Identifying Errors About God Made Easy (Expanded Version)

8/4/2019 Identifying Errors About God Made Easy (Expanded Version)

1/46

1 | P a g e

GOD IS REVEALED IN THE FAMILY!!

By Derrick Gillespie (Sept. 2011)

INTRODUCTION:

This writer contends that every error about God that exists in the world, in Christendom

(maybe even your own church), or in any other religious movement, can be identified and

Biblically defeated or stoutly refuted, once Gods image in the family of Man (Gen. 1:26, 27) is

used as one of the MAIN God-given means of understanding the things related to God in the

best way humanly possible!! Put another way, all of the false, yet seemingly correct (and

oftentimes appealing) teachings about God, His Son, and their Spirit can be easily identified and

refuted straight from the Bible itself, by simply interpreting the Bibles message about God

through the imagery and parallelism seen in the family!

Various Christian groups, admittedly, do have (in varying degrees) certain aspects of the truth

about God in their teaching, but usually some other equally important aspects are either

misunderstood, are being denied, or are being misrepresented. I guarantee you, that as you

embark on this journey of discovery you will be amazed as to how God has revealed, from the

very beginning, the helpful parables and object lessons in the human family so that we could

understand Him and the things related to Him!! You will be amazed too to see how the Bible

makes it easy (through the family) to identify every error about God wherever it appears. Why?

Romans 1:19, 20 indicate clearly that the very eternal Godhead or, more accurately, the

divine nature of God Himself, as it existed even from eternity, is revealed in humans

themselves, and can be understood by the things that were made as it related to humans.

Primarily, Gods nature was imaged in Man and the family, and hence we certainly arewithout excuseif we fail to look there to understand (if even in limited terms) .

I also contend that there is a certain language method of communication that the Bible uses in

communicating certain deep spiritual truths about God, yet it is usually missed by very many

well thinking people, and, as such, explains why so many are in confusion today about who God

really is. This language method was established from the very beginning of the Bible, and is its

method right throughout, to the very last book of Revelation. In fact, it is used so very often,

and applies to several things of like nature to the Godhead (if even inadequately so) that one

wonders why it is missed by so many. No wonder the Bible declares that spiritual things are

spiritually discerned. 1 Cor. 2:14. And let no one think that this writer is about to reveal any

new thinking or revolutionary viewpoint on the subject of God, but what I am about to do is to

reveal how the Bible itself already had its own God-given tools for us to understand certain

deep spiritual things about God. So without any further ado let launch into this adventure of

discovery.


2/46

2 | P a g e

WHO IS THE ONE TRUE GOD?

Theres no need to beat around the bush with this one. The Bible is consistent from Genesis to

Revelation that the one true God is the Father, Jehovah by name, a singular personal being,

or a numerically singular and absolutely non-composite person/being, who is simply the Father

of our Lord Jesus Christ. Over and over, in the overwhelming cases, when the Bible uses the

term God it simply is referring to the Father of Jesus. The texts are so abundant that there is

no need to even explore the very many, such as Deut. 6:4, Is. 43:10, Is. 42:8, Is. 44:24, John

17:3, 1 Cor. 8:6, Eph. 4:6just to highlight a few. They speak clearly. At this point you may begin

to think I dont see Jesus as divine, or that he is God in nature like the Father. Quite the

opposite!! But every truth will (in its own time) fall into place quite naturally in this

presentation, as we look honestly at the family; including what or who the Holy Spirit is, in

relation to the Father, the one true God, and in relation to Jesus His Son. But you will have to

read on to Biblically discover the TRUE relationships involved. It will all get quite interesting!!

WHY THE JEWISH AND MUSLIM OPPOSITION TO CHRISTIANITY?

There is an understandable problem and difficulty when the above quoted texts about the

Father as the one true God (and ones similar in nature) are brought alongside other texts which

make it plain, for instance, that God spoke from the very first book of the Bible in collective

language when speaking of the creation of Man. Genesis 1:26,27 introduces the very first

problem text, and to this very day the non-Christian Jews, who only accept the Old Testament

Scriptures, and who are avowed monotheists (i.e. believers in one God being), but who are

honest and open, admit that it creates much difficulty for them when it is considered that only

God can create Man; not angels or any other created beings. Thus to whom, on behalf of

whom, or of whom was God speaking, when he said let us (collective, plural) make man

(collective, plural) in our (collective, plural) own image (singular; not images) and then

proceeded to create Man or Adamin Gods singular image(not in the images of God and

angels)? And more importantly, to whom, on behalf of whom, or of whom did God speak when

he proceeded to make Man to be more than one person reflecting theirsingular image (Gen.

5:2)!! This passage creates seeming difficulty that has never been adequately resolved by the

orthodox Jew, or the Muslims who (many of them) also accept the Old Testament Scriptures as

coming from Allah or the one true God. So too has Gen. 3:22-24, Gen. 11:6, 7, and Is. 6:8

continued to be those texts the orthodox/non-Christian Jew (and Muslim) have given no

adequate explanation for.

Furthermore, the scholarly but honest Jews make it plain that Proverbs 30:4, speaking of the

Creator God having a Son, whose mysterious name is like unto his own mysterious name,

create difficulty for them to ascertain who this Son is. It could not be earthly Israel, as either a


3/46

3 | P a g e

singular or collective son in imagery, nor could it be any normal king or normal human figure

in Israel, since it seems illogical that any such person/group could be said to have a mysterious

name akin to that of Jehovah. Angels are usually referred to in collective, as the sons of God,

and no one angel (at least none the Jews or Muslims can think of) could be said to have such a

mysterious name. And of course, to the Jews and Old Testament culture, ones name is

indicative of ones inherent nature and character, and hence this Son that Jehovah challenges

the reader of Proverbs 30:4 to identify must also have a name comparatively mysterious as thatof Jehovah Himself, since God himself compares the two through the writer of Proverbs. To the

orthodox Jew (and Muslim), God could never have a Son of his very own nature, otherwise

that would fly in the face of He already declaring that his glory he would not share with

another, and that no God was formed after Him. If at least a divine Son was present and

creatively active in the picture at creation (as Proverbs 30:4 and Gen. 1:26, 27 would seem to

suggest very strongly, as Christians argue) then, to their Jewish (or Muslim) minds, God would

indeed be sharing His glory, he would have a person of like God-hood formed from Him and

after Him (since that is what a son normally is)! That Son would be equal in nature with Him!

Polytheism would be the result, and their monotheistic faith would be obliterated. Or so theythought. So they maintain to this day that all these are impossible realities, and hence no need

to be bothered. That could not be the explanation they argue.

All of this explains why the unconverted/orthodox Jews (like the later Muslims) rejected any

notion that Jesus was Gods Son in the highest/truest sense (as modeled in the human

family), and the main reason why the Jews of Jesus time even accused him of blasphemy and

rejected his claims of his unique or special and genuine or primary-type Son-ship, in

distinction to all other secondary-typesons of God (John 5:18 and John 10:33). However, the

first Christians were enlightened Jews themselves who felt that the claims of Jesus was a new

phase in the progressive revelation of the Godhead as connected to the plan for human

redemption (Rom. 16:25,26; Eph. 3:3-11), and thereafter the New Testament Scriptures of

Christianity abound with Jewish Christian writers simply accepting the later revelationabout

Jesus being God in nature.i.e. that Jesus not only personally pre-existed in Heaven alongside

the Father, but existed as brought forth from from everlasting or from eternity past, as

the exact copy of his person/being (Heb. 1:2,3; 1 Cor. 1:24; Prov. 8:22-31); that from before

the foundation of the world (John 17:5, 24-26) the Father loved Him (thus he was a separate

person/being to be loved), but still sent him to earth to save us (John 1:1-3,14,18; Is. 9:6);

that he is truly Gods only begotten Son from eternity past, not just when he came to earth

(John 3:16; Heb. 1:1-4; Prov. 30:4); that he was God in nature and was in the form of God

before emptying himself as a man (Phill. 2:5-11); that he is worthy of worship like the Father

(Heb. 1:6; John 5:23) to be even called my Lord and my God (John 20:28, 29); that he

naturally inherited, as a true Son, his Fathers title of God (Heb. 1:8; Is. 9:6) and even His

very own name of LORD or Jehovah (as TRUE sons naturally do; Heb. 1:4, 8-12); that he


4/46

4 | P a g e

did the actual creating of the universe on his Fathers behalf(Heb. 1:2,3, 10-12; Col. 1:16,17);

that he rules supremely alongside him (Rev. 3:21); that he will be the final Judge, Resurrect-

or, and Giver of rewards/justice on His behalf (John 5:22, 25; Rev. 22:12); and that despite

divine, yet he will forever be both divine and human as our Savior, since his incarnation

(1 Tim. 2:5;Dan. 7:13,14;Matt. 24:30; Phill. 3:20-21; Titus 2:13,14). READ AGAIN ALL BIBLE

TEXTS JUST GIVEN ABOUT JESUS BEFORE MOVING ON!! ITS VERY CRITICAL TO THE STUDY.

To the orthodox Jew (and later Muslims) all these new Christian teachings are the greatest

blasphemies that could be conceived, and hence explains why they reject not just Jesus as the

ultimate Messiah, but also the New Testament Scriptures as being inspired by the same

Jehovah God they believe in by way of the Old Testament. What is of interest to note, however,

is that (as Luke 24: 27,44-48 shows) Jesus and the disciples only had at the time, and only used

(at the time) the Old Testament Scriptures to prove, to the unbelieving, the truths regarding

Jesus pre-existence, his divinity and TRUE Son-ship, his co-Creatorship with the Father, his

divine earthly Mission, etc. (along with, of course, the disciples eyewitness accounts of his

miraculous life, death and resurrection). The New Testament is largely a commentary on the

Old Testament itself, and or a compilation of the later written version of the disciples

eyewitness accounts of the marvelous new revelations these first disciples acquired. Ancient

Judaism, which refused to accept gradually unfolding truth and new Christian thought, was

naturally going to be in tension with Christianity, which itself grew out of Judaism.

WHY THE CONFUSION IN CHRISTIANITY?

However, the problem was not only with the Jews rejecting Jesus as divine and as their true and

long awaited Messiah, but the issues became even more complex when the New Testament

teachings and accounts, with all its newly introduced matters related to the Godhead (or

divine nature) are considered as a whole. Not only were Christians now presenting more than

one person with divine qualities, who should be worshipped to the same degree, but along with

this came the newly emerging thought that the Holy Spirit has distinct personal qualities and

acts on behalf of both Jesus Christ and the Father as ifthey themselves are present. Christians

became pressed more and more (mostly by way of heretical teachers leading the flock astray)

to be precise and definitive when speaking of the one God, the Father in light of these new and

revolutionary teachings, and to show why they were not polytheists. As a result of this, over

time, very many differing viewpoints have arisen as to how to resolve the seeming tension

between the ideas of one true God the Father, and yet in the picture too is a divinely equal

Son who became a genuine human, along with a seemingly personal, and oftentimes

separately listed Holy Spirit, being depicted as God and acting on their behalf as God.

For example see Acts 5:3-5; Matt. 28:19; Acts 13:2;1 Cor. 12:4-6, 11; Eph. 4:4-6, 30; Rom. 15:30;

Rom. 8:26, 27; Heb. 9:14; Rev. 1:4,5; 2 Cor. 13:14). And this is just a small sample, mind you, of

the Holy Spirit being depicted in new and more profound ways than in the Old Testament.


5/46

5 | P a g e

These issues, when considered against the backdrop of the Father being the one true God,

more than any other matters in Christianity, have historically created the most division,

controversy, uncertainty, and outright confusion among someand continues so to do even to

this very day. Why? Firstly because it is natural that the things of God would be the most

challenging to man, otherwise he would not be God in the first place (Job 11:7-9). Secondly,

because the Biblical method of presenting the Father of Jesus as the one true God (yet never

denying His divinely equal Son, nor denying the Holy Spirits distinct and personal operationon their behalf) has been largely overlooked, has been oftentimes missed completely, or has

been vehemently resisted! And in its place human inventions, inadequate illustrations, and

speculative approaches have been used. Whats the much ignored or oftentimes overlooked

Biblical method? God imaging Himself in the family of Man!! Gen. 1:28, 27 ; Rom. 1:19, 20.

This writer contends that if people accept all that the Bible says about God, His Son, and His

Holy Spirit, if they use the Biblical method which patterns the divine nature or Godhead (even

if illustrated in a limited way), if they also accept that no one can fully explain the things of God

to satisfy all questions and all critics (Job 11:7-9), and if they accept that we should leave the

unexplainable alone, then much of the confusion and man-made difficulties would be avoided.

THE BIBLES METHOD OF PRESENTING GOD WHILE AVOIDING POLYTHEISM

I would have thought that if God made Man in his own image (Gen. 1:26- 28), then the best

method or approach to expressing the nature of God is to look at Mans nature. After all, apart

from Jesus exactlyreflecting His Fathers person (Heb. 1:2, 3) nothing else in known creation

on earth was ever said to be faintly paralleled with Gods image. Thus when we look at how

God uses imagery in relation to humans to present truths about humans themselves, and aboutthemselves in relation to God, then we can have a faint idea as to how best to look at the things

of God. God admittedly uses other things in nature to illustrate the things of God (not just

human related things), but it is prudent to realize that only Man himself, and the things related

to human relationships, can best illustrate (however inadequate) the things of God.

Here now is a summary of the main things am about to address in detail about the much

overlooked language of the Bible. Consider very carefully:

1. Why was the very name Adam, as given to Man by God Himself, literally a collectivenoun, with no plural number, and this name can mean both an individual of the kind, aswell as the whole group in collective? And why was this particular name given to the

very specie that was made in the image of God to pattern his nature? Why did Eve

take the very name of her husband, the head (Gen. 5:2), despite there was one true

Adam, or the male at the beginning? Why did God see them, Adam and Eve, as one

flesh or of one substance, as if they are one being, and the wife today is to be loved


6/46

6 | P a g e

as ifa man is loving himself, his own body (Eph. 5:22-30)? Despite Eve was already also

called Adam, why did Adam call Eve the mother of all living in Gen. 3:20, and then

her name just happen to literally mean the giver of life? Why did God commission

Man to multiply and fill (replenish) the earth, and it just so happened that all of

Mans manifold descendants all over the planet, as separate beings, can be expressed in

the singular of being his personal seed (e.g. Gen. 12:7;Gal. 3:16, 29)? And why is the

seed of Man (the medium of his life) always pictured as proceeding from the fatherfigure, and yet that seed cannot be the manifold descendants of the male or head figure

alone without the union of both male and female? Why does God focus on the head of a

human group as being representative of the whole group? For instance, why was Adam

and Eve together called the man or him and he in Gen. 3:22-24, and yet more

than one individual was driven out of the Garden of Eden? Why are women, who

originally came directly from the being and substance of the man/male, called the glory

of the man (1 Cor. 11:7), just as Jesus was/is also called Gods glory and the exact

copyof his person (Heb. 1:3)? Why are wives, sons, and daughters alike, given the

same name the father has? Why are families and genealogy in the Bible traced throughthe father alone, as head of the family, despite a male alone cannot procreate? Why

does Jesus, like in a marriage union, see the Church so much a part of himself, his body,

that when Paul (out of ignorance) initially persecuted the Church, he was charged with

persecuting Christ himself? Why has death passed on all men because of the failings of

Adam, the head of the race? Why does the story of Israel (Jacob) mean that salvation,

blessings and curses in the Old Testament were passed down to his whole family (in all

generations) through the head ancestor? Why do prophecies of kingdoms and powers

(in 2 Thess. 2, Daniel 2, 7, 8, and Revelation 13, for instance) focus on the head of those

kingdoms or powers as representative of the whole nation, kingdom or power? Why iseternal life and future glory of humanity assured through one person (e.g. Ps. 8:4-6;

Heb. 2:6-11), i.e. through Jesus, the Seed of Abraham (Gal. 3:16, 29) the human

forerunner, the human first fruits, the second Adam, the head or father (Heb. 2:10-

14) of the children he was given, or the head of the Church body he is one with? And

why does the Bible say all Christians are the same personal Seed (Gal. 3:29), and that

they are the many members of Christ, and yet there is still one true Christ (1 Cor. 12:12-

14), the head, and he is the one true Seed of Abraham? Could it be that COMPOSITE

UNITY of a closely related group (of like nature) or a unit of humans is best

represented by, and is centered in THE HEAD of that group?

2. Why in everyday life is the head and face of an individual of prime importance and oftenrepresents the whole person, but cannot be excluded/separated from the body, since

ones body is considered very much a part of whom one is, just like the head?


7/46

7 | P a g e

3. God the Father, the one true God, acts in unison with those who FULLY reflect Hisglory (Heb. 1:3)or his divine fullness (Col. 2:9), and who even share his divine name

(Matt. 28:19), simply because they are are of/from Him, i.e. His Son and Spirit. The

Spirit is so much like God that the Spirit is even literally equated with the Lord or

Jehovah while immediately depicted as distinct (2 Cor. 3:17, 18 and Eph. 4:4-6).

Apparently the Father does not consider this reality as polytheism, even when, for

instance, he orders/endorses worship for His Son, and in equal measure to thatoffered to Himself, mind you (Heb. 1:6; John 5:23). This can be easily seen where (just

like in a family), despite there are many anointed members of Christ (1 Cor. 12:12),

yet this does not many Christs make, since only Jesus is the one true Christ, or the sole

head ofrecreated humanity in status, despite he and his brethren are of like nature in

terms of being human and being anointed. Anointed members of the body of the

one true Christ are not falsely anointed ones or lesser anointed ones in terms of

their human and anointed nature, but they are not the person of Christ as the one

true Head of the body, the Church. Eve being called Adam in name (Gen. 5:2), and

being of equal nature to Adam, still meant there was still one true Adam, the originalprototype of Man, the human father and head of the entire human race, who fathered

the race throughEve the mother of all living (Gen. 3:20). Similarly, God clearly

considers whatever is accomplished by His Son and Holy Spirit as ifit was/is he himself

who did/does it. He pictures the whole operational unity of the Father, the Son, and the

Spirit as ifit is the one and the same doing it (e.g. 1 Cor. 12:4-6). The Father is the one

spiritual Head of Jesus, operating through the medium of the one visible and tangible

Christ, and both are present everywhere by way of the one personal Spirit. Jehovah God

is biblically said to, for instance, create by himself(see Is. 44:24; Is. 45:11,12), is Judge

himself(Ps. 50:2-6), is called the First and Last and only Savior (Is. 43:11;Is. 44:6), is

called the only Supreme King (1 Tim. 6:13-16; John 1:18), and yet Jesus, often times

through the power from the Spirit, either did it all on His behalf, or represents him in

the office in question, or is called the same thing he is called. How can this be and yet

God the Father is still called the one true God?

4. God the Father is called the one true God, the Head of Christ, and is a separateindividual being from Christ, and yet, despite a separate being himself(said to be sent

by the Father to us), Jesus is depicted as Gods divine right arm (Is. 53:1, 2), his Wisdom

and Power (1 Cor. 1:14), his Reason, or Logos (John 1:1), etc. Likewise the Holy Spirit,

despite having his own mind and will (Rom. 8:27;1 Cor.12:11), despite being distinct

enough to be sent by both Father and Son (John 14:26; 15:26), despite distinct enough

to intercede to the Father on behalf of praying Christians (Rom. 8:26), despite

manifested at times even in human form (Ez. 8:1-4) and despite exhibiting his own

distinct personal characteristics (e.g. Eph. 4:30), yet is depicted as the hand ofthe Lord


8/46

8 | P a g e

God (Ez. 8:1-4) or the finger of God (Luke 11:20;Matt. 12:28), while at other times

depicted as the inseparable mind of God (1 Cor. 2:11), and still at other times depicted

as his omnipresence (Ps. 139:7-10). Why is God using all of this imagery, regarding all

three (i.e. Father, Son, and Spirit who shares the same name; Matt. 28:19), to picture

them as ifthey are a single divine being in operation; a single being who has one head,

one body, one spirit, and one name? And remember no part of a being can be

LOGICALLY considered as inferior to him, or not be considered equally a member ofthat being himself. And why is it that the sum total of an individual human being, made

in the image of God, just happens to be biblically presented as a threefold union of

body, soul, and spirit (1 Thess. 5:23)? And why did God not just use the imagery of one

individual being in operation to illustrate his operational unity with His Son and Spirit,

but, more importantly, ALSO used the family union at the very beginning to image how

God exists and operates?

All of the foregoing relates to a deep spiritual principle found all over the Bible that many people

have either missed, or ignored, and hence why the nature of the Godhead, as faintly imaged in

the family and in man himself from the very beginning, is not properly understood. Lets now

explore these vital truths in the Bible, and it will be quickly seen how certain difficulties about the

Godhead is easily cleared up, and how certain erroneous teachings can be easily refuted.

THE IMAGE OF GOD IN MAN INTRODUCED

Lets start at the very beginning. God made Man (Gen. 1:26-28) *"in his image" (i.e. patterned

after him). Interestingly it turned out that:

(i) At the individual level, Adam and all individual humans thereafter for that matter, was/is a

*threefoldbeing (i.e. body, soul, and spirit united) which cannot be separated from his constituent

parts (1 Thess. 5:23).

(ii) At the generic or species level, a family of Man is considered as still one in essence (Gen.2:24),

despite being also made up of a threefold union of (a) a father, as sole head (b) a mother, as a

help-meet, and (c) the later arriving seed or manifold descendants resulting from their unity

(thus *completing the family); with all bearing the same family name from the father, and all still

forming part of whom is called Man (Gen. 5:1, 2). The two (Adam and Eve), when they combined

at the deepest human level, produced a third human person like themselves, Cain, who was stillcalled and was fully a part of Man (humanity, or the one specie), or the family of Adam. Notice

that the union at the deepest human/physical level results in a personal entity that is deemed the

seed of the man (or proceeds/comes from the man, the head), and yet, after inevitably

channeled through the woman, equally belongs to both parents, and reflects and represents the

features of both anywhere that personal entity goes.


9/46

9 | P a g e

It becomes MOST interesting that in the same way a single/individual human, with the image of

God, is a threefold union, likewise a complete family of separate humans, with the image of God,

is a threefold union of father, mother, and their seed or manifold descendants, all in a closely

knit a group, with all sharing the same family name of the father. There exist the very same but

original principle of a threefold union of the Father, and Son and their Holy Spirit, though they are

not one personal being literally (as is erroneously taught by many in Christendom; especially by

most traditional Trinitarians and the oneness Pentecostals as well, but just explaineddifferently). They are only one in metaphorical imagery, with the Father as Head, the one true

God; just like the one true Christ and His Church. The three should be depicted metaphorically

with only one Head; not three! Also the Father and Son united, as separate beings, at the deepest

level, results in the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit (the life of the Father) is depicted, admittedly, as

proceeding from the Father, the Head, but also as being channeled through Christ, and yet is

shared and equally possessed by both (Rom. 8: 9-11, 27). The Spirit is also depicted as equally

representing, in a personal way, both the Father and Son all over the universe wherever the Spirit

goes or is sent; with all three sharing the name of the Father (Matt. 28:19) the Head of that divine

group. No wonder the Bible declared And God said let us make man in our own image. Thegeneral parallels and matching principles (not necessarily the exact processes) are eye opening

and compelling, and I will highlight these shortly.

It becomes apparent why THE WORDS TRIAD, OR TRIO, OR EVENTRINITY (AS A SIMPLE

NOUN; NOT THE TRADITIONAL PROPER NOUN OF CATHOLIC TRADITION) ARE VERY

APPLICABLE TO THE GODHEAD!! Why? Because the very nature of the Godhead has the one

true God, the Father, united with His Son (as a separate being), and present everywhere

through the distinct Holy Spirit; a Spirit who results from their mysterious union, just as a

complete family is a threefold union. This is a triadic or threefold union indeed. Will come back

to the Trinityissue later, and clear up a few misconceptions.

Some may ask, if Adam was created first in time, then Eve, and then came their seed or

manifold descendants from their deep physical union much later, then how would this relate to

the Godhead of three persons whom Christians, like me, contend are equally eternal? Well, the

parallelism with how Man was created may simply relate to the fact that the revelation of the

Godhead persons to Man was to be progressive (despite all three existed in eternity), with

the eternal Father (Ps. 90:2) clearly revealed to us first! Then much later the eternal Son

(Micah 5:2; Proverbs 8:22-24; 1 John 1:1-3) was revealed more fully to us! And then the

eternal Holy Spirit (Heb. 9:14), of whom we know much less about today than Father andSon, was to be revealed last; and probably more to be fully revealed later, but at this time it

is not necessary. Remember that time came about only after creation began (since it relates

to day and night, sun, moon and stars as time markers), and all that was the creation or

invention of God. And so before time began God (plus His Son and Spirit) simply inhabited

eternity, or the infinite ages called from everlasting! Within the infinite ages or from


10/46

10 | P a g e

everlasting, there is no reality ofbefore and after, since before and after concepts

are time related realities ever since time was created. That is what very many people fail to

understand, and hence why the eternality of the Father, Son, and Spirit is confused with time,

and before and after concepts are imposed upon on them to limit the eternal nature of

Jesus and the Spirit, for instance. However, the creation of Man within time should never be

confused with the nature of beings that exist outside of time, despite some parallelism does

exist. The parallelism that exist between the Godhead and the time sequence of Adamscreation, then Eves (and then their later arriving seed or manifold descendants), may simply

relate to the fact that we are to always see (by way of the method in Man was created) that

both the Son and the Spirit are of or from the Father, the head of divinity, despite all three

existed within eternity and operated together to create all things including time itself(see Is.

44:24; Heb. 1:2; Col. 1:16,17; Ps. 104:30). All three are eternal because they all ALREADY existed

before time itself was brought into being at the beginning, i.e. when day and night, sun, moon

and stars --- all time markers---- were first created. That reality no TRUE Bible believing

Christian can escape!

*LETS NOTE A KEY CONSIDERATION HERE: *THE BIBLE SAYS SATAN, THROUGH HIS HUMAN AGENTSON EARTH TODAY (THE MAN OF SIN; A POWER OR SYSTEM OF PEOPLE, NO DOUBT) WILL DO WHATEVER IT TAKES TO

OPPOSE *"ALL THAT IS CALLED GOD, OR THAT IS WORSHIPPED"(2 THESS. 2:4). THIS TRUTH, APART FROM IT GIVING INSIGHTS

INTO THE LONG RANGING PLANS OF THE ARCHENEMY TO CONFUSE GODS OWN PEOPLE ABOUT GOD, BUT AGAIN THIS IS

CLEARLY INDICATING THAT "GOD" IS A COLLECTIVE GROUP (SINCE THE COLLECTIVE WORD *"ALL"FURTHER PROVES THAT TO

BE SO)! ALLTHAT IS CALLED GODMEANS EVERYONE IN THE CLASS OR GROUP OF DIVINITY! OBVIOUSLY SATAN HAS NO

NEED TO OPPOSE FALSE GODS, SINCE THEY ARE HIS OWN INVENTIONS. HE WOULD BE SEEKING TO OPPOSE AND EXALT

HIMSELF AGAINST DIVINE BEINGS; GENUINELY SO CALLED. ITS ONLY LOGICAL, SINCE THE PATTERN/IMAGE IN MAN (A

COLLECTIVE GROUP) MUST REFLECT THE FEATURES OF THE ORIGINAL BLUEPRINT OF DIVINITY. ALSO, UPON CLOSER

EXAMINATION, IT APPEARS THAT JUST AS SATAN NOW OPPOSES ON EARTH ALL THAT IS[CORRECTLY] CALLED GOD, OR

THAT IS [CORRECTLY]WORSHIPPED, SO TOO SATAN DID THE SAME IN HEAVEN AS LUCIFER BEFORE BEING CAST OUT AS

SATAN.WHY DO I SAY SO?ISAIAH 14:13, 14 HAS A RATHER CRYPTIC YET FASCINATING EXPRESSION ABOUT LUCIFER INHEAVEN. UPON HIS REBELLION AGAINST THE MOST HIGH, AND HE WANTING TO SIT IN THE SEAT OF THE MOST HIGH, HE

ALSO CLEARLY WANTED TO INTRUDE UPON THE PLACE RESERVED FOR DIVINITY, OR WHERE THE DIVINE ONES MEET; A

CONGREGATION FOR DIVINITY (AND NOT JUST A NORMAL MEETING PLACE FOR ANGELS, AS SOME COMMENTATORS THINK)!

LUCIFER WAS THE HIGHEST ANGEL EVER CREATED, AND YET HE WAS EXCLUDED! AND SO JUST LIKE THE THRONE OF GOD,

WHERE ONLY JESUS CAN SIT WITH THE FATHER (REV. 3:21), LUCIFER ALSO COVETED THE EXCLUSIVE PLACE OF ASSEMBLY FOR

DIVINITY. CLEARLY IT TAKES MORE THAN ONE DIVINE PERSON TO MEET, OR ASSEMBLE, AND THIS EXCLUSIVE MEETING PLACE

WAS CLEARLY OFF LIMITS TO LUCIFER; THE HIGHEST ANGEL EVER CREATED! HERE AGAIN WE SEE EVIDENCE OF THE GODHEAD

BEING MORE THAN ONE BEING, SINCE IT TAKES MORE THAN ONE PERSON TO ASSEMBLE. CLEARLY THE THE MOST HIGH,

JEHOVAH OUR GOD, IS ACTUALLY THE FATHER, AN INIVIDUAL (1 COR. 8:6), A "HE", YET HIS NAME INCLUDED OTHERS ONE WITH

HIM IN AN EXCLUSIVE WAY. IN THE SAME WAY THE INDIVIDUAL AND GENERIC LABEL MAN AND THE FAMILY NAME ADAM

MEANT ONE INDIVIDUAL WHILE ALSO EXTENDING TO OTHERS, SO TOO THE NAME JEHOVAHAND THE GENERIC LABEL GOD

APPLIES TO THOSE WHO SHARE HIS NAME (MATT. 28:19); THOSE HE IS DISTINCTLY UNITED WITH IN THE GODHEAD, AND

THOSE WHOM HE CANNOT BE SEPARATED FROM, AS AN EXCLUSIVE GROUP!! THESE ARE HIS SON, WHO IS *ALSO OUR GOD

(JOHN 20:28, 29), AND THE HOLY SPIRIT WHOM IS THE RESULT OF THEIR UNITY; THE PRESENCE OF WHOM (PS. 139:7)

REPRESENTS BOTH FATHER AND SON (ACTS 5:3, 4; ROM. 8:9, 10). BOTH FATHER AND SON ARE BIBLICALLY PROVEN TO BE OUR

GOD, THUS THE HOLY SPIRIT, WHO IS THE REPRESENTATIVE PRESENCE OF THEM BOTH, MUST ALSO BE OUR GOD, SINCE THE

BIBLE SAYS JEHOVAH OR THE LORD IS THE SPIRIT (2 COR. 3:17, 18). SINCE ALL THREE HAVE THE SAME NAME, AND THE

SAME NATURE AND CHARACTER (SINCE "NAME" DENOTE ALL OF THESE) AS SEEN IN MATTHEW 28:19, THEN NO WONDER MAN

WAS MADE IN GOD'S IMAGE!! THIS IS COMPELLING REASONING WHICH YOU SHOULD CONTEMPLATE DEAR READER.


11/46

11 | P a g e

Dont fight the truth, but accept it!! Now lets delve deeper into these compelling issues!

THE JEWISH VIEW OF FAMILY ONENESS

Now, as it concerns the oneness of Man, or a human family, spoken of collectively by focusing on

the head figure, let me say this. Lest you think I am taking liberty with ancient Hebrew of the

Bible, let me demonstrate conclusively that the Jews did see both a family as well as all humanity

as ifonly one person or being (the head of the family, the male) was involved. In popular butextra-biblical Jewish literature called the Wisdom of Solomon, despite it is not inspired like the

Bible, yet the following quote from it is quite eye opening about how Jews thought about Man, (as

well as about personified Wisdom, but I will elaborate on Wisdom later). Emphases and inserts in

brackets are mine:

Wisdom of Solomon 10:1-7She [wisdom] preserved the first formed father of the world[i.e. Adam],

that was created alone[despite united as one with his wife], and[wisdom] broughthim out ofhis fall

[i.e. assured him/them of future redemption after his/their sin in Eden], And[wisdom] gave him[i.e.

Adam, Eve and all men] power to rule all things.

. [Later when] the earth being drowned with the flood, wisdom again preserved it, and directed the

course ofthe righteous[i.e. Noah and family]in a piece of wood of small value.When the ungodly perished[in Sodom], she [wisdom] deliveredthe righteous man[i.e. Lot and his

family], who fled from the fire which fell down upon the five cities [Sodom and neighboring ones]. Of

whose wickedness even to this day the waste land that smoketh is a testimony, and plants bearing fruit

that never come to ripeness: and a standing pillar of salt is a monument of an unbelieving soul.

This collective or group language, as centered in/on the male or head figure(with the he or

him denoting all persons involved, and both genders), is seen in the inspired Bible too, and so

confirms the Jewish way of speaking. Here are just a few examples:

Gen 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man [i.e. Adam and Eve] is become as one of us,

to know good and evil: and now, lesthe[Adam and Eve] put forth his hand[whether Adam orEve], and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever:

Gen 3:23 Therefore the LORD God senthim[Adam and Eve] forth from the garden of Eden, to

till the ground from whence he[both Adam and Eve] was taken.

Gen 3:24 So he drove outthe man[both Adam and Eve]; and he placed at the east of the

garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of

the tree of life.

Genesis 6:3 And the LORD said, My Spirit shall not always strive with man [i.e. all humanity], for

thathealso is flesh: yethisdays shall be an hundred and twenty years.

Job 7:1 Is there not an appointed time to man[all humanity]upon earth? are nothisdays also

like the days of an hireling?

Job 7:17 What is man, that thou shouldest magnifyhim? and that thou shouldest set thine

heart upon him?

Job 7:18 And that thou shouldest visithimevery morning, and tryhimevery moment?


12/46

12 | P a g e

THE IMAGE OF GOD IN MAN EXPLAINED

Now that this often missed (or much ignored) Biblical principle, of the generic oneness of Man

(demonstrating Gods image) is now well established, lets apply and reason further. When God

made Man in his own image how many men (male gender)were first created? Only one!

Adam. In a word there was one true Adam, the first male, the head (father) of the entire

human race in the beginning. However, you will realize very quickly that Eve (the female) who

came directly from his substance was also recognized as constituting Adam, or Man, ormankind, or humanity (see Gen. 5:1, 2). To be Man in the highest/truest sense did not

require Eve to be the person of Adam, her husband and head, but by her being simply human.

Thus Adam, as Man, must of necessity, and in the first instance, include the oneness with his

wife who bears both his name and equal nature, despite difference of function. And this was

the direct parallel/result of Man being made in the image of God, simply because God,

after saying let us make man in our ownimage, then proceeded to make Man in Gods

image. *If divinity or the Godhead was one person alone, then the image of God in man

would be borne by only one person/gender alone. Only the male would be humanity; not all

persons/genders!Despite Gods image in man first related directly to Adam, the first

human and the one true Adam (1 Cor. 11:7), however the image of God in Man LOGICALLY

applies to all persons (Gen. 1:26-28), and humanity in Man is a shared reality between all

persons of Man. Correspondingly God-hood is a shared reality between the persons of

divinity. The original blueprint must correspond in basic elements to the image, or else

there is no image or pattern in the first place!!

How many persons of Man first existed after creation on earth was totally completed? A

plurality!! How many humanities has ever existed? Only one! No other human species has

existed; even today (with billions of persons) it remains so. Was humanity only the male? No?

Was Eve called Adam or Man (human) in the highest sense of nature? Yes! Because she

was not an inferior specie member of Man in nature! Was she a man (male gender)? Clearly

No! Why? Because she was not the person of Adam (the male)! Was the woman led by Adam!Clearly yes! Did this diminish her humanity? No! Was she Adam, the head, in status? No! Was

she inferior to Adam (the male) in nature? No! Why? Because they were both of one (the

same) substance, and thats why God did not make Eve from a separate lump of clay, but to

forever keep them one flesh (as if one person), despite they would be separate persons, he

took the woman directly from the substance of the male (the multiplication process was 1x1=

1)! If God had made the woman independently from another lump of clay the equation would

be 1+1 = 2, and would have defeated the imaging of the Godhead which is always one true

God the Father, who, before time began, literally begat a Son from His very own substance to

and yet they remain in principle one (still 1x1=1) as a man and his wife are one, and as Christ

and the Church are one.

The same rule, in general principle (as described in the foregoing) is true when applied to

divinity in almost every area! Jesus is clearly not the person of the Father, but is TRULY God

in the highest sense, since TO BE GOD IN THE HIGHEST SENSE DOES NOT REQUIRE THAT

JESUS BE THE FATHER IN PERSON. This is quite similar to saying, that any female is truly Man

(human) in the highest sense, despite not being the person of a male (gender). Eve was not


13/46

13 | P a g e

another man/male (or another head figure), as this would create two heads of the first family,

yet still she was fully and truly Man or human or another person of humanity, and fully one

with the one true Adam. Likewise the same principle applies to the Godhead. Jesus is also not

another one true God (or another Head figure of divinity), but hes likewise fully and truly

divine or truly God[capitalized] in nature, and fully one with the one true God the Father

(the only divine Head figure in the universe), because as 1 Cor. 8:6 clearly says there is one

God, the Father, and one Lord Jesus Christ! Yet Jesus, as another person of divinity, is also

rightfully called my Lord andmy God(John 20:28, 29); not just God in nature.Why?Because, in relation to us, Jesus is our Creator just like the Father! Some like to leave out the

last part of 1 Cor. 8:6, and ignore the true import of John 20:28, 29 or Heb. 1:8, 10!! I will not!!

The divine unity is inescapable. Paul, (just like Jesus in John 17:3) when speaking of divinity

and the one true God, the Father, always IMMEDIATELY introduced Jesus along with Him to

show the inescapable family unity, just as Eve was introduced IMMEDIATELY along with

Adam when God made Man in his image. Gen. 1:26, 27. Why? The unity of persons

demonstrated in the image of God in humanity was as inescapable as the unity of persons

in the original blueprint of divinity!! As any truly begotten child knows, he doesnt have only

one parent (i.e. reproducer and pre-eminent caretaking figure); but two!! Yet that child

inherits only the name of the head parent, who gets the credit for his begetting. As in heaven

during eternity (i.e. before all time), so too on earth (during time) Jesus was similarly

begotten of the Father through the Holy Spirit, yet the Father ultimately get the credit!! No

wonder God made Man in the image of divinity. The parallels are too plain to ignore.

Eve was not a man (in gender), or the head in status, however (like all wives thereafter) she

also had family rights to the name Adam (Gen. 5:2), and was by specie also called Man.

Man (the specie) was Adam primarily, but, along with Eve, was one specie, one existence, one

in being; NOT that both are a single personal being or one person, but are one related

existence- e.g. Acts 17:28. Please see the dictionary for thevarious

uses of the word being.That should clear up many misconceptions as to its usage.

Concluding then, I ask again was it simply Adams leadership in the first family, or he being the

first human creation, or being the one true Adam (the Man of the house) at the beginning,

and the only biologically un-begotten human male that sets him apart as Man in the truest

sense? Was it only Adam, the male, that bore or had rights to the family name Adam (see

Gen. 5:1, 2), or was he the only one to be considered Man/human in the highest or truest

sense of the word, simply because he (or his substance) was the source of Eve, the female, or

because he was the head (lord) of his wife? Certainly not!! Yet, those who focus on

headship, leadership, and ultimate group authority as the measure of true God-hood would

certainly like to think so about the Father in the divinity sense, and would want to create

distances between the members of the divine specie in terms of their TRUE nature, and the

highest honor they deserve.


14/46

14 | P a g e

WHY GOD IS CALLED HIM, AND YET DIVINITY IS COLLECTIVE?

As already proven, ifthe word Man or the name "Adam" is both an identifying term for an

individual as well as a generic term to denote the collective specie (Gen. 5:1-3), then a few

other truths start to emerge. Man in the collective is Biblically and logically called him as

centered in any head figure of humanity. This has already been clearly proven in the Bible and

the Jewish culture. A modern writer that I respect further demonstrates this often overlooked

principle where humanity is concerned. Note carefully the collective wording below, denoting

all men since creation:

Man[collective] came from the hands of the Creator, perfect in organization and beautiful in

form. The fact thatHE[collective] has for six thousand years withstood the ever increasing

weight of disease and crime is conclusive proof of the power and endurance with which HE

[collective]was first endowed.

E.G. White, S.D.A Bible Comm., Vol. 1, pg. 1082

Correspondingly, the word God is both an identifying term for an individual, the Father

himself, as well as a generic term to denote the collective specie of divine beings, or the

distinct manifestations of divinity who all share the NAME and FULL attributes of divinity, or

the divine attributes of the Father (see John 1:1-3; Matthew 28:19; Eph. 4:4-6). Is it then

proper to collectively refer to all three in the Godhead with singular pronouns like he or

him? I stand upon the Word of God and by the God-given rule of the image of God in man

to declare that it certainly is properno matter the principle not being understood by many,

and is usually resisted or opposed!!

The favorite author of mine (already quoted above), who always saw the Father as the one

true God, understood this collective language and hence wrote:

Have you been born again? Have you become a new being in Christ Jesus? Then co-

operate with the three great powers of heaven *who*all three called who+ are

working in your behalf. Doing this you will reveal to the world the principles of

righteousnessGod says,[notice after this whom she means says this] "Come out from

among them, and be ye separate, . . . and touch not the unclean thing; andIwill receive

you, and will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the

Lord Almighty." This is the pledge of[not one person, but]the Father, the Son, and the

Holy Spirit[i.e. the *pledge to receive and be a Father to you]; made to you if you will

keep your baptismal vow, and touch not the unclean thing In order to dealrighteously with the world, as members of the royal family, children of the heavenly

King, Christians must feel their need of a power, which comes only from the [three]

heavenly agencies that have pledged themselves to work in man's behalf. After we

have formed a union with the great THREEFOLD POWER [singular; collective], we shall

regard our duty toward the members of God's familywith a sacred awe.

-E.G. White, Signs of the Times, June 19, 1901


15/46

15 | P a g e

Notice carefully that to this writer God says, or saith the Lord Almighty, and yet she

explained it to mean the the great threefold Power(singular) of the Three (i.e. the Father,

Son and Spirit) spoke as ifone Lord Almighty spoke, and pledged themselves as ifthey are

the one Father to all newborn Christians. This writer I quoted above NEVER, EVER believed

the Three were one Being literally (she actually called the three the three Holiest BEINGS in

heaven), but clearly she was in touch with the Biblical language I have been speaking about all

along in this presentation.

Language-wise, it is no strange thing for a group to be the intended focus but the pronoun

"he" is used to represent the group, even if the head of that group is targeted primarily. The

Bible is replete with examples of the singular pronoun "he" used to mean a collection of

individuals united by a common feature or a set of attributes, but are represented by the head

of that group. See for proof:

(a) Gen. 3:22-24

(b) Dan. 2, 7, and 8 with Rev. 13

(c) Dan. 7:13, 14, 26, 27 with Rev. 12:1-5 and 1 Cor. 12:12

(d) Psalm 8:4-8

This reality seems likewise applicable to God who spoke from the very beginning as*"US", since

the Father (an individual "he") is the head of divinity or is the primary focus of divinity, and thus

He is used to represent the whole specie, just as Christ (an individual "him") is the head of

humanity or the primary focus of humanity, and thus is used to represent the whole specie as

the one Seed of Abraham (Gal. 3:16, 29)!! We see this imagery clearly in Daniel 7:13, 14 having

Christ as the representative son of man receiving a kingdom, and thereafter ruling, and yet

verse 27 of the same chapter shows how the application/interpretation applies it to all the

peopleof the saints of the most High. Compare Eph. 2:4-6 with Rev. 3:21 and this truth

become even clearer. Interesting indeed!

If Man, i.e. human beings united, can be one (Gen.2:24; Gen. 11:1-8), and represented as

speaking and acting as one, or represented together as "him" or "he" (Gen.3:22-24; Gen.

6:3;Psalm 8:4-8; Job 7;1,17,18) then God, speaking just like Man did e.g. "Go to, let us"(Gen.

11:3-8)He also can be pictured as a unity ofbeings speaking and acting as one (Gen. 3:22);

even if they are *NOT one individual Being literally, but are one spiritually and one in essence,as Man himself is (Acts 17:28). And never forget that God saying "Let us make man" can never

be blasphemously applied to the Father speaking in unison with angels, since man was never

made in the image of angels and God, but only in the image of divinity. So let no one divert

you from the plainness of this truth!


16/46

16 | P a g e

No human male could ever say to a beloved pet (a lesser specie), let us reproduce a child in

our image, and it happens. Why? The laws of the universe, as set in motion by divinity, means

that it takes two of the same kind (humanity) to reproduce humans, just as Father and Son

were of the same kind (divinity), and in union they created the universe (including man), but

the Father created through His Son and gets the credit as Head (Is. 44:24). Only divinity can

create. By the way,just as Eves name literally translates to mean the life giver (and she

gave life, as it were, to all on behalf of Adam, the father of all humans), so too, Jesus asCreator, is pictured as the Life giver in John 1:1-3, and gave/gives life to all on behalf of the

Father (John 5:21-29). And only God can give life!! Thus the term God is collective in

Gen. 1:26, 27 because of the corresponding realities that took place right there and then at

the beginning of Man. Man came from God as a collective group bearing the same family

name (Gen. 5:2), therefore Man was made in the image of God speaking in a group as us,

i.e. those of divinity spoke with one voice about our image (singular); not our images.

Period! End of story and all protestations to the contrary!!

Now, God even went as far as using the imagery of one individual being to represent the

members of the Godhead, to illustrate the unity, despite the separateness ofbeings involved

(just like the Church headed by Christ is similarly represented- 1 Cor. 11:3; 1 Cor. 12:12):

The Father is pictured in imagery as the Head of Christ (1 Cor. 11:3), and He worked on earth

through and controlled the man Christ Jesus (2 Cor. 5:19), who was then called the arm of the

Lord (Is. 53:1-3). Before that, and even before all time began, He worked through Jesus

depicted as the wisdom and power of God (1 Cor. 1:24; Prov. 8:1, 22-24), and as His Logos

or Personal Word (i.e. His already expressed Word as a separate person; John 1:1-3) to create

the universe (including day and night, sun moon and stars, which began time as we know it).

These are all metaphorical imagery, to depict unity of operation as ifonly one being is involved,and yet we know that by making the family of separate beings and the church of separate

beings to pattern or image that same original principle of Gods operation then we know

we are not dealing with only one Being. In addition the Father is pictured as working through

the Spirit who even at times appears with human form, and yet the Spirit is called the hand of

the Lord God (Ez. 8:1-4), at other times the finger of God (Luke 11:20; Matt. 12:28; Ex. 8:19;

Deut. 9:10), at other times his inseparable mind (1 Cor.2:11), and still at other times his power,

etc. All these are simply imageries to show the inseparable unity of all three in operation;

operating as ifthey are one being, with the Father as the Head of the whole operation, despite

they are not literally one personal being. We know they are not because the family and theChurch similarly patterns the united operation of the Godhead as ifonly one being or person is

involved (the head figure alone), and yet they also reflect/pattern the distinction of separate

beings at work!


17/46

17 | P a g e

Here again is that helpful illustration from that writer I greatly respect, one who consistently

saw the Father as the one true God, and yet insightfully wrote about the Godhead:

Have you been born again? Have you become a new being in Christ Jesus? Then co-

operate with the three great powers of heaven *who [notice all three called who+ are

working in your behalf. Doing this you will reveal to the world the principles of

righteousnessGod says,[notice after this whom she means says this] "Come out from

among them, and be ye separate, . . . and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receiveyou, and will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the

Lord Almighty." This is the pledge of[*not one person, but]the Father, the Son, and the

Holy Spirit[i.e. the *pledge to receive and be a Father to you]; made to you if you will

keep your baptismal vow, and touch not the unclean thing In order to deal

righteously with the world, as members of the royal family, children of the heavenly

King, Christians must feel their need of a power, which comes only from the [three]

heavenly agencies that have pledged themselves to work in man's behalf. After we

have formed a union with the great THREEFOLD POWER [singular; collective], we shall

regard our duty toward the members of God's family with a sacred awe.

-E.G. White, Signs of the Times, June 19, 1901

WHY I AM NOT THE USUAL TRINITARIAN

This leads me now to make it clear that despite this writer accepts, for the convenience of

communication, the application of the word trio/trinity/triad when considering the Godhead,

yet I am not a traditional or orthodox Trinitarian, since I do not believe that Father, Son and

Spirit are literally one Being united indivisibly as one substance literally. I believe simply what

the Bible teaches; that the Father and Son (and Spirit) are one as the members of the

Church and Christ himself are one. Theyre SEPARATE BEINGS, OR THE THREE HOLIEST

BEINGS IN HEAVEN, but one as the Church is. Anything else is futile speculation.I also dont

believe that the Godhead (as seen in subsequent pictorial) is best represented with three

heads or faces of Jesus on one neck, because the biblical imagery God uses nowhere supports

that principle. Only the Father is the Head of the divinity of the Three; not Jesus!!

This principle too is seen imaged in the threefold family union, where the members of the

human family are all equally human, and all have the same family name of the head of the


18/46

18 | P a g e

family, but only the father is the head of the family in status (remember though that his

headship does not imply that his wife or his seed/children are inferior in nature to him).

The spiritual unity of the Godhead, pictured IN IMAGERY as operating like a human body is very

apt indeed, but only as it applies as a metaphor; *not in literal terms as Roman Catholics

believe God to be, i.e. in terms of *1 literal numeric indivisible substance, and depicted with

three heads fused around one brain (as seen in foregoing Roman Catholic pictorial)!

No human body has more than one head. Period!! And that's why only the Father is the

"head" of Christ (1 Cor. 11:3), with Christ pictured in biblical imagery as the "arm of the Lord"

(Isaiah 53:1), and the Holy Spirit pictured as the "hand of the Lord" or "the finger of God" (Ez.

8:1-5 with Luke 11:20/Matt.12:28). All of this biblical imagery indicates the spiritual unity of

the Godhead in the same terms as Christ and the Church is!! These Scriptures clearly indicate

that it is OK to picture the Godhead operating *LIKE a human body with united members acting

in perfect unison!! And while all members of that union are equal in nature, all exist together,

and all members are just as important as the other, despite they function in different roles, yet

the equality of nature does not mean that all members are the Head!! That's how the Godheadhas chosen to be seen in imagery when God simply said from the beginning, *"LET US MAKE

MAN IN OUR OWN IMAGE!! Thus we need look no further, or strive to use man-made

illustrations. God has already given us the illustrative pattern he himself invented, i.e. Man as

an individual, and Man as a family--- all made in God's image!!

HOW THE FAMILY MODEL REFUTES ALL ERRORS ABOUT GOD!!

Lets now see how the image of God in Man helps us to be able to identify all heresies and

errors in the Christian faith. I will elaborate on two such types of heresies, as examples.

1. Main Errors of the Jehovahs Witnesses: The Watchtower and Jehovahs

Witnesses (JWs), like the Arian heresy of the fourth century, appealed to Jesus being called

the firstborn of all creature and the beginning of the creation of God, and sadly then

concluded that this means Jesus is a creature, and is not God by nature, since the Father is

the one true God. But if they had taken a little more time to patiently and objectively

research, and if they had believed Jehovah God himself when he said that he and Jesus

made Man in their own image, then they would not have found yourselves in this sad

situation. Scholarly exegesis makes it plain that words have varieties of meaning, and not

only the surface meaning should be grabbed and run with, and a text taken out of context

is a woeful pretext. Interestingly, my research shows me that the Jews referred to the

Father, or Jehovah Himself, as the firstborn of/over the world or all the creation

(Hebrew, becoro shel olam), as the Adam Clarkes Commentary on the Bible indicates:


19/46

19 | P a g e

The Jews term Jehovah becoro shel olam, the first-born of all the world, or

of all the creation, to signify his having created or produced all things

-Adam Clarkes Commentary on the Bible

Now it is absolutely true, that Jews, who are the best expositors of their own language,

should be trusted to at least know that this expression can be applied to God, or to divinity,

and yet it does not mean he is a creature. And we find this clearly applying also to Jesus as

the divine Son of God, without it applying to him being a creature, or the first thing

created. Because the expression firstborn or first begotten, as well as the broader

expression firstborn of all creation both have the added meaning ofpre-eminence over,

then we can see why they can be applied to Jesus in Col. 1:15-19. Paul, a Jew, rightly

understood that it means simply that Jesus has pre-eminence over all things BECAUSE he

himselfcreated all things. Thats why Paul said in verse 16 of Col. 1 FOR BY HIM WERE ALL

THINGS CREATED. The word for, in that context, clearly means heres the reason why.

Paul, as a Jew, knew very well that the word firstborn also has meaning of pre-

eminence when even things being created, or things being born are not the subject at

hand. And so we find the Bible calling a disease like leprosy the firstborn of death (Job

18:13), or describing Jesus coming from the grave as the first begotten of those from

the dead (Rev. 1:5). Why? Leprosy was the prime, pre-eminent, or leading disease in those

days, so too was Jesus the prime, leading, or pre-eminent person to have ever been in the

grave. Leprosy was not the first ever disease to exist in time, neither was Jesus the first to

ever be resurrected from the dead, and so the emphasis shows it means, in context, PRE-

EMINENCE OVER; not first in time. And even if Jesus, by way of his incarnation, became

part of his creation, it was thousands of years after he himself created all things, and it was

only after the MIRACULOUS incarnation process. In addition it was only after he was

already MADE (Heb. 2:17) to became part of the human species of creation, incarnation-

ally, that Paul applied the expression to Jesus, and so it still means his PRE-EMINENCE

OVER ALL CREATION, just like he is pre-eminent over the Church, or over those who are

from the dead, etc. Likewise, despite becoming himself a Jew long after Jews were in

existence he was still called the firstborn among many *Jewish+ brethren (Rom. 8:29),

because he has pre-eminence over all Jew.

Correspondingly, the term the beginning of the creation of God MUST mean he is the

ORIGINATOR, SOURCE, or BEGINNER of the creation of God, as well as being the PRE-

EMINENT One over the creation of God, since the expression beginning comes from theGreek word arche, and just like the words architectand archenemyshow, its use

extends to these meanings too; not just to first in time. This means therefore that Jesus is

the co-Creator!


20/46

20 | P a g e

The main reason for the Jehovahs Witnesses not understanding Jesus TRUE nature, as

Gods Only Begotten Son, is in them not accepting Gen. 1:26, 27 literally. Their

blunder is two-fold:

a) Over and over the Father Himself declares that Jesus is his ONLY BEGOTTEN Son, or

His very special Son, His unique Son who is the exact copy ofhis very person/being

(Heb. 1:1-3), who has the fullness of the Godhead or divine nature in Him (Col. 2:9),

and so is unlike everyone else called sons of God. Now, their thesis, because of its

failure to sufficiently/properly research, properly define words, and properly apply

exegesis, it has reduced Jesus to being just like all othersons of God: a CREATURE!! If all

other sons of God are CREATED beings (angels included), and if humans, as sons of God,

are spirituallysaid to be begotten again by God, then in what sense could Jesus be said

to be the ONLY Begotten Son God? Only in the sense no other son of God is. He was

(past tense) literally BEGOTTENof the very SUBSTANCEof God the Father Himself, by

divine procreation or reproduction from the PERIOD the Bible calls from everlasting, or

from eternity itself, since time is part of creation and was created by Jesus Himself (John

1:1-3). The known universe consists of (i) time and space (two invisible and intangible

realities), as well as (ii) tangible matter making up all living and non-living things (as proper

research would have indicated), and all three were the direct creation of Jesus Himself

(Col. 1:16,17)unless JWs wish to defeat John 1:2,3 or Col. 1:16,17, which I am sure they

cant, despite their futile attempts to (by even adding words to the Scriptures in John 1:1-

3, and Col. 1:16, 17). How sad!

The Greek word monogenesfor only begotten, as seen in John 3:16, means first, an

only child literally born from a parents own substance within a specie, as well as a unique

member of a group, and it is precisely the word God uses to describe Jesus, IN TOTALDISTINCTION FROM ALL OTHERS CALLED SONS OF HIS. JWs, however, deny all of what

Jesus Himself said, what His apostles taught, what almost all Christian apologists of the first

three centuries proved they inherited from apostles by way of their preserved writings,

and instead makes Jesus a CREATURE like you and me, like the angels, and like the known

created universe. Heresy I say!!JESUS IS NOT A CREATURE, but by Gods own admission,

over and over, he is his TRUE Son, and by right of coming from His substance (like Eve

came directly from Adams substance, as part of the demonstration of Gods image in man

at the very beginning), Jesus therefore, like no other son of God ever can, has rights, by

NATURAL INHERITANCE, to own ALL of what God Himself owns, including his name (aswives and literal sons do), his angels, his temple, his church, his children, his throne, his

kingdom, et al). John 16:15. He even owns, in a spiritual way totally unknown to man,

the very Spirit of God by natural right. Why? This is because he is a TRUE Son; NOT a

creature.


21/46

21 | P a g e

A creature is a new thing externally manufactured that never existed in its properties

before, but a reproduction is a biological PROCREATION from a pre-existing prototype

(big difference), and is the means by which a parent naturally/biologically brings about a

copy of himself and his pre-existing properties. Since no other son is said to be Gods

only begotten Son, or is said to be the exact copy of his person, then it

stands to irrefutable reason that Jesus was a NATURAL reproduction of His Father before

time began, i.e. from everlasting or from eternity, and hencehe isNOT a creation or

external manufacturing of properties never in existence before, but is of the divine

specie before time began (and hence is from everlasting as well). Yes, he is of the divine

specie, and hence is himself like his Father in terms of divine specie; not in terms of divine

headship or leadership; a matter God demonstrated faintly in principle, in the image of

God in man, when he made Eve to come directly from Adams substance, with Adam as

the one true head of the first family and the entire human race. And this principle is what

confirms that Jesus is God in nature, yes, God in highest nature, just like Eve was Man in

highest nature, because she came DIRECTLY from Adams substance. And yet Jesus is not

the person called God, the Father, despite inheriting his name and nature as TRUE sonsnaturally do of their literal fathers, and just like Eve was not the person called Adam, but

was called Adam in name (Gen. 5:1, 2), and just like wives and children naturally or

rightfully acquired the name of the head of the family. Why? This is because all are of the

same human species, and are one as a literal family! I wonder if married women among

the JWs see themselves as inferior to their husbands as head, or see themselves as unlike

him in specie.

b) Any teaching which denies that Jesus, by way of being Gods only begotten Son, is

not God in nature, is not divine, and has no divinity whatsoever is anti-Christ in spirit

because it denies the Father being a real Father in the TRUE sense, and denies that

Jesus is a real Son in the true sense!! I can excuse, as weak argumentation, someone

saying that Jesus being Gods only begotten Son is an expression which means that

Jesus is God in fullest nature, is unique as Gods divine Son, but not that he was

literally begotten or derived at the beginning, since that would mean he is not

eternal. Weak argumentation, but excusable as it exists among some today (e.g. among

certain mainstream SD Adventist leaders, writers, and teachers)! Why? Because it is

critical (salvific) to accept that Jesus, as the Son of God, is God in fullest nature, even if

you blunder on the how He is PROPERLY deemed to be so! But I cannot excuse

someone saying that Jesus being Gods only begotten Son means he is a creature and

is not divine. That is heresy, the spirit of anti-Christ, and by it the very teaching of

Gods image in man is being obliterated. Any definition of God is erroneous if it only

focuses on the Father, just like any definition of Man is erroneous if it focuses only

on the male, or father or head figure.What is true is thatlike Adam, the one true Man


22/46

22 | P a g e

(the prototype of humanity) at the beginning, the Father is the one true God, the

prototype of divinity, from all eternity. Yet if Eve, just like Jesus in relation to the

Father, was not the person of Adam, in the role of headship, did that mean she was not

human, but a false human, or a lesser human? You the reader, already know, or by now

SHOULD know the answer I am sure. Same with Jesus in principle, and even more, since

he is nota false God, or a lesser God, but is the exact copy of the Fathers person

(Heb. 1:3), and can even legitimately represent Him as the Everlasting Father (Is. 9:6)!

2. Main Errors ofOneness Pentecostals (Jesus Only)

Oneness Pentecostals or modalists or sabellians (commonly called Jesus Only) seem

very Biblical in insisting on one God being, whom they say is Jesus only. Jesus, whom

they say, is not just God in nature, but is the person of the Father Himself! But taking

another look at the image of God in Man shows up their heresy in several ways!

a) They make the Word (Logos) of God (John 1:1,2) to be the literal being or person ofGod the Father himself, by saying God Himself was literally the same being of Jesus

(depicted as the Word) whom he was plainly said to be with(Greek pros, literally

face to face). They seek to pass this off as logical, by appealing, first, to the Bible

saying and the Word was God, and secondly by appealing to Greek philosophy about

the Greek term logos (or word) alsomeaning the thought or the unexpressed

word of a person himself(i.e. its secondary meaning). However, both the language of

John in John 1, and the image of God in Man, or the family, defeats this teaching. The

person called God that the Word or Logos was said to be with in verse 1 is

designated in a way to show the clear distinction of beings. God, that the Word

(Logos) was said to be with is designated as ho theos (or the God), with the

definite article the (ho) indicating a proper noun. However, apart from saying that

the Word was withthe God (ho theos), clearly meaning a distinction, the Word or

Logos was simply said to be theos in verse 1, without the definite article the (ho

theos). If the definite article the (ho) was before both words God in verse 1 of

John, then it would mean that both the Word of God and God, the God, are the same

being!! But the literal Greek language construction of John 1:1 shows that when the

Word or Logos was being described in verse 1, it simply said the Word was God, or

simply theos without the definite article. This simply means that the Word or Logos

was divine, or of like/same nature as God, i.e. Jesus was divine just like the God that

he came from and was with. The same idea is worded differently in 1 John 1:1-3.

b) Now since (in imagery) any word, once expressed, becomes distinct and separate fromthe source, then we know Jesus was ALREADY separate as a being from the Father he


23/46

23 | P a g e

was said to be with in John 1:1. Here now is how the family, and the image of God in

Man, perfectly illustrates John 1:1-3. In the same way, Eve came directly from the being

of Adam, as a separate being, and then Adam fathered the race through her (never

apart from her), so too God did not create the universe without his Personal Word;

whom we now know to be Christ, a separate being. The parallel is simply unbeatable.

The same way Adam did not procreate in isolation, but by/through the being who came

directly from him, so too God, the Father, created by/through the being that camedirectly from Him before time began; the being depicted in imagery as the ALREADY

expressed Word or Logos. God did not create by his unexpressed thought, but

by/through His ALREADY expressed and personal Word, whom we now know as Jesus.

Thats precisely why Jesus was depicted as the Wisdom of God ALREADY brought

forthand ALREADY set upFROM EVERLASTINGor from eternity past; long before

anything was created (1 Cor. 1:24; Proverbs 8:22-24; Micah 5:2). In the same way, Adam

could say in love to Eve let us make a child, and he then fathered that child through

her, but only after she already came from him, in like fashion, only after Jesus was

already in existence from eternity as a separate being, as the already expressedPersonal Word, or as Wisdom ALREADY brought forth, could the Father naturally say

to Him of like nature, let us make Man in our own image, and then by/through Him

he created Man; just like he did all of creation in the entire universe (Col. 1:16,17)!! Its

as clear as crystal!!

c) In addition, the Jesus only or oneness Pentecostals are at a loss to show how Godcould be referring to his Son in Proverbs 30:4, long before Jesus sojourn on earth, and

yet, according to them, it was only the human son of Mary that could be called Gods

only begotten Son. They lamely try to squeeze into the picture God using futuristic

language or prolepsis in Gen. 1:26, 27 and in Proverbs 30:4. But that will never cut it.

Almost every early Christian writer and apologist of the first three centuries commonly

understood and expressed Jesus begetting or his descent from the Father as first

occurring during eternity, or from everlasting (Micah 5:2); not just on earth. This

indicates strongly what they inherited in understanding from the apostles themselves.

John 3:16 shows that God must have had a prior Son to giveup to us in the first place!

So therefore Jesus was begotten twice; only in two different ways by the same Father

(first as spirit, then as flesh)! Saved Christians are also sons of God in double fashion;

first originating physically from God through creation, and then begotten again

spiritually (1 Peter 1:3) to be his recreated son. The parallels in Jesus Son-ship and ours

are stubbornly alike in principle! No escaping it! Obviously, if Jesus is Gods only

begotten Sonamong other type of sons (i.e. created and adopted ones), and is the only

TRUE Son who wasthe exact copyof his very beinglong before even human creation

(Heb. 1:2, 3), then, in terms of original specie or by TRUE reproduction (not by creation


24/46

24 | P a g e

or adoption), Jesus could not have been be a fish, or an angel, or a lesser specie of

person than who the Father Himself was/is. This is because Jesus originally came from

the very Being of God Himself, who is Himself God in nature! Thus Jesus is truly God in

nature; not the Supreme Being of the Father in headship, or in individuality or

personhood.

The Father must also have had someone existing prior to Jesus earthly birth to be able

to sendHim to us (John 17:3). And someone cannot send themselves, whether as Son

or Spirit; only personal Representatives can be sent!! Most importantly, Jesus must

have been a separate being from the Father before the creation of man, since God must

have had someone to lovefrom BEFORE the foundation of the world (John 17:24)!

And since TRUE love, just like in the family, is a reciprocal relationship between

separate beings, then we know (just like Adam and Eve reciprocating love) that Jesus

already existed alongside the Father as a unit of love.The very essence of Gods nature

is love (a reality finding TRUE meaning only among beings; not in the atmosphere of

isolation and independence), and thats why God made us in his image *as a family of

love to reveal to us what the divine specie is like. He is not as a single, isolated,

dominant, and independent being in terms ofdivinity in heaven itself, as Jesus only

or oneness Pentecostal people say. The family on earth or the image of God in Man

does not pattern that isolation of the Father at all. We are therefore without excuse if

we do not discern the object lesson in our own families to understand. In fact, only true

love and humility would have the Father, despite being the Head of divinity, allowing

Jesus to be all that he is to us, as God, on His behalf(i.e. on the Fathers behalf Jesus

was our Creator, he is our Sustainer, he was Israels Protector, Israels Redeemer,

Israels final Judge, Resurrect-or, etc.. and is the same to all of us on His behalf).

Jesus in turn demonstrates his true love for the Father by never seeking to usurp his

place of Headship, despite being equal to Him in nature. That is precisely what the

mystery of godliness is all about. Humility, cooperation and love being

demonstrated between/among leader and subordinate of like nature in a family of

pure love.

And by the way, anywhere God was/is emphasizing that he alone created, or he alone

is Savior, or he alone is first and last, or he alone is called God, and that he would not

share his glory, etc., this is/was ALWAYS in contrast to the false gods of human

devising or human invention on earth!! NEVER were those words uttered by the one

true God as a means of separating himself from His Son or Spirit that He is NATURALLY

one with by nature.Never!! In fact, after Jesus was revealed fully in the New

Testament, almost every time the Father is expressed as the one TRUE God by Jesus

Himself, or by New Testament writers (e.g. John 17:3, 1 Cor. 8:6, Eph.4:4-6)


25/46

25 | P a g e

immediately before or after that expression either Jesus himself or both Jesus and the

Spirit is/are immediately introduced, to guard against us ever distancing the Father

from His Son or Spirit in terms of divinity. Thats precisely because of what Jesus

Himself (John 17:3), the Apostles (1Cor. 8:6; Eph. 4:4-6), and the family model (Matt.

19:4-6) has taught us about the image of God in Man, and about Adam, the one true

Adam!! Moses, writing in Gen. 1:26, 27 immediately introduced the female along with

Adam (both together) when speaking about God creating Man. Adam was to be everconsidered in oneness with his family (starting with his wife Eve), and Adam and Eves

physical oneness (at the deepest physical level possible) has, since Eden, produced

personal entities all over the planet; in the billions literally! The race of Man today

(resulting from their original oneness at the deepest physical level) is now equally

representing our first human parents everywhere, and is personally walking around

over the entire planet with both of their human characteristics, or their human

nature, still united (in that sense) as the one family or race of Man! And this parallels,

in the first instance, the oneness of the Father with his the Son, and thereafter this

oneness (at the deepest spiritual level) is somewhat patterned in their omnipresentHoly Spirit equally representing both of them anywhere that Spirit is sent or is present

on their behalf all over the universe! No wonder the Spirit is deemed as a sevenfold

Spirit (Rev. 1:4, 5) or a manifold Spirit (in extra-biblical Jewish literature); the Spirit

who equally sends greetings to the Church alongside the Father and Son, and is the

Representative means by which the Father and Son are deemed to be personally

omnipresent all over the universe. As it is in heaven, so it is on earth!

The Father, Son and Spirit are together pre-eminent over lesser heavenly beings, with

the Father as the final Head of all, while correspondingly on earth Man (meaning all

humanity, with Adam as the human father of all), was set over earthly species of lesser

nature (i.e. all species of animals, birds, fish, plants, etc.) as a reflection/imaging of the

original blueprint of Gods government in heaven. This is precisely how the principles of

oneness of the family of Adam work on earth. Even today, with Jesus as the second

Adam, the same principle is at work. He is now, on his human side, the human Father of

the entire recreated race of righteous children that God gave Him (Is. 9:6; Heb. 2:10-

13), despite all of saved humanity is simultaneously considered as his Bride that he is

forever one with. The recreated race of Man (through the second Adam) will then be

restored in its full inheritance of and ruler-ship over all things on the earth. The

parallels with Gods original Model for Man are simply amazing!

Jesus being FOREVER our Model of a true human son of God, NOW takes the place of

the first Adam who lost out on the Model, and since that time Jesus NOW has the

Father (since his incarnation) as His God (never before that), and demonstrates for us

how we should worship God! And he will continue to be that Model for us throughout


26/46

26 | P a g e

all eternal ages in the future as part of the plan of REDEMPTION. And yet he will still be

God in divine nature, since his universal rule upon the one throne of the Father (Rev.

3:21) will never end (Daniel 7:13, 14). Amazing combinations in the one life of our

GreatGod and Savior Jesus Christ, the one who is truly is called FOREVERMORE the

Mighty God and the Everlasting Father!! Is. 9:6

*Never again, dear reader, should the Scriptures about the Father being the one true God

ever bother you in terms of how they relate to Jesus as a separate being, or as the Wisdom or

Word of God from everlasting (or from eternity)!! Never!!

DEPICTION OF THE PRE-EXISTENT AND ETERNAL JESUS

And by the way, before moving on, let me add that the unconverted Jews, and the later

enlightened Christians, had interesting viewpoints regarding who the personified Wisdom in OldTestament imagery was all along. It is indeed eye opening!

A comparison of Jewish literature and the inspired Bible shows clearly that that:

In theApocrypha[i.e. popular but extra-biblical Jewish literature], the most advanced step is

taken regarding Wisdom [the Logos]... Wisdom [the Logos] is thought ofas a heavenly being

-Quoted from *INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPEDIA

*PERSONIFIED WISDOM IN IMAGERY, FOR THE ANCIENT JEWS, WAS AT TIMES EITHER EQUATED WITH, AND OR

MADE ONE WITH GOD HIMSELF, AND AT OTHER TIMES MADE DISTINCT FROM HIM. BUT THE SAME WISDOM

WAS LATER SEEN AS THE DISTINCTLY PERSONAL AND PRE-EXISTENT JESUS BY CHRISTIANS, DESPITE WISDOM

WAS LINGUISTICALLY DEPICTED IN THE FEMININE GENDER IN OLD TESTAMENT HEBREW (SIMPLY AS LANGUAGE

RULES OF COURSE). Proofs? COMPARE THE FOLLOWING CAREFULLY:

Wisdom of Solomon 10:15-20She[Wisdom] delivered the righteous people and blameless seed

[Israel] from the nation [of Egypt] that oppressed them. She entered into the soul of the servant

of the Lord[Moses], and withstood[overcame] dreadful kings in wonders and signs [e.g. the

Egyptian Pharaoh]; [wisdom] Rendered to the righteous [Israel] a reward of their labors, guided

them in a marvelous way, and was unto them for a cover by day [pillar of cloud], and a light ofstars [pillar of fire] in the night season; [wisdom] Brought them through the Red sea, and led

them through much water: But she [wisdom] drowned their enemies, and cast them up out of the

bottom of the deep. Therefore the righteous [all Israel] spoiled[defeated] the ungodly

[Canaanites], and praised thy holy name, O Lord, and magnified[i.e. praised] with one accord

thine hand[i.e. thy Wisdom or the arm of the Lord], that fought for them.


27/46

27 | P a g e

NOW NOTICE WHOM THE BIBLE IDENTIFIES AS THIS PERSONIFIED WISDOM:

Documents

Identifying Errors About God Made Easy (Expanded Version)