvation within them eles yet a higher than Lucifer has won for us the victory the Conqueror Michael came to this planet alone and left behind him his host he took upon himself the Garb

Of humanity and after 30 years of daily conflict against the deadly web of sin which inshes each of us he won a second Victory Upon A rugged wooden cross erected by Augustus Caesar’s created legionaries close quote so again apparently he was still Michael when he was on Earth yet they told us they had an infall Michael took upon himself human nature the Garb of humanity yet signs of the times July 23rd 1912 told us that the name Michael was tied to the nature that he assumed in becoming an angel and then Emmanuel was tied to the name of him taking on a human nature what this

Shows is that this movement has never been precise they don’t see all of this as a problem who cares if you’re loose and flippant with your christology and the claims that you make about God himself they’re the Commandment keeping church but they have no issue being loose around making sure you’re not putting forth an idol violating the first commandment now I’m going to skip over signs of the times June 16 1942 because they just repeat stuff we’ve already saw that Michael’s the only Archangel and in 18443 is where we saw them claim God is a familial

Title so just note that they talked about this stuff again before this next article then in the July 24 1945 issue of signs of the times they published an article titled our friends the Angels get this an article dedicated to describing what angels are and particularly focuses on refuting the claim that angels are The Departed spirits of humans obviously a wacky concept but notice quote it is precisely because angels are definite uh Heavenly personalities that they are distinct from man and cannot possibly be the spirits of our dead loved ones notice how clearly Paul makes

This difference in 1 Corinthians 6:3 know ye not that we shall judge Angels how much more things that pertain to this life angels are Heavenly while men are of this life note the clear differences stated in Hebrews 2:16 verily he took not on him the nature of angels but he took on him the Seed of Abraham it was because of this separation in nature that the Incarnation had to be in humanity as shown in the context since then the children are shares in Flesh and Blood he also himself in like manner partook of the same verse 14 close quote so now they entirely contradict

Every they’ve been saying repeatedly up to this point and they confirm what I said in Hebrews 1 and 2 yet in all these previous Publications they told us they had an infallible understanding in one in one of them where they’re trying to support against all of what we just read claiming that Jesus first took on the nature of an Angel to try and save Angels but they all rejected him so then sunk lower in the second phase of humiliation where he took on a human nature schizophrenic theology folks they don’t even know what they believe it’s an Ever moving

Goalpost and the same article reiterates it again quote they’re not developed from one original stock talking about angels as man is no such common nature binds the angels together as in the case with the race of men in his Incarnation Christ could do that with Humanity by taking the common nature of all men but to the angels he could not give help in this respect see Hebrews 2:16 close quote what bro what are you talking about

Man the exact thing that I said which refutes and contradicts everything they’ve been teaching their members through this paper the Sabbath School quarterly The Watchman magazine the Oriental Watchmen and so on they were just telling us all those years that Jesus Took upon himself in Angel nature to seek and save the Angels now they’re promoting this actually can’t be possible because Hebrews refutes it because Angels don’t share in a common nature so Jesus couldn’t take on one of their Natures like he could with humans and what did they tell us in the

June 6th 1911 issue of signs that we can know that Jesus became an angel to try and save the Angels because that’s how God pleads now and he never changes and since he’s eternally the same that proves Jesus became an angel to plead with them and repent and be saved but 34 years later well never mind Hebrews actually refutes that Jesus could become an angel because Angels don’t share in a unified nature like humans flee from this folks flee from this organization they don’t know what they’re talking about okay there’s so many other things I could point out that contradicts this

That they were saying earlier it’s just all over the place now we’re getting closer to Walter Martin’s publishing of the kingdom of the Cults we’re now up to the 1950s when he was doing his re research and meeting with the leaders of the SDA Church doing the research for his book which was published in 1965 okay 15 years from this point in the January 177 1915 issue or 1950 issue of signs of the times they published an article titled war in heaven here we go again remember five years before this they’re saying Jesus couldn’t help the Angels because they don’t have a common

Nature but humans do so Jesus was able to take on a human nature and help humans according to Hebrews but not Angels quote the symbol of the great red dragon that of the woman was seen by the Apostle John in heaven this is true first of all because the war between the two began in heaven we found that primarily the dragon is the devil and Satan who as Lucifer was once in heaven an honored official in the kingdom of God the first phase of the long struggle between Michael and the once Mighty Lucifer took place in heaven around the Throne of the Eternal the record is and there was war

In heaven Michael and his angels fought against the dragon and the dragon fought his angels and prevailed not neither was their place found anymore in heaven and the Great Dragon was cast out that old serpent called the devil and Satan which deceiveth the whole world he was cast out into the Earth and his angels were cast out with him Revelation 12 7-9 so pause before moving forward I’m going to say it again remember what the question Corner regarding waren Heaven told us some de prior they said Revelation 12 7-9 doesn’t support this first fall of Satan

This first battle around the throne and this supposed War taking place prior to Earth’s existence yet here they are once again using it to support exactly that using the phrase of first phase and what did this pre-earth war between Jesus and Satan take place over the Throne of the Eternal and as they’ve repeatedly told us up to this point the first phase what did that involve Jesus becoming an angel receiving the name Michael and battling with Satan for 4,000 years until he stopped being an angel and became a man folks the Bible nowhere says or

Teaches that prior to the Earth’s existence Satan and Jesus were engaged in a battle over the Throne of the Eternal seemingly implying that Jesus isn’t the Eternal they constantly depict Jesus and Satan as rival equals in this article watch them do exactly that because they continue because the war between the two great antagonist began in heaven the symbols first appeared to the prophet as being in heaven after the struggle was transferred to this earth it has continued to be a Warfare between the forces of righteousness on the one hand and on the other hand principalities and

Powers and the rulers of Darkness of this world and wicked Spirits in Heavenly places see Ephesians 6:12 even though this Earth is the battlefield the struggle is being waged over The Possession and rulership of the world which though Fallen is still a part of God’s Kingdom for the 4,000 years before Calvary Satan carried on his Warfare against Christ and his church on Earth on Earth chiefly from his position Before the Throne of God as the prince of this world close quote so Jesus and Satan are two great antagonists think about that as if there’s even a

Comparison talk about exalting Satan by demoting the almighty Son of God and they continue to portray things like this the article continues under the subheading of of the origin of sin were they right the leading actors in this great Heavenly Warfare for which Wicked Spirits in high places are responsible are Prince Michael and Prince Lucifer hello anybody

Home the leading actors in this great Heavenly War Warfare for which Wicked Spirits in high places are responsible are Two Princes Prince Michael and Prince Lucifer Michael means like unto God and Christ Alone is in the image of the invisible God he’s declared to be the express image of his person or the effulgence of his glory in the very image of his substance see Hebrews 1:3 in Daniel 10:13 through and 21 and Daniel 121 Michael is said to be the first prince in the kingdom of God and the great Prince which standeth for the children of thy people he will

Eventually stand up to reign as the supreme ruler of this world the angels of Michael are those who remained loyal to him during the Great crisis Chief among these was Gabriel Hero Of God catch this because of his heroism during the Revolt of Lucifer and his angels which may have been largely responsible for the right decisions of the other 2/3 Gabriel was exalted to take the position of the first of the anointed covering cherubs made vacant by the fall of Lucifer to Mary Gabriel said I am Gabriel that stand in the presence of God to Daniel he said there is none that

Holdeth with me in these things but Michael your prince close quote hold the phone notice we have another contradiction what did they tell tell us years prior in 1910 when Ellen White was still alive that Gabriel took Jesus’s position after he was exalted but now they’re telling us Gabriel took Lucifer’s position when he

Fell wait too this woman I mean they claimed that during the Heavenly revolt and war between Michael and Lucifer due to his heroism Gabriel was exalted to the position left vacant by Lucifer the Bible nowhere says any of this folks it doesn’t say anything about Gabriel changing any positions Angelic promotions a war before earth existed Etc and Jesus isn’t a prince he’s Jehovah the almighty God just citing proof texts that don’t say what they’re claiming doesn’t therefore make the belief biblical anyone can do that for all sorts of things I could make all sorts of

Assertions and then just cite a proof text and now be like well it’s biblical no it’s not how it works doesn’t mean I’m handling the Bible properly then in the m 28 1953 issue of the Bible in our times which was also an official publication seeking to teach what the Bible says about the end times we find an article titled which was the first world war get this where once again we see them talking about this fairy tale but within that we read quote we usually think of the expression the first world war as applying to the war that lasted from 1914 to 1918 but in

Actual fact the first world War Began some 6,000 years ago what is even more amazing this war is still raging and even now approaching its Climax and conclusion another astonishing fact about this first world war is that it did not begin on this Earth but in heaven the apocalypse as its name signifies lifts the curtain that conceals the Heavenly Universe from our view and reveals the nature and contestants in this Mighty conflict and then they cite Revelation 12 7-9 again close quote so yet again they contradict what they’ve previously claimed that

Revelation 12 7-9 can’t be used to support this first phase pre-earth battle that started in heaven supposedly yet they do so again and no this isn’t an astonishing fact it’s tot fiction and speculation fairy tale imaginings Revelation 12 has nothing to do with before the Earth’s existence but then notice something else quote note the vital truths that are brought to our attention in this intriguing scripture two Mighty beings are engaged in deadly combat one is called Michael other scriptures help us to identify Michael whose name means who is

As God the angel Gabriel calls him Michael the first Prince Michael your prince and Michael the great Prince Daniel 10:13 close quote uh yeah except that Daniel 10 says Michael’s the only one or or is only one of the archangels like we saw earlier but notice Michael is referred to as a separate being from God Jesus and Satan are two Mighty beings and Jesus as Michael is a separate being from God this is an example of what I pointed out earlier they don’t understand these words in this language and lastly we come to the final Source losing my voice this time from ml

Andreas you go a lot lot of stuff on this gentleman I’m not going to give a historical background on him but that’s who wrote this article signs of the times December 28 1954 this article says a lot of the same stuff the others have so I’m just going to focus on the specifics the something that’s a little bit different he says quote when Lucifer planned to claim godhood there was only one that stood between him and God and that was Michael there would therefore be every reason why Satan should oppose Christ if he got him out of the way the road would be

Clear close quote so when Lucifer planned to claim godhood the only thing standing between him and God God was Jesus yet again demoting the almighty word Blasphemous heresy very plainly showing that over and over and over again they evidence they do not understand the Trinity they supposedly had all that ironed out by the 1890s when Desire of Ages was published according to Jerry Moon yet here they are in the 19 50s talking about Jesus being a stop gap between Lucifer and God speaking of Jesus as though he isn’t God but the father is and then we get radio silence

Regarding this mess about Michael three years before questions on Doctrine is published and we see what I read at the beginning where they try and act like their belief in this area is basically just the same idea the Protestant reformers so a number of things in conclusion folks the first is that questions on Doctrine was deceptive and what they claimed is not true aside from that their view isn’t identical to the Jehovah’s Witnesses but that doesn’t get them off the hook the teaching is comprehensively just as bad as the Jehovah’s Witnesses this was being regularly

Published about people in the movement were asking questions about it having read these articles it was taught in the Sabbath School quarterly to the entire church and continued getting published until right before they knew the kingdom of the Cults was being produced had Walter Martin known about these sources he would have absolutely included seventh day adventism in the main part of the book he wouldn’t have put him in the appendix as heterodox there is zero chance of that had he been aware of these sources as a Baptist Minister he would have been absolutely flabbergasted

And I wish he was still alive today especially considering what we saw with him on John Ankerberg where he later found out after the book was published where he came across sources where they’re talking about Ellen White being the infallible interpretive Authority you could tell in that discussion he clearly felt like he was misled by the SDA leaders and that he got Hoodwinked after questions on Doctrine was published ministers ended up getting fired for standing by what was stated in the book this is what caused Martin’s confusion which then led to

Him re-evaluating essentially his assessment of the doctrines which we got an insight into on Ankerberg so if he would have known about these statements regarding Jesus becoming an Angel With An Angel nature to try and save Angels he would have absolutely labeled them as cultic secondly until the SDA Church officially comes out and denounces these claims as heretical there’s no reason to believe this has changed it’s part of the larger great controversy framework which is Central to AVST theology as a whole it isn’t just a side issue or a secondary matter

It’s allegedly part of Jesus’s work his person and work that’s what the gospel is it’s part of his person part of his person he became an angel part of his work save the Angels it’s allegedly part of his work and his humiliation and the aous god vindicating himself and his character which they tell us is the central Crux of their theological system pointing to random individual Adventists to say well they disagree or what have you is not a sufficient reputation of the Mountain of primary sources that we just looked at these s these sources hold more

Authority than just any individual random Adventist they’re published by the organization itself with their stamp of approval I understand many Adventists will say they disagree with what we saw that’s great praise God but that wasn’t the point of this my point wasn’t that every Adventist in the world believes this it was that the system of theology absolutely does and you can’t divorce it from that at the end of the day they were repeatedly teaching this idea of Jesus taking on the nature of angels and that this was necessary for God to vindicate

His character which is the entire heartbeat of adventism so I’m not sure how the leadership could claim that things have now changed thirdly Ellen White was alive when the majority of this was being published especially the most damaging quotes which were right at the tail end of her life not when she was a young ignorant teenager you know they love to do the well she got Progressive understanding over time and no toward the end of her life some of the worst quotes where are her rebukes and correction as the protector of doctrinal error that is unless she didn’t believe

It to be error which is why we can’t find them the organization tells us that part of her function and role is to protect avenus from doct confusion and deception yet she was published alongside a lot of these statements in the same exact Publications that state this stuff and if she corrected it at some point why did it continue to happen four this is a false god a false Christ and Christians and Adventists alike need warned about this no they don’t teach the same thing as the Jehovah’s Witnesses don’t make that mistake but understand it is just as

Problematic while some of the SDA Pioneers were Aryans like the Jehovah’s Witnesses the organization officially pivoted off of that but as you saw in some of the quotes they’re still demoting the sun distinguishing him from Jehovah he’s a stop gap between Lucifer becoming God the Jehovah’s Witnesses teach Jesus is a created angel named Michael the SDA church is teaching here that Jesus became an angel at a certain point he wasn’t created taking upon himself an Angel nature to try and save the angels and vindicate the law before the Angels against Satan’s accusations about it but

Then he sheath himself of that angel nature when he incarnated as a man moving to a second phase of his work of humiliation which was incarnating as a man something that he will retain forever in an eternally humiliated State never to regain back some of his Divine likee qualities such as omnipresence those are both both heretical and cultic doctrines placing both the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Seventh Day Adventist outside of the Christian faith okay now I know that was a lot but if you were a Seventh Day Adventist and you heard all that and you can remain in

This organization may God have mercy on your soul you can try and make all the excuses oh my pastor doesn’t talk about that or oh I’ve never heard this before you’re coping friend you’re coping if you think this is the Commandment keeping Church who’s talking about a Jesus that was an angel and all this nonsense we just looked at may God have mercy on your soul thank you all so much for being here hopefully you found this information uh helpful informational hopefully it got you caught up to speed pocket these def or uh sources so that you can reference back to these things

You can reference back to this there will be timestamps in the the description eventually so there’ll be time stamps throughout the whole video so you can easily go back and reference things may Christ richly bless you in the grace and peace won by him and his vicarious death on the cross for Sinners Not Angels until next time God bless