"Truth about Ellen White Writings"

Part 3

1. Joseph and Mary searching for Jesus (DA, Ch. 8, Luke 2:41-51)

Ellen White (1827-1915): “They searched for him throughout their company, but in vain. Shuddering how Herod had tried to destroy him in His infancy” (DA, p. 80).

William Hanna (1808-1882): “…they sought for him among his companions when they rested for the night… were there any there who still sought the child’s life? Herod was dead; Archelaus was banished…” (The earlier years of our Lord’s life on earth, pp. 123, 124, 1864).

Bennett James (1774-1862): “Their parental anxieties led them perhaps to say, “Has the family of Herod inherited his murderous design, and watched this opportunity to carry it out”” (Lectures on the Life of Christ, Vol. 1, p. 77, 1828).

2. Jesus questioned the teachers (DA, Ch. 8)

Ellen White (1827-1915): “He listened to their instruction. As one seeking for wisdom, He questioned these teachers… His questions were suggestive of deep truths… every question put before them a divine lesson, and placed truth in a new aspect… If Jesus had appeared to be trying to teach them, they would have disdained to listen. But they flattered themselves that they were teaching Him… The youthful modesty and grace of Jesus disarmed their prejudices. Unconsciously their minds were opened to the word of God, and the Holy Spirit spoke to their hearts. They could not but see that their expectation in regard to the Messiah was not sustained by prophecy” (DA, pp. 78, 80, 1898).

Bennett James (1774-1862): “This asking questions; was not catechising the doctors, but inquiring of them, which requires as much wisdom as is requisite to conveying, without appearing to teach, a knowledge of the true design of the law, and of the person and coming of Messiah”(lectures on the history of Jesus Christ, Vol. 1, p. 78, 1828).

Isaac Ambrose (1604-1664): “He, who as God, gave all the wisdom they had, doth now, as the Son of man, hearken to the wisdom he had given them; and when he had heard, then he asks; and after that, no doubt he answers: his very questions were instructions; for I cannot think that he meant so much to learn, as to teach those doctors of Israel. Surely these rabbins had never heard the voice of such a tutor” (Works of Isaac Ambrose, p. 220, 1829).

3.  The doctors desired to make Jesus their student (DA, Ch. 8)

Ellen White (1827-1915): “In this thoughtful Galilean boy they discerned great promise. They desired to gain Him as a student, that He might become a teacher in Israel” (DA, p. 80).

William Hanna (1808-1882): “When this strange, rude-looking, bright-looking, solemn-looking Galilean boy first came among them, was it the wisdom he then showed which drew them, as if anxious to gain a scholar who might turn out to be the chief ornament of their school…” (The earlier years of our Lord’s life on earth, p. 127, 1864).

4. Christ was like other men (DA, Ch. 8)

Ellen White (1827-1915): “His life in many respects was like that of other children, and it was difficult for them to realize that He was the Son of God” (DA, p. 81, 1898).

Ellen White: “He could have come in such a way as to charm those who looked upon him; but this was not the way that God planned he should come among the sons of men. He was to be like those who belonged to the Jewish race. His features were to be like those of other human beings, and was not to have such beauty of person as to make people point him out as different from others” (Christ Our Saviour, p. 9, 1899).

Henry Ward Beecher (1813-1887): “But for the after-record of Scriptures, we should have no reason to suppose that this child differed in any respect from ordinary children. Yet this was the Son of God!” (The Life of Jesus Christ, pp. 54, 55, 1871).

Bennett James (1774-1862): “With regard to his body, little is said, but that the child grew, and that he advanced in stature; for, having become truly man, and being born of a woman, he grew up as a child… Thus we are presented with a view of the Word made flesh, appearing as sucking infant, then weaned from the breast, growing up to maturity like any other child…” (Lectures on the History of Jesus Christ, pp. 70, 71, 1828).

5. Spend a thoughtful hour each day on the life of Jesus (DA, Ch. 8)

Ellen White (1827-1915): “It would be well for us to spend a thoughtful hour each day in contemplation of the life of Christ. We should take it point by point, and let the imagination grasp each scene, especially the closing ones. As we thus dwell upon His great sacrifice for us, our confidence in Him will be more constant, our love will be quickened, and we shall be more deeply imbued with His spirit. If we would be saved at last, we must learn the lesson of penitence and humiliation at the foot of the cross” (DA, p. 83).

Ellen White (1827-1915): “It will do you good, and our ministers generally, to frequently review the closing scenes in the life of our Redeemer. Here, beset with temptations as He was, we may all learn lessons of the utmost importance to us. It would be well to spend a thoughtful hour each day reviewing the life of Christ from the manger to Calvary. We should take it point by point and let the imagination vividly grasp each scene, especially the closing ones of His earthly life. By thus contemplating His teachings and sufferings, and the infinite sacrifice made by Him for the redemption of the race, we may strengthen our faith, quicken our love, and become more deeply imbued with the spirit which sustained our Saviour. If we would be saved at last we must all learn the lesson of penitence and faith at the foot of the cross” (4T, p. 374, 1881).

Daniel March (1816-1909): “Nevertheless it will do us all good, frequently and solemnly to review the closing scenes in the Saviour’s  earthly  life.  Amid all the material and worldly passions, by which we are all tempted, we shall learn many salutary lessons, by going back in memory, and spending a thoughtful hour, in the endeavor to strengthen our faith and quicken our love at the foot of the cross… First of all we may learn that lesson which is the beginning of life and peace to the weary souls, the lesson of penitence at the foot of the cross… We may learn the lesson of humility as we go back by faith and stand on the mount of the great expiation” (Walks And Homes of Jesus, pp. 313, 14, 18, 1866).

6. Jesus acted independently of the rabbinical laws (DA, Ch. 9)

Ellen White (1827-1915): “Rigid rules were prescribed for every act… as orthodox Israelites they were expected to observe. Bur Jesus did not interest Himself in these matters. From childhood he acted independently of the rabbinical laws… They were observing traditional rites that possessed no virtue… and he could not sanction the mingling of human requirements with the divine precepts” (DA, p. 84, 1898). Emphasis added.

Note: In the above statement Ellen White had said that Jesus did not conform to the rabbinical laws. Whereas, her earlier statement contradicts this: “From his childhood, Jesus conformed his life strictly to the Jewish laws” (Second Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, December 31, 1872). Emphasis added.

Stalker James (1848-1927): “A third and very serious ground of their opposition was, that He did not Himself preach, nor encourage His disciples to practice many ritual observences such as fasts, punctilious washings of the hands before meals, and so forth, which were considered the marks of a saintly man… They were made the substitutes for real purity; … But no one doubted their authority… Jesus regarded them as the general evil of the time. He therefore neglected them, and encouraged others to do so” (The Life of Jesus Christ, pp. 99-100, 1891).

7. He is gentle and unobtrusive (DA, Ch. 9)

Ellen White (1827-1915): “Because He was so gentle and unobtrusive, the scribes and elders supposed that he would be easily influenced by their teaching” (DA, p. 85).

Ingraham J. H (1809-1860): “How blind I have bee, not to have discovered, under His gentle and loving character, and unobstrusive wisdom, the Messias” (The prince of the House of David, p. 139, 1855).

8. Jesus had access to the tree of life (DA, Ch. 9)

Ellen White (1827-1915): “But they did not discern that He had access to the tree of life, a source of knowledge of which they were ignorant” (DA, p. 86).

John Harris (1802-1856): “He had access to a tree of knowledge which they knew not of” (The Great Teacher, p. 54, 1835).

9. Insinuation of His mysterious birth (DA, Ch. 9, John 8: 41)

                                                (Was Jesus ridiculed of being born of fornication?)

Ellen White (1827-1915): “There were those who tried to cast contempt upon Him because of His birth, and even in His childhood He had to meet their scornful looks and evil whisperings” (DA, p. 88). (Emphasis added).

Ellen White (1827-1915): “But the leaders of the people were offended, “and they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that He saith, I came down from heaven?” They tried to arouse prejudice by referring scornfully to the lowly origin of Jesus. They contemptuously alluded to His life as a Galilean labourer, and to His family as being poor and lowly. The claims of this uneducated carpenter, they said, were unworthy of their attention. And on account of His mysterious birth they insinuated that He was of doubtful parentage, thus representing the human circumstances of His birth as a blot upon His history. Jesus did not attempt to explain the mystery of His birth” (DA, p. 387, Chapter 41). (Emphasis Added).

Ellen White (1827-1915): “In mockery they answered, “We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God.” These words, in allusion to the circumstances of His birth, were intended as a thrust against Christ in the presence of those who were beginning to believe on Him. Jesus gave no heed to the base insinuation, but said, “If God were your Father, ye would love Me: for I proceeded forth and came from God” (DA, p.  467, Chapter 51). (Emphasis Added).

Ekkehardt Mueller (Associate Director of the Biblical Research Institute (BRI), General Conference of Seventh-day Adventist): “In John 8:41 the Jews tell Jesus: “we are not born of fornication” and may imply “but you were.” If this is the case, then these people seem to stigamatize Jesus by implying that he was an illegitimate child” (Fornication, pp. 4, 5).

Note: There is no allusion to the insinuations regarding Jesus’ mysterious birth in the gospels. It can be found only in the Apocryphal writings. I believe that except Mary and Joseph, (Elizabeth and Zechariah,) – no one else would have known the virgin (or the miraculous) birth of our Lord. There had never been a scandal concerning his birth so long as he was on the earth.

M. R. James (1862-1936): “The elders of the Jews answered and said unto Jesus: What shall we see? Firstly, that thou wast born of fornication; …Then said certain of them that stood by, devout men of the Jews: We say not that he came of fornication; but we know that Joseph was betrothed unto Mary, and he was not born of fornication. Pilate saith unto those Jews which said that he came of fornication: This your saying is not true for there were espousals, as these also say which are of your nation. Annas and Caiaphas say unto Pilate: The whole multitude of us cry out that he was born of fornication, and we are not believed… These twelve men are believed which say that he was not born of fornication, but the whole multitude of us cry out that he was born of fornication” (The Gospel of Nicodemus, or Acts of Pilate: Translated by M. R. James, 1924, p. 5. Originally composed in 4th century A D). (Emphasis Added).

Alexander Walker (1825-1903): “And the elders of the Jews answered and said to Jesus: what shall we see? First, thou wast born of fornication; … Some bystanders, pious men of the Jews, say: we deny that he was born of fornication: for we know that Joseph espoused Mary and he was not born of fornication… all the multitude of us cry out that he was born of fornication… and we are not believed” (Apocryphal Gospels, Acts and Revelations, pp. 129, 130, 1870).

Alfred Plummer (1875-1902): “This is far-fetched, and does not suit the context… ‘We were not born of fornication, as Thou art.’ But His miraculous birth was not yet commonly known, and this foul Jewish lie, perpetuated from the second century onwards (Origen, c. Celsum i. xxxii.), was not yet in existence” (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges, John 8:41, 1902).

10. Jesus never contended for his rights (DA, Ch. 9)

Ellen White (1827-1915): “Jesus did not contend for His rights” (DA, p. 89).

Thayer, Erastus William (1812-1902): “[Jesus] never contended for his own rights against others” (Sketches from the life of Jesus, Historical and Doctrinal, p. 547, 1891).

11. “I have trodden the wine press alone” (DA, Ch. 9, 74, 78; Isaiah 63: 3)

Ellen white (1827-1915): “Through childhood, youth, and manhood Jesus walked alone. In his purity and His faithfulness, He trod the wine press alone, and of the people there was none with Him. He carried the awful weight of responsibility for the salvation of man” (DA, p. 92).

Ellen White: “The Saviour trod the wine press alone” [this was in reference to his agony in Gethsemane] (DA, p. 693).

Ellen White: “And in the dreadful hour Christ was not to be comforted with the Father’s presence. He trod the wine press alone…” (DA, p. 754).

Phoebe Palmer (1807-1874): Phoebe used Isaiah 63:3, to describe Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane. In her notes we read: “…My God, why hast thou forsaken me? But still holding with an unyielding grasp upon the promise… And believing that the Saviour was treading the wine-press alone, and of the people there was none” (Way of Holiness, Notes by the Way, chap. 14).

Anne Catherine Emmerich (1774-1824): “I heard him exclaim, “I am pressed as the grape, which is trodden in the wine-press. My blood shall be poured out until water cometh, but wine shall here be made no more” (The Dolorous Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ, p. 272, 1862 [1833]).

Ruth Bryan (1805-1860): “I have trodden the winepress alone.” Isaiah 63:3: He is Heaven’s rich grape! He has been in the winepress of divine wrath for us, and hence it is we drink “the pure blood of the grape” (The Letters of Ruth Bryan, 1859).

Charles Spurgeon (1834-1892): “Only three highly favored ones, who had been with him on the mount of transfiguration —only these three could approach the veil of his mysterious sorrow: within that veil even these must not intrude;… He must tread the wine-press alone, and of the people there must be none with hi” (Sermon Delivered on Sunday Morning, February 8th, 1863).

Note: By carefully analysing the illustrations below you can identify the one that truly portrayed what Prophet Isaiah had actually meant – He is treading, and not being trodden, treading His enemies as the grapes of wrath.


Hieronymus Wierix (c.1600)


Tacuinum Sanitatis (14th century)


Treading the wine-press

Consider the following comments in contrast to the above:

Matthew Henry (1662-1714): “He does indeed tread the wine-press, but it is the great wine-press of the wrath of God (Revelation 14:19), in which we sinners deserved to be cast but Christ was pleased to cast our enemies into it, and to destroy him that had the power of death….He gains the victory purely by his own strength: I have trodden the wine-press alone, Isaiah 63:3. When God delivered his people and destroyed their enemies…” (Matthew’s Complete Commentary on the Bible, 1706).

Keil and Delitzch (1807-1888): “The reference through is not to the first coming of the Lord, when He laid the foundations of His kingdom by suffering and dying, but His final coming, when he will bring His regal sway to a victorious issue… His treading the wine-press is not the conquest of wrath, but the manifestation of wrath” (Bible Commentary on the Old Testament, 1857- 78).

John Gill (1697-1771): “The winepress is a symbol of the wrath of God; and not of what Christ bore himself as the sinners surety, for then he was trodden as a vine, or the cluster of it, himself; but of what he executed on others. Wicked men are compared to clusters of wine; the winepress into which they are cast is the wrath of god, and Christ is the treader of it” (John Gill’s Exposition on the Whole Bible, 1748).

Jamieson (1802-1880): “This final blow inflicted by Messiah and His armies… It will be a day of judgment to the hostile Gentiles (Rev 14:19, 19:13-15). He treads the wine-press here not as a sufferer, but as an inflictor of vengeance” (Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible,


12. Did Jesus have older brothers? (DA, Ch. 9, Luke 8: 19, 20)

Ellen White (1827-1915): “His brothers, as the sons of Joseph were called, sided with the rabbis…All this displeased His brothers. Being older than Jesus, they felt He should be under their dictation” (DA, pp. 86, 87).

Ellen White: “The sons and daughters of Joseph knew this…they tried to correct the practices of Jesus…” (DA, p. 90).

New Advent: “The majority of the Greek Fathers and Greek writers, influenced, it seems, by the legendary tales of apocryphal gospels, considered the “brethren” of the Lord as sons of St. Joseph by a first marriage” (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02767a.htm).

Note: The gospel writers do not call the “brethren” of Jesus as “sons of Joseph”, but sons and daughters of Joseph and Mary: “Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?” – Matthew 13:55.

History of Joseph The Carpenter (Apocrypha, 4th century A.D): “He [Joseph] married a wife. Moreover, he got himself sons and daughters, four sons, namely and two daughters (chapter 2). Now when righteous Joseph became a widower, my mother Mary, blessed, holy, and pure, was already twelve years old (chap 3). I moreover dwelt with them, [after Joseph took Mary as his wife] not otherwise than if I had been one of his sons” (chap 11). (Church Fathers: History of Joseph the Carpenter).

New Testament Apocrypha (20 CE) Chapter 4: No. 2. Eastern Christianity, following Eusebius, believes that they were “Joseph’s children by his (unrecorded) first wife. No. 3. Roman Catholicism, following Mark 15:40, Mark 16:1, John 19:25, and Jude 1 believes they were Jesus’ cousins, sons of Mary, the wife of Cleopas, which the Greek word for “brother” or “relative” used in the Gospels would encompass. No. 6. “The Proevangelium of James” a disgraceful work which is untruthfully alleged to have been written by leaders of Jerusalem Church, James is such a document. In this document it claims that Joseph was married previously and had two sons from it. No. 7. Both Christians and Jewish scholars are quick to point out, Aramaic had no word for “cousin,” so they claim the word for brother was used in this place (Supreme Bible of God-New Testament Apocrypha-the brothers, chapter 4).

Angel Manuel Rodriguez: “Although the topic is still being debated, it seems that the best solution is the last one: Jesus’ brothers were His stepbrothers. [He goes on to say], Why did the Lord close the womb of Mary? … Perhaps God was attempting to preserve the uniqueness of Mary’s experience as the mother of the Saviour” (Jesus’ Family Ties: Adventist Review, 2001).

Daniel Whedon (1808-1885): “Hence the James and Judas, or Jude, among the disciples, who were sons of Cleophas, and cousins of Jesus, were not the same as the James and Judas mentioned Matthew 13:55, who were literally brothers of Jesus. Jesus then had half-brothers, the sons of Mary, and the perpetual virginity of Mary is not to be believed. Our Lord had brothers, (half- brothers,) whose names were James, Joses, Simon, and Judas, and also sisters, He had cousins, whose names were James, Joses, Judas, and Matthew” (Whedon’s Commentary on the Bible: Matthew 12:46, 47,   1874).

Daniel Whedon (1808-1885): “Upon the whole, we think it a clear case that the brethren of our Lord, so-called, were not cousins, but literal half-brothers. The idea, therefore, that Mary was at once a wife and a nun, is an ecclesiastical tradition unsupported by Scripture, and is the offspring of the false notion of the superior sanctity of celibacy” (Whedon’s Commentary on the Bible: Matthew 13:55, 1874).

Adam Clarke (1762-1832):  “His mother and his brethren – These are supposed to have been the cousins of our Lord, as the word brother is frequently used among the Hebrews in this sense. But there are others who believe Mary had other children beside our Lord and that these were literally his brothers, who are spoken of here. And, although it be possible that these were the sons of Mary, the wife of Cleopas or Alpheus, his mother‘s sister, called his relations, Mark 3:31; yet it is as likely that they were the children of Joseph and Mary, and brethren of our Lord, in the strictest sense of the word” (Adam Clarke Commentary, 1832).

Samuel J. Andrews (1817-1906): “We may classify the various theories respecting them: First, that which makes them to have been the children of Joseph by a former marriage, or by adoption, and so Christ’s brothers and sisters. Second, that which makes them to have been children of a sister of His mother, and so His cousins-german. Some make them His cousins by His father’s as well as His mother’s side. Third, that which makes them to have been His own brothers and sisters, the children of Joseph and Mary” (The Life of Our Lord upon the Earth, p. 105, 1863).

Samuel J. Andrews (1817-1906): “If also He was not the eldest, but youngest son [as asserted by Ellen White and many others] of Joseph, how could be called the legal heir to the throne?” (Ibid., p. 107).

Samuel J. Andrews (1817-1906): “In regard to the Lord’s brethren, there were some in very early times who thought them the children of Joseph and Mary, but most thought them to be either His cousins, or the children of Joseph” (Ibid., p. 116).

A. M. Fairbrain (1838-1912): “He was the first, but not the only child of Mary; and it is more than probable that Joseph died during the youth or early manhood of Jesus. On the death of the father, the eldest Son would inherit his responsibilities, became the guardian and bread-winner of the family. And so to him was granted the Divine discipline of toil, of labour for bread that perisheth” (Studies In The Life of Christ, p. 56, 1882 [1880]).

Charles F. Deems (1820-1893): “He had for his playmates his younger half-brothers, children born to Mary after Jesus, together with his cousins, the children of Cleopas” (Jesus, p. 50, 1868).

Eustace R. Conder (1820-1892): “… who were his “brethren” of our Lord, repeatedly referred to in the Gospels and in St. Paul’s Epistles? … many [suppose] that our Lord’s mother ever had any other child than “her first-born Son” (Matt 1:25). But for this sentiment, – wholly foreign to Jewish ideas – perhaps no one would have ever doubted that “His brethren, James and Joses, and Simon, and Judas, and His sisters” (Matt 13:55; Mk 7:3), were younger brothers and sisters of our Lord, –  children of Joseph and Mary” (Outlines of the Life of Christ, pp. 44, 45, 1886).

August Neander (1789-1850): “Various scattered statements in the Evangelists lead us to conclude that Christ had younger brothers and sisters. The religious principles of Joseph and Mary offered no hinderance to this; it harmonizes well with the Christian view of the sanctity of wedlock” (Life of Jesus Christ in its Historical Connexion and Historical Development, p. 29, 1848).

13. Child-like faith of Mary” (DA, Ch. 10)

Ellen White (1827-1915): “Zacharias well knew how to Abraham in his old age a child was given because he believed Him faithful who had promised. But for a moment the aged priest turns his thought to the weakness of humanity. He forgets that what God has promised, He is able to perform. What a contrast between this unbelief and the sweet, childlike faith of Mary, the maiden of Nazareth, whose answer to the angel’s wonderful announcement was, “Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word”!” (DA, p. 98)

Henry Ward Beecher (1813-1887): “It may seem strange that Zacharias should be struck dumb for doubting the heavenly messenger, while Mary went unrebuked… the angel who rebuked Zacharias for doubt saw nothing in the trembling hesitating and wonder of Mary inconsistent with a childlike faith… A sweet and trusting faith in God, childlike simplicity, and profound love semm to have formed the nature of Mary” (The Life of Jesus The Christ, pp. 19, 20, 33, 1871).

14. John did not flatter his listeners (DA, Ch. 10)

Ellen White (1827-1915): “God does not send messengers to flatter the sinner…he lays heavy burdens upon the conscience of the wrong doer, pierces the soul with arrows of conviction… The voice that has rebuked sin, and put to shame pride and ambition” (DA, 104).

Thayer, Erastus William (1812-1902): “…he “knew not to give flattering titles to men:” but as one ordained of god spoke with most blunt directness of address, the most caustic severity, and the most scathing denunciation of sin” (Sketches from the life of Jesus, Historical and Doctrinal, p. 39, 1891).

15. Light from the throne of God rested on His head (DA, Ch. 11)

Ellen White (1827-1915): “His form was bathed in the light that ever surrounds the throne of God. His upturned face was glorified as they had never before seen the face of man… The light which fell from the open portals upon the head of our Saviour will fall upon us as we pray for help to resist temptation” (DA, pp. 112, 113).

Ingraham J. H (1809-1860): “… and when we looked up we beheld a dazzling light, though it was noon-day, brighter than the sun; and from the midst of this celestial splendour there darted, with arrow velocity, a ray of light, which descended upon the head of the Christ… amid the glory above His head, was seen the form of a dove of fire” (The Prince of the House of David, pp. 111, 112, 1855).

16. Direct communication with God lost (DA, Ch. 12)

Ellen White (1827-1915): “Ever since Adam’s sin, the human race had been cut off from direct communion with God; the intercourse between heaven and earth had been through Christ; …He had before communicated with humanity through Christ; now He communicated with humanity in Christ…But now it was manifest that the connection between God and man had been restored” (DA, p. 116).

John Wesley (1703-1791): “The fall brought upon mankind the loss of communion with God, his displeasure and curse… Immediately they were indisposed for communion with God… That man, when he fell, lost his original righteousness and therewith his title to God’s favour and to communion with God…For in that instant his original righteousness, title to God’s favour, and communion with God being lost, he was spiritually dead in sin” (The Miscellaneous Works of John Wesley,  Vol. 2, pp. 235, 339, 327, 328, 1828).

St. Theophan The Recluse (1815-1894): “The chief end of our lives is to live in communion with God. To this end the Son of God became incarnate, in order to return us to this divine communion, which was lost by the fall into sin. Through Jesus Christ, the Son of God, we enter into communion with the Father and thus attain our purpose” (Letters to Various People, 24).

17. Through sin man was cut off from communication with God (DA, Ch. 12)

Ellen White (18287-1915): “Ever since Adam’s sin, the human race had been cut off from direct communion with God; the intercourse between heaven and earth had been through Christ” (DA, p. 116).

J. W. Nevin (1803-1886): “The human race was … cut off from all intercourse with God… From the time of the fall, therefore, no communication of friendship could exist between God and man, except through Christ” (A Summary of Biblical Antiquities: Compiled for Sunday school Teachers, pp. 7, 9, 1830).

18. Satan decided to tempt Jesus personally (DA, Ch. 12)

Ellen White (1827-1915): “Satan saw that he must either conquer or be conquered. The issues of the conflict involved too much to be entrusted to his confederate angels. He must personally conduct the warfare. All the energies of apostasy were rallied against the Son of God. Christ was made the mark of every weapon of hell” (DA, p. 116)

John Harris (1802-1856): “As if the temptation of Christ were too great an enterprise, a field too momentous, to be left to the power of a common arm, the prince of darkness, himself, undertook personally to conduct the untried adventure. Having drawn out his forces, and entered himself in his way…” (The great teacher, p. 232, 1835).

19. The first sin (DA, Ch. 12)

Ellen White (1827-1915): “With Christ, as with the holy pair in Eden, appetite was the ground of the first great temptation… As by the indulgence of appetite Adam fell, so by the denial of appetite Christ must overcome” (DA, p. 117).

John Milton (1608-1674): “This more delusive, not the touch, but taste Deceav’d; they fondly thinking to allay Thir appetite with gust, instead of Fruit Chewd bitter Ashes, which th’ offended taste With spattering noise rejected” (Paradise Lost,  Book IX,  563-567, 1667).

John Nelson (1738?-1766): “Thus it is plain, that tho’ Adam did corrupt himself tho’ he sinned by indulging one of his appetites against the law of God, yet this abuse of his appetite did not descend to his son tho’ the natural appetite itself did, as being at first a part of the nature of Adam… They placed the appetite or desire of food upon a wrong object when they eat the forbidden fruit” (A letter to the Protestant Dissenters in the Parish of Ballykelly, pp. 27, 34, 1766).

Joseph Hall (1574-1656): “The first man was tempted to carnal appetite, by the forbidden fruit” (The Works of Joseph Hall, Vol. 2, p. 310, 1808).

20. He craved for food (DA, Ch. 12)

Ellen White (1827-1915): “The Saviour was faint from hunger, He was craving for food, when Satan came suddenly upon Him” (DA, p. 118, 1898).

Henry Ware (1794-1843): “At length he felt the consequences of so fasting. He was weary and weak. He was hungry and craved food” (The Life of Our Saviour, p. 45, 1833).

William Henry Furness (1802–1896): “After a while, his hunger became importunate. He craved food. And the craving introduced on his thoughts” (A History of Jesus, p. 49, 1833).