It is very important to recognize this distinction between the _fact_ and the _philosophical theories_ invented to explain the fact; because it is frequently the case that the denial of a theory is regarded as a denial of the great fact, when such is not the case. All may agree in the fact when very diverse theories are held to explain it. Whether our Creator actually has come in human form into this world, and exhibited an example of _self‐sacrifice_ and _suffering_ for the general good, is what we may infer as _probable_ by the light of nature, but which we can _fully prove_ only by revelation. Note D. Whether the Creator ever communes with the human spirit except through the material organizations, is one on which reason and experience furnish no intimations. No record is to be found of any communications from the Creator to mankind that were not made either by visible forms or intelligible sounds, or by visions and dreams in sleep. All the revelations recorded in the Bible were by some one of these methods. This being so, the system of common sense neither affirms or denies the direct access of the creative mind to the minds of his creatures. It is a question to be settled solely by revelation. Note E. This mode of explaining the depravity of mind is to be found in the _Conflict of Ages_. On page 90 the following passage exhibits the author’s idea, both of a _perfectly constructed mind_, and of a _depraved mind_: “So there is a _life of the mind_. It involves an original and designed correlation to God, and such a state of the affections, passions, emotions, intellect and will, that communion with God shall be _natural_, habitual, and the life of the soul. He who has been so far healed by divine grace as to reach this state, has a true idea of the _normal_ and _healthy state_ of the soul. And if he finds that there is that _in the state of his moral constitution and emotions_ which seems to lie beneath his will and undermine its energy to follow the convictions of reason and conscience, and that by divine grace _this has been changed_, and an energy not only to will but to do good is supplied, is it to be wondered at that, in some way, he should come to the conclusion that there is in _his nature_ or _moral constitution_, _depravity_ or _pollution_, anterior to the action of the will?” The theory which this author adopts is, that the “normal” state of man’s “_nature_ or moral _constitution_” was created in man by God in a preëxistent state, and that man’s “_depravity_ or pollution anterior to the action of the will” consists in “a habit of sinning,” generated in this preëxistent state. This habit of sinning was not a part of the perfectly‐constructed nature made by God. Man himself introduced it into his own mind, thus rendering it so depraved that every moral act is sin, and only sin.