teresa, you can take a look at W. W. Prescott's sermon, which was about Christ's taking our sinful flesh, and take a look at it, as well as her endorsement of it, and see that her endorsement of it was similar to what you put in bold red from 3SM, as well as the context of Prescott's sermon being similar to what Jones and Waggoner taught.

This is a small portion of the sermon:



EGW endorsed this sermon as truth "separated from error," as well as using language similar to the 3SM quote.

No, Teresa: the difference is in his divinity - which we do not have, no in our humanity, which he did have - for obvious reasons, like being our Saviour with a meritorious character, etc.

Those two long quotes from Ellen White, Teresa, are good. That was as good as she could find words to express what she heard from them: they said a lot more than just "look to Jesus" before you are led by him to keep his faith and do his Commandments...
That's why one reads their material which enjoyed her endorsement to fathom out what else they found in Scripture of Christ and us.

i dont have to see Jesus in the same light you do to know that He has the power to give me victory in my life.

no brother. that Jesus was somehow sinful like us is not the essence of righteousness by faith.

out of curiousity why didnt you put the source of her statement?

i dont understand the point you are making. perhaps you could tell me what you thought i got from these verse.

im lost as to your point,also.

mostly what i hear from some of you was Jesus was "like us" but i dont hear anything of what i consider the message. that is why i ask if any of you know it.

has the "war" taken over the attention?

Take a look at the 10 points listed, via the link of that name, on the home page of www.gospel-herald.com for a pretty thorough coverage of the message, as thus far suggested: this list was drawn up by the voluntary Message Study Committee, a group of pastors and laity existing since about 1985 out of pure frustration at the church's lack of study into the matter amid continuing confusion about the gospel as a church, let alone just what was preached by Waggoner and Jones.

It hasn't been the only effort to recover whatever has been lost from view while the church claims all is well. It is the most well known, for it's honourary leaders, Elder Robert Wieland (now 93, I think) and Elder Donald Short (deceased a few years ago, aged 90-odd; he was older), jointly wrote a bombshell of a letter (at least 60 pages) to the GC ExCom, the highest committee in the church, in 1950, claiming we had lost the meaning of the 1888 message of righteousness of faith and were resorting to false Christ worship, citing Sister White's warning of turning to Baal worship. They were both American missionaries to eastern and southern Africa, respectively, and had great frustrations in the field, but agreed, having met for the first time on the boat on their first holiday trip back to the States in the autumn of 1949, and a winter of research in the White Estate vault and the seminary archives, after the 1950 GC Session in San Francisco, that they had to respond to the call for revival and up holding Christ, at the Session, by challenging the leadership on its confusion over Christ. They first signed the one page letter Wieland had drafted on his own convictions - only Short, of all the brethern Wieland approached, said, "I'll sign that." - and then their longer document was demanded: it saved their ministerial creditials and missionary posts: Wieland eventually retired as the All Africa Editor, at least across central Africa - he was fluent in Swahili - of all the publishing houses; Short was editor of the (then) Sentinel Publishing House in Cape Town (the 'house' has been sold in the last 20 years; publishin now operates out of the Union Conference building, in Bloemfontein, Orange Free State). Their challenge was declined, but a few copies of the document escaped the withdrawal of them by the two missionaries from their friends - having shared several copies while under examination by the Executive Committee, on instruction to withdraw the document from circulation; those leaked copies inspired several to dig deeper for truth - the read had strangely warmed the heart, which is why Wieland and Short wrote it in the first place, for they had been strangely warmed by Waggoner's The Glad Tidings commentary on Galatians, on the law and gospel..., but it also sparked Robert Brinsmead's Sanctuary Awakening movement, which went off the rails. The 1987 "1888 Re-Examined" was the same document, edited for lay readership.

Those two missionaries in Africa have always only wanted the church leadership to recover the 1888 message from the 1888 messengers themselves: republish and reclaim from their books the gems of truth which thrilled Ellen White like nothig else ever did: she stated that it was the loud cry message of Rev 18, by which the earth is yet to "lightened with his glory". That's BIG GUNS!...

In essence, grace is so strong and effective it has intervened in human affairs and history to link us to itself in Christ taking our sinful, corporate nature and actually saving the whole world by his consequent life, death and resurrection, so that we may indeed have faith in him to know the peace of God. Christ's actions saved and reconciled the world to God, but we must believe it to experience it: thus,...as the church today is rather loath to state openly, justification by faith has a regenerating element, recreating our inner man, an experience not located or part of sanctification, where it is rather left by our preaching and literature by statement and by not stating the case when just saying we should follow God.

To be yet more concise: grace is sovereignly effected for us in Christ's person & actions: that he rose from the dead makes him the world's actual redeemer because he is, not because the world knows it - which it doesn't, obviously! He is their redeemer whether they like it or not.

This is the fulfilment of the everlasting covenant: yes, the "two covenants" - old and new, was also an issue at Minneapolis, and Sister White endorsed Waggoner on his view. We do not clearly present the truth on the two covenants - law or grace, yet, still, today...!!...A CD has been compiled by a pastor in the States documenting our confusion in our literature on the covenants, but the truth itself is that the old and new covenants are simultaneous and have run throughout history side by side, which is ultimately common sense, anyway!...it expresses the fact that we act either by human will or the will of God by faith - we have a constant choice, and Israel, at Sinai, opted for human will - check Ex 19:8. The rest of that chapter is likely God dramatically trying to wake them up to their stupidity in their endeavour, without breaking their support for Moses at the same time.

I'll stop here.

thank you for the time and effort you put into your reply.

i had to read for quite a ways before i saw some semblance of an answer to my first question, but it was there.

i have another question.

if my question(s) were misread/misunderstood, how would one know if s/he is reading anything else correctly?