1888 - Still Missing the Mark in 2013?

[AndrewK788]

This is an open question for all Seventh-day Adventists who have any understanding or awareness of the 1888 righteousness by faith message presented by E.J. Waggoner and A.T. Jones at the 1888 GC session in Minneapolis. Ellen White herself has stated that the third angel's message is "righteousness by faith in verity." I've read many materials on the 1888 message by Mrs. White, Jones and Waggoner themselves, as well as more recent works by Donald Short and Robert Wieland. To put it simply--the message of righteousness by faith was presented to the church in a way it had never been before in 1888. The church leadership, for the most part, rejected it.

My question to everyone here is do you think we've since embraced it as a church? What amount of importance do you think the messages brought forth by Jones and Waggoner have for the 21st century SDA church body, if any? I've been doing a ton of research on this, and certainly I have my opinions. I'm not trying to debate anyone so much as I'm trying to get a feel for how other Seventh-day Adventists perceive 1888 and everything it was about. I looking forward to hearing from you guys.

God bless!

 

[AndrewK788]

No comments anyone?

 

[stinsonmarri]

Hey Andrew the 1888 message center around keeping the Holy Appointed Set Time. Here I am still answering your questions ok!

Blessings,
stinsonmarri

 

[AndrewK788]

Hey Andrew the 1888 message center around keeping the Holy Appointed Set Time. Here I am still answering your questions ok!

Blessings,
stinsonmarri

I've read numerous arguments and essays about this being the true 1888 message--most recently an essay by Norman Bradley I believe. The only fallacy I see in many of these writings is that they base too much of their case on heresay and surmising. In any case, maybe other authors provide a more convincing argument that this was the true dispute in 1888...but Bradley doesn't cut it.

Do you believe that rightly understood, righteousness by faith and the keeping of Holy Appointed times are mutually inclusive? Or are you suggesting the 1888 message really had nothing to do with righteousness by faith at all? Certainly, White, Jones, and Waggoner wrote at length about righteousness by faith being the centrality of the 1888 message and the Latter Rain.

I understand there are some rumors that a great dispute broke out before the GC session was formally in session. Some ambiguous quotes from Uriah Smith hint that there was a dispute over the keeping of the Lev. 23 feast days. As I said before, these statements seem to be ambiguous at best, at least as far as my research has gone. Do you have any other research I could check out on the 1888 GC session?

Blessings,

Andrew

P.S. Sorry if I came off as antagonistic before stinsonmarri! I see you're answering my questions and I appreciate it. It's hard to tell people's tone in plain text on the internet, but I assure you there is nothing but good will and sincere seeking coming from my end. God bless!

 

[stinsonmarri]

Andrew:

It is a pleasure talking to you. You are not bothering me at all. When you understand the Righteousness of YAHSHUA it is all about both the Redemption and Salvation plan. HE had to follow every part of the sacrificial system to a tee. Then HE as true example of Melchizdeck who was a real man and he was black. The Jebusites were black coming from Ham's son Canaan! These people knew all of this first and they including their oldest brother's children were once obedient. However, they begin to disobey and that's the reason why Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed. The Everlasting Fire is the same Fire that came down on the Burnt Offering for the priest to used in all their sacrifices and lighting the candles. This will be the same Fire known as the Lake that will cleanse the earth. I tell you this because you must understand. YAHSHUA had to fulfill the Law of ELOHIM through being Righteous. HE never ever used HIS OWN POWERS, HE totally depended on the FATHER. When HE prayed to HIS FATHER the HOLY SPIRIT assisted in the miracles except when HE called Lazarus's name! We too can have they same power through the HOLY SPIRIT!

The Righteous of the Law also came into play. The Law is ELOHIM the FATHER'S Character and it is binding through out Eternity. Compassion and Grace went into the Law before man or any created beings including the angels were created. The Law stated that the shedding of blood would only be the way to be redeemed. Only ONE equal to and part of the Law could atone for sin! However the remission of blood was require by the Law. This was an escape for man or he would have to die. Animals were substituted but they could not take away sin. They only met the Law requirement of blood. Only an ELOHIM could come and died to restore man completely. If you think that it was easy for the FATHER to allow HIS SON to die for all of mankind it was not. Why, were are rebellious, ungrateful, violence and so much more. We cannot blame all on Satan because we choose to sin! The SON pleaded with HIS FATHER on our behalf plus HE saved Satan's and those evil angels lives for a time as well. HE made an atonement for them or they would have died standing before the FATHER! HE stood between because the GLORY of the FATHER would have destroyed them!

Now this whole story is wrap around the Heavenly Sanctuary and the Holy Appointed Set Times were already set up in Heaven. The Sabbath is one of them as well. These Holy Days deal with presenting to the Father the first fruit of your harvest which by the way includes tithing! It is a link to truly understand the last days and how to prepare for what is about to happen. I have a paper that I have written if you would like it go to my email box and we can discuss it further. Pray for me because I know that that there are more like us who have not bowed their knees to Baal

Finally understanding the 144,000 and so much more is all surrounding the Holy Appointed Set Time. Remember it is still your choice!

Be bless,
stinsonmarri

 

[Castaway57]

I understand there are some rumors that a great dispute broke out before the GC session was formally in session. Some ambiguous quotes from Uriah Smith hint that there was a dispute over the keeping of the Lev. 23 feast days. As I said before, these statements seem to be ambiguous at best, at least as far as my research has gone. Do you have any other research I could check out on the 1888 GC session?

Blessings,

Andrew

Hello Andrew. You ask some good questions - do you mind if I ask you something first so I can understand better where you are coming from?

If you had to state to the general public in just 3 or 4 sentences, just what the "1888 message" actually is, what would you say, and how would you say it?

I would invite each person participating in this topic to also submit what they would say and how they would say it. I will also submit my take on it when I come back.

We must keep in mind that throughout our Adventist history, the gospel has always been wonderfully simple, and simply wonderful! - (CD Brooks).

 

[AndrewK788]

Hello Andrew. You ask some good questions - do you mind if I ask you something first so I can understand better where you are coming from?

If you had to state to the general public in just 3 or 4 sentences, just what the "1888 message" actually is, what would you say, and how would you say it?

I would invite each person participating in this topic to also submit what they would say and how they would say it. I will also submit my take on it when I come back.

We must keep in mind that throughout our Adventist history, the gospel has always been wonderfully simple, and simply wonderful! - (CD Brooks).

Hello Castaway,

Thank you for the reply. I agree it would be helpful to openly state what each of our understandings actually is on the 1888 message, or else we'll end up getting lost in misunderstandings and ambiguity.

It has not been until recently that I have heard anyone try to say that the 1888 message was in fact the keeping of the feast days. This is not my take, though I say that with great flexibility and humility.

What I DO believe 1888 centered around:

Righteousness by faith. EGW herself said the third angel's message is righteousness by faith in verity I believe.

This most specifically pertains to the power to overcome sin in ones life...What most Christians would call sanctification. It also deals with the nature of Christ. I am in agreement with Waggoner when he quotes Romans 8:3 that states Christ came in the likeness of sinful flesh...in other words, not the sinless, pre-fall nature of Adam. Why is this important? Because what Christ did--overcame sin in sinful human flesh--He empowers every one of us to do.

The great difference in 1888 that Luther or Wesley did not have in regards to righteousness by faith is its relation to the heavenly sanctuary and the ongoing work of atonement in the Most Holy Place.

Now whether the biblical message God intended to be received in 1888 was something other than righteousness by faith I don't know. What I do know is Waggoner, Jones, and White talked about it to such an extent to suggest that righteousness by faith wasn't their primary thrust in 1888 seems to be willful ignorance at best. But that's just my opinion. Feel free to disagree!

If I've been to vague on any of these points I could elaborate, but I tried to keep it short for the sake of simplicity. What is your take on 1888?

God bless,

Andrew

 

[Martinman]

I think I can contribute a little on the 1888 picture, the year 1888 is connected to the sanctuary message in more then one way. The year 1888 was a 49th year, (the 7th sabbatical year) in the 50 year sanctuary cycle of years. Not only was it the 7th Sabbath year it was the first possible year in the cycle of years that we could have expected the judgment to begin on the cases of the living according to the specifications of the sanctuary system that God gave to Moses. I am talking about the alignment of the autumn festivals as described by the Apostle Paul in Colossians 2:16,17. I am talking about the shadows of things to come.

 

[stinsonmarri]

Martinman:

Both you and Andrew are correct. But both also deals with Holy Appointed Set Times. We set time for the things we need done. But cannot realize that we get it from the ORIGINAL TIME SETTER! This whole thing is so simple but Satan want you to keep his set time and not YAHWEH. The times is set when the SAVIOR will return and when the Time (get it time) of Trouble will begin. Time will be set when probation is close and time was set when Investigated Judgment begin. It is all about Time folks. Every thing you do, the sun do, the moon, start, trees, plants, birds all exist with time being set. Why is that so hard to understand? You get up at a set time you work hours at set time by your bosses. A child is born at a set time. The Sanctuary is center around Holy Appointed Set Time. You see Satan had this pagan word feast to replace the correct words. You thinking of eating instead of time and we seem to love that!
Finally the Righteousness of YAHSHUA was set to be revealed at the correct set time. HE will come and as it is in the Book of Daniel the FATHER will speak His Holy Appointed Set Time:


Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days. Dan 12:12

Only those who will understand all of HIS Holy Appointed Set Time will understand this one. Then all will again return at another Holy Appointed Set Time to judge the wicked and live in peace to honor the Righteous of YAHSHUA in the FATHER'S Sanctuary. We all then will keep all of the Holy Appointed Set Times belonging to the Father forever! This is the 1888 Message!

Blessings and welcome back Castaway we've miss you, I have,
stinsonmarri

 

[AndrewK788]

Martinman:


Only those who will understand all of HIS Holy Appointed Set Time will understand this one. Then all will again return at another Holy Appointed Set Time to judge the wicked and live in peace to honor the Righteous of YAHSHUA in the FATHER'S Sanctuary. We all then will keep all of the Holy Appointed Set Times belonging to the Father forever! This is the 1888 Message!

I am curious about your take on the specific quotes we have on 1888. I am not suggesting the Spirit of Prophecy trumps Scripture, but Ellen White did make many comments that affirmed the 1888 message being righteousness by faith. What's more, is upon reading what Waggoner and Jones actually said and later wrote, they were not at all talking about Holy Set Appointed Times. I have read quite extensively through the 1888 Materials as well as the individual writings of these men and they do not make the Holy Appointed Set Times of any consequence.

So my question is this: do you believe they were wrong in their presentation in 1888? And if so, do you also believe EGW was wrong in her hearty endorsement of these men? Or do you believe that there is an Adventist conspiracy to cover up what they really said and rewrite history (as some have gone so far to suggest)?

I'm not even debating that we may possibly keep these appointed times some day. All I am pointing out is that there is no debate on what Waggoner and Jones said--or didn't say. And the fact remains they didn't say much of anything about Holy Appointed Set Times. How can we reconcile this fact with the idea that the 1888 message is centered around the keeping of these times when the so-called messengers mentioned nothing about it?

God bless,

Andrew

 

[JDMiowa]

This is an open question for all Seventh-day Adventists who have any understanding or awareness of the 1888 righteousness by faith message presented by E.J. Waggoner and A.T. Jones at the 1888 GC session in Minneapolis. Ellen White herself has stated that the third angel's message is "righteousness by faith in verity." I've read many materials on the 1888 message by Mrs. White, Jones and Waggoner themselves, as well as more recent works by Donald Short and Robert Wieland. To put it simply--the message of righteousness by faith was presented to the church in a way it had never been before in 1888. The church leadership, for the most part, rejected it.

My question to everyone here is do you think we've since embraced it as a church? What amount of importance do you think the messages brought forth by Jones and Waggoner have for the 21st century SDA church body, if any? I've been doing a ton of research on this, and certainly I have my opinions. I'm not trying to debate anyone so much as I'm trying to get a feel for how other Seventh-day Adventists perceive 1888 and everything it was about. I looking forward to hearing from you guys.

God bless!

Ellen White warned the church leaders that those who had stood their ground ever since 1888 and had "for years" resisted the light of the Minneapolis theology were in grave danger. She had "no smooth message" for those who had confused the theological issues in an attempt to protect their previous positions, refusing to admit error [Ibid., p. 97].

In 1896, Ellen White wrote another communication to Battle Creek entitled, "The Danger of Rejecting Truth." She was very concerned about the denomination for she knew they were in great "peril." "The church needs to be converted," she wrote, again making reference to the denomination's refusal to accept the 1888 message. She reminded them about the history of the Jewish nation and compared their rejection of Christ with the denomination's recent rejection of the new light from Minneapolis [Ibid., p. 64.]. In a reference to the Galatian controversy, she scolded the church by saying, Seventh-day Adventists "are in danger" of rejecting truth "because it contradicts something which they have taken for granted" but which is not really truth at all. Ellen White also wrote of the danger the institution face for its rejection and its publication the Review which had been influential against the Minneapolis message, "That men should keep alive the spirit which ran riot at Minneapolis is an offense to God. All heaven is indignant at the spirit that for years has been revealed in our publishing institution at Battle Creek. Unrighteousness is practiced that God will not tolerate. He will visit for these things [Ibid., pp. 76-77.]."

Because the vast majority of the Battle Creek hierarchy continued to reject the 1888 message, the results of their rejection began to surface. This in turn lead to the fulfillment of Ellen White's predictions that the judgments of God would be poured out upon the denomination's institutions.

By February, 1902, the world-famous sanitarium burned to the ground and ten months later, the Review and Herald building was also completely destroyed. Within one hour, the flames had reduced the Review's four-story, 80,000-square foot building to a heap of smoldering ruins [SDA Bible Commentary, p. 213.], never again to be rebuilt in Battle Creek.

Ellen White was not surprised by these events. It was Ellen White's position that the denomination's 14-year history from 1888 through 1902 culminated in tragic loss as a direct result of not accepting the original 1888 message delivered by Waggoner and Jones. Her statement in 1902 summarizes her viewpoint of this episode quite succinctly: "I have been instructed," she wrote, "that the terrible experience at the Minneapolis conference is one of the saddest chapters in the history of the believers in present truth [EGW letter 179, 1902]."
I for one agree with Ellen White. Sorry to say, most current SDA still reject new light.

 

[AndrewK788]

Ellen White warned the church leaders that those who had stood their ground ever since 1888 and had "for years" resisted the light of the Minneapolis theology were in grave danger. She had "no smooth message" for those who had confused the theological issues in an attempt to protect their previous positions, refusing to admit error [Ibid., p. 97].

In 1896, Ellen White wrote another communication to Battle Creek entitled, "The Danger of Rejecting Truth." She was very concerned about the denomination for she knew they were in great "peril." "The church needs to be converted," she wrote, again making reference to the denomination's refusal to accept the 1888 message. She reminded them about the history of the Jewish nation and compared their rejection of Christ with the denomination's recent rejection of the new light from Minneapolis [Ibid., p. 64.]. In a reference to the Galatian controversy, she scolded the church by saying, Seventh-day Adventists "are in danger" of rejecting truth "because it contradicts something which they have taken for granted" but which is not really truth at all. Ellen White also wrote of the danger the institution face for its rejection and its publication the Review which had been influential against the Minneapolis message, "That men should keep alive the spirit which ran riot at Minneapolis is an offense to God. All heaven is indignant at the spirit that for years has been revealed in our publishing institution at Battle Creek. Unrighteousness is practiced that God will not tolerate. He will visit for these things [Ibid., pp. 76-77.]."

Because the vast majority of the Battle Creek hierarchy continued to reject the 1888 message, the results of their rejection began to surface. This in turn lead to the fulfillment of Ellen White's predictions that the judgments of God would be poured out upon the denomination's institutions.

By February, 1902, the world-famous sanitarium burned to the ground and ten months later, the Review and Herald building was also completely destroyed. Within one hour, the flames had reduced the Review's four-story, 80,000-square foot building to a heap of smoldering ruins [SDA Bible Commentary, p. 213.], never again to be rebuilt in Battle Creek.

Ellen White was not surprised by these events. It was Ellen White's position that the denomination's 14-year history from 1888 through 1902 culminated in tragic loss as a direct result of not accepting the original 1888 message delivered by Waggoner and Jones. Her statement in 1902 summarizes her viewpoint of this episode quite succinctly: "I have been instructed," she wrote, "that the terrible experience at the Minneapolis conference is one of the saddest chapters in the history of the believers in present truth [EGW letter 179, 1902]."
I for one agree with Ellen White. Sorry to say, most currant SDA still reject new light.

This is an excellent post regarding 1888 and Ellen White's take on it. I'm thankful to see others who understand its importance, but also saddened. I agree with you that many current Adventists would still ultimately reject the same light that was rejected in Minneapolis.

 

[stinsonmarri]

I am a great fan of Jones and Waggoner but you must understand Righteous and Faith was centered around Galatian. The point was about what was the schoolmaster. EGW said which I agree both Moses law and ELOHIM'S Law and Commandments were schoolmaster. You have to understand what righteousness is all about! We have to depend on the aid of the HOLY SPIRIT. We have the power of choice which no ones truly understands in my book. The Bible says that the just shall live by faith. That is why I am a SDA by faith and not by denomination.
When the SAVIOR was pleading to HIS FATHER to let this cup pass from HIM. This was the first time the SON was separated from HIS Father. HE could not see beyond the grave. If you understand all those sacrifices which all were centered around HIS Life and HIS death. Here the Righteous of YAHSHUA who now was truly separated from HIS FATHER. All HIS Power and Glory was left in Heaven. HE now became a victim like those innocent lambs.

And saith unto them, MY SOUL is exceeding sorrowful unto death: tarry ye here, and watch. Mark 14:34

The human body was weighted down and the DIVINE was in distress that drops of blood was coming out of the Human body! This body went through a Spiritual death. The FATHER sent an angel to revive HIM so that HE could die on a tree. If we do not understand what happen in that Garden to YAHSHUA we cannot realize that is was faith that kept HIM through Righteousness. YAHSHUA'S faith and belief in HIS FATHER'S promise to be with HIM even though HE could no longer see or feel HIS FATHER'S PRESENCE. YAHSHUA took on sin so HIS FATHER hid from HIS SON. YAHSHUA died from a broken heavy heart. It makes me shutter as I write what HE done to save me. Because of HIS faith and RIGHTEOUSNESS now I can receive that same power. But here's where the two laws separate. ELOHIM'S Law points to being redeem through Salvation while Moses' law only taught the tools of Redemption. Moses law deals with symbols by using live animals but they could not complete the job. YAHSHUA the true LAMB actually took on sin and completed the Job. Sacrifices died and that's it. YAHSHUA rose from the grave to go further to complete the mission of saving us. HE now stand and save only those who have hope and faith by receiving the Righteousness HE imparts on us to be obedient to the FATHER'S Law and Commandment.

This is what the argument was about and the Holy Appointed Set Time are the time setter to put all of the plans of both Redemption and Salvation in place. Read Matt 25 about the Kingdom is like what? 10 virgins who at time all fell asleep. What sleep? When the cry came that the BRIDGROOM is coming go out to meet HIM. They had to bring something that is why they are called the firstfruit. Time is the most important thing and all is base once again on ELOHIM'S Time-period.

Key points
Sanctuary is the Courtroom and real cases are being heard-Rev 11:1
Righteousness by faith - Hebrew 10:23; 11:33, 40; 12:2
Faith is by doing - Hebrew 11:1; Rev 14:12
Time is by preparing and presenting Rev 14:1-4

Blessings,
stinsonmarri

 

[JDMiowa]

"When the SAVIOR was pleading to HIS FATHER to let this cup pass from HIM. This was the first time the SON was separated from HIS Father. HE could not see beyond the grave." Quote by Stinsonmarri

Why would Jesus tell the thief he would be saved if Jesus could not see past the cross? Was Jesus lying to make the thief feel better?

 

[Castaway57]

I am a great fan of Jones and Waggoner but you must understand Righteous and Faith was centered around Galatian.
stinsonmarri

"righteousness by faith" is woven throughout the entire Bible, all people, in every age.

 

[JDMiowa]

"righteousness by faith" is woven throughout the entire Bible, all people, in every age.

"Righteousness by faith" is an Old Testament teaching!

 

[Castaway57]

"Righteousness by faith" is an Old Testament teaching!

Are you saying people from the OT were/are saved differently than people, including us, from the the NT?

 

[AndrewK788]

Are you saying people from the OT were/are saved differently than people, including us, from the the NT?

I may be wrong, but I think JD was simply agreeing with you by pointing out that righteousness by faith originates in the OT and thus is interwoven through ALL of Scripture...which is different from the popular evangelical conception that righteousness by faith didn't exist before Christ and the New Covenant.

Habakkuk 2:4 "...but the just shall live by his faith."

Habakkuk was the source quoted in Romans 1:17 and Hebrews 10:38.

 

[AndrewK788]

"When the SAVIOR was pleading to HIS FATHER to let this cup pass from HIM. This was the first time the SON was separated from HIS Father. HE could not see beyond the grave." Quote by Stinsonmarri

Why would Jesus tell the thief he would be saved if Jesus could not see past the cross? Was Jesus lying to make the thief feel better?

I'm not trying to step into the midst of an ongoing discussion, but the idea of Christ not seeing beyond the grave is entirely biblical!

Christ came in the likeness of sinful flesh to condemn sin in the flesh (Rom. 8:3), thus he came in the nature of fallen man. Christ willfully limited himself by taking the sinful nature of man. In the trials of Calvary, with the weight of the world's sin bearing down upon his soul, Christ could not "see" beyond the grave. But he certainly grasped it by faith! and that is the point. The same faith we are meant to manifest is the faith Christ manifested himself.

We live by faith, not by sight, and the same was true of Christ while he was upon this earth in the likeness of fallen man or else the declaration of Hebrews 4:15 would be a sham. No, Christ could not see beyond the grave, but he trusted that God was able to bring him through, despite what his humanity might have felt. He did not lie to the thief; he shared his faith. And it is that faith that saves all of us.

 

[JDMiowa]

I'm not trying to step into the midst of an ongoing discussion, but the idea of Christ not seeing beyond the grave is entirely biblical!

Christ came in the likeness of sinful flesh to condemn sin in the flesh (Rom. 8:3), thus he came in the nature of fallen man. Christ willfully limited himself by taking the sinful nature of man. In the trials of Calvary, with the weight of the world's sin bearing down upon his soul, Christ could not "see" beyond the grave. But he certainly grasped it by faith! and that is the point. The same faith we are meant to manifest is the faith Christ manifested himself.

We live by faith, not by sight, and the same was true of Christ while he was upon this earth in the likeness of fallen man or else the declaration of Hebrews 4:15 would be a sham. No, Christ could not see beyond the grave, but he trusted that God was able to bring him through, despite what his humanity might have felt. He did not lie to the thief; he shared his faith. And it is that faith that saves all of us.

I,"see" your point. I'll like to share a different,"view" on this topic. It was not the unknown that bothered Jesus, but the knowen. I had posted this earlier. The last supper was in fact the Seder meal, remembering the Passover Lamb that brought protection and deliverance in Egypt.* Jesus drinks from the first three cups, (three times from one cup) but not the fourth cup.* The fourth cup is the Passover cup. Pesach translated Passover literally means "protection."* Jesus would not take this cup of protection, because the protection is possible only because he (God's first born) substituted his death for us and them. If God's first born did not die in their place on the cross, (the first born sons of Israel in Egypt) there would not have been a fourth cup of protection, (remembering God's protection of their first born in Egypt) in their past to remember. Kind of like the movie, "Back to the future" where they were concerned about changing the future, by changing some past event. But Jesus was concerned about changing the past, by not fulfilling the prophecy of his future. The significance of the Passover (first day of Unleavened Bread) which is also a Preparation Day for the Feast of
Unleavened Bread (a HIGH Sabbath) is truly great. Then he also rested until the end of the Seventh Day Sabbath showing its significance also. Both Sabbaths were needed to reveal the reason for Christ's death. Pasach, a Jewish festival that commemorates the exodus of the Jews from Egypt, is marked chiefly by the Seder ritual and the eating of matzoth. It begins on the 14th day of Nisan. The 15th day of Nisan is a HIGH Sabbath. The last cup or the fifth cup, he took alone, on the Mount of Olives.* It did not have wine, but was filled with "God's wrath meant for the nations" also known as, "Elijah's cup."* This cup was the cause of Jesus great anguish that made him sweat large drops of blood. Hematidrosis (also called hematohidrosis ) is a very rare condition in which a human being is suffering extreme levels of stress causing capillaries to burst under the skin.*** Probably from high blood pressure, and then the
blood passing through the skin.*** Leonardo da Vinci described a soldier who sweated blood before battle.*** Also men unexpectedly given a death sentence have suffered from the condition.*** This condition is normally fatal. In Luke 22:23-24, Dr. Luke describes this condition with Jesus, he also tells how an angel from heaven strengthened him. If not for this angel strengthening him, he most likely would have died right then and there.