The Mysteries of the Godhead Revealed

By Harry A. Peyton

TABLE OF CONTENTS:
DEDICATION, ACKNOWLEDGEMENT, A WORD OF ADMONISHMENT (3)

PREFACE (10)

INTRODUCTION (11)

CHAPTER 1 A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE MONTHESTIC ONENESS BELIEF
VERSES SATANS BABYLONIAN-CATHOLIC TRINITY (13)
The Biblical Doctrine of One God Verses the Babylonian Trinity of Three Persons or gods.
The Oneness Modalist Monarchian Doctrine or the Monotheistic Belief of the Bible (33 ADPresent Time).
The Catholic Semi-Arian Doctrine or the Belief in Two-Unequal-gods (70-325 AD).
The Catholic Arian Doctrine or the Belief that Denies Jesus Deity (310-450 AD).
The Catholic Binitarians Doctrine or the Belief in Two-Equal-gods (325-382 AD).
The Catholic Trinitarian Doctrine or the Belief in Three-Equal-gods (382 AD-Present Time).
(Comparing the Babylonian Trinity with the Trinity of Catholicism; Noted Trinitarian Bible Scholars Confessed that the
Catholic Trinitarian Doctrine Cannot Be Found in the Old or New Testaments.)

CHAPTER 2 THE TRINITY OF THE BABYLONIAN RELIGION (33)
Nimrod Started the Worship of Nature in the Form of A Trinity.
Semiramis Started the Worship of the Trinity in the Form of Three Persons.
What Does the Bible Mean by the Term Mystery Babylon?
Nimrod Invented the Doctrine that God Is An Omnipresent Spirit in His Essence.

CHAPTER 3 THE ONE AND ONLY GOD OF THE BIBLE IS THE FATHER (38)
How Important Is It to God that We Understand His Godhead?
What Is God or How Does the Word of God Define God?
(Is God a Personal Spirit or an Impersonal Spirit? Is God a Singular Unbegotten Spirit Who Has Form, Shape, and Locality?)
How Many Gods Are There: One, Two, Three, or More?
What Is the Name of the One God of the Bible?
The Father Alone Is YHWH the One and Only God.

CHAPTER 4 THE SONSHIP PROGRAM OF GOD THE FATHER (47)
Is Jesus Christ the Eternal Son of God or the Begotten Son of God?
(Professor Walter Martin Declared Jesus Is Not the Eternal Son of God; Professor Lewis Mayer Taught that the Term Son of God Referred
to Jesus Humanity; Jesus Is the Only Born Monogenes Son of God: Jesus Sonship Began at Bethlehem.
How Did God the Father Send the Son?
Did Jesus as Gods Son Have a Real Human Nature?
(As a Man: Jesus Was Limited in Knowledge and Had to Be Taught; Jesus Was Limited in What He Could Do; Jesus Did Not Teach or
Invent His Own Doctrines; Jesus Had A Human Will; Jesus Need Food, Water, and Rest to Stay Alive; Jesus Had A Human Flesh, Bone,
and Blood Body; Jesus Could Die.)
Jesus As the Son of God Was A Spirit Filled Man Who Was Subordinate to His God
(Jesus as the Son of God Had A God He Prayed to; Jesus as the Son of God Had A God He Worshipped, Served and Obeyed;
Jesus as the Son of God Was Subordinate to His God).
Since Jesus Spoke of the Father and of Himself in the Third Person,
Does this Mean Jesus and the Father Are Two Separate Persons?

CHAPTER 5 JESUS IS THE FATHER IN HIS NATURE AS GOD (65)
Who Is Christ?
Isaiah Acknowledged Jesus as God the Father.
Jesus Claimed to Be God the Father.
Thomas Acknowledged the Supreme Deity of Jesus.
John Acknowledged the Supreme Deity of Jesus.
Paul Acknowledged Jesus as God the Father.
Jude and Peter Acknowledged the Supreme Deity of Jesus.
Comparison Between Old and New Testament Scriptures Prove Christ to Be God the Father.
(Who Is the One LORD? Who Was Pierced in His Hands, Feet and Side? Who Created Man and the World? Who Is the Savior of All
Mankind? Who Is the Only Potentate, King of Kings and Lords of Lords? Who Is the Stone of Stumbling and the Rock of Offence? Who Did
the Children of Israel Tempt in the Wilderness? Whom Was John the Baptist Preparing the Way for? Who Is the Holy One of Israel? Who
Is the First and the Last? Who Is the Almighty God? Whom Was Jesus Reconciling the World to? Who Will Come to the Mount of Olives to
Set up His Millennial Kingdom? Who Will Judge the Dead? Who Will Raise the Dead? Who Raised the Body of Jesus from the Dead? Who
Draws Men to God? Who Is the I AM of the Bible? Who Sends the Comforter? To Whom Does the Spirit of Man Return to When He Dies?
Did Christ Preexist Before He Was Born at Bethlehem?
Why Did God the Father Choose to Become His Own Son?

CHAPTER 6 GOD THE FATHERS OLD TESTAMENT DIVINE SPIRIT, SOUL,
AND GLORIFIED SPIRITUAL BODY (95)
My Understanding of the Godhead.
God the Father in the Old Testament Had Three Real Natures: A Spirit, A Soul, and A Spiritual Body
Gods Unbegotten Spirit Has Never and Can Never Be Seen.
Before Time Began, Gods Unbegotten Spirit Begot A Divine Holy Spirit,
Who Dwelt in A Divine Human Soul and Glorified Human Spiritual Body.
What Was the Glory Christ Had Before the Universe Existed?
Oneness Apostolic Preachers Who Believe in God the Fathers Old Testament Visible Glorified Spiritual Body.
The Prophets Seen and Talked with God the Fathers Glorified Human Nature in the Old Testament.
God the Father, as the Angel of YHWH, Appeared and Talked to the Patriarchs in His Human Nature.
Some Human Attributes of God the Fathers Old and New Testament Divine Humanity.
God the Fathers Glorified Human Spiritual Body Became A Natural Body at Bethlehem,
and All of His Divine Holy Spirit and Soul Natures Dwelt in It.

CHAPTER 7 CHRIST IS THE HOLY SPIRIT: THE LIVING WORD,
THE SPOKEN WORD, AND THE WRITTEN WORD OF GOD (128)
Christ, as the Holy Spirit, Is the Living Word of God in A Human Spiritual Body: (Is Only One Spirit; Is the Spirit of
the Lord Jesus Christ; Is Called by Many Titles; Is the Spirit of the Father; Is a Personal Spirit that Can Be Lied to, Grieved, Resisted,
Can Anoint, Teach, Bear Witness, Pray, and Make Intercession.)
Christ, as the Holy Spirit, Is the Spoken Word of God: (Gods Power Is in the Spirit-Words that Proceed Out of His
Mouth and They Are the Creative Words of God.)
Christ, as the Holy Spirit, Is the Written Word of God.

CHAPTER 8 BIBLICAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS
TRINITARIANS ASK ABOUT THE GODHEAD (136)
Do the Titles Father, Son, and Holy Ghost Prove the Trinitarian Doctrine?
The Dove and the Voice at Jesus Baptism Explained.
What About Plural Pronouns Referring to God, Do They Prove the Trinitarian Doctrine?
The Hebrew Word Elohiym Explained.
The Hebrew Idiom the Right Hand of God Explained.
What About Revelation 5:6-7, Does it Prove the Trinitarian Doctrine?
Jesus Surrendering the Kingdom to the Father Explained.

BIBLIOGRAPHY (150)

ENDNOTES (154)
Copyright May 30, 1996 by Harry A. Peyton under the title of The Doctrines of Christ

A Note from the Author: Since Almighty God, the Lord Jesus Christ, gives His Salvation
and His Word to all freely (Rev 22:17, Mt 10:7-8), this book, and all other books, written by
Harry A. Peyton are given without charge, and can be accessed through the Internet at the
following address: http://www.DoctrinesOfChrist.com. Therefore, fell free to copy it in digital or
2
written form, and share it with others. Since this book is copyrighted, the author forbids any
alteration of its contents, and the reproduction of it in any form for Marketing Purposes. This
book may be placed on anyones web page, as long as my website address is attached to it.

The author believes that the Word of God is infallible in the ORIGINAL LANGUAGE it was
written in, and all translations of the Bible regardless of how good they may be are NOT. Since
the author has implicit faith in the infallibility of the Word of God, the author has formed his
beliefs firmly on the truth of the Bible. This author uses the ancient ANTIOCHIAN LITERAL-
HISTORICAL METHOD OF INTERPRETING THE BIBLE, which was used by early Christian Prophets
and Apostles of the Bible.

I definitely believe that the ancient Alexandrian Allegorical Method of spiritualizing
scripture, which was made popular by the ancient Jewish philosopher Philo Judaeus (13 BC 50
AD) and later used by the Ante-Nicene Catholic Priests, especially Origen and his student
Clement of Alexandria (200 AD), is an abomination to our Lord. Therefore, all scriptures will be
interpreted in a literal exegetical fashion, unless the language used and the context demands a
spiritual interpretation.

All CAPITALIZATION and ITALICIZATION in QUOTES used in this book is always MINE. All
Biblical quotes used in this book will be in dark red, and from the New King James version of the
Bible, unless another version is stated as the reference. The vast majority of all translations of
the Bible, as well as Hebrew and Greek Lexical definitions and grammar, will come from
BibleWorks computer software program version 7.0. The author in most places will quote verses
from the Bible instead of commenting on a verse and giving a reference; for He believes that the
written Word of Gods has greater power to inspire and enlighten a heart to understand and act
upon truth, than the elegant oratory or writings of any man.

If this book has been a blessing to my beloved readers, and they would like to send an offering
to the author, feel free to do so. If anyone wishes to send any biblical or historical materials to
the author, my address is: 148 Little Creek Hills Rd.: Alto, NM 88312: Phone # 575-336-2800:
Email address: DoctrineOfChrist@Hotmail.com.

DEDICATION

Jesus Christ, our great God and Savior came to give Eternal Life to all who will enter into a
covenant relationship with Him through the New Birth, and walk with Him in Spirit and Truth.
This book is designed to reveal the absolute truth pertaining to the Supreme Deity of the Lord
Jesus. It is dedicated to all the courageous men, women, and children of the present and past
centuries, who loved the Lord Jesus Christ and believed His Truths. I would especially like to
acknowledge those who suffered social scorn, loss of income, loss of property, imprisonment,
torture, and martyrdom for their faith in Christs New Birth message and their Modalist
Monarchian Monotheistic belief in Jesus Supreme Deity.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

I would like to acknowledge my Lord, Jesus Christ, whose love, grace, and inspiration made
this book possible. May He use this work for the propagation of His Gospel, so many souls may
come to know and love Him.
3

A WORD OF ADMONISHMENT

This admonishment is given to encourage all of Gods children to become students of the
Bible. Beloved, permit me to ask you, why did some of Gods children in Jesus day reject their
Messiah and the truths He taught them? Did they not have God Himself as their preacher or
teacher? Did they not believe in the one true God? Did they not believe that the Bible was Gods
Word? Did they not attend church every Sabbath Day? The answer is obviously yes to all these
questions, so why did they reject their Savior and His teachings? The answer can be found in
second Corinthians 4:4; this verse reveals that Satan blinds the minds of those who do not believe the
truth. There are thousands of truths that can be found in Gods Holy Word, but the truths
concerning Salvation in Christ through the New Birth, and the Godhead in Christ are the two
truths that Satan blinds the minds of believers the most.

How did Satan blind the minds of the believers in Jesus day, and in our day? He
accomplished this by using false prophets, who filled their minds with false beliefs. It was for this
reason, Jesus warned all believers to: beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees (Mt
16:6). What did Jesus mean by the term leaven? In verse 12, the Bible gives us the answer: Then
they understood that He did not tell them to beware of the leaven of bread, but of the [false] doctrine of the Pharisees
and Sadducees.

Even though some of these false prophets may have dazzled and mesmerized Gods Jewish
children with their oratory and teaching skills, their doctrines were still false. Our Savior spoke
of these deceived prophets when He said: in vain they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the
commandments of men. Making the Word of God of no effect (Mk 7:7, 13). It is quite evident that these
men followed some the false traditional teachings of their forefathers in their organization, and as
a result, they became deceived and went about deceiving others.

Therefore beloved take heed, for even though a teacher may be able to paint beautiful
spellbinding word pictures, or a preacher may be able to speak very fast and give fiery orations,
this does not necessarily mean what they are preaching or teaching is the truth! Evidently, not
everything these Doctors of the Law and pastors taught was a lie, for Jesus told them: you Brood
of vipers! How can you, being evil, speak good things (Mt 12:34)?

Since Jesus was the new and unknown preacher in town, who resoundingly taught the Bible
antithetically or contrary to the accepted theologians, pastors, and preachers of His day,
therefore many of the Gods people chose to believe the teachings of their pastors and religious
organization instead of His teachings. It must have broken our Lords heart! It saddens me to
say that this is exactly what many sincere Christians do today, when they hear or read Gods
Messages on the New Birth and the Godhead in Christ that were taught by Jesus and His
apostles.

When I understood how Satan blinds the minds of believers, I soon developed a healthy fear
that maybe I was not studying the Bible with an open and unprejudiced mind. I therefore
reexamined all my beliefs. As a result, I discovered that several of my beliefs were incorrect, and
I needed to repent and change them. Even though I was afraid to change my beliefs, being an
Apostolic Pentecostal minister with a BA in Theology, I made up my heart and mind to walk in
the Light as He is in the Light. I also came to the realization that I am not married to the
4
doctrines of any preacher, church, Bible College, or denomination, but to the Lord Jesus Christ,
who is the infallible Word of God and the Truth (Jn 1:1; 14:6).

Beloved, if you and I expect to hear Jesus say to us Well done good and faithful servant (Mt 25:21),
then we must not be afraid to change our beliefs, when we perceive that they are not in
agreement with the written Word of God; for the Bible, not men or organizations, is the only
source of absolute truth. Let us not forget, the people who hated the teachings of Jesus and His
apostles were not the sinners among the Gentiles, or the Jewish people as a whole, but the
Church Officials such as: the High Priest, Doctors of the Law, elders (pastors), and priests, who
were entrusted with leadership positions. These church officials were more dedicated to the
traditions of their organization, than they were to almighty God and His holy infallible Word.

Therefore, it becomes very evident that none of these church officials was an infallible teacher
of the Bible, even though their followers thought they were. Because many of Gods Jewish
people blindly followed the teachings of the officials of their church, they rejected their Savior
and His teachings, and die lost. This cold but sobering fact should be a warning to all believers in
Christ today!

Therefore, it is extremely dangerous for us to deify any man or organization, by esteeming
them as our infallible teacher, regardless if they call themselves: the Apostle, the Prophet, the
Prophetess, the Pope, the Seventh Church Age Messenger of the Branhamites, the Little Flock of
the Watchtower, the Doctor of Divinity, or the Pastor. Now, since my name, your name, your
pastors name, your churchs name, and the name of your denomination, are not written in the
Word of God, none of us are infallible teachers.

Every believer needs to love and respect their teachers, but they should never place them on a
pedestal and worship them as their infallible Pope, whereby everything that comes out of their
mouth is: thus says the Lord. Most believers are not aware that this is form of idolatry and God
hates it. Beloved, when God saved me and delivered me from this kind of idolatry, I made a vow
to God, i.e. after I came out of Catholicism, that I would never again place my faith in any priest,
preacher, or religious organization, but only in the Lord Jesus Christ and His holy infallible
Word. I promised my God that I would not believe anything about the Bible, until I could
personally pray about it and search it out for myself!

Now God has blessed me with some great pastors and teachers, whom I love and respect even
to this day, but I can honestly say that I never worshipped any of them, by making anyone of
them my infallible preacher. Please do not take what I am saying in the wrong way; I am not
condemning or belittling the biblical and holy office of a bishop, but I am placing it in a biblical
and historical context. Beloved, you may have a pastor who is a good teacher, or even a great
preacher, but I promise you he is not infallible, and I am happy to tell you that neither am I.

Now someone might ask me why I am happy about not being infallible. The answer is simple,
if I lead anyone to think my teachings or books are infallible, I cannot change or correct them, if
I later discover that any part of my teachings are incorrect. Therefore, I do not want to place
myself in a position, where I cannot say: I am wrong, please forgive me. I make an honest and sincere
mistake, and I will correct it and teach it correctly.

For the last 34 years, as an author, pastor, an assistant to a pastor, an evangelist, and a student
of the Word of God, I have always admonished Gods people to become students of the Bible. I
5
challenged them to prove what I taught them was the truth. I did this for two reasons: FIRST, I
wanted their faith to be in the infallible Word of God and not in fallible man. I knew that they
could parrot what I taught them, but I also knew that the Word of God could not get down deep
into their hearts, unless each of them prove to themselves by their own prayer and research,
what is truth and what is error. Every child of God needs to take their salvation seriously, for it
is too precious to place it in the hands of any man, regardless of what title he may be called by.

SECOND, I knew from the Word of God that I was not the only mouthpiece of God in the
Church. I knew every humble Holy Ghost filled child of God was a Priest of God, and as such
could receive revelation of truth from God (1Co 14:26). Therefore, I knew that God placed them
there not only for me, as their pastor, to equip them for the work of the ministry, i.e. to become able
preachers and teachers of the gospel (Eph 4:11-12), but also for me to learn from them (1Co 14:31).

Because some of Gods Jewish children, in the days of the Lord Jesus, did not take their God
given responsibility of studying the Word of God for themselves seriously: they rejected the truths He
preached and died lost. They chose instead to follow the teachings of their misguided Pastors and leaders, who may
have been sincere or insincere in their walk with God. Our Savior warned all believers in Him not to
follow their example. Jesus said it this way: Many will say to Me in that day [i.e. the Day of Judgment], Lord,
Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your
name? And then I will declare to them, I never [oudepote] knew you (Mt 7:22-23). Drs. Timothy and Barbara
Friberg, in their Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament, defined the Greek word
oudepote as: an adverb negating a point of time, never, not at any time.
1


Jesus did NOT DENY that these believers in Him, who acknowledge Him as their Lord, did not
do these miraculous works by faith in His holy Name, but He did declare that these believers
were NEVER in a COVENANT RELATIONSHIP with Him, whereby they became His children. In
other words, false prophets deceived them concerning: the strait and narrow way that led to the Eternal
Life in Christ (Mt 7:13-15). These believers in Christ evidently did NOT BELIEVE in or know the
biblical NEW BIRTH message (Jn 3:5 & Tit 3:5 cp with Acts 2:38; 10:44-48; 19:1-5), which would have placed
them in the death, the burial, and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ. This GOSPEL with its New Birth
message is the solid rock foundation, which all believers must build their spiritual house on (Mt
7:24-27). Therefore, if believers in Christ do not want to die lost, they must get their nose in Gods
Book and keep it there.

Let us always remember, the Word of the living God commanded all of Gods Pastors and
saintly Priests, to evangelize the world for our Lord Jesus Christ. The Bible declared: It please
God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. The preaching of the cross to them that perish is
foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God (1Co 1:18, 21, KJV). Jesus told His Church:
You shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem,
and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth (Acts 1:8); and Go therefore and make disciples of all
the nations (Mt 28:19).

God commanded all of His Priestly children to preach: The truths found in His Holy Word, not the
lies of the Babylonian Religion, i.e. Mystery Babylon (Rev 17:5); Jesus Christ and Him crucified, not the death of
Zoroaster (one of several names for Nimrod); Eternal Life through Christ, not Lucifers doctrine of the eternality or
godhood of man; the New Birth not reincarnation; Water Baptism in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, not
baptism in the titles of Nimrods Babylonian Trinity; Spirit Baptism of the Holy Spirit, not spiritualism. Gods
people are ambassadors not diplomats, preachers not philosophical puppets, prophets not greedy blind watchmen
who are dumb dogs that cannot bark (Isa 56:10-12).

6
If any of my beloved readers, would like to know more about the biblical and historical truth
concerning the Priesthood Ministry of all Believers, and how God set up the Ministerial
structure of the Church, I invite them to read my book entitled, The Heresy of the Nicolaitans,
which is given without charge on my website, along with other books on subjects such as: the
New Birth, the Godhead in Christ, Hell, the Mysteries of the Spirit and Soul of man, Prophecy,
etc.

Biblical Rules for Interpreting the Bible: Since Pastors in the same denomination, and
saints in the same church, differ from one another in their understanding of certain doctrinal
teachings of the Bible, is not time for all of them to use the same rules for interpreting the Bible. This is the
only way Pastors and saints can come to a real harmony or agreement on what is truth! This can only happen
if all of Gods children are willing to love, respect, and submit to one another (Eph 5:21; 1Pe 5:3).
Therefore, all of Gods children should lovingly admonish one another to walk in truth, and to
repent of all false doctrines. This requires humility! This is why God commanded Pastors to be:
examples to the flock, and for Pastors and Saints to: submissive to one another, and be clothed with
humility, for God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble (1Pe 5:3, 5).

Beloved, we must beware that our hatred of false doctrine, does not turn into hatred for
misinformed Pastors or individuals in and out of the church! If this ever happens, we have
turned our back on Gods way of love, and have entered into Satans ballpark, for he is the
author of hate. If we venture to play Satans deadly game of hate, we will find ourselves the
losers when we stand before God at the end of our life. Let us remember that God hates the sins
that sinners commit, but He loves sinners and pleads with them to repent. Let us also never
forget that God has appointed many Pastors, not one, in each church assembly to be the Judges of Truth (Eph
4:11-15; 1Ti 1:2-4; 3:2-5; 4:16; 5:17-22; 6:3-11; 2Ti 2:24-26; 3:16-17; 4:2-5; Heb 13:17). Therefore, I humbly
submit to you, for your approval, some biblical rules for interpreting the Bible that God has given me:

FIRST, God gives revelations to us as we pray, love, keep, hunger, and search for truth (Jn 14:15,
23; Psa 119:33-34; Pro 2:4; Mt 5:6; 1Jn 5:2-3)! Beloved, we do not understand the teachings of the Bible
by our intelligence, regardless how much or little we may possess, but it comes by inspiration
from Gods Holy Spirit (Jn 16:13; 14:26; 1Jn 2:27). Either we will believe Satans lie that we can not
understand the Bible, because of our lack of education in theology, or we will believe what Jesus
said: If any man will do His [Gods] will, he shall know the doctrine, whether it be of God (Jn 7:17).

Therefore, we must have our mind made up that we will settle for nothing less than truth, in
our walk with our Creator and Savior. God never intended His Word to be interpreted by the
imaginations of the mind of mankind; it makes no difference if they are called the Apostle, the
Prophet, the Prophetess, the Pope, the Seventh Church Age Messenger of the Branhamites, the
Little Flock of the Watchtower, the Doctor of Divinity, or the Pastor. I have discovered through
my own experiences that we are beings, who love to follow the traditions of our elders, church,
and organization. This is good as long as they are teaching true, but if not, God told us to: Buy
the truth, and do not sell it (Pro 23:23).

If we do not buy the truth because it is not popular, or because it offends our parents,
relatives, friends, church, organization, and so on, then we are selling our salvation for the favor
and praises of men. We become men-pleasers instead of God-pleasers. We will esteem men much
more highly than we esteem God. Pastors and saintly Priests, who preach this great gospel,
should always remember that there is a price to pay to walk in truth! Rejection, loneliness, and
7
heartache are often a part of this great price; nevertheless, everyone who truly loves our dear
Lord will always be willing to pay any price, to walk with Him in truth. If we claim to be
children of the Light: we must walk in the Light or darkness will overtake us (Jn 12:35-36, 46). Therefore, I
encourage my beloved readers to open their hearts and minds, as they open their Bibles in search
for the truth.

SECOND, we must be willing to do our homework and study the Word of God with an open,
unbiased, honest, and humble spirit! The Bible is a Book inspired with all of Gods children in
mind, and God intended that His children should read, study, and understand it, for it is one of
our Heavenly Fathers great and precious gifts to us. Therefore, let each of us become students of
the Bible, and eat our daily bread. Let us not be lazy; let us study the Word of God for ourselves
every day.

A brother whom I lead to Gods New Birth, once told me that his dad, who was a Protestant
denominational minister, told him that he spent four years in Seminary School so he could learn
the Bible, and twenty years unlearning what he had learned. In other words, because he was so
thoroughly indoctrinated with the beliefs of his denomination: it was a real struggle for him to lay aside
his biases, and to study the Bible with an open mind. This can happen to pastors who place their faith in
their denomination, and to saints of God who place their faith in the teachings of their pastor.
This can happen to both, if they fail to study the Word of God with an unbiased mind.

Because God does not want His children to be deceived by Nicolaitan pastors, teachers, and
organizations, He commanded them to: Prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God;
and Prove all things, hold fast that which is good; and Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman
that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the Word of truth (Rom 12:2, 1Th 5:21, 2Ti 2:15, KJV).
According to the great apostle Paul, the Berean saints explicitly followed these God given
commands, for he wrote: Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they
received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true
(Acts 17:11, NIB). In other words, these believers did not allow their love and respect for Paul, or
any other teacher, to prevent them from examining their teachings with the written Word of
God.

I can remember what my dear mother told me, whom was a devout Catholic, when I was
witnessing to her about the reality of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. She told me that she had
received this glorious experience in prayer in 1964, and shortly after the Holy Spirit led her to
start reading the Bible. The Holy Spirit than began to teach her, and revealed to her, that some
of the things she was taught by her Priest was incorrect. After about six months, she went to her
Priest and asked him about these things. He then told her that she could not understand the
Bible, for she did not have Seminary training. Therefore, he FORBADE her to read the Bible! It
deeply grieves me to say, she believed this lie and followed this command. Beloved for centuries
the Bible was chained to Catholic pulpits, written in Latin, and only a Priest could read and
interpret it. Well, the Bible is not chained up anymore, and it is written in a language that we all
can read! Therefore beloved, none of us has an excuse why we cannot study it.

THIRD, we must be willing to lay aside our pride, fears, and bias beliefs, whereby we can search
for all the scriptures on any given subject of the Bible. After we find them, we must meticulously examine all of
them, and search for an interpretation that will harmonize with all of the evidence. Since all scriptures in the
Bible come from God, not even one can contradict another, i.e., in the original language it was written
in (2Ti 3:16). After we have done this, then God will be able to open our spiritual eyes and give us
8
enlightenment. Another way of saying this is: we must first find all the pieces to the jigsaw
puzzle, which is the hardest part of studying the Bible, but this is where the real men and women
of God become separated from the false prophets. We must then put all the pieces together until
we can see that one and only perfect picture, which is the absolute truth. If we fail to find most of
the scriptures, we will see a picture using the scriptures we have found, but it will probably be a
distorted picture, even though we may think it is the truth.

When one is looking for a harmony in scriptures, and not for a debate, knowing that the Bible
is the infallible Word of God, in the original language that it was written in, it is not that hard for two people
with opposing perspectives to come to an agreement, if their true motive is to find truth. The
Bible declares: Only by pride cometh contention (Pro 13:10). Since none of us enjoys change when it
comes to our religious beliefs, we react very negatively when someone disturbs our feelings of
security. If we truly love our fellow man, then we will not be afraid to humbly tell each other the
truth, even if we momentarily become offended. No surgery is pleasant while the doctor is
cutting us open, but after the tumor, cancer, or disease is removed, and our health is restored,
what joy good health brings.

FOUTH, I furthermore admonish my beloved readers to believe that God said what He meant
and meant what He said; in other words, God intended that we believe and understand every word
in the Bible He used to express His infallible thoughts or teachings (Psa 12:6-7; Pro 30:5; Mt 4:4).
This means we must make use of Greek and Hebrew lexicons (dictionaries). The reason for this is: Greek
and Hebrew words, like words in the English or any other language, have more than one
meaning. There is a literal meaning, and there is a figurative meaning. Each Bible translator
must choose the word that fits the context of the scriptures surrounding the word. Hopefully,
they can do this without allowing their own religious beliefs to hinder them from choosing the
correct word.

A good example of translators missing the truth by using the figurative meaning over the literal
meaning of Greek words, and totally ignoring the context, can be found in John 3:8. Most
translators translated it as: The wind [Pneuma] blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound [phone] of it, but
cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit [Pneuma] (NKJ; also see
the KJV, NIV, ASV, RSV, etc). The true translation, that is, the literal translation, which is in perfect
agreement with the context is: The Spirit [Pneuma] breathes where He desires, and the voice [phone also means
language] of Him you hear, but you know not where He comes, and where He goes, so is everyone having received
birth from the Spirit [Pneuma] (Morris Literal Translation of the Bible; also see The Interlinear Bible by J. P. Green,
and Youngs Literal Translation of the Holy Bible, etc). In the following verse, the Greek word phone is
translated language, and from the context can only mean language: if I do not know the meaning of
the language [phone], I shall be a foreigner to him who speaks, and he who speaks will be a foreigner to me (1Co
14:11, NKJ; also see NAS, NAB, NLT, ESV, RSV).

Therefore, we must interpret the Bible in a literal fashion. This is only way we can fulfill the Bible
command that we should not wrest or twist or pervert the scriptures to our own destruction
(2Pe 3:16). All scriptures must be taken literally, unless it is a Jewish idiom, or the language and
context demands a spiritual interpretation. If a symbolic interpretation is what God intended,
then God will interpret the symbolic word or phrase somewhere in His Holy Word. God
ordained that each scripture should be interpreted in the light of other scriptures (1Co 2:11-13). Jesus taught
us that we would know false prophets by their fruits. The major fruit of all false prophets, in all
ages, is their frequent use of the allegorical method to interpret the Bible.

9
A favorite saying among those who have already been deceived by false prophets is: I know
this teaching is not of God because it brings in confusion. Therefore, many believers will follow the
example of their deceived teachers, and place a literal meaning on the scriptures they want to
believe in, and a figurative meaning on the scriptures that seem to bring confusion to them.
Because they are not willing to change their beliefs, they will not look for an interpretation that will
harmonize with all the scriptures on that subject, i.e. of course using the literal method. Therefore, they would
rather believe a lie and spiritualize away the scriptures that seem to bring confusion to them.
Beloved, if you are guilt of this sin, God is calling you right now to repent.

Beloved, we must learn patience, and wait upon our Savior with faith in our hearts, expecting
Him to give us enlightenment as we pray and study His Word. Let us always remember that it is
our God given responsibility to seek for truth, and it is our Heavenly Fathers responsibility to
reveal truth (Mt 7:7-8). Beloved, do not be afraid to test or thoroughly examine your beliefs, for
truth can be placed under a microscope and thoroughly dissected, and it will shine brighter than
ever, as long as we follow the biblical guidelines that are given in the Bible for studying the Word
of God. These are some of the biblical rules that can be found in my book entitled How to Study
the Bible, which is also given away on my website.

Conclusion: Therefore, the author of this book is asking his beloved readers to prayerfully
read this book to the end, so that they may comprehend the entire teaching. After doing this,
then dissect and examine this book by looking for a harmony in all the scriptures that I use, and
the scriptures you know of that pertain to this subject, as both of us interpret them in a literal
fashion. After you have done these things, then judge for yourself the validity of this teaching.

As my beloved readers read the following study, I challenge them to love God enough to prove
this message either true or false; for many, like myself, have discovered truth by trying to prove it
wrong! I rather you read this book and become either angry or glad, but please do not become
indifferent; for if you are angry you will try to prove it wrong, but if you are glad, that means God
has given you the revelation of this truth. If you are unresponsive that means you do not take your
salvation seriously!

I would much rather see someone fight against the truth, as the apostle Paul did before God gave
him understanding, than for that person to be indifferent toward truth and die lost! I do not say
this in the spirit of pride or in claiming infallibility, but I put forth this challenge in hopes that
they will earnestly and thoroughly examine this truth. If anyone believes he or she has found an
error in any portion of the above teachings, or in the following teachings, I admonish him or her
to love me enough to correct me, and to show me how their belief is in perfect harmony with all of
Gods reveal will on this subject. Also, if you have any biblical or historical materials you would like to
share with me, please send them to me, or email them to me, at the above address.

Beloved, truth is the greatest gift of love that any preacher can give to those who listen to their
spoken message, or reads what he or she has written. The more truth any child of God places in
their heart, the more of Jesus they have, for He is the Truth (Jn 14:6). Beloved, it is impossible for
you to say you love Jesus and not love the Bible, for Jesus is the Living Word (Jn 1:1), and every
word in the Bible are His Words. My prayer for you is that the Lord Jesus Christ, who is both the
Almighty God and the Son of God, will open your heart and mind to understand His message of
truth. With all the above truths in mind, let us begin our SEARCH FOR TRUTH!

10
Your Loving Servant In Christ,

Harry A. Peyton

PREFACE

Napoleon Bonaparte speaking of the Deity of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and the
conquering power of His Cross said: I know men; the life and death of Jesus Christ was not that of a man. If the
death of Socrates was that of a sage, the death of Jesus Christ was that of God. The gospel of Jesus Christ is no mere
book but a living creature with vigor, a power that conquers all that opposes it. Alexander, Charlemagne, and myself
have founded great empires, but upon what did the creation of our genius depend, upon force: but, this man Jesus
Christ has founded His empire upon love, and to this day millions would die for Him.
2


In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the world,
and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. And the Word was made flesh, and
dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth
(Jn 1:1, 10, 14); also And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifested in the flesh,
justified in the Spirit, seen by angels, preached among the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up in glory;
and Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever (1Ti 3:16, Heb 13:8).

Throughout this book the author will lay aside his theological biases, and present a book
based on investigative research, with one objective in mind, that is: to examine all the scriptures
in the Bible that are given on this extremely important doctrine, and after this, to harmonize
each scripture whereby all of them are in complete agreement. The author is a one God, Jesus
Name Pentecostal Preacher. After 38 years of studying the godhead, I can honestly say I do not
believe it exactly the way I did when I started.

Some of the conclusions I have reached are definitely different from the two-god doctrine of
the early Catholics, and the Trinitarian doctrine of the later Catholics. It is also different from
the early Arians and their later counterpart the Jehovahs Witnesses. Even though it is different
from the Catholic, Protestant, and Arian doctrines of the godhead, it is not different from the
One-God doctrine of the early Apostolic Pentecostals of the first and later centuries.

My disagreement with all these denominations on the godhead is not a boastful or arrogant
statement. Nevertheless, I must walk in the light of what God has shown me through my prayers
and studies, just as all men who love the Lord Jesus Christ must do. It is not a sin to change your
beliefs on any given subject of the Bible when you perceive you are wrong, that is part of the
growing process of being a Christian, but it is a sin to compromise or sell out ones beliefs
because of fear of a preacher, church, organization, financial loss, or persecution. I cannot help
but believe that there are preachers in every denomination, who know truths about the godhead,
which they are afraid to preach.

Even though I firmly and vigorously opposed the Trinitarian doctrine taught by Catholic and
Protestant theologians, pastors, preachers, and priests, and lovingly chide or reprove them
throughout this book, I do not hate them. We are all human and are subject to mistakes; we all
have biases and are subject to follow them. Therefore, it behooves all of us to be determined to
study the infallible Word of God with an open, honest, and unprejudiced mind! Preachers of this
great gospel must ask themselves some important questions. Is the approval of my people or
organization more important to me than my sweet Lord's approval, which comes from obedience
11
to Him? Am I willing to sell my soul for a position, salary, or anything else? Preachers should
always remember that there is a price to pay to walk in truth!

INTRODUCTION

Is God one, two, three or more persons? Is God an omnipresent Spirit in His personal essence,
or is this one of the qualities Gods many attributes? In other words, does God fill the universe
with the Spirit-Words that came out of His mouth at creation, or does He physically dwell in all
matter, even in Hell and in Satan, with His personal Essence (Jn 6:63; Heb 1:3, 11:3; Psa 139:7-8)? Is
the Word or Logos the eternal Son of God, or is He the begotten Son of God? Was Jesus begotten
by God the Father before time began, as some have taught, or was He begotten at Bethlehem, or
was He begotten at both times?

Is Jesus God? If Jesus is God, is he a part of God, meaning one third of God, or is He all God?
Is Jesus God the Father, is He God the Son, or is He both? Did Christ have a dual nature, that is,
a Divine as well as a Human Nature before Bethlehem, or was it after it, or was it at both times?
Who was the Father of Jesus when He was conceived in the virgin Mary, was it God the Father,
was it the Holy Spirit, or was it both? Is the Holy Spirit a person? If the Holy Spirit is a person,
how can He be in a million believers at the same time?

Why are their scriptures in the Old Testament that speak of Gods Soul Nature in the present
tense? For example, God the Father told Israel, if you keep My commandments: I will set My
tabernacle among you: and My Soul shall not abhor you, but if you do not, My Soul shall abhor you (Lev 26:11,
30). When Israel repented: They put away the foreign gods from among them and served the LORD. And His
Soul could no longer endure the misery of Israel (Jud 10:16). How does one explain these scriptures?
These are just a few, of many scriptures, which speak of Gods Soul in the Old Testament. Why
is it that no book of theology, at least the ones I have read, ever mention that the one God of the
Old Testament had a Soul Nature as well as a Spirit Nature.

Why does Jesus refer to His preexistence as the Son of Man, that is a Man or Human Being,
before He was born of Mary? Jesus said it this way: And no one has ascended into heaven, but He who
descended from heaven, {even} the Son of Man (Jn 3:13, NAS); and What then if you should see the Son of Man
ascend [to heaven] where He was before [proteron] (Jn 6:62)? According to Doctors Friberg, the Greek
adjective proteron, which is used in reference to time means: earlier, former or prior? The verb He
was is in the imperfect or past tense and it obviously refers to the place where the Son of Man
dwelt before He came to earth.

Since we know God is omniscient, what does the following passages of scripture mean? The
LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart (Gen 6:6, NAS); also I am
going down to see whether these reports [of the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah] are true or not. Then I will know (TLB); or
I will therefore go down and see, if they [i.e. the reports] completely correspond with the cry which comes to me, and if
not, that I may know (LXE); or I will go down now, and see if their acts are as bad as they seem from the outcry
which has come to me; and if they are not, I will see (Gen 18:21, BBE). We know that Jesus was
omniscience in His Nature as Deity or God in the New Testament, but as the Son of Man He was
limited in knowledge. Jesus speaking in His Human Nature of His second coming said: But of that
day and hour no one has knowledge, NOT even the angels in heaven, or the Son, but the Father [i.e. Deity] only (Mt
24:36, BBE). Is there any connection between all of the above passage of scriptures?

12
Did God appear to the Patriarchs and Prophets in the Old Testament as a theophany, which
many erroneously claim was a temporary human manifestation of Deity (Gen 18:1-2, 13-14, 32:24-30)?
If He did, then why did the apostle Paul write that Christ existed in the form of God in the Old
Testament, before He took on a slaves form or fleshly natural body at Bethlehem (Phi 2:6, NAS,
compare with Jn 1:1 & Heb 1:3)? What was this form or body He had in the Old Testament? The
word form is the Greek word morphe. Dr. Joseph Thayer, in his dictionary entitled A Greek-
English Lexicon of the New Testament, defined morphe as: 1) the form by which a person or thing
strikes the vision [i.e.] 2) external appearance.
3
What does this and all the above verses really teach? We
will find out later in this book.

CHAPTER 1
A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE
MONTHESTIC ONENESS BELIEF
VERSES SATANS BABYLONIAN-CATHOLIC TRINITY

This chapter is excerpt from my book entitled, A History of Oneness through the Centuries. It
contains selected passages from this book.

Have you ever wondered why there are so many different teachings or diversity of beliefs in
Christendom pertaining to the doctrine of godhead? Have you ever wondered how one God can
be three separate persons or beings? If so, let me assure you, that you are not alone. There has
been a host of others throughout all ages that have asked the same question.

The Biblical Doctrine of One God Verses the Babylonian Trinity of Three
Persons or gods: Gods people in the Old Testament went into apostasy several times. They
keep going into Lucifers Mystery Babylonian Religion, or in other words, Lucifers Babylonian
Trinity. This trinity consisted of: Baal, Ashtaroth, and Tammuz. Baal represented god the
father, the sun god; Ashtaroth represented the mother god or the mother of the gods, the moon
goddess; Tammuz represented the son of god or god the son, who was also known as the sun god.

The Bible stated: They [the Children of Israel] forsook the LORD, and served Baal and Ashtaroth (Jug 2:13).
God told Ezekiel: You will see greater abominations that they [the House of Israel] are doing. So He brought me to
the door of the north gate of the LORDs house; and to my dismay, women were sitting there weeping for Tammuz
(Eze 8:13-14). God told Jeremiah: The children gather wood, the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead
dough, to make cakes for the Queen of Heaven; and they pour out drink offerings to other gods, that they may
provoke Me to anger (Jer 7:18).

Gods people did not fall into this apostasy one time, but throughout their history Israel
forsook the LORD, worshipped, and served the Babylonian Trinity. Here are two more
examples: the prophet Samuel speaking to the house of Israel said: If you return to the LORD with all
your hearts, then put away the foreign gods and the Ashtoreths from among you, and prepare your hearts for the
LORD, and serve Him [not them] only; and He [not them] will deliver you from the hand of the Philistines. So the
children of Israel put away the Baals and the Ashtoreths, and served the LORD only (1Sa 7:3-4). Years later
after the people of Israel went into Baal worship again, they cried unto the LORD and said: We
have sinned, because we have forsaken the LORD and served the Baals and Ashtoreths; but now deliver us from the
hand of our enemies, and we will serve You (1Sa 12:10).

13
There has been in the history of the Christendom five teachings on the godhead, and each
appeared in the following order:

The Oneness Modalist Monarchian Doctrine
or the Monotheistic Belief of the Bible (33 ADPresent Time)

This is the oldest teaching known in church history; it started with the apostles in 33 AD and it
can be found throughout church history. It declared that the Father, Son and Holy Ghost were
titles, offices, modes of revelation, or characters as in a play, that the one person of God has
revealed Himself to His Children. As the Father, the one God revealed Himself as the Creator of
man and the cosmos. As the Son of God, the Father revealed Himself as the Savior of all mankind
by becoming a Human Being, i.e. with a real flesh, bone, and blood physical body, and as a man
died for their sins. As the Holy Spirit, the Father revealed Himself as the Regenerator of man, by
dwelling in him for the purpose of redeeming, empowering, and transforming him into Christs
likeness.

According to Catholic and Protestant Church Historians, Gods Apostolic Pentecostal Modalist
Monarchian Churches were in the vast majority for the first four centuries. It is a crime against
God that the Vatican destroyed the writings of these Post Apostolic Pentecostals. Thus, the only
history we have of these Men of God, and what they believed, are what their Catholic antagonist
wrote against them in their early histories, which can be found in the Ante Nicene Fathers, and the
Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers. It is obvious from the writings of these Catholic Priests that many
books were written against them, i.e. by the Apologists of Gods Apostolic Pentecostal Church and
others.

Professor Charles Guignebert, in his historical work The Early History of Christianity, confirmed
the above truth when he declared: various Christian people had written a great deal against her [Catholicism],
or concerning her; this literature has almost entirely disappeared and the little that remains is only enough to show us
how great would be the service it might render. Because it has no alternative but to use (a) polemical or exegetical writing
mainly, badly emended by accounts reputed to be historical, but written long after the events and at a time when they were
scarcely understood.... It is right and necessary that we should not forget that fact. For example, to try to exact from the
collection of [Catholic] Christian documents alone an exact idea of the early times of the Church was to give way to a
tantalizing delusion; whether the fact was realized or not, the undertaking [of it by historians] was inspired by prejudgments
of the faith.... They [historians] endeavored to preserve its old standing as an originality, and this desire was fed from more
than one root in the theological postulate of revelation.
4


Therefore, any unbiased student of history must overlook the venom, slander, distortion, and
outright lies these early Catholic Priests wrote against Gods Apostolic Preachers. For this reason,
an unbiased student of the Bible must judge these Men of God by what they taught about God, and
how it agrees with Gods Biblical record. The Catholic Encyclopedia gave a fair explanation of the
origin and differences of belief between Gods Modalist Monarchians and the early Catholic Priests.
It revealed that the Jesus Name Monarchians: made the Son and the Holy Ghost merely aspects or modes of
existence of the Father, thus emphatically identifying Christ with [the Father] the one God.... They spoke of the Father as
Spirit, and the Son as flesh.

This encyclopedia went on to reveal, that the Gods Apostolic Pentecostals were against the
Catholic adoption of Plato and Philos doctrine of two-unequal-gods; that is: the learned philosophizing of
the Christology of Catholicism. It also declared that the Catholic godhead doctrine: looked too much
like a mythology or a Gnostic emanationism. Gods Apostolic: Monarchians emphatically declared that God is one,
14
wholly and perfectly one, and that Jesus Christ is God, wholly and perfectly God. This was right, and even most necessary,
and whilst it is easy to see why theologians like Tertullian and Hippolytus opposed them [i.e. the Oneness Pentecostals] for their
protest was precisely against the Platonism, which these theologians had inherited from [their Catholic predecessors i.e.] Justin
and the Apologists.

It went on to declare the Egyptian Catholic allegorists, that is: The Alexandrians alone insisted rightly
on the generation of the Son from all eternity; but thus the Unity of God was even less manifest. The writers who thus
theologize may often expressly teach the traditional Unity in Trinity, but it hardly squares with the Platonism of their
philosophy. The theologians were thus defending the doctrine of the Logos at the expense of the two fundamental doctrines
of Christianity, the Unity of God, and the Divinity of Christ. They seemed to make the unity of the Godhead split into two or
even three, and to make Jesus Christ something less than the supreme God the Father. This is eminently true of the chief
opponents of the Monarchians, Tertullian, Hippolytus, and Novatian.
5
I sincerely thank the Catholic Priests,
who wrote this Catholic history, for their honesty and forthrightness.

Praxeas Godhead Doctrine: With the above truth in mind, let us examine the ancient
Modalist Monarchians belief in the Godhead. Quintus Septimius Florens, better known as
Tertullian, wrote against Praxeas and other one God Pentecostal Preachers around 200 AD, whom
he vehemently hated. According to Elgin Moyer in his Who Was Who in Church History, Praxeas:
came to Rome in the time of Marcus Aurelius [161-180 AD].
6
If this was so, then Praxeas would have came to
Rome when Eleutherus was the Bishop-Pope of the Catholic Church in Rome. The renowned
twentieth century German Lutheran professor Adolph Harnack, in his History of Dogma,
declared that Eusebius claimed that Eleutherus (AD 174-189) was converted to the oneness doctrine.
Professor Harnack wrote: If this Bishop was Eleutherus, and that is probable from Eusebius H.E. V. 4, then we
have four Roman Bishops in succession who declared themselves in favor of the Modalistic Christology, viz., Eleutherus,
Victor, Zephyrinus, and Callistus.
7


Praxeas may have come to Rome twice and was the one who converted Catholic Bishops
Eleutherus and Victor to the truth. He was evidently a great preacher and teacher of the Gospel of
Christ. According to Tertullian, Praxeas was a confessor for Christ. The Merriam-Websters
Collegiate Dictionary defined confessor as: one who gives heroic evidence of faith but does not suffer
martyrdom. Tertullian ridiculed Praxeas suffering in a Roman prison for his unwavering faith in
Christ by saying: it was simply and solely because he had to bear for a short time the annoyance of a prison.
8

Therefore, when this great preacher came to visit the Modalistic Monarchian Pentecostal Church in
Rome, both of these Catholic Bishops of Rome were no doubt very impressed by his preaching and
his reputation as a confessor for Christ.

Tertullian stated Praxeas Godhead doctrine as: Praxeas introduced a [an assumed] heresy, which
Victorinus [i.e. Victor, the Catholic Bishop-Pope of Rome - 189-198 AD] was careful to corroborate. He asserts that Jesus Christ
is God the Father Almighty. Him he contends to have been crucified, suffered, and died.
9
Tertullian continued:
In the course of time, then, the Father forsooth was born, and the Father suffered, God Himself, the Lord Almighty,
whom in their preaching they declare to be Jesus Christ. The older [so-called] heretics, much more before Praxeas, a
pretender of yesterday. which supposes itself to possess the pure truth, in thinking that one cannot believe in One
Only God in any other way than by saying that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are the very selfsame
Person.

The simple, indeed, (I will not call them unwise and unlearned,) who always constitute the majority of believers,
are startled at the Dispensation ([supposedly] of the Three in One), on the ground that their very rule of faith withdraws them
from the worlds plurality of gods to the one only true God. They are constantly throwing out against us that we are
preachers of two gods and three gods, while they take to themselves pre-eminently the credit of being worshippers of
the One God. We, say they, maintain the Monarchy (or, sole government of God). And so, as far as the sound goes,
do even Latins. Well, then Latins take pains to pronounce the e|a,ta (or Monarchy), while Greeks actually refuse
15
to understand the et,se|et a or Dispensation ([supposedly] of the Three in One). I am, moreover, obliged to say this, when
(extolling the Monarchy at the expense of the Economy) they contend for the identity of the Father and Son and Spirit

.
10


Tertullian continued: They distinguish two, Father and Son, understanding the Son to be flesh, that is man,
that is Jesus; and the Father to be Spirit, that is God, that is Christ. See, say they, it was announced by the angel:
Therefore, that Holy Thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. Therefore, (they argue,) as it
was the flesh that was born, it must be the flesh that is the Son of God.
11
Praxeas and all other oneness
Pentecostals taught that God the Father, the one and only true God, was manifested in the
human flesh at Bethlehem (1Ti 3:16; Jn 1:14); and because of Christs flesh and blood body, He
became known as the Son of God.

Let my beloved readers take note, Tertullian indisputably declared that Gods Modalist
Monarchian Pentecostal Churches were in the vast majority in the second century, and not only in
the second century but much more before it, i.e. the first century. Tertullian also declared that
Gods Apostolic Churches were scattered throughout the Roman Empire, i.e. in all the Latin and
Greek speaking nations. In fact, the Greek language was the common language of the nations in
the Roman Empire. It was definitely use by Gods Jewish apostles in writing the New Testament.

In fact, Ignatius wrote against them in 107 AD, when he said: There are not then either three
Fathers, or three Sons, or three Paracletes, but one Father, and one Son, and one Paraclete. Wherefore also the
Lord, when He sent forth the apostles to make disciples of all nations, commanded them to baptize in the name of
the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, not unto one [person] having three names, nor into three who
became incarnate, but into three possessed of equal honor.
12
In his Epistle to the Trallians, he tried to
defame Gods people by saying, the Oneness Pentecostals teach: the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are but
the same person.
13


Noetus One God Doctrine: Catholic Bishop Hippolytus of Pontus, which was near Rome,
passionately hated Noetus and other Oneness Preachers; he wrote against them around 225 AD. He
declared: Noetus affirms that the Son and Father are the same, no one is ignorant. But he makes his statement
thus: When indeed, then, the Father had not been born [of Mary at Bethlehem], He yet was justly styled Father; and
when it pleased Him to undergo generation, having been begotten, He Himself became His own Son, not anothers.
For in this manner he thinks to establish the sovereignty of God, alleging that Father and Son, so called, are one and
the same (substance), not one individual produced from a different one, but Himself from Himself; and that He is
styled by name Father and Son, according to vicissitude of times [or at different time periods].

But that He is one who has appeared (amongst us), both having submitted to generation from a virgin, and as a
man having held converse among men. And, on account of the birth that had taken place, He confessed Himself to
those beholding Him a Son, no doubt; yet He made no secret to those who could comprehend Him of His being a
Father. That this person suffered by being fastened to the tree, and that He commended His spirit unto Himself.
And He raised Himself up the third day, after having been interred in a sepulcher, and wounded with a spear, and
perforated with nails.
14
Jesus being God the Father did raised the Temple of His Human Body from
the dead, as the Word of God teaches (Jn 2:19 cp with Gal 1:1).

Hippolytus informed us that Roman Catholic Bishops-Popes Zephyrinus (198-217 AD) and
Callistus (217-222 AD) became disciples of Cleomenes, who was a disciple of Epigonus, who was a
disciple of Noetus. Epigonus came to Rome in the time of Zephyrinus, or shortly before c. 200, and
started a School of Theology, which flourished during the Bishopric of these two men. Hippolytus
says it this way: Now a certain man called Epigonus becomes his [Cleomenes] minister and pupil, and this person
[Epigonus] during his sojourn at Rome disseminated his [so-called] godless opinion. But Cleomenes, who had become his
disciple was wont to corroborate the (Noetian) doctrine. At that time, Zephyrinus [convinced] those who were
present for the purpose of becoming disciples of Cleomenes. The school of these [so-called] heretics during the
succession of such bishops, continued to acquire strength and augmentation, from the fact that Zephyrinus and
16
Callistus helped them to prevail.
15
Cleomenes remained the head of this school until 215 AD, when
Sabellius succeeded him as the head teacher until 220 AD.

Catholic Bishop-Pope Zephyrinus One God Doctrine: Hippolytus declared that
Zephyrinus taught: The Father, who is in the Son, deified the flesh, after He had assumed it, and united it with
Himself, and established a unity of such a nature that now Father and Son are called one God, and that henceforth it
is impossible that this single person can be divided into two. Now Callistus brought forward Zephyrinus himself,
and induced him publicly to avow the following sentiments: I know that there is one God, Jesus Christ; nor except
Him do I know any other that is begotten and amenable to suffering. The Father did not die, but the Son.
Zephyrinus called us [Hippolytus & his small band of followers] worshippers of two gods.
16


Catholic Bishop-Pope Callistus Godhead Doctrine: According to Hippolytus, Callistus
publicly reproached him and his very small band of rebels by saying: Ye are Ditheists. Callistus alleges
that the Logos Himself is Son, and that Himself is Father; and that though denominated by a different title, yet that in
reality He is one indivisible Spirit. And he maintains that the Father is not one person and the Son another, but that
they are one and the same. and that all things are full of the Divine Spirit, both those above and those below. And he
affirms that the Spirit, which became incarnate in the virgin, is not different from the Father, but one and the same.

And he adds, that this is what has been declared by the Savior: Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and
the Father in me? For that which is seen, which is man, he considers to be the Son; whereas the Spirit, which was
contained in the Son, to be the Father. For, says (Callistus), I will not profess belief in two Gods, Father and Son, but
in one. For the Father, who subsisted in the Son Himself, after He had taken unto Himself our flesh raised it to the
nature of Deity, by bringing it into union with Himself, and made it one; so that Father and Son must be styled one
God, and that this Person being one, cannot be two. And in this way Callistus contends that the Father suffered
along with the Son; for he does not wish to assert that the Father suffered, and is one Person. all consented to his
[Bishop Callistus so-called] hypocrisy we, however, did not do so and called us worshippers of two gods.
17


Let my beloved readers take note, according to Hippolytus the Modalist Monarchian Pentecostal
Church of Rome, and the converted Oneness Catholic Church of Rome, contained the majority of
Christians in Rome at that time. Both Catholic Bishops-Popes of Rome accused Hippolytus small
band of Catholic rebels of believing in two separate persons or gods in the godhead. They did not
accuse them of being Trinitarians, which is the belief in three separate persons or gods.

It is also seems that Catholic Bishop Callistus held a slightly different viewpoint on the godhead
than Praxeas, Noetus, Epigonus, Cleomenes, Sabellius, and other Modalist Monarchians. For he
seems to have believed, God in His essence was an omnipresent spirit, unless he is speaking of the
attribute of omnipresence; it is hard to tell from the information that is given. Because Callistus
and Sabellius held different Christology views, Callistus when he became the Bishop of Rome
accused Sabellius of hold unorthodox beliefs on the Godhead, and brought pressure on him to
teach his former belief, which was the belief of Cleomenes and Noetus. Hippolytus says it this
way: Sabellius was wrought upon to relapse [go back] into the system of Cleomenes by this very Callistus, who
alleges that. Sabellius as not entertaining orthodox opinions.
18
Gods essence will be discussed in chapters
two and six.

In 355 AD, the Arian Catholic Church published the Lengthy Creed of Sirmium. This creed
cursed all forms of Oneness. It stated: And those who say that the Father and Son and Holy Ghost are the
same, and irreligiously take the Three Names of one and the same Reality and Person, we justly proscribe from the
Church, because they suppose the illimitable and impassible Father to be limitable withal and passible through His
becoming man: for such are they whom Romans call Patripassians, and we Sabellians.
19


17
Gods Apostolic Churches, not only existed in the first century, but also were in the majority at
that time and through the fourth century. Catholic Bishop Ignatius, in 107 AD, wrote against them in
his Epistle to the Trallians, in which he mocked Gods truth by saying the Oneness Pentecostals of
his day taught: the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are but the same person.
20
Ignatius apostatized from the
truth of the Godhead and the biblical ministerial structure of Gods Church in or shortly after 70
AD. Satan used this heretical Bishop to start his Nicolaitan Catholic Church. Justin Martyr, in
150 AD, wrote against Gods Oneness Jesus Name People that existed in the second century.

Justin, who started the first Catholic school of theology at Rome, in his First Apology wrote:
For they, who affirm that the Son is the Father, are proved neither to have become acquainted with the Father, nor
to know that the Father of the universe has a Son.
21
Methodist Professors John McClintock and James
Strong, in their Cyclopaedia of Biblical Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature Doctors
McClintock and Strong spoke of Justins denunciation of the One God Jewish and Gentile
Pentecostals this way: Modalist Monarchianism is generally supposed to have originated about the end of the
second century. It seems to us, however, that this [assumed] heresy may be traced to the very earliest times of Christianity.
Justin Martyr expressly denounces it, and his notice guides us to its source, for he finds the [assumed] heresy to exist both
among the Jews and Christians. He condemns the Jews for thinking that, when God was said to have appeared to the
patriarchs, it was God the Father who appeared.
22


Protestant professor Harnack confessed that Gods Apostolic Pentecostal Churches were in the
vast majority before the Nicene Council. He blatantly admitted that during the second half of the
second century through the second half of the third century many of the Catholic Churches in the
Roman Empire were converted to the one God doctrine of Gods Jesus Name Modalist Monarchian
Churches. Dr. Harnack said it this way: The real dangerous opponent of the [Catholic] Logos Christology in the
period between AD 180 and 300 was not Adoptianism, but the doctrine which saw the Deity Himself incarnate in Christ,
and conceived Christ to be God in a human body, the Father becoming flesh.... Modalism, as we now know from the
Philosophumena, was the official theory in Rome... The Modalistic doctrine which sought to exclude every other... was
embraced by the great majority of all Christians before the Nicene Council.
23


English Catholic Cardinal John Henry Newman, like Dr. Harnack, made the same confession,
when he was scolding the Protestants about Luthers protest. He referred them to the protest that
was made by the one God Jesus Name Apostolic Christians, who taught in the first through third
centuries. Professor Newman in his work entitled Essays and Sketches wrote: Praxeas, Noetus, and
Sabellius, in the third century protested against the Catholic or Athanasian doctrine of the Holy Trinity.... Noetus was in
Asia Minor, Praxeas taught in Rome, Sabellius in Africa. We read... their doctrine prevailed among the common
people, then and at an earlier date [or centuries], to a very great extent, and the true faith [meaning his Babylonian-Catholic faith]
was hardly preached in the churches.
24


Novatian (257 AD), a Catholic Bishop of Rome hated the fact that Gods Apostolic Pentecostals
were in the majority. He confessed this truth when he wrote against them and said: MANY [so-called]
heretics, moved by the magnitude and truth of this divinity [Christs Divinity], exaggerating His honors above measure,
have dared to announce or to think Him not the Son, but God the Father Himself. VERY MANY [so-called] heretics,
as we have said, have so accepted Him as God, as to think that He must be pronounced not the Son, but the Father.
Therefore, let it be considered whether He is God or not, since His authority has so affected some, that, as we have
already said above, they have thought Him God the Father Himself, and have confessed the divinity in Christ with
such impetuosity and effusion. They thought that He whom they read of as the Son, because they perceived Him to
be God, must be the Father.
25


The Catholic Semi-Arian Doctrine
or the Belief in Two-Unequal-gods (90325 AD)

18
This was the second teaching on the godhead to arise, according to church history. This was
the teaching of an apostate group Preachers, which broke from the monotheism of the Modalist
Monarchian Preachers somewhere in 70 AD or shortly after. These apostates started the Catholic
Church and called themselves Catholics; none of these heretics taught the present day Catholic
and Protestant doctrine of the Trinity.

They taught that the Father and Son were two separate and distinct persons, beings, or gods.
They did not teach an equality of persons. They taught that the Father was the highest or
greatest God, and He created a lesser god, being, or person before the world began, which He
called the Son. They also believed that the Holy Ghost was an impersonal spirit and another
name for Christ. Therefore, they did not believe in or teach the Trinity of three equal persons in
one God!

Who were the early apostates who started the Catholic Church? According to history, they
were: Ignatius of Antioch (c. 70), Clement of Rome (c. 70), and Polycarp of Smyrna (c. 70) were among
the first heretics to form the Catholic-Babylonian Church in the first century. The main Catholic-
Babylonian heretics of the second and third centuries were Justin Martyr (c. 150), Clemens of
Alexandria (c. 200), Tertullian (c. 200), Hippolytus (c. 225), Origen (c. 215), and Cyprian (c. 250). All of
these heretics loved the writings of the Greek philosophers, especially Plato, and the allegoric
method of interpreting the scriptures that was used by Philo, a first century Jewish heretic.

Harvard University professor Harry A. Wolfson, in his church history The Philosophy of the
Church Fathers, boldly confessed the above truth when he stated: these men [i.e. the Catholic Ante Nicene Priests]
did not believe in a preexistent Trinity.... Before His [Jesus] birth, there were only two preexistent beings, God and the Holy
Spirit, the latter identified with the preexistent Christ, and, if the term Logos is used it is identified with the Holy Spirit.
[Like] Philo, the [Catholic Ante Nicene] Fathers attributed to the Logos... two stages of existence prior to the creation of the
world,
26
which according to Philo was the internal and external Logos that was also called by the title
of the Holy Spirit. According to Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary, Philo Judaeus (13 BC-50AD)
was a: Jewish philosopher of Alexandria; [he was] often regarded as forerunner of [Catholic] Christian theology in his
attempt to reconcile revealed religion of Jews with Greek philosophy.

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia gave a fair summation of the godhead doctrine of
these early Catholic Priests; under the heading, the formation of the doctrine of the Trinity we read: In the
nature of the case the formulated doctrine was of slow attainment. In the 2nd century the dominant neo-Stoic and neo-
Platonic ideas deflected Christian thought into subordinationist channels, and produced what is known as the [Catholic]
Logos-Christology, which looks upon the Son as a prolation [i.e. an extension] of Deity reduced to such dimensions as
comported with relations with a world of time and space; meanwhile, to a great extent, the Spirit was neglected
altogether.
27


Ignatius Doctrine of Two-gods (107 AD): Ignatius, who was the first Catholic to teach
this doctrine in written form, emphatically proclaimed many times in his letters that God the
Father was uncreated and the highest God, and Christ was created by the Father before the
universe was spoken into existence. He definitely spoke of the Logos as a separate being or
person from the Father and called Him the begotten god, who was not equal to the Father. In his
Epistle to the Magnesians, Ignatius affirmed his belief in two-unequal-gods by declaring: He [the
Logos] being begotten by the Father before the beginning of time, was God the Word, the only-begotten Son, and
remains the same forever.
28
In this passage, Ignatius connected the Logos with the Son and
proclaimed that the Son was begotten and therefore was not an eternal being.

19
Ignatius ends his letter to the Ephesians with these words: Fare ye well in the harmony of God, ye
who have obtained the inseparable Spirit who is Jesus Christ.
29
Ignatius indisputably proclaimed that the
Holy Ghost was Jesus, that is, another title of Christ. He obviously did not believe in the doctrine
of the Trinity, i.e. three equal and eternal persons in the godhead. Let my beloved readers take
note, Ignatius used the above passages of scriptures to verify His teaching that Christ was a
begotten God, and He was also the Holy Spirit. From this time on, all Catholic Priests used
Ignatius teachings on the godhead in their writings, and some will even put their own religious
twist to it, but all will claim that the Father and Son are two separate beings or gods.

Justins Doctrine of Two-gods (150 AD): Justin in his First Apology called the Logos:
the first-begotten of all creation. He then stated that the Holy Spirit is the Logos. He says: It is wrong,
therefore, to understand the Spirit and the power of God as anything else than the Word, who is also the first-born of
God.
30
Justin, like Ignatius, connected the term first-born with the creation of the Son before the
creation of the universe. In Justins Second Apology we read: The Father of all, who is unbegotten.
The Word, who also was with him and was begotten before the works [i.e. creation].
31
Justin continued: The
Scripture has declared that this Offspring was begotten by the Father before all things created; and that which is
begotten is numerically distinct from that which begets, any one will admit. I asserted that this power was begotten
from the Father, by His power and will, but not by abscission, as if the essence of the Father were divided.
32


Justin in his Dialogue with Trypho a Jew clearly defined his heresy of two-unequal-gods. He
says: I shall give you another testimony, my friends, said I, from the Scriptures, that God begat before all
creatures a Beginning, [who was] a certain rational power [proceeding] from Himself. He was begotten of the Father
by an act of will. The Word of Wisdom, who is Himself this God begotten of the Father. But this Offspring,
which was truly brought forth from the Father, was with the Father before all the creatures, and the Father
communed with Him; even as the Scripture by Solomon has made clear, that He whom Solomon calls Wisdom, was
begotten as a Beginning before all His creatures and as Offspring by God.

Justin then quoted Proverbs, the eight chapter, to prove that the Logos was begotten by the
Father. He says: And it is written in the book of Wisdom The Lord created me the beginning of His ways for
His works. From everlasting He established me in the beginning, before He formed the earth. He begets me
before all the hills. When I repeated these words, I added: You perceive, my hearers, if you bestow attention, that
the Scripture has declared that this Offspring was begotten by the Father before all things created; and that which
is begotten is numerically distinct from that which begets, any one will admit. I have discussed briefly in what has
gone before; when I asserted that this power was begotten from the Father, by His power and will, but NOT by
abscission, as if the ESSENCE of the Father were DIVIDED; as all other things partitioned and divided are not the
same after as before they were divided.
33


No one can read the writing of the early Catholics and believe they taught the eternal Sonship
of the Lord Jesus Christ, which is part of teachings of the Trinitarian doctrine. It is a pity that
this blind apologist understood these scriptures through the eyes of Plato and Philo. For instead
of seeing the Logos as the embodiment of God or the Fathers visible Self with a human nature as
Paul taught (Col 2:8-9; 1:15), he saw Him as a person existing outside of or next to God.

Tatians Doctrine of Two-gods (160 AD): Tatian was a disciple of Justin Martyr. He,
like his master, also believed that the Logos had a beginning, and the Holy Spirit was just
another name for the Logos. He wrote: For the Lord [i.e. the Father] of the universe inasmuch as no creature
was yet in existence, was alone. The Logos Himself also, who was in Him subsists. And by His [i.e. the Father]
simple will the Logos springs forth; and the Logos not coming forth in vain becomes the first-begotten work of the
Father. Him (the Logos) we know to be the beginning of the world. But He came into being by participation, not by
abscission. The heavenly Logos, a Spirit emanating from the Father, in imitation of the Father who begot Him,
made man an image of immortality.
34
No eternal Trinity can be found here.
20

Theophilus Doctrine of Two-gods (170 AD): Theophilus taught the same godhead
doctrine as all the others. He wrote: God, then having His own Word internal within His own bowels, begot
Him, emitting Him along with His own wisdom before all things. He had this Word as a helper in the things that
were created by Him, and by Him He made all things.... He [the Logos] then being the Spirit of God, and governing
principle, and wisdom, and power of the Highest, came down upon the prophets and through them spake.
35
Here
Theophilus clearly revealed that Christ was begotten before time began, and He was the Holy
Spirit. No one can accuse Theophilus of being a Trinitarian.

Theophilus also declared: The God and Father, indeed, of all cannot be contained, and is not found in a
place, for there is no place of His rest. The Word, then, being God, and being naturally produced from God,
whenever the Father of the universe wills, He sends Him to any place; and He, coming, is both heard and seen, being
sent by Him, and is found in a place.
36
According to this Catholic Priest, God the Father is omnipresent
and has no form, but Christ who was begotten by the Father has form and a dwelling place.

Other Catholic Priest, such as Tertullian, will use Theophilus godhead teaching, and also
claim God the Father emitted His Son from His own bowels, by speaking Him into existence. No
one can accuse Theophilus of being a Trinitarian, even though he is the first Catholic to use the
word Trinity. Theophilus, being an allegorist like His Catholic predecessors in the ministry, in
his teaching on the sun and moon compares the godhead to them; he says: In like manner also the
three days which were before the luminaries, are types of the Trinity: of God, and His Word, and His Wisdom.
37
Let
my beloved readers take note, Theophilus used the personal pronoun His to show that the Word
of God and the Wisdom of God belong to God the Father.

Irenaeus Doctrine of Two-gods (180 AD): Irenaeus, like his fellow Catholic bishops,
taught that the Logos was a created being, whom the Father begot before time began. Irenaeus
declared: If any one, therefore, says to us, How then was the Son produced by the Father? We reply to him, that
no man understands that production or generation but the Father only who begat, and the Son who was begotten.
38
From the Fragments of the Lost Writings of Irenaeus we read: Christ, who was called the Son of God
before the ages, was manifested in the fullness of time, in order that He might cleanse us through His blood. He
also ascended to the heavens, and was glorified by the Father, and is the Eternal King; that He is the perfect
Intelligence, the Word of God who was begotten before the light; that He was the Founder of the universe.
39


Irenaeus continued: I have also largely demonstrated that the Word, namely the Son, was always with the
Father; and that Wisdom also, which is the Spirit was present with Him anterior to all creation. He declares by
Solomon. The Lord created Me the beginning of His ways in His work: He set me up from everlasting in the
beginning before He made the earth. He brought me forth. And again: When He prepared the heaven, I was with
Him, and when He established the fountains of the deep; when He made the foundations of the earth strong, I was
with Him preparing [them]. I was He in whom He rejoiced, and throughout all time I was daily glad before His face,
when He rejoiced at the completion of the world, and was delighted in the sons of men.
40
Irenaeus applied the
title the only begotten God to the Son of God, that is, the Logos, when He was created at the
beginning of time. He stated: His Word, as He Himself willed it, and for the benefit of those who beheld, did
show the Fathers brightness, and explained His purposes (as also the Lord said: The only-begotten God, which is in
the bosom of the Father, He hath declared [Him].
41


Irenaeus called Christ the Holy Spirit of the Father. He wrote: For He [Jesus] is indeed Savior, as
being the Son and Word of God, but salutary [i.e. producing a beneficial effect] since (He is the) Spirit for he says: The
Spirit of our countenance Christ the Lord. But (for) salvation as being flesh: for the Word was made flesh, and
dwelt among us.
42
According to this passage, Irenaeus declared that Jesus being both the Son of
God and the Word of God has beneficial effects, because as the Word of God or as Christ He is
the Holy Spirit of God, and as the preexisting Son of God He became flesh and blood at
21
Bethlehem. He also declared: He [Jesus], who is the perfect bread of the Father, offered Himself to us.... He did
this when He appeared as a man. [We who] become accustomed to eat and drink the Word of God, may be able also
to contain in ourselves the Bread of immortality, which is the Spirit of the Father. Those upon whom the apostles
laid hands received the Holy Spirit, who is the food of Life (Eternal).
43


Tertullians Doctrine of Two-gods (200 AD): It is in Tertullian that Trinitarians make
their boast. They probably surmise, surely someone who writes against Oneness Pentecostals, uses
the word Trinity in his writings, and speaks of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit must be a
Trinitarian, NOT SO! According to Dr. Schaff: Tertullian cannot escape the charge of subordinationism. He
bluntly calls the Father the whole divine substance, and the Son a part of it.
44


Tertullian declared: For before all things God was alone being in Himself and for Himself universe, and
space, and all things. Moreover, He was alone, because there was nothing external to Him but Himself. Yet even not
then was He alone; for He had with Him that which He possessed in Himself, that is to say, His own Reason. The
Word was in the beginning with God, although it would be more suitable to regard Reason as the more ancient.
Although God had not yet sent out His Word, He still had Him within Himself. Now, whilst He was thus planning
and arranging with His own Reason, He was actually causing that to become Word, which He was dealing with in the
way of Word or Discourse. I may therefore without rashness first lay this down (as a fixed principle) that even
then before the creation of the universe God was not alone, since He had within Himself both Reason, and, inherent
in Reason, His Word, which He made second to Himself by agitating it within Himself. [In other words, the Word was
inside the Father because He had not spoken it out thus far to become a separate person.]

Therefore, does the Word also Himself assume His own form and glorious garb, His own sound and vocal
utterance, when God says, Let there be light. This is the perfect nativity of the Word, when He proceeds forth from
God. By proceeding from Himself He became His first-begotten Son, because begotten before all things.
45
Tertullian
concluded by saying: Whatever therefore was the substance of the Word that I designate a Person, I claim for it the
name of Son; and while I recognize the Son, I assert His distinction as second to the Father. For the Father is the
entire substance, but the Son is a derivation and portion of the whole. Besides, does not the very fact that they have
the distinct names of Father and Son amount to a declaration that they are distinct in personality?
46


Tertullian taught the Spirit was Christ: The Word was formed by the Spirit, and (if I may so express myself) the
Spirit is the body of the Word. The Spirit is the substance of the Word, and the Word is the operation of the Spirit,
and the Two are One (and the same). We declare, however, that the Son is God and the Word and Spirit of God.
47
Now, where can anyone find the eternal Sonship doctrine, or the Holy Spirit being a separate
person from the Logos in any of these passages? Tertullian did not teach the Trinitarian doctrine.

Dr. Harnack speaking of the pagan godhead doctrine of the Ante Nicene Catholic Priests wrote:
It is not Judaeo-Christianity that lies behind the [Babylonian-Catholic] Christianity and doctrines of the apologist, but Greek
philosophy - Platonic metaphysics, Logos doctrine of the Stoics, Platonic and Stoic ethics - the Alexandrine-Jewish
apologetic... particularly in that of Philo.
48
Because most Christians are not aware of the Babylonian origin
of the Trinity doctrine, let us briefly look at the affinity these men had for the Greek philosophers
and Mystery Religion, so we can comprehend how the Pagan-Catholic Church came up with their
Babylonian-Trinitarian godhead and baptismal beliefs in the late fourth century.

Philos Doctrine of Two-gods (57 AD): Philo was an apostate Jewish Rabbi and
commentator, who interpreted the Old Testament Scriptures by the use of the Greek
philosophical allegorical method. He took Plato teaching of a dual god or two-unequal-gods, and
tried to bring it into Judaism. Elgin Moyer, in his book entitled Who Was Who in Church History,
revealed Philos role in the development of the Catholic doctrine of a greater and lesser gods. He
says that Philo was a: Jewish Hellenistic philosopher.... As a philosopher, [he] sought to reconcile Greek philosophy
and the Old Testament by means of allegorical interpretation.... Philos method of allegorical interpretation had much
influence on the allegorical method of interpretation followed by the [Catholic Ante Nicene] Alexandrian Church Fathers,
especially Clement and Origen.
49

22

Dr. Levi L. Paine, in his book The Ethnic Trinities, gave us some insights to the origin of Philos
godhead doctrine. He says: On the whole, it may be said that Philo is the historical founder of the Logos theology.
He placed the Logos as the great principle of divine mediation in the forefront of his philosophical system.
50
He went
on to say that Philo received his Logos idea from Plato. He said Plato did not call his mediator Logos
but the World Soul. Philo in his godhead teachings taught that the Father was so holy that He
could not come into contact with the world personally, so He created a second god called the Logos
who could. Philo taught that the Logos was not the Father, but was a separate being or person from
the Father; the Father being the highest or greatest god, and the Logos an inferior or lesser god,
which mediated between God and man.

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia explained Philos doctrine of two-unequal-
personal-gods this way: The internal Logos is the firstborn, the second god, the mediator, the ransom, [and] the image
of god.... The external Logos abides in man is the prophet, shepherd, ambassador, artist, elder, interpreter, [and] the
shadow of god.... The Logos mediates between god and the world, but partakes of the divine nature only.
51
According
to many theologians, Philos internal Logos was a very real being or person who existed outside of
God. Philos external Logos or Holy Spirit was the impersonal Spirit of the second god or the
internal Logos. Because of this teaching, the early Catholic Priests taught that the Holy Spirit was
just another name for Christ. Philo, as well as the Ante-Nicene Catholic Priests, did not teach a trinity.

Dr. Wolfson confirmed the above truths by stating: We have shown that Philos view, like that of
Justin Martyr, maintained that the antemundane [i.e. before creation the] Logos had two stages of existence, and that
while during its first stage it existed only as a power in God, during the second stage it existed as a real being outside of
God. Justin Martyr already describes the Logos as one whom God begot from Himself.... Justin Martyr
maintained that the Logos is distinct from the Father in number and not in name only.
52
Justin no doubt
wrote this against Gods oneness Apostolic Pentecostal Preachers who branded him as a heretic.

Bob L. Ross, a Baptist Preacher, in his book entitled The Trinity and the Eternal Sonship of
Christ, definitely told an intentional lie when he stated: in Philo [there] is no real personal being to the Word
beyond the abstract [i.e. an idea in the mind].
53
No doubt, many Trinitarian theologians and historians, like
professor Wolfson, would definitely declare this a lie; of course, they would probably use the word
fabrication or say that Mr. Ross is simply ignorant of Church history.

Platos Doctrine of Two-gods (387 BC): Dr. Paine declared that Platos World Soul: was
not an eternal divine being, but a created mediating being whom God made to be the connecting link between things, or, in
more philosophical language idea and phenomena.
54
Justin Martyr in his First Apology speaking of Platos
teaching of the godhead in the Timoeus quotes Plato as saying: the power [i.e. second god] next to the first
god was placed crosswise in the universe. For he [Plato] gives the second place to the Logos, which is with God, who
he said was placed crosswise in the universe.
55


Zoroasters Doctrine of Two-gods (3000 BC): The International Standard Bible
Encyclopedia declared: Zoroastrianism was an active, missionary religion that has exerted a profound influence
on the worlds thought. [The Magi] brought teachings that effected a far-reaching modification of popular views and
produced an influence on so basic a writer as Plato himself.
56


The doctrine of two-unequal-gods was not very new in the Greek, Roman, and all other pagan
societies of their day. Professor Levi Paine in his book entitled, The Ethnic Trinities, gave us some
insights to the origin of this godhead doctrine. Paine speaking of the earliest stages of Zoroastrian
23
Trinitarian evolution wrote: Mithra, or Mitra is a creature of Ormuzd, the created light that is a sun god. As
such he is a servant and organ of Ormuzd, mediating between Him and man.
57


Arkon Daraul in his book entitled Secret Societies compared Roman Mithraism with that of
Roman Catholicism. He stated: It is claimed by those who still believe in its Mysteries and celebrate them, that
[Roman Catholic] Christianity did not so much supplant Mithraism as absorb it.
58


Hermes Teaching on Two-gods: Around 300 AD Lactanius, who believed in the doctrine of
two-unequal-gods, wrote some of its history in his writings. He said this godhead teaching could
be found in: Trismegistus and the predictions of the Sibyls. He went on to describe Hermes as an ancient
pagan god who served as a herald and messenger of the other gods, who was called Mercury by
the Romans. Hermes was also the god of science, eloquence, cunning, the protector of boundaries
and commerce, and the guide of departed souls to Hades. Let us hear what Lactanius says
Hermes taught. He says: Hermes, in the book which is entitled The Perfect Word, made use of these words: The
lord and creator of all things, whom we have thought to call god, since He made the second god visible and sensible....
He hallowed him, and altogether loved him as his own Son.

The Ancient Sibyls Teaching on Two-gods: Lactanius also quotes from the Sibylline Books that
were composed by women who were considered by the Babylonians, Egyptians, Greeks, and
Romans as prophetesses. There were about ten Sibyls that are known in history. Lactanius says: The
Erythraean Sibyl, in the beginning of her poem, which she commenced with the supreme god, proclaims the son of god as
the leader and commander of all, in these verses: The nourisher and creator of all things [god the father], who placed the
sweet breath in all, and made god [the son] the leader of all. Speaking of the Son of God at the end of this poem she says:
But whom god [the father] gave for faithful men to honour. And another Sibyl enjoins that he ought to be known: Know
him as your god, who is the son of god.
59


It is very clear or evident from the above historical references that Zoroastrianism was the origin
or source of the godhead teachings of Philo, Plato, some of the earlier Greek Philosophers, and early
religions. Zoroastrianism preceded the Babylonian Religion and became part of its teachings. From
the time the pagan priests of Babylon left their religious temple called the Tower of Babel, and were
scattered throughout the earth, they and their descendants have been placing their own religious
twist to the teachings of Mystery Babylon in all the pagan religions they started. The Word of God
clearly revealed that Mystery Babylon is the mother of all false religious systems (Rev 17:1-6).
Between Hermes, Plato, Philo, and the Sibyls, it is not hard to perceive were all of the early
Catholics Priests received their inspiration and revelation of the godhead.

It appears to me that at the beginning of the fourth century, and not at the middle, many of the
Catholic Churches in the Roman Empire abandoned their One God belief and went back to their
Semi-Arian belief of two-unequal-gods in the Godhead. Professor Harnack spoke of it this way: It
was only from the second half of the fourth century that the West was invaded by the Platonic theology which [Justin
Martyr,] Hippolytus, Tertullian, and Novatian had cultivated, to all appearance without any thorough success. Some of its
results were accepted, but the theology itself was not.... Yet there is no mistake, on the other hand, as we are taught by
Institutiones of Lactantius as well as the Tractates of Cyprian, that the rejection of Modalism and the recognition of
Christ as the Logos forced upon the West the necessity of rising from faith to a philosophical and, in fact, a distinctively
Neoplatonic dogmatic. It was simply a question of time when the departure should take place.
60


The Catholic Arian Doctrine
or the Belief that Denies Jesus Deity (310 450 AD)

24
This was the third teaching on the godhead to arise. It started in 310 AD with a Catholic
Presbyter in Egypt by the name of Arius. Since the Nicolaitan Catholic Church at this time
taught Jesus was God, but a lesser god that the Father, it was not hard of Satan to get many of
these Catholic Priests to deny the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ altogether. For in a short time,
this Catholic Priest had a large following that challenged the godhead doctrine of their fellow
Catholic Priests. This teaching stated that the Father is the one and only God, and Jesus is not
God in any sense, but is the highest or greatest being in Gods creation, which is now the doctrine
of the Jehovahs Witnesses.

The Trinitarian German Reformed Church Professor Philip Schaff, in work entitled History of
the Christian Church, declared: The Arians made the Holy [Spirit] the first creature of the Son, and as
subordinate to the Son as the Son to the Father. The Arian trinity was therefore not a trinity immanent and eternal,
but arising in time and in descending grades, consisting of the uncreated God and two created demi-gods [i.e. half-gods].
The Semi-Arians here, as elsewhere, approached the [so-called] orthodox doctrine, but rejected the consubstantiality,
and asserted the creation of the Spirit.
61


The Catholic Binitarian Doctrine
or the Belief in Two-Equal-gods (325 382 AD)

The fourth teaching on the godhead was a belief in two-equal-persons or gods. This doctrine
started in 325 AD. The Catholic Church started this doctrine in an effort to combat the Arian
doctrine of the godhead. Therefore, these Nicene Catholic Priests changed their doctrine of two-
unequal-gods to a doctrine of two-equal-gods, but only after the Arian doctrine gained
acceptance. They put their doctrine into a written form and called it the Nicene Creed.

Before we examine this Creed, let us evaluate the spiritual condition of the Catholic Church and
its Bishops at that time. Professor Guignebert speaking of Catholicisms political compromise with
the state during Roman persecutions says: Babylonian Catholic Christian ethics and Christian resignation
to the worlds continuance had reaffirmed allegiance to all social regulations. Above all a community of believers, united,
disciplined and directed by leaders whom they obeyed [as gods], presented to the State a cheering spectacle of order, the
product of a well administered government, which already shows signs of developing a political consciousness.... It was
time for both State and [Babylonian] Christianity to think of a compromise.
62


According to The Cambridge Medieval History, Constantine chose Catholicism to be his bride in
313 AD when he gave the Edict of Milan. It revealed: he [Constantine] exempted the clergy of the Catholic Church -
not those of the sects [i.e. Gods Apostolic Church & others] - from the decurionate [i.e. the military] and other burdens, he gave
them only the privileges already enjoyed by some of the heathen priests and teachers. But the relief was great enough to
cause an ungodly rush for holy Orders [into Babylonian-Catholic Priesthood]. The [Catholic] Church was not quite, what
Constantine wanted it to be. He was not more attracted to it by its [so-called] lofty monotheism than by the imposing unity,
which promised new life to the weary State. For six hundred years, the world had been in quest of a universal religion....
If the Church was divided against itself, it could not help the Empire. Worse than this, it could hardly be divided against
itself without being also divided against the Empire.
63
Money and power has always been the prime
motivating factors behind all that Vatican has done throughout the centuries.

Lutheran professor Harnack in his history, The Mission and Expansion of Christianity, gave us
some of the reasons why pagans were attracted to Roman Catholicism. He revealed that this
daughter of Mystery Babylon Christianized many of doctrines of pagan religions. Harnack
speaking of this apostasy declared: The most momentous result was the gradual assimilation of the entire
[Catholic] Christian worship to the nature of the ancient mysteries. By the third century [200 AD] it could already rival
25
the most imposing cultus in all paganism, with its solemn and exact ritual, its priests, its sacrifices, and its holy
ceremonies.
64


Dr. Harnack, in another history entitled What Is Christianity, spoke of some of the pagan
doctrines that Catholicism Christianized. He declared: The worshipper can only get to God by the
priests mediation. Living faith was transformed into deification [of men]. Miracles and miraculous cures
disappear altogether, or else are by priestly devices. Fervent prayers become solemn hymns and litanies. The
Spirit becomes law and compulsion. In its external form as a whole this [Babylonian-Grecian] Church is nothing more
than a continuation of the history of Greek Religion under the alien influence of Christianity, parallel to the many
other alien influences which have affected it... It takes the form, not of a Christian product in a Greek dress, but of a
Greek product in a Christian dress. No one can look at this Church from outside, with its forms of worship, its
solemn ritual, the number of its ceremonies, its relics, pictures, priest, monks and compare it on the one hand with
the [Apostolic Pentecostal] Church of the first century.
65


Professor Guignebert also spoke of Catholicism absorption of pagan doctrines, ceremonies and
rituals stated: In the third century it [the Babylonian Catholic Church] could meet and overcome the entire pagan syncretism
[i.e. the combination of different forms of belief or practice], because it had itself become a syncretism in which all the fertile ideas
and the essential rites of pagan religiousness were blended. It combined and harmonized them in a way that enabled it to
stand alone, facing all the inchoate beliefs and practices of its adversaries without appearing their inferior on any vital
point. This extensive work of absorption, which helps us to understand, that a moment came when [Catholic] Christianity
was able to arouse favorable attention to itself on the part of the manifold sympathies active in the Greco-Roman
world. Toward the end of Constantines reign [337 AD], the union of Church and the State, the absorption of paganism
by Christianity, and its total destruction with the connivance and, if necessary, the help of the State, could have been
foreseen.
66


Guignebert informs us that one of the major doctrines Catholicism Christianized was the
birthday of the Zoroastrian god Mithra. He wrote: Mithra is a solar deity, and his birth occurs upon the 25
th
of
December, i.e. the winter solstice.
67
The winter and summer solstice were two days that all pagan
religions held sacred in which they worshipped their gods. This heathen pre-Christian religious rite
has not change much has it!

Ronald Holmes in his book Witchcraft in History revealed that Roman Catholicism used this day
to bring in pagans into their Zoroastrian-Babylonian religion. He stated: The early [Catholic] Christians
had tried to be as flexible as possible in their spreading of the gospel in order to provide further links for potential
converts between Christian and non-Christian beliefs. But what was perhaps the master-stroke in this approach
[was] when the [Catholic] Church Fathers declared the birthday of Christ to be December 25. By this stratagem Christ was
made identifiable in the minds of many pagans with the particular sun-god [Mitra] they worshipped, and a connection was
supplied which serve as a strong bridge to [Zoroastrian-Babylonian-Catholic] Christianity.
68
Stephen E. Jones in his
book entitled The Babylonian Connection boldly told the truth and did not try to water it down,
when he stated that Roman Catholicism: began to be paganized or, as some prefer, paganism was
Christianized.
69


In a book entitled The Works of John Adams, Adams, who was the second President of the
United States wrote a letter to the third President of the United States, Thomas Jefferson, in
which he fearlessly spoke of the origin of Catholicism. On July 16, 1814, Adams declared: If the
Christian religion, as I understand it, or as you understand it, should maintain its ground, as I believe it will, yet
Platonic, Pythagoric, Hindoo, and Cabalistical Christianity, which is Catholic Christianity, and which has prevailed
for fifteen hundred years, has received a mortal wound, of which the monster must finally die, yet so strong is his
constitution, that he may endure for centuries before he expires.
70


The noted English Historian Edward Gibbon confirmed the above truths, in his classic work
entitled The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. He declared: The Supreme Pontiff was constantly
26
exercised by the emperors themselves. They knew and valued the advantages of religion, as it is connected with civil
government.... Constantine and his successors... continued to exercise a supreme jurisdiction over the ecclesiastical
order; and the sixteenth book of the Theodosian code represents, under a variety of titles, the authority which they
assumed in the government of the Catholic Church.
71
This code of the Catholic emperor Theodosius I
(379-395 AD) pronounced the death sentence on any so-called heretic who denounced the Nicene
Creed. By now my readers should be able to understand why Constantine chose Catholicism to
be his bride. With the above truths in mind, let us now examine the Emperor-Pope Constantines
Nicene Creed.

According to Catholic Church historian Socrates Scholasticus (380-439 AD): Constantine convoked a
General Council summoning all the [Catholic] bishops by letter to meet him at Nicaea in Bithynia [i.e. NW Turkey]. The
emperor arrived... and on his entrance stood in their midst, and would not take his place, until the bishops by bowing
intimated their desire that he should be seated.
72
Let my beloved readers take note, Constantine did not
summons the one God Jesus name Bishops, who were in the majority at that time, as Tertullian,
Hippolytus, and Church historians have declared. Therefore, the obvious question to ask is: why
not? The answer is simple, Constantine knew he could not control them and become their Supreme
Pontiff. He also knew that the pagan religions of the Roman Empire would not join up with true
Christianity. This is why he chose the Roman Catholic Church to be the bride of the Roman
Empire, i.e. the State Religion, as shown above.

The Nicene Creed: Socrates recorded the conference of Nicaea and its Creed as following: the
agreement of faith, assented to with loud acclamation at the great council of Nicaea is this: We believe in one God
the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible: [and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of God
the Father before all ages] and [of the same] substance of the Father; God of God and Light of light; true God of true God;
begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father: by whom all things were made, both which are in heaven and on
earth: who for the sake of us men, and on account of our salvation, descended became incarnate, and was made
man; suffered, arose again the third day, and ascended into the heavens and will come again to judge the living and
the dead. [We] also [believe] in the Holy Spirit.

But the holy Catholic and Apostolic church anathematizes those who say There was a time when he was not,
and He was not before he was begotten and He was made from that which did not exist, and those who assert that
he is of other substance or essence than the Father, or that he was created, or is susceptible of change. This creed
was recognized and acquiesced in by three hundred and eighteen [bishops]. Five only would not receive it, objecting
to the term homoousios, of the same essence, or consubstantial.
73
As a result, these five bishops were sent
into exile by the emperor-pope. In a very short time, two of the Catholic Bishops Eusebius of
Nicomedia and Theognis of Nice saw the light of Pope Constantine infallible wisdom and
accepted his consubstantial doctrine and Nicene Creed.

Socrates mentioned Eusebius Pamphilus of Caesarea, who was also a Catholic Bishop and
church historian, as attending this Council. He says: Eusebius held aloof for a short time. at length
acquiesced in it, and subscribed it with all the rest: he also sent to the people under his charge a copy of the Creed,
with an explanation of the word homoousios, that no one might impugn his motives [i.e. accuse him of lacking integrity or
having false motives] on account of his previous hesitation.
74
Eusebius wrote: we believe and present to you the
distinct avowal of our faith. It is this: We believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and
invisible: and [in one Lord Jesus Christ the only] begotten Son, born before all creation, begotten of God the Father
before all ages. It was generally admitted that ousias (of the essence or substance) simply implied that the Son is
of the Father indeed, but does not subsist as a part of the Father. To this interpretation of the sacred doctrine, which
declares that the Son is of the Father, but is not a part of his substance.

On the same grounds we admitted also the expression begotten, not made: for made, said they, is a term
applicable in consequently he is no creature like those which were made by him, but is of a substance far excelling
any creature; which substance the Divine Oracles [i.e. Pro 8] teach was begotten of the Father by such a mode of
generation as cannot be explained nor even conceived by any creature. Thus also the declaration that the Son is
27
consubstantial with the Father having been discussed, it was agreed that this must not be understood in a corporeal
sense, or in any way analogous [i.e. similar] to mortal creatures; inasmuch as it is neither by division of substance, nor
by abscission, nor by any change of the Fathers substance and power, since the underived nature of the Father is
inconsistent with all these things. That he is consubstantial with the Father then simply Father only who begat him;
and that he is of no other substance or essence but of the Father.
75


Let my beloved readers take note, Emperor Constantine and these Catholic priests confessed
that Christ existed in some mysterious and unexplained way before he was begotten by the Father
before time began. This is pure nonsense! If Christ existed in some substance, which they would
probably call god, which was not of the Fathers substance, than why did He need to be begotten by
God the Father.

Emperor-Pope Constantine and these priests also declared that Jesus was begotten by the
Father before time began, and He was consubstantial or homoousios with the Father, i.e. the
Logos was begotten out of the same substance as the Father. This made Jesus equal with God the
Father, since both the Father and He shared in a substance called God. Therefore, these Catholic
Priests change the godhead doctrine of their forefathers, who believed in two-unequal-gods, for a
belief in two-equal-gods. This Creed speaks of the Holy Ghost, but does not tell us what they
believed about the Holy Ghost.

Roman Emperor Constantine Invented the Consubstantial or Homoousios
Doctrine: Socrates in his history revealed that Constantine is the one who declared that the Father
and Son were consubstantial, i.e. of the same substance. In a sense, Constantine was acting as their
first Pope. Socrates revealed that the Emperor Constantine in his final speech to these Catholic
priests incited: all to unanimity. At length he succeeded in bringing them into similarity of judgment and conformity
of opinion on all controversial points.... Exhorting all present [with the power of an Emperor-Pope who controlled the secular sword] to
give their assent and subscribe to these very articles; thus agreeing in a unanimous profession of them, with the insertion,
however, of that single word homoousios consubstantial, an expression which the Emperor himself explained. Let my
beloved readers take note, Constantine, who was acting as their apostle and theologian, inserted the
word consubstantial or the Greek word homoousios into the Catholic Nicene Creed, and even gave
his definition of it so none of his fearful obedient Bishops would place their own definition on it.

How did Pope Constantine define this word? Socrates says the Emperor defined it: as not indicating
corporeal [i.e. physical bodily] affections [i.e. feelings] or properties [i.e. attributes]; and consequently that the Son did not subsist
from the Father either by division or abscission. For said he [the Emperor], a nature which is immaterial and incorporeal
cannot possible be subject to any corporeal affection; hence our conception of such things can only be in divine and
mysterious terms. Such were the philosophical views of the subject taken by our most wise and pious sovereign; and the
bishops on account of the word homoousios drew up this formula of faith.
76
Let my beloved readers also take
note, Constantine claimed the nature or substance of the Father and Son was immaterial i.e. not
consisting of matter, and incorporeal i.e. having no material body or form.

Anyone with any common sense would ask himself or herself, why after many years of bickering
among these Catholic Bishops would the Arian Catholic Bishops who did not believe in the Deity of
Christ, and their fellow Catholic Bishops who believed in two-unequal-gods, now agree with
Emperor-Pope Constantines doctrine of two-equal-gods, who were homoousios or of the same
substance called god? In other words, why would both of these groups of Catholics, who believed
the Son was not equal to God the Father, would now subscribe to a creed that denied their godhead
teachings of the past? Why would they both agree to a doctrine that they and their forefathers
never believed? One might say, well Constantine was a great theologian, but the truth was: as their
28
Emperor who carried the secular sword, he was their infallible pagan High Priestly-Pope who interpreted and made all
doctrines pertaining to religion!

Socrates explained Constantines Nicene Creed this way: the meaning of these terms was clearly defined;
when it was generally admitted that ousias of the essence or substance simple implied that the Son is of the Father
indeed, but does not subsist as part of the Father [i.e. His personal essence]; to this interpretation of the sacred doctrine, which
declares that the Son is of the Father but is not a part of His [personal] substance.
77
According to Pope
Constantines Creed, the Father at some point in eternity past begot or generated the Son from a
substance that must be called God. The Father begot the Son not from His portion of Gods
substance but from a different portion of Gods substance, or in other words, they both had a
different portion of a substance called God. Now, since they declared that the Father and Son were
two separate and distinct persons, beings, or Gods, this can an only mean neither one is wholly God
but only a part of God.

Since Pope Constantine and these Catholic priests declared that the Father begot or generated
the Son from a different portion of Gods substance than His own, where did the Father get this
other portion? One would have to conclude that before the Son was begotten, there were two
beings, one called God and the other called the Father, and the Father had a portion of the
substance of the being called God. Now, if the Son received a portion of Gods substance, than you
have two beings that share a portion of a substance of a being called God, i.e. the Father and, the
Son. When one analyzes this doctrine, he or she is left with two questions, i.e. how much of a portion
of Gods substance does the Father and Son have, and how many more portions of Gods substance
are left in the being called God, whereby other beings may be begotten and also share in a portion
of Gods substance? If you believe in Nimrods doctrine, or the Catholic-Protestant-Pentecostal
doctrine, that god is an omnipresent spirit in his essence, than the answer would be: there is no limit in
the number of beings who can share in the substance called god.

If the Father, Son, and God had equal portions of Gods substance, than each would be one third
of God. For example, if you cut an apple into three equal portions, each portion is considered as a
third of an apple. No one with any intelligence would call a third of an apple the whole apple, even
though it has all the characteristics, properties, and nature of the whole apple. Unless they, like
Pope Constantine, profess the godhead is a mystery. How can three different and separate divine
persons or beings be one God? Moreover, if there are three beings called God, then why did these
Catholic Bishops declared: the one God [was] the Father Almighty in their Creed?

Socrates also spoke of the First Creed of Sirmium, which was published in 352 AD in presence of
the Emperor-Pope Constantius II. Some historians suggest that this creed belongs to some other
council than the First Council of Sirmium, and Constantius was an Arian in his belief on the
Godhead. Anyway, this Emperor-Pope, like his Father Constantine, commanded his Catholic
Bishops to meet with him to draw up this creed because many of the so-called Catholic Orthodoxy
objected to the word consubstantial in the Nicene Creed and would not use it in their teachings.
Socrates said it this way: Since it troubles very many to understand about that which is termed substantia in
Latin, and ousia in Greek; that is to say, in order to mark the sense more accurately, the word homoousion or
homoiousion, it is altogether desirable that none of these terms should be mentioned: nor should they be preached on
in the church, for this reason, that nothing is recorded concerning them in the holy Scriptures; and because these
things are above the knowledge of mankind and human capacity, and that no one can explain the Sons generation.


Socrates recorded this creed thus: We believe in one God the Father Almighty, the Creator and Maker of
all things, of whom the whole family in heaven and on earth is named, and in his only begotten Son, our Lord Jesus
29
Christ, who was begotten of the Father before all ages, God of God, Light of Light, by whom all things visible and
invisible, which are in the heavens and upon the earth, were made: who is the Word, and the Wisdom, and the true
Light, and the Life. [We believe] also in the Holy Spirit, that is to say the Comforter, whom, having promised to his
apostles after his ascension into the heavens, to teach them, and bring all thinks to their remembrance, he sent; by
whom also the souls of those who have sincerely believed in him are sanctified. But those who affirm that the Son is
of things which are not, or of another substance and not of God, and that there was a time or an age when he was not,
the holy and catholic Church recognizes to be aliens. If any one should say that the Son is unbegotten, and without
beginning, intimating that there are two without beginning and unbegotten, so making two Gods, let him be
anathema.
78


Let us now examine the statement concerning the Holy Spirit in the Nicene Creed: (We believe) also
in the Holy Spirit. What did they believe about the Holy Ghost? Whatever they believed about the
Holy Spirit, the majority of them did not believe he was a third person in a Babylonian Trinity. In
fact, most of them did not know what to believe about the Holy Ghost.

The New Catholic Encyclopedia definitely informed us what the Catholic Bishops at Nicaea
believed about the Holy Ghost. Under the heading of the Trinity, the Catholic Church made a
good and honest confession about the development of their Babylonian-Trinitarian doctrine. It
stated: In the last analysis, the 2nd century theological achievement was limited. A Trinitarian solution was still in
the future. The Apologists spoke too haltingly of the Spirit; with a measure of anticipation, one might say too
impersonally.... On the eve of Nicene 1, the Trinitarian problem raised more than a century earlier was still far from
settled. It was the problem of plurality within the single, undivided godhead.
79


Dr. Schaff speaking about the Holy Spirit wrote: Even among the adherents of the [so-called] Nicene
orthodoxy, an uncertainty still for a time prevailed, respecting the doctrine of the third person of the Holy Trinity. Some
held the [Holy] Spirit to be an impersonal power or attributes of God; others, at farthest, would not go beyond the
expressions of the Scriptures. Even as late as 375 AD, in the time of the Catholic theologian Gregory of
Nyssa, most Catholics Bishops did not believe the Holy Spirit to be a personal being. Gregory
wrote: Of the wise among us, some consider the Holy Ghost an influence, others a creature [meaning an angel], others God
himself, and others know not which way to decide.
80


After the Nicene Council, Constantine in his new position as Emperor-Pope issued an Edict.
Did this new Edict grant religious freedom to all who would not believe in or teach Constantines
Nicene Creed? Let us hear what this great Pagan Catholic Pope has to say about religious
freedom. Eusebius recorded Constantines Edict as:

Victor Constantinus Maximus Augustus: Forasmuch, then, as it is no longer possible to bear with your
pernicious errors, we give warning by this present statute that none of you henceforth presume to assemble
yourselves together. We have directed, accordingly, that you be deprived of all the houses in which you are
accustomed to hold your assemblies: and our care in this respect extends so far as to forbid the holding of your
superstitious and senseless meetings, not in public merely, but in any private house or place whatsoever. Let those of
you, therefore, who are desirous of embracing the true and pure religion, take the far better course of entering the
Catholic Church, and uniting with it in holy fellowship, whereby you will be enabled to arrive at the knowledge of
the truth.

And in order that this remedy may be applied with effectual power, we have commanded, as before said, that
you be positively deprived of every gathering point for your superstitious meetings, I mean all the houses of prayer, if
such be worthy of the name, which belong to heretics, and that these be made over without delay to the Catholic
Church; that any other places be confiscated to the public service, and no facility whatever be left for any future
gathering; in order that from this day forward none of your unlawful assemblies may presume to appear in any
public or private place. Let this edict be made public.
81


30
This Roman Edit meant that the TRUE CHRISTIANS had to hold secrete underground
meetings. Emperor-Pope Constantine made it very clear to Gods people, that they either join his
Roman Catholic Church and confess Satans doctrine of two-equal-gods or face persecution by
the Roman Empire. Professor Schaff speaking of this new Roman persecution says: The successors
of Constantine enforced the [Babylonian-Catholic] Christian religion to the exclusion of every other; and not only so,
but they enforced [so-called] orthodoxy to the exclusion of every form of dissent, which was punished as a crime against
the State. Theodosius [380 AD] in the course of fifteen year issued at least fifteen penal laws against [so-called]
heretics, by which he gradually deprive them of all right to the exercise of their religion, excluded them from all civil
offices, and threatened them with fines, confiscation, banishment, and with death.
82


What did Lucifer hoped to gain from this new persecution by these so-called Christian Roman
Emperors, who were not going to have their empire divided by religion? The answer is obvious,
Satan knew no amount of physical persecution from Pagan Roman Emperors could persuade
Gods children to give up their inheritance in God. Therefore, the Old Serpent hoped that
persecuting them as heretics would bring confusion to the masses of true Christians. He hoped to
deceive them into believing that Gods blessings were on the Catholic Churches. He hoped that
they would accept the Catholic godhead and other doctrines as truth. By this stratagem, the
Lucifer hoped to gradually bring some or many of Gods children into the Catholic Church; but
thank God, most of Gods Apostolic Pentecostal children remained faithful to their God and
Savior, and endured their persecution as good soldiers of Christ.

The Catholic Trinitarian Doctrine
or the Belief in Three-Equal-gods (382 AD-Present Time)

The fifth teaching to arise on the godhead was the Trinitarian doctrine. In 381 AD, Catholic
Bishops dreamed up yet another dogma, which they called the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed.
This creed was the same as the Nicene Creed, but it may have made the Holy Ghost a person in
the godhead; it is hard to tell, for their doctrine of the Holy Spirit is not very explicit. Therefore, no
one can say with any degree of certainty that they did! The only thing this creed says, which was
different from the Nicene Creed is this: We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life; he proceeds
from the Father, is adored and honored together with the Father and the Son; he spoke through the prophets.

In 382 AD Bishop-Pope Damascus called a Council in Rome in which the Catholic Church drew
up a clear Babylonian-Trinitarian godhead creed; there cannot be any doubt that this creed
definitely declared that the godhead is composed of three-equal-persons, beings, or gods; it also
connected the formula of baptism with the godhead for salvation. It stated: Therefore this is the salvation
of Christians: that believing in the Trinity, that is the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and being baptized in the Trinity.
These Babylonian Nicolaitan Bishops also declared: (1) We pronounce anathema against those who do not
proclaim with complete freedom that He the Holy Spirit is of one power and substance with the Father and the Son....
(10) If anyone denies that the Father is eternal, that the Son is eternal, and that the Holy Spirit is eternal: he is a
heretic....

(16) If anyone denies that the Holy Spirit is truly and properly from the Father, and, like the Son, is of the divine
substance and is true God: he is heretic. (17) If anyone denies that the Holy Spirit has all power and knows all things,
and is everywhere, just as the Father and the Son: he is a heretic.... (18) If anyone says that the Holy Spirit is a creature,
or was created by the Son: he is a heretic.... (20) If anyone denies that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit have one divinity,
authority, majesty, power, one glory, dominion, one kingdom, and one will and truth: he is a heretic.... (21) If anyone
denies that the three persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, are true persons, equal, eternal, containing all
things visible and invisible, that they are omnipotent, judge all things, give life to all things, make all things, and conserve
all things: he is a heretic.
83

31

Lucifers Babylonian Catholic Trinity now became a reality. Therefore, these heretics changed
their godhead doctrine again; they traded in their belief in two-equal-gods, for a belief in three-
equal-gods. The Father, Son and Holy Ghost were now three separate and distinct persons (Greek
- hypostases) or beings. Catholic Bishop Jerome (390 AD) confirmed this Councils decision when he
wrote: it is the custom at baptism to ask, after the confession of faith in the Trinity, do you believe in the Holy Church.
84


In all centuries past, many students of history have known the origin of the Catholic Babylonian
Trinity. Ex-President Adams wrote a letter to ex-President Thomas Jefferson in which he spoke of
the origin of the Catholic Trinitarian doctrine. On June 28, 1813, he wrote: Professors Priestley and
Lindsey have both denounced as idolaters and blasphemers all the Trinitarians and even the Arians.... Priestly barely
mentions Timaeus; but it does not appear that he had read him. Why has he not given us an account of him and his
book? He was before Plato, and gave him the idea of his Timaeus, and much of his philosophy.... I wonder that Priestly
has overlooked this, because it is the same philosophy with Plato's, and would have shown that the Pythagorean, as well
as the Platonic philosophers, probably concurred in the fabrication of the [Catholic-Protestant] Christian Trinity.
85


Comparing the Babylonian Trinity with the Trinity of Catholicism: Trinitarian
minister and historian Alexander Hislop, in his great book The Two Babylons, compared the
Trinity of Roman Catholicism with that of the Trinity of the Babylonian and other Pagan
Religions. He declared: The ancient Babylonians, just as the modern [Catholic] Romans, recognized in words the
unity of the godhead; and while worshipping innumerable minor deities [demons], as possessed of certain influence on
human affairs, they distinctly acknowledged that there was one infinite and Almighty Creator, supreme over all.
Most other nations did the same.... In the unity of that one only god of the Babylonians, there were three persons, and
to symbolize that doctrine of the Trinity, they employed, as the discoveries of Layard prove, the equilateral triangle,
just as it is well known the Roman Church does at this day.

The Papacy has in some of its churches, as for instance, in the monastery of the so-called Trinitarians of Madrid,
an image of the triune god, with three heads on one body. The Babylonians had something of the same.... In India, the
supreme divinity, in like manner, in one of the most ancient cave-temples, is represented with three heads, under the
name of Eko Deva Trimurtti, one god, three forms.
86
There can be no room for doubt that the
Babylonian Trinity, of three separate persons or beings in the godhead, was taught by all
heathen nations long before Christianity can into being.

The Jewish Encyclopedia under the heading of the Trinity reproved both Catholicism and
Protestantism when it declared: The idea of a Trinity, which, since the council of Nice, and especially through
Basil the Great [370 AD], had become the Catholic dogma, is of course regarded by Jews as antagonistic to their
monotheistic faith and due to the paganistic tendency of the [Roman Catholic] Church: God the Father and God the
Son, together with the Holy Ghost... have their parallels in all the heathen mythologies, as has been shown by many
Christian scholars.
87


Noted Trinitarian Bible Scholars Confessed that the Catholic Trinitarian
Doctrine Cannot Be Found in the Old or New Testaments: The Encyclopedia Britannica
speaking of the Trinity stated: In general we may say that the Trinity takes on four differing aspects in the
Christian church: in its more common and easily apprehended form as three gods, in its ecclesiastical form as a
mystery which is above reason to be accepted by faith.... To some Christians the doctrine of the Trinity appeared
inconsistent with the unity of God, which is emphasized in the Scriptures.
88


In The Encyclopedia of Religion, which is composed by many Trinitarian scholars, we read:
Exegetes and theologians today are in agreement that the Hebrew Bible does not contain a doctrine of the Trinity....
Further, exegetes and theologians agree that the New Testament also does not contain an explicit doctrine of the
Trinity.... Some theologians have concluded that all post-biblical Trinitarian doctrine is therefore arbitrary [meaning
32
based on ones preferences, notions, or whims]; while it is incontestable that the doctrine cannot be established on scriptural
evidence alone.
89


Dr. James Hastings, in his Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, under the heading of the
Trinity declared: The Old Testament could hardly be expected to furnish the doctrine of the Trinity.... In the
New Testament, we do not find the doctrine of the Trinity in anything like its developed form, not even in the Pauline
and Johannie theology. The story of the Trinity in ecclesiastical history is the story of the transition from the
Trinity of experience, in which God is self - revealed as the Father or Creator and Legislator, the Son or Redeemer,
and the Spirit or Sanctifier, to the trinity of [Catholic and Protestant] dogma. To say that there are three separate
personalities in the Godhead would be polytheism.
90
I would add: to say that there are three separate persons,
i.e. three separate Spirits, Souls, and Bodies in the godhead would be polytheism.

Trinitarian Methodist professors John McClintock and James Strong affirmed the above
statements on the Trinity when they wrote: Respecting the manner in which the Father, the Son, and the
Holy Ghost make one God, the scripture teaches nothing, since the subject is of such a nature as not to admit of its
being explained to us.
91
What these scholars are saying is that the Babylonian Trinity is a mystery.
Now, have you not heard other Trinitarian theologians, pastors, and preachers say the same
thing?

Lutheran professor Harnack wrote: The doctrine of the Trinity, as professed by the Church [i.e. Roman
Catholic and Protestant Churches], is not contained in the New Testament. At first, the Christian faith was not Trinitarian
in the strictly ontological reference [i.e. in the beginning, or as it first existed]. It was not so in the apostolic and sub-apostolic
ages, as reflected in the NT and other early Christian writings. Nor was it so even in the age of the [Catholic] Christian
apologists.
92
What Dr. Harnack is saying is this, Catholic apostates of the apostolic and
sub-apostolic ages, along with their deceived converts, did not believed in a Trinity of three
persons in the Godhead. None of these Catholic heretics considered the Holy Spirit to be a
separate person in the Godhead in any sense of the word; also, none of these Catholic Priests
considered the Son to be equal with the Father in origin, power, and other attributes.

The noted English Catholic Cardinal John Henry Newman confessed that the doctrines of the
Trinity, apostolic succession, the Eucharist, and the Mass were not found in the Bible. Even
though he understood these facts, he still believed they were true, for he defends them not from a
Biblical point of view, but from the traditions of the early Catholic Ante Nicene Priests. He
admonished all Protestants to accept by faith these Catholic doctrines, since they have accepted
the Catholic doctrine of the Trinity by faith without any real scriptural proof.

Catholic Cardinal Newman scolded Protestants by saying: Where was your Church before Luther?
The obvious and historical answer is they were in the Roman Catholic Church. He then
proceeded by saying: Take a large view of the faith of Christians during the centuries before Constantine
established their [i.e. the Roman Catholic] religion. Is there any family likeness in it to Protestantism?
93
The obvious
answer is no. He then went on to prove that historically, by comparing the teachings of the
Reformers with that of the Catholic Ante Nicene Priests.

Cardinal Newman then proceeded to make a very shocking confession. Let us hear this
Priests confession, and see if He makes a good and true confession, before we grant him
absolution. He declared: all parties must confess, the Catholic doctrine of the Trinity is not brought out in form
upon the surface of Scriptures. As I have said more than once, to allege, that all points that are beyond clear Scripture
proof are mere peculiarities of each sect [i.e. different religious systems]; so that if all Protestants were to agree to put out
of sight their respective peculiarities [i.e. unscriptural doctrines], they would then have a Creed set forth distinctly,
clearly, and adequately, in Scripture. For take that single instance, which I referred to in a former Lecture, the
doctrine of the Holy Trinity. Is this to be considered as a mere peculiarity or no? Apparently, a peculiarity [for] it is not
33
brought out in form in Scripture. First, the word Trinity is not in Scripture. Next, I ask how many of the verses of
the Athanasian Creed are distinctly set down in Scripture?
94


Professor Newman continued his confession and reproach of Protestants by saying: He who
admits the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, in spite of felling its difficulties, whether in itself or in its proof - who submits
to the indirectness [meaning lack] of the Scripture evidence as regards that particular doctrine - has a right to be told
those other doctrines, such as the apostolic succession.
95
This Catholic Priest proceeded with his
confession and reproach to the fallen away daughters of Catholicism by saying: not Scripture, but
history [i.e. the tradition of the Ante Nicene Priests] is our informant in Christian doctrine. [All Protestants] who consider the
Bible as the one standard of faith, [i.e. those who say they base their beliefs on the Bible and not tradition], let no one take refuge
and comfort in the idea that he will be what is commonly called an orthodox Protestant [if] he will admit the
doctrine of the Trinity, but not that of the Apostolic Succession. This is an impossible position: it is shutting one
eye, and looking with the other, shut both or open both.
96


Confessor Newman in his reproof to Protestant theologians and preachers clearly told them: since
you have accepted and believed the Catholic dogma of the Trinity by faith, without any real scriptural proof, you have
earn for yourselves the right to accept and believe by faith all other Catholic doctrines, which are also not taught in the
Bible, as Newman openly admitted on pages 122, 206, 207 and 211. In other words, open both of your eyes and
find the truth, or close both of your eyes and become a Catholic Priest. No matter what people may
or may not say about Cardinal Newman, I do believe this Catholic Priest made a good and true
confession, for which Gods Apostolic Pentecostal people everywhere do thank him, and grant him
absolution.

Conclusion: Therefore, as most Trinitarian theologians, pastors, and preachers know, but
will not publicly confess, it took the Catholic Church over 260 years to develop the Catholic and
Protestant doctrine of the Trinity. That is, from 90 AD when Catholicism began with Ignatius of
Antioch and Clement of Rome to so-called Roman Pope Damascus of Rome in 350 AD to the
Nicene-Constant Creed of 382 AD.

CHAPTER 2
THE TRINITY OF THE BABYLONIAN RELIGION

This chapter is excerpt from my book entitled, A History of Oneness through the Centuries. It
contains selected passages from this book.

The Word of God speaking about some of the people that lived after the flood of Noah stated:
Although they knew God [referring to His godhead], they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became
futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and
changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man and birds and four-footed
animals and creeping things. Who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature
[ktisis] rather than the Creator (Rom 1:21-23, 25).

Dr. James Strong in his work entitled Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible defined
the Greek word ktisis to mean: creation.
97
It is obvious from the above passage that the godhead
was not a mystery to these people, but as many Catholic and Protestant theologians, bishops,
preachers, and priests of today, they did not like this truth. Since the Bible clearly stated that
these people knew the truth about the godhead and changed it to nature worship or Pantheism,
what was the truth they knew, and who were these people that perverted this truth?

34
Nimrod Started the Worship of Nature in the Form of a Trinity

The truth concerning the godhead, the soul of man, and the souls future destiny were totally
perverted at the Tower of Babel around 2,300 BC. It was at this Tower where the first false
religion began, which was created by Nimrod who was the son of Cush, who was a son of Ham,
who was a son of Noah (Gen 10:1-8). This religion was called the Babylonian Religion, which in the
Bible is known as Mystery Babylon. According to some reports of history, Nimrod became so
perverted that he married Semiramis, his own mother. In Egypt Semiramis was known as Isis,
and Arnobius (300 AD) stated this truth this way: Is it Isis, tanned by Ethiopian suns, lamenting her lost son
and husband torn limb from limb?
98


In his rebellion against God, Nimrod started through Satan's tutoring a priesthood that
practiced witchcraft, magic, astrology, the worship of Lucifer as the sun god, and Lucifer's
demons as various planets, stars and constellations. Nimrods religion was nature worship, which
consisted of Pantheism, Animism, and Polytheism. Nimrod was the first to teach that the
godhead consisted of a Trinity. Nimrods Nature Trinity consisted of Anu, Ea, and Bel; Anu
represented the heavens or air, Ea represented water, and Bel represented the earth.

Stephen E. Jones revealed: Nimrod combined Semitic monotheism with Accadian animism to produce
pantheism. He taught that god is nature itself, and each nature-spirit [even man] is part of god.
99
Thus, creation
itself was worshipped as god or the universal soul. This is exactly what the Bible declared happen
in the above passage of scripture. We will examine Nimrods doctrine of god being an impersonal
omnipresent spirit in his essence, which fills the entire universe at the end of this chapter.

Nimrods history and his religion of nature worship can be found in a work entitled the
Recognition of Clement, which some believe was written by Clement of Rome in 100 AD. It
revealed that it was: Ham [who] unhappily discovered the magical act, and handed down the instruction of it to
one of his sons [i.e. Cush], who was called Mesraim, from whom the race of the Egyptians and Babylonians and
Persians are descended. Him the nations who then existed called Zoroaster, admiring him as the first author of the
magic art [i.e. Cush or Zoroaster wrote many books on magic]. He therefore, being much and frequently intent upon the
stars, and wishing to be esteemed a god among them, began to draw forth, as it were, certain sparks from the stars [i.e.
lighting from the sky], and to show them to men in order that the rude and ignorant might be astonished, as with a
miracle; and desiring to increase this estimation of him, he attempted these things again and again, until he was set
on fire, and consumed by the demon himself, whom he accosted [or approached] with too great an importunity or with
too many request and demands. He therefore was struck by lighting.

But the foolish men, who were then, [erected] a sepulcher to his [Cushs] honor, they went so far as to adore him
as a friend of God, and one who had been removed to heaven in a chariot of lightning, and to worship him as if he
were a living star. Hence also, his name was called Zoroaster after his death, that is, a living star. The magic art
having been handed down to him [Nimrod, the son of Cush] as by a flash, whom the Greeks also called Ninus, and from
whom the city of Nineveh took its name. Thus, therefore, diverse and erratic superstitions took their beginning from
the magic art. For, because it was difficult to draw away the human race from the love of God, and attach them to
deaf and lifeless images, the magicians made use of higher efforts, that men might be turned to erratic worship, by
signs among the stars, and motions brought down as it were from heaven, and by the will of God. And those who had
been first deceived, collecting the ashes of Zoroaster [Cush] brought them to the Persians, that they might be
preserved by them with perpetual watching, as divine fire fallen from heaven, and might be worshipped as a heavenly
god.
100


Nimrod being angry invented the religion of Zoroastrianism, with it dualistic system of a good
god i.e. his father Zoroaster (a title of Lucifer) and evil god i.e. YHWH, who destroyed the world
35
with a flood and killed his father Cush. Thus, Nimrod combined Nature Worship with
Zoroastrianism.

Semiramis Started the Worship of the Trinity
in the Form of Three Persons

After Nimrod died, Semiramis had Nimrod deified as Baal the sun god or god the father (1Ki
18:21-40). Nimrod became the second deified man in history, for his father Cush was the first.
Semiramis also had herself deified as Ashtoreth (Hebrew) or Astarte (Greek), the Queen of Heaven or the
mother of the gods (Jer 44:17-25). Semiramis thus became the first deified woman in history and she
was identified with the moon. Semiramis also had Tammuz, her illegitimate son, deified as god
the son (Eze 8:14). This made Tammuz the first living god in history. This demonic woman claimed
that Nimrod came back in the spirit and impregnated her. Therefore, Tammuz received his
supposed deification from both Nimrod and Semiramis.

Hislop stated the above truth this was: The scheme, thus skillfully formed, took effect. Semiramis gained
glory from her dead and deified husband. The licentious and dissolute life of Semiramis gave her many children,
for whom no ostensible father on earth would be alleged. All that was needful was just to teach that Ninus [i.e.
Nimrods soul] had reappeared [i.e. reincarnated] in the person of a posthumous son, of a fair complexion, supernaturally
borne by his widowed wife after the father [i.e. Nimrods spirit] had gone to glory.... It was from her son that she derived
all her glory and claims to deification. [Semiramis] was worshipped by the Babylonians and other eastern nations
under the name of Rhea, the great goddess mother.
101


Because the Catholic Church believes and teaches the doctrines of Mystery Babylon, it had to
deify Mary and give her the title the Mother of God, so she could be worshipped as Semiramis.
The Catholic Church in mystery form made her the Holy Ghost or the third person in their
Babylonian Trinity; this is why there are many pictures of Mary with a dove above her head in
Catholic Churches! Hislop declared that many of the ancient pictures and statues of Semiramis,
with a dove above her head or holding Tammuz in her arms, were Christianized by the Catholic
Church.

It was at this point the Babylonian Trinity of three separate persons or beings in the godhead
came into existence, and Lucifer's doctrines of Immortality, Reincarnation, and Perfection of the
Soul that was taught by Nimrod was confirmed. These doctrines and a few others became know
as the Babylonian Mysteries, and thus Secret Societies were born. In time Semiramis
Babylonian Trinitarian doctrine of the godhead, became more important than Nimrods nature
doctrine of the godhead in the Babylonian Mysteries, because this father, son and mother were
suppose to be the first humans to become deified, which gave their followers hope of returning
back to paradise and also becoming deified. In other words, the Babylonian Trinity was
connected to the ancient pagan and heathen doctrine of mans deification.

It is very evident to anyone who studied the Babylonian Religion that Lucifer must have
discovered the true doctrines of Christ sometime after his fall and rebellion. Satan could have
received these prophetic truths by learning how to read the stars; the Bible could have stated this
belief when it declared: Your word, O LORD, is eternal; it stands firm in the heavens [shamayim] (Psa 119:89,
NIV). The Hebrew noun shamayim is plural in number. No matter how Lucifer discovered the
doctrines of Christ, he evidently imitated and perverted them with his Mystery Religion.

36
What Does the Bible Mean by the Term Mystery Babylon?

John speaking about this false religious system says: Upon her forehead was a name written, Mystery
Babylon, the great mother of harlots and abominations of the earth (Jn 17:5). Since the Bible called this
religion Mystery Babylon, or the Babylonian Mysteries and the mother of all false religious
systems, what does the word mystery mean? The word mystery is the Greek word
musterion which means: a secret i.e. through the idea of silence impose by initiation into a religious rite.
102


Since this is an occult mystery, let us inspect what the occult authorities have to say about it.
The Encyclopedia of Occultism and Parapsychology, under the heading of Mysteries, revealed
that it was: A term for what is secret or concealed in a religious context.... The mysteries were secret cults, to
which only certain initiated people were admitted after a period of preliminary preparation.... But the mysteries
appear to have circled around the semi-dramatic representation or mystery-play of the life of a deity.
103
Let my
readers take note, the doctrines of the mysteries centered on their teaching of the godhead or the
Trinity. In the book entitled Secret Societies and Subversive Movements, by English historian
Nesta Webster, under the sub-title The Mysteries we read: Now from the earliest times groups of initiates
or wise men have existed, claiming to be in possession of esoteric doctrines known as the Mysteries, incapable of
apprehension by the vulgar, and relating to the origin and end of man, the life of the soul after death, and the nature
of god or the gods. The Initiates believe that the sacred mysteries should not be revealed to the profane but should
remain exclusively in their own keeping.
104


Nimrod Invented the Doctrine that God Is an Omnipresent Spirit
in His Essence

Since Nimrod taught that nature was god (Recognition of Clement, the Worship of the Sun & Stars, Rom
1:21-25), it was only natural for him to make his god an impersonal omnipresent spirit, out of
which a good god and evil god later evolved to create all things. Therefore, the entire universe
was composed of gods substance or omnipresent spirit essence. John Blunt, in his Dictionary of
Sects, Heresies, Ecclesiastical Parties, and Schools of Religious Thought, defined Nimrods doctrine
of pantheism, as it was taught by the religion of India, which was one of the daughters of
Mystery Babylon.

Blunt declared: Those who hold the opinion that God is everything, and everything is God supposes an
infinite [omnipresent] eternal substance, which arouses itself into action by self-energy, and clothes itself in a
multiplicity of forms, that in the aggregate make up the universe. Thus, the divine idea as the whole is all things, and
all things are the whole, and in the end all things will return once more into the inscrutable oneness from whence
they came forth. Such was the groundwork of the Brahmanical system, and of the cosmogony of the most ancient
Indian writings.

Blunt went on to describe the Brahmans idea of creation: Brahma the primal substance, the absolute,
awakening into consciousness, gave birth to Maja, spectral matter, the illusive source of all that appears to exist. A
threefold manifestation of himself [i.e. a Trinity] is put forth by Brahma: Brahma the Creator, Vishnu the Preserver,
and Siva the Destroyer. All creation proceeded forth from the joint energy of Brahma and Maja.... Thence the
world of spirits and of men evolved. Only when a man recognizes [that] all things [are] in Brahma does he wake up
from his dream, and gain the use of thought. [In which] the truth is apprehended that the contemplative mind is one
with the Infinite.
105


Anyone with an ounce of common sense should be able to understand that the theory of
evolution is an ancient heathen religious doctrine; for the ancient priests of Brahma and other
pagan religions definitely received their teaching on evolution from the Babylonian religion.
37
Athenagoras (177 AD) a Christian Grecian philosopher declared the Greek philosophers taught
the gods of the Greeks were humans, and they evolved from the ocean. He said: Homer speaks of
Old Oceanus, the sire of gods . He, too, has fixed their [the human gods of the Greek] first origin to be from water:
Oceanus, the origin of all. For, according to him, water was the beginning of all things, and from water mud was
formed, and from both was produced an animal.
106
Athenagoras went on to reveal that the Greeks
received their stories of the gods from the Egyptians.

Let us compare the theory of evolution taught today with Satans ancient Indian teaching.
Braham or the primal substance to the evolutionists - would be hydrogen-atoms that came into
existence from no one and no place. Braham awakening into consciousness to these so-called
scientific priests of Satan would be the burning of hydrogen atoms as they gather into a gas
cloud. The giving of birth to Maja or matter to the evolutionists would be the BIG BANG. To the
Brahmins and to the evolutionists the world of spirits would be the forces of nature. The evolving
of men from the primal waters would be the evolving of man from one-cell creatures from the
sea in the religion of the evolutionists.

This is why I have said many times: evolution is not science but religion, and those who teach it are not
scientists, but pagan priests of heathenism! None of these so-called scientists or pagan priests can tell us
where this primal substance or the first hydrogen atom came from. Therefore, they are force to
admit that the primal substance or the first hydrogen atom must be their god, since they claim
that all things came from it. I might also add how can the pagans lifeless, unintelligent,
impersonal god give life, intelligence, and personality to multitudes of offspring, and not possess
these attributes itself? It is ridiculous to believe that some of the offspring of this one spiritual
substance have intelligence and personality, but their creator does not! This is why Einstein and
other true scientist found it impossible to believe that life, order, and intelligence could spring
forth from disorder, non-intelligent, and non-living things. Where there is a design, there must
be a designer.

These pagan priests also must admit that their god has no spoken word or moral laws for his
creation to follow, since their god is not a personal god. Thus, you have the doctrine of
humanism; man becomes his own god and makes his own laws, whether they are moral or
immoral. Therefore, all those who believe in these damnable doctrines are force to admit that all
religions, even their own, are nothing but man made. All their religious doctrines, even their
doctrines of the eternality and reincarnation of mans personal soul would be a lie. Their religion
in all reality would rob them of any hope in this life or the one to come.

Nimrods Babylonian omnipresent spirit doctrine makes the true Gods personal substance in
everything and in all empty space. If this lying doctrine is true, then will someone tell me why God
forbid men to make graven images of earthly and heavenly objects that were known as gods, if
He personally dwells in these things and they are nothing but manifestations of Him? God gave
the Second Commandment against this kind of foolishness: You shall not make for yourself a carved
image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water
under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them [as gods]. For I, the LORD your God, am a jealous
God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me
(Exo 20:4-5).

I have asked several Christian preachers, who believe in Nimrods omnipresent spirit
doctrine: If God is a shapeless, formless omnipresent Spirit that fills the universe with His own personal
substance as you claim, then He must be in the sun, moon, stars, trees, rocks, and in all matter such as human
beings. If I hold a glass of water in my hand, am I holding a part of god in my hand? When I ask them this
38
question, I am not trying to be sarcastic or insulting to them or to God, but I do want them to
stop and think about their belief in this false doctrine.

Now every preacher can see that this is ridiculous, but all some of them can say is: God as a
Spirit is not matter. I then say: If God is an omnipresent Spirit in His own personal substance that fills the
universe, as you teach, then He must be in these things or there are some places where He is not! Some
preachers will respond to this by saying: God fills all empty space not matter. He is like the air, which is
everywhere. I usually take my hand and grab a hand full of air and say: Do I have God in my hand?
Does air have intelligence? Can air think, talk, see, hear, feel, smell, and have a mind and will? The God I serve has
all these attributes and a whole lot more, and besides this empty space in the universe has no air in it! This again
according to your doctrine would mean that there are places were God is not!

My beloved readers by now should begin to understand how ridiculous Nimrods pagan
omnipresent spirit doctrine is. If God is not a personal Spirit Being that has form, shape, and
locality, which the Word of God declares dwells in Christ alone, but is an omnipresent spirit in
His essence, then the heathens were right when they worshipped the different parts of creation,
for god would have been in these things. That is, all these things would have been manifestations
of gods substance. However, my Bible tells me God cast off the heathen for this belief, and
punished His Old Covenant children for this sin, when they forsook Him, and worshipped Baal
and other nature gods. Do you think He is going to excuse His New Covenant children for
believing the same lie? This doctrine is not a Biblical doctrine and it surely robs God of His
personal unbegotten Spirit essence. The omnipresent spirit doctrine is nothing but pure
mysticism, and it originated in Nimrods Zoroastrian-Babylonian Religion or Mystery Babylon.

God, as a personal unbegotten Spirit Being, will be discussed in the next chapter under the
subtitle, Is God a Singular Unbegotten Spirit Being, Who Has Form, Shape, and Locality. Gods
attribute of omnipresent will be discussed in chapter seven under the subtitle, The Holy Spirit Is
Christ, the Living Word, the Creative Word, and the Written Word of God. If my beloved readers
would like to learn more about Oneness history, or the history and the development of the
Trinitarian doctrine, or the history of the Trinity of the Babylonian Religion, I would suggest
reading my book entitled, A History of Oneness through the Centuries.

CHAPTER 3
THE ONE AND ONLY GOD OF THE BIBLE
IS THE FATHER

How Important Is It to God that We Understand His Godhead?

Paul stood on Mars hill and told the: Men of Athens! I see that in every way you are very religious. For
as I walked around and looked carefully at your objects of worship, I even found an altar with this inscription: TO
AN UNKNOWN GOD. Now what you worship as something unknown I am going to proclaim to you. We should
not think that the divine being [He not them] is like gold or silver or stone--an image made by man's design and skill.
In the past God overlooked such ignorance [men not knowing the godhead], but now he commands all people everywhere
to repent (Acts 17:22-23, 29-30, NIV).

The great apostle told us in plain words that it is Gods will for all men every where to know
God's Godhead, so therefore it cannot be a mystery that God's children can not know. In fact,
God is commanding His children to know His Godhead. God thought it was so important that He
39
gave us Commandments that we may know, love and obey Him by. The first and greatest
Commandment is: I am [not we are] the LORD your God. You shall have no other gods before Me not us
(Exo 20:2-3).

Jesus speaking as a man about His deity said: This is eternal life that they may know You [Father], the
only true God, and Jesus Christ [Your humanity] whom You have sent (Jn 17:3). Jesus Christ, who was, is, and
shall ever be the humanity of God the Father, connected salvation or Eternal Life with knowing
that the Father is the one and only true God. There are many that confess Christianity, who say
that knowing the godhead is not important; if what Jesus said is true, and it is, then they will no
doubt be surprised in the day of Judgment.

What Is God, or How Does the Word of God Define God?

The apostle John speaking of some of the attributes of God wrote: God is light and God is love;
but only the Lord Jesus Christ, the Creator Himself, gave us a definition for God when He said:
God is a Spirit [Pneuma] (1Jn 1:5; 4:7; Jn 4:24). This is the only verse in the Bible that tells us what God
is. Therefore, what did our Lord mean by the word Spirit. Did He mean that God is a personal
Spirit Being, and His essence is composed of a substance called Spirit, which has form, shape,
and locality, or did He mean that God is an impersonal spirit, whose omnipresent substance fills
the universe?

Is God a Personal Spirit or an Impersonal Spirit?

The Encyclopedia of Religion speaking about the essence and nature of God stated: The basic
issue concerning the nature of the divine is whether God is to be considered a personal being or... impersonal....
Monotheists have struggled through the ages with questions concerning the corporeality of God, including shape
and dimension.... The tension between the two concepts, the God of form, and God without form has arisen in
multitude of ways for faithful persons of various traditions.
107
The Jewish Encyclopedia speaking of Gods
attributes of being corporeal and incorporeal stated: Several Biblical expressions apparently favor a
conception of God as a carnal being, and many teachers take these expressions literally. It is the nature of a carnal
body that it is limited and defined by space. God, as a non-corporeal being is not limited by space [for] the universe
has not sufficient room for Him; it cannot contain Him.
108


Certain Jewish Rabbis, who were initiated into the doctrines of Mystery Babylon after they
went into Babylonian Captivity in 606 BC, taught Satans omnipresent spirit doctrine. Many
forms of Christianity still teach this lie. Heathen religions could not exist without their omnipresent spirit
doctrine, for many of their important doctrines are totally dependent on this one, such as, the deification of man, the
reincarnation of the soul of man, and so on. Believe me when I say, Lucifers omnipresent spirit doctrine
is the foundation for his godhead doctrine of Zoroastrianism and his later development of his
human Babylonian Trinitarian doctrine.

In other words, if this so-called Luciferian omnipresent spirit god wanted to create the good
and evil gods of Zoroastrianism, to be his agents to create all things, what would stop this
omnipresent god from doing so? In addition, if this god wanted to reveal to humanity that they
were gods, because they were all part of his, her, or its substance, and therefore devised the
Trinity of the Babylonian Religion to teach them this lie, what would stop this omnipresent spirit
god from doing so? The Word of God nowhere teaches that the true God is in omnipresent Spirit
in His ESSENCE, but this is one of His many ATTRIBUTES!

40
Christian and Jewish theologians, when speaking of the difference between theism and
pantheism, hardly ever bring out the fact that they also believe in a personal god who fills the universe with
His own personal spirit substance. These theologians always make it sound as though they believed in
a God of form and locality, who has personality and self-consciousness, while all heathens believe
in an impersonal omnipresent spirit god, who is nature or the universe itself. Let us now examine
how some theologians have tried to explain the difference between theism and pantheism.

Dr. Levi L. Paine in his book Evolution of Trinitarianism says: Monotheism, or theism, in the
philosophical sense, holds that God is a single personal being. It emphasizes personality as the true center and test of
all spiritual substance. The spiritual world is composed of persons. If God is spirit, He is a person. Moral life
involves a moral self-consciousness with its capacity of distinguishing the Ego from the non-Ego, and this is what is
meant by personality. The limit of a spiritual substance is its range of self-consciousness. There are as many spiritual
beings as there are centers of self-consciousness. Theism holds that God, in whose moral image we are, is such a self-
conscious being. Pantheism, on the contrary, makes self-consciousness, or personality, only a quality or accident of
[their gods] substance, so that there may be only one spiritual substance and yet many persons.
109


If the one and only true God is an omnipresent Spirit in His essence as certain Christian and
Jewish theologians teach, than what is the difference between: one omnipresent spiritual substance in
the many persons of Pantheism that have self-consciousness, and the one omnipresent spiritual substance in three
persons with self-consciousness? In addition, if the true God is an omnipresent Spirit in his one
spiritual substance, what is preventing Him from sharing His divine substance that fills the
universe with a million other persons or gods, whom He could create? Is there any difference
between this damnable doctrine and the Babylonian pagan belief in god?

Therefore, those in Christendom and in Judaism who teach that Gods personal Essence fills
all matter and space are in all reality teaching that God is an impersonal spirit, or the doctrine of
pantheism, which theologians do their best to deny with their theological gibberish. These
theologians because of their knowledge of what pagan religions, the Greek Philosophers, and
certain Catholic Nicene Priests taught about Gods Spirit Essence, they have taken certain
scriptures that speak of Gods attribute of omnipresence (1Ki 8:27, Jer 23:24), and ASSUMED that God is
omnipresent Spirit in His personal Essence.

I believe that the God of the Holy Bible is a singular personal intangible, invisible Spirit Being,
whose Essence has form, shape, and locality. The Bible emphatically and indisputably declares:
In Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form (Col 2:9). In other words, all, not a part, of Gods
spiritual substance dwells in the one person of Christ. Therefore, Gods personal essence cannot dwell in
anything or anywhere but in Christ! The Expositor's Greek Testament did an excellent job in
revealing this truth. It defined the Greek words used in this verse this way: En auto is emphatic, in
Him and in Him alone. Katoikei [means] permanently dwells.... Pan [or all] is emphatic, the whole fullness dwells
in Christ.... The addition of theotetos defines pl as the FULLNESS of DEITY. The word is to be distinguished
from theiotes being divine or God-like [used in Acts 17:29].... All the FULLNESS of the GODHEAD dwells in Christ;
therefore, it is VAIN to seek it wholly or partially OUTSIDE of HIM.
110


This is why I believe my God is omnipresent, not in His Essence, but in the Spirit-Words that
went out of His mouth at creation; for by the breath [Ruwach Spirit] of His mouth all things were
made; Jesus said it this way: the Words that I speak to you are Spirit (Psa 33:6; Jn 6:63). One of Gods
many attributes is omnipresent, and through this attribute, which I call His Spirit-Words, He is
everywhere and in everything, even in hell (Psa 139:7-8). Now, no one in his or her right mind
would ever claim that God in His personal Essence dwells in hell. Therefore, since the Bible
41
clearly declared that God is in hell, it cannot be speaking of Gods personal Essence, but the
Spirit-Words that came out of Gods mouth when He created Hell.

The Word of God emphatically proclaimed that God spoke the worlds into existence, through
the power of the Spirit-Words that came out of His mouth at creation (Heb 1:3; 11:3). Therefore
wherever His Spirit-Words are, there God has a presence. As long as Gods spoken Spirit-Words
dwells in the sun, the moon, the stars, the planets, the universe, and even in hell itself, they will
continue to exist. Gods attribute of omnipresent, and the scriptures that speak of it, will be
discussed in chapter seven. Therefore, my assumption is based on this and the following facts.

Is God a Singular Unbegotten Spirit,
Who Has Form, Shape, and Locality

Definition of Spirit and How It Is Used in the Bible: The Hebrew word ruwach is the
word for spirit in the Old Testament. Ruwach is used 378 times. The King James translators
translated it 227 times as spirit, 5 times as spirits, 1 time as spiritual, 6 times as mind, 27 times as
breath, 1 time as air, 82 times as wind, 11 times as winds, 1 time as windy, cool, tempest, 4 times
as blast, 2 times as vain, 5 times as side, 1 time as sides, courage, anger and quarters. The Greek
word pneuma always means spirit in the New Testament, just as anemos means wind, and pneo
means breath. Pneuma is used 385 times in the New Testament. The King James translators
translated it 257 times as spirit, 32 times as spirits, 92 times as ghost, 1 time as spiritually, 1 time
as spiritual, 1 time as life, and 1 time as wind (Jn 3:8 - Spirit).

God Is a Personal Spirit: Pneuma and Ruwach are used in the Bible to designate Gods
Spirit Nature (Jn 4:24; 1Pe 1:10-11; Psa 51:11). The Bible informs us that God and His angels, and
Lucifer and his angels are all personal spirits, who have form, shape, and locality. Demons are
disembodied spirits. By examining the scriptures that speak of these personal spirit beings, and also
the spirit nature of man, we should be able to understand God as a personal Spirit Being in a
greater light; for it is UNREASONABLE to BELIEVE that all other spirit beings have form, shape, and
locality, but God as a personal Spirit Being does not. Therefore, as we examine the scriptures that
use Pneuma and Ruwach in them, we can discover important facts concerning spirit beings.

Demons Are Personal Disembody Human Spirits: The Bible reveals that all spirit
beings do have spirit bodies, which can be seen, when they chose to reveal themselves. The proof
of this can be found when Jesus stood in the midst of the apostles, who were: terrified and
affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit [pneuma i.e. a demon spirit ]. However, Jesus calmed their
fears by telling them: Behold My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself. Handle Me and see, for a spirit [pneuma
i.e. a demon] does not have flesh and bones as you see I have (Lk 24:37, 39). It is obvious from the above verses
that the apostles believed that they saw a demon spirit that look like their Lord. According to our
Lord, demon spirits do not have tangible spiritual bodies, but spirit bodies.

Demons are personal evil spirits: for all the devils besought Him [Jesus], saying, send us into the swine,
that we may enter into them. And forthwith Jesus gave them leave. And the unclean spirits [pneuma] went out [of the
mans body], and entered into the swine (Mk 5:12-13; compare with Mt 12:43-45; 14:26; Lk 24:37; 9:39; 10:20;
11:24-26; Acts 8:7; 19:12). In these verses and all others dealings with evil spirits, we perceive
demons as intangible spirits, and they have personality and intelligence. There can be many
demons living inside of the body of one man; they can also be cast out. I have been told by some
who were possessed by demons, that is, after God used me to cast these unclean spirits out of
42
them, that demons have spirit bodies that look like vapor that you can see through, and their
bodies are ugly and deformed, but have the same outward appearances as men.

What are the demons and where do they come from? Some believe they are the fallen angels
that fell with Lucifer at the beginning; others believe that they are the fallen sons of God or
angels that fell from heaven in Noahs day. I personally believe they are the human spirits of the
wicked dead; and at the White Throne Judgment, they will be reunited with their souls and earthly
bodies, and then be thrown into the Lake of Fire. Since the human spirit of a man or woman
does not fall asleep with their soul, their spirit, which is in a conscious state, returns to God.
Since no lost spirit stay in heaven, I believe God sends these spirits back to earth, where they stay
until the resurrection of their soul and body. I believe there are many unsaved human spirits,
who are on the earth, that are not wicked spirits. Therefore, they are not demons who try to
either make contact with or enter into living human beings.

Gods Angels Are Personal Spirit: Pneuma is also used to refer to the God the Father's
holy angels. Paul said God made His angels spirits [pneuma] and His ministers a flame of fire (Heb 1:7). In
Psalms 104:4, David used the Hebrew word ruwach in reference to Gods angels, who are always
referred to as rational being. Jesus spoke of His holy angels when He said: The Son of man shall send
forth His angels [pneuma], and they shall gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity
[sinners]; And shall cast [ballo - to throw violently] them into a furnace of fire (Mt 13:42-43).

The above passage is positive proof that angels, who are spirit beings, are not only intelligent
beings who can follow instructions, but must have a spiritual tangible bodies that are capable of
pick up and violently throw men with natural physical bodies into the Lake of Fire? It is obvious
that lost mankind is not going to volunteer to jump into the Lake of Fire, therefore, they will
have to be thrown in, which means men will be fighting with Gods mighty angels in that day.
Therefore, I believe that angels have two natures, i.e. a spirit and a tangible, visible, spiritual body.
Probably a spiritual body that is made of a spiritual flesh and bones, just as man will have in the
resurrection (Lk 24:37-39; 1Co 14:42-44). I do NOT KNOW if angels have a soul nature. The Bible definitely
reveals that Christ, in both the OT and NT, and mankind have a soul nature, which will be
discussed in chapter six.

The prophet Daniel saw Gabriel the archangel and described him. He said Gabriel had the
appearance of a man (Dan 8:15-16). Notice that this spirit being looked like a man, and had the ability
to understand and explain the mysteries of God to Daniel. This definitely proves that angels are
rational beings who have spiritual tangible bodies, which looks like mans body. Gabriel told
Daniel, he would have come sooner but the Prince of Persia [a fallen angel or a spirit being who Satan place over the
nation of Persia] withstood me one and twenty days: but lo, Michael one of the chief Princes [i.e. archangels of God], came to
help me (Dan 10:12-13). This means, as I stated above, Gods angels are spirit beings who have
spiritual tangible bodies that are capable of fighting with other spirit beings such as Satans
angels.

I believe that Gods OT Spiritual Body, like angels spiritual bodies, could dim the light that
radiated from inside their bodies, and look like an ordinary man when they appeared to
mankind. I do not believe that God or His angels took on or created a body when they appeared
to man, and then that body simple went out of existence when they finished communicating with
man. That is, I do not believe the satanic garbage of the theophany doctrine of Jewish mysticism,
that is the Zohar, which is one of the books of the Cabala. Therefore I say again, I do NOT KNOW
43
if angels have a SOUL NATURE; there is no scripture that I know of that teaches they do, but this
is NOT absolute PROOF that they do not!

Satan and His Angels Are Personal Spirits: John declared: there was war in heaven,
Michael and his angels fought against the dragon [Satan]; and the dragon fought and his angels. [As a result, Satans]
angels were cast out with him (Rev 12:7-9). According to these verses, there was a tremendous fight in
heaven between Gods angels and Satan and his angels. Consequently, we see that Satan and his
angels lost their access to heaven forever in the middle of the tribulation period. There can be no
doubt this was not a war of words, but one of real physical confrontation. Gods angels will
definitely have a real physical confrontation with men, when they hurl them into the Lake of
Fire.

Men, Like Other Spirit Beings, Have a Spirit Nature: The Jewish Encyclopedia
speaking about the human spirit stated: In most languages, breath and spirit are designated by the same
term. The life-giving breath [spirit] cannot be an earthly origin, for nothing is found whence it may be taken. It is
derived from the supernatural world, from God.
111
The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia,
defined mans spirit this way: the Scripture speaks of spirits of just men made perfect (Heb 12:23), where
there can be no thought of a material or physical or corporeal organization.... The spirit is thus... the spiritual part
in man as that, which thinks, feels, wills, and also denote certain qualities which characterize the man.... Hence, we
[i.e. the souls of men] are called upon to rule over our own spirit (Pro 16:32; 25:28), and are warned against being
overmastered by a wrong spirit. God is called the Father of spirits.
112


In the following scriptures, mans spirit cannot be a non-personal entity or symbolism for his
life or breath. Try substituting the word life or breath for the word spirit and see if they have any
meaning. Man's spirit or ruwach can be: revived - Gen 45:27, hardened - Deu 2:30, stirred up - 2Ch 36:22,
preserved by God's visitation - Job 10:12, constrain from doing something - Job 32:18, with or without guile - Psa
32:2, renewed - Psa 51:10, breached or split by a perverse tongue - Pro 15:4, broken by deep sorrow - Pro 15:13,
ruled by the soul - Pro 16:32, wounded or hurt and also can sustain man's infirmities - Pro 18:14, vexed - Ecc 1:14,
in error - Isa 29:24, troubled - Dan 2:1, quieted or calmed - Zec 6:8.

Mans spirit or pneuma can become: holy - Rom 1:4 and can be made perfect by Gods molding hand -
Heb 12:23. The Word of God teaches that the LORD formed the spirit [ruwach] of man within him (Zec
12:1). The word formed is the Hebrew word yatsar which means: to squeeze into shape.
113
There is
no scripture that I know of, which tells us when our spirit came into us, whether it took place at
conception, or birth, or sometime in-between. The spirit of man can be saved or lost at the
Judgment. The apostle Paul told the church to deliver the sinful brother unto Satan for the
destruction of the flesh that the spirit [pneuma] may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus (1Co 5:5). The human
spirit inside of man can pray; Paul said it this way: For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit
[pneuma] prays, but my understanding [soul] is unfruitful (1Co 14:14). Therefore, all the above scriptures
definitely teach that a real spirit nature lives inside of man, which along with his soul gives man
life, intelligence, and personality.

Summary of Facts: From all of the above scriptures in this section, we can clearly perceive
that spirit beings such as Gods angels, Lucifer, the fallen angels, demons, and mans human
spirit are rational personal spirits that have intelligence. It appears that Gods angels, Lucifer,
and his angels also have some type of spiritual tangible bodies. Demons and the spirits of living
men have a spirit body that also resembles mans physical body (Lk 24:37-39). Demons are
disembodied spirits who no longer have a physical body of their own; whereas the spirits of
living men live in a physical body.
44

Therefore, since God the Father created the spirits of both angels and men, and their spirits
were made in the image and likeness of His Spirit Nature, why should it be hard for theologians
to believe that God, in His personal essence, is also a Spirit who has a Spirit Body? In chapter six
of this book, we will discover that God, like the angels also had a Spiritual Tangible Body in the
OT, but unlike the angels, He also had a Soul Nature as well, that is, God had three separate and
distinct natures in OT, a Spirit, a Soul, and a Human Spiritual Body.

How Many Gods Are There: One, Two, Three, or More?

The Word of God explicitly declares to the entire world that there is One and only One God.
The Jewish Scribe said unto Jesus: for there is one God and there is none other but He not them (Mk
12:32). Paul confirmed this great truth when he said there is only: one God who can justify the
believer (Rom 3:30). He also said: God is one (Gal 3:20). The apostle James said it this way: You
believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe and tremble (Ja 2:19). The word one in
all these verses, and all others that apply to God being one in the New Testament, is the Greek
word heis which according to Dr. Strong means: a primary numeral one not one in unity.
114


All passages in the New Testament that speak of the husband and wife becoming one flesh
uses the Greek word mia, which refers to one in unity or uniting something; for example, The two
shall become one flesh'; so then they are no longer two, but one [mia] flesh (Mk 10:7-8). The pagans
worshipped Diana: with one [mia - united] voice (Acts 19:34). Paul used both of the Greek words
together when He said: stand fast in one [heis - numerical] Spirit [and] with one [mia a united] mind (Phi 1:27).
Paul, unlike Trinitarian preachers, knew the difference between heis and mia!

Therefore, my beloved readers should be able to perceive the difference between how a
husband and wife are one in unity and God is one in number. No preacher that claims to be a
Christian will ever declare claim there are numerically two, three, or more gods. Besides all this,
where does the Bible ever compare the oneness of a husband and wife to that of the godhead?
The answer is nowhere! There is not one place in the Bible where the Word of God proclaimed a
family of gods or declared that godhead is composed of three persons united (mia) in God, but it
does declare in many places that the godhead is composed of one person or one numerical (heis)
God!!

What Is the Name of the One God of the Bible?

The one God openly declared that His personal name in the Old Testament is YHWH. The
one God of the Bible proclaimed: Hear, O Israel: The LORD [YHWH] our God is one LORD, not three
LORDS (Deu 6:4). In the Septuagint one LORD is written as sute, .t,. The Greek word used
here is heis. Therefore, Moses cannot be teaching a unity of LORDS or two or three beings or
persons called LORD. There can only be one person here who is called by Gods personal name of
YHWH, which is used 6,519 times in the Old Testament, which no one knows how to pronounce.

God told His people that His name should not be used in a wrong way; He declared: You shall
not take the name [not names] of the LORD your God in vain, for the LORD will not hold him guiltless who takes His
[not their] name in vain (Exo 20:7). YHWH also said He would not give His glory to another, which
includes His name; He said: I am [not we are] the LORD: that is My [not our] Name: and My glory will I not give
to another (Isa 42:8). The great prophetic prophet Isaiah also confirmed that Gods name was
45
YHWH. He declared: You O LORD are our Father, our Redeemer, from Everlasting is Your [not their] name
(Isa 63:16).

Now Trinitarian preachers openly contradict God prophets by claiming that there are three
persons called by the name of YHWH, that is, they all share this name together. This is utter
nonsense for there cannot be two or three Fathers and redeemers who are called LORD here,
and all the pronouns in this verse and all others are singular not plural! Who are we going to
believe, Trinitarian preachers or the prophets Moses and Isaiah, who proclaimed that there is
only one God and person in the godhead whose name was YHWH, which no one knows how to
pronounce in English or any other language. Gods name is not and never will be Jehovah or
Yahweh! If my beloved readers would like to discover the occultic origin of the name Jehovah, I
invite them to read my book Preacher, What Must I Do to Inherit Eternal Life.

The Father Is YHWH the One and Only God

The Bible in both the Old and New Testaments unequivocally and unerringly declared that
the One and Only God is the Father. Jesus being the one God manifested in the flesh, for the
most part in the gospels, speaks as a man and not as God. Jesus speaking through His human
nature called His Father God. He said: Him [the humanity of the Father] has God the Father sealed (Jn 6:27).
The man Christ Jesus called His Father the one and only true God. He said: This is eternal life, that
they may know You [Father], the only [monos] true God, and Jesus Christ [Your humanity] whom You have sent (Jn
17:5).

The word only is the Greek word monos which according to Dr. Strong means: sole or single.
115
According to the above scripture, if Jesus is not the Fathers visible humanity as Trinitarians
theologians deny, then He cannot be the one and only true God. Therefore, the Trinitarian
doctrine robs our Lord of His deity. There is no way Trinitarian theologians can make 3 gods or
persons in the godhead out of this scripture, or any other. They must confess Jesus to be the
Father, the one and only God, or become an Arian i.e. a Jehovahs Witness and denounce His
deity.

The Jews or Gods old covenant people would never believe in three gods in the godhead.
They only knew one God, which was the Father. The Jews proudly told our Lord: We have one
Father, even God (Jn 8:41). The great Apostle Paul indisputably declared that the one God is the
Father, who is in all of His children. He boldly stated there is only one Spirit, one LORD or
YHWH, who is: the one [heis] God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all (Eph 4:4-
6).

Paul reiterated this same great truth when he wrote: But to us [Christians] there is but one [heis] God,
the Father, of whom are all things, and we in Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, who is the humanity of the
Father. Then Paul goes on to make a very profound statement. He said: Howbeit there is not in
everyone that knowledge (1Co 8:6-7). The word one in all the preceding verses is the Greek word
heis, which as I said before means: numerical one. There is no unity of persons called God here,
just like there is no unity of persons called Spirit, or YHWH, or Jesus Christ. Now Paul told all
Christians that the Father is the numerical one God, the sole or single God. Therefore, Jesus
must be the Fathers humanity or He cannot be God.

46
The Apostles James and Peter, like Paul, declared that the one God is the Father. James
stated this truth this way: with the tongue bless we God even the Father (Ja 3:9). Peter said it this
way: Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ (1Pe 1:3). The prophet Malachi also joined
the mighty host of witnesses by saying: Have we not all one Father? Has not one God created us (Mal
2:10)? The Septuagint translated this verse as: .e, .t,, using the Greek word heis to express
that the Father is the one and only God. Therefore, the apostles and prophets are unanimous in
declaring that the one God is the Father.

Nowhere does the Bible ever use the term God the Son. The Deity of the Son comes not from
being the Son, but by being God the Father. This is why the Bible declared that the Father or the
one God was in Christ, or as the man Jesus expressed this relationship, God the Father dwells in Me
(2Co 5:19; Jn 14:6-11). Therefore, if any theologian looks for the Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ,
outside of the Father, he will not biblical find it; for if Jesus is not God the Father, then He
cannot be God!

If any Trinitarian theologian believes in or knows of another God besides YHWH the Father,
then he knows something the nation of Israel, and all the Prophets of God, did not know. The
Father clearly and boldly declared in the First Commandment: I am [not we are] the LORD [YHWH]
your God... You shall have no other gods before Me not us (Deu 5:6-7). Moses speaking about the Father
said: The LORD He is [not they are] God; there is none else beside Him [not them]. The LORD He is God in heaven
above, and upon the earth beneath: there is none else (Deu 4:35, 39). King David stated this great truth this
way: You are great, O Lord GOD. For there is none like You, nor is there any God besides You [not you three],
according to all that we have heard with our ears (2Sa 7:22). King Solomon stated this truth in his prayer
of dedication of the temple by declaring: all the people of the earth may know that the LORD is God, and
that there is none else (1Ki 8:60).

If any Trinitarian theologian believes in or knows another God beside YHWH the Father,
then he is smarter than God Himself, or in other words, he knows something that God does not
even know; for, God the Father proclaimed: Ye are even My [not our] witnesses. Is there a God beside Me
[not us]? Yea, there is no God; I know not any (Isa 44:8, KJV).

God gave a message to Cyrus king of Persia through His prophet Isaiah, a 150 years before he
was born in which He declared: I am [not we are] the LORD, and there is no other; there is no God besides Me [not
us]. I will gird you, though you have not known Me, that they [meaning you and the nations] may know from the rising of
the sun to its setting That there is none besides Me. I am the LORD, and there is no other God (Isa 45:5-6).

Our Heavenly Father is not only speaking to Cyrus, but He wants all Christians everywhere
to know and believe that the Father is the one and only God. If you are a Christian, hear what
the Word or Logos is saying to you: I am [not we are] God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none
like Me not us (Isa 46:9).

How many times does the Father have to tell Trinitarian preachers, in His holy and infallible
Word, that He and He alone is the one and only God before they believe Him? The Bible reveals
that out of the mouth of two or three witnesses let ever word, doctrine, or belief be established.
In all of the preceding Scriptures, you have not three, but many witnesses, which boldly and
clearly proclaimed that the Father is the only true God. Therefore, the obvious question is, why
do Trinitarian theologians not believe it.

47
I was praying for the sick one day in a hospital in New Orleans, when I went into a room
where there was a Jewish man. As I talked with him, I asked him this question: What is the main
teaching of the Jewish Faith? He replied without hesitation: We Jews believe that God has spared and
preserved us for one reason, so we might be a witness to the world, that there is only one God. I then told him:
Praise God, I believe it, and I am so happy to know that the Lord Jesus Christ is God the Father manifested in
flesh.

CHAPTER 4
THE SONSHIP PROGRAM OF GOD THE FATHER

In the beginning of this book, I said that the sonship program of God began at Bethlehem; it is
now time to prove this statement. In the following sections on the Sonship of Christ, I will not be
focusing on the supreme Deity of Christ, Who is the Almighty God, but my focus is to help my
beloved readers understand what the Sonship Program of God the Father is all about. The term
Son of God, as it applies to our lovely Lord, does not refer to His Deity but to His Humanity as a
Spirit filled Man. Christ or the existed in the Old Testament, not as the so-called Eternal Son of
God, but as the Logos i.e. the Word of God. In the Bible, the term Son of God always referred to
someone who was filled with the Spirit of God, whether it was an angel or man.

Is Jesus Christ the Eternal Son of God or the Begotten Son of God?

Trinitarian theologians believe that Jesus is called the Son of God because He eternally existed
with His Father as such. This is pure nonsense, as I will prove in this section of my book. Now all
oneness Pentecostals believe Jesus existed in the OT as YHWH i.e. God the Father, Who was
known as: Christ, the Word of God, the Holy One, the Angel or Messenger of God, the Form or
Image of God, etc., but not as the eternal Son of God. As I have shown above, Jesus as the Son of
God had a very real Human Nature. It is now time to discover why and when Jesus became
known as the Son of God.

Professor Walter Martin Declared Jesus Is Not the Eternal Son of God: Professor
Martin a well-known trinitarian scholar, along with many other trinitarian theologians, realized
that the doctrine of the eternal Sonship of Christ is not one that can be biblical defended, without
twisting and taking out of context many passages in the Word of God. Dr. Martin in his book
entitled The Kingdom of the Cults admonished his readers to fix the following statements in their
minds. He declared that the doctrine of eternal generation or eternal Sonship of Christ: A)
springs from the Roman Catholic doctrine first conceived by Origen in AD 230.... B) The Scripture nowhere calls
Jesus Christ the eternal Son of God, and He is never called Son at all prior to the incarnation, except in prophetic
passages in the Old Testament....

C) The term Son itself is a functional term, as is the term Father and has no meaning apart from time. D)
Many heresies have seized upon the confusion created by the illogical eternal Sonship or eternal generation
theory of Roman Catholic theology, unfortunately carried over to some aspects of Protestant theology. E) Finally;
there cannot be any such thing as eternal Sonship, for there is a logical contradiction of terminology due to the fact
that the word Son predicates time and the involvement of creativity. In summary, since the word Son definitely
suggests inferiority and derivation [origin] it is absolutely essential then that Christ as the Eternal Word and not as the
Eternal Son be pointed up as an antidote to the Arian heresy of Jehovahs Witnesses.
116


Professor Lewis Mayer Taught that the Term Son of God Referred to Jesus
Humanity: In The Biblical Repository, the January 1840 issue, Rev. Lewis Mayer, D.D., of York,
48
PA, in an article entitled, The Sonship of Christ, clearly revealed that the term Son of God is not
a term that expresses the deity of our Lord but His Humanity. This protestant Trinitarian
professor definitely believed in the Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ, but like Professor Walter
Martin and Dr. John MacArthur, he denied the Trinitarian doctrine of the eternal Sonship of
Christ.

Dr. Mayer commenting on Gods Sonship program found in Roman 1:4 wrote: The term Spirit of
holiness does not designate the divine nature of Christ, and His Sonship is not in His divinity. Jesus Himself gave
no such explanation of the appellation Son of God as to make it a title of divinity, and the New Testament contains
none. This error, as far as I know, is universal. If this title [Son of God] were always a designation of the compound
person, the God-man, as such, and not used with reference to His human nature, it would follow that the God-man, as
such, is inferior to the Father, could do nothing of Himself [and] knew not the day or the hour of the judgment, etc.
But if these consequences must be admitted, they will prove that the divinity of Christ is not true divinity....

As the God-man our Redeemer could not be subordinate to God, could not be exalted and could not in any sense
be dependent, but as the Son of God He is all this. Consequently, the title Son of God is not properly a designation of
the God-man, but of the man Jesus.... It was the Son of God that was given; the Son that was sent; the Son that was
born, that agonized in Gethsemane, that died upon the cross, that was raised from the dead by the Father, was
exalted to the right hand of God, was constituted the head of the church, etc. Nothing of all this can be predicated
[affirmed] of divinity; and it, consequently, shows that as the Son of God, Jesus is a man
117


Baptist Bob Ross, in his book The Trinity and Eternal Sonship of Christ, defamed Oneness
Pentecostals as: detractors from the Gospel of Christ. He added: Oneite groups deny His natural (Son of
God by nature) and His eternal (without a beginning as son) Sonship.
118
His insulting remarks against One
God Pentecostals, and especially Rev. David Bernard, deserve an answer. Therefore, in this
chapter I will examine some of his arguments for the Trinity and the eternal Sonship of Christ.
Since this man, like the Jehovah Witnesses and other cult groups, uses the allegorical method of
interpreting scriptures, it will not be a difficult task to prove him wrong in his belief system.

Ross openly confessed: There are some Baptists, such as the popular John MacArthur, who are short of the
mark on the eternality of the Son of God.
119
No doubt trinitarian professor Walter Martin would be
included in his group, who have missed the mark. I wander why Ross used the term: short of the
mark, to express his feelings of disgust towards these trinitarian theologians? Now as most people
know one of the definitions for sin is to miss the mark, or do wrong [i.e.] transgress.
120
What Ross
has failed to point out to his readers is that all of these trinitarian Baptist scholars believed in the
eternality of Christ as the Word, but not in the eternality of His office as Son of God, as Dr.
Martin has already pointed out in the paragraphs above.

Now, if the Bible taught that the Christ was called the Son of God in the Old Testament, I, like
Drs. Martin and John MacArthur, would have no objection in using this title to describe His
Deity. But since all the scriptures in the OT, which use this title are prophetic, and are connected
to Jesus birth at Bethlehem, it would be a gross injustice to God and to His holy Word to
connect eternality to this title of the Messiah our Savior! In other words, Christ is eternal because
He is God the Father, and not because He is called the Son of God. I will discuss the meaning of
the title Son of God later in this chapter.

Let us examine Ross arguments for the eternal Sonship of Christ, and see who has miss the
mark in their teaching on this subject. Ross bases much of his arguments for the eternality of
Gods Sonship program on Psalm 2:7: I will declare the decree: The LORD has said to Me, You are My
Son, today [yowm] I have begotten [yalad] You; the New International Version translated it as: I will
49
proclaim the decree of the LORD: He said to me, You are my Son; today I have become your Father; and the
Jewish Publication Society translated it as: Let me tell of the decree: the LORD said to me, you are My
Son, I have fathered you this day (Tanakh - 1985).

Now how does Ross define the words today and begotten or the Hebrew words yowm and
yalad? Does he go to a good Hebrew lexicon to acquire a proper meaning and understanding of
these words? No, he does not, and the reason why is because he knows that these words have
reference to the act of begetting at a certain period of time, and this is not what he wants he readers to
believe. Therefore Ross erroneously defined the term begotten to mean: the son is of the same stock, or
essence, as the father. This father-son relationship is anthropomorphic of the Eternal Father Eternal Son
relationship. Begotten was not intended to teach us that the Father and Son are exactly the same as the human
father and son [relationship]. It was intended to teach us that the Son is of the same nature and essence as the
Father. Begotten is simply anthropomorphic of their eternal relationship.
121


Let us rain on Ross parade. The word begotten is the Hebrew word yalad, which is use 498
times in the Old Testament. It is translated as: beget 201 times, bare 110 times, born 79 times, bring forth 25
times, bear 23 times, delivered 5 times, borne 3 times, birth 2 times, labour 2 times, and misc. 48 times. It is not one
time translated by the King James translators or any other translators as same substance as Mr.
Ross fallaciously declared. The Theological Workbook of the Old Testament by Dr. l. Laird Harris
defined yalad as: to bear, bring forth, beget of child birth to be born to beget (a child).
122
The
Septuagint uses the Greek word gennao, which is used in the NT 97 times, and it was translated
as: begat 49 times, be born 39 times, bear 2 times, bring forth 1 time, be delivered 3 times, and
misc. 3 times. Louw-Nida Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament by Drs. J. P. Louw and E.
A. Nida defined it as: the male role in causing the conception and birth of a child to be the father of, to
procreate, to beget.
123


Therefore, the above declaration by Ross is out of the realm of reality, and it goes into the
realm of fantasy, because Ross used Philos allegorical method to interpret the scriptures, he
definitely takes scriptures out of their contextual settings, and totally ignores the meaning of the
words God uses to express His truths. Is it not a pity that Ross resorted to Catholic tradition, and
not the Bible, to define the word begotten; in fact he uses Emperor-Pope Constantines teaching of
consubstantial, which according to Catholic Bishop Socrates of the fourth century is: an expression
which the Emperor himself explained at the Council of Nicaea.
124
The word consubstantial is the Greek
word homoousios, which means: of the same substance as I stated before in the history of the Nicene
Creed!

I would also like my beloved readers to take note to Ross statement, which declared the term
begotten is an anthropomorphic expression. What Ross is telling his readers is that they should
interpret this term in an allegorical fashion, as he and his forefathers the Ante-Nicene Catholic
Priests have done. In other words, use the Catholic method of interpreting Scriptures, which is to
hide the truth by spiritualizing the Bible, or to take the Word of God figuratively whenever it does
not agree with their beliefs. This is exactly why many of the Jewish Rabbis in Jesus day rejected
their Messiah; and also why some the earlier Bishops in Gods Pentecostal Church apostatized from
the truth, and formed the Catholic Church around 70 AD. The allegorical method of interpreting the
Bible is a great abomination in the sight of Almighty God!

In the following discourse Ross, using the allegorical method of interpreting the Bible to
stretch the word today out of the realm of time to mean eternity. He deceivingly stated: If
everywhere we read day it meant a day in time we would certainly be in a pickle for understanding the
50
Scriptures. Actually, where there is obviously an abstract use of the word This is the sense in which the word
[today] is used; that is, the circumstance or the occasion indicates the day, and that dictates the sense to be
understood. The decree [in Psalm 2:7] itself is eternal, as Gods decrees are said to be before the world, from
everlasting.
125


Let my beloved readers take note that Mr. Ross declared that the Son is eternal because this
decree of prophecy is eternal. Now if we use this idiotic and illogical line of reason, than Ross
must declare that John the Baptist was an eternal being who existed with God before time began,
because God also made a eternal prophetic decree concerning his birth (Isa 40:1-6). Even though
Ross speaks of Biblical Hermeneutics in his book, when he consistently interprets Gods Word
this way, I do not believe he even has a clue as to what it means or the principles it teaches.

Let us again examine Ross arguments: FIRST point - the word today in the above reference
is the Greek adverb semeron, which is used in Heb. 1:5 and Psa. 2:7 in the Greek Septuagint.
SECOND and final point even though the decree was in Gods mind before the beginning of
time, that does not make it eternal; for the church was also in Gods mind at that time (Eph 1:4-5),
does that mean the church existed as a living entities at that time. Anyone who would say it did,
would be considered as a heretic by all Pentecostal preachers and most protestant preachers.
God decree in Psalms 2:7 had a beginning when God spoke it through the prophet David; and it
had a fulfillment when the Christ was born at Bethlehem on a certain day in time!

Therefore, let us not twist or pervert the Word of God by using the allegorical method of
interpreting the scriptures. Let us interpret Gods Word by using the literal method. The only
time we should use the allegorical method is when the language use is figurative or the context
demands a figurative meanings. I believe with all my heart that God meant what He said, and said
what He meant. God speaking about his holy infallible Word declared: Every word of God is pure.
Do not add to His words, lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar (Pro 30:5-6). Mr. Ross and all other
preachers who use the allegorical method should definitely take heed to this verse of Scripture,
i.e. if they do not want to stand before God at the White Throne Judgment!

So, with the above verse in mind, let us look at how the Hebrew and Greek lexicons define the
words today and begotten. The Hebrew word yome is used 2,274 times, and according to Dr.
Harris: Our word is the most important concept of time in the OT, by which a point of time as well as a sphere of
time can be expressed. It can denote: 1. the period of light (as contrasted with the period of darkness), 2. the
period of twenty-four hours, 3. a general vague time, 4. a point of time, 5. a year (in the plural; 1Sam 27:7; Exo
13:10; etc.).
126


The Greek Septuagint translated the Hebrew yome by the Greek adverb semeron, which
according to Drs. Friberg is: an adverb of time; (1) generally designating the present today, this day (MT
11.23), in contrast to . ,. , (in the past); (2) as an unspecified period of time between past and future periods for the
present, at this time (LU 13.32, 33); (3) as the twenty-four-hour period beginning at sundown today, this very day (MK
14.30); (4) as designating the same period of time as the day of the discourse today (MT 21.28); (5) as a religious
technical term identifying the limits of the time God has put at mans disposal for some purpose today (HE 3.13).
127


The Greek adverb Semeron is used 41 times in the New Testament and was translated by the
KJV translators as: this day 22 times, today 18 times, and this 1 time. Gee, I wander why the KJV
translators and no other modern translator ever translated the above Hebrew and Greek words
as eternal or eternity; or why no Hebrew or Greek lexicon define these words as eternal or eternity,
if they have that meaning and can be use in that sense! I know that the apostle Peter compared
one day, that is the Greek noun hemera, to a time of a thousand years (2Pe 3:8), but I do not find one
51
scripture where even hemera means eternity. Let us remember that eternity cannot be measured by
days, week, months, or even years. There is an old proverb that goes like this: if an eagle came to
earth every million years, and scratch the surface of the earth with it claws, by the time the eagle wore-down the
earth to nothing, eternity would just be starting!

Now, how Mr. Ross can spiritualize yome in Psalm 2:7 in the Hebrew Bible, or semeron in the
Greek Septuagint and the NT to mean eternity is beyond me. The word is definitely connected to
a period of time, therefore it cannot mean eternity; for as I stated before, eternity has no time. In Luke
23:43, the Greek adverb semeron is used when Jesus told the thief on the cross: today you will be
with Me in Paradise (Lk 23:43). Now Mr. Ross how are you going to interpret semeron or today in
this verse? Are you going to use the illogical allegorical method of interpreting it by saying the
thief was in Paradise in eternity past, or are you going to use Gods literal method of interpreting this
verse and say it meant the thief went to Paradise that very day with His Savior? I will show in the next
section of this chapter that Hebrews 1:1-6, which quotes and explains the above verse, reveals that
the Father begot His Son at Bethlehem.

Now, there is not one verse in the entire Bible that ever calls Christ or the Word the eternal Son
of God. This may be a startling and very shocking revelation to many trinitarian preachers,
especially to Mr. Ross, but it is the truth any way. In fact, the Bible never uses the term God the
Son, and the reason for that is because Jesus does not receive His deity from His sonship or
humanity, but Jesus is deity because He is God the Father incarnated into flesh, and as God the
Father He is eternal or without beginning or end. Not only this, but also the terms eternal Son of
God and only born Son of God have exactly opposite meanings. The very fact that the apostle John
clearly used the term only begotten Son of God in the above verses and several others, definitely
implies or teaches that the Word was first called the Son of God at Bethlehem, and therefore the
Sonship program of God had a beginning.

Jesus Sonship Began at Bethlehem: The first chapter of the Book of Hebrews definitely
reveals that the Sonship program of God began at Bethlehem, or in other words, it was at
Bethlehem when the Word or Christ first received the title of Son of God, or became known as
the Son of God. The apostle Paul expressed this truth this way: God, who at various times and in
various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son whom
He has appointed heir of all things, through [dia] whom [hos] also He made the worlds.

Who [the Son] being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person [hupostasis], and upholding all
things by the Word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the
Majesty on high, having become so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent
name than they. For to which of the angels did He ever say: You are My Son, Today I have begotten You? And
again: I will be [esomai or . ceat] to Him a Father, and He shall be [esomai or .cat] to Me a Son? But when He again
brings the firstborn into the world, He says: Let all the angels of God worship Him. But to the Son He says: Your
throne, O God, is forever and ever Your God, has anointed You with the oil of gladness more than Your
companions (Heb 1:1-9).

Let us examine each verse and look for a harmony of thought as we compare each one with the
other. In verse one the Son is mentioned as speaking after the prophets, and not before them.
Therefore Paul is giving the order of revelation, in other words, God spoke through the prophets
first, before He spoke through the Son. According to the Bible, it was Christ as the Holy Spirit
who spoke through the prophets in the OT (1Pe 1:11). Since the Sonship program of God did not
start until Bethlehem, as this chapter will clearly reveal, it was not the Son of God that spoke
through the prophets but Christ as the Holy Spirit!
52

Verse 2: Meaning of words: The Greek relative pronoun hos and the preposition dia are
both in the genitive or possessive case. Drs. Friberg revealed that the Greek preposition dia has
several meaning when it is use: with the genitive [case]. (4) causal; (a) of the efficient cause [i.e. reason] in
consequence of, by, on the basis of, on account of (RO 12.1).
128
Since the Bible clearly stated that God
spoke through the Son in the last days and not in the OT, the time period must be sometime
after Christ became the Son of God at Bethlehem, as the verb shall be to me a Son in verse 5
reveals, which is in the future tense.

Therefore, I believe the preposition dia is used in the causal sense in which Christ, the
Almighty God, is declaring the reason why He made the worlds; i.e. He made it for His Son or
Humanity in whom He would redeem the creation He made. For this reason, I believe that this
verse should read: on account of Whom He made the worlds. The Bible definitely teaches that God
was in Christ: and all things were created through Him and for Him (Col 1:16). Regardless of what
interpretation is correct, Christ did not exist as the Son until He was born of Mary.

Let my beloved readers take note, God or Deity appointed His Son or Humanity heir of all
things; in other words, the Son inherited all things because God gave it to Him. This definitely
reveals that the Son or the Fathers Humanity was subordinate to God (Phi 2:8), i.e. the Son was in
a lower position as One who is given a gift, and the Father was in a higher position as the One
who gave Him the gift. Therefore, Trinitarians preachers are in a pickle, who proclaimed that
the Father and Son are equal in power and authority. For either they have to change their
teaching and proclaimed that the Father is a greater God and the Son is a lesser God, or they
have to teach as Oneness Apostolic Pentecostals do, that is, the Son refers to Gods Humanity; in
other words, God the Father is greater than the Humanity that He dwelt in (Jn 14:6-11).

Verse 3: reveals that the Christ, who became the Son in the last days was: the effulgence [brightness]
of His [Gods] glory [Eze 1:26-28], and the very [visible] image of His [invisible] substance [essence] (ASV, cp with Col 1:15).
Drs. Friberg defined hupostasis as: God's substantial nature real being, essence (HE 1.3).
129
Because the
Son was Gods humanity, who was the very appearance of His invisible essence, He could purged
our sins by his precious sinless blood; therefore the Son became exalted above all of Gods creation
as this verse and Philippians 2:9 revealed.

Verse 4: Because God the Father dwelt in Marys Son, or the Son was God the Fathers visible
Self, the Son or the Man Jesus became much superior to angels as the name He has inherited is more
excellent than theirs (NRS). Now let my beloved readers take note, Paul did not say the Son was
always superior to the angels, which would have been the case if Son existed in the OT as the
Christ! Now since the verb having become or became definitely refers to an action that took place
in the NT and not in the OT, Paul must be declaring that the Son is Gods Humanity.

Paul expressed the above truth in a different way when he wrote, Christ who was almighty
God in the OT: emptied Himself, taking the form [morphe] of a slave, being born in human likeness. And being
found in human form [morphe], he humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death-- even death on a cross.
Therefore [dio], God also highly exalted Him [the Son i.e. His Humanity] and gave Him the name that is above every name
(Phi 2:7-9, NRS). Drs. Timothy and Barbara Friberg, in their Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New
Testament, defined the Greek word morphe as: (1) form, external appearance; generally, as can be
discerned through the natural senses (MK 16.12); (2) of the nature of something, used of Christ's contrasting modes
of being in his preexistent and human states form, nature (PH 2.6, 7).
130
In other words, Paul is telling all
who have ears to hear and a heart to understand that Christ emptied Himself of His Spiritual
53
Humanity or morphe, which He had in the OT, and took on the morphe or Natural flesh and blood
body of a human being, i.e. Davids seed.

Paul then proceeded to tell us why the Son of God inheriting a name better than the angels. To
understand the truth of all this, we need to ask: when did the Son of God inherit this name? If the man
Jesus did not inherit this name when He became the Human Son of God, than why did the
apostle Paul tie this inheritance to Jesus death as a human being in the above verses. The word
therefore is the Greek conjunction dio, which is used 53 times in the NT. It was translated in the
AV as: wherefore 41 times, therefore 10 times, and for which cause 2 times. Drs. Friberg defined
it to mean: inferential conjunction for this reason, therefore, for this purpose (MT 27.8) (#6904). The word dio
or therefore is stating the reason why God gave His Human Son a better name than the angels;
for according to Paul it was because Jesus gave Himself as Gods sacrifice for the sins of the
world on Calvarys cross. Since Calvary took place after Christ emptied Himself of His glory, we
now know when He inherited a better name.

Verse 5: For to which of the angels did He ever [pote] say: You are My Son, Today I have begotten You? And
again: I will be [esomai - . ceat] to Him a Father, and He shall be [esomai - .cat] to Me a Son? The obvious answer
to Pauls question is none, or in other words, God did not say this to any angel. God no doubt
was using Paul to speak against Gnosticism in this verse, which taught Jesus was an angel and
did not have a real physical body. Drs. Friberg defined pote as: an enclitic indefinite adverb of time, at
some time, or other. In rhetorical questions expecting a negative answer ever (HE 1.5).
131


Let my beloved readers take note, immediately after Paul quotes David prophecy of Christ
being born a Son of God on a certain day in time; he then immediately quotes another prophecy,
which Nathan made to David concerning a Son who would come from his loins. In other word,
Paul being a great and infallible theologian used scripture to interpret scripture. Both of these
prophecies were made around 1040 BC.

Therefore, let us examine Nathans prophecy to David: It shall come to pass when thy [Davids] days
shall be fulfilled, and thou shall sleep with thy fathers, that I will raise up thy seed [i.e. Jesus] after thee, which shall be
of thy bowels, and I will establish His [i.e. Jesus] kingdom. He shall build Me a house, and I will set up His throne for
ever. I will be [esomai or . ceat] to Him [i.e. Jesus] a Father, and He shall be [esomai or .cat] to Me a Son: and my mercy
will I not withdraw from Him [i.e Jesus, Davids Son], as I withdrew it from them that were before thee. And I will
establish Him in My house and in His kingdom for ever; and His throne shall be set up for ever (1Ch 17:11-14, The
English Translation of the Septuagint Version of the OT, Sir Lancelot Brenton). Let my beloved readers take
note, Davids Son will be born after David is dead. Therefore, this prophecy cannot be referring
to Davids son Solomon or any other son who was born to him when he was living.

In the Greek of the New Testament and in the Greek Septuagint of the Old Testament, the
verb esomai is used in this verse to express God the Fathers relation to His future Son. The verb
will be or .ceat is in the future tense, middle voice, indicative mood, first person, singular
number, and the verb shall be or . cat is future tense, middle voice, indicative mood, third
person, and singular number. Now that we have discussed the correct context and grammatical
background of this verse, let us examine the meaning of this verse. FIRST, according to Psalms 2:7,
Gods Son or Humanity was prophesied to be begotten or born on a certain day in time, not in eternity
past. SECOND, the Son that was prophesied to be born was going to come from the loins of David,
which definitely means that this Son would be was a human being.

THIRD, the verb tenses used in 1Chronicles 17:13 and Hebrews 1:5 are future tense and not present or
past tense. This verse did not say: I am right now [present tense] His Father, meaning that the Son would
54
have been born at the time the prophecy was given. It also did not say: I have always been [past tense]
His Father, meaning that the Son would have been born before the prophecy was given, or in
other words, in eternity past. Therefore, none of the above can be true! The infallible Word did
declared: I will be [future tense] His Father, and He shall be [future tense] My Son, meaning that the Father did
not have a Son at the time the prophecy was given, since this was going to be a future
relationship.

According to the apostle Paul Jesus is the Son of Man because He was from Davids seed, and
He was ordain to be the Son of God because the Spirit of Holiness dwelt in Him, Who raised Him
from the dead. Paul expressed this great truth this way: Concerning his Son, who was born of the seed
of David according to [kata - from] the flesh, who was declared [horizo - ordained] to be the Son of God with power,
according to [kata - from] the Spirit of Holiness, by the resurrection from the dead; even Jesus Christ our Lord (Rom
1:3-4, ASV). The last part of this verse reads this way in the Greek NT: etc. |e, uteu .eu . | eu|a.t
saa :|.ua a,t.cu|, . a |aca c.., |.s. | `Iceu Xtceu eu sut eu . |. A literal translation of this
verse would read thus: ordained (i.e. defined) to be Gods Son with power from the Spirit of Holiness, out of the
resurrection of the dead of Jesus Christ our Lord.

The verbal participle horizo is used 8 times in the NT and it is translated as: determine 3 times,
ordain 2 times, was determine 1 time, declare 1 time, limit 1 time. This verbal participle is in the
aorist tense, passive voice, masculine gender, and singular number. German professor Walter
Bauer in his Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature
defined horizo to mean: Passive 1 aorist. from the basic meaning to separate entities and so establish a
boundary, derives the sense to define ideas or concepts: set limits to, define, explain.
132
Now what can be clear
than these verses? According to this definition: Jesus is Davids Son because His flesh came from
Davids seed, and He is ordained or defined to be the Son of God because the Holy Spirit of God dwelt in
His humanity, Whom raised Him from the dead (Rom 8:11);

If my beloved readers have any doubts concerning when or why God the Father gave Jesus the
title the Son of God, let the archangel Gabriel settle the matter for you. Gabriel told Mary:
behold, you will conceive in your womb, and bear a Son, and you shall name Him Jesus. He will be great, and will
be called [future tense - s c.at] the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father
David. And the angel answered and said to her, The Holy Spirit will come upon you, AND the Power of the Most
High will overshadow you; and for that reason [dio] the holy offspring shall be called [future tense - s c.at] the Son of
God (Lk 1:31-32, 35, NAS).

The inferential conjunction dio as I pointed out before means: for this reason, therefore, for this
purpose (LU 1.35).
133
The verb kaleo or sc.at is in the future tense, indicative mood, and passive
voice. Drs. Friberg defined it to mean: passive have as a name, be called (LU 1.61).
134
Let all take notice
to the verb tense this Archangel used to tell us about the Son. He stated twice that Jesus will be
(future tense) called the Son of God, not has always been (past tense) called the Son of God, and not is (present
tense) called the Son of God.

If we could ask Gabriel when Jesus received this title, he would quickly reply when Mary
brought forth her firstborn Son. If we would ask Gabriel why Jesus would be given the title the
Son of God, he would say because the Holy Spirit of the Father shall impregnate Mary, therefore or
for that reason the Babe shall be given the title the Son of God, for God shall be His Father. If Trinitarian
theologians do not believe the words of the prophets and apostles concerning why the Man Jesus
Christ was given the title, the Son of God, maybe they will believe Gods Archangel.

55
Verse 6: And again, when He brings His firstborn [Human Son] into the world, He says: Let all the angels of God
worship Him (NIV). The word firstborn is the Greek word prototokos, and it is used 9 times in the
NT. It was translated as: firstborn 7 times and first begotten 2 times. Out of the nine times
prototokos is used, it refers to Jesus 8 times, and it is always used in connection with Gods Sonship program
for Christ. When did the angels worship the firstborn, was it in eternity past, or was it at His birth
in Bethlehem? Let us agree to allow the Bible to interpret itself: Then the angel said to them [the
shepherds], Do not be afraid, for behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy which will be to all people. For there is
born to you THIS DAY [semeron not in eternity past] in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. And this will
be the sign to you: You will find a Babe wrapped in swaddling cloths, lying in a manger. And suddenly there was
with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying: Glory to God in the highest, And on earth
peace, goodwill toward men (Lk 2:10-14).

Therefore, this day [semeron] I have begotten You, Psalm 2:7 and Hebrew 1:5, is referring to the day
Jesus was born at Bethlehem and became known as the Son of God. All of the above passages of
scriptures are totally against Mr. Ross allegorical interpretation that it was referring to the
Jesus being the eternal begotten Son of God. As I have stated before, there is not one verse in the
Bible, where Jesus is ever called the eternal Son of God, or even uses the term eternal Son of God.
The Word of God does call Jesus, the only begotten or the only born Son of God.

All of the above passages of scripture also clearly revealed that Jesus was called the Son of
God because the Holy Spirit dwelt in His Humanity, thereby making God His Father. I believe it
will become even more evident to my beloved readers, from the following scriptures, that the
term Son of God is an expression that refers to a being who has the Spirit of God in them, such as: Angels
(Job 38:4; 1:6; 2:1), and Men (Lk 3:38; Rom 8:10-16; 1Jn 3:1-2; Neh 9:20, 30; 1Pe 1:11; Psa 82:1-7 cp with Jn 10:35-
36).

The prophet Isaiah gave us a beautiful prophetic picture of Jesus being a Spirit filled Man or
Son of God with the power. He prophesied: There shall come forth a Rod from the stem of Jesse [i.e. Davids
father], and a Branch shall grow out of his roots. The [Holy] Spirit of the LORD shall rest [or remain] upon Him [David's
Son], the Spirit of wisdom and understanding, the Spirit of counsel and might, the Spirit of knowledge and of the fear
[i.e. reverence] of the LORD (Isa 11:1-2). According to this passage of scripture, Gods the Fathers
Spirit filled His Humanity or the Son of God with all the gifts of the Spirit or the fullness of His
power.

Isaiah spoke of Jesus, as the Son of God, being filled with the Spirit of God in another place:
Behold! My Servant [My Humanity] whom I uphold, My Elect One in whom My Soul delights! I have put My Spirit
upon Him; He will bring forth justice to the Gentiles (Isa 42:1). Jesus, as a Spirit filled Man, was called the
servant of the Father, this is why God said at Jesus baptism: This is My beloved Son [My Humanity], in
whom I am well pleased (Mt 3:17). Therefore, God identified His Son with His Servant, which proves
that the Son was the humanity that God the Fathers Holy Spirit and Soul was well pleased to
dwell in. If Trinitarian theologians claim that this verse refers to Jesus as the so-called God the
Son or the eternal Son of God, then they will have God the Son as a servant to God the Father.
This would mean that God the Father is greater than God the Son, so how can they teach that
they are coequal.

The apostle Nathaniel confessed Jesus to be the Son of God, that is, a Spirit filled Man or
Prophet immediately after Jesus prophesied to Him. Nathaniel confession took place before he
saw Jesus do one miracle. The apostle John declared: Jesus saw Nathaniel coming toward Him, and said
of him, Behold, an Israelite indeed, in whom is no deceit! Nathanael said to Him, How do You know me? Jesus
answered and said to him, Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you. Nathanael
answered and said to Him, Rabbi, You are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel (Jn 1:47-49)!
56

It is obvious to me that Nathaniel associated the term Son of God to mean a prophet i.e. man
filled with the Spirit of God. How did Nathaniel know that Jesus was a Son of God or prophet?
The same way the woman at the well knew He was a prophet and the Messiah. Jesus told her and
Nathaniel things He could not have known unless He had the Holy Spirit of God in Him. My
beloved readers should keep in mind that in the OT, and in the gospels, only a select few people
could have the Spirit of God dwelling in them, i.e. the prophets, and certain priests and kings.
Before Jesus and John the Baptist came, Israel did not have a prophet for 300 years i.e. since
Malachi.

Jesus told the Samaritan woman at the well: Go, call your husband, and come here. The woman
answered and said, I have no husband. Jesus said to her, You have well said, I have no husband, for you have had
five husbands, and the one whom you now have is not your husband; in that you spoke truly. The woman said to
Him, Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. I know that Messiah is coming (who is called Christ). When He comes,
He will tell us all things (Jn 4:16-19, 25). Let us remember the children of Israel expected Christ to
come as a Spirit filled Man or a Prophet for the scripture also declared: Moses truly said to the
fathers, 'the LORD your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your brethren meaning earthly men
(Acts 3:22).

How Can the Apostle Paul Apply Psalms 2:7, to Jesus Birth at Bethlehem and
His Birth from the Dead, Without Contradicting Himself? Baptist Trinitarian scholar
Dr. A. T. Robertson, in his Word Pictures in the Greek New Testament, connected gennao in Heb
1:5 to Christs birth and resurrection. Robertson wrote: no single angel is called Gods Son like the
Messiah in Ps 2:7. Dods takes have I begotten thee to refer to the resurrection and ascension, while others
[lexicographers] refer it to the incarnation.
135
Gee, I wander why Robertson never mention that at least
one lexicographer believed that gennao could mean the same substance, as Mr. Ross and some
of his Trinitarian cohorts teach.

Since Robertson mention that some lexicographers believe that Psalm 2:7 is applied to Jesus
birth at Bethlehem, and others believe it is applied to Jesus birth from the dead, let us now
examine it application to the Resurrection of Christ, since we have already examined its
application to His natural birth. Paul said: God has fulfilled this for us their children, in that He has raised
up Jesus [His Humanity]. As it is also written in the second Psalm: You are My Son, Today I have begotten You. And
that He raised Him [His Humanity] from the dead, no more to return to corruption. Therefore He also says in another
Psalm: You will not allow Your Holy One [His Humanity] to see corruption. Therefore let it be known to you,
brethren, that through this Man is preached to you the forgiveness of sins (Acts 13:33-38).

I personally believe this Psalm applies to both, since there cannot be any contradictions in the
infallible Word of God. Since both of these applications are applied to the Son in the realm of
time, i.e. when or after He was born of Mary, this Psalm cannot be referring to the Son being
begotten in eternity past as Mr. Ross and some Trinitarians desperately declare, in order to
defend their eternal Sonship doctrine. So, with this truth in mind, let us examine this passage of
scripture.

Context: The apostle is preaching to Jews in the synagogue of Antioch in Pisidia. He started
his preaching on the birth and resurrection of Jesus with a brief history of Israel, and as he came
to King Davids era he declared: From this man's seed [King Davids seed], according to the promise, God raised
up for Israel a Savior Jesus (Acts 13:23). It is here that the great teacher quoted the prophecy of
Psalm 2:7, which every Jew knew applied to the birth of their Messiah, i.e. King Davids Son.
57

After Paul revealed that this prophecy was fulfilled in the Man Jesus Christ, he then moved
on to the scriptural proof of the resurrection of Davids Son by quoting Psalm 16:10. Therefore,
the great apostle again connected the birth of Jesus to His resurrection. If Jesus as a Man was
not born their could not be a dead or resurrection.

The apostle evidently applied Psalm 2:7 to both Jesus birth at Bethlehem as he definitely did in
Hebrews 1:5, and in the passage in Acts to the resurrection of Davids Son. I must admit, for years
this had me puzzled, but thank God the eyes of my understanding was opened through my son
Brian, to whom God gave the revelation of truth, as he was studying the day Jesus was born. He
told me: Dad, Jesus was born at Bethlehem and born from the dead on resurrection day i.e. Nisan the 17
th
or 3
days after Passover. Immediately I knew this was the truth, praise God! Therefore, Paul could
apply this Psalm to both Jesus natural birth and His birth from the dead without contradicting
himself, for they both happen on the very same day!!

The apostle Peter confirmed this interpretation when he proclaimed: Men of Israel, hear these
words: Jesus of Nazareth, a Man attested by God to you by miracles, wonders, and signs which God did through
Him in your midst, as you yourselves also know. Therefore, [David] being a prophet, and knowing that God had
sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, according to the flesh, He would raise up the Christ [as the Son
of God] to sit on his [Davids] throne, he, foreseeing this, spoke concerning the resurrection of the Christ, that His Soul
was not left in Hades, nor did His flesh see corruption. This Jesus God has raised up, of which we are all witnesses
(Acts 2:22, 30-32).

Since Jesus birth at Bethlehem and His birth from the dead took place on the very same day,
i.e., Nisan the 17
th
, Paul could apply Psalm 2:7 to both births without contradicting himself.
Therefore, all one God Theologians and many Trinitarian Theologians, who believe that Psalms
2:7 is speaking of the birth or incarnation of Christ at Bethlehem are right; and all Theologians
who believe it applies to the resurrection of Christ are also right!

Conclusion: Since all of the above lexical definitions of the words begotten and today
connected Psalm 2:7 to a birth and a time period, every honest student of the Word of God must
confess that this Psalm cannot be referring to: a oneness relationship of the Father and Son in sharing the
same essence that was called God in eternity past, as Mr. Ross deceitfully has declared. Ross allegorical
method of interpreting Gods Words is an abomination in the sight of God, and it is definitely
not sound Biblical Hermeneutics, as Mr. Ross pretends to follow.

As my beloved readers can perceive by now, the literal method of interpreting the Bible is
much better than Ross demonic Catholic allegoric method of interpretation, whereby the Word
of God is wrested or twisted and taken out of its context in order to teach his heretical doctrine
(2Pe 3:16). With this statement, I will say goodbye to Mr. Ross and his heretical book!

Therefore, all the above passages of scripture definitely referred to Jesus in His office as
Gods Firstborn Human Son; consequently, these passages are speaking of God the Fathers
Sonship program for Christ. According to the prophet Isaiah: Jesus will see the labor of His Soul,
and be satisfied [for] My righteous Servant shall justify many, for He [Gods Firstborn Human Son of God] shall bear their
iniquities (Isa 53:11). This verse can only be fulfilled by Christ becoming the Son of God, that is,
Christ taking upon Himself a Human Body of flesh and blood and dieing for the sins of the
world, whereby many could receive the Holy Spirit of Christ and become sons of God.

58
How Did God the Father Send the Son?

God the Father sent His prophetic Son, the same way He sent John the Baptist, that is,
through His prophetic Word. The Holy Word of God declared: There was a man sent from God, whose
name was John (Jn 1:6). The Bible also informed us of Johns prophetic identity. John speaking
about himself said: I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the LORD, as said
the prophet Isaiah (Jn 1:23). Let my beloved readers take note, John claimed to be the fulfillment of
Isaiahs prophecy which stated: The voice of one crying in the wilderness: prepare the way of the LORD;
Make straight in the desert a highway for our God. Behold your God (Isa 40:3). These passages of Scripture
not only declared that John was divinely sent by God the Father, but it even tells us who Christ was
going to be. It explicitly, expressly, emphatically proclaimed that John was preparing the way for
YHWH or the Father, who Isaiah proclaimed was: our God, the God you could see, i.e. the God you could
behold with your eyes.

Now, no one in his or her right mind would ever claim that John the Baptist existed at the time
Isaiah gave this prophecy. All would readily admit that John only existed in the prophetic mind of God.
No one would question the fact that God sent John through His prophetic Word 700 years before
he existed. Since this is true, why is it so hard for Trinitarian theologians to understand that God
the Father sent His future Son the very same way, i.e. through His prophetic Word? As I stated
before, Christ existed in the Old Testament as God the Father not as the Son of God.

Isaiah, as Gods court announcer, also made a prophetic decree about Gods future son. In his
announcement, he told us how the Son was going to be born. He said: Behold, a virgin shall conceive
and bear a Son (Isa 7:14). Thank God Isaiah did not stop there with his God given announcement,
he then proceeded to tell us who Gods future Son would be. He boldly proclaimed: For a child will
be born to us, a son will be given to us; and the government will rest on His shoulders; and His name will be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace (Isa 9:6, NAS). The infallible word of God
indisputably declared in this prophecy that God prophetic Son, Who be born one day in time and
not in eternity past. This is positive proof that Christ did not exist in eternity past as the Son of
God as Trinitarians teach, but He did exit as God the Father, the one and only God!

God being omniscient declared: the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are
not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure" (Isa 46:9-10). The one and only God
of the Bible, whom the Scriptures reveal is the Father, openly declared that His prophetic Word
would always be fulfilled. He knows and declares things long before they ever come into being.
This is exactly how God sent His Son. He declared it first through His prophets and then brought it to
fulfillment at Bethlehem.

Did Jesus as Gods Son Have a Real Human Nature?

Jesus is called the Son of Man because He was and is a Human Being in every sense of the
word, with all the characteristics, attributes, and limitations of mankind. In other words, Jesus
had and still has today two very real natures, that is, Deity and Humanity. Jesus is not part God
and part Man, but all God and all Man. Jesus in His Human Nature had the same human
limitations as all men have, but in His Nature as God He had no limitations. Therefore, with this
infallible truth in mind, let us begins our study on Jesus Human Nature as the Son of God.

59
As a Man, Jesus Was Born of A Woman: Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of
Nazareth, into Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of
David, to be registered with Mary, his betrothed wife, who was with child. So it was, that while they were there, the
days were completed for her to be delivered. And she brought forth her firstborn Son, and wrapped Him in swaddling
cloths, and laid Him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn (Lk 2:4-7). This definitely
qualifies Him to be Human, even though God was the one who conceived him in the womb of
Mary.

As a Man, Jesus Was Limited in Knowledge and Had to Be Taught As A Child:
Isaiah the prophet not only declared how Jesus was going to be born of a virgin, but also
informed us about His human nature. He declared: Before the Child shall know to refuse the evil and
choose the good, the land that you dread will be forsaken by both her kings (Isa 7:14-16). This prophecy is
truly amazing. Think about it. Immanuel, the omniscient or all knowing God, in His human
nature as a child had to be taught the difference between what was good and evil, just like any
other child.

What this means is that our LORD was a human being in every sense of the word. His flesh
was just as real as any man's flesh. This definitely qualifies Him to be considered as a man in
every way. Luke confirmed these truths when he wrote: the child grew and increase in wisdom and
statute (Lk 2:40, 52). Our God as a boy had to grow and mature in His body and mind, just like
any other human being. Can any Trinitarian preacher deny the plain truth these verses teach
concerning the real human nature of our LORD?

Jesus speaking as a man about the time of His return to earth said: Of that day and hour no one
knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father (Mk 13:32). Our LORD in His
humanity did not know the day or the hour of His return, but as God the Father, He knew all
things for all the treasures of wisdom are hid in Him (Col 2:3). If Jesus Christ is not God the Father as
Trinitarian theologians declare, then the Father knows something the Son does not know. If they
are two distinct and separate persons, then how can the Father and Son be equal in knowledge?
The Father would have to be a greater God and the Son would have to be a lesser or inferior
God. By now my beloved readers can see just a few of the problems, Trinitarian theologians run
into to with their Babylonian-Catholic-Trinity of three separate persons.

As a Man, Jesus Had a Human Flesh, Bone, and Blood Body: Jesus called the bread
and wine at the last supper, in a symbolic sense, His physical body and blood: This is My body...
[and] this is My blood (Mt 26:26, 28); and one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood
and water came out (Jn 19:34). If this did not qualify Him to be considered a human being, then
Medical Science needs to revamp it Medical definition of mankind; because Jesus had a human
body that could feel pain and suffer just like any other mortal man.

As a Man, Jesus Was Limited in What He Could Do: Jesus as a man had to totally
rely upon His God or the Father who dwelt in Him for help. Jesus flesh cried out I [can] do nothing
of Myself, but as my Father taught Me that I do (Jn 8:28). Notice, as a man, our Savior was limited in
what He knew or could do, but as God the Father, He knew all things and could do all things, as
Paul stated: Christ [is] the power of God and the wisdom of God. If there are two persons in the
godhead, as Trinitarian preachers proclaim, then you have a greater God called the Father and a
lesser God called the Son. Since the Father can do all things and knows everything, but the Son is
limited in what He can do and has to be taught, then how can they be equal in power and
knowledge?
60

As a Man, Jesus Need Food, Water, and Rest to Stay Alive: According to the Bible,
after Jesus made a long journey: He was hungry (Mk 11:12). The Pharisees accused Jesus of eating
and drinking with publicans and sinners (Lk 5:30). Jesus even became tired and need to rest His
body: Jesus therefore, being wearied with His journey, sat down on a well (Jn 4:6). Now, since many
Trinitarian theologians insist that everything Jesus says and does, he says and does it as the so-
called God the eternal Son, if this is true, does their God get hungry? Does their God need to eat
to stay alive? Does their God become tired and needs to rest? Isaiah speaking of the one and only
God declared: Have you not known? Have you not heard? The everlasting God, the LORD, the Creator of the
ends of the earth, neither faints nor is weary, His understanding is unsearchable (Isa 40:28). Jesus, as God the
Father never became tired, but as the Son of God He needed rest.

As a Man, Jesus Did Not Teach or Invent His Own Doctrines: Jesus taught only the
truths that the Father taught Him as He was growing up. The Son of God said: My teaching [or
doctrine] is not My own. It comes from Him who sent Me (Jn 7:16). As a man, Jesus set the example for all
godly teachers of the Word of God to follow, which is we must totally rely upon God to be our
teacher.

As a Man, Jesus Had a Human Will: Jesus human will can clearly be seen in His
prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane: Abba, Father, all things are possible for You. Take this cup away
from Me; nevertheless, not what I will [meaning the will of His humanity], but what You will [meaning the will of His Deity].
Again He went away and prayed, and spoke the same words (Mk 14:36, 39). The Word of God emphatically
declared that Jesus prayed in the Garden as a man i.e. as the Son of God, and not as God. Paul said it
this way: In the days of His [Jesus] flesh, when He had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying
and tears unto Him [the Father] that was able to save Him [the humanity of God] from death (Heb 5:7).

If Jesus Deity, and not His Human Nature as the Son of God, is praying to His God, then you
have a greater God and a lesser god mention here. The greater God being God the Father whose
will is being done, and the lesser God being the Son whose will is inferior and under total
subjection to the Fathers will. For if Jesus is praying as God, you would have one god praying to
another God for help and deliverance from death, which means you would be teaching that God
not only prays but God can die.

Here are a two more scriptures that revealed that our God as the Human Son of God had a
human will. The Bible speaking about Gods future prophetic Son stated: a [natural physical human]
body hast thou prepared for Me. Why? So He could come as it was written of Him: to do Thy will, O
God (Heb 10:5-10). Notice, God's prophetic Human Son of God had a God, which was the Father,
whom He served. According to these verses, He was born into this world to do or accomplish the
will of the Father. If Jesus is not speaking as a Man in these verses but as the so-called God the
Son, then you have a greater God and a lesser god. Can my beloved readers see the demonic web
of confusion, the Babylonian-Catholic three-persons in godhead doctrine brings. Thank God for
the simple truth that the Almighty God, the Father became a human being and dwelt among His
creation.

As a Man, Jesus Could Die: The Son of God: cried with a loud voice... [and] said, Father, into thy
hands I commend My Spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the Ghost (Lk 23:46). Our God in His human
nature not in His Divine nature died. The prophet Isaiah speaking about the death of God
61
prophetic Son said: It pleased the LORD to bruise Him. My righteous servant [shall] justify many. He has
poured out His Soul unto death (Isa 53:10-12).

If this passage is not speaking about the humanity that the Father would dwell in, but is
referring to God the so-called Eternal Son as Trinitarian theologians declare, then you have the
Son being the servant of the Father, so how can they be coequal. The Father would have to be a
greater God and the Son a lesser God. In addition, they will have to teach that God died, which
means man can kill God; therefore, how can God can be eternal. Oh, I am so glad that I am not a
Trinitarian preacher because that would be a blasphemous statement to make.

As a Man, Jesus Is Our Mediator and High Priest: For there is one God and one Mediator
between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus (1Ti 2:5); and Seeing then that we have a great High Priest who has
passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. For we have not an High Priest
which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without
sin. Every high priest [is] taken from among men. that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins But this
Man [the Son of God] offered one sacrifice for sins forever (Heb 4:14-15; 5:1; 10:12). These passages must be
speaking of Jesus in His role as the Son of God, i.e., His Human Nature, for God cannot be tempted
by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone (Ja 1:13).

Conclusion: According to all of the scriptures mention in this section, Jesus as the Son of
God is without a doubt a man in every aspect of the word. He was born of a woman as a baby,
grew up as a child, and entered into His manhood, just as any other human being would be
expected to do. As a man, He had to study and pray to learn God's Holy Word just like any other
godly man has to do. Jesus had a human body with a human mind and will; His body was
composed of flesh, bones and blood, which needed to eat and sleep to survive. Last of all, His
body could die, which definitely classifies the Son of God as human being.

Jesus as the Son of God Was A Spirit Filled Man,
Who Was Subordinate to His God

Jesus as the Son of God Had a God He Prayed to: When Jesus was hanging on the
cross as a Spirit filled man He cried out in prayer and said: My God, My God, why have You forsaken
Me (Mt 27:46). At Lazarus tomb the Son of God prayed to His God and said: Father, I thank You
that You have heard Me. And I know that You always hear Me (Jn 11:41-42). If Jesus prayed as God the Son
and not as the Son of God, then you have one God called the Son, praying to a different God
called the Father. This would mean that you would have a greater God and a lesser God; the
greater God being the one who answers prayers, and the lesser God being the one who offers up
prayers. Therefore, how can they be coequal if the Trinity is true?

Therefore, either Trinitarians will have to teach the One God Jesus Name Apostolic position,
i.e. Gods Humanity or the Son of God prayed and died, or they will have to teach their God can
pray and their God can die. Paul clearly declared that it was Gods Humanity, i.e. the Son of
God who was crucified: Paul said it this way: if they [Christians] fall away, to renew them again to
repentance they crucify again for themselves the Son of God (Heb 6:6). Therefore, Paul definitely revealed
that the title Son of God was just another name for the Humanity of Christ that was crucified.

The Bible in many places called the Father, the God of Jesus, for example, Paul told the
Church to: glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and Blessed be the God and Father of our
62
Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and God of all comfort (Rom 15:6, 2Co 1:3). If these verses of
scripture are not referring to the Father being the God of Jesus Human Nature, than
Trinitarian Theologians will have to confess that the Jesus as God has a God over Him, Whom is
much greater than He. Therefore, the Trinitarian godhead doctrine makes Jesus a lesser or
inferior God to the Father.

As God the Father, Jesus was dependent on no one, but as the Son of God Jesus totally relied
on the Father for everything. As a Spirit filled Man Jesus prayed: Father, if thou be willing, remove
this cup from Me.... And being in an agony He [the Son of God] prayed more earnestly (Lk 22:41-44). One of the
greatest proofs that the term Son of God is a title for Jesus Humanity, as a Spirit filled Man, is
the very fact that He prayed that He could die. The Bible gives us positive proof that it was the
Humanity of Christ that prayed in the Garden; for the Word of God clearly declared that
Christ: In the days of His flesh, when He had offered up prayers and supplications, with vehement cries and tears
to Him [the Father His God] who was able to save Him [the Man Christ Jesus] from death (Heb 5:7). God cannot die
but the humanity that the Father lived in could.

If Jesus is praying as the so-called God the Son or as Deity, as Trinitarian Theologians
theorize, then they will have to say that God prays. If God prays, to whom would God pray to?
The answer is obvious! He would have to pray to a God that is greater or superior to Himself.
Therefore, if the Son of God prayed to the Father as the so-called God the Son, and not as a
Spirit filled Man, then the Father must be a greater or a superior God than Son, so how can
they be coequal? For this reason, Trinitarian Preachers must either believe and teach the
oneness doctrine that Jesus had two separate and distinct natures, i.e. Deity and Humanity, and
the Son of Gods Deity came from the fact that He was God the Father, or they must teach the
early Catholic Semi-Arian doctrine that there are two unequal gods, the Father being the greater
God and Jesus being the lesser God!

Jesus as the Son of God Had a God He Worshipped, Served and Obeyed: The Son
of God as a Spirit filled man told the woman at the well: We [Jews including Himself] know what we
worship (Jn 4:22). When the Son of God, as a Holy Man of God, was being tempted by the Devil to
sin, He overcame him by the written Word of God. The Bible records this event this way: Now
when the tempter came to Him, he said All these things I will give You if You will fall down and worship me.
Then Jesus said to him, Away with you, Satan! For it is written, You shall worship the LORD your God, and Him
only you shall serve (Mt 4:3, 9-10).

The word you in this verse not only included Jesus but all Spirit filled men. Therefore, the
Son of God Jesus refused to worship or serve any God but the Father. As a Spirit filled man
Jesus set an example for all of Gods sons to follow. If Jesus was speaking as God the Son as
Trinitarian theologians surmise, then Jesus did not exclude Himself from serving and worshipping God the
Father. Jesus did not say worship and serve Me, but He did tell Gods children that they should
worship and serve the Father their God. The Son of God being a Spirit filled Man set the example for
all of Gods sons to follow. Therefore if Son of God does not represent God the Fathers
Humanity, than he cannot be equal to God the Father; for how can they be equal as Trinitarian
preachers teach, since the lesser god serves and worships the greater God.

Jesus as the Son of God Was Subordinate to His God: Professor Martin commenting
on John 14:28 wrote: My Father is greater than I, revealed that the humanity of Jesus was speaking here. The
comparison between Christ and His Father in that context and verse clearly indicates that Jesus was speaking as a
man.
136
What Martin fails to tell His readers is that Jesus humanity is the Son of God, i.e. they
63
are identical expression that represents the same thing; therefore when the Son of God spoke, it
was always His Humanity speaking.

What Martin also fails to tell his readers is: Jesus as a Son of God i.e. a Spirit filled man never
claimed equality with the Father. The Son of God always placed Himself in a subordinate position to
His God and Father. This is why the Son of God said: The servant is not greater than his master; nor is
He [the Son of God] Who is sent greater than He [God the Father] Who sent Him" (Jn 13:16); and The Son can do
nothing of Himself (Jn 5:19); and To sit on My right hand and on My left is not Mine to give (Mt 20:23); and
"All things are delivered unto Me of My Father" (Mt 11:27); and All power is given unto Me in heaven and in
earth, (Mt 28:18); and For as the Father has life in Himself, so He has granted the Son to have life in Himself, and
has given Him authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of Man (Jn 5:26-27); and I have finished
the work which You [Father] gave Me to do (Jn 17:4).

God speaking of Jesus as His prophetic Son declared: I, the LORD, have called You in righteousness,
and will hold Your hand; I will keep You and give You as a covenant to the people, as a light to the Gentiles, to open
blind eyes, to bring out prisoners from the prison, those who sit in darkness from the prison house (Isa 42:6-7). It
is obvious from this scripture, Jesus as a Spirit filled Man did not walk in His own strength or
keep Himself from sin by His own power, but totally relied upon the Father Who dwelt in His
Humanity.

According to Acts 10:37-38, God the Father gave Jesus or the Son of God His power and the
Holy Ghost; Luke expressed this truth this way: God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and
with Power, who went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with Him.
Therefore, if Jesus is not the Father, then the Father has to be greater than the Son in power, for
He is the one who gave Jesus the Holy Spirit and Power. This is why the Son of God said: All
power is given unto Me in heaven and in earth (Mt 28:18). Therefore, how can the Father and Son of God
be coequal in power as Trinitarian theologians theorize, if they are two separate persons or
gods?

All of these passages of Scripture can only mean that the Son of God, being the Humanity of
God the Father, was subject to Deity and less than Deity. In other words, the Physical Body
Nature of Jesus, which God the Father dwelt in is not God, but the Spirit and Soul Natures of
Jesus is God! These are just a few examples that prove the Babylonian-Catholic Trinity cannot be the
truth. If the title Son of God does not refer to the Spirit filled humanity that the Father came in,
then you have the so-called God the Son as a weak or inferior god, and the Father being a greater
or superior God. Since this is so, how can Trinitarian theologians teach that the Father and Son
are equal in power, knowledge, and all other attributes of God?

Conclusion: The Archangel Gabriel definitely told us when God the Father gave His Human
Son the title the Son of God, i.e. when Mary conceived and brought forth Jesus. He also told us
why Jesus would be called the Son of God, i.e. because the Fathers Holy Spirit would dwell in
this Humanity, whereby God would become His Father. The great apostle Paul declared the very
same truth as Gabriel, when he declared that Jesus was known as the Son of God because the
Fathers Spirit of Holiness dwelt in His Humanity.

The infallible Word of God indisputable declared that God the Father gave His Humanity,
Whom He called His Servant, His Spirit without measure, all the gifts of the Spirit, His anointing,
and all of His power. It also declares that the Son of God prayed to Father, was subject to His
Father, submitted His own will to the Fathers will, could do nothing without His Fathers help,
64
had less knowledge than the Father, and the Father was greater than the Son. Therefore, or
because of these indisputable proves, no Trinitarian preacher can claim Jesus was the Eternal
Son of God Who was coequal in authority and power with the Father in eternity past. There can
be no doubt that Jesus received the title Son of God when He was conceived and born at
Bethlehem.

If the Godhead does not consist of one Person, who has two real separate and distinct Natures,
that is, Deity and Humanity, than Jesus cannot be the one and only God. Since all of the above is
true, I ask Trinitarians Preachers again, if their are two persons in the Godhead, and the term
Son of God refers to Jesus Deity as the so-called God the eternal Son, than how can He be
coeternal, co-omnipotent, and co-omniscient with the Father as you teach? The only logical,
reasonable, and harmonious interpretation to all the above passages of scripture is to declare:
the title Son of God refers to God the Fathers Spirit filled Humanity.

Since Jesus Spoke of the Father and of Himself in the Third Person,
Does this Mean the Father and Jesus Are Two Separate Persons?

As we have discovered in this Bible study, Jesus definitely had, and still has, a very real
Human Nature as the Son of God, but let us not forget that Jesus also has another nature, that is,
His Nature as God. He was the Son of God in the NT because the Fathers Holy Spirit and Soul
Natures dwelt in His Human Physical Body. Therefore, Jesus personality was composed from
His Nature as God and His Nature as Man. This truth will be discussed in more detail in chapter
six. Because Jesus is all God and all Man, He has the ability to speak as God and the ability to
speak as a Man. Because of this ability, which is His alone, many Trinitarian Catholic,
Protestant, and Pentecostal Theologians have assumed that there are two or three persons in the
Godhead.

There argument goes something like this: The person speaking cannot be the same person being spoken
of. In other words, Jesus speaking in the first person cannot be God the Father, whom is spoken of in the third
person. What these Theologians forget, or choose not to mention in their teachings, is that Jesus
in many places in the Gospels speaks of Himself in the Third person, as though He was speaking
of someone different from Himself! When I have brought this fact to the attention of Trinitarian
Preachers, not one of them has told me that he believes Jesus is two separate persons. All anyone
of them can say is: You must remember, Jesus has two real natures, one as God and the other as Man. With
this infallible truth in mind, let us examine the following passage of scriptures.

Jesus prayed to His Father at Lazarus tomb and said: Father [3rd person], I [1
st
person] thank You [3rd
per.] that You [3rd per.] have heard Me [1st per.]. And I [1st per.] know that You [3rd per.] always hear Me [1st per.], but
because of the people who are standing by I [1st per.] said this, that they may believe that You [3rd per.] sent Me [1st
per.] (Jn 11:41-42). Trinitarian will quote these verses and say: Jesus did not say, I [1
st
person] thank
Myself [1
st
pers per.] that I [1st per.] have heard Myself [1st per.]. And I [1st per.] know that I [1st per.] always hear Myself [1st
per.] when I [1st per.] pray, but because of the people who are standing by I [1st per.] said this, that they may believe
that I [1st per.] have sent Myself [1st per.]. Therefore, they conclude, how can Jesus be the Father, when He is praying
to the Father? If He is the Father, then He is praying to Himself. How can Jesus be the Father when He is speaking
of the Father in the third person?

I usually answer: Do you believe Jesus is God? They say: Yes. I then say: Do you believe that
Jesus is a lesser God than the Father, i.e., the Father is the greatest God and Jesus is a lesser God? They usually
say: Absolutely not, I am not a Jehovahs Witness! I say: If Jesus is praying or speaking as the so-called God
the Son, then you have one God praying to another God. Therefore, how can Jesus be equal to the Father, if God
65
prays? Now either you must become a One God Jesus Name Preacher, and confess that Jesus is praying in His
Human Nature as a Man, or you must deny the Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ, and become a Jehovahs Witness;
but you cannot confess you believe in a Trinity of three equal persons or gods in the Godhead!

Jesus speaking as God the Father about His Humanity said: the Son of Man [3rd per.] goes [verb - 3rd
person, singular number] as it is written of Him [3rd per.] (Mt 26:24). Jesus did not say: I [1st per.] am going as it is
written of Me [1st per.]. Jesus told His disciples: Behold, we go up to Jerusalem, and all things that are written
by the prophets concerning the Son of Man [3rd per.] shall be accomplished. For He shall be delivered [verb 3rd person,
singular number] unto the gentiles, and shall be mocked, and spitefully entreated, and spitted on: And they shall
scourge Him [3rd per.], and put Him [3rd per.] to death: and the third day He [3rd per.] shall rise again (Lk 18:31-33).
Let my beloved readers take note again, Jesus did not say: all things written concerning Me [1st per.]
shall be accomplished. For I [1st per.] shall be delivered unto the gentiles. And they shall scourge Me [1st per.], and
put Me [1st per.] to death and the third day I [1st per.] will rise again.

Jesus said that the people of the earth: shall see the Son of Man [3rd per.] coming in the clouds of heaven
with power and great glory. And He [3rd per.] shall send His [3rd per.] angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they
shall gather together His [3rd per.] elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other (Mt 24:30-31).
Once again, Jesus did not say: I [1st per.] am coming in the clouds of heaven. And I [1st per.] shall send My [1st
per.] angels and they shall gather together My [1st per.] elect. Since Trinitarian theologians are so anxious
to show scriptures of Jesus speaking about the Father, in their attempt to prove that there are
two separate persons in the Godhead, why is it that none of them would dare use these scriptures
to teach that the person speaking, and the person spoken of cannot be the same person.

Jesus speaking as the Son of God after the death, burial and resurrection of His Humanity
said unto His apostles: These are the words which I [1st per.] spake unto you, while I [1st per.] was yet with you,
that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms,
concerning Me [1st per.] (Lk 24:44). Jesus then stops speaking as the Son of God i.e. as Spirit filled
Man and began to speak as God the Father, for He said: thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ
[3rd per., not Me 1st per.] to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: And that repentance and remission of sins
should be preached in His [3rd per., not My 1st per.] name among all nations (Vss 46-47).

This passage of Scripture definitely proves that Gods Sonship program continued after the
resurrection of Christ. In fact, Jesus will continue in His redemptive office as the Son of God, i.e.
Gods Humanity, until all things are placed under His feet, then this office will cease, and He will
no longer be known as the Son of God. Jesus at the present time is known as God the Father and
the Son of God, but when the end comes, He will only be known as God the Father to all of His
redeem children (1Co 15:24-27).

Many Trinitarian preachers totally ignore dual nature of Jesus Christ that is clearly
demonstrated in all the above scriptures. Some foolishly persist in saying that Jesus always spoke
as God, and He never spoke as a Man. I remember one Church of Christ Minister, whom I had a
forty-hour discussion with in his church office, who made this statement to me. I told this
Minister: The Bible teaches, Jesus always prayed as a Man and not as God. Paul said it this way, in the days of
His flesh, when He had offered up prayers and supplications, with vehement cries and tears to Him [Deity] who was
able to save Him [Humanity] from death (Heb 5:7). If Jesus prayed as God as you say, and not as a Man, then your
God can die, and this would mean that Jesus is a lesser or inferior God than God the Father. For if God prays, to
whom would God pray? He would have to pray to a greater and more powerful God than Himself.

Therefore, all Trinitarian preachers, who use the third person argument to prove their
Babylonian-Catholic-Protestant Trinity of three separate persons in the Godhead, are not telling
their hearers the truth. For if they use this argument to teach that Jesus and the Father are two
66
separate persons, they will also have to teach that Jesus is two separate and distinct persons, for
without a doubt, Jesus spoke of Himself in the third person. In conclusion, the third person
argument of Trinitarian Theologians use is not a valid argument!

CHAPTER 5
THE SUPREME DEITY OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST

Let my readers keep in mind that the Word of God emphatically declared there is one and
only God, which is the Father. Therefore, if Christ is not the Father, He cannot be God in any
sense. I said at the beginning of this book that Jesus is the one and only God, or in other words,
He is God the Fathers visible Self. It is now time to prove it. This and the next chapter are
devoted to that purpose.

Who Is Christ?

Jesus asked His disciples: Who do men say that I, the Son of Man, am? Jesus obviously wanted to
know what the religious folks thought about Him. The answer was: Some say John the Baptist, some
Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets. The religious world in His day evidently had no idea
who He really was. Even after two thousand, the Church world or the Catholics and Protestants
of today do not know Jesus true identity. Jesus then asked those who personally knew Him: But
who do you say that I am?

Simon Peter was the first one to respond with the answer. He said: You are the Christ, the Son of
the living God. Then our Lord responded and told Peter that God the Father gave Him this
revelation, and this revelation would be the rock or foundational truth that He would build His
Church on, and the gates of Hades would not prevail against it. Then He charged His disciples that they
should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ [Xtceu] (Mat 16:13-20).

Who is the one that is called Christ? Is He Almighty God, who was prophesied to come and
robe His deity in a physical body of flesh and blood? Is He one-third of God or one of three gods?
Is He nothing more than Gods highest created angel? Is He nothing more than a Spirit filled
man or a Prophet, who was called the Christ? Is He nothing more than a good man that was a
religious teacher? The answer to these questions is what every Christian needs to find out.

The Greek word Xtceu is translated into English as Christ. In the Hebrew, Christ is called
the Messiah and both of these terms mean: the Anointed One. The Old Testament Church was build
upon the foundational truth that YHWH the Father was, and still is, the one and only God (Deu 6:4). Now the New
Testament Church was built on the same foundational truth, which is the revelation that Jesus Christ is the rock or
the almighty God, i.e. God the Everlasting Father robed in flesh (Isa 9:6)!

The apostle Paul told us who the Rock was when he spoke of the children of Israel in the
wilderness and declared that they: all drank the same spiritual drink; For they drank of that spiritual Rock
that followed them, and that Rock was Christ (1Co 10:4). The Word of God definitely and emphatically
declared that there is only one rock and that is God! David said it this way: For who is God save the
LORD? Or who is a Rock save our God (Psa 18:31)?

Jesus did not command His disciples to tell no man that He was the Son of God, but He did
command them not tell anyone that He was the Christ. Let my beloved readers keep in mind that
67
the important term here is Christ, not the phrase the Son of God. Jesus did not want the religious
leaders to know at this time that He was the Christ; for if they knew He claimed to be Christ or
the Messiah, then they would have tried to kill Him before His time.

According to the Bible, the religious leaders agreed among themselves: that if any man did
confess that He [Jesus] was Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue (Jn 9:22). The religious leaders did
not throw people out of the synagogue for believing Jesus was a Rabbi, or a religious teacher, or
a Prophet, or even a Son of God; but they did excommunicate them for believing and confessing
that Jesus was the Christ. It is obvious that the religious leaders did not want anyone to believe
that Jesus was Christ their Messiah.

At Jesus trial the High Priest asked Him: Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed? Jesus said, I
Am. And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.
Then the high priest tore his clothes and said, What further need do we have of witnesses? You have heard the
blasphemy! What do you think? And they all condemned Him to be deserving of death (Mk 14:61-64). The
religious leaders asked Jesus many times in the past, if He was the Christ and Jesus never gave
them a direct answer. Why did Jesus give them an answer here? Jesus knew these religious
leaders were looking for a reason to put Him to death, and He knew that the time of His death
was now at hand. Therefore, He confessed to them the truth that He really was Christ their
Messiah.

It is evident from the Bible that the Pharisees expected Christ or the Messiah to be a Spirit
filled human being and not God Himself. They and the Sadducees thought Christ was going to be
nothing more than a Spirit filled man, a prophet and deliverer like Moses. A man who would
come and set Israel free from the Roman yoke and sets up His Millennial Kingdom (Acts 1:6); and
as a man, He would rule as a king in the kingdom because He was David son and heir.

This truth can be seen when Jesus asked the Pharisees: What do you think about the Christ? Whose
Son is He? They said to Him, The Son of David. He said to them, How then does David in the Spirit call Him
LORD, saying: The LORD said to my LORD [i.e. the Fathers prophetic Humanity], Sit at My right hand, till I make Your
enemies Your footstool? If David then calls Him LORD, how is He his Son? And no one was able to answer Him
a word, nor from that day on did anyone dare question Him anymore (Mt 22:41-46).

It is evident from the above verses that Jesus question threw these religious leaders into a
theological delirium! It is also perfectly obvious that these men did not believe that Christ would
be God. For Jesus whole argument against them would have been entirely without meaning if He
were not the one and only God, also the Pharisees would not have been so perplexed or
bewildered. Yes, what Jesus was telling these religious leaders was very simple, He blatantly told
them that Davids Son would not only be a Son of God or a Spirit filled Man, but God the Father
manifested in the flesh, with a human body, emotions, mind, and will. In other words, Davids
Son would be all God and all Man, therefore having two separate and distinct Natures i.e. Deity
and Humanity all in one being or person

Is it not a terrible disgrace and indictment against Gods children that the majority of them
believed the teachings of the Pharisees over our sweet Lords teachings? Because they loved and
respected their religious teachers, and their preachers were in the majority, they blindly followed
the blind and they lost out with God and became His enemies. Things have not change much
from that time to our day, because the majority of Christendom still believes Satans
Babylonian-Catholic-Protestant Trinitarian godhead doctrine of three persons or gods. I hope
68
and pray that God will use this book, to help every honest Christian everywhere to understand
the truth.

Isaiah Acknowledged Jesus as God the Father

Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which
being interpreted is, God with us [e .e,] (Mt 1:23, Isa 7:14). The phrase God with us reads ho Theos in the
Greek NT, which means: the God with us. According to Dr. Strong, the Greek word theos
means: a deity, especially (with GSN3588 [i.e. the]) the supreme deity,
137
i.e. the one and only God, the
Almighty God.

Jehovahs Witnesses, who are the modern day Arians, in their heretical attempt to disprove
the Supreme Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ in John 1:1 quoted Robertsons book, A Grammar of
the Greek New Testament [pg 761] which stated: among the ancient writers ho Theos was used of the God of
absolute religion in distinction from the mythological gods.
138
I can tell my beloved readers in all truth, in
my discussions on John 1:1 with those in this cult, when I show them in their own Kingdom Interlinear
of the Greek Scriptures that Matthew 1:23, and other passages of Scripture in the Greek NT, proclaim
Jesus to be the God i.e. ho theos the true God, some of these people become speechless. Therefore,
the infallible Word of God declared Jesus to be ho Theos or the one and only true God with us. Since
the one and only God is the Father, this has to mean that Jesus is God the Father with us. The
Bible did not declare that Jesus was a god or some small deity with us, but the one and only
supreme Deity with us.

Isaiah, speaking under the holy unction of the Holy Spirit, again declared the supreme Deity
of the Lord Jesus Christ when he boldly prophesied: For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to
us; and the government will rest on His shoulders; and His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God
[i.e. El Gibbor], Eternal Father, Prince of Peace (Isa 9:6, NAU & NAS). The Jewish Publication Society in
their 1985 Tanakh English translation of the OT also referred to Gods future Son as: The
Eternal Father, a peaceable ruler. Professor Walter Martin interpreted this passage this way: Isaiah
9:6 in the Hebrew Bible is one of the most powerful verses in the Old Testament in proving the deity of Christ and
incontestably declares that Jehovah himself planned to appear in human form.
139


Let my beloved readers take note, the infallible Word of God indisputably proclaimed Jesus
Christ to be the Eternal or Everlasting Father. How many Eternal Fathers can there be?
Trinitarian theologians who teach three persons, beings, or gods in the Godhead will have to also
teach that there are two eternal Fathers in the Godhead. If there are two beings in the Godhead
that are known as the Eternal Father, then please show me where in the Bible does it declare that
kind of nonsense?

Trinitarian preachers will also have to declare that Gods holy prophet Malachi was wrong,
when he declared to his Jewish kinfolk: Have we not all one Father? Has not one God created us (Mal
2:10). The Jewish people only believed in and worshipped one Eternal or Everlasting Father who to
them was the one and only true God. This is why they told our holy LORD: We have one Father even
God (Jn 8:41). Since it is impossible for there to be two Eternal or Everlasting Fathers, Jesus has
to be God the Father or the infallible Word of God contradicts itself!!

Isaiah was right when he prophesied about the supreme Deity of Gods future Son: Who has
believed our report (Isa 53:1)? Jehovahs Witnesses can believe that Michael the archangel took on
the appearance of flesh. Trinitarian preachers can believe that 1 of 3 persons or 1/3 of God
69
became a man at Bethlehem. The Mormons can believe that one of a multitude of gods became
our savior. However, only one God, Jesus Name, Holiness Pentecostals would dare believe that
the Creator and Ruler of the universe, the Eternal Father, loved you and me so much that He
Himself became a sinless human being, and in His human nature died a horrible death on
Calvarys Cross, just so He could prove to us that He loves us! Praise God forever, I believe it! I
know it for a fact!!

Isaiah not only called Jesus the Eternal Father, but also: the Mighty God or El Gibbor. The
JW will argue: Because Isaiah did not use the title Almighty God in Isaiah 9:6, Jesus cannot be YHWH.
However, they are wrong again, because this title the Mighty God belongs only to YHWH. The
prophet Jeremiah said it this way: the Great, the Mighty God [i.e. El Gibbor], the LORD [YHWH] of hosts, is His
name (Jer 32:18, also see Neh 9:32). Men and angels are called mighty [gibbor] ones, and false gods are
called by the title el, but no man, angel, or false god is called by both titles, the Mighty God or
El Gibbor in the Hebrew OT.

Professor Martin commenting on this title wrote: The term mighty God is in itself indicative of
Jehovah since He is the only God (Isaiah 43:10-11), but the term mighty is applied to Him alone in relation to His
deity.... However, Jehovah's Witnesses argue that since there is no article in the Hebrew text, mighty therefore
does not mean Jehovah. The question then arises, are there two mighty Gods? This we know is absurd; yet
Jehovah's Witnesses persist in the fallacy, despite Isaiah 10:21, where Isaiah without the article declares that Jacob
shall return unto the mighty God, and we know that Jehovah is by His own word to Moses the God of Jacob
(Exodus 3:6).... If we accept Jehovah's Witnesses view, there must be two Mighty Gods; and that is impossible, for
there is only one true and Mighty God.
140


Trinitarian Pastor friend of mine, in the two above statements by professor Martin, this
renowned Trinitarian scholar boldly admits the truth that Jesus is YHWH in human form. You
say Martin was writing against Jehovahs Witnesses and biblically proving the supreme Deity of
the Lord Jesus Christ to them, because they deny it. I say amen, but that does not take away
from the fact that Jesus is YHWH, who according to the infallible Word of God is the one and
only true God of the OT.

Therefore, I am asking all Trinitarian theologians, pastors and preachers of this great Gospel,
the same question Martin asked the Jehovahs Witnesses: Do you believe and teach that there are two
Eternal Fathers and two mighty Gods mentioned in the OT? Well what is you answer? If you truly believe
there are two separate and distinct persons in the Godhead, i.e. God the Father and God the Son,
then you must answer yes. Therefore, you should proclaim in all your writings and preaching
that you believe in: two mighty Gods, in two eternal Fathers, and in two YHWHs. Now if you refuse to
do this than you should denounce Satans Babylonian-Catholic-Protestant Trinity of three
persons or gods in the Godhead. I say this in love, in hopes of stirring up your spirit to pray and
search for the truth!

Jesus Acknowledged His Deity as God the Father

Since Jesus is the Truth there is no way He could tell a lie even if He wanted to! Man Jesus
speaking to Philip said: I am the Way and the Truth and the Life; No one comes to the Father except through
Me (Jn 14:6, NIV). In this verse, Jesus told us that no one could approach His supreme Deity
without first going through the blood that His Humanity shed at Calvary, or as Paul expressed it:
there is one mediator between God and men, the man [i.e. the human being] Christ Jesus (1Ti 2:5). The Man Jesus
revealed His true identity to Philip when He told Him with purpose, deliberation, and well-chosen
70
words i.e. well-defined and precise language that even a child could comprehend, that His
Humanity was God the Fathers visible Self! Jesus explicitly and undeniably declared: If you
really knew Me, you would know My Father as well. From now on, you do know Him and have seen Him [i.e. God the
Father] (Jn 14:7, NIV).

Now Jesus did not tell Philip as Trinitarian preachers and affirm, whom twist this scripture
around and take it out of context: you see one like the Father, or you see an exact replica of the Father.
No! No! A thousand times no! Now what I cannot understand is how Trinitarian Bible scholars,
who teach that a student of the Word of God should interpret the Bible in a literal sense, and not
in a figurative sense, can willfully and unashamedly violate this golden rule of Biblical
Hermeneutics, when it does not agree with their theological biases.

I believe with all of my heart that Jesus said what He meant and meant what He said. Jesus
unequivocally, unquestionably, and undeniably told Philip, when you see Me you are looking at
the Father! The Bible does not call Jesus the image or form of the Father for naught! He is truly
not only the visible body of God the Father, but He is the only human body the Father has, for
the Bible declares that no one has or can ever see God the Father in His Essence as a Spirit Being
(1Ti 6:16).

After Jesus told Philip that He was God the Father visible Self: Philip said, Lord, show us the
Father and that will be enough for us. Jesus seeing that Philip was confused, like so many Trinitarian
theologians and Jehovahs Witnesses I have discussed Jesus Godhead with, said: Don't you know
Me Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen Me has seen [horao] the Father.
How can you say, 'Show us the Father (Jn 14:8-9, NIV)? The Greek verb horao i.e. . . as.| is in the
perfect or past tense, active voice, and indicative mood.

Dr. Wallace defined the perfect tense this way: As Moulton points out, the perfect tense is the most
important, exegetically, of all the Greek Tenses. The perfect is used less frequently than the present, aorist, future,
or imperfect; when it is used, there is usually a deliberate choice on the part of the writer [or speaker]. The force of
the perfect tense is simply that it describes an event that, completed in the past (we are speaking of the perfect
indicative here), has results existing in the present time (i.e., in relation to the time of the speaker). Or, as Zerwick
puts it, the perfect tense is used for indicating not the past action as such but the present state of affairs resulting
from the past action.
141
This means that Phillip was not only looking at God the Father at that very
moment, but every time he saw Jesus in the past!

Jesus continued His teaching on His supreme Deity by telling Philip: Dont you believe that I am
in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you are not just my own [or of this humanity], rather it is
the Father living [meno] in Me, who is doing His work. Believe Me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father
is in Me; or at least believe on the evidence of the miracles themselves (Jn 14:10-11; NIV). The verb participle
meno is in the present tense and active voice. This means Jesus told Philip that God the Father at
that very moment was dwelling inside His Human body. Professor Bauer defined meno to mean:
someone who does not leave a certain realm or sphere: remain, continue, [or] abide the Father, who abides in me J
14:10.
142


To paraphrase what Jesus said: Have I the Father been with you all this time, and you still don't know
who I am, or You claim to be My children and you do not even know who I am. These disciples like so
many Trinitarians, Jehovahs Witnesses, and Mormons could not see past the veil of flesh. This is
why these religious sects always take these verses and allegorically interpret then to say: I am in
union with the Father and the Father is in union with Me. It is the Father dwelling in union with Me. Oh, what
twisted perverted nonsense of Greek grammar men can use to pervert the great and precious
71
truth of the Word of God! I continually praise God for this wonderful truth that will set the
captive free from Satan's Babylonian-Catholic-Protestant Trinity of three persons in the
godhead.

Dr. Mayer commenting on these verses wrote: We must add here another ground of... the mysterious
union subsisting between the man Jesus Christ and the godhead.... He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father. I
am in the Father and the Father in Me. I and the Father are one. There is no such union elsewhere in the universe;
God is not so united with any other man, nor with any other intelligence. Christians are the temple of God; the
Spirit of God dwells in them; they have fellowship with the Father; but it is nowhere said that all the fullness of the
godhead dwells in them bodily; and none of them can dare say, he that seeth Me hath seen the Father. This union
was such that it was the Father that spake and taught in Christ, and was the Father dwelling in Him that wrought His
works.
143


Jesus not only told Philip and all of His apostles the truth concerning His true identity, but the
entire religious world, when He cried out and proclaimed: He who sees Me [i.e. His Humanity] sees Him
[meaning the Father] who sent Me (Jn 12:45). How many times does Jesus have to tell the Jehovahs
Witnesses, Mormons, and Trinitarian theologians that He is the visible fleshly body or humanity
of God the Father before they start believing Him? On a different occasion, Jesus told the
religious leaders and Jewish masses: I and My Father are one [heis]. Then the Jews took up stones again to
stone Him. Jesus answered them, Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works
do you stone Me? The Jews answered Him, saying, For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy
because You being a Man make Yourself God (Jn 10:30-33). The Greek word heis as I have stated before
means: one in number not in unity!

Since the Jews only believe in and taught one God, who was the Father, they without dispute
understood that Jesus claimed to be God the Father. As soon as our Savior revealed His identity
to the religious world, they were ready to kill Him! Is it not ironic that Trinitarian preachers
today are ready to crucify Gods people for saying the very same thing that Jesus told these
religious leaders, i.e. He was YHWH in a human nature or He was God the Fathers visible Self?

This murderous religious spirit did not changed over the centuries. History definitely reveals
that Catholic Popes and priests, as well as Protestant Reformers and pastors of every century
have hated this great Biblical truth. Millions of Gods people, throughout the centuries have
gladly allowed themselves to be burnt alive at the stake, then deny the supreme deity of the Lord
Jesus Christ. John Calvin had Doctor Miguel Servetus burned alive at the stake on October 27,
1553 for writing books that proclaimed Jesus Christ was God the Father in flesh. If my readers
would like to read about this event, I would recommend my book entitled A History of Oneness
Throughout the Centuries.

Thomas Acknowledged the Supreme Deity of Jesus

Thomas unquestionably and unequivocally proclaimed Jesus Christ was the one and only true
God when he cried out to Jesus and said: My LORD [YHWH] and my God (Jn 20:28). In the Greek NT
this verse reads this way: e sute, eu sat e .e, eu i.e. the LORD of me and the God of me. Can
anyone deny the fact that Thomas, who was a devout Jew, who believed in one and only one God,
acknowledged Jesus as God the Father i.e. YHWH of the Old Testament?

I can remember a discussion I had with an elder in the Jehovahs Witnesses on the Supreme
Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ. I showed him this scripture in The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of
the Greek Scriptures (T.K.I.G.S.), and said: As you can clearly see, Thomas called Jesus ho Theos, the God, i.e.
72
the one and only true God. He replied: You must understand, Thomas was in shock in seeing His master raised
from the dead. He said this in a state of total amazement. He did not mean to imply that Jesus was the God or
Jehovah.

I said: I cannot imagine any Jew in Jesus day making a statement like this, regardless of what condition he
found himself in, unless he truly believed it. For if it was not true, this Jew knew, he would be guilty of blasphemy.
Not only this Jesus should have rebuke him for this, if Thomas statement was not true. Therefore, by your
interpretation of this verse, you make Jesus a sinner, because Jesus did not rebuke Thomas, but accepted what he
said as a statement of truth! Not only this, but there are other places in the NT where Jesus is called ho Theos.

John Acknowledged the Supreme Deity of Jesus

John fearlessly and passionately declared to all who love our Savior: In the beginning was the
Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God (Jn 1:1). This verse in T.K.I.G.S., i.e., the Watch
Towers perverted translation of the Bible, reads like this: the Word was a god. The reason the so-
called apostles or little flock, who write all their literature give for this translation is: In the original
Greek there is no definite article ho [the] before Theos. The reason for their rendering the Greek word divine and
not God is that the Greek noun Theos is without the definite article, hence an anarthrous Theos.
144


The Arian Watch Towers argument against Jesus deity in this passage of Scripture is
basically this: Since the definite Greek article ho is absent before Theos in this verse, there is no way John could
have meant to say that Jesus was the supreme or true God. I absolutely disagree with them that the article
ho has to be before Theos or the scripture cannot possible be speaking of the true supreme deity.
Therefore, before we examine the rules of Greek grammar on the anarthrous Theos, let us quote
this verse in the Greek NT: E| a, | e e,e, sat e e,e, | :e, e| .e| sat .e , | e e ,e,; i.e. In
the beginning was the Logos, and the Logos was with the God and God was the Logos.

Let my beloved readers take note to the fact, the predicate noun God precedes the verb was.
Dr. Daniel Wallace, in his Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, spoke of this and the anarthrous
article use in the Greek NT. He declared: Statement of the Rule - Colwells rule is as follows: Definite
predicate nouns which precede the verb usually lack the article . . . a predicate nominative which precedes the verb
cannot be translated as an indefinite or a qualitative noun solely because of the absence of the article; if the context
suggests that the predicate is definite, it should be translated as a definite noun.
145


According to this Greek rule of grammar, the context must define whether the predicate noun
God, in this verse, should be understood to refer to the God. The preposition with i.e. pros in
this verse definitely shows a relationship between the Logos and the God. The million-dollar
question is what is the relationship the Word had with God? Trinitarian preachers believe the
Logos existed with the God throughout eternity past as the eternal Son of God. The Arian
Jehovahs Witnesses believe the Word was created as a separate person from the God in the
beginning of time, and existed with the God as a god.

Therefore, there is nothing in the above verse that would inform an unbiased student of the
Bible, that John was speaking of two different gods, persons, or beings. Because of this reason, it
is only logical to assume that the God is the same God that John called the Logos! The only safe
and real way to prove this is by allowing other scriptures to interpret this scripture. Now since
Jesus is definitely called the God i.e. the one and only true God in Matthew 1:23 and John 20:28, and
the one and only Eternal Father in Isaiah 9:6, as I have already shown, there can no doubt that the
God in John 1:1 is the Logos. These are just a few scriptures I will use in this chapter to prove
Jesus is God the Father.
73

Now in the New Testament, there are 282 occurrences of the anarthrous .e,. There are many
places in the Greek NT where it speaks of the true and supreme God and the Greek article ho
i.e. the is missing, for example in the JWs New World Translation (NWT) of the Bible we read:
Moses calls Jehovah the God of Abraham and a God of Isaac and a God of Jacob. He is a God not of the dead, but
of the living (Lk 20:37-38; also see Mt 6:24; 19:26; Lk 2:52; 20:38; Acts 5:39; Rom 2:17; 8:8, 27; 2Co 1:21; 5:1; 6:7;
Gal 2:19; 4:8; Phi 3:9; 1Th. 2:5; 2Th 1:8; Tit 1:16; Heb 3:4). I would like my JW friends to look up these
scriptures in their Greek interlinear or any Bible translation, and they would soon discover that
the definite Greek article ho is absent. Does this mean these passages of Scripture are not
speaking of the one and only true God because the Greek article ho is missing? Of all the
Watchtowers good blind slaves, I have asked this question to, not one ever said no.

Let my JW friends also examine one of their favorite verses of scripture: No man has seen God at
any time (Jn 1:18). In the NWT this verse reads: a God. Now is this passage of Scripture also
referring to the true God? Tell me friend where is the definite Greek article ho in this verse!
Since all Jehovah Witnesses acknowledge that this verse refers to the true God and the Greek
article ho is missing, they have no biblical grounds to deny the supreme deity of the Lord Jesus
Christ in John 1:1. Let the JW look in their interlinear again, and they will discover to their
dismay that the Bible in other places calls Jesus ho Theos or the one and only true God, as I have
already proved above.

Dr. Mayer commenting on John 1:1 wrote: The union of the man Jesus Christ is specifically with the
Word, the Logos: And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, John 1:14.... Of this Word or Logos the apostle
says, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God, John 1:1. There is
therefore a sense in which the Word is distinct from God and can be said to be with God; and there is a sense also in
which he is not distinct but the same: The Word was God. It is in the latter sense that John views the Word when
instead of saying, The Word which is in Me, He says, The Father who is in me; meaning by the term Father the
godhead. So, also, the apostle Paul viewed the Word or Logos. The same view is taken in all the places, so far as I
remember, where this apostle speaks of the divinity in Christ; for he makes no distinction between that divinity and
the Jehovah who was the object of worship to the Israelites.
146


Another way of interpreting this verse is by realizing that the Word was another name for the
Soul of God. Therefore, this verse could read this way: In the beginning was the Humanity of God, and
the Humanity of God was with God, and the Humanity of God was God, that is, Gods Visible Human Self.
Since God the Father begot His own Human Nature, that is, His Holy Spirit, Soul and Spiritual
Body Natures from His own Spirit Substance, and will eternally dwell in His Human Visible Self,
no one can separate His three separate and distinct natures and make three separate and distinct
gods, persons, or beings out of them. It would be like Trinitarian preachers teaching that mans
spirit, soul, and body are three separate and distinct persons, which would be utter nonsense to
any intelligent mind! The Soul of God the Father will be examined in the next chapter.

The apostle John again speaking of Jesus as the one and only true God wrote: we are in Him
that is true, even in His Son Jesus Christ; this is the true God [e at|e, O.e,] and Eternal Life (1Jn 5:20). Now if I
was a Trinitarian preacher and believed in three gods or persons, I would have to ask myself
which person of the Godhead is John referring to as ho Theos in this passage of Scripture?
Praise God since oneness Christians do not believe in Lucifers Babylonian-Catholic-Protestant
Trinity, Satan cannot blind their minds with this kind of confusion. If my beloved readers have
any doubts as to whom John refers to by the terms the true God and Eternal Life, then allow John to
explain himself. John declare in another place: The Life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we
proclaim to you the Eternal Life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us (1Jn 1:1-2; NIV). Now what
74
can be clear than this, the Lord Jesus Christ is the true God and Eternal Life for He is God the
Fathers visible Human Self.

John also wrote: the Lord God of the holy prophets sent His angel to show His servants the things which
must shortly take place (Rev 22:6). Now if I was a Trinitarian preacher, I would have to ask myself
who is the Lord God John spoke of in this verse? Well do not worry about it preacher, your JW
friends have the answer for you. In T.K.I.G.S. this verse reads this way: Jehovah the God of the
inspired expressions of the prophets sent His angel. Now the great Apostolic Pentecostal Apostle does not
leave His beloved readers in doubt as to whom he meant by this title; for in verse 16 we read: I,
Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things in the churches. By allowing scripture to interpret
scripture, it is easy to perceive that the Lord Jesus Christ is YHWH or the one and only true
God. I am sure that once the Watch Towers false apostles realizes this, they will perverted these
verses, just as they have done with all the others verses on the deity of Christ.

Paul Acknowledged Jesus as God the Father

The great apostle Paul quoting the prophet David called Gods prophetic Son ho Theos i.e.
the God. Paul wrote: But to the Son He says: Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; A scepter of
righteousness is the scepter of Your Kingdom (Heb 1:8). In the Greek New Testament and in the Greek
Septuagint of the OT this verse, which is also found in Psalms 45:6, reads thus: e e|e, ceu e .e,
.t, e| at.|a eu at.|e, aee, .uue, aee, , act.ta, ceu. Both Greek versions use the phrase
ho Theos to refer to Jesus. Verse 7 of this Psalm reveals that God the Father Humanity Nature
love righteousness and hate wickedness; therefore [i.e. because of this reason] God, Your God, has anointed You [Gods
Humanity] with the oil of gladness more than Your [human] companions.

Now all the Jehovahs Witnesses and Trinitarian preachers who have read this book thus far
should repent of denying the supreme Deity of our dear Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. They
should start confessing Him as God the Fathers one and only Human Self, for Gods Holy Spirit,
Soul, and Human Body is the God the Fathers one and only dwelling place (Col 2:9). There is no
way any angel or man can see and communicate with God any other way than through the
Fathers Human Visible Self. Christ is the only mouth, voice, image, form, body, or human
nature that God the Father will ever have!!!

Paul admonished the church to understand the: mystery of God, both of the Father and of Christ... lest
anyone should deceive you with persuasive words (Col 2:2-4). In this verse, Paul obviously declared that
the godhead is a mystery; but wait a minute preacher, let us look at the context of these verses
and see if the apostle does not explain this mystery. Paul knew that false prophets would come
and deceive some of Gods people concerning this great mystery, this is why he said under the
anointing and inspiration of God: Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit,
according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ. For in
Him [not them] dwells all [not 1/3] the fullness of the godhead [the office of Father, Son, & Holy Ghost] bodily (verses 8-9).

The apostle Paul prophetically warned the church of the early Catholic Ante Nicene Gnostic
Priests who would pervert this truth by teaching the philosophies of Philo and Plato, i.e. the
Godhead consisted of two unequal gods or persons, the Father being the one and only true God
and the Son a lesser or inferior god. Therefore the great apostle told us in very clear and precise
language, what the mystery of the godhead is. He indisputably or incontestably told us that the
entire godhead dwells in the body or human nature of one person, the Lord Jesus Christ. In other words,
everything that makes God, God, dwells in Christs Human Body; this includes not only Gods
75
attributes but also His very essence. In fact, the godhead of the present, the past and the future
dwelt in Christ. The Word or Christ has always been, is right now, and will ever be, the one
body, image, person, or Human Nature of God the Father.

Dr. Mayer made this interesting comment about the above verse: That it was not one distinction
only [meaning one person] in the godhead, but the whole godhead that was united with the man Jesus is plain from those
words of Paul.... All the fullness of the godhead cannot be one distinction in it, exclusive of the two other distinctions,
unless it be that each of the three distinctions be mere mode or aspect of the same fullness.
147
As stated before,
the Expositor's Greek Testament defined the Greek words used in this verse this way: En auto is
emphatic, in Him and in Him alone. Katoikei [means] permanently dwells.... Pan [or all] is emphatic, the whole
fullness dwells in Christ.... The addition of theotetos defines pl as the fullness of deity. The word is to be
distinguished from theiotes being divine or God-like [used in Acts 17:29].... All the fullness of the godhead dwells in
Christ; therefore, it is vain to seek it wholly or partially outside of Him. Theotes is not to be taken to mean the
perfection of divinity that is ideal holiness or any of the attributes [such as theiotes implies]. The passage thus asserts the
real Deity of Christ.
148


In Synonyms of the New Testament, Archbishop R. C. Trench spoke about the differences
between the Greek words theotes used in Colossians 2:9 and theiotes used in Roman 1:20. He wrote:
We have rendered both by godhead; yet they must not be regarded as identical in meaning, nor even as two different
forms of the same word.... On the contrary, there is a real distinction between them and on which grounds itself, on
their different derivations; theotes being from theos [God or Deity], and theiotes being from the adjective theios
[godlike]. St. Paul is declaring that in the Son there dwells all the fullness of the absolute godhead. He was, and is,
absolute and perfect God; and the apostle uses theotes to express this essential and personal godhead of the Son.
149


The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia commenting on Colossians 2:9 declared: The
phrase fullness of the godhead is an emphatic one. It means everything without exception that goes to make up the
godhead, the totality of all that enters into the conception of the godhead. All this says Paul dwells in Christ bodily.
The term (theotes) chosen to express the godhead here is the strongest and most decisive which language can afford....
All the fullness of the Supreme Deity dwells in Christ bodily. Paul wishes here to assert that all that enters into the
conception of God, and makes God what we mean by the term God, dwells in Christ.
150
Even the Emphatic
Diaglott, which is the old Jehovahs Witnesses Greek interlinear, translated theotes as: the Deity
and not as a deity or godlike or divine qualities. It therefore acknowledged Jesus Christ to
be the true one and only true Deity.

My beloved readers should be able to perceive from all the above quotes that these Biblical
Scholars definitely declared that the entire Godhead permanently dwells in one person and only
one person and that is Christ, who is God the Fathers visible Human Self. Since the godhead
consist: of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, this means the apostle Paul emphatically preached
that these three offices of the Godhead dwells in the body of Christ Jesus and in Him alone.

Paul declared that Father God was [en] in Christ reconciling the world to Himself [not themselves] (2Co
5:19). If you will remember we have already discovered in 1 Corinthians 8:4-6 that the Father is the
one and only God; so this can only mean that it was the Father in Christ reconciling the world to
Himself. Therefore, Jesus is God because He is the Father, not because He is the Son of God. The
verb | comes from .t t and is in the imperfect or past tense, active voice, third person, and
singular number. This means God existed or lived in Christ at that time and in the past. Jesus not only
claimed that the Father lived in Him, but that He was God the Fathers visible self or humanity
(Jn 14:6-11).

The Watch Tower in their Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures translated
the above scripture on the translation side as: God was by means of Christ reconciling a world to
76
Himself. Notice, the so-called little flock translated the Greek en Xtc. as by means of Christ, and
on the Greek interlinear side in their word for word translation that appeared under each Greek
word, it read: God was in Christ. Gee, I presume the very little flock must have been confused and
forgot the meaning of this Greek preposition, or perhaps someone at their headquarters whom
the very little flocks salary gave his infallible command to change it. They evidently figured that the
true translation did not rob Jesus of His true Deity, so they decided to pervert it just as they
perverted all other scriptures that declared that Jesus is the one and only true God.

If any JW has any doubt to what the Greek preposition en i.e. in means, let Professors H. E.
Dana and J.R. Mantey settle the question for them. In their book entitled A Manual Grammar of
the Greek New Testament, they declared: En root meaning: [is] within.
151
If the Jehovahs Witnesses
still have any doubts concerning the basic meaning of this preposition, then let them go to the
first page of their interlinear to the section entitled, Diagram Illustrating Basic Meanings of Greek
Prepositions, and read what their so-called 144,000 heavenly apostles wrote about this preposition. The
very little flock declared: the Greek preposition en means in and the Greek preposition dia
means by means of. Now isnt that an eye open to all the blind slaves of the Jehovahs Witnesses
who put all their trust in their false apostles.

Even when someone points this out to them, as I have many times, they still refuse to believe
it. So, will one of them please tell me why they refuse to believe something their so-called
infallible Watch Tower published? What will the JW say when they stand before the Lord Jesus
Christ, the Almighty God, and He accuses them of denying His absolute supreme deity? They
will no doubt be speechless as Gods angels drag them away and violently cast them into the
Lake of Fire. In fact, what will Trinitarian preachers say when God accuses them of teaching the
Catholic-Babylonian Trinity?

The apostle Paul again confirmed the supreme Deity of Jesus when enthusiastically and
emphatically preached the eternally blessed [.ue,e,] God (Ro 9:5). The word enthusiasm is from three
Greek word entheos meaning inspired, en meaning in, and theos meaning god. Gee, I wonder what
god is in the Jehovahs Witnesses and Trinitarian Preachers, who inspires them to deny the
supreme Deity of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ? This so-called god is definitely not a god I
want to inspire me! The word blessed is the Greek word .ue,e, i.e. eulogetos, which is an
adjective and not a verb; therefore, according to the rules of grammar it modifies or describes
God. Since it is not a verb, it cannot refer to an action from God, such as being blessed of God. If
Paul wanted his readers to understand that Jesus was blessed of God, he would have made
eulogetos a verb and put Theos in the genitive or possessive case instead of the nominative case.
Therefore, this phrase must be translated as: the blessed God or the exalted God, it cannot be
translated as blessed of God.

In 1849 a oneness Congregational pastor by the name of Dr. Horace Bushnell wrote a book
entitled God in Christ; in it he made this very interesting statement: In the great work of redemption,
the Father is the Son whom He sends. He prays to Himself, submits to His own will, offers an atonement to
Himself, and ascends at last to His own bosom.
152
Now here is a man who definitely understands the two
separate and distinct natures of the one person who is known to us as the Lord Jesus Christ. This
man definitely did not confuse Jesus human nature with His nature as the one and only Deity,
the Creator of the universe.

Paul emphatically declared the supreme Deity of Jesus when he wrote: God was manifested in the
flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen by angels, preached among the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up in
77
glory (1Ti 3:16). Let all my JW and Trinitarian Preacher friends take note, according to Paul, who
was manifested in the flesh? Was it Michael the archangel as the JW teaches, or someone known
as the eternal Son of God as Trinitarian Pastors teach? No, no, a million times no! Paul declared
it was the one true God who loved the human race so much that He became man so he could
redeem us from our sins!!

Since some of the newer translations of the Bible, like the perverted New World Translation,
erroneously translated this verse to read: He was manifested in the flesh, let us see what authority
they used to do so. The Textus Receptus or the Received Text used the Greek word Theos that is
God in this verse. The newer versions used two corrupted Greek Manuscripts to support their
erroneous translation. One Greek Text was called the Vaticanus and the other Sinaiticus. In both of
these manuscripts the Greek pronoun os which means he was used.

As history reveals, the King James Translators had the Vaticanus Greek manuscript but
refused to use it. They claimed that Eusebius of Caesarea corrupted this manuscript by
perverting the scriptures that spoke of the Deity of Jesus, the virgin birth, and other subjects. It
is a well-known fact of history that Eusebius, alone with Origen, was accused of denying the
Deity of Christ. Eusebius definitely had an affinity toward Arianism. This man, who was a great
admirer of Origen, was order by Emperor-Pope Constantine in 331 AD to prepare 50 Greek New
Testaments of which only the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus have come down to us today. In fact,
Eusebius took his Greek Text from Origens Hexapla.

Jasper James Ray, in his book entitled God Wrote Only One Bible, informed us that there are:
2,864 cursive and uncial manuscripts of the New Testament in whole or in part. It has been acknowledged, even
by some enemies, that nineteen-twentieths of these manuscripts are in accord with the Received Text.... Dean Burgon,
Presbendary Miller, Dr. Scrivener, and others uphold the Textus Receptus. [They all boldly declare that] the Sinaitic
and Vaticanus, with their fellow allies were scanty survivals of a corrupt tradition.
153
Jehovahs Witnesses
claim that most of the Greek manuscripts read: he instead of God was manifested in the flesh.
Manuscript evidence proves them wrongs again. The fourth and fifth century Greek manuscripts like
Alexandrinus, Ephraimi, K, P, and sixth century Psi. 81, 88, 104, 181, 326, 330, 436, 451, 614, 629, 630, 1241, 1739,
1881, 1962, 1984, 1985, 2592 and 2495 all read, God was manifested in the flesh.

Not only did these ancient Greek manuscripts read this way, but ancient Bible translations
translated it that way also, such as the Peshitta or Syrian Bible and the Italic Bible. The Syrian Bible was
used in Antioch Syria in 150 AD, and the Italic Bible was used in Italy, France, Great Britain and
Africa in 157 AD. Both of these ancient translations were translated from the first century Greek
Vulgate. Therefore, my beloved readers must choose which Greek Text he or she is going to
believe; as for me and my house, we choose the Textus Receptus.

Paul again confirmed Jesus supreme Deity when he told Gods children that we they keep:
the doctrine of God our Savior (Tit 2:10, NIV). In verse 13, Paul indisputably told us who he meant by
the term Savior; for he told all who truly believe in the Deity of Christ that we should: wait for
the blessed hope, the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ. In the Greek NT the last
part of this verse read thus: eu .,aeu O.eu sat c.e, .| `Iceu Xtceu. The conjunction and
is the Greek word kai and it means: and, also, even, so then, too, etc. (Strong, # 2532). Therefore, this
verse could be translated this way: of the great God even the Savior of us Jesus Christ.

The Jehovahs Witnesses would interpret the above verse, and all others like it, to mean that
there are two persons, one person called God i.e. the Father and the other Jesus Christ our
78
Savior. Trinitarian Preachers would definitely take issue with them and say there is only one
person mention here and that is Jesus Christ, who has two titles or holds two different positions,
one called the God and the other the Savior.

If the JW and the Trinitarian Preacher cannot decide which interpretation is correct than let
God the Father interpret this passage of Scripture for them; for He declared: I am [not we are] the
LORD; and beside Me [not us] there is no Savior (Isa 43:11). Therefore, Jesus Christ has to be the Human
Nature of God the Father or the Bible contradicts itself. Oh, by the way this interpretation is also
the one God, Jesus Name interpretation of this Scripture, i.e. the Lord Jesus Christ as the
Humanity of God the Father is the one and only Savior of mankind!

Jude and Peter Acknowledged the Supreme Deity of Jesus

Jude, the brother of our Lord in the flesh, informed us that false prophets denied, disowned,
or renounced: our only [monos] Master, God, and LORD, Jesus Christ (Jude 1:4 YLT). In the Greek NT
the above phrase reads thus: e| e|e| e.c:e | O.e |, sat Ku te| . | `Iceu| Xtce| a |eu .|et. The
Greek verb participle a |eu .|et or arneomai i.e. denying is in the present tense. All the Greek
words in this passage are in the accusative case or used as direct objects, except the pronoun
. | i.e. of us, which is in the genitive or possessive case. The adjective monos means as stated
above: only or alone, i.e. no other.

Since all of the Greek words are used as direct objects, they must follow the verb participle
denying and not precede it! Therefore, this verse could also read: the only Master, God, and LORD
of us, Jesus Christ. Praise God, Jude definitely knew who His earthly brother was, for he
indisputable declared that Jesus Christ was his only Master, his only God, and his only LORD
i.e. YHWH. Two thousand years have pass since Jude made this declaration, and Satan still uses
men, like the Jehovahs Witnesses and Trinitarian Pastors whom he has deceived, to deny the
Supreme Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ!

The apostle Peter also acknowledged Jesus Supreme Deity when he declared: To those who
have obtained like precious faith with us by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ (2Pe 1:1); the
Greek NT says it this way: eu .eu .| sat c.e, `Iceu Xtceu. Let all my JW friends take note
that the article the modifies the noun God, therefore Peter is speaking of ho Theos i.e. the God
or the one and only true God. Let them also take note to the fact that every word in this phrase is in
the genitive or possessive case. A literal translation of this verse could read thus: by the
righteousness of the God and Savior of us Jesus Christ.

Peter like Jude and Paul definitely did not want Gods children to become deceived by false
prophets concerning the Supreme Deity of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Oh, when will the
enemies of Christ ever stop robbing our sweet and gentle redeemer of His full Deity; for the JW
makes him a demigod, Trinitarian Pastors make Him one of three persons, beings, or gods, and
the Mormons make Him one of a multitude of gods.

Let us take a few minutes to examine the Mormon belief that Jesus is God the Father. What
do they mean by this title? As one examines their beliefs, they will discover that their
understanding of this title is very different from what the Bible and oneness Pentecostals teach.
Since I am a firm believer in reading the original writings whenever possible, which in this case
79
would be the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon, i.e. the 1st edition, all quotes from this demonic
inspired book will be from this edition.

I spent several months comparing the 1
st
edition with the newer editions and here is some of
the things I discovered concerning their godhead teachings. In the First Book of Nephi, we read
about a fictitious prophet whose name was Nephi, who supposedly lived in the time of Zedekiah,
king of Judah. Well as the fairytale goes, Nephi was carried away in the Spirit of God and saw in
a vision the Lords earthly Mother Mary. An angel said to him: Behold, the virgin which thous seest, is
the mother of God, after the flesh. And I looked and beheld the virgin again, bearing a child in her arms. And the
angel said unto me, behold the Lamb of God, yea even the Eternal Father.
154


All later editions read: the mother of the Son of God, and the Lamb of God, yea even the Son of the Eternal
Father. I presume the Hierarchy of Mormonism did not want their blind slaves confuse on how
Mary was the known as the mother of God, so they changed Smiths writings to read: the mother
of the Son of God. They did this because they teach that Jesus before He became the Son of God at
Bethlehem through Mary, he had a goddess mother on another planet who begot him in eternity
past as God. Therefore, they did not their blind slaves to believe that Jesus had two women who
were known as the mother of God. In addition, they did not want their blind worshippers to think
that Smith was teaching that Jesus did not have a Father who was His God. Therefore, they
changed both of these passages. As my beloved readers can easily perceive, this is a major
doctrinal change.

The above is only one of many places, where the Mormon elite changed their prophets
teachings. Here is one more example: the Lamb of God is the Eternal Father and Saviour of the world. In
the new edition chapter 13:40, they changed Smiths book to read: the son of the Eternal Father.
155

When one reads all the changes the Mormon Hierarchy have added to Smiths writings and
lectures, you cannot help but wonder why they can consider Smith to be their infallible prophet.

In the Book of Mosiah, a fictitious king by the name of Benjamin, who lived after the time of
Nephi, made a supposedly prophecy concerning the birth of the Lord Jesus Christ. He said: For
behold, the time cometh, and is not far distant, that with power, the Lord Omnipotent who reigneth, which was, and
is from all eternity to all eternity, shall come down from Heaven, among the children of men, and shall dwell in a
tabernacle of clay. And he shall be called Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Father of Heaven and Earth, the
creator of all things, from the beginning; and his mother shall be called Mary.
156


I suppose Smiths demons conjured up all these prophets, who named Christ as Jesus and
His mother as Mary, supposedly centuries before Jesus was born of Mary, is so his readers would
believe that these prophets were greater than any of the prophets of the Old Testament in the
Bible. In other words, these demons wanted their readers to believe that the Book of Mormon
had to be greater than the true Word of God, i.e. the Holy Bible! This is why I believe Smith was
demon possessed.

In the same Book of Mosiah, we can read about another fictitious prophet by the name of
Abinadi who supposedly prophesied and said: I would that ye should understand that God himself shall
come down among the children of men, and shall redeem his people; and because he dwelleth in flesh, he shall be
called the Son of God: and having subjected the flesh to the will of the Father, being the Father and Son; the Father,
because he was conceived by the power of God; and the Son, because of the flesh; thus becoming the Father and
Son: and they are one God, yea, the very eternal Father of Heaven and of Earth; and thus the flesh becoming
subject to the Spirit, or the Son to the Father, being one God, suffereth temptation.
157


80
Now why would these demon spirits, who controlled Joseph Spirit, want him to place the truth
of the Godhead in his book? I believe it was for three reasons: 1
st
) These demons were mocking
God and His truth. 2
nd
) They were hoping to draw simple-minded Oneness Pentecostals into
Mormonism. 3
rd
) They knew that Joseph Smith had already perverted this truth, when he
claimed that God the Father and God the Son came to him and ordained him to be their prophet, and
commissioned him to restore all the truth that the Catholic Church took away. This supposedly commission
took place before he started preaching, and before Smith fabricated the Book of Mormon.
Therefore, these demons knew that Mormon people would not believe that Joseph Smith taught
or believed in only one God.

Not only this, but the Mormon Church teaches the old pagan Babylonian doctrine of the
godhood of Man, which Mormons call the doctrine of Eternal Progression. This doctrine is
basically this: Jesus came down from a planet called Heaven, with one of His many wives called Eve, and started
the Human race, i.e. Jesus was the 1
st
Adam. Therefore, He became known as God and Father of the human race.
Now Jesus has a Father and mother on another planet, whom are his gods, as well as gods to all their other children.
In addition, Jesus mother and Father have a mother and Father on another planet, whom are gods to all their
children, and the progression of gods goes on. This is why, if you have ever taken a tour in one of their
temples, you will hear your guide say several times: As God was, so man can become. This doctrine is
what God showed pagan king Nebuchadrezzar as an image of a deified man, which has been the
foundational doctrine of Mystery Religion in ever century.

In 1984, I live in Silver City, NM, and I was sitting in the office of a Mormon professor that
taught at Western New Mexico University. I pointing out to Him the major doctrinal changes
that were made in the Book of Mormon, and then I worked my way through the first edition of
the Doctrines and Covenant, i.e. the 1835 edition, which were the lectures Joseph Smith. I then
showed him that Smith never taught most of the major offices that were in the Church of the Latter Day Saints,
and that evidently one of their prophets or someone in their Hierarchy Structure took Smiths
teachings, and add about a page to his lecture, naming these offices and describing their
functions.

I then asked him how he would explain these changes. He said: Are you familiar with our doctrine
of Progressive Revelation? I responded: Yes sir, I am. If I understand it correctly, it simple means that the
prophet in office could change any revelation of the past. In a sense, the prophet in office is like the Catholic Pope,
who supposedly speaks for God. He replied: You have got it. Obviously some prophet after Joseph Smith, who
had the same spirit as Joseph Smith, knew Joseph Smith was suppose to teach these office at that time, but for some
reason he did not, so he decided to add them into Joseph Smith lectures. I told him: If I was Mormon, and I
believe in your doctrine of Progressive Revelation, I can see how that could be possible. But I have one problem with
that, why is there not a footnote stating what you said, so the reader would know that Joseph Smith is really not
saying these things, for without a footnote, this is nothing but a lie, a clear deception that the Mormon people are
hoodwink or suckered into believing.

He replied: It must have been an oversight. I then told him: Sir, you and I both know why this footnote
is not there. Every Mormon believes that God commissioned Joseph Smith to restore all the truth back into the
Church. If this is true, then one must conclude that either Joseph Smith was a false prophet and God did not
commission him to do this, or the prophet who added these officers to the hierarchy structure of the Mormon
Church was a false prophet. Either way it proves Mormonism to be a false religion! At this point, he asked
me to leave. I have always been amazed at how intelligent men can fall for this type of religious
nonsense. The answer is: they do not take Christ, His Word, and the salvation he offers seriously. Well, so
much for the occult teachings of Mormonism. Let us go back to the Deity of the Lord Jesus
Christ.

81
Comparison Between Old and New Testament Scriptures
Proves Christ to Be God the Father

One of the most illuminating ways to help honest hearted believers, to understand the
supreme deity of our Lord Jesus Christ, is by allowing scripture to interpret scripture. In other
words, compare the scriptures in which God the Father speaks of Himself, or proclaims what He
has done, or will do, with those that reveal that Christ was the one who fulfilled those passages of
scriptures. In any exegesis of scriptural truths, one of the greatest hermeneutical principles is the
principle of comparison of scriptures. In comparing scriptures, one should ask himself or herself
these questions: Who is speaking? Who is being spoken of? What is being said? When and where
was it said? If it was prophecy, who fulfilled it? In other words, did the speaker say he would
personally fulfill it or did he say another would fulfill it?

As long as Trinitarian theologians interpret the Word of God by their belief in the
Babylonian-Catholic Trinity, and the Jehovahs Witnesses interpret it by their Arian belief, all of
the following scriptures will be nothing but confusion to them. The Devil will no doubt
continually tell them that the godhead is a mystery and it cannot be understood, for the Bible to
them will seem to contradict itself. With these truths in mind, lets begin our comparison:

Who Is the One LORD? God the Father: Moses speaking to the Children of Israel said
the first and greatest commandment is: Hear, O Israel: the LORD our God is one LORD [YHWH] (Deu
6:4). The apostle Paul confirmed this truth when he told the Ephesians that there is only one [heis]
LORD, one [heis] faith, one [mia] baptism, one [heis] God and Father of all (Eph 4:4-5). As I have shown before,
the Greek preposition heis means: one in number and mia means: one in unity. The apostle Paul
speaking under the anointing of the Holy Spirit indisputably declared that there is one and only
one God in number, not unity. Then Paul identified this one God, he said it was YHWH the
Father.

YHWH speaking through the prophet Isaiah declared: There is no God else beside Me [no us], a just
God and a Savior; there is none beside Me [no us]. Look unto Me [no us], and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth; for
I am [not we are] God, and there is none else. By Myself have I sworn, the word is gone forth from My mouth in
righteousness, and shall not come back, that unto Me [no us] every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear (Isa
45:21-23). Gee, I wonder what the entire human race will swear to God the Father on that day.
Have no fear for the apostle Paul will give us the answer and remove all your doubts! Gods one
name in the OT is YHWH as I have already shown, and the King James translators translated it
as LORD 6,510 times, and it is translated throughout the Septuagint Greek OT as KURIOS.

Jesus: Paul quoted the above passage of Isaiah, in which he identified YHWH, the only God
and Savior as the Lord Jesus Christ. He declared: Therefore God [the Father] also has highly exalted Him
[His Humanity] and given Him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that
Jesus Christ is LORD, to the glory of God the Father (Phi 2:9-11). Therefore, by comparing both Old and
New Testament passages of Scripture, we can easily see the identity of our sweet Savior. Because
of this great truth, I beseech every Trinitarian preacher and JW by the love of Christ, not to wait
for the White Throne Judgment to bow their knee to Jesus, and confess Him as God the Father.
Please do not reject our dear Lords Supreme Deity any longer.

82
Paul called Christ the LORD many times in the New Testament. He began at his conversion
on the road to Damascus where he discovered the identity of the Lord Jesus Christ. This devout
Pharisee, who did not believe in Jesus Supreme Deity, saw Him in a vision as He shinned
brighter than the sun. Paul asked this radiant being: Who art You, LORD [KURIOS]? And the LORD
[KURIOS] said I am Jesus (Acts 9:5). Let us us remember, this young Jewish Pharisee knew only one
LORD and that was YHWH! He obviously knew from the brightness of the being he saw that this
person was God! As soon as Paul discovered that YHWH or God the Father was Jesus, the Bible
stated he was astonished and started trembling (vs 6). No doubt, that is how it will be at the
White Throne Judgment.

Paul speaking to the Church wrote: Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit
of God calls Jesus accursed, and no one can say [. ,.t] that Jesus is LORD [KURIOS] except by the Holy Spirit " (1Co
12:3). The Greek verb . ,.t means: to say, speak, tell, call, assert, or declare. This can only mean that
no one can verbally say or declare in writing that Jesus Christ is YHWH unless the Holy Ghost
anoints them to do so!! Permit me to prove the above statement. The Jews of Jesus day called
Him Lord, but did not believe that He was God. The Mormons call Jesus Lord, but they believe
He is one of a multitude of gods. Jehovahs Witnesses call Jesus Lord, but they believe that He is
Michael the archangel, who is not the true God in any sense of the word. Catholic Priests and the
Protestant Preachers call Jesus Lord, but they believe that He is 1\3 of God, or 1 of 3 gods in
Satan's Babylonian-Catholic Trinity. The Cults and Eastern Religions call Jesus Lord, but they
believe that Jesus is just one of many prophets.

All of these religious leaders interpret the word lord to mean: master, ruler or prophet. They
never associate it with Gods the Father name YHWH or LORD in the OT. Is the Holy Spirit of
God inspiring them to say or write this in their writings? The answer is obviously not, so this
Scripture can only mean that no one can write or call Jesus Christ LORD i.e. God the Father
unless it be by the direct unction of the Holy Ghost. This is how the Old Testament Prophets and
the New Testament Apostles and Disciples, after the Day of Pentecost, understood the word
Lord to mean as it applies to Christ. Any other interpretation of this word would rob Jesus of
His Deity. Therefore I plea with all my JW and Trinitarian Pastor friends, please stop robbing
our great and holy Savior, whom I know many of you love, of His full and supreme Deity?

Who Was Pierced in His Hands, Feet and Side? Jesus: When the disciples told
Thomas that our Lord was raised from the dead, he replied: Unless I see in His hands the print of the
nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into His side, I will not believe. After eight
days Jesus came and told Thomas: Reach your finger here, and look at My hands; and reach your hand
here, and put it into My side (Jn 20:24-27). This proves that our Lord still had these wounds in His
resurrected body. The apostle John speaking of Jesus said: Behold, He is coming with clouds, and every
eye will see Him, even they [the Jewish people] who pierced Him (Rev 1:7-8).

God the Father: The prophet Zechariah spoke of Jesus returned to the earth to setup His
Millennial Kingdom; it was at this time a Jew asked His Messiah: What are these wounds in Your
hands [yad]? Then He shall answer, those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends" (Zec 13:6, KJV).
The Jewish Publication Society translated it this way: What are these wounds between thy hands? Then
he shall answer: 'Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends (1917 ed.). Brentons translation
of the Greek Septuagint of the OT reads this way: What are these wounds between thine hands? And he
shall say, Those with which I was wounded in my beloved house [LEX]. According to Dr. Strong the
Hebrew word makkah means: a blow (in 2Chr.2v10, of the flail); by implication, a wound (#4347); and
83
yad is: a primitive word, a hand (#3027), and the KJV translators translated it as hand 1,349 times in
the OT.

Verses 2 & 8 leaves no room for doubt that the LORD i.e. YHWH is the speaker. Therefore, the I
who was wounded in His Hands had to be God the Father. Verses 2-5 reveals that the time this
event takes place is at Christs return, when all idols will be destroyed and all false prophets will
be killed in the land of Israel. Zechariah confirmed the above truth in another prophecy he
declared: YHWH said: I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace
and supplication; then they will look on Me [.] whom they pierced [daqar] (Zec 12:10). The Hebrew verb
particle daqar is: a primitive root, to stab (#1856); in other words, to stab or pierce through as with a
spear, sword, knife, or even a nail. The personal possessive pronoun Me i.e. . is 1
st
person
and singular number. Therefore, this verse must mean Me not Him or One, which would be
3
rd
person singular number.

According to the context in verses 7-8, YHWH is the one speaking. Verses 10-14 reveal that the
time period is at the end of the Great Tribulation Period i.e. the return of Christ to the earth; it
will be at this time Christ will pour out the Spirit of Grace upon the nation of Israel and forgive
their sins. According to these verses when Messiah openly shows Himself to these Jews, and they
finally realize that He is Jesus whom they have rejected for centuries, they will become smitten in
their hearts and a great weeping of repentance with take place in the nation. The prophet said it
this way: In that day there shall be a great mourning in Jerusalem, like the mourning at Hadad Rimmon in the
plain of Megiddo. And the land shall mourn, every family by itself: the family of the house of David by itself.

If Jesus is not God the Fathers own Humanity, then will some JW or Trinitarian Pastor
please tell me how and when God the Father had His hands and side pierced? By comparing the
statements of the apostle John with that of the prophet Zechariah, it is easy for one to perceive
that God the Father in His role as the Son of God will fulfill the prophecies in Zechariah and
Revelations. Thus, Jesus Christ must be the Almighty God or the Everlasting Father (Isa 9:6).

Who Created Man and the World? How many persons or gods created man and the
world, one, two, three, or more? Christ: The apostle John wrote that YHWH as the Word of God
was: in the world and the world was made by Him not them (Jn 1:10). The apostle Paul confirmed this
truth when he declared: For by Him [Christ] were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are on earth,
visible and invisible, whether thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: All things were created through
Him, and for Him (Col 1:15-16).

In the corrupted NWT, the Watch Tower inserting the word other in this verse, which reads:
all other things have been created through him. The word other is not in any Greek manuscript. It is
not even in the Interlinear Greek Scriptures of the JW. Now surely one would think they would
believe their own Interlinear, but they obviously do not when it come to the Supreme Deity of
Jesus. If ignorance of the Word of God could be classified as a blessing, they and the Jehovahs
Witnesses and the Mormons would be the most bless people on earth.

God the Father: The prophet Isaiah without dispute informed us that YHWH is the one and
only Creator. Isaiah declared this infallible truth this way: Thus says the LORD, your Redeemer, and
He [not they] who formed you from the womb: I am [not we are] the LORD, who makes all things, Who stretches out the
heavens all alone [not with the help of My Son], Who spreads abroad the earth by Myself [not with the help of My Son] (Isa
44:24). The Jewish Publication Society in their English translation of the Bible translated this
84
verse this way: I am [not we], the LORD, who made everything, Who alone [not with the help of My Son] stretched out
the heavens And unaided spread out the earth (Tanakh - 1985).

The Greek Septuagint used the Greek word e|e, or monos to express how God the Father
created the heavens i.e. the universe; it stated: . ,. sute, e cu|.. | :a|a . ..t|a e| eua|e| e|e,.; I.e. I am
the Lord that performs all things: I stretched out the heaven alone [monos]. Drs. Friberg defined e|e, or
monos as: (1) as without accompaniment alone (MT 14.23) (MK 4.10); (2) as singly existing only, lone (JN 17.3);
e . he alone (1T 6.16); (3) as isolated from others; (a) of persons alone, by oneself, solitary (JN 16.32); (b) of things
by itself, single (JN 12.24).
158


If Jesus is not the humanity of God the Father, i.e., the Fathers visible Self, as Trinitarian
theologians vehemently denounce and curse, then Jesus cannot be the Creator for the Father
clearly and distinctly declared He created man, the heavens, and the earth alone and by Himself.
He did not say He created everything with the help of two, three, or more beings helping Him. I
am not the one saying this, but almighty God said it in His Holy Infallible Word. Therefore,
there cannot be two or three creators or gods mention in this verse or any other. The Father
gives the credit of creation to Himself only and no one else.

God the Father speaking as the one and only Creator said: For thus says the LORD, Who created
the heavens, Who is God, Who formed the earth and made it, Who has established it, Who did not create it in vain,
Who formed it to be inhabited: I am [not we are] the LORD, and there is no other, and Indeed My [not our] hand has
laid the foundation of the earth, And My [not our] right hand has stretched out the heavens; When I [not we] call to
them, they stand up together (Isa 45:18, 48:13). Will some Trinitarian Doctor of Theology please tell me
what is the meaning of the words no other, or is that to complicated for them?

Can the words no other, by the stretch of ones imagination, mean two persons or gods working
with the Father created the universe with Him? I know to any rational person this sound
ridiculous, but this is how Trinitarian Theologians explain this phrase. They keep saying it is a
mystery, and to understand it you would have be God. Yes, it is a mystery sure enough, but it is
not a mystery that comes from God and His Word, it comes from Lucifers Mystery Babylon the
mother of all false religious systems and His Babylonian Trinity.

By comparing these Scriptures, one can perceive that Jesus Christ must be God the Father.
The Father clearly took credit for creation. He gave credit to no one but Himself. He boldly
stated for all those that have eyes to see and a heart to understand that He created all things
alone and by Himself. If one believes the Bible is true, and words in the Bible have exact
meaning, and every Word of God is Pure (Pro 30:5), then you need to give serious thought to the
words alone, by Myself, no other, and the singular pronouns use in these two passages of
scripture.

Let us compare Hebrew 1:10 with Psalms 102:25. God the Father: In Psalms we read: In the
beginning you [YHWH] laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands (NIV). Who
is the You mention in this verse? Let us look at the context. In verses 1, 12, 15, 16, 19, 21, 22, and 24
the speaker is identified as the LORD or God the Father. In the NWT, the Watch Tower substitutes
the name Jehovah for LORD in all these verses.

Now let us compare this passage with the same passage that is mention in Hebrew. Christ: In
the beginning, O LORD, you laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands (Heb
1:10, NIV). Who can deny that this passage is referring to the Lord Jesus Christ? The entire
85
context of scriptures surrounding this passage refers to Jesus. In verse 9, the Bible speaks about
the Lord Jesus as a man anointed with the oil of joy and so on. Therefore, the LORD or God the
Father in Psalms is Jesus in Hebrews.

It is obvious that the Watch Tower believed that the passage in Hebrew was referring to Jesus
because they did not translate the Greek word Kurios or LORD with the name Jehovah as
they did in Hebrews 2:13 and in fact 231 times in their New Testament. In the appendix of their
Bible, page 1456, they give this as the reason: Below we give a concordance of all places in this translation
where the name Jehovah occurs in the Christian Greek Scriptures. This is positive proof that they believe
Hebrews 1:10 is referring to the Lord Jesus Christ, as to the YHWH who laid the foundations of the earth.

Therefore, according to their own Bible, the Lord Jesus Christ must be the Father, the one
and only God. Now I am sure some good Watch Tower Slave with point this out to their Little
Flock or the so-called Anointed Ones. When they do, what will be the results? Well this Little
Flock will do as they have done many times in the past, they will just change or correct their
translation or doctrine, and the next generation of the Watch Towers blind slaves will never
even know that they change it.

Why all this deception? The answer is simple; the so-called Anointed Ones to the JW are their
infallible gods, for who among them is going to believe the doctrines of mere mortals who make
mistakes. This is exactly why the Mormons made Joseph Smith their infallible prophet, the
Seventh-Day Adventist made Ellen G. White their infallible prophetess, Christian Science made
Mrs. Mary Baker Eddy their infallible prophetess, the Branhamites made William Branham
their infallible prophet, the Catholics made their Pope their infallible prophet, and the list goes
on. They are all looking for their superstar to tell them what this or that means. The reason
being is that they do not know how to study the Bible for themselves, so they look to their gods to interpret
the Bible for them. This is exactly why I call them blind slaves! Is it deplorable that people will
put their faith and trust in everyone and everything except the only infallible One, the Lord
Jesus Christ and His infallible Word?

Who Is the Savior of All Mankind? Jesus: The angel of YHWH told Joseph that Marys
Son: will save His people from their sins (Mt 1:21). This same angel spoke to the shepherds and said:
For there is born to you this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the LORD (Lk 2:11). The apostle
Paul confirmed this truth when he wrote: we also eagerly wait for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ (Phi
3:20). Now both the angel and Paul told us that the Savior is the Lord Jesus Christ.

God the Father: God speaking about Himself said: I am [not we are] the LORD your God, the Holy One
[not the Holy us] of Israel, your Savior. You are My [not our] witnesses, says the LORD Before Me [not us] there was
no God formed, nor shall there be after Me. I, even I, am the LORD, and besides Me [not us] there is no Savior.
Therefore you are My witnesses, Says the LORD, that I am [not we are] God (Isa 43:3, 10-12); and There is no
other God besides Me [not us], A just God and a Savior; There is none besides Me; (Isa 45:21); and I the LORD
am [not we are] your Savior, and your Redeemer, the Mighty One of Jacob (Isa 49:26); and I am the LORD your
God ever since the land of Egypt, and you shall know no God but Me [not us]; For there is no Savior besides Me [not
us] (Hos 13:4).

If every Trinitarian Theologian and Pastor would mediate and study the above passages of
Scriptures prayerfully, our loving heavenly Father would surely reveal His identity to them.
Even Trinitarian Professor Walter Martin was forced to admit that Jesus was YHWH the Savior,
when he declared: Many times Jehovah declares His existence as the only God and Savior, Isaiah 41:4; 43:11-
86
13; 44:6; 45:5; 48:12; etc. This is indeed irrefutable proof, since Christ could not be our Savior or Redeemer if he
were not Jehovah, for Jehovah is the only Savior Isaiah 43:10.
159


One might ask, if Dr. Martin is a Trinitarian, and he definitely was, then why would he claim
that Jesus was YHWH, knowing that the JW confesses YHWH to be God the Father? The answer is
simple; professor Martin is a debater who has no ethical code. In other words, when debating
Oneness Preachers, Martin will use the arguments of the JW against them, and when debating
Jehovah Witnesses, Martin will use the argument of Oneness Pentecostals against them. A true
Man of God always looks for the harmony in all scriptures, which are used by both sides. This is
the ethical code that Almighty God expects all Men of God to use in interpreting the Bible. Dr.
Martin and Trinitarian Preachers use this abominable technique because they are devotees of
the Catholic Ante Nicene Priests, who used this technique, especially against their Oneness
antagonist. Tertullian was a master of this vile technique.

The Arians are more honorable that Trinitarian Preachers, for they, like Oneness
Pentecostals, do not change their arguments or position. They will tell you in simple and clear
language, what they believe and why they believe it. Any Oneness Preacher, who has debated a
Trinitarian Pastor, knows that it is almost impossible to get him to define his belief on the
Trinity. He will be very vague in his definitions. I usually get right to the point when debating
with a Pastor like this, and ask him: When you see God, do you believe the Father will be standing or sitting
in one place with a body of His own, and the Son and Holy Ghost in another place with a body of their own? Now
that is a very simple and reasonable question to ask a Trinitarian; but trying to get a Trinitarian Pastor to answer
this question in a forthright manner, is like a Dentist pulling teeth out of his patients mouth without anesthesia?
Very few Trinitarian Pastors have the intellectual honesty to say: I believe that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost
each have a body of their own, and they are coeternal, and coequal in rank and in all attributes of God. It
appears that a poisonous snake cross my path, and I had to chase it down and kill it, before it got
away from me, so with this said, let us get back to the subject of one Savior.

What can be clearer than all the above passages of Scripture that teach one God, one Savior,
and one person in the godhead? Notice, the Father declared in clear and precise language that
He is the only God, and He is the only Savior. He did not say, as Trinitarian preachers so
foolishly teach, there is no Savior besides the Father, His Eternal Son, and the Holy Spirit, and
these three Saviors are in all reality one Savior. You ask them how can three persons or gods be
one Savior? They will quickly tell you without blinking their eyes that it is part of the Mystery of
the blessed Trinity. Anyone who would say these things, or even imply them, would be guilty of
adding to the Word of God. Come on preacher, let us preach the truth and denounce the
Catholic-Babylonian Trinity.

Whom are we going to believe? Did God the Father lie, or did Paul and the angel of God lie?
If Trinitarian preachers are correct and there are three separate persons in the godhead, then we
must conclude that the Father must have lied when He stated that He was the only Savior.
However, if God the Father became the Son of God at Bethlehem, there is no contradiction and
every Scripture is in perfect harmony with the other. These scripture prove beyond dispute that
Jesus Christ is God the Fathers visible Self or His Humanity.

Isaiah stated the above truth this way: God the Father: He saw that there was no man, and
wondered that there was no intercessor; therefore His arm brought salvation for Him" (Isa 59:16). Verse 15 reveals
that YHWH is the speaker. Who is the arm of God the Father? Isaiah declared that this Hebrew
idiom referred to the humanity of Christ. Isaiah speaking about the Fathers Humanity said: to
whom has the Arm of the LORD been revealed? For He [the Arm or Humanity of YHWH] shall grow up before Him
87
[YHWH] as a tender plant, and as a root out of dry ground. He [YHWHs Humanity] has no form or comeliness; and
when we see Him [the Arm or Humanity of YHWH], There is no beauty that we should desire Him. He is despised and
rejected by men, A Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief (Isa 53:1-3). No one, not even a JW, could
deny that the Lord Jesus Christ is the one spoken of in this passage as the Arm of YHWH or God the
Fathers Humanity, who brought salvation to man for Him.

Who Is the Only Potentate, King of Kings and Lords of Lords? God the Father:
The apostle Paul declared that the Lord Jesus Christ would reveal the Father to the whole world,
when He came back to the earth again. He said the Father was: the blessed and only [monos] Potentate
the King of kings and the Lord of lords, Who only [monos] is having immortality, dwelling in light unapproachable,
Whom no one of men did see, nor is able to see" (1Ti 6:14-16, Young's Literal Translation of the Holy Bible). The
Greek word monos, as I stated before, means: sole or single.
160
If the Lord Jesus Christ is not God
the Father as Trinitarian theologians suppose, then their doctrine robs Him of His Deity and
Immortality! For the Bible emphatically declared that the Father is the only being in the universe
that has immortality at this present time, and He alone is only Potentate, the only King of kings,
and the only Lord of lords.

Jesus: Praise God, it was this scripture the Lord Jesus used to bring Earl, my elder brother,
out of Watch Tower's slavery. He was one of their slaves for over five years. He was a builder
and had his own crew, and just about every day while his men built homes, he would knock
doors and peddle their false doctrines. One day in preparing a half hour talk on the godhead, the
words only Potentate, the King of kings and the Lord of lords caught his attention; for he said to
himself: these titles cannot apply to God the Father alone, for I know Jesus is also called by these titles (Rev
17:14; 19:16). As he meditated on the word only used in the above verse, he concluded that the
New World Translation and other translations of the Bible must be wrong. Therefore, he looked
at these verses in his Greek interlinear and found the Greek word monos was there to his
dismay.

As time went on, this verse troubled him, so he decided to go to the JW elders in his hall to see
how they would explain it. After they examined the passage for some time, they told him: Earl,
we can see that the word only is in the Greek Scriptures, but the Greek must be wrong. Earl you know we have
the truth, so just put this out of your mind. Thank God Earl could not believe that the Greek
manuscript of the Bible was wrong or made a mistake. Therefore, he began to ask God in prayer
to show him the truth. It was during this time that Jesus gave him the revelation of His godhead.
Praise God, Earls eyes were opened and he believed in and confessed Jesus to be the Father
manifested in flesh. Thank God after years of praying for Him, and at different times debating
with Him, God revealed Himself to my brother. Gods Word never goes out void, truly some sow,
some water, but God gives the increase (1Co 3:6-7).

Who Is the Stone of Stumbling and the Rock of Offence? Jesus: The apostle Peter
said Christ was to the unbeliever and the disobedient a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence (1Pe
2:7-8). God the Father: Isaiah the prophet said that YHWH was going to be a sanctuary [for the
believers]; but for [the unbeliever] a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offense (Isa 8:14). Verse 13 reveals that
YHWH is the speaker. Trinitarian theologians and Jehovahs Witnesses will either have to admit
that Jesus Christ is God the Fathers Human Nature and the fulfillment of Isaiah's prophecy, or
confess that the Bible contradicts itself.

Who Did the Children of Israel Tempt in the Wilderness? God the Father: The
prophet David said that the Children of Israel: tempted God in their heart by asking meat for their lust.
88
Yea, they spake against God; they said, Can God furnish a table in the wilderness...? Therefore the LORD [YHWH]
heard this, and was wroth (Psa 78:17-21, KJV). Moses said: the LORD sent fiery serpents among the people,
and they bit the people; and much people of Israel died (Num 21:5-6). The prophets Moses and David both
claimed that it was God the Father, the children of Israel tempted in the wilderness, and it was
the Father who destroyed them with serpents.

Jesus: Paul speaking about this very same event said: But with most of them God was not well
pleased, for their bodies were scattered in the wilderness. Nor let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted,
and were destroyed by serpents (1Co 10:5-9). Will any Trinitarian Theologian or JW dare say that the
apostle Paul was confused when he declared that the Children of Israel tempted Christ in the
wilderness? Whom are they going to believe, the prophets Moses and David or the apostle Paul?
The only way to harmonize these scriptures is by confessing that Christ is God the Father.

Whom Was John the Baptist Preparing the Way for? Jesus: John declared that he
had come for the sole purpose of preparing the way for Christ, so He could appear to Israel; or
as the Bible said it: He should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come (Jn 1:23-31). The word
manifest is the Greek word phaneroo which means: to appear. God the Father: The prophet
Isaiah claimed that John was preparing the way for YHWH. Isaiah said: The voice of one crying in
the wilderness: Prepare the way of the LORD; make straight in the desert a highway for our God. The glory of the
LORD shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together; for the mouth of the LORD has spoken" (Isa 40:3, 5).
Since there are no contradictions in the Bible, the Lord Jesus Christ must be God the Father
manifested in the flesh, and when the Jews in Jesus day saw Him they were looking at the
Fathers own Humanity!

Who Is the Holy One of Israel? God the Father: If there are three persons in the
godhead as Trinitarian theologians theorize, then the Father is holier than the Son or the Holy
Spirit, for He alone is the Holy One. Let every Christian hear what God the Father has declared:
I am [not we are] the LORD, your Holy One [not the Holy trio], the Creator of Israel, your King; and Our Redeemer,
the LORD of hosts is His name, the Holy One [not the holy three] of Israel; and the Holy One of Israel; He [not they] is
called the God of the whole earth (Isa 43:15, 47:4, 54:5); also No one is holy like the LORD [not the holy three], for
there is none besides You (1Sa 2:2). Therefore, God the Father is the one and only Holy One, as the
prophets Isaiah and Samuel had declared.

Jesus: The prophet David prophesying about the resurrection of Christ said: For You [YHWH]
will not leave my soul in Sheol, nor will You allow Your Holy One [not the holy trio] to see corruption (Psa 16:10, Acts
2:27-31). Peter told the Jew: You denied the Holy One [not the holy three] and the Just (Acts 3:14). How many
Holy Ones can there be? If Jesus is not the Fathers Visible Self, then you have a holy duo or a
holy trio. The only problem with this is that the Bible never uses the term the holy two or the
holy three, therefore Jesus must be God the Father in flesh, the Holy One. Can my beloved
readers imagine the state of confusion Trinitarian Pastors must be in, who teaches the
Babylonian-Catholic Trinity? There is no way any theologian can teach two or three persons or
gods in the godhead in all the above scriptures without violating the Word of God.

Who Is the First and the Last? Jesus: The apostle John had a vision of Christ in His full
radiance. The Lord spoke to him and said: Fear not; I am [not we are] the First and the Last: I am He that
lives, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen" (Rev 1:17-18). God the Father: speaking
said: Listen to Me [not us], O Jacob, and Israel, My called: I am He, I am [not we are] the First, I am also the Last;
and Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel, and His Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: I am [not we] the First and I
am the Last; Besides Me [not us] there is no God (Isa 48:12, 13; 44:6). How many First (Alphas) and Last
89
(Omegas) can there be? Since Trinitarian preachers teach three persons in the godhead, they then
have three persons claiming to be the First and the Last. Which one of the three would be the
First, and which one would be the Last?

Since these preachers of confusion teach the Father is the First Person and the Holy Ghost is
the Last Person in the godhead, then how can Jesus be the First and Last if He is not the Father
and the Holy Ghost? Remember, the Father clearly stated I am and not we are the First and the
Last. Therefore Jesus must be the Humanity of God the Father, or you have three persons
claiming to be the First and Last, which cannot be. Dr. Martin speaking about Jesus being YHWH
the First and Last said: we find that Jehovah declares in Isaiah 44:6 that He alone is the First and the Last and
the only God, which eliminates forever any confusion as their being two First and Last. Christ could not be our
Savior or Redeemer if he were not Jehovah.
161


Who Is the Almighty God? God the Father: the LORD appeared to Abram and said to him, I am
[not we are] Almighty God (Gen 17:1). YHWH speaking to Moses said: I [not we] appeared unto Abraham,
unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name LORD [YHWH] was I [not we were] not
known to them (Exo 6:3). Jesus: speaking to John said: I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and
the End, says the Lord, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty. I am the Alpha and the Omega,
the First and the Last. I am He who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore (Rev 1:8, 11, 18).
Let my beloved readers take note, the Almighty is called by all the titles Jesus is called by, then
He claims a new title, He who was. What does this title signify? In verse 18, the Almighty gives us
the answer; it represents the One who was dead. The Bible will interpret its own symbols if the
interpreter will allow it to.

Revelation 21:22 is a very interesting passage of Scripture, but many Bible translations have not
translated it correctly. Professor Darby correctly translated it as: And I saw no temple in it; for the
Lord God Almighty is [esti] its temple, and [kai - even] the Lamb (Rev 21:22, Dr. Young & the English Standard
Version translations both gave the same correct translation). The Greek NT reads this way: e .e, e
:a|esa . |ae, au, .ct| sat e a |t e|. The Greek verb esti i.e. .ct| is in the present tense,
indicative mood, no voice, 3rd person, and singular number, and it mean: to be; therefore this
verb should be translated as: is, and since it is not plural in number it should not be translated
are. Now the Greek conjunction kai as I have shown before means: and, even, or also. If you are
a oneness translator, you will choose to translate kai as even, thereby showing that the Lamb
of God is the Temple and the Almighty God, just as John declared in the first chapter and verse
eight.

How many Almighty Gods can there be? If there are three persons in the godhead, and all
three claim to be almighty, then how can this be? For either one will have all the might and the
other two will have no might, or all will share the power and have some might, but all three
cannot have all the might. Jesus speaking as a man said: All power is given unto me in heaven and in
earth (Mt 28:18). Now either God the Father gave all of His power to His own Humanity and rules
in and through His Humanity, which is part of Himself, or the Father is powerless, that is, if He
is a different person from Jesus, because He gave all of His power to Jesus. The Babylonian-
Catholic Trinity is nothing but confusion when one meticulously inspects its teachings.

Whom Was Jesus Reconciling the World to? God the Father: The apostle Paul
proudly proclaimed that the Church was: reconciled to God [the Father] by the death of His Son (Rom
5:10). Jesus: In almost the same breath, he says Jesus made atonement for sins through the blood
shed by His Humanity, and by this atonement: He reconciled all things unto Himself (Col 1:20, 22). Is
90
Paul contradicting Himself here? If I were a Trinitarian theologian, I would have to think that
Paul was confused; for he told the Roman Church that Jesus reconciled the world to God the
Father, and he told the Colossian Church Jesus reconciled the world to Himself. So, what is the
only logical and scriptural answer to this Trinitarian delirium? Let us allow Paul to explain or
give us the answer. Paul said: God [the Father] was in Christ [the Fathers Humanity] reconciling the world unto
Himself (2Co 5:19). This is the only logical explanation that will harmonize all the scriptures on
this subject. Therefore, it definitely proves that Jesus is the Father.

Who Will Come to the Mount of Olives to Set Up His Millennial Kingdom? God
the Father: The prophet Zechariah declared: The LORD will go forth and fight against those nations, as
He fights in the day of battle. And in that day His [not their] feet will stand on the Mount of Olives. Thus the LORD
my God will come, and all the saints with You [not with them]. And the LORD shall be King over all the earth. The
LORD is one [not three], And His name one [not three] (Zec 14:3-5, 9). Jesus: The angel of God said to our
Lords disciples: Men of Galilee, why do you stand gazing up into heaven? This same Jesus, who was taken up
from you into heaven, will so come in like manner as you saw Him go into heaven. Then they returned to Jerusalem
from the Mount called Olivet (Acts 1:9-12). Paul prayed that God would establish the hearts of the
saints in Holiness until the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ with all of His saints (1Th 3:13).

By comparing these scriptures, we understand that Jesus Christ ascended into Heaven from
the Mount of Olives and He, as God the Father, will descend from heaven in a cloud with all of
His saints, and He will return to the Mount of Olives to establish His Millennial Kingdom. By
comparing Zechariah 14:3-4 with Revelation 19:11-21, one can also comprehend that He is the One
Who will wage war against the nations, and destroy the Antichrists army.

Who Will Judge The Dead? Jesus: Paul said that God will judge the world in righteousness by
that man whom He has ordained (Acts 17:31). Jesus speaking as a man said it this way: For the Father
judges no one, but has committed all judgment to the Son [His Humanity]. And [the Father] has given Him authority to
execute judgment also, because [hoti] He is the Son of Man (Jn 5:22, 27). As stated before, the conjunction
hoti means: for this reason. Therefore, Jesus will judge the world as a Man not as God. God the
Father: The prophet David declared: the LORD [YHWH]... has prepared His [not their] throne for judgment.
And He [not they] shall judge the world in righteousness, and He [not they] comes to judge the earth (Psa 9:7-8;
96:13). Let my beloved readers take note, the Bible declared that God the Father would be the one
to sit on His throne and judge the world of sin.

Therefore, if Jesus is not God the Fathers Humanity, the Bible definitely contradicts itself in
these passages of Scripture. Trinitarian preachers will definitely have a problem with these
scriptures. The apostles John and Paul stated that the Son or the Man Christ Jesus will judge the
world, and Jesus said the Father would judge no man. However, the prophet David said that
YHWH the Father would judge all men. All Trinitarian theologians, who teach that there are
three separate persons in the godhead, will have to conclude that either David made a mistake or
John and Paul did. I am so happy that I am Oneness, because the Babylonian-Catholic Trinity is
nothing but confusion. It is so simple to believe that the Father will judge the in and through His
Humanity, who is His visible Self.

If my beloved readers still have any doubts, than let the prophet Daniel and the apostle John
quench them for you. Daniel saw God the Father in a vision and spoke of His Judgment when he
said: I watched till thrones were put in place, and the Ancient of Days was seated; His garment was white as snow,
and the hair of His head was like pure wool. His throne was a fiery flame, its wheels a burning fire; fiery stream
91
issued and came forth from before Him. A thousand thousands ministered to Him; ten thousand times ten thousand
stood before Him. The court was seated, and the books were opened (Dan 7:9-10).

John saw the very same person and event and revealed that the Ancient of Days was Jesus. He
said: I saw seven golden lampstands, and in the midst of the seven lampstands One like the Son of Man, clothed
with a garment down to the feet and girded about the chest with a golden band. His head and hair were white like
wool, as white as snow, and His eyes like a flame of fire. His feet were like fine brass. I am He who lives, and was
dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore; and I saw a great white throne and Him [not them] who sat on it, from
whose face the earth and the heaven fled away. And there was found no place for them. And I saw the dead, small
and great, standing before God, and books were opened. And another book was opened, which is the Book of Life.
And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books (Rev 1:13-18;
20:11-12).

Who Will Raise the Dead? Jesus speaking to Martha said to her I am [not we are] the
resurrection, and the Life (Jn 11:24-25). Jesus went to Lazarus tomb and cried with a loud voice, Lazarus,
come forth (Jn 11:43). Jesus, speaking of the resurrection of Old Testament Jewish saints, said He
would raise them up at the last day (Jn 6:40). Jesus who cannot lie because He is the Truth said:
The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live
(Jn 5:25).

God the Father: Paul said: God both has raised up the Lord, and will also raise us up by His power" (1Co
6:14). He confirmed this great truth when He told the Roman Church: But if the Spirit of Him [God the
Father] who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your
mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you (Rom 8:11). Paul explicitly told us that God the Father
raised Jesus, i.e. His Humanity, from the dead and He will also raise all His children. However,
our sweet Lord said He is the Resurrection, and He would raise the dead. Therefore, Jesus
Christ must be God the Fathers visible Self.

Who Raised the Body of Jesus From the Dead? God the Father: The apostle Paul
declared: God the Father raised Him [i.e. Son of God] from the dead (Ga 1:1; also Acts 3:26; Rom 8:11; 1Co
6:14). Jesus: speaking in His Deity i.e. as the Father said: Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in
three days. But the temple he had spoken of was his body (Jn 2: 19, 21, NIV). Since there cannot be any
contradiction between what Jesus and Paul said, Jesus has to be God the Father who raised His
own humanity from the dead.

Who Draws Men to God? God the Father: Jesus speaking as a man said: No one can come
to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day (Jn 6:44). Jesus:
speaking as God the Father said: if I be lifted up from the earth, [I] will draw all peoples to Myself" (Jn
12:32). Is Jesus contradiction himself here? In one breath, He tells us that the Father draws all
men to the Son, and in the next breath, He informs us that He draws all men to Himself. Now
which is it? Therefore, the only logical conclusion to this Trinitarian predicament is Jesus must
be God the Fathers Human Nature.

Who Is the I AM of the Bible? Jesus: Professor Martin speaking of Jesus as the great I
AM of the OT declared: John 8:58 - Jesus said unto them... before Abraham was [born], I AM. In comparing
this with the Septuagint translation of Exodus 3:14 and Isaiah 43:10-13, we find that the translation is identical.
162

Jesus told all Jehovahs Witnesses and Trinitarian Pastors, who would deny His supreme deity:
You will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I AM He, you will die in your sins (Jn 8:24). God the
Father: Dr. Martin continued his comments on the Great I Am by identifying Jesus as YHWH,
92
who was God the Father. Martin boldly declared: In Exodus 3:14, Jehovah speaking to Moses said, I
AM, which any intelligent scholar recognizes as synonymous with God. Jesus literally said to them, I AM Jehovah
and it is clear that they understood Him to mean just that, for they attempted, as the next verse reveals, to stone
Him.
163


In the above passage, Trinitarian Pastors have the truth straight from this renowned
Trinitarian scholars own mouth, Jesus is YHWH. You say, as I stated before, Martin was writing
against Jehovahs Witnesses and biblically proving the supreme Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ to
them, because they deny it. I say amen again, but that does not take away from the fact that
Jesus is YHWH, who is the one and only true God. Let us not forget, it was God the Father who
Abraham and Moses saw and spoke to (Gen 17:1; Exo 3:2-6). There can only be one I AM, that is of
course, if you are not a Trinitarian Preacher who has to believe in and confess: two almighty Gods,
two eternal Fathers, two so-called Jehovahs, and two I AMs.

Who Sends the Comforter? God the Father: Jesus speaking as a man said that our:
Heavenly Father [will] give the Holy Spirit to them that ask Him, and I will pray [to] the Father, and He shall give
you another Comforter [Parakletos] which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send (Lk 11:13; Jn 14:16, 26,
KJV). Jesus: John the Baptist declared that Christ: shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost (Mt 3:11; Jn
1:33). Jesus speaking as God or the Father said: I will send the Comforter to you, therefore: It is
expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter [Parakletos] will not come unto you; but if I
depart, I will send him unto you (Jn 15:26; 16:7).

Jesus Is the Parakletos: The apostle John wrote: If any man sin, we have an Advocate [Parakletos] with the
Father, Jesus Christ the righteous (1Jn 2:1). These are the only places in the Greek NT where the
Greek word Parakletos is used. Therefore, Jesus speaking as God, i.e. the Father, He said He
would send the Holy Ghost, but when He spoke as the Son of God, i.e. Man, He said the Father
would send the Holy Spirit. Therefore, Jesus not only has to be God the Father, but also the Holy
Ghost for He is the Comforter or Parakletos. My beloved readers should by now comprehend the
folly of the Babylonian-Catholic-Protestant Trinitarian doctrine. Furthermore, Trinitarian
Preachers will now have to believe in and confess: two Parakletos or Comforters or Holy Ghosts. Oh, I
am so glad that I am not a Trinitarian!

To Whom Does the Spirit of Man Return to When He Dies? God the Father:
Solomon said: The spirit [of man] shall return unto God who gave it, and Who knows the spirit of the sons of
men, which goes upward, and the spirit of the animal, which goes down to the earth (Ecc 12:7, 3:21)? If I were a
Trinitarian preacher, I would have to ask myself this question, which God gave man his human
spirit, and which God receives mans spirit when man dies; is it the Father, the Son, or the Holy
Ghost? When the Humanity of God the Father was dying on the Cross of Calvary, He cried out
to His God and said: Father, into Thy hands I commend My spirit: and having said thus, He gave up the ghost
(Lk 23:46, KJV). In this passage of scripture, we discover that God the Father is the one who
receives mans spirit at death.

Jesus: Stephen as he was being stoned to death called upon God saying, Lord Jesus receive my
spirit (Acts 7:59). Either Jesus in His Deity is God the Father or you have another Trinitarian
contradiction in the Word of God. However, once one receives the revelation of the supreme
Deity dwelling in Christ, or as Paul said: all the fullness of the godhead dwelling in the humanity of
Christ (Col 2:9), every scripture harmonizes perfectly. O Praise our great God and Savior.

93
Did Christ Preexist Before He Was Born at Bethlehem? As Man Jesus was Davids
Son, the Branch of Jesse, Gods Righteous Servant, and as God the Father Jesus was Davids
God. The prophet Micah prophetically speaking of the Deity of Davids Son declared: His going
forth or origin is from Everlasting (Mic 5:2). Therefore, Micah informed us that Jesus as God the
Father had an Eternal Existence. This is why Isaiah called Davids Son: the Everlasting Father (Isa
9:6). David expressed the eternality of God the Father this way: Before the mountains came into being,
before You brought forth the earth and the world, from eternity to eternity You are God (Psa 90:2, JPS Tanakh).

The apostle John boldly proclaimed that Jesus, who existed in the OT as Christ, the Logos,
YHWH was the Creator, i.e. the world was made by Him (Jn 1:10). Therefore, it was God the Father
who came down from heaven (Jn 3:13). This is why Jesus could say: before Abraham was [meaning existed],
I AM (Jn 8:56-59). Since Jesus existed before Abraham, and claimed to have seen him, when did
He actually see Abraham? The Word of God explicitly said: the LORD [YHWH] appeared to Abram, and
said unto him, I AM [not we are] the Almighty God (Gen 17:1).

In none of the above scriptures does the Bible state or even imply that Jesus had an existence
in the Old Testament as the Son of God or as the so-called God the Son, but only as YHWH or the
Logos. So either Trinitarian Preachers will have to confess that: Jesus is God the Father, or confess
that they believe in: two almighty Gods, two eternal Fathers, two so-called Jehovahs, two I AMs, and two Holy
Spirits, or they will have to declare that the Bible contradicts itself.

Why Did God the Father Choose to Become His Own Son? The Word of God
unmistakably declared that Jesus was: the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world" (Rev 13:8). The
expression the foundation of the world is referring to the creation of the world as can be seen in the
following scriptures: (Psa 18:15, 102:25, 104:5; Isa 48:13; Mt 13:35; Jn 17:24; Heb 1:10, 9:26). This means
God had a plan of redemption for mankind before He ever made Adam and Eve. In other words,
God in His foreknowledge knew that mankind would fall into sin before he created them;
therefore, He created a plan of redemption, which is known today as Calvary, before He created
the universe.

I believe that God greatly desires true genuine agape love from His creation (Mk 12:30; 2Co 2:9; Ja
1:12; Rev 2:4-5); this is why He made us. This is also, why He chose to redeem us by becoming a Man
one day and dieing as the Lamb of God for our sins, so He could prove His love for us by this
awesome and magnificent act. As one mediates and prays about this concept, they will come to the
following conclusions. Somewhere in eternity past, God existed alone and by Himself. The only
fellowship He had was the thoughts of His own eternal mind. As a result, He was very lonely. There
was no one for Him to fellowship with, or in other words, no one with whom to share His thoughts,
feelings, and love. There was also no one who could return love to Him.

God, in a sense, was like Adam before Eve came into being. God knew the loneliness that was in
Adams heart. For this reason He said: It is not good that man should be alone (Gen 2:18). God greatly
desired someone to love Him with agape love! Philo love will not do (Jn 21:15-18). Therefore,
somewhere in eternity past, angels and mankind came into His mind. God needed intelligent beings,
like Himself, who possessed some of His own attributes to give His love to, and receive love in
return.

God did not create angels and men because: He was bored and need some entertainment, or He wanted
someone to exercise power over, or someone to fall down in worship and kiss His big toe, or someone to verbally flatter
94
Him. Those who believe these things are inadvertently declaring that God is an egotistical, self-
centered, and a power driven maniac; no my friend, our God does not have any of these attributes.
If the Almighty was an ego driven satanic psychopath, who wanted worship, all He would have to
do is appear in heaven where men of every nation could see Him on satellite television, as He hurled
thunderbolts of lightning to the earth, and by the time he reached terra firma everyone would be on
their faces praising Him out of fear. If Lucifer had Gods power, he would definitely do it.

If the Lord had any of these attributes, He would have never given angels and men the power of
self-determination. He would have made them robots. However, God did not desire robots; He
wanted and needed true genuine agape love that can only come through the power of choice. For
this reason, and this reason only, God created all beings with a free will. The Word of God clearly
proclaimed that not only men and angels were created as good and holy beings, but also Lucifer
himself. This explicitly and emphatically means that God did not create Lucifer as an evil being.
Lucifer became that way through his incessant or continuous rebellion against his Creator.

Because our God is omniscient, as the Word of God boldly proclaimed, He foreknew that sin and
misery would come into the world, as a direct result of having given His intelligent beings the ability
to choose their own destiny. Therefore, God devised a plan called Calvary as a way to express His
love for His creation, whereby His creation would never doubt His love for them. The apostle Peter
gave us some insights into Gods predestinated plan of salvation. He says we have been redeemed
with: the precious blood of Christ, as of a Lamb without blemish and without spot: Who [referring to Christ as the
Lamb] verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world (1Pe 1:19-20). The apostle Paul spoke of
Gods predestined salvation plan when he declared that God: has saved us and called us with an holy
calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus
before the world began (2Ti 1:9). It is obvious from these passages of scriptures that Calvary was in
the mind and plan of God before the world began.

CHAPTER 6
GOD THE FATHERS OLD TESTAMENT DIVINE
SPIRIT, SOUL, AND GLORIFIED SPIRITUAL BODY

My Understanding of the Godhead

To help my beloved readers to better understand the terms I will be using in this chapter, and
what I mean by these terms, I will give them my definition of the following words:

God is an unbegotten Spirit Being in His Essence, whose Spirit Essence has locality and also
the form and shape of a man, that is, God has a Spirit Body.

Christ, Logos, or YHWH - is a name given to Gods begotten Humanity, which was composed
of a Holy Spirit, a Human Soul, and a Glorified Human Spiritual Body. The Unbegotten Spirit
begot His Three Natures from His own Eternal Spirit Essence before time began!

The Holy Spirit comes in three forms: Christ the Living breathing Personal Word of God,
the Impersonal Spoken Words of God, and the Impersonal Written Words of God.

95
Substance - that of which a being or thing consists of or is compose of, such as: contents or
material.

Essence - that whereby a being or thing is what it is, such as, a spirit substance or a physical
or material substance.

Nature the fundamental characteristics or qualities of a living entity or thing, such as, God,
angels, human beings, animals, and non-living things.

Person is a human, who is composed of three separate and distinct natures, that is, a spirit, a
soul, and a body, such as: God in Christ and human beings; (Gods angels, Lucifer and his angels
are not persons but spirit beings).

Every point used in the preceding and following statement of faith will be fully examined and
explicated in this chapter!

My Understanding of the Godhead: God is a singular personal Unbegotten Spirit Being
in His Essence, who has an intangible Spirit Body (Jn 4:24). God as a Spirit Being has never been
seen, or ever will be seen, by any angel or man, for He has hid Himself in the person of Christ (1Ti
6:16, 2Co 5:19, Col 1:15). Before time began, I believe God the Eternal Spirit Being begot a Divine
Holy Spirit, a Divine Human Soul, and a Divine Glorified Human Spiritual Body. I believe His
Human Spiritual Body was the same Human Body Jesus had when He rose from the dead, which
had Spiritual Flesh, Bones, and a Human Brain (Lk 24:37-43), and this Body shined like the sun.
Thus, the invisible God became the Manifested Visible God.

In this way, the Eternal Spirit of God formed a Godhead in Christ that consisted of three real
Natures, that is, His begotten Holy Spirit Nature, His begotten Human Soul Nature, and His
Glorified Spiritual Body. Therefore, God formed a Godhead that consisted of Deity and
Humanity, and gave His Godhead a personal name of YHWH, and He gave this single Person
several titles such as Christ, the Anointed One, the Holy One, and the Word or Logos. Thus,
Christ became the Only Begotten God (Jn 1:18, NAS), this verse will be examined later. When God
created angels and men in and through His Godhead, He then became known as God the Father.
Since all of Christs Natures were part of Gods very Being, Christ was God the Father for He
was Gods Visible Self.

In the New Testament, God the Fathers Divine Holy Spirit and Divine Human Soul came into
the Virgin Mary, and transformed their Divine Human Glorified Spiritual Body into a seed, and
then planted it into Marys Womb. As a result, Marys Son became know as the Son of God and
the Son of Man. Therefore, the real mystery of the Godhead is revealed when we realized that
God the Fathers Three Natures are part of Gods one personality and Person. In other words,
Gods Unbegotten Spirit Personality was expressed in His Holy Spirit Nature and His Human
Personality was expressed through His Human Soul and Spiritual Body Natures.

Thus, these Three Natures made up Gods ONE PERSONALITY, and made Him One Person and
One God. Therefore, Christ was definitely both God and Man at the very same time in both the
OT and in the NT! The only real difference between Christ of the OT and Jesus of the NT was
that Gods NT Body was a Body of Flesh, Bones, and Blood, which place many limitations on
Jesus life and abilities, and it probably had an effect on His Personality for He could now be
96
tempted to sins. The Bible stated this truth this way: For we do not have a High Priest who is unable to
sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been TEMPTED in EVERY WAY, just as we are-- yet
was without sin (Heb 4:15, NIV).

I believe there were two reasons why God chose to beget His Three Natures. FIRST, God
obviously desired to have a personal relationship and fellowship with the angels and men whom
He would create, whereby He could give them love and receive their love in return. Therefore,
God as an Unbegotten Eternal Spirit Being, which could never be seen, wanted to give His
creation a visible expression or personal manifestation of Himself, whereby they could see, know,
and love Him as their God. Because God desired true genuine agape love, He gave angels and
men the power of self-determination. Freewill is essential in any true love relationship.

SECOND, as stated before, God being omniscience foreknew by given angels and men the
power of choice, that some of His angels and all of mankind whom He would create would fall
into sin. Therefore, He devised a plan to reveal His love and redemption to His creation. This
plan became known as Calvary (Rev 13:8; 1Pe 1:19, 20; Eph 1:4; Rev 17:8). Since God knew that He
would become an earthly flesh and blood man one day to fulfill His plan of Redemption, He
chose to beget His Three Natures from His Own Essence, which became His GLORY, to signify
and reveal His mysterious plan of Salvation before creation began.

The apostle John referring to Christs preexistence called Him: the beginning of the creation of
God; and Solomon referred to His Three Natures as the Wisdom of God, who was begotten:
before the beginning of the earth (Rev 3:14; Pro 8:22, 23, 30, RSV). Our Lord speaking about His
preexistence declared that He was a Heavenly Spiritual Man before Bethlehem (Jn 3:13, NAS, cp Jn
6:62, 1Co 11:7). The Word of God definitely reveals that Gods Glorified Human Spiritual Body
had a Soul in the Old Testament (Lev 26:11 & 30, Jud 10:16, etc). The Bible called this Heavenly Man:
Gods Glory, Gods (outward visible) Form, and the express Image of His Essence (Isa 6:1-4; Phi 2:6; Heb 1:3; Col
1:15).

Because the Bible indisputably declares that God had a Human Nature in the OT, I believed
the one God chose to reveal Himself to His creation as one Person, who had three separate and
distinct Natures. I believe ALL of God the Fathers Spirit Essence was in Christ (Col 2:9). These
three Natures made God a PERSON, that is, ONE PERSON. Therefore, CHRIST is the ONE and ONLY
PERSON of GOD, that is, the ONE and ONLY TRUE GOD. He is the Eternal Gods VISIBLE SELF, or
He is the Visible Manifestation of the Invisible God (Col 1:15).

God the Father in the Old Testament
Had Three Real Natures: A Spirit, A Soul, and A Spiritual Body

I know most Oneness and Trinitarian Preachers teach: Christ did not have a Human Nature in the
OT. This is why I have added this chapter to this book, to prove He did! It is now time to answer
some of the question I asked at the beginning of this book, such as: Did the Christ as the Word of God
have a dual nature, that is, a Divine and a Human Nature before Bethlehem? Why are there scriptures in the Old
Testament that speak of God the Fathers Soul Nature being in existence at the time the scripture was given? Why is
there over a 100 scriptures in the OT that speak of Gods bodily parts, if they did not exist? Were all these
scriptures mere allegorizations? I know some will twist and pervert this truth by using Satans
allegorical method of interpreting Scriptures, which is known today as Lucifers doctrine of
anthropomorphism!

97
Why is it that no book of theology or encyclopedia, at least the ones I have read, ever mention
that the one God of the Old Testament had a Human Nature as well as a Human Glorified
Spiritual Body Nature? Why does Jesus refer to His preexistence as the Son of Man, that is, a Man or
Human Being? Was this nothing more than a slip of the tongue or fill in mystical words to inspire
His listeners and readers with a Gnostic sense of mysticism, or was Jesus communicating to us a
great OT Truth? Many scriptures in the Hebrew Bible speak of God the Fathers Holy Spirit and
Human Soul Natures. The following sections of this chapter are given to help my beloved readers to
understand the above mystery of the Godhead.

The Word of God explicitly informs us that man is made in the image and likeness of God (Gen
1:26-27). The biblical terms image and likeness, which the Bible uses to describe both God and
man will be defined later in this chapter. The apostle Paul clearly declared that man has three
separate and distinct natures when he wrote: And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray
God your WHOLE spirit [pneuma], and soul [psuche], and physical body [soma] be preserved blameless, unto the coming
of our Lord Jesus Christ (1Th 5:23). The apostle prayed that God would sanctify the entire being of
man, and not just a part of him. Paul confirmed the above truth when he declared: For the Word
of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder [or
apart] of the soul [psuche], and spirit [pneuma], and of the joints and marrow [referring to soma - the body] (Heb 4:12).

Therefore, since God made man in His image and likeness, God, like man, is a singular being
or person whose has three real Natures, that is, the Unbegotten Divine Spirit has a begotten
Divine Holy Spirit Nature, a Divine Human Soul Nature, and a Divine Human Glorified
Spiritual Body Nature. Only the Word of God is able to give us an understanding of some of the
distinctions between Gods Natures. Even though Gods Natures, like that of mans natures, have
similar and different characteristics and functions from each other, no one in his or her right
mind would declare that God, or even man, is three separate and distinct persons, because both
have three separate and distinct natures. Since this is true beyond dispute, it would be very
foolish for anyone to declare that Gods Natures are three separate and distinct persons or gods.

Reverend Finis Jennings Dake, speaking about Gods the Fathers Spirit, Soul, and Spiritual
Body Natures, made an outstanding and insightful comment on John 4:24, in the note section of
Dakes Annotated Reference Bible. Dake declared: God is a SPIRIT BEING. He is a PERSON with a
personal spirit body, a personal soul, and personal spirit like that of man. HIS BODY is of spirit substance (Job
13:8; Heb. 1:3). He has a PERSONAL SPIRIT BODY (Dan. 7:9-14; 10:5-9) form (Phi. 2:5-7); image and likeness
of a man (Gen. 1:26 [27]; 9:6; Ezek. 1:26-28; 1 Cor. 11:7; Jas. 3:9).

He has a PERSONAL SOUL with feelings of grief (Gen. 6:6); anger (1 Ki. 11:9); repentance (Gen. 6:6); jealousy
(Ex 20:5); hate (Pr. 6:16); love (Jn. 3:16); pity (Ps. 103:13) pleasure and delight (Ps. 147:10-11); and other soul
passions like other beings. He has a PERSONAL SPIRIT ( Isa. 30:1) with mind (Rom. 11:34); intelligence (Gen
1:26; Rom. 11:33); will (Rom. 8:27; 9:19) knowledge and wisdom (Isa. 11:2; 1 Tim. 1:17); reason (Isa. 1:18) and
many other attributes, powers, and spirit faculties. He has been seen bodily many times (Gen. 18; 32:24-30; Ex.
24:9-11 Isa. 6; Dan. 7:9-13; Ezek. 1).

He has BODILY PARTS such as, back parts (Ex. 33:23), mouth (Num.12:8), lips and tongue (Isa. 30:27), feet
(Ezek. 1:27; Ex. 24:10); eyes (Ps. 11:4); ears (Ps 18:6); hair, head, face, arms (Dan. 7:9-14; 10:5-19), loins (Ezek.
1:26-28; 8:1-4), and other bodily parts. He has bodily presence (Gen. 3:8; 18:1-22) and goes from place to place in a
body like other persons (Gen. 3:8; 11:5; 18:1-5, 22, 33 32:24-32 Zech. 14:4). He has a countenance (Ps.
11:7); He wears clothes (Dan. 7:9-14; 10:5-19); eats (Gen. 18:1-8; Ex. 24:11) dwells in a mansion and in a city
located on a material planet call Heaven (Jn. 14:1-3; Heb 11:10-16; 13:14; Rev. 21); sits on a throne (Isa. 6; Dan.
7:9-14). Let us examine Gods Soul Nature.

98
God the Fathers Old Testament Divine Soul Nature: At this point in our Bible study
on the Godhead, I would like to ask my beloved readers two very important questions: Did God in
the OT have a Soul Nature? If God did have a Soul Nature, was it part of His personality, that is, did it have Mind,
Will, and Emotions? If the Bible teaches that God did have a Soul Nature in the OT, then anyone
who denies it would be robbing God of a part of His personality. Therefore, if the one and only
God of the OT did have a Soul Nature, then this would be a very important factor in our
understanding of God and His Godhead. So, with this truth in mind, let us proceed with our
study on the Godhead.

How Some Bible Scholars Define Soul: The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, defined
soul this way: Nephesh or soul can only denote the individual life with a material organization or body (that which
is tangible or corporeal).... In the SOUL, which SPRANG from the SPIRIT and exist continually through it, lies the
individuality - in the case of man, his personality, his self, his ego. The soul stands for the whole person.
164

According to the above definition, the soul came from the spirit, or the spirit produced the soul!
It also must have some connection with a corporeal or a tangible body, and the spirit is the life of
the soul. The only problem with this definition is that there is no Scripture that reveals that the
spirit of man produced the soul of man.

In the Old Testament, the Hebrew word nephesh is the word that is always used to describe
the soul. Nephesh is used 723 times. It is translated 416 times as soul, 58 times as souls, 1 time as
souls, 96 times as life, 18 times as lives, 14 times as person, 3 times as man, 2 times as ghost, 12
times as heart, 2 times as hearts, 11 times as mind, 4 times as minds, 3 times as will, and so on. In
the New Testament, the Greek word psuche is the word that is used to describe the soul.
Psuche is used 105 times. It is translated 35 times as soul, 19 times as souls, 36 times as life, 5 times
as lives, 1 time as mind, 2 times as minds, 1 time as heart and heartily.

The two places where the Hebrew word nephesh was translated ghost are used in reference
to what happens to the soul of man at the moment of death. These passages are: But the eyes of the
wicked shall fail, and they shall not escape, and their hope shall be as the giving up [mappach - breathing out] of the
GHOST [nephesh] (Job 11:20, KJV). Youngs Literal Translation of the Bible translated this verse this
way: And the eyes of the wicked are consumed, And refuge hath perished from them, And their hope is a
Breathing Out of SOUL! The other place is: She [i.e. Israel] that hath borne seven languisheth: she hath given
up [mappach - breathing out] the GHOST [nephesh]; her sun is gone down while it was yet day: she hath been ashamed and
confounded: and the residue of them will I deliver to the sword before their enemies, saith the LORD (Jer 15:9,
KJV). Youngs Literal Translation of the Bible: Languished hath the bearer of seven, She hath breathed
out her SPIRIT [nephesh - SOUL].

Two good examples of the soul of man leaves the body at death and returning is when Elijah
breathed into the mouth of the widows son, who died of an illness. The Bible says it this way:
Now it happened after these things that the son of the woman who owned the house became sick. And his sickness
was so serious that there was no breath [neshamah] left in him. He stretched himself out ON the child three times,
and cried out to the LORD and said, O LORD my God, I pray, let this childs SOUL [nephesh] come back to him.
Then the LORD heard the voice of Elijah; and the SOUL [nephesh] of the child came back to him, and he revived (1
Kings 17:17-22). Elisha did the very same thing for the Shunammite womans son, who died of a
heat stroke. He breathed into the boys mouth and his soul returned: And he went up and lay ON the
child, and put his mouth on his mouth, his eyes on his eyes, and his hands on his hands; and he stretched himself out
on the child, and the flesh of the child became warm (2Ki 4:17-36).

There are over TWENTY (20) Scriptures in the Old Testament that speak of God the Fathers
SOUL in passages, which reveal that His SOUL existed in the very day that God spoke these
99
Scriptures. In other worlds, these Scriptures were not referring to a future existence of Gods
SOUL. Why is it that modern day theologians never mention anything about Gods Soul Nature
in the Old Testament? Could it be that they believe in and teach Mystery Babylons omnipresent
spirit doctrine. They readily discuss the few scriptures that speak of Gods Spirit Nature, but
totally neglect the many scriptures that speak of His Soul Nature. This cataclysmic error has led
to several false beliefs pertaining to Gods person and nature.

Origen (200 AD) speaking of the Soul of God the Father and Man wrote: Ye shall not eat the
blood, because the life [Nephesh] of all flesh is its blood; and ye shall not eat the life [Nephesh] with the flesh, in which it
intimates most clearly that the blood of every animal is its life. Yet Holy Scripture declares that God breathed into
his countenance the breath of life [chay plural number - lives], and man became a living soul [Nephesh]. But with
regard to God, we find it written as follows: And I will put MY SOUL [Nephesh] upon that soul [Nephesh] which has
eaten blood, and I will root him out from among his people; and also in another passage, Your new moons, and
sabbaths, and great days, I will not accept; your fasts, and holidays, and festal days, MY SOUL [Nephesh] hateth.
It is difficult indeed both to feel and to state how that which is called in Scripture the SOUL of GOD is to be
understood; for we acknowledge that nature to be simple, and without any intermixture or addition. In whatever
way, however, it is to be understood, it seems, meanwhile, to be named the SOUL of GOD.
165


Because of the false Semi-Arian concept of the godhead, the Ante Nicene Catholic Priests did
not understand the Biblical teaching on God the Fathers Soul Nature, therefore they did not
write about it. Justin Martyr (150 AD) denied the existence of God the Fathers Divine Human
Soul and Glorified Spiritual Body, even though the orthodox Jews of his day believed and taught
it. In the Dialogue of Justin with Trypho the Jew, Justin says: Just as YOUR TEACHERS suppose,
fancying that the FATHER of all, the UNBEGOTTEN GOD, has HANDS and FEET, and FINGERS, and a SOUL,
like a composite being; and they for this reason TEACH that it was the Father Himself who appeared to Abraham
and to Jacob.
166


I do not need to interpret the following passages of Scripture, for their meaning is clear, the
language is clear; therefore there is no need to look for some hidden mystical meaning. Now, all you
super spiritualists, get out your allegorical pens and see what form of mystical nonsense you can
apply to the following scriptures. Even the mystics with all their mysticism will not be able to
spiritualize away Gods truth in these scriptures. All these passages emphatically teach that God
had a Divine Human Soul Nature in the Old Testament, and His Soul had a will! God swore an oath
by His own Soul and will not repent or change His oath. There is no other way to interpret these
passages of scripture. Now, all you Trinitarian Preachers, Jehovahs Witnesses, Mormons, and so
on, either believe God has a Soul, or tear the following Scriptures out of your Bibles, since they
does not agree with your theology.

God the Fathers Divine Human Soul Nature in the Old Testament Was His Personal Self:
Some of the scriptures that speak of Gods Nephesh or Soul Nature, the King James translators
translated as Himself or mind: Be instructed, O Jerusalem, Lest My SOUL [Nephesh] depart from you; Lest
I make you desolate, A land not inhabited (Jer 6:8). God speaking about the jubilation of His Spirit and
Soul declared: Yes, I will rejoice over them [Israel] to do them good, and I will assuredly plant them in this land,
with all My Heart [leb i.e. probably SPIRIT] and with all My SOUL (Jer 32:41). God swore an oath by His Soul:
The LORD of hosts has sworn by Himself [Nephesh His SOUL]: 'Surely I will fill you with men, as with locusts, And
they shall lift up a shout against you (Jer 51:14); and The Lord GOD has sworn by Himself [Nephesh His SOUL],
the LORD God of hosts says: 'I abhor the pride of Jacob, And hate his palaces; Therefore I will deliver up the city
And all that is in it (Amos 6:8).

God the Fathers Divine Human Soul Nature in the Old Testament Had Intelligence: The
LORD said: My Mind [Nephesh SOUL] would not be favorable toward this people (Jer 15:1); Darbys
100
translation: Jehovah said unto me, though Moses and Samuel stood before me, My SOUL would not turn toward
this people. Send them out of my sight, and let them go forth. YHWH said to Ezekiel about the harlotry of
Judah and Israel: So she [Judah] uncovered her harlotries, and uncovered her nakedness; then My SOUL
[Nephesh , KJV- Mind] was alienated from her, like as My SOUL [Nephesh , KJV- Mind] was alienated from her sister
[Israel] (Eze 23:18, Jewish Publication Society JPS). According to the Bible mans soul, like Gods Soul,
is also intelligent and is the center of his thought life, for Solomon said about man: For as he
thinketh in his soul [Nephesh], so is he (Pro 23:7, DBY). All these scriptures definitely reveal that Gods
Soul Nature is intelligent, rationale, and part of Gods Human thought life.

God the Fathers Divine Human Soul Nature in the Old Testament Had A Will: But He is
unique, and who can make Him change? And whatever His SOUL [Nephesh] desires, that He DOES (Job 23:13);
also Then I will raise up for Myself a faithful priest who shall do according to what is in My heart [lebab probably
refers to SPIRIT] and in My Mind [Nephesh - SOUL]. I will build him a sure house, and he shall walk before My anointed
forever (1Sa 2:35). Gods Human Soul Nature, unlike mortal mans soul nature, can do and
accomplish whatever He wills!

God the Fathers Divine Human Soul Nature in the Old Testament Had Human Emotions:
God told Israel, if you keep My commandments: I will set My tabernacle among you, and My SOUL
[Nephesh] shall not abhor you, but if you do not, I will destroy your high places, cut down your incense altars,
and cast your carcasses on the lifeless forms of your idols; and My SOUL [Nephesh] shall abhor you (Lev 26:11, 30).
When Israel repented of their sins and returned back to the LORD: His SOUL [Nephesh] was grieved
for the misery of Israel (Jug 10:16). David said: The LORD tests the righteous, But the wicked and the one who
loves violence His SOUL [Nephesh] hates (Psa 11:5). God told Israel: Your New Moons and your appointed
feasts My SOUL [Nephesh] hates (Isa 1:14); and Behold! My Servant whom I uphold, My Elect One in whom My
SOUL [Nephesh] delights (Isa 42:1).

God speaking taking vengeance on Israel said: Shall I not visit for these things? saith the LORD: and
shall not My SOUL [Nephesh] be avenged on such a nation as this (Jer 5:9, KJV, also see vs 29 & 9:9)? God also
declared: I have forsaken My house, I have left My heritage; I have given the dearly beloved of My SOUL
[Nephesh] into the hand of her enemies (Jer 12:7); and Have You utterly rejected Judah? Has Your SOUL [Nephesh]
loathed Zion? Why have You stricken us so that there is no healing for us? We looked for peace, but there was no
good; And for the time of healing, and there was trouble (Jer 14:19); also I dismissed the three shepherds in one
month. My SOUL [Nephesh] loathed them, and their soul [Nephesh]also abhorred Me (Zec 11:8).

Conclusion: All of the above passages of Scripture prove beyond a shadow of doubt that God
had a Divine Human Soul Nature in the Old Testament, and His Soul definitely had Mind, Will,
and Emotions. In other words: His Soul had Intelligence or the ability to reason things out and
make rational decisions. His Soul had a Will in which He blessed those who obeyed His
commandments, that is, His stated Will, and punished all those who did not. Gods Soul
definitely had Human Emotions such as love, hate, grief, joy, etc.

Therefore, all of the above passages of Scripture definite teach Gods Divine Human Soul
Nature is part of Gods Personality. The Word of God does not inform us as to how Gods
Unbegotten Spirit and begotten Holy Spirit and Soul Natures operated or functioned in His
Glorified Human Spiritual Body to form Gods Personality. However, since man is made in the
image and likeness of God (Gen 1:27), it would behoove us therefore, to know something about how
mans spirit and soul operates in his human physical body to form his personality.

101
The Operation of Mans Spirit and Soul Natures in the Body: Anyone who studies the Bible
knows that mans spirit is not his soul, and his soul is not his body (1Th 5:23; Heb 4:12). This can
clearly be understood in the fact that all three natures of man goes to different places after death
of the body. The body returns to dust. The soul of man goes to Hades or Sheol in the depths of
the earth in an unconscious state, that is, a dream state. The spirit of man returns to God in a
conscience state. If it is saved it stays in heaven, if it is lost God sends it somewhere, probably
back to earth until the resurrection. The Word of God reveals that mans spirit has mind, will,
and emotions, and mans soul has the same. Mans physical brain is mans third mind and it is
his mechanical computer, and it forms part of mans thinking process and his personality.

Medical Science Declared Man Has Two Minds: With all the above Scriptural truths in mind,
I would like to present to my beloved readers a few paragraphs on the part the spirit and soul
natures of man play in forming mans single personality. In the last fifty years, medical science
has proven through their split-brain operations that the two frontal lobes of the brain learn,
analyze information, think differently, has different wills, and can hide information from each
other. Some scientists have called it the two minds of man. They really do not have a clue as to how
this is possible. The reason they do not is that they are looking for some physical thing in the
brain of man to explain this phenomenon. I believe the answer lies in the spiritual natures in
man, and not only his physical nature.

I believe this phenomenon is possible because the spirit and soul of man are two completely
different natures. I believe the human spirit OPERATES through, NOT is, the right lobe of the
physical brain, and the soul OPERATES through, NOT is, the left lobe. I believe the information
from the spirit and soul minds of man is sent to some part of mans brain, which is mans third
mind. This information is analyzes and process and then is sent to mans conscious brain, which
forms mans conscious thought life. In the Bible mans third mind is called dianoia, that is,
mans intellect or understanding. The Word of God speaks of the three minds of man this way:
And you shall love the LORD your God with all your heart [kardia - spirit], with all your soul [psuche], with all your
mind [dianoia intellect - understanding], and with all your strength [of the body].' This is the first commandment (Mk
12:30).

The cerebrum, Latin word for brain, is divided into two large almost symmetrical
hemispheres. Each hemisphere of the cerebrum is divided into 5 lobes. The Frontal is the largest
of the 5 lobes of the forebrain, and is considered by some as the seat of conscience thought,
whereas the other 4 lobes is where subconscious thoughts take place; somehow the Frontal Lobe
of the cerebrum unites the thoughts of the Subconscious Brain of both hemispheres into one
conscious thought.

Both hemispheres of the cerebrum control the functions of the entire body, such as many vital
functions of intellect: thinking, perception, remembering, emotions, language, speech, vision,
hearing, etc. Both hemispheres of the brain are involved in very high complex cognitive
functions, with each hemisphere specializing in complementary fashion for different modes of
thinking. The left hemisphere controls the right side of the body, whereas the right hemisphere
controls the left side.

The left hemisphere is dominate over the right side, and is in charge of our thinking process
the majority of time, regardless of what hand, eye, foot, etc, is dominate. The right hemisphere is
in control when we are dreaming at night or daydreaming. Dr. Levy found indications that the
102
two modes of processing information can interfere with each others learning process at times,
and can have opposing wills. One hemisphere can also hide information from the other side.

Bilaterally Functions of Both Hemispheres: Integrative functions such as learning, using both
ears to locate direction of sounds, emotions, etc. Here is the medical proof of the spirit and soul
minds of man:

According to Dr. Edwards: In 1960, Cal Tech medical scientists discovered in their studies of neurosurgical
patients: that each hemisphere, in a sense, perceives its own reality or perhaps better stated, perceives reality in its
own way. The verbal half of the brain the left half DOMINATES most of the time in individuals with intact
brains as well as in the split-brain patients. It also discovered: the right, nonspeaking half of the brain also
experiences, responds with feeling, and processes information on it own. In 1973, Dr. Roger Sperry, a California
Institute of Technology psychobiology professor, stated: There appears to be two modes of thinking, verbal and
nonverbal, represented rather separately in left and right hemispheres. Science in general, tends to neglect the
nonverbal form of intellect, that is, the right hemisphere.

In our own brains, with intact corpus callosa, communication between the hemispheres melds or reconciles the
TWO PERCEPTIONS, thus preserving our sense of being ONE PERSON, a UNIFIED BEING. We now know
that despite our normal feeling that we are one person a single being our BRAINS are DOUBLE, each half with
its own way of knowing, its own way of perceiving external reality. In a manner of speaking, each of us has TWO
MINDS, TWO CONSCIOUSNESS, mediated and integrated by the connecting cable of nerve fivers between the
hemispheres.

We have learned that the two hemispheres can work together in a number of ways. Sometimes they cooperate with
each half contributing its special abilities and taking on the particular part of the task that is suited to its mode of
information processing. At other times, the hemispheres can work singly; with on half ON and the other half more
or less OFF. And it seem that the hemispheres MAY ALSO CONFLICT, one half attempting to do what the other
half knows it can do better. Furthermore, it may be that each hemisphere has a way of KEEPING KNOWLEDGE
FROM THE OTHER hemisphere.
167
If my beloved readers would like to read an in-depth study on
mans spirit and soul natures, I would suggest my book entitled, The Mysteries of Mans Spirit
and Soul Revealed.

Here is a chart of how mans minds works, as stated above I believe the Soul of Man works
through the Left Hemisphere of the Brain and the Human Spirit of Man works through the
Right Hemisphere. Both of these SPIRIT NATURES IN man are NOT part of the Physical Body of
man, even though it uses parts of the body to express itself!

Left Brain Functions Right Brain Functions
General Description: The Left Hemisphere of the Brain
analyzes, forming ideas and concepts, counts, marks
time, plans step-by-step procedures, verbalizes, and
makes rational statements based on logic. It processes
information in a linear, step-by-step systematic style
fashion that analyzes each part that make up an idea,
concept, or pattern.

Linear reasoning functions of language such as
grammar and word production are in this hemisphere,
which definitely makes a difference in the way the
information is processed and eventually stored in
memory.

Because it examines all parts of a problem, it processes
information slower. It is good at categorizing and
General Description: The Right Hemisphere of the Brain
sees things that may be imaginary existing only in the
minds eye or recall things that may be real. It is the
craftsman, the inventor, the artist, etc. It has imagination,
visualization, perceptual and spatial skills in creativity.
Perceptual information from the eyes, ears, and rest of
the body is sent to this hemisphere, along with motor
information that is sent out to the body.

The mode of processing information is rapid, complex,
whole-pattern, spatial, and perceptual. It may start
processing information anywhere, or take everything at
once. It does not process information in a logical or
systematic fashion.

Since it does not have very good verbal control, you
103
naming ideas, concepts, or things. It is good at analyzing
the most noticeable and important characteristics of an
idea or concept, and it shuts down in sleep.
cannot reason with it. You cannot get it to make logical
propositions such as: This is good and that is bad.
Dreaming takes place on this side of the brain.
Verbal and Written Information: It reasoning powers
are based on comprehension of word meanings and
grammar. It uses words to name, describe, and define
things.
Nonverbal and Imagistic Information: It reasons by the
use of precise images or pictures formed in the minds
eye. It has a minimal connection with words, and it
operates by awareness of things.
Language: It recognizes and focus on grammar or
sentence structure, lexical meaning of words, that is,
vocabulary, word and phrase patterns, literal meaning
vs figurative meaning of sentences, contextual structure,
and theoretical ideas and concepts.
Language: It recognizes accentuation and the rise and fall
of the voice in speaking, the patterns of rhythm, sound,
and stress in words spoken, contextual structure, and
pragmatic language that is based on practical rather than
theoretical ideas and concepts.
Convergent Information: It tends to follow only well-
established patterns of information, which have been
accepted as facts.
Divergent Information: It uses a variety of assertions,
especially unfamiliar theories, as bases for assumptions in
making deductions
Sequential and Analytical Reasoning: It is a serial type
of processing, which breaks down all important
information into its separate components or categories.
The parts are then slowly processed, one at a time, in a
very orderly, logical, analytic, computer-like-fashion. It
takes time to identify all parts of the information input.

Linear Reasoning: Thinking in terms of linked ideas,
one thought directly following another, often leading to
form a well-established pattern of conclusions, which
are based on facts and not assumptions. It can work
under the pressure of time limits and reach conclusions.
In other words it is very time conscious.
Simultaneous and Holistic Reasoning: It is parallel type
of processing and is particularly good at grasping
patterns of relations between the parts of a problem or
something, and then combining the parts simultaneously
to eventually arrive at a complete picture or solution;
example: putting together a Jigsaw puzzle.

It can visualize how things exist in space and how the
parts go together to make up the whole. It puts the pieces
together to form a picture or pattern. This will often lead
to assumptive conclusions. It put no time limit on solving a
problem. It will keep searching for an answer even after
months.
Logical or Rational Reasoning: It operates by rules of
logic. Drawing conclusions based on logic: one thing
following another in logical order for example, a
mathematical theorem or a well-stated argument. It
draws conclusions based on reason and facts drawn
from research of others.
Intuitive or Non-rational Reasoning: It operates by what
one feels to be true without knowing the facts. It makes
leaps of insight, often based on incomplete patterns,
hunches, feelings, assumptions, or visual images. It
understands metaphors, it create new combinations of
ideas.
Objective Reasoning: Its is not influenced by personal
feelings or opinions in considering and representing
facts.
Subjective Reasoning: It is based on or influenced by
personal feelings, tastes, or opinions. It bias in its
examination of facts.
Abstract Reasoning: It denotes an idea, quality, or state
rather than a concrete object.

Temporal: It keeps tract of time, organizing things in a
timely fashion, one thing after another: Doing first
things first, second things second, etc. It can think or
meditate in the present or past time modes.

Digital: It uses calculation by a numerical method as in
counting.
Analogical Reasoning: It sees a likeness between things;
understanding metaphoric relationships.

Non-temporal: Without a sense of time. It does not have a
good sense of time and does not seem to comprehend
what is meant by the term wasting time. It can think or
meditate in the present or future time modes.

Spatial: Seeing where things are in relation to other
things, and how parts go together to form a whole.
Mathematics: It can interpret and understand counting
measurement, that is, perform exact numerical
calculation, numerical comparison, and estimation
through direct fact retrieval.
Mathematics: It can interpret and understand shapes and
motions. It can perform approximate numerical
calculation, numerical comparison, and estimation, but it
operates more on the visual perspective.
Symbolic Concepts: It can think using symbols to stand
for something; for example: the sign + stands for the
process of addition.
Concrete Concepts: It seems to think of the thing as-it-is
at that present moment. It sees things for what they
simply are in all of their awesome complexity.
104
Emotions: It tends to meditate on the positive things of
life. It is strongly connected with what is good, just,
moral, and proper. Because it operates by logic it tends
to live by its beliefs.
Emotions: It tends to meditate on the negative things of
life, such as the abnormal, immoral, and feelings that are
out of conscious control like worry, fear, etc. It play a
major role in our emotional expression.

Wikipedia encyclopedia under the heading of Lateralization of Brain Function stated: Linear
[straight or nearly straight line] reasoning and language functions such as grammar and vocabulary often are lateralized
to the left hemisphere of the brain. In contrast, prosodic [The patterns of rhythm and sound used in poetry: The patterns of
stress and intonation in a language] language functions, such as intonation and accentuation, often are lateralized to the
right hemisphere of the brain. Functions such as the processing of visual and audiological stimuli, spatial
manipulation, facial perception, and artistic ability seem to be functions of the right hemisphere. Other integrative
functions, including arithmetic binaural sound localization, and emotions, seem more bilaterally controlled
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lateralization_of_brain_function).

Wikipedia encyclopedia under the heading of Roger Wolcott Sperry stated: He was a
neuropsychologist, neurobiologist and Nobel laureate who, together with David Hunter Hubel and Torsten Nils
Wiesel, won the 1981 Nobel Prize in Medicine for his work with split-brain research. In his Nobel-winning work,
Sperry tested ten patients who had undergone an operation developed in 1940 by William Van Wagenen, a
neurosurgeon in Rochester, NY. The surgery, designed to treat epileptics with intractable grand mal seizures,
involves severing the corpus callosum, the area of the brain used to transfer signals between the right and left
hemispheres.

Sperry and his colleagues tested these patients with tasks that were known to be dependent on specific
hemispheres of the brain and demonstrated that the two halves of the brain may each contain consciousness. In his
words, each hemisphere is indeed a conscious system in its own right, perceiving, thinking, remembering, reasoning,
willing, and emoting [i.e. portray emotion in a theatrical manner], all at a characteristically human level, and both
the left and the right hemisphere may be conscious simultaneously in different, even in mutually conflicting, mental
experiences that run along in parallel. This research contributed greatly to understanding the lateralization of
brain function. In 1989, Sperry also received the National Medal of Science
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Wolcott_Sperry).

A Biblical Example of Mans Spirit and Soul Communicating and Expressing Itself in the
Body: Could it be that the left hemisphere of the brain is how the soul of man communicates and
expresses itself in the body, and the right hemisphere of the brain is how the spirit communicates
and expresses itself in the body. Could it be that the spirit and soul sends its inputs to some
physical element in the brain, at least I think it could be in the brain, which computes the
subconscious inputs of the spirit and soul and produces a single conscious thought, that is, it
sends it to mans conscious brain. If the soul of man operates through the left hemisphere of the
brain, which is the dominant nature of mans brain, this would mean that MOST of mans verbal
communication comes from his soul nature.

According to the apostle Paul, Gods Holy Spirit ANOINTS mans spirit to pray and sing in
tongues, that is, a language that is unknown to the speaker for he or she was not taught that
language. Paul also declared in the same breath that there is another part of mans mind, which
I believe is probably a combination of the soul and mans physical mind (dianoia), which did not
understand what his spirit was saying. He then went on to say that he would allow his spirit to
prays and sings in tongues without his soul and physical intellect understanding what is being
said. He also declared that he would also allow his soul and intellect to pray and sing in a
language it knew.

The apostle Paul said it this way: For if I pray in a tongue, MY SPIRIT PRAYS [not the Holy Spirit], but my
understanding [nous i.e. mind] is unfruitful. What is the conclusion then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will also pray
with the understanding [nous i.e. my mind]. I will sing with the spirit, and I will also sing with the understanding [nous i.e. my
105
mind] (1Co 14:15). Since Paul revealed that the Holy Spirit is the one that gives the human spirit of
redeem man the ability to pray in a language that is not known by the speaker (1Co 12:4-11), the
Holy Spirit must reside in and operate through the human spirit nature of man!

Since most of mans verbal communication is in a language he knows, this must mean it is
probably coming from his soul and intellect of his brain. The Bible does declare mans soul and
intellect should rule over or have control over his own human spirit. The Word of God says it
this way: WHOEVER has no rule over his own spirit is like a city broken down, without walls (Pro 25:28). This
is why the SOUL and INTELLECT of Gods children MUST ALLOW Gods Spirit in their human
spirit to lead, guide, and speak to them and through them (Rom 8:14). Therefore, with these
Biblical and Scientific facts in mind, it is only logical to assume that Gods personality, like mans
personality, must be a combination of all His Natures. If my readers would like to read a study on
mans spirit, soul, body natures, I would suggest my book entitled, The Mysteries of the Spirit and
Soul of Man Revealed.

Gods Unbegotten Spirit Has Never and Can Never Be Seen

There is much confusion in the religious world concerning Gods Unbegotten Spirit Essence.
Mystery Babylons teaching on Gods Essence being an omnipresent spirit has blinded many to
Gods true Essence. The true Essence of God in both the Old and New Testaments is a difficult
subject to understand, but God gave us enough scriptures in His Holy Word to have some
understanding of it. Therefore, let us examine the scriptures that teach this truth.

According to the Bible, Gods Eternal Spirit Nature has never, and will never be, seen by any
man or angel. John said it this way: No man has seen [..as.|] God at any time (Jn 1:18; also 1Jn 4:12).
Paul confirmed this teaching when he said: no man has seen [.t e.|] God nor can see [te.t|] Him (1Ti
6:16). The Greek verb . . as.| is in the perfect or past tense, active voice, and indicative mood;
and the verb .te.| is in the aorist tense, and active voice indicative mood,; and the verb te.t| is
in the aorist tense, active voice, infinite mood. Therefore, according to the apostles, no one has
seen God in the past, and no one will be able to see God in the future, that is, Gods Spirit
Essence.

With the above truth in mind, what does the Bible mean by the above undeniable scriptural
statements of fact? Did not the apostles John and Paul, who declared Jesus Christ is God the
Father see Him. Did not all the apostles and the disciples see and handle our Lord. Therefore, did
they not see God! Did not the Prophets and Patriarchs in the Old Testament declare that they
had seen God. Now, either the Bible contradicts itself, or the preceding scriptures were referring
to the fact that no man or angel has or can see Gods Unbegotten invisible Spirit Nature, which
according to the Paul is the eternal, immortal, [and] invisible God (1Ti 1:17, NIV).

If the above is not true, then Oneness and Trinitarian Preachers will have to become
Jehovahs Witnesses, that is Arians, and deny the Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, it is
very evident that none of them saw God in His Essence as an Eternal Spirit Being, but what they
saw was Gods one and only Visible Self, which was Christs Glorified Human Spiritual Body in
the Old Testament, and Christ Jesus Human Natural Body in the New Testament.

Gods visible and invisible natures may be illustrated this way: A friend of yours comes to you
and says: I seen your father yesterday. In one sense of the word, your friend did see your father, but
106
in another sense, he did not. What he saw was the body, which was definitely part of your
fathers makeup, but the being who lived in the body he did not see. It is also like a woman
standing over the coffin of her father, and as she looked at the corpse and says: he going. By this
expression, she means that his spirit and soul, which lived in the body was going. Another way to
express this truth may be illustrated by a light bulb: A man looks at a light bulb and says: I see
light. In one sense of the word, he did see light in the form of a light bulb, but someone might ask
him: did you see the true essence of light, i.e., all the different atoms such as charged particles of electrons and
protons inside the light bulb that made light appear? The answer would obviously be no.

Therefore, in one very real sense men did see God when they looked upon Christ, for they saw
Gods Human Body Nature, which is definitely a part of God Himself. However, in another sense
they did not see God, for they did not see Gods Spirit and Soul Essence that dwelt in that Body.
For this reason, the only way any of us will ever see God, is when we look upon His one and only
glorious manifestation of Himself, which today is in the Human Glorified Spiritual Body of the
Lord Jesus Christ (Col 2:9)! This is all of God we will ever see and converse with.

Before Time Began, Gods Unbegotten Spirit
Begot A Divine Holy Spirit, Who Dwelt in A
Divine Human Soul and Glorified Human Spiritual Body

As stated before, I believe God the Fathers personality is composed of three separated and
distinct Natures, that is, His Divine Unbegotten Spirit Essence and His begotten Divine Holy
Spirit, Soul, and Glorified Spiritual Body Natures. When I say God begot a Human Nature, I
mean God definitely had a real Nature as a Human Being. This one being or person was known
as Christ or the Word. When I use the term three Natures of Christ, I use it to show the THREE
DISTINCTIONS in Gods Godhead that forms Gods personality. The Bible teaches that
everything that makes God, God, dwells in Christ. With this truth in mind, let us continue our
study on the three natures of YHWH, the one and only true God.

In this section and following sections of this chapter, I will be proving that God, before time
began, begot His Divine Human Natures. As I have demonstrated above, the Bible definitely
teaches that God had a Soul Nature in the OT. Therefore, it is only logical to ASSUME that the
Gods Image, Form, or personal Visible Manifestation of Himself was His Divine Human
Spiritual Body. In the following Scriptural and historical proof, I will present evidence that God
definitely begot His Human Natures before the beginning of time:

1) The Bible teaches that Christ, who existed in the Old Testament, was a Glorified Human
Being. Our Lord speaking about His preexistence declared that He was a HEAVENLY MAN before
Bethlehem. He said: And no one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven, {even} the Son
of MAN (Jn 3:13, NAS). Lets compare this verse with John 6:62, where Jesus said: What and if ye shall
see the Son of MAN ascend up [i.e. to heaven] where He was BEFORE? If the Christ or Logos did not want us
to understand that He existed had a Human Nature in the Old Testament, then why did He refer
to Himself as a MAN? Why did He not use a general or ambiguous term such as Me to express
His preexistence?

2) The apostle Paul called the Fathers Glorified Spiritual Body in the OT the FORM of God.
He said the Logos: who, existing in the FORM [morphe] of God, counted not the being on an equality with God a
thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form [morphe] of a servant, being made in the likeness of men;
107
and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient even unto death, yea, the death of the
cross (Phi 2:6-8, ASV). In these verses Paul definitely interpreted part of John 1:1; he declared that
the Logos existed as God the Fathers Visible Glorified Body or Self before He emptied Himself
of it, and took the physical body of flesh and blood.

Harvard Professor Joseph Thayer accurately interpreted this passage and defined morphe
as: the form by which a person or thing strikes the vision; the external appearance Phil. 2:6 Phil. 2:7; this whole
passage (as I have shown more fully in the Zeitschr is to be explained as follows: who, although (FORMERLY
when he was e ,e, [the Logos] acase,) He BORE the FORM (in which HE APPEARED to the inhabitants of heaven)
of God yet did not think that THIS EQUALITY with God was to be EAGERLY CLUNG to or RETAINED (see
a:a,e,, 2), but EMPTIED himself of IT (see s.|e., 1) so as to assume the form of a servant [i.e. the Natural Physical
Body of Man], in that he became like unto men and was found in fashion as a man.
168
Without doubt, Dr.
Thayer has a true understanding of this verse.

If anyone has any doubt that morphe is referring to the Christ existing in the OT as God the
Fathers Visible Self, then let them read the following definitions of morphe by other competent
Greek Scholars. Archbishop Trench said it this way: St. Paul speaks of the Word [the Logos] before His
incarnation as SUBSISTING in the FORM of God. It was with respect of God, He so EMPTIED Himself of His
GLORY.
169
According to the Bible, Dr. Thayer, and Archbishop Trench, the EQUALITY and
GLORY Christ emptied Himself of, when He was conceived in Marys womb, was His Divine
Glorified Spiritual Body.

Dr. Robert Patton, who was a Greek Professor at the University of New York in the nineteen
century, speaking of the Greek word morphe wrote: The word morphe CANNOT, we believe, be found
in Classical, Septuagint, New Testament, or Patristic Greek, in the SENSE of essence, except perhaps in some of
the [Ante Nicene] Fathers, were an attempt is made to explain the passage.... We cannot conceive, then, that the
Philippians, when they read this understood any thing more or less than this: Who, being the VISIBLE, palpable,
MANIFEST EXPRESSION of the Deity; beaming with divine effulgence, God MANIFEST in the FLESH, the
express image of His person; alluding principally to that external display of divine effulgence, by which the godhead
shone through the MAN.
170


The Expositor's Greek Testament defined morphe this way: In the LXX [the Greek Septuagint] morphe
denotes the form, appearance, look, or likeness, of someone, that by which those BEHOLDING him would judge
him. See Job 4:16, Dan 5:6, and three other places, Wisd. 18:1,4 and Macc. 15:4. Plainly, from the context of these
passages, the word had come, in later Greek, to receive a vague, general meaning, FAR REMOVED from the
accurate, metaphysical content which belonged to it in writers like Plato and Aristotle.
171


Professor Walter Martin also commented on this verse, and others, in his arguments against
the Jehovahs Witnesses prove that the Lord Jesus Christ existed in the OT as YHWH in a
Human Form. He wrote: If the Hebrew Old Testament tells us anything, it is the fact that there is but one God:
Hear, O hear, Israel: The LORD is one LORD, [YHWH - Deu 6:4].... The God of the Old Testament and the God and
Father of our Lord Jesus Christ are ONE and the SAME PERSON. Throughout the entire content of inspired
Scripture the fact of Christ's identity is clearly taught. He is revealed as JEHOVAH GOD in HUMAN FORM (Isaiah
9:6; Micah 5:2; Isaiah 7:14; John 1:1; 8:58; 17:5; cf Exodus 3:14; and Hebrews 1:3; Philippians 2:11; Colossians
2:9; and Revelation 1:8, 17, 18).... Within the realm of Old Testament Scripture, Jehovah the Lord of Host has
revealed His plan to appear in human form and has fulfilled the several prophecies concerning this miracle in the
person of Jesus Christ....

Jehovah's Witnesses can present no argument to refute this plain declaration of Scripture, namely that
JEHOVAH and CHRIST are ONE and the SAME, since the very term Immanuel God or Jehovah with us belies any
other interpretation. [In Micah 5:2 which refers to Jesus Christ] the term going forth can be rendered origin. We know
that the only one who fits this description, whose origin is from everlasting, must be God Himself, since he alone is
the eternally existing One (Isaiah 44:6, 8).... St. Paul in the second chapter of Philippians removes all doubts on this
108
question when he writes, guided by the Holy Spirit, that Christ NEVER CEASED to be JEHOVAH [i.e. YHWHS
personal form or body] even during His earthly incarnation.
172


Origen interpreted the passage in Philippians this way: And with respect to His having descended
among men, He was PREVIOUSLY in the FORM of God; and through benevolence, divested Himself (of His
GLORY), that He might be capable of being received by men.
173
Origen also declared: But you will ask if, when
He was trans-figured before those who were led up by Him into the lofty mountain, He appeared to them in the
FORM of God, in which He FORMERLY was [in], so that He had to those below the form of a servant, but to those
who had followed Him after the six days to the lofty mountain, He had not that form, but the form of God.
174


Augustine interpreted this passage the very same way, when he wrote: He, being in the FORM of
God emptied Himself by taking the form of a servant, both acts and suffers, and receives, in that same form of a
servant, what the apostle goes on to mention: He humbled Himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death
of the cross.
175


My translation of Phillipans 2:6: The Logos who existing as the outward visible [Human Glorified Spiritual] body
of God [the Father], did not consider [this] equality [i.e. attribute] a prize to be retained, therefore He emptied Himself [of
His Divine Glorified Spiritual Body] when He became generated in the likeness of men, taking the outward visible body of a
slave [i.e. a flesh, bone, and blood body]. Being found in the same condition or circumstance as a human being, He humbled
Himself becoming submissive to the death [of fleshly desires], moreover of the death of the cross.

Let my beloved readers take note to the fact that all the above Greek scholars, and may I also
add many ancient preachers, clearly revealed that the Greek language declared: the Logos
existed as the Divine Human Glorified Spiritual Body of God BEFORE He took on a real Human
Physical and chemical Body at Bethlehem. In addition, even after He took on a human slaves
body with all of its chemistry, He never cease being God the Father Human Visible Self, as Dr.
Martin has revealed. Let us not forget that John called God the Fathers Visible Manifestation of
Himself in the OT the Word or Logos, as I have shown before in my exposition of Jn 1:1-2.

3) The apostle Paul also called Gods OT glorious Form or Body, the Image of God. Paul
declared that the Logos was: the brightness of His [the Father's] glory [doxa] and the express IMAGE [charakter] of
His person [hypostasis] (Heb 1:2-3). The Greek words hypostasis according to Louw-Nida Greek-
English Lexicon, is defined as: the essential or basic nature of an entity substance, nature, essence, real
being. The Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament defined the Greek word charakter as:
the exact likeness, full expression. The apostles statement here is very clear, that is, Christ is the
visible Form, Image, or Body of God the Fathers invisible Spirit and Soul Essence.

If we could ask Paul: Whose glory did the prophets see in the Old Testament, or whom did the glory belong
to, and what was that glory, what do you think he would say? Let us allow Paul to answer these
questions. Paul speaking of the Fathers glorious OT Human Spiritual Body again, called it: the
IMAGE [eikon] of the invisible God (Col 1:15). The Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament
defined the Greek word eikon as: the likeness, image; form, [or] appearance of something. Eikon is
used 23 times in the NT and is always translated as image. Paul referring to Gods Image
declared: the glory [doxa] of God [is] in the face of Jesus Christ (2Co 4:4, 6). For this reason, according to
the apostle, when the prophets of the OT saw Gods glory, they saw YHWH or the Logos face.
Therefore, the Logos is the full expression, the exact likeness, or Gods Visible Divine Human
Nature; in other words, Christ is God the Fathers Visible Human Self.

Paul without any dispute clearly, unmistakably revealed that the term Image of God was a
phrase that definitely referred to Gods own visible outward Body. Paul taught this truth, when
he was instructing the Corinthian Church about outward holiness standard for men and women.
109
He told them that a woman should not cut her hair, for her uncut hair was given for a covering,
but if a man has uncut hair, it is an ignominy in the sight of God. The apostle then gave us the
reason why it is a disgrace for a man to wear his hair long. He said: For a man indeed ought not to
cover his head, since he is the IMAGE [eikon] of GOD (1Co 11:7, 14)? According to the above passages of
scripture, Christ is the IMAGE and GLORY o f God.

Let my beloved readers take note, Paul declared that a man should not cover his head, or have
long hair hanging down below his chin, because man is made in Christs own personal Image.
The Bible says it this way in the Greek Septuagint: God made man, according to the IMAGE [eikon] of
GOD He made him (Gen 1:27, LXE). Therefore, the only logical deduction one can make from this
statement of Paul concerning Gods own Image is: Christ must have had short hair when He created
Adam. This is the only interpretation that would make any sense out of Pauls argument against
longhaired men.

From the following passages of scripture were eikon is used, one should easily perceive that
eikon means the outward visible form or appearance of a person or thing. Jesus asked the
religious hypocrites, who were trying to trap Him about paying tribute to Caesar: Whose is this
image [eikon] (Mt 22:20-21). Can anyone argue the fact that Caesars visible image was on the coin,
i.e. the outward form and shape of his bodily features was on the coin? God told Elijah that he
had 7,000 men: who have not bowed the knee to the image [eikon] of Baal (Rom 11:4). Was the image of
Baal an imaginary and invisible figure, or did it have some kind of body and appearance that
men could see and bow their knee to it?

Conclusion: All of the above scriptures cited thus far in this chapter, all declared: God had a
Divine Human Soul as well as a Divine Human Glorified Spiritual Body in the OT, which became Jesus Christ in the
NT! Therefore, when the Bible speaks of the Logos as the Image, Form, or Human Spiritual Body
of God the Father, it can only mean one thing, that is, Christ is the Visible Divine Human Nature
of Gods invisible Unbegotten Spirit Essence. This great immutable truth needs to be proclaimed
among all who call themselves Christians.

4) According to the Book of Proverbs, God begot His Divine Holy Spirit, Soul, and Spiritual
Body before time began: The LORD FORMED Me from the beginning, BEFORE He created anything else. I
was appointed in ages past, at the very first, BEFORE the earth began. I was BORN BEFORE the oceans were
created, before the springs bubbled forth their waters. Before the mountains and the hills were formed, I was BORN
BEFORE He had made the earth and fields and the first handfuls of soil. I was there when He established the
heavens, when He drew the horizon on the oceans. I was there when He set the clouds above, when He established
the deep fountains of the earth. I was there when He set the limits of the seas, so they would not spread beyond their
boundaries. And when He marked off the earth's foundations, I was the Architect at His side. I was His constant
delight, rejoicing always in His presence (Pro 8:22-30, NLT).

Many ancient Rabbis taught the same above truth: Should one ask: Is it not written, Ye saw no
manner of similitude? The answer would be: Truly we did behold Him under a certain similitude, for is it not written,
and the similitude of the LORD should he [Moses] behold [Num 12:18].... Even that similitude was a likeness of the
HOLY ONE, blessed be He.... For in the beginning... when He CREATED the FORM of SUPERNAL MAN to be
known according to the style YHWH in order that He might be known by His attributes and perceived in each
attributes separately.
176
Let my beloved readers take note, these Rabbis taught that God begot a
DIVINE HUMAN NATURE to reveal Himself to His creation.

According to Justin Martyr (150 AD), the orthodox Jews of his day believed in and taught that
God had a Divine Human Nature in the Old Testament. In the Dialogue of Justin with Trypho
110
the Jew, Justin says: Just as YOUR TEACHERS suppose, fancying that the FATHER of all, the
UNBEGOTTEN GOD, has HANDS and FEET, and FINGERS, and a SOUL, like a composite being; and they for
this reason teach that it was the Father Himself who appeared to Abraham and to Jacob.
177


It is very evident that Justin believed in Nimrods pagan doctrine, that is, god is an
omnipresent spirit in his personal essence. It is a pity that Justin judge truth by what Plato and
Philo taught about God, instead of what the Bible taught about Him. Since the ancient Jews
believed that God had a Divine Human Nature in the OT, why is it so hard for theologians to
believe it today? Could it be that they are also blinded by their pagan omnipresent spirit
doctrine, and their belief in Emperor-Pope Constantines Nicene Creed?

Dr. A. T. Roberson, the well known Baptist Greek Scholar, declared that ancient Jews called
Gods visible personal Manifestation of Himself by the Hebrew title MEMRA, which means the
Word. Roberson wrote: Logos is common for reason as well as speech. Heraclitus used it for the principle which
controls the universe. The STOICS employed it for the SOUL of the world (anima mundi). The Hebrew MEMRA
was used in the Targums for the MANIFESTATION of God, like the Angel of Jehovah and the WISDOM of God in
PR 8:23. The personal pre-existence of Christ is taught by Paul (2Co 8:9; Php 2:6f.; Col 1:17) and in Heb 1:2f. and
in Joh 17:5.
178
Let my beloved readers take note, according to Dr. Robertson, and the above
Apostolic Pentecostal Scholars, the Jewish Doctors of the Law declared: Wisdom in Proverb the eight
chapter represented the MANIFESTED God or the VISIBLE God.

Our Lord and Savior Himself speaking of His Deification as the only begotten God stated: No
man has seen God at any time; the ONLY BEGOTTEN GOD [.e, - Theos], who is in the bosom of the Father, He has
explained Him (Jn 1:18, New American Standard); or O.e| eue.t, ..as.| :. :e. e|e,.|, .e, e .| .t, e|
se:e| eu :ae, .s.t|e, .,cae (Novum Testamentum Graece, Nestle-Aland 27th Edition); YHWH, God the
Father, said the very same thing about Himself when He declared: My witnesses are you -- declares
the LORD -- My servant, whom I have chosen. To the end that you may take thought, And believe in Me, And
understand that I am He: Before Me NO God was FORMED, And after Me none shall exist (Isa 43:10, JPS
TANAKH). Both of these passages of scriptures will be thoroughly examined shortly.

According to Alfred Edersheim, in his book The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, ancient
Rabbis taught Christ was BEGOTTEN before time began: The LXX translators convey the idea, that
the existence of this Messiah was regarded as premundane [i.e. before the world] before the morning-star (b Ps. cx. [i.e.
I have begotten thee from the womb before the morning, LEX]), andHis Person and dignity as superior to that of men and
Angels: 'the Angel of the Great Council,' (d Is. ix. 6) probably the ANGEL of the FACE, a view fully confirmed by
the rendering of the Targum. The Midrash on PROV. viii. (b Ed. Lemb. p. 7 a) expressly mentions the MESSIAH
among the seven things created BEFORE the WORLD.
179
Since ancient Jewish Rabbis understood
Wisdom in Proverb the eighth chapter to refer to the invisible God begetting a Divine
Supernatural Man so He could become visible, let us thoroughly examine this passage of
scripture.

The Key to Understanding the Birthing Process of Christ in Proverbs 8:22-30:
The JPS Tanakh of the Holy Scriptures, published by Jewish Publication Society, translated this
passage this way: The LORD created [qanah - FORMED] Me at the beginning of His course, as the first of His
works of old. In the distant past I was FASHIONED [nacak]. BEFORE the foundation of the mountains were sunk,
BEFORE the hills I was BORN [chuwll. He had not yet made earth and fields, or the worlds first clumps of clay. I
was there when He set the heavens into place. I was with Him as a Confidant [builder] a source of delight every day,
rejoicing before [paniym] Him at all times, rejoicing in His inhabited world, finding delight with mankind.

The Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament by Drs. R. Laird Harris, Gleason L. Archer
Jr., Bruce K. Waltke defined qnh as: get, acquire, create. There are six places where qn: appears to
111
mean create. Most interesting is the use in Prov 8:22. If we are right, then Prov tells us of the eternal generation
of Wisdom, i.e. Christ (Jn I; Lk 11:49). It is of interest that all of the derivatives [of the root] show the usual meaning
acquire, possess (#239.0).

Dr Strong defined the Hebrew verb nacak to means: to pour out; cuwl means: to twist or whirl
(in a circular or spiral manner); and paniym means: the face as the part that turns.
180
The Hebrew and
Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament by Drs. Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner,
defined cuwl as: 1. to be in labour Is 13
8
23
4f
26
17f
45
10
54
1
66
7f
Hab 3
10
Sir 48
19
, Jr 4
31
to cause labour pains Ps
29
9
(tAlY"a; :: Scharbert 22f: makes to whirl). 2. to bring forth (through labour pains) Dt 32
18
Is 51
2
Ps 90
2
Job 39
1

Pr 25
23
to be brought forth (through labour pains) Ps 51
7
Jb 15
7
Ps 8
24f
, Ps 90
2
Is 66
8
(#823).

It is should be noted that the Hebrew words used throughout Genesis for God creating man
and animals are bara and asah, which means to create or make something.
181
Since Solomon did
not use these Hebrew words to describe the birth of Christ but qanah, that is, to acquire or produce, I
believe the words create or made is NOT what God intended for His children to understand. I
believe God wanted His people to understand that Gods Divine Holy Spirit, Soul, and Glorified
Spiritual Body came into being through a type of BIRTHING PROCESS.

This is why God chose to use the Hebrew word cuwl to describe the birth of Christ, which to
me implies: God FORMED Christs Natures by some kind of internal whirling motion that took place in Gods
Eternal Spirit Substance, and this process of labour continued until Christ was born or begotten.
Therefore, I BELIEVE this birthing process included all of Gods Divine Natures, that is, His Holy
Spirit, Soul, and Spiritual Body. Since all of the Natures were BEGOTTEN and COMPOSED of
Gods Unbegotten Spirit, they are all part of God Himself.

Brentons English translation of the Greek Septuagint translated the above passage this way:
The Lord made [ktizo] Me the beginning of His ways for His works. He established Me before time was in the
beginning, before He made the earth He begets [gennao] Me. I was by Him, suiting [harmos] Myself to Him, I was
that wherein He took delight; and daily I rejoiced in His Presence continually.

Dr. Thayer defined the Greek word ktizo this way: to create, of God creating the world, man, etc.,
Mark 13:19; 1 Cor. 11:9. [It is] equivalent to form, shape, i. e. (for SUBSTANCE) COMPLETELY to CHANGE, to
TRANSFORM.
182
Dr. Bauer defined the Greek word gennao as: to cause something to come into existence,
primarily through procreation or parturition [i.e. giving birth].
183
Drs. Louw and Nida defined the Greek
word harmos to mean: part of the body, which joins two parts together, [i.e. a] joint He 4.12. In the use of
harmos the emphasis is not upon the joints as a moving part of the body, but as a means by which different parts of
the body are effectively joined together.
184


Conclusion: Since Christ was the only begotten God before creation began, that is, before the
time began, what Nature of Christ was begotten? Was it His Holy Spirit Nature, His Soul
Nature, or His Spiritual Body Nature? You say the Bible does not tell us! Well, lets rephrase the
question. Since Christ is the only begotten God, what Nature of Christ was God? Was it begotten
Divine Holy Spirit Nature, His Divine Human Soul Nature, or His Divine Human Spiritual Body
Nature? Well, since all three Natures was begotten by the Unbegotten Spirit Substance of God,
and was composed of Gods very Spirit Substance, all three Natures must be part of God
Himself; in other words, all of Christs very Being was God! Therefore, all of Gods very Being
became Christ, and Christ was all of Gods very Being (Col 2:9), for He is the one and only Person
of God, or Gods Visible Self!

112
Some theologians teach that Wisdom in the above passage of Scripture is nothing more than a
personification of a non-existent-human being. Even thou wisdom is personified as a woman in
verses 1, 11, 12, and 14 of this chapter of Proverbs, there can be no doubt that the wisdom in the
above verses of scripture is NOT referring to Gods attribute of wisdom. If it refers to an
attribute of God, did Gods create, formed, or BEGET His own wisdom (vs 22), or how was wisdom
BORN (vs 24), and how can an impersonal attribute REJOICE (vs 30)? If God BEGOT the attribute of
wisdom before time began, then there must have been a time when He was without this attribute!

It is apparent to any unbiased mind that wisdom is much more than an impersonal attribute
of God in these verses of Scripture. Now if one uses the allegorical method of interpreting this
passage of Scripture, it does not matter what WORDS God used to expressed His truth, for the
allegorist can negate any part of Gods holy infallible WORD he or she wishes to, if it does not
agree with their interpretation. On the other hand, if one interprets this passage of Scripture
LITERALLY, as I do, then ever WORD of God has specific meaning, which communicates Gods
truth!

Let us examine the biblical facts: 1) Wisdom is presented as a living entity, who was begotten
by God Himself (vs 22). When this took placed something in God began to move internally in
Him, or be transformed in Him, in a whirling spiral manner (vss 24, 25). 2) Wisdom came into
being before God created the universe or anything else (vss 23-26). 3) Wisdom is pictured as a
Master Builder or Creator who was rejoicing always in His presence [paniym - FACE] (vs 30, NIV). Since
Christ is the Wisdom and Face of God (1Co 1:24; 2Co 4:6), I believe the above verse is teaching that
the Master Builder or Creator rejoiced always as Gods FACE, meaning Gods outward Visible
Manifestation of Himself.

If Wisdom in this passage refers to God begetting or transforming a portion of His Eternal
Divine Spirit Substance into three Divine Natures, then this passage, and all the other passages of
Scriptures, which speak of Gods Divine Human Natures in the Old and New Testaments would
harmonize perfectly. Therefore, whatever interpretation one wants to place upon the Gods
infallible words in this passage of Scripture, all must agree, Wisdom came into being before
creation of the world began! Let examine history and see how ancient Oneness Preachers and the
Catholic Two-God Preachers interpreted this passage in Proverbs.

Ancient Oneness Preachers Interpretation of Proverbs Eight: All ancient Oneness
Preachers believed Christ existed in the Old Testament as God the Father, not as the Son of God.
Tertullian revealed that Praxeas and other early Apostolic Pentecostals of the 2nd and 3rd centuries
believed that the Logos or Christ was God the Fathers visible Divine Humanity in the OT. This can
be seen in Tertullians argument against them. Tertullian wrote: This for CERTAIN is He [Christ] who,
being in the FORM of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God [Phi 2:6]. In what FORM of God? Of course,
he [Paul] means in some FORM, not in none. For who [among the Jesus Name Preachers] will DENY that GOD is a BODY,
although God is a Spirit [Jn 4:24]? For [a] SPIRIT has a BODILY SUBSTANCE of its own kind, in ITS OWN
FORM.
185


Let my beloved readers take note to Tertullians argument: First he quotes Philippians 2:6,
which reveals that Christ was the form, image, or body of God in the OT. Then he revealed that
none of Gods Oneness Preachers would deny the fact that God the Father, in His Unbegotten Spirit
Essence had a BODY. Either one has to believe that the Father and Christ had separate bodies as
Tertullian believed, or they have to believe that these Apostolics Pentecostals believed Christ was
the body of God in the OT, that is, God the Fathers Visible Self.
113

Tertullian continued his argument: The Son likewise acknowledges the Father, speaking in His own
person, under the name of Wisdom: The Lord FORMED Me as the beginning of His ways, with a view to His own
works; BEFORE all the hills did He BEGET Me [Pro 8:22-23]. The very WORD Himself, who is spoken of under
the name both of Wisdom and of Reason, and of the ENTIRE DIVINE SOUL and SPIRIT. He became also the Son of
God, and was BEGOTTEN when He PROCEEDED FORTH from Him. Do you [Praxeas] then GRANT that the
WORD is a certain substance, CONSTRUCTED by the [Unbegotten] SPIRIT and the communication of Wisdom? [You
say,] Certainly I do. But YOU will NOT ALLOW Him to be really a SUBSTANTIVE BEING [i.e. independent person], by
having a SUBSTANCE of HIS OWN [i.e. a separate substance from the Fathers unbegotten Spirit substance]; in such a way that
He may be regarded as an objective thing and a person, and so be able to make two, the Father and the Son, God and
the Word.
186


According to Tertullian, Gods Apostolic Pentecostal Preachers must have believed that God in
His Eternal Spirit Substance begot the Divine Natures of Christ! The real difference between
Tertullian and Gods Pentecostal Preachers understanding of Proverbs 8, Philippians 2, and John 4,
is Gods Apostolic Preachers in the first through the fourth centuries, as well as today, would never
allowed Gods Eternal Spirit Essence and His begotten Divine Humanity to be divided into different
persons or gods. Gods Monarchian Preachers denied any hypostases, that is, persons within the
Godhead, that is, outside of the One Person of Christ.

In other words, since Gods Divine Humanity was begotten FROM Gods Eternal Spirit
Substance, therefore, His Divine Human Natures were part of God Himself; just as a mans spirit,
soul, and body is part of man himself. Since no Trinitarian Preacher can make more than one
person out of mans three natures, there is no way they can make two or three persons or gods out
of Gods Divine Natures. Therefore, the Word of God, in all the above-mentioned scriptures,
definitely reveals that God the Father had three real distinct and separate Natures that made up
His Godhead.

According to Tertullian, Praxeas must not have believed God to be an omnipresent Spirit Being in
His essence or substance, as Tertullian did! Omnipresence is one of Gods many attributes, but His
Personal Unbegotten Spirit Essence and His Divine Human Natures are not omnipresent.
Therefore, Tertullian implied that the Jesus Name Preachers of his day believed that God the
Fathers essence or substance was contained in His Human Natures.

Even though all ancient Oneness Preachers proclaimed that the Lord Jesus Christ was the God
the Father manifested in a flesh and blood body in the New Testament, they all did not hold the same
Christology views. According to my understanding of history: one group of oneness preachers, that
is Praxeas, Noetus, Callistus, Commodian, and others, may have believed that Gods Unbegotten
Spirit Nature and His Divine Holy Spirit and Soul Natures became incarnated in the Virgin Mary
at Bethlehem, and His Divine Glorified Spiritual Body became a flesh, bone, and blood Body in her
womb. The other group of Oneness preachers, that is, Sabellius, Photinus, and others believed the
very same thing, except they probably believed that a PORTION of Gods Unbegotten Spirit Nature
stayed in Heaven. The following historical quotes reveal Sabellius belief system:

John Blunt, in His Dictionary of Sects, Heresies, Ecclesiastical Parties, and Schools of Religious
Thought, speaking of the doctrine of Sabellius pertaining to the Incarnation wrote: The only Divine
Sonship allowed by Sabellius doctrine being then that which took place in time at the Incarnation, there was also at that
time, a division of the Union.... If Hilary be a competent witness, that Sabellius did assert a separation of the
PROTENSIO, which reaching usque ad Virginem, took the name of Son. This last step was taken to avoid the charge
of Patripassianism... by asserting that only a PORTION of the DIVINE NATURE became incarnate.
187

114

Catholic Priest Alexander (301 AD), bishop of Lycopolis, declared that Sabellius taught that the
Logos had a corporeal pre-existence. Alexander believed that the Logos, as the Son of God, was begotten
at the beginning of time. Speaking of the Logos pre-existence, Alexander wrote: we believe in one
Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God; not begotten of things which are not, but of Him who is the Father; not
in a corporeal manner [i.e. a physical body] by excision or division as Sabellius and Valentinus thought, but in a certain
inexplicable and unspeakable manner. The nature of rational beings cannot receive the knowledge of His divine
generation by the Father. We have learnt; in this alone is He inferior to the Father, that He is not unbegotten.
188


Gregory Thaumaturgus (260 AD), Catholic Bishop of Alexandria in Egypt, gave Sabellius
doctrine this way: But some treat the Holy Trinity in an awful manner, when they confidently assert that there
are not three persons. We clear ourselves of Sabellius, who says that the Father and the Son are the same. For he
holds that the Father is He who speaks, and that the Son is the Word that ABIDES in the Father, and becomes [i.e.
became] MANIFEST at the TIME of the CREATIOIN, and thereafter REVERTS to God on the fulfilling of all things.
The same affirmation he makes also of the Spirit.
189
If Gregorys understanding of Sabellius teachings is
a correct one, Christ became the manifested God, or God the Fathers Visible Self before
creation, and when Gods Sonship Program is fulfilled when death is destroyed, Gods Sonship
Salvation Program comes to an end, but Gods Divine Human Natures never cease to exist.

Photinus, another one God Preacher of the fourth century, also taught that a portion of Gods
substance became Jesus at His conception. According to Blunt Theodoret claimed: Photinus differs
from Sabellius only in phraseology.... Photinus held the tenet of an Antitrinitarian Monarchian and that Jesus Christ
was born of the Holy Ghost and the Virgin Mary; that a certain PORTION of the DIVINE SUBSTANCED, which he
called the WORD, descended and entered into Mary.
190


The early Catholic historian Socrates in his history spoke of the Arian Creed of Sirmium, which
was published in 352 AD, in presence of the Arian Emperor (Pope) Constantius. Some historians
suggest that this creed belongs to some other council than the First Council of Sirmium. In this
creed, the Arian Catholic Church revealed BOTH of the Christology views of Gods Apostolic
Oneness Preachers. These heretics cursed Gods Jesus Name People of that day by saying:

If any one shall dare to assert that the UNBEGOTTEN, or a PART of HIM, was born of Mary, let him be
anathema. If any man affirming Him that was born of Mary to be God and man, shall imply the UNBEGOTTEN
GOD Himself, let him be anathema. If any one should affirm that the Father said not to the Son, Let us make
man, but that GOD spoke to HIMSELF, let him be anathema. If any one says that it was not the Son that was seen
by Abraham, but the UNBEGOTTEN GOD, or a PART of HIM, let him be anathema. If any one says that it was
not the Son that as man wrestled with Jacob, but the UNBEGOTTEN GOD, or a PART of HIM, let him be
anathema. If any one should say that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are ONE PERSON, let him be anathema. If
any one, speaking of the HOLY SPIRIT, the Comforter, shall call him the UNBEGOTTEN GOD, let him be
anathema.
191
Let my beloved readers take note, it is very evident that Gods Oneness Pentecostals believed the Holy
Spirit was the Unbegotten Spirit of God.

In 355 AD, the Arian Catholic Church published the Lengthy Creed of Sirmium. In this creed
they gave Marcellus and Scotinus Christology views, which was a form of Sabellianism. It stated:
We abhor besides, and anathematize those who make a pretense of saying that He is but the MERE WORD of God
and UNEXISTING, having His being in another [i.e. the Father], now as if pronounced, as some speak, now as
MENTAL [probably meaning: existing in the mind of God], holding that He was NOT CHRIST or Son of God or mediator or
IMAGE of God BEFORE AGES; but that He first became Christ and Son of God, when He took our flesh from the
Virgin. Such are the disciples of Marcellus and Scotinus of Galatian Ancyra. Whosoever calls the Son of God
the MENTAL or pronounced Word, be he anathema.
192
This appears to be the belief of many Oneness
Pentecostals of today.

115
All Catholic Ante Nicene Priests believed Christ existed in the OT as the Son of God. If any
Trinitarian Preacher can show me just one Scripture where Christ was called by the title of Son in
the OT, which was not prophecy of His future existence such as, Isaiah 7:14, 9:6, or Psalm 2, then I
would not hesitate to use this title in reference His real existence in the OT. I have no personal
objection to using this title, as an OT title for Christ, but since it has no Scriptural foundation, I do
not use it.

Miguel Servetus, the greatest Antitrinitarian, Anabaptist, One God, Jesus Name Preacher in
the sixteenth century chose to be burnt alive at the stake before he would confess the Trinity or
that the title Son of God was an OT title for His God and Savior. Servetus who wrote several
Scriptural books against the Trinity, which caused him to be the most wanted man in Europe,
Dead or Alive, by Catholic and Protestant Ministerial officials. According to Robert Wallace, in
his Antitrinitarian Biography, after Servetus was arrested, tried, and sentenced to dead by John
Calvin, a minister by the name of Farel visited him in prison just before his death. Farel:
strenuously urged him to recant: but Servetus, in reply to Farels repeated solicitations, implored him to produce
one solitary passage of Scripture, in which it is stated, Christ was called the Son of God, before His birth of the
Virgin Mary; and though he was fully alive to the awful situation in which he stood, and knew that he would be
shortly summoned into the presence of his final Judge, neither threats not enticements could prevail upon him to
retract.

Wallace describing his death wrote: Servetus was fastened to the trunk of a tree fixed in the earth, his feet
reaching to the ground; and a crown of straw and leaves, sprinkled over with brimstone, was placed upon his head.
His body was bound to the stake with an iron chain, and a coarse twisted rope was loosely thrown round his neck.
His books were then fastened to his thigh; and he requested the executioner to put him out of his misery as speedily
as possible. The pile was then lighted, and he cried out in so piteous a tone, as to excite the deep and earnest
sympathy of the spectators. When he had suffered for some time, a few of them, from feelings of compassion, and
with a view to put an end to his misery, supplied the fire with a quantity of fresh fuel.

Wallace also declare: Minus Celsus related that the constancy of Servetus in the midst of the fire, induced
many to go over to his opinion; and Calvin makes it an express subject of complaint, that there were many persons
in Italy, who cherished, and revered his memory.
193
One of Servetus biographers stated that many
copies of his books were piled around his feet and used as fuel to burn him. Servetus died a
victorious martyrs death on October 27, 1553.

Truly, this was a great man of God. Moyer speaking about him as a Medical Scientist says
that he was: the real discoverer of the pulmonary circulation of the blood.
194
It was not until the 20th
Century that Medical Science gave him the honors he justly deserved for this discovery. Servetus
in his book On the Errors of the Trinity wrote: Christ Jesus is really the Father. He Himself is the face
of the Father, nor is there any other person of God but Christ; there is no other hypostasis of God but Him. They
[the Trinitarians] say that one portion [of God], I say that the whole nature of God is in Him. In Him is the whole deity of
the Father. He is God and the Lord of the world. The Father is in the Son.
195


Ancient Catholic Preachers Interpretation of Proverbs Eight: It is a pity that the
Ante Nicene Catholic Priests interpreted this beautiful passage of Scripture through the eyes of
Philo and Plato, as I have shown in chapter 1, under the title of: The Catholic Semi-Arian
Doctrine or the Belief in Two-Unequal-gods. Dr. Archibald Robertson in the Prolegomena to the
Select Writings and Letters of Athanasius made the following truthful and insightful comment
on the godhead belief of the Ante and Nicene Catholic Priests.

Robertson stated: the Logos of Origen is still in important particulars the Logos of the APOLOGISTS, of
Philo, and the philosophers. The DIFFERENCE lies in His co-eternity, upon which Origen insists without
116
wavering. He [Christ] is, as a Hypostasis [Person], SUBORDINATE to the Father. Monarchianism in either form
he [i.e. Origen] is diametrically opposed. Monarchianism was the [assumed] heresy most dreaded, the theology of the
[Catholic] Church was based on the philosophical categories of Plato applied to the explanation and systematization of
the rule of faith.
196


Most of the Ante Nicene Catholic Priests taught that God the Father begot Christ out of a
different substance than His own Unbegotten Spirit Substance. It was because of this heretical
belief, they taught that there were two separate unequal persons or gods in the Godhead; that is,
the Father being the one God, and Christ being a lesser god than the Father, but greater than all
other beings. Tertullian, the Montanist, was the exception, for he did not teach this Semi-Arian
doctrine, but he believed that the Father and Son were two equal persons in the Godhead, and
the Holy Spirit was not a person but a title of Christ. With this truth in mind, let us examine the
teachings of these Catholic Priests on the eighth chapter of Proverbs:

In 107 AD, Ignatius of Antioch, in the Syriac Version of his Epistle to the Tarsians, wrote:
Himself is NOT GOD OVER ALL, and the Father, but His Son. Wherefore it is one [Person] who put all things
under, and who is all in all, and another [Person] to whom they were subdued, who also Himself, along with all other
things, becomes subject. For in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was
God. And in another place, The Lord created Me, the beginning of His ways, for His ways, for His works. BEFORE
the WORLD did He formed Me, and BEFORE all the hills did He BEGET Me.
197
Let my beloved readers
take note to the fact that Ignatius made a definite connection between John 1:1 and Proverbs
8:22-30, that is, the Word was begotten by God in the beginning.

In his Epistle to the Magnesians, Ignatius reaffirmed his belief in two-unequal-gods by saying:
He [the Logos or Christ] being BEGOTTEN by the Father BEFORE the beginning of time, was God the Word, the only-
begotten Son, and remains the same for ever.

For He is not the voice of an articulate utterance, but A
SUBSTANCE BEGOTTEN by Divine Power.
198
Let my beloved readers take note again that Ignatius
did NOT teach that Christ was begotten by God the Fathers own substance, and He was NOT the
God over all, but He was a lesser God than the Father. There is a world of difference from being
the one and only God and a god.

In 150 AD, Justin Martyr of Rome interpreted the above passage in Proverb, the same way as
Ignatius. He declared: And it is written in the book of Wisdom The Lord created Me the beginning of His
ways for His works. From everlasting He established Me in the beginning, BEFORE He formed the earth. He
BEGETS Me BEFORE all the hills. The Scripture has declared that this OFFSPRING was BEGOTTEN by the
Father BEFORE all things created; and that which is begotten is NUMERICALL DISTINCT from that which begets,
any one will admit. When I asserted that this power was begotten FROM the Father, by His power and will, but
NOT by ABSCISSION, as if the ESSENCE of the Father were DIVIDED. He was begotten of the Father by an act
of will; just as we see happening among ourselves: for when WE GIVE OUT SOME WORDS [i.e. speak words], WE
BEGET the WORD; yet NOT by ABSCISSION, so as to lessen the word (which remains) in us, when we give it out.
199


Therefore, Justin claimed that God the Father begot the Son from a different Substance than
His own, and He begot it by speaking this substance into existence. Many of these Catholic Priests
taught the very same thing. Theophilus of Antioch (170 AD) said it this way: But when God wished to
make all that He determined on, He begot this Word, UTTERED [i.e. the Word into existence] the first-born of all creation,
NOT Himself being EMPTIED of the Word [Reason], but having begotten Reason, and always conversing with His
Reason.
200


Professor Wolfson speaking of Philo and Justins godhead doctrine stated: We have shown that
Philos view, like that of Justin Martyr, maintained that the antemundane [i.e. before creation began] Logos had two stages
of existence, and that while during its first stage it existed only as a Power IN God, during the second stage it existed
as a real BEING OUTSIDE of God. Justin Martyr already describes the Logos as one whom God BEGOT from
117
Himself.... Justin Martyr maintained that the Logos is distinct from the Father in number and not in name only.
201
Oneness Apostolic Preacher declared the Logos was distinct from the Father in name only!

Catholic Bishop Irenaeus (180 AD) of Lyons wrote: He [i.e. God] declares by Solomon, God by Wisdom
founded the earth. And again: The Lord created Me the beginning of His ways in His work: He set Me up from
everlasting in the beginning BEFORE He made the earth. He BROUGHT Me FORTH. Therefore He was
with the Father from the beginning. as also the Lord said: The ONLY-BEGOTTEN GOD, which is in the
BOSOM of the Father, He hath declared (Him).
202
Let my beloved readers again take note to the fact
that Irenaeus associated Proverbs 8:22-30 with John 1:18, therefore he believed the Word
became the only begotten God in this chapter of Proverbs.

In 200 AD, Tertullian of Carthage Africa, like his heretical forefathers, also interpreted the
passage in Proverbs to refer to two separate beings or gods. Tertullian declared, before creation
began: God had not yet sent out His Word, He still had Him within Himself. Therefore without rashness first lay
this down (as a fixed principle) that even then before the creation of the universe God was not alone, since He had
within Himself both Reason, and, inherent in Reason, His Word, which He [the Father] made second to Himself by
AGITATING it within Himself.

Listen therefore to Wisdom herself, constituted in the character of a Second Person: At the first the Lord
created Me as the beginning of His ways, with a view to His own works, BEFORE He made the earth. He BEGOT
Me; that is to say, He created and GENERATED Me in His own intelligence. Then, therefore, does the Word also
Himself assume His OWN FORM and GLORIOUS GARB, His own sound and vocal utterance, when God SAYS,
Let there be light. This is the perfect NATIVITY of the Word, when He PROCEEDS FORTH from God
FORMED by Him. For by PROCEEDING from Himself He became His FIRST-BEGOTTEN SON, because
BEGOTTEN from the womb of His own heart even as the Father Himself testifies: My heart, says He, hath
emitted my most excellent Word.
203


Even though Tertullian, like his predecessors, believed the Father begot His Son into existence
through some form of stirring up or agitation of His own personal substance, Tertullian goes on to
reveal that the Son was a second person or separate person from the Father. He definitely believed
that the Father begot the Son from His own substance, for he says: For the Father is the entire substance,
but the Son is a DERIVATION and PORTION of the whole. Tertullians Second God in the godhead can
clearly be perceived when he told Gods Apostolic Pentecostal Preachers: But you will not allow Him
[i.e. Christ] to be really a substantive being, by having a substance of His own; in such a way that He may be regarded
as an objective thing and a person, and so be able (as being constituted second to God the Father,) to make two.
204

According to Dr. Schaff: Tertullian cannot escape the charge of subordinationism. He bluntly calls the Father the
whole divine substance, and the Son a part of it.
205


Catholic Bishop Hilary of Poitiers (360 AD), writing on the Trinity, and against the Arians,
gave the traditional teaching of His Catholic forefathers on Proverbs. He wrote: They [the Arians]
argue that He is a creature, because it is written, The Lord hath created Me for a beginning of His ways. We
confess One God (the Father), alone unmade, alone eternal, alone unoriginate while the Son, put forth by the Father
outside time, and created and established BEFORE the worlds, DID NOT EXIST before He was BORN, but, being
BORN outside time BEFORE the worlds, came into being as the Only Son of the Only Father. For He is neither
eternal, nor co-eternal, nor co uncreate with the Father, NOR has He an existence collateral with the Father. For
this reason God is His source, and hath RULE OVER Him, as being His God, since He is before Him.
206
The
Oxford Dictionary of English defined collateral as: a person having the same ancestor as another but
through a different line.

Let my beloved readers take note, this Catholic Bishop stated the above things 35 years after
Emperor Constantine, the real first Catholic Pope, and his frighten religious rabbits drew up
Constantines Nicene Creed. Let us not forget, this creed stated: Christ was begotten, not made,
118
consubstantial with the Father, that is, of the same substance with the Father. Eusebius, who was one of
the frighten rabbits that help draw up this creed stated this creed this way: We believe in one God the
Father Almighty and [His only] begotten Son, BORN before all creation, begotten of God the Father before all
ages. It was generally admitted that ousias (of the essence or substance) simply implied that the Son is of the Father
indeed, but does NOT subsist [i.e. exist] as a part of the Father. To this interpretation of the sacred doctrine, which
declares that the Son is of the Father, but is NOT a part of His substance.
207


Catholic and Protestant Trinitarian Bible Scholars would definitely consider all the above
Catholic writings as heresy, for this is not the Trinity they believe in today, for they believe all
three person are coeternal, that is, none of them had a beginning in time or was begotten before
time began! They also teach that all so-called persons of the Trinity are co-omniscient, co-
omnipotent, etc. This definitely leaves these Trinitarians without any ancient history to support
their godhead heresy. As my beloved readers can perceive by now, all early Catholic Apologist
believe the Father was greater then the Son in the godhead, and the Son was begotten by the
Father before time began, and was a separate person from the Father. They, as well as most of
Gods Oneness Preachers of that day, recognized the fact that Wisdom in the above passage in
Proverbs represented Christ, or the Logos, and God begot Him before time began.

As I stated above, it is a pity these Catholic Priests interpreted this and other scriptural
passages through the eyes of the philosophers, especially Philo, who was the great Jewish
ALLEGORIZER who twisted scripture to fit the teaching of the Greek Philosophers. Therefore,
they could not see the simple truth that this passage was teaching. They knew Calvary was in the
mind of God before the creation of the world (Rev 13:8; 1Pe 1:18-20), but they failed to understand that
God chose to beget or change a portion of His invisible Self into a visible Spiritual Humanity before
time began, to fulfill His redemption plan for man.

5) Isaiah 43:10: You are My witnesses, says the LORD, and My servant whom I [not We] have chosen, That
you may know and believe Me [not Us], and understand that I AM He. Before Me [not Us] there was no God FORMED
[yatsar], nor shall there be after Me. Dr. Harris defined the Hebrew verb yatsar as: to form, 'to fashion.
While the word occurs in synonymous parallelism with br create and a make in a number of passages, its
primary emphasis is on the SHAPING or FORMING of the object involved. (yrm) forms, members, only in Job
17:7, referring to parts of the body as having been fashioned.
208


Before we examine the truth of the above verse, let set forth what this verse is not teaching.
God is not referring to the making of and worshipping idols in this verse, as some have taught;
for multitudes of idols were formed before this was written, during the time it was written, and after
it was written. If God is just warning His children not to make any idols, then why would He tell
His children that there was no idols formed before Him, when all of His children believed He was
the Creator, and no one existed before Him. This would not make any sense! In addition, in the
context of this passage, idols are nowhere mentioned.

I believe this verse is another reference to the origin of Wisdom or Christ. YHWH has
declared in this passage of scripture that He is the one and only begotten God, who was begotten
before the universe began. In other words, God is declaring an immutable truth, that is, when He
BEGOT His Divine Human Natures from His Eternal Spirit Substance, He did not beget any
other God beside Christ. There was no Trinity of gods. Jesus declared this truth, when He spoke
of His preexisting state in the OT as the Logos. He proclaimed: No man has seen God [in His unbegotten
Holy Spirit Nature] at any time; the only begotten God [e|e,.|, .e,], who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained
[Him] (Jn 1:18, NAS). The Greek adjective e|e,.|, means: only begotten, and .e, or Theos
means: God.
119

Dr. A.T. Roberson in his Word Pictures in the Greek New Testament made this interesting comment
on this verse: The only begotten Son this is the reading of the Textus Receptus. But the best old Greek
manuscripts (Aleph B C L) read (God only begotten) which is undoubtedly the true text. So he is God only
begotten.
209
Dr. M.R. Vincent in his Word Studies in the New Testament stated: Several of the principal
manuscripts and a great mass of ancient evidence support the reading God only begotten.
210
The Codex
Alexandrinus is one of the principal manuscripts that used the Greek word Theos, instead of
huios, which means son. There seems to be abundant evidence for this translation in the
writings of the Ante-Nicene Catholic Priests. If this Greek text is correct, than Jesus would be
declaring that He, as YHWH, is the Begotten God, who dwells in the chest of the Father. This
would definitely be in harmony with the passages of Scripture in both Proverbs and Isaiah.

6) The Bible spoke of the Word or YHWH as: the image of the invisible God, the Firstborn [:.e ese,]
of all creation (Col 1:15). The Bible in Basic English translated this verse this way: Who is the image of
the unseen God coming into existence before all living things. Let us first examine word meanings and the
grammar Paul used to express his teaching on the godhead. The Greek word Prototokos or
:.e ese, is an adjective pronoun, which means it refers back to the relative pronoun e, or
Who, which is the subject. Prototokos is composed of two Greek words: protos which means:
foremost or first, and tikto which means: to be produce, or to be generated, or to be born. Therefore,
according to Gods inspired apostle, YHWH is the image, form, or body of the invisible God,
Who was the firstborn of God.

Verse 16: For by Him all things were created. All things were created through Him and for Him. Now
according to the context, after Paul informed Gods children that the Word was born or
produced before all of creation, he then declared that all things in the universe was created by
Him and for Him. In very simple language, the Firstborn was the Creator. In other words, Paul
is giving us the order of creation, that is, what came first, and what came second, and so on.

Verse 17: And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. The apostle in this verse chooses to
emphasize to his reader that the Logos is before all things; the Greek preposition pro means: in
front of or prior to. Why did the apostle Paul purposely accentuate this point? Since Paul definitely
told his readers that the Firstborn was the Creator of all things, one would naturally assume that
He had to be before creation. The apostle no doubt did not want his readers to become confuse
over the above facts, that is, the Firstborn was not only their Creator and God, but He Himself
was the First-Produced of God.

Verse 18: Let my beloved readers take note, YHWH is called: the Firstborn from the dead, not as
some teach, the first begetter or the original bringer forth out of the dead ones. There is no way
prototokos can be translated these ways and make any sense; only First-Produced or Firstborn
will do. Prototokos is used 9 times in the NT. It is used twice to refer to the natural birth of
Christ: Mary brought forth her Firstborn Son (Mat 1:25; Lk 2:7), and twice as a title for Christ: when
God brings His Firstborn [or First-Produced] into the world, He says, let all Gods angels worship Him (Heb 1:6, NIV;
Col 1:15). It is also used three times in reference to the resurrection of Christ, and calls Him the
firstborn of the dead ones (Rom 8:29, Col 1:18 & Rev 1:15). Prototokos is also used once as a title for the
Church of Christ or the Church of the Firstborn (Heb 12:23).

It is used once to refer to the natural birth with reference to God killing all the firstborn of
Egypt (Heb 11:28, cp with Exo 11:5). The Hebrew word bekowr is the equivalent of the Greek
prototokos. It is translated firstborn 117 times in the OT and it always referred to the natural
120
birth. Therefore their is no doubt in my mind that the passage in Colossians, like the passages in
Proverbs, Isaiah, and the Gospel of John, is referring to the Invisible Spirit of God begot or
transformed a portion of Himself into a Visible Manifestation of Himself, who was called
YHWH, the Word, and the First-Produced or Firstborn.

Theophilus (170 AD) interpreted the passage in Colossians this way: For before anything came into
being He [God the Father] had Him [the Word] as a counselor, being His [i.e. the Fathers] OWN MIND and THOUGHT.
But when God wished to make all that He determined on, He BEGOT this Word, UTTERED, the FIRST-BORN of
ALL CREATION, not Himself being emptied of the Word [Reason], but having BEGOTTEN Reason, and always
conversing with His Reason. The Word, then, being God, and being naturally PRODUCED from God, whenever
the Father of the universe wills, He sends Him to any place.
211


Eusebius interpreted the Colossian passage the same way: The Lord created Me in the beginning of
his ways, for his works; BEFORE the world he established me, in the beginning, BEFORE he made the earth He
BEGAT Me. The divine Word, therefore, PRE-EXISTED and appeared to some. The FIRST-BORN and
FIRST-CREATED Wisdom of God, the PRE-EXISTENT WORD himself.
212


7) The apostle John called the Logos: The Faithful and True Witness, the Beginning [arche] of the
creation of God (Rev 3:14). Dr. Strong defined arche as: a commencement (in time), chief (in order, time,
place or rank). German Professor Walter Bauer gave this definition: the first cause, the beginning of
Christ Rv 3:14; but the meaning beginning = first created is linguistically probable.
213
Therefore, according
to language, that is, the meaning of words, the term beginning of the creation of God could definitely
mean Christ was born of God before creation began. In other words, John, like Paul, is telling
Gods children when God begot Christ.

Since the Greek word arche could mean: beginning or first if it refers to time, and cheif if
it refers to position, let us allow Scripture to interpret Scripture. Therefore, let us examine the
scriptures where arche is used in reference to the person of Lord Jesus Christ. John writes: in the
beginning was the Word (Jn 1:1). In verse 2 he says: the same [Logos] was in the beginning with God. John
also declared that the Logos: was from the beginning of time, and you [fathers] have know Him [the Word]
that is from the beginning (1Jn 1:1; 2:14). John definitely used arche in his writings to refer to time, not
to Christs position or rank.

Paul speaking of Christ as the man Melchizedek wrote: having neither beginning of days, or end of
life (Heb 7:3). In the following passages of Scripture, arche is used as a title for Christ. The Logos
speaking of Himself says: I am Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the Ending (Rev 1:8; 22:13). John
obviously contrasted the Word with the beginning and with the ending, and both are in reference
to a time period. Paul declared that Jesus: is the Beginning, the firstborn from the dead (Col 1:18). Since
beginning is used in connection with the firstborn from the dead, it is simply saying that the
resurrection of the dead started with Jesus resurrection.

Therefore, since arche is always used in reference to time, when it is connected to Christ, I
believe Revelations 3:14 is teaching that God, that is, the Unbegotten Invisible Spirit Nature of God,
started creation by changing a portion of Himself into a visible Manifestation of Himself. He did
this so His creation could see, know, love, and have fellowship with Him. It is evident from the
Bible, God did not want His children loving and serving creation as their god, or anything in
creation. This is why God chose to create all things through, in, and for His Visible Divine
Human Self. God wanted to make certain His creation knew whom to love!

121
8) The apostle John boldly declared: In the beginning was the Word [Logos], and the Word was with God,
and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God (Jn 1:1-2). Therefore, one should ask: how
could the Logos be with God the Father and be God the Father at the same time? If my beloved readers
would allow me to paraphrase this verse, the truth will become clear: In the beginning was the
Humanity of God, and the Humanity of God was with God, and the Humanity of God was Gods Visible Self.

As one understands and believes the above truth about God Human Nature, the fog of
confusion is removed and the following scripture make perfect sense: The LORD regretted that He
had made man on earth, and His heart was saddened. (Gen 6:6, JPS, Tanakh). The OT is full of scriptures
like this one, which reveal that God had a very real Human Nature in the OT. This scripture and
others like it will be examine in this chapter.

What Was the Glory Christ Had Before the Universe Existed?

Jesus Human Nature speaking about His Divine Nature said: Now this is Eternal Life: that they
may know You, the ONLY [monos] true God, and Jesus Christ [Your Humanity], whom You have sent. I have brought
You GLORY on earth by completing the work You gave Me to do. And now, Father, glorify Me [Your Humanity] in your
presence with the GLORY I had with [of] You before the world began (Jn 17:3-5, NIV). The Greek word monos
as I have stated several times before means: alone, no other. Therefore, the Human Nature of
Christ openly confessed that His God and Father was the one true God, or in other words, there
is no other God outside of the Father, or the Father alone is the one and only true God. Now, if
Trinitarian Theologians do not confess that Jesus Human Nature spoke of His Divine Nature,
than they will have to become an Arian Jehovahs Witness, and denounce the Supreme Deity of
the Lord Jesus Christ!

Let us not forget that Christ in the OT and the NT is the Visible God or the Begotten God.
Since Christs Holy Spirit, Soul, and Spiritual Body in the OT was composed of Gods Eternal
Spirit Substance, Christ is the One and Only True God and Father of all creation. Therefore,
God the Father is definitely in Him. However, as I stated before, Gods Divine personality is in
His Holy Spirit Nature and His Divine Human Personality is in His Soul and Body Natures. Thus
Christ in the OT and Christ Jesus in the NT can speak as God, and He can speak as a Man! Let
us look at a literal translation of verse 5:

sat |u| eeace | . cu :a. :aa c.au. ee .t ,e| :e eu
And now continue to glorify Me You Father with Your own the glory which I had before of Thee
e| (the) se ce| (world) .t |at (existed) :aa (with) cet (You). The Greek pronoun cu (You) is a personal
pronoun, and is in the nominative case, that is, it is use as the subject of a verb; and the noun
:a. (Father) is in the vocative case, which is use in ADDRESSING someone. The verb eeace| (glorify)
is in the aorist tense, active voice, and IMPERATIVE mood, which means it is a command or a
strong statement of fact. Merriam-Websters Colligate Dictionary gave a simple definition of the
aorist tense: an inflectional form of a verb typically denoting simple occurrence of an action without reference to its
completeness, duration, or, repetition. Some Greek grammarians have compared this tense to a moving
picture which continues, while they compare the present, past, and future tenses to a snapshot of
an event that happen at a particular moment of time!

The verb .t,e| (HAD) is in the IMPERFECT or PAST tense, active voice, and indicative mood,
which means it is statement of fact. The DEFINITE ARTICLE eu (Thee) is in the genitive or
possessive case! The reflexive Greek pronoun c.au. or seautou is in the dative case or an
indirect object, which means that it should be translated as Your own. Drs. J. P. Louw and E. A.
122
Nida in their Louw-Nida Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament defined seautou as: a
reflexive reference to a receptor noted in the immediate context yourself, of you, your and now, Father,
glorify me with YOUR OWN glory Jn 17.5 (#92.10).

Therefore, this verse could be translated: And now You Father CONTINUE to glorify Me with YOUR
OWN glory [or the glory of YOURSELF], which I HAD of Thee before the world existed with You. What was the
glory Christ had that never ceased to be His? Jesus said it was c.au. or the Fathers own personal
Glory! Let my beloved readers take note, Christ Jesus connected the continuing glory He had in
past ages, and at the present time, with the personal glorified presence or essence of the God the
Father living and dwelling inside of Him.

Professor Walter Martin confirmed this truth when he stated: St. Paul in the second chapter of
Philippians removes all doubts on this question when he writes, guided by the Holy Spirit, that Christ NEVER
CEASED to be JEHOVAH [i.e. YHWHS personal form or body] even during His earthly incarnation.
214
Did not Jesus
say: He who has seen Me has seen the Father. I am IN [. | - en] the Father, and the Father IN [. | - en] Me the
Father dwells IN [. | - en] Me (Jn 14:9-10). The apostle Paul definitely tells us where God the Fathers
personal glory dwells. He declared: the glory [doxa] of God [is] in the face of Jesus Christ (2Co 4:4, 6).

I believe, as Sabellius believed, that a portion of Gods the Fathers Unbegotten and Invisible
Spirit Nature stayed in Heaven, while His begotten Holy Spirit and Soul Natures dwelt in Jesus
on the earth. Therefore, Gods the Father was in Jesus and in heaven at the same time! As stated
above, the early Catholics accused Sabellius of teaching this doctrine, when they stated: If any one
shall dare to assert that the UNBEGOTTEN, or a PART of HIM, was born of Mary, let him be anathema.
215


Some oneness preachers have erroneousness taught that the Logos or the Word in John 1:1 is
an expression that means Gods mind, thoughts, or plans. They say just as Calvary was in the
mind or plans of God before creation, so was His glorification. Therefore, they say, the glory
Christ had before the beginning of time was a prophetic glory that existed only in the mind and
plans of God. If this was Christs glory, what kind of glory would that be? Was Jesus declaring
that He wanted to go back into Gods mind, thoughts, or plans?

Jesus did not say: Glorify Me with the glory you planned on giving Me, but He did say: glorify Me
with the glory which I had [.t ,e|] before the cosmos [kosmos] was with You. Jesus also wanted His Human
Glorified Spiritual Body back, which He had before the beginning of time. This can only means the
Divine Human Natures of Jesus, as the Logos or Christ, had a real glory in eternity past and not
an imaginary one. To say this was referring to His future glory, would be twisting the Word of
God, or totally ignore the grammar and language God chose to use to communicate this great
truth.

These misguided brethren, as Trinitarians of the past and present, teach this erroneous
doctrine because they believe that God is an omnipresent Spirit in His Substance, and therefore
did not have a Permanent Glorified Human Body in the OT, but only appeared as a temporal
being, that is a theophany. What will my brethren do with Jesus Glorified Human Resurrected
Body that He has today? Will Jesus Glorified Body disappear also, as the bodies of these so-
called theophanies supposedly had done? In fact, it does NOT even seem to trouble my brethren
that the word theophany, like the word trinity, is never mentioned in the Bible, and this concept is
nowhere taught in the Bible.

123
It disturbs me that good Men of God, who believe in the supreme Deity of the Lord Jesus
Christ, can believe and teach this theophany doctrine that the Babylonian-Jewish-Mystics
invented in their Cabala to deny the Logos or the Word was YHWH, that is God the Fathers
Personal Human Body in the OT. Now, I am sure my brethren do not know where this doctrine
originated, for if they did, they would denounce it in a heartbeat. The proof that this doctrine
originated with Jewish Mysticism will be given later.

Another question I would like to ask my brethren is this: Was Jesus declaring that He wanted to go
back to being a so-called omnipresent spirit that fills the universe? This is an impossible position, because
Jesus would be doing away with His own Glory, which is His resurrected Glorified Body of
today, that is, God would be doing away with His own Divine Human Nature. As far as I know,
all Oneness and Trinitarian preachers believe that Jesus Glorified Body will exist forever.

Oneness Apostolic Preachers
Who Believed in God the Fathers Old Testament Visible Spiritual Body

Thank God, even in this day, God still has Apostolic Pentecostal Oneness Preachers, who have
taken similar stands on the godhead, as their ancient predecessors. Even though these great
preachers of the Gospel of Christ, did not use the term Gods Glorified Spiritual Humanity, as I do,
they definitely believed in and taught: the invisible God had a very real visible nature or Self in the OT.

In a book entitled A God I Can Understand, Reverend Ronald E. Willhoite courageously spoke of
the Fathers one and only visible-Image in the Old Testament. He declared: Although Gods substance is
invisible, unapproachable, and unfathomable, He chose to CHANGE a PORTION of that SUBSTANCE into something
that could be seen and approached. Why would God want His creatures to see Him? Because love needs an object to love!
It was not enough for God to be all-powerful and all-knowing; He is also a God of love. To love someone, you must
communicate with them and be with them. Fellowship is a necessary component of true love; so Elohiym CHANGED a
PORTION of HIS INVISIBLE SELF into a CREATURE FORM that His creatures could see, know, and somehow
understand.
216


Reverend Paul Ferguson in his book God in Christ Jesus also fearlessly spoke of YHWHs visible-
Self. He proclaimed: Read these verses - Ex 33:20; Jn 1:18; Col 1:15; 1Ti 1:17; 6:16 over again, carefully! They
appear to teach that it is a physical impossibility for human flesh to approach unto or see God.... God gave us the true
interpretation of all this. 1. The INVISIBLE GOD has an IMAGE (2Cor. 4:4, Col. 1:15, Heb. 1:3). 2. Anyone who sees
this IMAGE has seen God. 3. This is not just a masquerade [probably meaning a Theophany]. The IMAGE is God! John 20:28.

The reader will notice that in each instance of the VISIBLE APPEARANCE of God what appeared was called God.
And what the Bible calls God was and is forever God and none else. Not an archangel, a demigod, a separate person, but
absolutely and wholly God.... Creatures must meet Creator but not on His own level, or they would be consumed at His
glory and brightness. Thus, He CHANGED a PORTION of this CONSUMING FIRE [GODS SUBSTNACE] into
something His creatures could see, know, and, in part, understand.... From this IMAGE or VISIBLE PART of Himself,
God, so to speak, did business.... Clearly, this was Gods headquarters from which He manifested Himself to the heavenly
hosts.
217


Reverend John Miller, an ex-Presbyterian Pastor who came into Oneness, in his book entitled Is
God A Trinity, also declared that the Logos was God the Fathers Visible-Self. He wrote: in the
Hebrew Scriptures the MANIFESTED Jehovah is called the WORD of God, and to Him individual subsistence and
divine perfections are ascribed.... BEYOND A DOUBT the Old Testaments DOCTORS of the LAW did deal with the
LOGOS, and that in very extraordinary ways.... They prepared important Targums that is to say they paraphrased the
Old Testament revelation. These paraphrases were universally accepted; and, when Christ came upon the earth, they
were in many synagogues.... Now, one of the things superstitiously tampered with was the Word of Jehovah. The
124
Targums had multiplied it.... They CAST OUT the term Jehovah two hundred times, and put in the Word of Jehovah,
with no other warrant than some growing and unquestioned superstition.
218


Reverend John Paterson, a Canadian Jesus Name Preacher, also wrote a book entitled God in
Christ Jesus; in this book Paterson spoke of some of the changes made in the Targums concerning
God the Father visible nature. He declared: the Greek word Logos means not only the expression of the
thought, but also the inward thought itself. So we conclude that the WORD was the VISIBLE EXPRESSION of the
INVISIBLE GOD - in other words, the INVISIBLE GOD EMBODIED in VISIBLE FORM; and not only this, but the
WORD was, essentially, nothing less than the ETERNAL GOD.

The Aramaic versions of the Old Testament [is] commonly called the Targums. In every passage, which implies
BODILY CHARACTERISTICS or CORPOREALITY, the term MEMRA replaces the [so-called] name Jehovah
employed by Moses. This term Memra signifies the Word, and to Him are ascribed all the attributes and glory of God.
The Targums at the same time recognizing that it was He who appeared to the patriarchs and prophets. So here we have
both Scriptural proof and historical evidence that the one who showed Himself to Abraham, and to Moses, and to the
elders of Israel was none other than the ETERNAL SPIRIT in a VISIBLE, PERSONAL FORM under the exalted name
of Jehovah, the WORD. From the Scriptures quoted it should be obvious that the Word was NOT merely an impersonal
thought existing in the mind of God, but was in reality, the ETERNAL SPIRIT Himself CLOTHED upon by a VISIBLE
and PERSONAL FORM.
219


Dr. Pfeiffer speaking of the Targums invented by the Alexandrian Jewish doctors of the Law,
who loved the allegoric method of interpreting the scriptures used by Aristobulus and Philo
declared: Anthropomorphism was offensive to the Greek mentality, so all reference to God which imply human
characteristics were eliminated by means of the allegorical concept.
220
Therefore, many scriptures that spoke of
Gods Glorified Human Nature in the OT were paraphrased or reworded as the above Apostolic
Pentecostal Scholars have revealed.

The Prophets Seen and Talked with God the Fathers
Glorified Human Nature in the Old Testament

The Prophet Moses Saw God the Father's Glorified Humanity in the Old
Testament with His Natural Eyes and Not in a Vision: The Bible speaking of Moses
stated: So the LORD spoke to Moses face to face [paniym], as a man speaks to his friend. Moses, who lived
around 1485 BC, saw and spoke to God many times, but on the following occasion Moses asked
God: Please, show me Your GLORY [kabowd]. Then He [God] said, I will make all My GOODNESS pass before
you. But He said, You cannot see My FACE [paniym]; for no man shall see Me, and live. And the LORD said,
Here is a place by Me, and you shall stand on the rock. So it shall be, while My GLORY passes by, that I will put
you in the cleft of the rock, and will cover you with My HAND [kaph] while I pass by. Then I will take away My
HAND [kaph], and you shall see My BACK [achowr]; but My FACE [paniym] shall not be seen (Exo 33:11, 18-23).

From Moses description of this event, we know Moses was actually looking at God the
Fathers Body as it radiated brighter than the sun. When God revealed His GLORY to him, He
only allow Moses to see the backside of His glorious body. Let us define the key words used in
this narrative: The Hebrew word face is paniym and it can be translated as: face or presence. It is
evident from verse 11, paniym in this narrative means face, for it would be ridiculous to say God
spoke to Moses presence to presence. The Hebrew word kaph means: hand, and achowr means:
back, back parts, hinder parts.

How do we know that Moses was not seeing a vision of God in a futuristic state? God the
Father said: If there be a prophet among you, I [not we] the LORD will make Myself [not ourselves] known unto him
125
in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream.... My [not our] servant Moses is NOT so [for] I speak [to him]
MOUTH to MOUTH and the SIMILITUDE [temuwnah] of the LORD shall he BEHOLD [nabat] (Num 12:6-8).
According to Dr. Strong, the Hebrew word: temuwnah means: shape or image, and nabat
means: to look intently at.
221
If God wanted to show Moses a vision, he would not have to hide
him in a cleft of a rock, so He could use His hand to prevent him from seeing His face.

Let us not deal falsely with Gods Word, if the language is clear and it makes literal sense, let
us believe that God said what He meant, and meant what He said. Therefore, let us interpret this
narrative in a literal fashion the way God intended. Here are the facts: first, Moses asked to see
Gods present glory; second, God responded to Moses request by talking about His present
bodily parts, which He called His goodness, that is, His face, hands, and back. Third, God told
Moses that He would walk by Him, so He could see His bodily parts but not His face.

Now these are the facts, anything less than this is assumption! Now, according to the Word of
God, Moses had already seen Gods face and body several times before this event, but each time
the Logos appeared to him, He dimmed His glory or brightness, and His face and body looked like an ordinary
man (Exo 3:1-6; 6:2-3; 24:1-2, 9-11). Moses obviously wanted to see God the Father's face and body as
it shined like the sun. Take note to the fact, YHWH told Moses that no man could see, with his
natural eyes, His face and live.

Both in the Old and New Testaments the Hebrew word kabowd and the Greek word doxa,
which is translated as GLORY, and it always means, as it is used in connection with Gods
Person: Gods body shinning brighter than the sun. All the Prophets knew it as YHWH the Father. It
was this glorified spiritual human body that John called the Logos in John 1:1. Paul called it the
express visible image, the brightness of His Person or Substance, and His form or visible body.

The apostles saw Gods glorified Body in a vision. They described it this way: Jesus was
transfigured before them: and His face did shine as the sun, and His raiment was white as the Light (Mt 17:2, 9).
Luke said the appearance of His [Jesus] face changed, and His clothes became as bright as a flash of lightning.
They saw HIS GLORY [doxa] (Lk 9:29-32). Here we have positive proof that Gods glory or doxa,
refers to: Gods OT and NT Human Image, Form, or Body shining as the sun. Praise God I believe it!

The Prophet Ezekiel Saw God the Fathers Glorified Humanity: Ezekiel, who lived
around 592 BC, also saw YHWH in His glory sitting on His throne in heaven, and God told him to
go a deliver His message to the Children of Israel that existed in Ezekiels day. Ezekiel declared
that he saw: a throne of sapphire, and high above on the throne was a figure like that of a MAN. I saw that from
what appeared to be His WAIST up He looked like glowing metal, as if full of fire, and that from there [i.e. His waist]
down He looked like fire; and brilliant light surrounded Him. Like the appearance of a rainbow in the clouds on a
rainy day, so was the radiance around Him. This was the appearance of the likeness of the GLORY [kabowd] of the
LORD. When I saw it, I fell facedown, and I heard the voice of one speaking. He said: Son of man, I am [not we are]
sending you to the Israelites, to a rebellious nation that has rebelled against Me [not us]; they and their fathers have
been in revolt against Me [not us] to this very day. The people to whom I am [not we are] sending you are obstinate and
stubborn. Say to them, `This is what the Sovereign LORD says (Eze 1:26-28, 2:2-3).

In the Greek Septuagint of the OT the word glory used in the above verse reads this way
ee, or doxa. The prophet Ezekiel explicitly, expressly, and beyond dispute associated the
term glory with YHWHs Spiritual Glorified Humanity shinning like the sun in its full
radiance; and also beyond dispute is the fact that this event took placed in Ezekiels day, for God
spoke of Israels rebellion against Him in that day, not a future day!

126
The Prophet Daniel Saw God the Father's Glorified Humanity: Daniel, who lived
around 605 BC, also saw Christ in a vision, and described Him exactly the same way the apostle
John did in the Book of Revelation, as the great Judge of all humanity. Daniel said I beheld till the
thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of Days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of His head
like the pure wool...and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before Him: the judgment was set, and the books
were opened (Dan 7:9-10). If Christ had no permanent body in the Old Testament, but only
appeared and disappeared as a theophany, than why would Christ be called by the title Ancient
of Days? If YHWH was a theophany of God as the allegorists claim, should He not be called the
Theophany of Days instead of the Ancient of Days.

Daniel saw God again and definitely called Him a Man. He said: a certain MAN clothed in linen,
whose waist was girded with gold of Uphaz! His BODY was like beryl, His FACE like the appearance of lightning,
His EYES like torches of fire, His ARMS and FEET like burnished bronze in color, and the sound of His words like
the voice of a multitude (Dan 10:5-6). Notice, Daniel in both visions described YHWHs personal glory
as a Man, who had a body that shined brighter than the sun. Since the spiritualists do NOT
believe that God has bodily parts, and mocks anyone who claims He does, what kinds of mystical
interpretation will these Babylonians put on Daniels description of the Logos?

John, like Daniel, gave the very same description of the Ancient of Days glorified spiritual
humanity. He wrote: I saw one liken to the Son of Man [Jesus]. His head and His hairs were white like wool,
as white as snow; and His eyes were as a flame of fire... and His countenance was as the sun shinning in his strength
(Rev 1:13-16). Verse 18 leaves no room for doubt to the identity of this person; it can be no other
than the Lord Jesus Christ, as God the Father; for the Bible stated: I am He who lives, and was dead,
and behold, I am alive forevermore. Therefore, there cannot be any doubt that the Ancient of Days
that existed in Ezekiel and Daniels day was YHWH the Logos.

The Prophet Isaiah Saw God the Father's Glorified Humanity: The apostle John
quoted Isaiah's prophecy concerning the blindness of the Jews and than said: These things said
Isaiah, when he saw His [Christs] GLORY [doxa], and spake of Him (Jn 12:37-41). Any good reference Bible
will cite Isaiah the sixth chapter as the source. When did the prophet Isaiah see Christs glory or
doxa, and what was the glory that He saw? According to Isaiah, who lived around 700 BC, he saw
YHWH as He existed in his day, and not in a futuristic time. He wrote: I saw the LORD [YHWH]
SITTING on a throne, high and lifted up, and the train of His robe filled the temple. Above it stood seraphim. one
cried to another and said: Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of hosts. So I said: Woe is me, for I am undone! Because
I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips; for my eyes have seen the King, the
LORD of hosts (Isa 6:1-5). Isaiah definitely proclaimed that he saw YHWH or God the Fathers
glory, whom the apostle John declared was the Logos.

Let us examine the facts: First, Isaiah saw the Logos glorified with His body shinning like the
sun. Second, Isaiah saw God in heaven sitting on his throne with all the holy angels of God
surrounding Him and worshipping Him. It is very evident that the angels were not worshipping
an invisible God or an imaginary God who was sitting on the throne, as only allegorists would so
foolishly believe. Therefore, Isaiah saw the Logos in heaven not on the earth surrounded by
sinful men. Third, God talked with Isaiah and he with God, for Isaiah declared: I heard the voice of
the LORD, saying: Whom shall I [not we] send, and who will go for us [i.e. God & His angels]? Then I said, Here am I!
Send me. And He [not they] said, Go, and tell this people. Then I said, LORD, how long? And He [not they]
answered (vss 8-11). Therefore, from the above scriptural facts, Isaiah was taken to heaven in the
Spirit and saw the Logos in His glory, that is as Christ existed in the Old Testament as YHWH.

127
The Prophets Amos, Micah, And Zechariah Saw God the Father's Glorified
Humanity: The prophet Amos, who lived around 800 BC saw: the LORD stood on a wall made with a
plumb line, with a plumb line in His hand. And the LORD said to me, Amos, what do you see? And I said, A
plumb line. Then the LORD said: Behold, I am [not we are] setting a plumb line In the midst of My [not our] people
Israel; I [not we] will not pass by them anymore (Amos 7:7-8). Notice, God spoke to Amos about the
problems Israel was having at that present time. Now, what kind of mystical interpretation will
the allegorists place on God having feet and hands in these verses? Amos did not say he saw the
Logos in His glory, i.e. as His body shined like the sun, but at the same time that does not mean
he did not.

Micah, who lived around 755 BC, also declared that he saw God the Father who spoke to him.
Micah said: I saw the LORD [YHWH] SITTING upon His throne, and all the host of heaven [i.e. Gods angels]
standing on His RIGHT HAND and on His LEFT. And the LORD said who shall entice Ahab king of Israel that he
may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead (2Ch 18:18-21)? In this passage of scripture, the Bible describes
another scene where YHWH or the Logos is sitting on His throne in heaven, and His holy angels
are on standing on both sides of Him, no doubt giving Him loving praise. The one person sitting
on the throne is talking to His angels and they are talking to Him. Notice, Christ is talking to His
angels about king Ahabs death, who lived in the days of Micah the prophet. It is evident that the
God whom Micah saw sitting on the one throne in heaven had a body.

The prophet Zechariah, who lived around 534 BC, saw: the two anointed ones, who stand beside the
LORD of the whole earth (Zec 4:14). It is evident from the testimony of all the above prophets of God
that they saw YHWH in their day in a bodily form. Whom are these two anointed one who are
stood around Gods throne? In verse 11, these two anointed men are called two olive trees. In the
Book of Revelation the eleven chapter, the apostle John called these two anointed one the two
witnesses (vs 3), the two olive trees standing before the God of the earth (vs4), and two prophet (vs 10), who
will come to the earth in the Great Tribulation Period and do many miraculous acts. Therefore,
it is evident that these two prophets will continue to stand next to God until they are sent to the
earth. It is clear from the context of this passage, these two prophets were not standing on each
side of an invisible or a nonexistent God.

A Side Comment: These two prophets will be killed and resurrected at the end of the sixth
trumpet, or just after the battle of Armageddon (cp Rev 11:14 with 8:13). I personally believe these
prophets are Moses and Elijah. Even though Moses died, I believe God raised him from the
death before his body rotted or went back to dust. It is evident from Jude 1:9 that Michael the
archangel fought with the devil over the body of Moses; also the Jewish Talmud claimed that God
raised him from the dead. Let us not forget that it was Moses and Elijah that appeared with
Jesus at the Mount of Transfiguration (Mt 17:1-3)! These truths are thoroughly covered in my
book The Mysteries of Prophecy Reveal, which is an exposition of the Book of Revelation that is
also given away on my website.

God's Angels and Lucifer Seen God the Father's Glorified Humanity: The Bible
informs us of an event that took place in the prophet Jobs day, who was probably born around
2300 BC or shortly after the flood of Noah (2342 BC). It stated: there was a day when the sons of God [the
angels] came to present themselves before the LORD [Almighty God the Logos], and Satan came also among them.... [Satan
said to YHWH, Job] will surely curse You to Your face [paneh]! And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that he [Job]
has is in your power; only upon himself put not forth your hand; so Satan went forth from the presence [paneh] of the
LORD (Job 1:6, 11-12).

128
The Hebrew word paneh is translated as face 390 times, 21 times as person, and 76 times as
presence in the Old Testament. It is evident from this passage of scripture that the God who
sat on the throne in heaven had a face and body. It is obvious to any logical thinking person that
the angels were not presenting themselves to in invisible omnipresent Spirit, and Satan was not
talking to an empty throne; this would be ludicrous! Therefore, according to this and all the
preceding scriptures, men, God's angels, Satan and his angels have seen God the Father's glory
or human body when it shined like the sun.

Theologians Deny Gods OT Soul and Body Natures: I know all of the allegorists,
who love to spiritualize away the clear truths of the Bible, will say that Satan was talking to a
theophany of God, that is, a temporary manifestation of God. This would be preposterous, for
this would mean Satan was fighting against a God whom he could not see, or a God who could
appear in a million different forms or bodies and then disappear. It would be like someone
fighting against the air, or a cloud, or smoke. Satan is not dumb; he is smart enough to deceive
the fallen angels that fell with him, and a multitude of men in all ages of mankind (Rev 12:9). If
these spiritualists claim that Satan was seeing and talking to a theophany of God in Jobs day,
then maybe they believe that Satan was talking to a theophany of God in the Book of Revelation;
for the Bible stated: the accuser of our brethren, who accused them before our God day and night, has been cast
down (Rev 12:10). Therefore, all the scriptural evidence points to the fact that YHWH, that is, the
Logos had a personal permanent glorified Divine Human Body in the OT, which was not a mere
theophany (a temporary manifestation of God).

When theologians want to deny that God had a Divine Glorified Spiritual Body in the OT,
they usually quote scriptures such as: He shall cover you with His feathers, And under His wings you shall
take refuge, or Hide me under the shadow of Your wings, or How precious is Your loving kindness, O God!
Therefore the children of men put their trust under the shadow of Your wings (Psa 91:4; 17:8; 36:7). After citing
these verses to you, they then will ask, do you believe God has a body of a bird, with feathers and
wings? You say no, this is evidently symbolism for God's mercy, as Exodus 19:4 and 25:20 reveals.
They then tell you the big lie: all scriptures speaking of Gods bodily parts are pure symbolism. The
author admits that some of the passages of Scripture that speak of Gods bodily parts are
symbolic expressions, but most of them are not, and therefore should be taken literal as God
intended.

I am so sick of preachers spiritualizing the truths of the Holy infallible Word of God and
calling His Word a lie. When the language used in the Bible is clear and the context is not
symbolic, we must believe that God said what He meant and meant what He said! Whom are we
going to believe, some theologians or Gods Word? Preachers may think it is all right to
spiritualize away Gods truths, but the Bible teaches me that they will be judged for it one day.
The majority of the scriptures in the Bible should be interpreted literally, but there are some
that should be interpreted symbolically. Therefore, let each Scripture be interpreted by its
context and by comparing it to ALL the other Scriptures that are on that subject!

Each scripture must be taken in the light of the context of those around it, and not out of
context, for example, the Bible reveals that there are scriptures that speak of mans bodily parts
in symbolic language, but no one would dare claim that man does not have a body. Here are a
few examples: Break the arm [meaning the power] of the wicked and the evil man; or He [God] will keep the feet
of [or preserve] His saints; or What do you mean by crushing My people and grinding the faces of the poor [meaning
129
bring them to destruction]; or He heals the broken in heart [meaning a heart full of sorrow] and binds up their wounds
[meaning heals their emotions] (Psa 10:15; 1Sa 2:9; Isa 3:15; Psa 147:3).

Now preacher, if you make ALL the Scriptures, which speak of Gods bodily parts symbolic,
then you be sure to teach that man does not have a body either, and that ALL the scriptures that
teach that man has bodily parts are just mere symbolism. There are more than a hundred
scriptures in the Old Testament that speak about the different parts of Gods body, such as: His
face, eyes, ears, mouth, voice, chest, arms, hands, hips, and feet. To say all of these are symbolic
is pure nonsense or idiotic!

I am so sick and tired of reading or hearing preachers calling Gods OT Divine Humanity
nothing but an anthropomorphic expression, that is, ascribing to God imaginary human
characteristics, or saying that it was a mere theophany, that is, a temporary human manifestation
of Deity. What they are really doing is calling the infallible Word of God a lie! When will these
preachers stop robbing God the Father of His Personal Glory or Personal Dwelling Place, which
in the OT was the Glorious Visible Spiritual Body of YHWH (Eze 1:26-28; Isa 6:1-5; Mt 17:1-2; Phi 2:5-
6).

A believer would be better off believing that the moon was made of green cheese, and the sun
was made of ice cream, than believe Satans lie that the Word or the Logos was not the Visible
Human Spiritual Body Nature of God in the OT. I do not mean to be rude or harsh, but every
time I think about how these preachers rob my God of His Glory through their heretical
teachings, a righteous anger comes over me whereby I want to yell out: stop telling your lies, God is
going to judge you one day for them.

God the Father, as the Angel of YHWH,
Appeared and Talked to the Patriarchs in His Human Nature

As my beloved readers read the following passages of Scripture, they should keep in mind that
the phrase angel of LORD, according to the writings of some theologians, should have read
LORD. These scholars declared that the words angel of were adding to Gods personal name of
YHWH in hundreds of places in the Jewish Targums, which was a paraphrase version of the Old
Testament.
222
Oneness Preacher Rev. Miller stated this truth this way: Now, one of the things
superstitiously tampered with was the Word of Jehovah. The Targums had multiplied it.... They cast out the term
Jehovah two hundred times, and put in the Word of Jehovah, with no other warrant than some growing and
unquestioned superstition.
223
Paterson, also a Oneness Preacher, speaking of the same thing said: In
every passage [i.e. in the Targums], which implies bodily characteristics or corporeality, the term Memra replaces the [so-called]
name Jehovah employed by Moses. This term Memra signifies the Word, and to Him are ascribed all the attributes and
glory of God. The Targums at the same time recognizing that it was He who appeared to the patriarchs and prophets.
224


The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, under the subtitle the Angel of the Theophany
stated: This angel is spoken of as the angel of Yahweh, and the angel of the presence (or FACE) of Yahweh.
The angel and Yahweh are at times distinguished from each other, they are with equal frequency and in the same
passages merged into each other.
225
I emphatically declare that God has never appeared to anyone in
any temporary manifestation of Himself known as a theophany. The Angel of YHWH was
YHWH, who was in the burning bush, and in the cloud. It was the Word or Gods visible and
permanent Self or humanity that the patriarchs and prophets saw and spoke to.

130
One should keep in mind that the words theophany and trinity are never used in the Bible.
Anyone who would make the Angel of YHWH a temporary manifestation of YHWH would be
guilt of robbing Christ of the GLORY He had in the OT as the face and body or humanity of
God the Father. In all the following passages of Scripture, it appears: YHWH dimmed the brilliant
light that shone forth from His glorious body when he appeared to the patriarchs; therefore, he looked like an
ordinary man. I might add, the angels of God that appeared to the prophets in the OT did the very
same thing, for their bodies also shine very brightly in their heavenly abode (Rev 10:1-11; 22:2-8, 16).

God the Father, as the Logos, Appeared to Abraham as A Man: The Word of God
explicitly stated: Then the LORD [YHWH] appeared to him [Abraham] by the terebinth trees of Mamre, as he was
sitting in the tent door in the heat of the day. So he lifted his eyes and looked, and behold, three men [i.e. God & two
angels] were standing by him; and when he saw them, he ran from the tent door to meet them, and bowed himself to
the ground, and said: My LORD [not my Lords], if I have now found favor in Your sight, do not pass on by Your
servant (Gen 18:1-3). It is very evident that Abraham recognized one of the men to be his master and God, for
this was not the first time God appeared to Abraham looking like an ordinary man. Therefore,
every time God appeared to Abraham He must have had the same Human form and physical
appearance, for Abraham recognized Him each time.

It was at this time that God told Abraham: I [not we] will certainly return to you according to the time
of life, and behold, Sarah your wife shall have a son. And the LORD said to Abraham, "Why did Sarah laugh.
And the LORD said the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is great. Then the men [two angels] turned away
from there and went toward Sodom, but Abraham still stood before the LORD (vs 10, 13, 20, 22). While
Abraham was pleading with God for his nephew Lots life, the Bible stated: the two angels came to
Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gate of Sodom (Gen 19:1). Notice the Bible declared that
the two men that went to Sodom were angels not members of an imaginary Trinity.

The point I want to make is that YHWH appeared to Abraham as a man. He looked just like a
man and Abraham recognized Him when he saw Him. God manifested Himself to Abraham just
prior to this one, for the Bible stated: the LORD appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I Am [not we are] the
Almighty God; walk before Me [not us], and be thou perfect.... And He left off talking with him, and God went up from
Abraham (Gen 17:1, 22; also 26:2). According to Jesus, He was the Man who appeared to Abraham
as YHWH, the Almighty God; for He told the Jews of His day: Your father Abraham rejoiced to see
My day, and he saw it and was glad. Then the Jews said to Him, You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen
Abraham? Jesus said to them, Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM. (Jn 8:56-58).

According to the Bible, sometime before God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, Abraham met
a man by the name of Melchizedek. Now was this man? According to the apostle Paul He was
God, who in His Human Nature was the High Priest of God. Paul said it this way: For this
Melchizedek, king of Salem, Priest of the Most High God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the
kings and blessed him. Now beyond all contradiction the lesser [Abraham] is blessed by the better [Melchizedek] (Heb
7:1,7). Therefore, this man had to be greater than Abraham. Paul then informs us that this man was
YHWH. Paul declared that this man was: without father, without mother [without parents], without [human]
genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life [i.e. He eternal], but made like the Son of God [i.e. His Spiritual
Humanity was similar to the Sons Natural Humanity], remains a Priest continually [or will forever be Gods High Priest] (verses 3-
6).

Paul quoting Psalms concerning the Human Nature of Jesus becoming our High Priest wrote: So
also Christ did not glorify Himself to become High Priest, but it was He who said to Him: You are My Son [i.e. My
Humanity], Today I have begotten You. As He also says in another place: You are a Priest forever according to the
order of Melchizedek (Heb 5:5). According to the Word of God, the only beings that can become a
High Priest to God are men: For every high priest [is] taken from among men [and] is appointed for men in
131
things pertaining to God (Heb 5:1). Therefore, Abraham saw, recognized, and talked to God the
Father, who looked like an ordinary man, and was also called Melchizedek!

God the Father, as the Angel of YHWH, Appeared to Jacob as A Man: The Bible
stated: Jacob was left alone; and there wrestled a man with him until the breaking of the day.... And Jacob called
the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face and my life is preserved (Gen 32:24, 30). Jacob
claimed this Man he was wrestling with around 1770 BC was God. The prophet Hosea confirmed
this fact that this Man was YHWH. Hosea said: Jacob had power over the Angel and prevailed: he
wept, and made supplication unto Him: he found Him in Bethel, and there He spake with us; even the LORD God of
hosts (Hos 12:4-5). Therefore, according to Jacob and Hosea this Angelic Man was God the Father.
Jacob speaking of Gods Angelic Humanity said: the Angel of God spoke to me in a dream, saying,
Jacob. And I said, Here I am. And He said, I Am [not we are] the God of Bethel, where you anointed the pillar
and where you made a vow to Me [not us] (Gen 31:11-13).

The Word of God expressly declared: the LORD appeared unto him [Jacob] the same night, and said, I
Am [not we are] the God of Abraham thy father (Gen 26:24); and the LORD stood above it [Jacobs ladder], and said I
Am [not we are] the LORD God of Abraham thy father, and the God of Isaac (Gen 28:13); and God appeared unto
Jacob again, when he came out of Padanaram and blessed him.... And God went up from him in the place where He
talked with him (Gen 35:9, 13). The Angel of YHWH or the Logos in all the above passages of
Scripture was not a theophany, i.e. some momentary human manifestation of God, because both
Abraham and Jacob recognized Him each time He appeared to them.

God the Father, as the Angel of YHWH, Appeared to Moses as A Man: The Bible
declared: the Angel of the LORD appeared unto him in [not as] a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush.... And
when the LORD saw that he turned aside to see, God called unto him out of the midst of the bush, and said, Moses,
Moses. And he said, here am I. He [the Angel of YHWH] said I Am [not we are] the God of thy father, the God of
Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. And Moses hid his face; for he was afraid to LOOK UPON GOD
(Exo 3:2, 4, 6). Here we have positive proof that the Angel, Word, or Logos of YHWH was God the
Father Himself. Notice, the Bible says YHWH or the Angel was in the bush and called out to him
from the bush. Isaiah the prophet called the Angel or Logos the face of God the Father. He said: In all
their [Israels] affliction He was afflicted, and the Angel of His [YHWH'S] Presence [paniym - Face] saved them (Isa 63:9).
Let my beloved readers take note, the Angel was the Human Face of Almighty God.

As I have already shown, the Bible proclaimed that there was not in Israels history a
prophet: like unto Moses, whom the LORD knew face [paniym] to face [paniym ] (Deu 34:10). YHWH said:
With him [Moses] will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not in dark speeches; and the similitude
[temuwnah human form] of the LORD shall he behold (Num 12:8). In fact, Moses seen Gods face and spoke
with Him many times, not in visions but with his natural eyes (Exo 33:11; 34:5; & Num 11:25). The
Bible emphatically declared that Moses was looking at God and not some bush which was
suppose to be God.

Friend when theologians claim that God appeared as a bush, or a cloud of fire, or a
theophany, beware, for they are teaching a false doctrine. As a result, they are robbing God the
Father of His personal glory, which is His Spiritual Human Nature, that is, His Holy Spirit and
Glorified Spiritual Body that He had in the Old Testament. God the Father not only appeared
unto Moses, but in fact, the Bible revealed that He appeared unto many Israelites at one time. It
says: Then went up Moses, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel: And they saw the
God of Israel: and there was UNDER His FEET as it were a paved work of a sapphire stone.... And upon the nobles
of the children of Israel He laid not His HAND: also they saw God, and did eat and drink (Exo 24:0-11).

132
God appeared visibly over the mercy seat to the High Priest on the Day of Atonement once a
year, for the scripture stated: I will appear in the cloud above the mercy seat (Lev 16:2, Num 7:89). Notice,
God did not say He would appear as a cloud but in a cloud! According to the Bible, God would
also speak to the High Priest, on any given day, when he stood in front of the veil in the Holy
Place, and asked God for directions concerning major problem the Nation of Israel faced (Jud
20:27-28).

Some Human Attributes of God the Fathers
Old and New Testament Divine Humanity

Gods Old Testament Spiritual Humanity Seem to Be Limited in Knowledge:
The Logos angels told Him about certain events on the earth and He had to go there to check
out their reports. The Word of God expressly and emphatically declared: the LORD said [to
Abraham], because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous; I will go down
now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto Me; and IF NOT, I will
know (Gen 18:21-22; also KJV, JPS, NAS, ASV, DBY, etc). The New International Versions translates this
verse this way, I will go down and see IF what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached Me. IF
NOT, I will know. The Bible in Basic English: I will go down now, and see if their acts are as bad as they
seem from the outcry which has come to Me; and if they are not, I will see.

Why did the YHWH say that He would go to Sodom and Gomorrah and see if the report the
angels gave Him about Sodom and Gomorrah were as bad as they claimed? Did He not know?
The allegorists say God is speaking in human frailty in order that we can understand Him, but
this cannot be, because God cannot lie. If He did know and said He did not know, then He lied.
The Logos as almighty God knows all things, even the very thoughts of every mans heart at one
time, but in His Humanity He had limited knowledge.

Just as YHWH went down from heaven to see the people of Sodom and Gomorrah, He went
down to see the Gower of Babel:

But the LORD came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of
men had built. Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language, that they may not understand one
another's speech (Gen 11:5-7). Let my beloved readers take note to the fact, the first time He went to
see the tower, He went by Himself; and the second times He came down from Heaven, He went
with some of His angels to destroy the Tower of Babel and confuse the peoples language.

Gods New Testament Physical Humanity also Seem to Be Limited in
Knowledge: Just as the Logos, in His OT Spiritual Humanity seem to be limited in knowledge,
so was His NT Physical Humanity; for Isaiah declared: Before the Child shall know to refuse the evil
and choose the good, the land that you dread will be forsaken by both her kings (Isa 7:14-16). This prophecy is
truly amazing. Think about it. Immanuel, the omniscient or all knowing God, in His human
nature as a child had to be taught the difference between what was good and evil, just like any
other child. Dr. Luke confirmed this truth when he stated: the child grew and increase in wisdom and
statute (Lk 2:40, 52). Jesus speaking in His Human Nature about the time of His return to earth
said: Of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father (Mk
13:32). Our LORD in His Humanity did not know the day or the hour of His return, but in His
Nature as Almighty God He knew all things: for all the treasures of wisdom are hid in Him (Col 2:3).

Gods Spiritual Humanity Repented and Regretted Some of the Decisions He
Made: Because mans heart before the flood was continually evil: And GOD saw that the wickedness
133
of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And
it repented [nacham] the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. And the LORD
said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping
thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth [nacham] Me that I have made them (Gen 6:5-7, KJV).

The Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament defined nacham as: be sorry, REPENT, REGRET,
be comforted, comfort. The origin of the root seems to reflect the idea of breathing deeply, hence the physical
display of one's feelings. The KJV translates the Niphal of nhm REPENT thirty-eight times. The majority of
these instances refer to Gods REPENTANCE, not man's. The Scriptures inform us that God REPENTS (Gen
6:6-7; Exo 32:14; Jud 2:18; 1Sam 15:11 [35] et al.), i.e. He relents or changes His dealings with men according to His
sovereign purposes. The Lord has sworn and will not change His mind (Psa 110:4). Thus the OT states that
God REPENTED of the judgments or evil which he had planned to carry out (1Chr 21:15; Jer 18:8; Jer 26:3, 19;
Amos 7:3, 6; Jon 3:10). A change in mans conduct brings about a change in Gods judgment (#344.0).

Exodus 32:9-14 And the LORD said unto Moses, I have seen this people, and, behold, it is a stiffnecked
people: Now therefore let Me alone, that My wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them: and I
will make of THEE [i.e. Moses] a great nation. And Moses besought the LORD his God, and said Remember
Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, thy servants, to whom thou swarest by thine Own Self, and saidst unto them, I will
multiply YOUR seed as the stars of heaven, and all this land that I have spoken of will I give unto YOUR seed, and
they shall inherit it for ever. And the LORD repented [nacham] of the evil which He thought to do unto His people
(Exo 32:9-14, KJV).

Therefore was the wrath of the LORD kindled against His people, insomuch that He abhorred his own
inheritance. Many times did He deliver them; but they provoked Him with their counsel, and were brought low
for their iniquity. Nevertheless He regarded their affliction, when He heard their cry: And He remembered for them
His Covenant, and repented [nacham] according to the multitude of His mercies (Psa 106:40-46).

For thus saith the LORD of hosts; As I thought to punish you, when your fathers provoked Me to wrath, saith
the LORD of hosts, and I repented [nacham] not: So again have I thought in these days to do well unto Jerusalem and
to the house of Judah: fear ye not (Zec 8:14). Therefore, God in His Divine Human Soul Nature does
repent and regrets certain judgments He has pronounced on mankind, but God in Divine Holy
Spirit Nature is Immutable and never repents or changes His Mind about anything. Immutable
means: Unchanging over time or unable to be changed. If this is not so, then the Bible contradicts itself
(1Sa 15:29, KJV).

All the above scriptures in this chapter definitely reveal that God had a real Human Nature in
the Old Testament. They certainly imply that God must have change or transformed a portion of
His Eternal Spirit Substance into a Divine Holy Spirit Nature, a Divine Human Soul Nature, and
a Glorified Divine Human Spiritual Body before the beginning of time, wherewith He became
the Manifested or Visible God. It was through His Divine Human Natures He spoke the worlds
into existence, and made Man in that image and likeness.

God the Fathers Glorified Human Spiritual Body
Became A Natural Body at Bethlehem,
and All of His Divine Holy Spirit and Soul Natures Dwelt in It

Oneness Preacher Rev. Paul Ferguson speaking of God the Fathers Visible-Self becoming the
Son of God at Bethlehem wrote: Jesus, the Son, received a set of chromosomes from God, the Father. The single
cell, which encased these tiny bands, which would help determine His characteristics, had been the Glorious Image
through which God ruled the universe. This cell (the smallest unit of life) united with another single cell in the womb of
Mary, and thus, the Son of Man was conceived.
226
I believe, like Brother Ferguson, that the glorious
134
spiritual body, which God the Father had in the OT, became a natural flesh and blood body at
Bethlehem.

I believe Gods OT Divine Humanity was made of a spiritual tangible flesh and bone body; in
fact, I believe that it was the same body Jesus had when He rose from the dead. Let us remember
the glorious resurrected body of Jesus was not only tangible, but it was also spiritual, for it could
appear and disappear at will. Jesus described it thus: Behold My hands and My feet, that it is I myself:
handle me, and see; for a spirit has NOT flesh and bones, as ye see Me have (Lk 24: 39). Matthew described Jesus
glorious body this way, Jesus was transfigured before them: and His face did shine as the sun, and His raiment was
white as the light (Mt 17:2). Therefore, before God begot Christ, He in His Eternal Spirit Essence
and Spirit Body did not have a body of flesh and bones, that is, He did not have a Divine Human
Nature.

We also know that God the Fathers Old Testament Divine Soul Nature was very pleased to
dwell in the Son born of Mary, for the Scripture says: This is my beloved Son, IN whom I am well
pleased (Mt 3:17, cp with Isa 42:16). Not only was God the Fathers Soul Nature was going to dwell
in a natural physical body of Jesus, but Gods Divine Holy Spirit Nature as well; for God giveth
not the Spirit by measure unto Him (Jn 3:34). Therefore, when Gabriel told Mary: you will conceive in
your womb and bring forth a Son [for] the Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the Power of the Highest will
overshadow you (Lk 1:30-35).

I assume that the YHWH reduced His Glorified Divine Human Spiritual Body Nature to a
Seed and by means of God the Fathers Divine Holy Spirit and Soul Natures, He impregnated or
implanted this Seed into Marys womb, who was a Virgin. Thus, the God the Fathers seed
united with Marys egg and produced Gods earthly Physical Human Body. Through this holy
union, the Fathers heavenly Glorious Divine Spiritual Body became an earthly or Natural Body
composed of flesh, bones, and blood. I do not believe that the Fathers Divine Holy Spirit and Soul Natures
went through any transformation, but His Human Physical Mind or Brain Nature had to be taught the difference
between right and wrong (Lk 2:40, 46, 52; Isa 7:14-16). The natural body that the Fathers Holy Spirit
and Soul were now in had the same chemical makeup, desires, and weaknesses of any other
earthly fleshly body.

Gods Glorified Spiritual Body, no doubt, was one of the things the Apostle was referring to,
when He declared that Christ or the Heavenly Man emptied Himself when He became a Natural
Man (Phi 2:7, ASV). He also emptied Himself of all His glory by being confined to body of flesh and
blood with all of its weaknesses, limitations, and so on. This is one of the reasons, as I stated
before, why Jesus said: And now, [continue to] glorify Me [Your Humanity], Thou Father with Thyself, with the
GLORY that I had before the world was with Thee (Jn 17:5, YLT). The Divine Holy Spirit and Soul
Natures of Christ evidently wanted to go back to that Glorified Heavenly Spiritual Body that
they had before they took on a natural fleshly body. I also believe, as I stated before in my
exposition of this verse, that Christs Divine Holy Spirit and Soul desired to be reunited with the
other portion of their Unbegotten Spirit Nature that was located in Heaven.

Conclusion: In this chapter, we learned that God transformed a portion of His Eternal
Spirit Substance into a Divine Human Nature called Christ; thus forming a Godhead that
consisted of two real Natures, that is, God and Man. In other words, Christs personality as God
was in His Holy Spirit Nature, and His personality as Man was in His Divine Human Soul and
Glorified Spiritual Body Natures. Thus, the personality of the one and only God was composed
of two separate and distinct Natures. This great truth was demonstrated, as I have already
135
shown in this chapter, in what we know of mans personality, which is composed of his spirit,
soul, and body natures.

Let us not forget, man is made in the image and likeness of God. When one believes and
understands this great truth, the real mystery of the godhead then becomes revealed, that is,
when we realized that Christs Holy Spirit, Soul, and Glorified Spiritual Body Natures are part
of God the Fathers one personality and Person. As we all know, no one in their right mind
would declare: a man is three separate and distinct persons because he has three natures.

Therefore, no Trinitarian theologian, pastor, or preacher could ever say, and be telling the
truth, that the one and only God of the OT and the NT is three separate and distinct person or
gods, because He has three separate and distinct natures. My beloved readers, the truth of the
Godhead is so simple when one interprets the Bible in a literal fashion. Jesus speaking in His
Divine Human Nature said it this way: I thank You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have
hidden these things from the wise and prudent and have revealed them to babes (Mt 11:25).

CHAPTER 7
CHRIST IS THE HOLY SPIRIT: THE LIVING WORD, THE
SPOKEN WORD, AND THE WRITTEN WORD OF GOD

In this chapter we will examine Christs Divine Holy Spirit Nature. I believe there are three
aspects to the Holy Spirit, that is, Gods Personal Living Word, Spoken Word, and Written
Word. In the Bible, the Holy Spirit always represents Christ. The Holy Spirit is another name or
title for the Lord Jesus Christ. I define the three aspects of the Holy Spirit this way: First, Christ
is the Personal Living Word of God, that is, Gods Visible Self. He is the very embodiment of
Gods Word (Rev 19:13). Christs Unbegotten Spirit Nature dwells in His Divine Holy Spirit
Nature, which dwells in His Divine Human Soul Nature, which dwells in His Divine Human
Glorified Spiritual Body! Therefore, Christ, as the Holy Spirit, is the Mouth, Tongue, and Body
of God. It is He who spoke the universe into existence (Gen 1:3,6,9,11,14; Jn 1:14, Col 1:15-17, Heb 11:3).
The Prophet David said it this way: By the WORD of the LORD the heavens were made, and all the host of
them by the Breath [Ruwach - Spirit] of His Mouth (Psa 33:6).

Second, the Holy Spirit, as Christ, is the Spoken Words of God. Jesus revealed this truth when
He said: The Words that I speak [meaning the Words that come out of My Mouth] to you are Spirit [Pneuma], and they are
life (Jn 6:63). In fact, God is present throughout the entire universe by the Spoken Spirit-Words
that came out of Christs mouth at creation; for the Bible reveals that Gods Creative Spirit-
Words are omnipresence and fill heaven and earth (Jer 23:24), and the universe cannot contain them
(1Ki 8:27). Third, the Holy Spirit, as Christ, is the Written Words of God, which God spoke
through the prophets and apostles to reveal His will, plan, and purpose for our life.

Christ as the Holy Spirit Is Only One Spirit: The apostle Paul told the Ephesian
Church that there was only ONE [heis] Spirit (Eph 4:4); if there is more than one Spirit, than there
can be more than one [heis] God and Father of all (vs 6). According to the Bible, through the
atonement of the Lord Jesus Christ: believers have access by one [heis] Spirit unto the Father (Eph 2:18).
Paul told the Church: For by one [heis] Spirit are we all baptized into one body... and have been all made to
drink into one [heis] Spirit (1Co 12:13).

136
As stated before, according to Dr. Thayer, the Greek adjective heis means: a primary numeral
one. Drs. Friberg defines it the same way: one, a single, only one. Therefore, when the Word of God
declares that there is one Spirit, and only one Spirit of God, it does not mean a unity of Spirits,
or an agreement of Spirits, or one in kind, but a numerical one Spirit in number. In conclusion,
these scriptures clearly reveal that there is not two, three or more Holy Spirits of God, but one
and only one. So, with this truth in mind, let us begin our study of the Holy Spirit.

Christ, as the Holy Spirit, Is the Living Word of God
in A Human Spiritual Body

The Jewish Encyclopedia speaking of the Holy Spirit as Christ stated: What the Bible calls Spirit of
YHWH and Spirit of Elohiym is called in the Talmud and Midrash Holy Spirit.... The nature of the Holy Spirit is
really nowhere described.... The phrase in Cant 2:12, the voice of the dove (A.V. turtle), is translated in the Targums
the voice of the Holy Spirit.... The prophet hears and sees by the Spirit. In the Messianic time however, the Holy
Spirit will, according to Joel 2:28-29, be poured out upon all Israel; i.e. all the people will be prophets. New
Testament writers look upon the Messiah, who is actually identified with the Holy Spirit as having arrived.
227


If the Holy Spirit is not the Spirit of the Lord Jesus Christ, then how did the Holy Spirit shed
blood at Calvary? Paul told the Ephesians elders: the Holy Ghost [Agion Pneuma] has made you overseers,
to feed the church of God, which HE [| - the Holy Ghost] has purchased with His own blood (Acts 20:28). Irenaeus
in 180 AD translated this verse thus: Take heed, therefore, both to yourselves, and to all the flock over which
the Holy Ghost has placed you as bishops to rule the Church of the Lord, which HE [|] has acquired [:.t.:etcae] for
Himself through His own blood.
228


Let us examine the facts: First, the name of Jesus or the word Son is nowhere stated in this
verse. Second, the Greek words Agion Pneuma, that is, Holy Spirit is in the nominative case, which
means it is the subject of this verse. Third, the pronoun HE is the Greek word | which is a
relative adjective pronoun, which is in accusative case, that is, it is a direct object and in the singular
number. Therefore, this pronoun modifies the subject of the sentence, which is the Holy Ghost. Since the
Word of God indisputable declared that the blood, which was shed on Calvarys Cross, belonged
to the Holy Spirit, this can only mean that the Holy Spirit is the Lord Jesus Christ.

In the Old Covenant, only a select few among the Jewish people could receive the Holy Spirit,
such as prophets, priests and certain kings. Isaiah said the children of Israel: rebelled and vexed
His Holy Spirit. They cried out saying: where is He [not them] that put His Holy Spirit WITHIN him [meaning
Moses] (Isa 63:10-11). The apostle Peter called the Holy Spirit: the Spirit of Christ, which was IN
them, meaning the prophets of the Old Testament (1Pe 1:11). The apostle Paul declared: Christ
lives IN me (Gal 2:20). He told the Colossian Church that the mystery, which was hid from all ages,
was: Christ in you, the hope of glory (Col 1:27, 3:11). Paul also told Gods church: the Spirit of Jesus
Christ was IN them (Phi 1:19), or Jesus Christ is IN you, except you be reprobates (2Co 13:5), and God
sent: the Spirit of His Son INTO your hearts (Gal 4:6).

The Human Nature of Jesus speaking of His Divine Nature said, I will pray to: the Father and
He will give you another Helper [Parakletos], that He may abide with you forever even the SPIRIT of TRUTH, whom
the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He DWELLS WITH
YOU and will be IN you. I will not leave you orphans; I WILL COME TO YOU. At that day you will know that I
am IN My Father, and you IN Me, and I IN YOU (Jn 14:16-20).

137
In the above verses, Jesus revealed to His disciples that He was the Holy Spirit of God. In verse
17, Jesus called His Holy Spirit the Spirit of Truth, and in verse 6 He called Himself the Truth. In
the same verse, Jesus spoke about Himself dwelling with His disciples in the flesh, but as the Holy
Spirit He promised He would come back to them and dwell in them. In verses 18 and 20, He says
the same thing but in a different way. In verse 26, Jesus called the Holy Spirit the Comforter or
the Advocate, the One who makes Intercessor for the believer. Jesus said it this way: The
Advocate [Parakletos], the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you everything (NRS).

If you have any doubt that Jesus is the Holy Spirit, that is, the Parakletos, let the apostle John
quench your doubts for you. John said: if any man sin, we have an Advocate [Parakletos] with the Father,
Jesus Christ the righteous (1Jn 2:1). Who did John say the Parakletos was? It was Jesus Christ the
righteous. Jesus referring to Himself as the Holy Spirit also told His disciples that He would be
with them always: even unto the end of the world, and He would be in the midst of all believers (Mt
28:20; 18:20). Therefore, Jesus is the Holy Spirit.

The Holy Spirit as the Living Word of God Is Called by Many Titles: Jesus called
the Spirit of God: the Spirit of Truth, the Holy Spirit or Holy Ghost, and the Comforter or
Advocate (Jn 14:16-17, 26, ASV). Paul called the Holy Spirit by many titles. He told the Timothy:
the Holy Spirit... dwells in you. He told the Roman Church: the Spirit of God dwell in you, and if the
[Holy] Spirit of Him [God the Father] that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, He that raised up Christ from the
dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by His [Holy] Spirit that dwells in you (2Ti 1:14; Rom 8:9-11; also 1Co
3:16).

Paul also identified the Holy Spirit with the Lord Jesus Christ when he stated: if any man have
not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His, or if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin (Rom 8:9-11).
Paul called the Holy Spirit of the Lord Jesus Christ by these titles: the Spirit of His Son (Ga 4:6),
the Spirit of Jesus Christ (Phi 1:19). The King James translators translated the Holy Spirit in their
version of the English Bible as Holy Ghost, probably because they believed the Holy Spirit was
the Spirit of the Departed One. Since there cannot be more than one Spirit, the Holy Spirit, the
Spirit of God, the Spirit of Christ, the Spirit of Jesus Christ, the Spirit of His Son, and the
Comforter are all titles for the same person, that is, titles for Gods the Fathers Divine Holy
Spirit, who became the Lord Jesus Christ at Bethlehem.

The Holy Spirit as the Living Word of God Is the Spirit of God the Father: If
God the Father and the Holy Spirit are two separate persons or Spirits, then who is the Father of
the Babe of Bethlehem? The apostle Paul positively declared that God is the Father of Jesus. He
said: Blessed be the God, even [kai] the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies (Eph 1:3 also 2Co
1:3). Gods Divine Holy Spirit and Soul Natures were the Father of Jesus Fleshly Human Body
Nature, as the archangel Gabriel proclaimed: the Holy Ghost shall come upon you, and the Power of the
Highest shall overshadow you (Lk 1:35). Gods angel told Joseph: that which is conceived in her is of the
Holy Ghost (Mt 1:20). If the Holy Spirit is NOT one of God the Fathers own Natures, as the
Trinitarians theologians teach, then they will have to start teaching that Jesus had two Fathers.

YHWH, the one God of Israel, said: I will pour out My [Holy] Spirit upon all flesh (Joel 2:27-28). This
prophecy was partly fulfilled on the day of Pentecost 600 years after Joel gave it (Acts 2:16). The
Bible teaches that a 120 disciples were: filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues as
the [Holy] Spirit gave them utterance (Acts 2:4). In verses 17-18, Peter quoted Joels prophecy and told
them that YHWH or God the Father had just brought in a New Covenant, in which He was going
to give His Holy Spirit to all races of mankind.
138

David called the Spirit in Him the Holy Spirit, when he begged YHWH: take not Thy Holy Spirit
from me (Psa 51:11). Jesus speaking prophetically in his Human Nature to His disciples said, it is:
the Spirit of your Father who speaks in you (Mt 10:20, NAS). Paul told the Thessalonian Church that
God the Father has: given unto us His Holy Spirit (1Th 4:8). The apostle John told the church: God
dwells in us.... Hereby know we that we dwell in Him, and He in us, because He has given us of His Spirit (1Jn 4:12-
13).

Let my beloved readers take note, in all the above scriptures, the Holy Spirit belongs to God
the Father. Can anyone read these clear Biblical statements and then teach that the Holy Spirit is
its own person. There can be no doubt that the Holy Spirit belongs to the one and only God, who
is the Father (also read Isa 61:1, 63:10-11. Mt 10:20, and 1Th 4:8). Therefore, according to all of the
above passages of scripture, the Holy Spirit is the God the Father.

The Holy Spirit as the Living Word of God Is A Personal Spirit: Since Christ is
God the Fathers Holy Spirit and Soul Natures, He is a Person. Therefore, all the personal
attributes of the Man Jesus Christ can be applied to God the Fathers Holy Spirit Nature,
because God is one Person and one God. For this reason, all of the following personal attributes
can be applied to the Holy Spirit of Christ.

Christ, as the Holy Spirit, Can Be Lied to, Grieved and Resisted: Peter said to Ananias: why
has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land (Acts 5:3)? Paul
admonished the Church in Ephesus to: grieve not the Holy Spirit of God, whereby you are sealed unto the
day of redemption (Eph 4:30). Stephen told the Jews: You stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears,
you do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did (Acts 7:51). Since the Holy Spirit is one of Jesus
many titles, Ananias was truly lying to Jesus, just as the Jews resisted Him as the Holy Spirit that
spoke in and through the prophets. They refused to obey His Word and even killed His prophets.

Christ, as the Holy Spirit, Can Anoint, Teach, Bear Witness, Pray, and Make Intercession to
God, Through the Human Spirit of the Believer: John told the church: you need not that any man
teach you: but as the same anointing teaches you of all things (1Jn 2:27). Jude admonished the church to
build themselves up in their most holy faith by: praying in the Holy Ghost (Jude 1:20). Paul wrote:
The Spirit Himself bears witness with our [human] spirit that we are children of God. We also who have the
firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of
our body. The Spirit also helps in our weaknesses. For we do not know what we should pray for as we ought, but
the Spirit Himself makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered (Rom 8:16, 23, 26, 27, NKJ).

Let us not forget what the apostle Paul said about praying in the spirit. He said: For if I pray in
an unknown tongue, my spirit prays, but my understanding [or soul and physical mind] is unfruitful, or does not
understand what is said (1Co 14:14). It is mans human spirit that Gods Spirit anoints to speak in
an unknown language, and it is mans soul that speaks in a language that it knows. Therefore, it
is Gods Holy Spirit that anoints our human spirit to pray, groan, and even speak in a language
that we have never been taught or understand. From all the evidence of the above scriptures, we
must conclude that the Holy Spirit is the Lord Jesus Christ.

Christ, as the Holy Spirit, Is the Spoken Word of God

In this section, we will examine the scriptures that reveal the Holy Spirit is the Spirit-Words
that comes out of the mouth of God. Jesus said it this way: It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits
139
nothing. The WORDS [Rhema] that I SPEAK [meaning the Words that come out of My Mouth] to you are SPIRIT [Pneuma], and
they are life (Jn 6:63). Let my beloved readers take note, the Holy Spirit is life and Gods Words are
life, therefore the Holy Spirit is the Words of God. In other words, all Words that come out of
the mouth of God are Spirit-Words. The Greek word rhema and its counterpart the Hebrew
word dabar are synonymous and they both mean: a word or words spoken, i.e. a verbal utterance.

Dr. A. T. Robertson commenting on the above verse stated: The words (ta rmata) - Those in this
discourse (I have just spoken, lelalka), for they are the WORDS of GOD ([Jn] 3:34; 8:47; 17:8). No wonder THEY
are SPIRIT and are life (pneuma estin kai z estin). The breath of God and the life of God is in these WORDS of
Jesus. Let us examine John 3:34 that Dr. Robertson referred to: For He whom God has sent SPEAKS
the WORDS of GOD, for [gar] God does not give the SPIRIT by measure to Him. Let my beloved readers take
note how Jesus connected the Words He spoke to the Spirit of God.

This connection can be better understood when we understand the meaning of the Greek
conjunction gar. Dr. Thayer define this particle this way: A particle of affirmation and CONCLUSION,
denoting truly therefore, verily as the case stands, the thing is first affirmed by the particle ,. , and then is referred to
what precedes by the force of the particle aa. The reason and nature of something PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED
are set forth. Some PREVIOUS DECLARATION is EXPLAINED.
229
Since Christ is Gods the Fathers
Holy Spirit, or Visible Self, in both the Old and New Testaments, He is the Living Personal Word
of God, who is the vocal organ, mouthpiece, and breath of God. Therefore, Christ has the Spirit-
Words of God in Him without measure, for Gods Holy Spirit and Soul Natures are in Him.

Gods Power Is in the Spirit-Words that Proceed Out of His Mouth: My Word that
goes out from My MOUTH: It will not return to me empty, but will accomplish what I desire and achieve the
purpose for which I sent it (Isa 55:11, NIV); and God sent His Word [Dabar], and healed them [the children of Israel],
and delivered them from their destructions (Psa 107:20); and O LORD, at the blast [neshamah] of the Breath
[Ruwach SPIRIT] of Thy nostrils the sea opened (Psa 18:15). The Hebrew word neshamah means: breath
and ruwach means: spirit. Therefore, this verse could be translated as: O Lord, at the breath of the
Spirit in Your nostrils the Read Sea opened. Isaiah said Jesus would: smite the earth with the rod of His
MOUTH, and with the Breath [Ruwach - SPIRIT] of His LIPS shall He slay the wicked (Isa 11:4).

Let my readers take note again of the connection between Gods Spirit and the Words He
speaks. God spoke Spirit-Words to His children and they were healed and delivered. He spoke
certain Spirit-Words to the Red Sea and it opened. He will speak certain Spirit-Words to the
wicked after the Judgment and they will eventually perish. Regardless of what you and I believe
about the Essence of the Holy Spirit of the Father, one thing can be said with all certainty, the
Holy Spirit of God is the Lord Jesus Christ and the Spirit-Words that come out of His mouth, for
He is the Living Word of God!

A good example of the Holy Spirit being the Spirit Words that came out of Christs Mouth
can be found in the Biblical New Birth. According to the Bible, all of mankind lives by the
personal human spirit that God placed in them, for it is the life of all flesh (Ja 2:26). All men have
their being in their human spirit. Mans spirit is born in this life spiritually dead, for man
inherited from Adam and Eve the curse of physical, spiritual and eternal death. As a result, men
are born in this life without the Spirit of God dwelling in them. Therefore, mans spirit and soul
became enslaves to their flesh, which dominates the mind of their spirit and soul natures.

Paul speaking about mans unregenerate nature said: we were all dead in sins (Eph 2:1-5). He also
said that the woman or man who has not been born of Gods Holy Spirit is: dead while she [or he] lives
140
(1Ti 5:6). The apostle John said it this way: He that loves not his brother abides in death (1Jn 3:14). What
else can these things mean, except the unregenerate spirit and soul of man is spiritually dead to the
Words of God, that is, the voice of God, but alive to the things of the flesh, the world and demonic
spirits. Only Gods Holy Spirit-Words can make mans spirit and soul alive and keep it alive.

I believe a believer in Christ becomes BORN of Gods Holy Spirit when: God speaks His personal
Spirit-Words into the believers human spirit, which will cause the believer to speak in a known language that he or
she has never learned. The very moment this happen, the believer is BORN of the Holy Spirit. For example, God
might say: Harry Peyton be BORN of My Holy Spirit. When this happen, my human spirit became
resurrected from its sleep of death and it then started it journey towards God, His Word, and His
Holiness. This in turn made my personal human spirit HOLY. Because the Holy Spirit is the
Spirit-Words of God, it can come in and dwell in millions of believers at the same time. I do not
know what personal form, if any, the Holy Spirit takes when God speaks It into a believers human spirit, but one
this is sure, our human spirit becomes alive to the things of God. If my beloved readers would like to know
more about how to be BORN of the Holy Spirit, I would recommend my books: Preacher, What Must
I Do to Receive Eternal Life, or, What Do You Mean I Must Be Born-Again, which are given away on my
website.

The Holy Spirit, as Christ, Is the Creative Word of God: Paul speaking of Spirit-
Words that came out of the mouth of God the Fathers Holy Spirit and Soul at creation said:
Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the WORD [Rhema spoken Word] of God (Heb 11:3).
In the book of Geneses we read the phrase: God said repeatedly, as God was placing life forms
back on earth (Gen 1:3, 6, 9, 11, 14, 20, 24, 26). One example of this would be where: God said let there
be lights in the firmament of heaven (Gen 1:14). As soon as God the Father spoke those Dabar Spirit-
Words, the sun and stars started shinning on the earth. From that day to this, Gods Spirit-
Words are in every object He created, and as long as His Spirit-Words remain in these things,
they will continue to exist.

The prophet David also connected the Fathers Holy Spirit with the Words that came out of
His mouth at creation. He declared: By the Word [Dabar spoken Word] of the LORD were the heavens made;
and all the host of them by the Breath [Ruwach - SPIRIT] of His MOUTH (Psa 33:6). Another way of saying this
would be By the Spirit-Words of the LORDs Spirit, Soul, and Holy Spirit were the heavens made; and all the
host of them by the Spirit in His mouth. In other words, Gods Holy Spirit and Soul spoke their Rhema
or Dabar Spirit-Words through their Divine Glorified Spiritual Body, and the works of creation
came into existence (Col 1:16; Jn 1:10). The prophet Job said this same thing this way By His SPIRIT
[Ruwach] He hath adorned the heavens (Job 26:13).

David expressed the same truth by stating: Your Word, O LORD, is ETERNAL; it stands firm [i.e.
stationed] in the heavens [shamayim] (Psa 119:89). The Hebrew word shamayim, i.e., heavens is a common
noun, masculine gender, and plural number. This means Gods creative spoken Word has an
abode throughout the entire universe, not in the first, second, or third heaven alone. Christ who
is the brightness of God the Fathers glory: upholding [phero] the UNIVERSE by His WORD [Rhema spoken
Word] of POWER (Heb 1:3). Professor Bauer defined phero as: to cause to continue in a state or condition,
sustain, fig., of the Son of God who bears up the universe by his mighty word Hb 1:3.
230
Therefore, according
to the above passages of Scripture, God created the universe and holds it together by the SPOKEN
Spirit-Words that came out of His mouth at creation.

Gods Holy Spirit Creative-Words are how God is omnipresent in the universe, that is, how
He dwells everywhere in the universe. God said it this way: Can anyone hide himself in secret places so
141
I shall not see him? says the LORD. Do not I fill heaven and earth (Jer 23:24)? King Solomon revealed that
Gods Holy Spirit-Words not only fills heaven and earth, but also the heaven and heaven of heavens
cannot contain them (1Ki 8:27)? King David also taught that Gods Holy Spirit-Words dwells in
everything even in hell. He wrote: Where can I go from Your Spirit? Or where can I flee from Your
presence? If I ascend into heaven, You are there; If I make my bed in hell, behold, You are there (Psa 139:7-8).

Therefore, since all the above scriptures definitely declare that God the Fathers Holy Spirit
Words fills heaven, earth, hell, and the entire universe, and they also holds the universe together,
it is only logical to assume that Gods Spirit that dwell in all of creation is His Holy Spirit-Words. In addition,
they are not God the Fathers PERSONAL Divine Spirit and Soul Essence. Who would dare say that any
part of Gods Personal Natures dwells in hell or even in Lucifer? Therefore, omnipresence is one
of Gods many attributes, but God is not an omnipresent spirit in His Person Essence as
Pantheistic Mystery Babylon and all pagan religions have taught throughout the ages.

There is a world of difference between these two concepts: A) a Personal God who has a
presence in the universe by His Spirit-Words that holds the universe together; B) an impersonal
god who is the universe and has a presence in all things animate and inanimate, i.e. all things
living and nonliving. It is because of this demonic belief, pagan religions teach everything in the
universe is part of god, their god has a multitude of personalities.

Therefore, regardless of whatever claims of personality or self-consciousness Oneness and
Trinitarian theologians make for their Babylonian omnipresent spirit doctrine, they are teaching
pantheism. If God is an omnipresent spirit in His Essence as these theologians teach, than
heathen religions were right in their teaching of three or even a multitude of gods, because this
would mean the entire universe is alive and has intelligence, or the power of thought. Dear
brother and sister in Christ, I beg you to denounce this lying Satanic Babylonian doctrine!

The God I believe in does not dwell throughout the universe with His Personal Essence, but
according to the Bible dwells in one person and one person alone, and that is in the Lord Jesus
Christ. The great apostle Paul stated this truth this way: For in Him dwells all the fullness of the
Godhead bodily (Col 2:9); or For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form (NIV); or For in Him
the whole fullness of Deity dwells bodily (RSV). Now brother and sister in Christ, either you believe all
of Gods Personal Unbegotten Spirit Essence and His Divine Holy Spirit and Soul Essence dwell
in the Divine Human Body of the Lord Jesus Christ, or believe Gods Personal Unbegotten Spirit
Essence and Divine Natures dwell in everything in the universe, including Hell and Lucifer!

I believe that some Christians, who have Christianize the omnipresent spirit doctrine of pagan
religions, imagine god to be this humongous spirit being that fills the universe, and everything in
the universe are parts in His body. All I can say is that gods body is very unstable, for there are
supernova explosions that happen ever day in the universe. Not only this, but they will have to
confess, that Lucifer, the fallen angels, and demons are all part of gods body that fills the
universe. This would be a blasphemous statement to make! Therefore, I do not know about you,
but I believe what Gods holy apostle declared in the above passage of scripture.

Christ, as the Holy Spirit, Is the Written Word of God

It is also essential for believers to be refilled with the Spirit of God, after his or her human
spirit has been BORN of the Holy Spirit. According to the Bible, believers in Christ can be refilled
142
with the Holy Spirit as they pray, study, and placing the Word of God in their hearts. Paul told
believers in the Church of Ephesus, who were already born of the Holy Spirit to: be filled with the
Spirit (Eph 5:18). How does a born again believer become full of the Holy Spirit after he or she has
already received it? The answer can be found in Pauls admonishment to the Colossian Church.
He said: Let the Word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom (Col 3:16). John said it this way: I have
written unto you, young men, because you are strong, and the Word of God abides IN you, and ye have overcome the
wicked one (1Jn 2:14). Jesus said: If anyone loves Me, he will keep My Word (Jn 14:23).

Luke declared that Stephen, Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas were
all men: of good reputation, full of the Spirit and of wisdom (Acts 6:3-5, NAS). Luke speaking of Barnabas
said he was: full of the Holy Spirit and of faith (Acts 11:24, NAS). Luke connected being refilled with the
Holy Spirit with: praying, studying, and speaking the Word of God. He said: when they [referring to
born-again believers] had prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled together; and they were all filled
[pletho] with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the Word of God with boldness (Acts 4:31).

The Greek verb pletho is in the aorist tense, passive voice, and indicative mood. The aorist
tense is continuous action, i.e., action without reference to its completeness. This means these
believers, who had been born of the Holy Spirit, were continually being renewed and refilled
with the Spirit because of their devotion to God and His Word. For this reason, it is possible for
born-again believers to become filled with the Holy Spirit many times over, if they are willing to
pray, study, live by, and speak the Word of God. If this is not so, then will someone biblically tell
me how a believer becomes full of the Ghost after he or she has receives it? All these men were
filled with the Holy Ghost many times after they were born of the Spirit (Acts 4:8; 6:3, 5, 8; 7:55;
13:9).

Therefore, since there is only one Holy Spirit that is in Gods Children, the Spoken and
Written Word of God must be two forms of the Fathers Holy Spirit. I believe this is what Jesus
meant when He declared: WE will come to him and make OUR home with him (Jn 14:23). In other
words, the Spoken and Written Spirit-Words, which were spoken by God the Fathers
Unbegotten Spirit and Soul Natures through His Defied Human Holy Spirit Nature, would come
to the believer and make their abode in them. Thus, the believer became BORN of Gods Holy
Spirit when God personally spoke His Rhema Spirit-Words into his or her human spirit, which
regenerated his or her human spirit. In addition, a believer can be refilled with Gods Holy Spirit
as he or she prays, studies, and meditates on Gods Written Word and places them into his or
her heart.

CHAPTER 8
BIBLICAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS
TRINITARIANS ASK ABOUT THE GODHEAD

The following scriptures are the passages Trinitarian theologians use to teach three persons in
god. The Trinitarian doctrine states that each person is a separate being from the others. Each
being or god lives in a separate body from the others. The first God is called the Father, the
second God the Son, and the third God is the Holy Ghost. Many of them foolishly declare that
they expect to see the Father, Son and Holy Ghost in three separate bodies when they see God in
the next life. According to them, each of these separate so-called persons shares in, or partakes
in, the one substance that is called God. All those who teach this doctrine of devils do not know
what this substance is, or why it is suppose to be in only three beings and not more.
143

Trinitarians preachers claimed that each of these three beings have all the attributes of this
one substance called God. According to them some of these attributes are: All of them are suppose to
be equal in power and knowledge, one is not greater than the others, and one is not older than the others, which
means all three are suppose to have no beginning. Since the Word of God cannot contradict itself, the
following passages of scriptures will NOT reveal three separate persons in the godhead, but only
one God who chose to reveal Himself in three different natures to His children as I have already
shown. With these things in mind, let us scripturally examine the questions Trinitarian
theologians ask.

Do the Titles Father, Son, and Holy Ghost
Prove the Trinitarian Doctrine?

Matthew Use of the Titles of the Godhead: Trinitarians use Matthew 28:19 to assert their
doctrine of the Trinity. In this passage of Scripture, Jesus told His disciples to: teach all nations,
baptizing them in the name [onoma] of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. If there are three
names mention here, then why is Greek word onoma singular and not plural. Obviously the
New Testament writers knew the difference between the Greek word onoma, which means:
name, and the Greek word titlos, which means: title (Jn 19:19-20).

Since Jesus commanded them to baptize in the name and not titles, what is the name of the
Father? What is the name of the Son? What is the name of the Holy Ghost? In the Book of Acts,
the apostles always carried out or fulfilled Jesus command to baptize in one name only, by
baptizing all their converts in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. This proved beyond all doubt that
Jesus Christ was not only the name of the Father, the Son and Holy Ghost, but that He actually
holds all three positions in the godhead (Acts 2:38, 8:16, 10:48, 19:5, 1Co 1:12-15). This also proves that
there are not three persons in the godhead.

John Use of the Titles of the Godhead: John says: For there are three that bear record in
heaven, the Father, the Word [the Logos], and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one [heis] (1Jn 5:7). The question
we should ask is what did John mean by Greek word heis? Since heis means: one in number and
not one in kind or unity, John could not mean that these three titles referred to a united godhead.
John did not say these three titles are three persons or gods, but he did say that they represented
one God or person in number. Since the Bible cannot contradict itself, this has to be so. Surely if
John and all the other apostles, being Jews, believed in three persons in the godhead, they would
have clearly and openly declared to all Jews that they no longer believed God was one person.

Paul Use of the Titles of the Godhead: Paul told the Thessalonians: God Himself, and our
Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, direct our way unto you; and he told the Colossians that they had a
full understanding of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ (1Th 3: 11, Col 2:2). Now if these
three titles represent three persons in the godhead as Trinitarian theologians teach, then one
person is called God, another person is called the Father, and the last person is called Christ,
then the Father can not be Christ, and both the Father and Christ can not be God. By examining
these scriptures using their rules of logic, Trinitarian preachers have not only robbed Christ of
His Deity, but also the Father of His Deity. I am so glad that I am not a Trinitarian theologian.

In verse nine of the same chapter in Colossians, the great apostle Paul explains the mystery of
the godhead. He proclaimed for the entire Christian world to believe and understand: in Christ
144
dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily (Col 2:8-9), or the entire godhead dwelling in the humanity or body
of the Lord Jesus Christ. No Trinitarian theologian can twist this scripture enough to make it teach
three persons in the godhead. Yes friend, their can be no doubt that Paul believed in one and
only one person or God in the godhead, who is the Lord Jesus Christ. Where in any of the above
scriptures can a Trinitarian Theologian find God dwelling in, or manifesting Himself in three
separate bodies? Since they cannot, why do Trinitarian theologians have such a hard time with
the titles of Christ? This is a real mystery to me!

In the Book of Corinthians, Paul said: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and [kai - even] the Lord
Jesus Christ (1Co 1:3; also 2Co 11:31; Eph 1:3; Col 1:3; 1Pe 1:3). According to A Concise Greek-English
Dictionary of the New Testament, prepared by Dr. Barclay M. Newman, Jr., the Greek
conjunction kai means: and, also, but, even, that is.
231
Therefore, kai could be translated as even
or that is not only in the above verse, but many others speaking of the titles or offices of the
Godhead. But the use of and is also acceptable in several places of Scriptures, for it stresses
different relationships in the Godhead, such as: God the Father Deity and His Humanity, that is,
God Deity as the Father and His Humanity as the Son!

Both the Jehovahs Witnesses and Trinitarian Preachers would vehemently declare that the
above verse, and all the others verses, are speaking of two different persons. The JW would
interpret them to mean God the Father and a lesser god by the name of Jesus; while a
Trinitarian Preacher would deny that interpretation and say this verse speaks of two equal
persons in the Godhead God the Father and God the Son. Now both the JW and the
Trinitarian Preacher would totally agree that Paul spoke of one and only one person when he
declared that there is only: one God and [kai - even] Father of all (Eph 4:6, also Ga 1:4; Ja 3:9; Phi 4:20; Col
3:17; 1Th 1:3; Ja 1:27; 3:9). Even though Paul used two titles or positions to express God the Fathers
relationship to His Children, this does not disturb these religious fanatics one bit.

In my discussions with Jehovahs Witnesses and Trinitarian Pastors, I have always been
amazed or astounded at how quickly they can so easily change their interpretation of Scripture
when it comes to the titles or positions God holds. If I wanted two make two persons of Gods
titles or positions, I would say to these zealots, Paul declared: Blessed be the God and [kai - even] Father
of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His abundant mercy has begotten us again to a living hope through the
resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead (1Pe 1:3).

Now according to their interpretation of the titles or positions of God, there must be two
persons who have a relationship with Jesus, one who is called God and another who is called the
Father; therefore the Father cannot possible be God. These preachers have absolutely no
argument when they assume that God in this verse is speaking of the Holy Spirit. The truth is the
apostle was declaring that the Humanity of Christ had a God who was over Him and it was the
Father. This is why the Humanity of Christ cried out His Father as He was dying on the Cross:
My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me (Mt 27:46), also when His Humanity was resurrected it
declared: I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God (Jn 20:17). As I have
stated in the chapter 4, The Sonship Program of God the Father, God the Father was the Deity of
Jesus Humanity, that is, Jesus as God was the Father, and as the Son of God Jesus was a Man.
When will Trinitarians and JWs stop making two persons out of Jesus nature as God and His
nature as Man.

Paul definitely declared that it was: God the Father who raised Him [Jesus] from the dead (Ga 1:1). If
this does not mean that God the Father raised the Son of God i.e. His own Humanity from the
145
dead, than Trinitarians will have to teach that one person who was known as God the Father
raised another person who is known as God the Son from the dead. This would mean one of their
gods could die, and God the Father had to be a superior God than God the Son because He was
the One who raised Him from the dead!

Oh, what confusion of mind the Jehovahs Witnesses and Trinitarian Preachers encounter
when they persist in making two or three persons out the titles of God. It is a real tragedy that
these religionists, who believe the Father and Son are two separate persons, interpret these titles
or positions of God through the teachings handed down to them from their forefathers, that is,
Plato, Philo, and the Ante Nicene Catholic Priests. These poor blind and deceived people will also
have to teach that Jesus is two persons, for He holds many positions and is known by many titles.
The Bible calls Jesus: the Apostle and High Priest of our confession (Heb 3:1), our Lord and Savior (2Pe
1:11; also 2:20; 3:2), the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last (Rev 1:3), and Root and the Offspring of
David (Rev 22:16).

Now what Trinitarian Theologian would dare say that Jesus is two separate and distinct
persons, because He is the Father and Son of David; in other words, who will declare that Jesus
as one person is know as the Root that is the Father of David, and Jesus as another person is
Davids Son. It is like a Trinitarian Pastor mockingly asking me one time: how can Jesus be the
Father and be the Son of the Father at the same time, it is impossible and ridiculous? I told him: You say it is
impossible, and not reasonable, and it goes against all logic, and I say you are right, that is, if there are two persons
in the Godhead. Therefore, I would like to ask you the same question: How can Jesus be the Father of David and
the offspring or Son of David at the same time? You say well that easy: Jesus as Davids God was Davids Father
his Creator, and Jesus in His Human Nature was Davids Son. You say this is both reasonable and logical because
Jesus had two separate and distinct Natures, one as God and the other as Man. I say you are right, and you have
answered your own question.

Jesus is God the Father in His Deity and He is the Son of God in His Humanity! As the Son of
God, He was a Spirit filled Man who had a God He verbally prayed to and worshipped, whom
He called His Father. As God the Father, Jesus was the One who did all miracles and had all the
power. Now what is so complex about that? It only becomes complex when one believes in
Lucifers Babylonian Religion of three persons or gods in the godhead! When will you awake out
of your Trinitarian nightmare, and behold the one you love in His full glory. Please, I beg you,
stop robbing your Savior of His supreme Deity, as the one and only God.

If Jehovahs Witnesses and Trinitarian Preachers persist in their delusions, then they will
have to teach that the apostle Paul was a false prophet. You say why is that? Because Paul
declared God the Father to be the: ONLY [monos] Potentate [dunastes], the King of kings and Lord of lords
(1Ti 6:15); now both of these religious groups of Pharisees knows that Jesus is also known by these
same titles, as John declared (Rev 19:16, comp with verse 13). Drs. Timothy and Barbara Friberg, in
their Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament, defined monos as: without accompaniment
alone, and dunastes as: one who is in a position to command others ruler, sovereign, [or] potentate (1T 6.15).
232


Now, if the God the Father is the only Sovereign, King of all kings, and Lord of all lords, than
how can Jesus also be called by these titles? What a terrible dilemma and delirium these
religious teachers must be in as they try to decide if Paul knew what he was talking about when
he declared that God the Father was the ONLY One who held these titles! Now if Jesus is not
God the Father, the one and only true God, in is His Nature as God, then the Bible definitely
146
contradicts itself. Therefore, the Trinitarians and JWs will have to decide which of the apostles
was not inspired of God!

The Dove and the Voice at Jesus Baptism Explained

When John baptized our LORD: And the Holy Spirit descended in bodily [somatikos] form [eidos] like a
dove upon Him, and a voice came from heaven which said, You are My beloved Son; in You I am well pleased (Lk
3:22). Drs. Friberg defined the Greek word somatikos (so-mat-ee-kos') as: (1) having the form and
characteristics of a body, bodily, tangible (LU 3.22); (2) pertaining to the body physical (1T 4.8) (#26167); and
eidos (I-dos) as: what is visible to the eye form, (external) appearance (LU 3.22) (#7961). Now, with these
definitions in place let us examine this passage of Scripture.

Where in this Scripture can Trinitarian preachers fine God manifesting or appearing in
bodily form as three separate persons or beings? They cannot! All they can biblical see is the one
person or being, the Lord Jesus Christ, who is standing in the Jordan River. The Bible also
mentions two miraculous manifestations of the power of the Holy Spirit of the Father. The first
miracle was Gods manifestation of the Holy Spirit in the form, shape, and body of a dove or a
bird, in other words, no one saw a person. The second miracle was Gods manifestation of a voice
that came from heaven, and again no one saw a person.

Now according to the Bible, what do these miraculous manifestations of Gods power mean? Is
God doing all this to prove that there are three persons in the godhead as Trinitarian theologians
teach? The answer is definitely no! The Infallible Word of God declares that these miraculous
manifestations were given for the sole purpose of revealing to John the Baptist who the Messiah
was. The Bible declared: John bare record, saying, I [not we] saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove,
and it abode upon Him. And I knew Him not: but He [i.e. God] that sent me to baptize with water, the same [God] said
unto me, Upon whom you shall see the Spirit descending, and remaining on Him, the same is He which baptizes with
the Holy Ghost; and I [not they] saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God (Jn 1:31-34).

No Trinitarian preacher would ever claim that God looks like a bird because His Spirit-
Words appeared as one, or that God looks like a donkey because He spoke through one (Num
22:27-28). If a Trinitarian was there when Balaams ass spoke, he or she would not be foolish
enough to say that God is donkey, or is IN one, because he heard God speak through one. No
Trinitarian preacher would say God is, or is IN a rock, because he or she heard Gods voice
coming out of a bolder (Lk 19:40).

No, a million times no! A Trinitarian would simple say, God has for some reason chosen to
manifest His presence to us through these miraculous manifestations. Let my beloved readers
take note, John said he did not know who the Messiah was until God gave him these miraculous
signs; therefore the Bible emphatically declared that the purpose of the manifestation of the dove
and the voice were for miraculous signs to let John know who the Messiah was. Therefore, it
certainly was not given to prove an imaginary Trinity of three persons or beings in the godhead.

I might also add, if the Holy Spirit is not the person of the Lord Jesus Christ, but a second
person in the godhead, than let Trinitarians provide just one Scripture that reveals what He
looks like or where anyone claimed to see Him? Trinitarians answer by saying the Holy Spirit is
an invisible Spirit Being and cannot be seen. If you claim that the Holy Spirit is a Spirit Being is
He a Human Being? You say No! If the Holy Spirit is a Spirit Being and not the Lord Jesus
Christ, than how can the Holy Spirit shed blood as Paul declared in Acts 20:28, that is: HOLY
147
SPIRIT has made you overseers, to shepherd the Church of God which HE purchased with HIS OWN BLOOD?
Well, I rest my case!

What did God the Father mean when He spoke of the Son of God and said: in Whom I am well
please (Mt 3:17)? Jesus gave us the answer when He quoted Isaiahs prophecy concerning His
Humanity. He said: Behold My [YHWH'S] Servant [i.e. Humanity], whom I have chosen; My beloved, in Whom My
Soul is well pleased: I will put My [the Father's] Spirit upon Him (Mt 12:17-18 compare with Isa 42:1-8). Let my
beloved readers take note, God the Father called His humanity His servant. He also declared that His Soul
was pleased to dwell in that Humanity, and that He would pour out upon His humanity His Holy Spirit (Isa
11:1-4). What can be clearer than this?

What about Plural Pronouns Referring to God,
Do They Prove the Trinitarian Doctrine?

God [Elohiym] said ['amar], Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. So God created [bara'] man in HIS
[not their] own image, in the image [not images] of God created HE [not them] him; male and female created HE them
(Gen 1:26-27). The Hebrew verbs 'amar and bara' are both in the imperfect tense, 3
rd
person,
masculine gender, and singular number, therefore Elohiym, that is, God is a singular God not a
plural God! The Jewish Encyclopedia speaking about this passage stated: Elohiym does not designate
a plurality of deities. The very context shows this, the verbs in the predicate are singular. The phrase Let us make
man in our image Genesis 1:26 is proved by the subsequent statement of God created man in His own image verse
27. This refers to one God only.
233
There are thousands of scriptures where singular pronouns such
as: I, Me, He, Him, and His are use in speaking of Elohiym or the one true God.

Now the real question Trinitarian preachers should asking is: why did God use plural
pronouns when He spoke of or thought of creating man, and USED singular pronouns when He
actually did the work? The answer can be found in one of the definitions of the Hebrew verb
'amar. Dr. Harris in his Theological Workbook of the Old Testament defined this verb this way:
say, speak, say to one self (think), intend, command, [and] promise. The verb appears in the OT almost five
thousand times. This common verb, as with its parallels in other languages, has a wide variety of meanings. A
usage often confused and incorrectly interpreted on the basis of a study of the English versions alone, is say in the
heart (Deut 8:17; Psa 14:1). The meaning is THINK, a subvocal speaking.
234


Therefore, I believe the true explanation of this passage is: God the Fathers Divine Holy Spirit
Nature was communicating with His Divine Soul Nature, or in other words, God was thinking out loud and
taking counsel with His own intellect, just the way all men do, who are created in His likeness, have
done throughout the ages. The Word of God implicitly declared: God the Father did take counsel with
Himself before He created the universe. The Bible says it this way: God performed all of His creative
works: according to the counsel of His will (Eph 1:11).

One thing is for sure, God the Father created all thing, including man, alone and by Himself.
The Bible informs us that no one, absolutely no one helped Him, or gave Him a hand in the work
of creation. Isaiah said it this way: Thus says the LORD, your Redeemer, And He [not they] who formed you
from the womb: I am [not we are] the LORD, who makes all things, Who stretches out the heavens all alone, Who
spreads abroad the earth by Myself (Isa 44:24, compare with 45:18). Now the New Testament emphatically
declared that Jesus Christ created the world (Jn 1:10, Col 1:16).

Since the Word of God definitely declared that the Father created the world alone and by
Himself, either Jesus Christ is the God the Father in His Nature as God, or the Bible contradicts
itself. Since Trinitarian Theologians believe in three persons or gods, they must decide which one
148
of these scriptures they will believe. They will have to take one literal and make the other
symbolic. As for me and my house, we are going to believe in the Infallible Word of God and
take all the scriptures literally, thereby believing Jesus Christ is God the Father, Praise the
LORD.

Jewish Rabbis have interpreted Genesis 1:26 and 27 as God speaking to the angels. The
Jewish Talmud, which is the oral interpretation of the law, quoted Rabbi Johanans teaching on
this passage, which stated: Let us make man in our image. And God created - sing. - man in His own image.
Come, let us go down and there confound their language. And the LORD came down - sing. - to see the city and
tower [Gen 11:7, 5].... The Holy One, blessed be He, does nothing without consulting His heavenly Court.
235


There are two other scriptures that speak of God discussing His plans with angels: Behold, the
man is become as one of us, to know good and evil. So He [not them] drove out the man, and He [not them] placed at
the east of the Garden of Eden Cherubims (Gen 3:22-24). Isaiah the prophet saw God the Father in a
vision sitting on His throne in heaven. He saw all the angels of God around the throne
worshipping Him. Like the previous conferences mention, God was again discussing His plans
with the angels, but this time He asked them this question: Whom shall I [not we] send, and who will go
for us (Isa 6:8)?

Let my beloved readers take note that the plural pronouns used in the above verses are
referring to God and His angels. In verse 1, Isaiah said: I saw the LORD sitting upon a throne [not three
thrones]. In verse 5, he says: mine eyes have seen the King [not Kings], the LORD of hosts [angels]. The entire
context shows one person or God called YHWH and a host of angels. The Bible speaks of another
conference God the Father called in heaven. In it, God discussed His plans with the angels, as a
way of informing them of what He was going to do. The Word of God declared: I saw the LORD
sitting upon His [not their] throne, and all the host of heaven standing on His right hand and on His left. And the
LORD said, Who shall entice Ahab king of Israel, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead? And one [angel]
spake saying after this manner and another [angel] saying after that manner (2Ch 18:18-19).

Where in any of these passages do you see more than one God holding counsel with His
angels? You do not, do you. The above four passages are the only passages in the Bible where
plural pronouns are used in connection with God discussing His plans with His angels. As my
readers can see, Gods Old Covenant children taught that God was speaking to the angels or His
heavenly court not to an imaginary Trinity. No matter what Trinitarians may say about the Jews
people as a whole, they never have and never will believe in the Babylonian Catholic Trinity.

This explanation of God discussing His plans with the angels is one possible rationalization of
the plural pronouns used in Genesis 1:26, but I definitely believe that Gods Divine Holy Spirit
Nature was taking counsel with His Soul Nature. Since God created the universe alone and by
Himself, no angel helped God create anything, but according to the Bible, God took counsel with
no one but Himself. Even though angels did not assist God or counsel God in creation, they were
there when God did create man and the universe, for the Bible stated: the morning stars [archangels]
sang together, and all the sons of God [angels] shouted for joy (Job 38:4-12).

The Hebrew Word Elohiym Explained

The argument Trinitarians use with the Hebrew word elohiym goes something like this: the
word elohiym is plural therefore it should be translated as gods and not as God singular. Let us look at one
example they use. Jacob built an altar, and called the place Elbethel: because God [Elohiym - gods]
149
appeared unto him there (Gen 35:7). Trinitarian Preachers use scriptures like this one to try to get
believers to believe in their gods. If we allow the Bible to interpret itself, we will discover that the
Elohiym that spoke to Jacob was one person not three. Jacob declared: the Angel of God spake unto
me in a dream, saying.... I AM [not we are] the God [Elohiym] of Bethel where you vowed a vow to Me [not us] (Gen
31:11, 13).

Why is this Hebrew word Elohiym in the plural form? The Jewish Talmud gave this reason:
The plural Elohiym is treated as plural of majesty.
236
By the word majesty, the Talmud means plural of
attributes such as; holiness, mercy, justice, etc. I believe it also could refer to Gods Natures: Spirit, Soul
and Body. Elohiym is used 2,701 times in the Old Testament. The King James Version, besides every
other translation of the Bible, always translated it as God singular and not gods plural when
referring to the true God. The reason for this is because the verbs in the predicate are always in
the singular and not plural number. Also Elohiym is used 99.99% of the time in connection with
singular pronouns in reference to the one and only true God such as: I, Me, He, His or Him, and .01%
with plural pronouns, which I have already discussed. There are places in the Bible were Elohiym
appears without the use of a pronoun at all, that is, in reference to God, but for the most part it is
used with pronouns.

Since the Hebrew word elohiym is plural, does this mean there are three gods as Trinitarian
preachers imagine, or a multitude of gods as the Mormons and pagans declare? Does this word
mean there cannot be just one God? Even when elohiym is used in connection with a false god it
could be referring to one god and not to three or more; for the Word of God declared that Aaron
made A molten calf [not calves] and the people said: These be your gods [elohiym], O Israel (Exo 32:4).

In verses 8 and 20, God told Moses that the people: made them a molten calf [not calves], and have
worshipped it [not them].... Then he [Moses] took the calf [not calves] which they had made, burned it [not them] in the fire,
and ground it to powder; and he scattered it on the water and made the Children of Israel drink it. Now what
Trinitarian Theologian can make three molten calves out of one? Since elohiym does not refer to
three separate and distinct molten calves, why do Trinitarian preachers want to make three gods
out of one God? This is a real mystery to me. Could it possible be that they believe in the Three
Persons of the ancient Babylonian Trinity, that is, Nimrod as god the Father, Semiramis as god
the Mother, and Tammuz as god the Son.

Hislop stated the above truth this was: Semiramis gained glory from her dead and deified husband [i.e.
Nimrod as Baal]. The licentious and dissolute life of Semiramis gave her many children, for whom no ostensible
father on earth would be alleged. All that was needful was just to teach that Ninus [i.e. Nimrods soul] had reappeared
[i.e. reincarnated] in the person of a posthumous son [i.e. Tammuz], of a fair complexion, supernaturally borne by his
widowed wife after the father had gone to glory.... It was from her son that she derived all her glory and claims to
deification [i.e. as Ashtoreh]. [Semiramis] was worshipped by the Babylonians and other eastern nations under the
name of Rhea, the great goddess mother (1Ki 18:19; Jer 44:17-18; Ezk 8:12-15).
237
When will all those who
say they love the Lord Jesus Christ come out of the Doctrines or Mysteries of the Babylonian
Religion (Rev 17:1-6; 18:2-5)?

Let us look at a few examples were the Hebrew word elohiym is used to refer to the true and
only God and false gods. King David told Gods children: Let us come before His [not their] presence
with thanksgiving, and make a joyful noise unto Him [not them] with psalms; for the LORD is a great God [Elohiym],
and a great King above all gods [elohiym] (Psa 95:2-3). The one and only true God spoke to Moses and
said: I AM [not we are] the LORD thy God [Elohiym], which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the
house of bondage. You will have no other gods [elohiym] before Me [not us].... You will not bow down to their gods
[elohiym], nor serve them. You shall serve the LORD your God [Elohiym], and He [not they] shall bless your bread, and
150
your water; and I [not we] will take sickness away from the midst of you (Exo 20:2-3; 23:24-25). Would any
Trinitarian theologian dare interpret or translate the First Commandment to read: We are the
LORDS your gods. You will have no other gods before Us? If they are not willing to say and teach this
perversion of Scripture, then they truly do not believe in their Catholic-Babylonian Trinitarian
doctrine of three persons or gods in the godhead!

The Hebrew Idiom the Right Hand of God Explained

Stephen being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up steadfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and [kai -
even] Jesus standing on the right hand of God, and said, behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man
standing on the right hand of God (Acts 7:55-56). What did Stephen see? Did he see Jesus and the
Father standing together, or did he see the man Christ Jesus glorified having all of Gods power.
After the following Scriptural dissertation of the Jewish Hebrew Idiom the Right Hand of
God, we will return to this passage of Scripture and examine it very carefully to ascertain what
truth we can extract from it! I am a firm believe that Scripture should interpret Scripture!!

In 1972, when I was 27 years old, and 2 years old in the Lord, I held a discussed on the
godhead with a black Church of Christ Minister, whom other denominations would classify as a
pastor. Speaking of the above Scripture, this Pastor said to me: please do not tell me, when the Bible
speaks of Jesus standing or sitting on the right hand of God, that He is doing one of these numbers, then he
laughed as he proceeded to sit down on his own right hand.

I told this Pastor: if you had truly known the Lord Jesus Christ, Who is the power of God, you would not
have made fun of Him. I then proceeded to quote and explain the following passages of Scriptures
to him. I said: I am in no way saying that the one and only God does not have a literal right hand, for He surely
does; for Jesus is the only body God the Father will ever have (Col 2:9). Now because Jesus definitely has literal
right hand, I would naturally be inclined to interpret this passage in acts in a literal fashion as you do, if it were not
for the clear biblical fact that this a Hebrew idiom in reference to God. The expression right hand of God is used
repeatedly in both Old and New Testaments in a figurative sense, to express Gods power and favor; for that reason
I must allow Scripture to interpret this passage of Scripture.

I then told this preacher: the Bible speaks of the Children of Israel singing a song unto the LORD, after He
destroyed the Egyptian army in the Red Sea. They sang, Your right hand, O LORD, is become glorious in power:
Your right hand, O LORD, has dashed in pieces the enemy (Exo 15:6). I then said to him: Take note that the
Children of Israel gave the glory to God the Father for drowning the Egyptians. They said that God did it by His
right hand. Does this mean God told the angels in heaven, stand back, for I am going to go down to earth and
destroy the Egyptian, and just to make it sporting, I am going to tie My left hand behind My back, and with My
right hand alone, I am going to destroy this army? The answer is obviously no! For the Bible teaches that God used
Moses to destroy the Egyptians, that is, Moses was Gods right hand. The LORD said unto Moses: Stretch out your
hand over the sea that the waters may come again upon the Egyptians (Exo 14:26). Therefore, it is obvious in the
above verse, the Hebrew idiom the right hand of YHWH was symbolism for Gods power, and Moses was Gods
power, for he stretched out his right hand and closed the Red Sea. Now this is the very first place in the Bible where
this Hebrew idiom is ever used!

I also told this preacher: God speaking about creation said, Mine hand... laid the foundation of the earth,
and My right hand has spanned the heavens (Isa 48:12-13). I then asked this minister: Do you believe God
literally used His right hand to create heaven and earth? In other words, did God tie His left hand behind His back
and with His right hand alone started creating the worlds. This preacher then said: The Bible said He did it
with His right hand, so I believe He did it with His right hand. I said: The Word of God emphatically declared
that God spoke the worlds into existence, for By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the Word of
God (Heb 11:3). David wrote: By the Word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the
breath of His mouth (Psa 33:6). In Genesis the first chapter, the expression God said is use repeatedly referring to
151
how God created the universe. Since the Bible cannot contradict itself, and it clearly revealed that God spoke the
worlds into existence, therefore the expression the right hand of God has to be symbolism representing His power,
which is Christ the Living Word, who is the LITERAL RIGHT HAND of God

I continued expounding this truth to him by saying: David used this Hebrew idiom in praising God.
He said, Your right hand has held me up (Psa 18:35). I asked this preacher: Did God with His literal right
hand hold David up, or was David saying that God keep him by His power? It is obvious here that it must be
symbolism. The Bible revealed that not only David was kept by Gods power, but all believers are also kept by His
power; for Jesus said: I give unto them [the believers] eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man
pluck them out of My hand (Jn 10:28-29). Now was Jesus referring to His right or left hand? No one would deny that
Jesus has a literal right hand, but will anyone dare claim that all the believers in the world are literally in it, or will
anyone declare that Jesus has a humongous hand that reaches from heaven to earth? This Scripture definitely
reveals that this is a symbolic expression that has to means that believers are kept by Gods power.

Jesus claimed to cast out devils by the finger of God (Lk 11:20). I then asked this pastor: Was this
finger on God the Fathers right hand, or was it on His left hand, or was it a symbolic expression representing that
Jesus cast out devils by Gods power? The Bible calls the humanity of Christ the Arm of the LORD, that is, the
Arm of the Father (Isa 53:1-2). Since the Bible called the humanity of Christ the Fathers Arm, what arm is He, the
right, or the left, or was this symbolism that revealed all of God the Fathers power was given to this humanity? The
Bible also declared that God exalted His humanity, the man Christ Jesus, to the right hand position of His power, for
Peter said: Him has God exalted with His right hand [or power] to be a Prince and a Savior (Acts 5:31). The Jewish
High Priest who sat in the seat of Moses, that is, he was the power of God on the earth, which meant that this man
sat at the right hand of the power of God. This man asked Jesus if He be the Christ. Jesus replied: It is as you said.
Nevertheless, I say to you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on
the clouds of heaven. Then the high priest tore his clothes (Mt 26:64-65).

I continued by saying: Jesus very boldly told Caiaphas, when He came back to the earth again, He was
going to be sitting in the seat of Moses, or He was going to be the High Priest, or He was going to be the power of
God on the earth. When the High Priest heard this, the Bible says he rent his garments. Now according to the Law
of Moses, God forbade the High Priest to do this, for Moses said unto Aaron, and unto Eleazar and unto Ithamar,
his sons, Uncover not your heads, neither rend your clothes; lest you die, and lest wrath come upon all the people
(Lev 10:6). Caiaphas the High Priest knew of this ordinance. But when he heard Jesus say that He was going to take
his place as the power of God on the earth, and sit in the seat of Moses, Caiaphas rent his garments and the Aaronic
Priesthood, which was under the Old Covenant, legally died or could now be legally abolished by God. Therefore,
God could legally establish the Melchizedek Priesthood for the New Covenant.

I then told this minister: Jesus told us that He was going to separate the saved from the lost when He came
back to earth to set up His Millennial Kingdom. He said He would place the sheep on His right hand and the goats
on the left. According to this passage, Jesus told the lost that were on His left hand, Depart form Me, you cursed
into everlasting fire (Mt 25:33, 41). Now if the Father is a different being or person from Jesus as you and other
Trinitarian preachers teach, then you must teach that the Father stands or sits on the left hand of Jesus. Therefore,
according to the above verse, everyone standing or sitting on Jesus left hand will be lost. I hope you can see how
foolish your doctrine three-gods is!

According to the Bible, the Right Hand of God, as it applies to Jesus, is a title of the Son of
God, that is, the Human Nature of God the Father, which as I have shown began at Bethlehem.
Therefore, this title is applied to Jesus Mediatory work and was given to Him WHEN He
ascended to Heaven and sat down on the Throne of His POWER. The Bible says it this way:
Hereafter [not before this time] the Son of MAN will sit on the right hand of the power of God (Lk 22:69); and after
Gods Human Nature endured the cross, despising the shame [He] sat down at the right hand of the throne of
God (Heb 12:2); and because God the Fathers Humanity became obedient to the point of death, even the
death of the cross. Therefore [i.e. for this reason], God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is
above every name(Phi 2:8-9). Therefore, the title right hand of God signifies that All AUTHORITY [i.e.
POWER] has been given to Me [i.e. Jesus] in heaven and on earth (Mt 28:18).
152

With the above scriptural truths in mind, let us take another look at Stephens vision. In Acts
7:55 Stephen saw: the glory of God and [kai even that is] Jesus standing on the right hand of God. The word
and is the Greek word kia, which means: and, even, also, or that is. This verse definitely could
read that Stephen saw the Glory of God that is Jesus. Where does the Glory of God dwell? The
Bible unhesitatingly or unquestionably says it dwells in the face of Jesus (2Co 4:6). Therefore,
what Stephen saw was the humanity of Jesus Christ, high and lifted up, having all of Gods
power in heaven and earth, with the glory of God shining in His face. This is why Stephen prayed
to God saying: Lord Jesus receive my spirit (vs 59). Solomon said: The spirit shall return unto God who
gave it (Ecc 12:7). It is obvious Stephen believed Jesus to be God the Father, that is, the God who
gave him his human spirit, for he prayed for Jesus to receive his spirit.

What About Revelation 5:2-7, Does It Prove the Trinitarian Doctrine?

The apostle John saw a vision of: And I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice, Who is worthy
to open the book, and to loose the seals thereof? And no MAN in heaven, nor in earth, neither under the earth, was
able to open the book, neither to look thereon. And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of
the tribe of Juda, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof. In the
midst of the elders, stood a a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven
Spirits of God, sent forth into all the earth; and He came and took the book out of the right hand of Him [i.e. God] that
sat upon the throne (Rev 5:6-7).

As stated before, I definitely believe in interpreting the Bible in a literal fashion, as I have
done throughout this book, that is, unless the language used is a Hebrew Idiom or it is symbolic!
NO theologian anywhere would claim that that the expression a lamb with seven horns and eyes
refers to a literal animal that dwells on the earth. For this reason, the context demands that the
Bible student interpret this passage of Scripture in symbolical fashion. Since God is giving us a
symbolic picture of a truth He wants to impart to us, we should ask: is the expression the right
hand of God in this Scripture also a symbolic phrase, that is: is it a Hebrew Idiom?

With the above truths in mind, let my beloved readers take note to what this passage of
Scripture has clearly stated: First, since this passage definitely emphases that a MAN must open
the Seven Seal Book, this can only mean Jesus cannot open this book as God, but He must open it
because He is a MAN. Second: John then reveals that Jesus was definitely a MAN for he gives His
ancestry, that is, He was from the Tribe of Judah and from the line of King David. Third: John
then tells us why Jesus as a MAN has the RIGHT to take this book and open it. He says it is because
He was Gods SLAIN LAMB, who now as a MAN has all of Gods power; that is, Jesus is the Right
Hand of God or Gods High Priest, who sits in the Seat of Moses. Now with these truths in mind,
let us examine these expressions used in this passage of Scripture and see what God is
communicating to us through them.

First: Who and what does the slain Lamb represent? It is obvious to all who study the Bible
that the Lamb represented the Lord Jesus Christ, for John the Baptist speaking of Jesus said:
Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world (Jn 1:29). Paul speaking of Jesus death at
Calvary wrote: Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us (1Co 5:7). Therefore, God want us to see a
symbolic picture of the MAN Jesus Christ as Gods Passover Lamb who died for our sins. Because
He is Gods SLAIN LAMB, He has prevailed and has earned the right as a MAN to open the Seals
of Revelation the Six Chapter.

153
Second: The Lamb had seven horns and seven eyes, which the Bible declared represented the
seven Spirits of God. There can be no doubt that the MAN Jesus Christ is the slain Lamb of God,
and the seven Spirits of God belong to Him. Now, what are the seven Spirits of God? Seven is a
number that represents fullness. The seven eyes is a symbolic expression representing Jesus
ability to know all things (Pro 15:3; 22:12). The seven horns is symbolism for Jesus having all power
in heaven and on earth (Hab 3:4). Therefore, the seven Spirits of God represents Jesus having the
fullness of Gods knowledge and power.

The prophet Isaiah told us what the seven Spirits of God were when he declared that Jesus, as
Davids son, would have: The Spirit of the LORD [or the Spirit of holiness] will rest on him-- the Spirit of wisdom
and of understanding, the Spirit of counsel and of power, the Spirit of knowledge and of the fear [reverence] of the
LORD (Isa 11:1-2, NIV). The apostle John confirmed Isaiahs prophecy by declaring that the
fullness of Gods Spirit dwelt in the MAN Jesus Christ. John said it this way: for God gives not the
Spirit by measure to Him (Jn 3:34).

Third: Let us examine the Hebrew idiom, the right hand of God. As I have already shown in
the section before this one, this expression is symbolism for Gods power and favor. Now, who is
the one sitting on the throne? Trinitarian theologians are quick to proclaim that it is God the
Father and they are right; for this passage of Scripture is a beautiful symbolic picture of both the deity
and humanity of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Jesus as God the Father is the one sitting on the throne, for the Book of Revelation stated that
there was only One [not two or three] sitting on the throne, and the Lamb who is sitting in the center of the
throne shall be their shepherd (Rev 4:2; 7:17, NAS). There can be no doubt that Jesus in His Deity is the
one sitting on the throne, for John wrote: He who sits on the throne said I am the Alpha and the Omega,
the beginning and the end (Rev 21:5-6, NAS). Jesus said: I am the Alpha and the Omega, says the Lord God,
who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty. I am the first and the last, and the living One; and I was
dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore (Rev 21:5-6; 1:8, 17-18, NAS).

Therefore, with these truths in mind, what is God telling us in this symbolic picture? As we
examine context of this passage of scripture, we see in verse one a symbolic picture of the Lord
Jesus Christ in His Deity, as God the Father, holding or having power to keep the mysteries of
God concealed from all men, for the book was sealed. In verses two through four: no MAN in
heaven, nor in earth, neither under the earth was found worthy enough to open the book or reveal the
mysteries of God. In verse five, God reveals to us that Jesus in His HUMANITY, as King Davids
Son or the Lion of the tribe of Judah, was the one who prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven
seals thereof.

Verse six reveals to us how He prevailed or conquered as a MAN, for He was the Lamb of God who
was SLAIN at Calvary. He was the only MAN who lived a sinless life. He was the only MAN who
had Gods Spirit in Him without measure. Jesus in His HUMANITY had all of God power, all of
His knowledge, and everything else that makes God God dwelling in Him. Verse seven is a
symbolic picture of Jesus taking the seal book and opening or revealing the mysteries of God.
Because He was a MAN who conquered the world, the flesh and the devil, therefore, He earned the right to open the
book, in other words, Jesus opens the sealed book as a MAN, and not as God! As a MAN, Jesus opens the Book
as Gods High Priest, who sits or stands at the Right Hand of the power of God, and who is Gods
ordain Teacher to all of His Children!

Jesus Surrendering the Kingdom to the Father Explained
154

The following passage of Scripture is a beautiful picture of Jesus two offices, that is, His Deity as
God the Father and His Humanity as the Son of God, working together in perfect harmony to
accomplish Gods Plan of Salvation. Then comes the end, when He [the Son] shall have delivered up the
kingdom to God, even the Father; when He [God] shall have put down all rule and all authority and power; for He
[the Son] must reign, till He [God] has put all enemies under His [the Sons] feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is
death; for He [God] has put all things under His [the Sons] feet. But when He [God] says all things are put under Him
[the Son], it is manifest that He [God] is excepted which did put all things under Him [the Son]. And when all things shall
be subdued unto Him [the Son], then shall the Son [of God] also Himself be subject unto Him [God] that put all things
under Him [the Son], that God may be all in all (1Co 15:24-28).

Contextual Setting: Verses 12-23 & 29, The subject the great apostle and teacher is teaching
on is the resurrection, which is the direct result of Christs Mediatory work at Calvary and His
glorious resurrection from the dead; for example: But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become
the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christs at His
coming. Otherwise, what will they do who are baptized for the dead, if the dead do not rise at all (verses 20, 23,
29).

Therefore, the first question we should ask is what does verses 24-28 have to do with the
resurrection, especially Christs resurrection, since these verses are sandwich between verses 20-23
and 29 on the resurrection? The answer is obvious, Jesus did not die or resurrect from the dead in
His nature as God, but in His nature as Man; for God cannot die or be killed by anyone, hence, He
does not need to be resurrected. Therefore, Paul is indisputably speaking of Jesus Human
Nature as the Son of God, that is, Gods Sonship Program, which as I have already shown started
at Bethlehem.

The apostle Paul spoke of Christs Mediatory High Priestly work as the Son of God this way:
For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the MAN Christ Jesus (1Ti 2:5); and Every
priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But this
MAN, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God, from that time waiting
till His enemies are made His footstool (Heb 10:11-13). The phrase He must reign, till He [God] has put all
enemies under His feet (1Co 15:25); and Jesus sat down at the right hand of God, from that time waiting till His
enemies are made His footstool (Heb 10:13) are speaking of the same event!

Therefore, Paul must be referring to Jesus Mediatory work as Gods Savior and High Priest.
Let us always remember that God the Father is the one who gave His Own Human Nature, that is
His Son, all of His kingly power and authority to rule and judge all of mankind, as the one who is
the Right Hand of His Power (Mt 28:18; Jn 5:26-27). We must therefore interpret this passage of
Scripture in Corinthians in connection with the MAN Christ Jesus Mediatory work of
REDEMPTION, which has give His Children the right to a Resurrection to Eternal Life.

After Paul subtlety ties in the resurrection of Christ with His Mediatory work, he then
informed us that the Sons Mediatory work will come to an end, that is, when all mankind of the
past, present, and in the future are saved and resurrected. It will be at this time Gods Sonship
Program of Redemption will end. But this will not happen until all rebels against Christs are
destroyed; then death will be no more: for the wages of sin is death (Rom 6:23). In other words, death
will cease to exist, because all sinners are destroyed, and the only beings existing are Gods holy
children. Gods holy and perfect creation goes back to the way it was before sin came into the
world through Lucifers rebellion, and later Adams sin.

155
Therefore Jesus, in His Mediatory work as the Son of Man or King Davids Son, must rule
and reign in His Kingdom until all of His enemies are destroyed (Lk 1:30-33; Act 2:29-31). It will be
at this time the Sonship Program of God will end. Now, this does not mean that Gods glorified
Human Nature will cease, but the office of Sonship will cease, which includes His positions as Savior, High
Priestly Mediator, and so on, just as His position as Gods Lamb has now been fulfilled. Since Gods Sonship
Program began with Jesus birth at Bethlehem, He has held two positions, that is, God the Father
and the Son of God. However, when the end comes, the position of Son will cease and He will only
be known as God the Father at that time to all of His children! As we examine this passage of
scripture, we should ask these questions; what is the Kingdom Jesus, as the Son of God, that is,
Gods Human Nature, gives up? Whom will Jesus, as the Son of God, give the Kingdom to? How
long does the reign of Jesus, as the Son of God, last? Therefore, with the above great truths in
mind, let us examine this scriptural passage.

What Is the Kingdom Jesus Gives Up as Gods Humanity? The context of the above
passage demands that the Kingdom Jesus Humanity surrenders to His Deity is not the
Millennial Kingdom; for this Kingdom came to end long before Death and Hell were destroyed.
John said it this way: Now when the thousand years have expired, Satan will be released from his prison and
will go out to deceive the nations. The devil, who deceived them, was cast into the Lake of Fire and brimstone
where the beast and the false prophet are. Then Death and Hades were cast into the Lake of Fire. This is the second
death. And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the Lake of Fire (Rev 20:7-15).

Therefore, this Kingdom must be Gods Spiritual Kingdom, that is, the Church, for this is
where God reigns in the hearts of his people, which will last for eternity. Jesus speaking of His
Spiritual Kingdom said: unless a believer becomes born again of water and Spirit he cannot enter into
the kingdom of God (Jn 3:5). Jesus explicitly told us: The kingdom of God does not come with observation
for indeed, the kingdom of God is within you (Lk 17:20-21). Paul confirmed Jesus teaching by
proclaiming that Gods kingdom dwells in the believer by means of the Holy Ghost. Paul said it
this way: the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost
(Rom 14:17). Paul also declared that God the Father has translated us [the believers] into the kingdom of His
dear Son (Col 1:12-13). Therefore, the kingdom of God must be God transforming the spirit of men
by His Holy Spirit, whereby He can live His life through them; or in other words, God living and
reigning in the hearts of His children or His church.

Whom Does Jesus, as Gods Humanity, Give the Kingdom to? Jesus gives the
kingdom or the Church to Himself. The humanity of Christ will present the Church to His own
Deity. Paul says it this way, Jesus as Gods Humanity: present it [the bride or the kingdom] to Himself [i.e. His
Deity] a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without
blemish (Eph 5:27). Paul also declared: God was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself (2Co 5:19).

Does the Reign of Jesus, as the Gods Humanity, Come to an End? Jesus as Gods
Son will surrender the Church to His own Deity. At this time, His reign as Davids Son and
Gods Son and Highly Priestly Mediator will come to an end, but His reign as God or the Father
will never end. Jesus kingly rule as God and as the Son of David must go through the
Millennium. He must judge the world not as God, but because He is Gods Son and Davids Son.
He will rule in His OFFICE as Gods Son until Death and Hell are finally destroyed.

The Bible declared these truths this way: The Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David;
And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there will be no end (Lk 1:32-33). The
Bible also declared: The Father [i.e. God] judges no one, but has committed all judgment to the Son. [For God]
156
has given Him [His Humanity] authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of Man; and God has
appointed a day on which He will judge the world in righteousness by the Man whom He has ordained. He has given
assurance of this to all by raising Him [His Humanity] from the dead (Jn 5:22, 27; Acts 17:31).

Since the apostle Paul declared that the reign of Jesus as the Son of God will come to an end
(1Co 15:24-28), and Gabriel declared that Jesus reign will last forever, where is the harmony? The
only way I can see a harmony is to believe that Paul is speaking of Jesus reign in His OFFICE as
Son of God comes to an end, or the Sonship program of God comes to an end, and Gabriel must be
speaking of Jesus reigning as God the Fathers Glorified Spiritual Humanity or Visible Self will
last forever! When death is destroyed time will come to end, Jesus will no longer BE KNOWN as
the Son of God or hold the OFFICE of Sonship. Jesus will only be known as God the Father to all
of His Children! Jesus at the present time, and in the millennium, will hold both offices, for He is
both the Father and the Son.

If the above verses are teaching two separate persons in the godhead as Trinitarian
Theologians teach, then Jesus cannot be equal to the Father, because Jesus reign as the Son of
God will comes to an end, and He will then surrenders the Kingdom or Church to the Father.
Therefore, the Father has to be a greater God and Jesus a lesser God according to their belief
system. Therefore, they must teach two unequal gods, not two or three coequal gods.

The phrase God may be all in all (1Co 15:28) is very difficult to understand. We know from
Scripture that God was in some of His Children in the OT and in His Church today through the
Divine Holy Spirit of the Lord Jesus Christ (1Pe 1:11; 2Co 13:5; Ga 4:6; 1Co 3:16-17). Some ancient
Catholic Priest, such as Hippolytus (225 AD), in their Babylonian-New Age Satanic delusional
belief in the Deification of mankind believe this passage referred to man becoming god in the
resurrection.

Hippolytus taught this doctrine this way: And thou shalt be a companion of the Deity, and a co-heir with
Christ, no longer enslaved by lusts or passions, and never again wasted by disease. For thou hast become GOD: for
whatever sufferings thou didst undergo while being a man, these He gave to thee, because thou wast of mortal mold,
but whatever it is consistent with God to impart, these God has promised to bestow upon thee, because thou hast
been DEIFIED, and begotten unto immortality. For the Deity having made thee even GOD unto His glory! (ANF,
vol 5, Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies, bk 10, chp 30, pg 317). Hippolytus went on to declare: If,
therefore, man has become immortal, he will also be GOD. And if he is made GOD by WATER and the HOLY
SPIRIT after the REGENERATION of the LAVER he is found to be also joint-heir with Christ after the
resurrection from the dead. Wherefore I preach to this effect: Come, all ye kindreds of the nations, to the
immortality of the BAPTISM (ANF, vol 5, Hippolytus, The Extant Works and Fragments, Pt 2, The Discourse on the
Holy Theophany, sec 8, pg 495).

A Plea for All Believers to Walk in Truth

All who fight against the godhead in Christ are contending against God and not man. All
Trinitarian preachers should give serious thought to and meditate on the question the prophet
Job asked; Will you accept His [Gods] person [not persons] (Job 13:8)? Now what will Trinitarians say
when they stand before the Lord Jesus Christ at the White Throne Judgment, and He demands
them to tell Him why they believed and taught Satan's Babylonian-Catholic Trinity of three
separate persons in the godhead?

Let us never forget that our Lord Himself connected Eternal Life with knowing that the
Father was the one and only true God, and Jesus was His human nature. In other words, Jesus
157
speaking as a man about Himself said: This is Eternal Life, that they might know You [Father] the only true
God and Jesus Christ [your humanity] whom You have sent (Jn 17:3). If you can believe that God is very
displease with all those in pagan religions who worshipping Him ignorantly, what makes you
think He will excuse you for worshipping Lucifers Babylonian-Catholic Trinity! My Bible
teaches me that God commanded His Children to: Come out of her [meaning Mystery Babylon], my people
lest you share in her sins, and lest you receive of her plagues (Rev 18:2-4).

My beloved readers, who are beloved of God, I have written this book under the direction of
the Holy Spirit in order that those who have spiritual eyes may see the truth, and those who
hunger and thirst for truth may be fed, and those who have been deceived concerning the
supreme deity of the Lord Jesus Christ may know the truth, and be set free from Satans lies. I
plea with you, please do not be one of the Christians who say to our Lord on the Day of
Judgment: Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many
wonders in Your name? And then I will declare to them, I never [oudepote - at any time] knew you; depart from Me
(Mt 7:22-23)! Drs. Timothy and Barbara Friberg, in their Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New
Testament, defined the Greek word oudepote as: an adverb negating a point of time, never, not at any time.
238


Jesus did NOT DENY that these believers in Him, who acknowledge Him as their Lord, did not
do these miraculous works by faith in His holy Name, but He did declare that these believers
were NEVER in a COVENANT RELATIONSHIP with Him, whereby they became His Children. In
other words, false prophets deceived them concerning: the strait and narrow way that led to the Eternal
Life in Christ (Mt 7:13-15). These believers in Christ evidently did NOT BELIEVE in or know the
Biblical NEW BIRTH message which would have placed them in the death, the burial, and
resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ.

This minister of Christ firmly believes this can ONLY be done by being baptized into the sin
cleansing Name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and by receiving the Holy Spirit with the initial
Biblical evidence of speaking in tongues as the Spirit of God gives them the words to speak in a
known language, which was not learned by them (Jn 3:5 & Tit 3:5-8 cp with Acts 2:36-40; 10:44-48; 19:1-
5). This GOSPEL with its New Birth message is the solid rock foundation, which all believers
must build their spiritual house on (Mt 7:24-27). If my beloved readers would like to read a book
that thoroughly explains the New Birth, I would recommend my book: Preacher, What Must I Do
to Inherit Eternal Life; also What Do You Mean I Must Be Born Again?

Books Written by the Author and Given Away on His Website:
A Biblical, Medical, and Psychological Account of the Sufferings of the Lord Jesus Christ
The Heresy of the Nicolaitans
Biblical Creationism vs Pantheistic Theories of Evolution (Nature Worship)
A Prophetic History of Gods Apostolic Pentecostal Church (The Seven Prophetic Periods of the Church Age)
The Mysteries of Prophecy Revealed
What Do You Mean I Must Be Born Again?
Preacher, What Must I Do to Inherit Eternal Life?
A Historical Record of Speaking in Tongues
The Mysteries of the Godhead Revealed
A History of Oneness Throughout the Centuries (Baptism in Jesus Name, the Godhead in Christ)
What Happens to Mans Spirit, Soul and Body Immediately after Death?
What Is Lost Mans Eternal Destiny? (Immediate Annihilation, Eternal Torment, Torment for a Time
and Then Universal Salvation, or Torment for a Time and Then Annihilation)
The Mysteries of the Spirit and Soul of Man Revealed
(What Are They? Does Each Nature of Man Have Mind, Will, and Emotions?)
158
Holiness: Gods Beauty College
What Is Gods Rest for the Believer: the Sabbath Day or Gods Sabbath Spirit
How to Study the Bible
A Calendar of Biblical and Historical Dates and Events Beginning with the Creation of Adam
The Heresies of the Pharisaical Jewish Ebionites
William Marion Branham: His Life, Teachings, and Demonic Spirit-Guide
Nutrition and Nutritional Charts
Law vs Grace or Works vs Faith
Water Baptism: the Essentiality, the Mode, and the Formula
Glossolalia: Ten Steps of Faith to Receiving the Baptism of the Holy Ghost
Glossolalia and the New Birth
Benefits of Salvation and the False Doctrines that Hinder It
Eternal Life vs Eternal Death

Christs Loving Servant,

Harry A. Peyton
148 Little Creek Hills Rd.
Alto, NM 88312

Telephone # 575-336-2800
Internet Address: DoctrinesOfChrist@hotmail.com
Website: DoctrinesOfChrist.com

BIBLIOGRAPHY

A Critical History of the Evolution of Trinitarianism [and Its Outcome in the New Christology],
1900, Levi Paine: Houghton, Mifflin & Company: Boston and NY: Riverside Press: Cambridge:

A God I Can Understand, 1981, Ronald E. Willhoite: Search For Truth Pub., Inc.: Houston, TX.

Aid to Bible Understanding, 1971, Watchtower Bible And Tract Society Of Penn.: Watchtower
Bible And Tract Society NY

A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, 1990, H.E. Dana & J.R. Mantey: Casa
Bautista: El Paso, TX

A New Standard Bible Dictionary, 1936, chief editor Melancthon W. Jacobus: Blakinston:
Philadelphia, PA

A New Standard Bible Dictionary, 3rd ed., Funk & Wagnalls: NY

Between the Testaments, 1972, Charles F. Pfeiffer: Baker Book House: Grand Rapids 6, MI

BibleWorks For Windows, 1996, Michael S. Bushell, Hermeneutika Computer Bible
Research Software: P.O. Box 2200, Big Fork, MT 59911-2200. The following Lexicons and Dictionaries
are from BibleWorks: 1) Analytical Lexicon to the New Testament, by Timothy & Barbara Friberg; 2) A Greek-
English Lexicon of the New Testament, by Joseph Henry J. Thayer; 3) Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament
and Other Early Christian Literature, by Walter Bauer, edited by Frederick W. Danker; 4) Word Pictures in the
Greek New Testament, A.T. Robertson; 5) Louw-Nida Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament; 6) Greek-
English Dictionary, Barclay M. Newman; 7) Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, Wallace; 8) The Theological
159
Workbook of the Old Testament, by R. Laid Harris, Gleason L. Archer, & Bruce K. Waltke; 9) The Hebrew and
Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, by Ludwig Koehler & Walter Baumgartner; 10) The International
Standard Bible Encyclopedia, by James Orr (new editor Stanley Morris); 11) Easton Bible Dictionary; 12) Faussett
Bible Dictionary; 13) All translations of the Bible.

Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, 1969, John MClintock &
James Strong: Arno Press: NY, NY

Dictionary of Sects, Heresies, Ecclesiastical Parties, and Schools of Religious Thought, 1971,
John H. Blunt: Gryphon Books: Ann Arbor, MI

Encyclopedia of Occultism and Parapsychology, 1984, edited by Leslie Shepard: Gale
Research Co.: Detroit, MI

Essays and Sketches, 1948, John H. Newman: Longmans, Green & Co.: NY, NY

God in Christ, 1849, Horace Bushnell: Brown and Parsons: Hartford, CN

God in Christ Jesus, 1st ed., Paul Ferguson: Apostolic Press: Stockton, CA

God in Christ Jesus, 1966, John Paterson: Word Aflame Press: Hazelwood, MO

God Only Wrote One Bible, 1970, Jasper James Ray: Eye Opener Pub.: Junction City, OR

History of Dogma, 1961, Adolph Harnack: Dover Publications, Inc.: NY, NY

History of the Christian Church, 1979, Marvin M. Arnold: Apostolic Publishing House:
Memphis, TN

History of the Christian Church, 1970, 1980, Philip Schaff: William B. Eerdmans: Grand
Rapids, MI: 8 vols.

Is God A Trinity, 1975, John Miller: Word Aflame Press: Hazelwood MO

Joseph Smith Begins His Works (Book of Mormon 1830 First Edition), 1958, Publishers Press,
Wilford C. Wood Publisher.

Life of Christ, 1st ed., Ray G. Jones: College Press & Book Store: Tupelo, MS

New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, The Catholic University of America: McGraw-Hill Book Co.:
NY

Sage Digital Library, 1996, Sage Software, Albany, OR. All quotes from the Ante Nicene Fathers, and
Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers are from this software.

Secret Societies, 1965, Akron Daraul: Tandem Books: London

Secret Societies and Subversive Movements, 1924, Nesta H. Webster: Boswell Printing & Pub.
Co., LTD: London
160

Strongs Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, 1980, James Strong: World Bible Pub.: Iowa
Falls, Iowa

Synonyms of the New Testament, 1963, Richard C. Trench: Macmillian & Co.: Cambridge,
MA

The Babylonian Connection, 1978, Stephen E. Jones: Americas Promise: Phoenix, AZ

The Babylonian Talmud, 1935, chief editor I. Epstein: The Soncino Press: London

The Biblical Repository, editor Edward Robinson: Gould and Newman Pub.: NY: a quarterly
periodical pub. from 1830-1850 AD

The Cambridge Medieval History, 1967, H. G. Watkins & J. Whitney, ed.: University Press:
Cambridge, MA

The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1911, editors C. Herbermann, E. Pace, C. Pallen, T. Shahan & J.
Wynne: The Gilmary Society: NY

The Church Teaches, 1973, translators J. Clarkson, J. Edwards, W. Kelly, J. Welch: Tan
Books & Pub. Inc.: Rockford, IL

The Complete Biblical Library, 1986: The Complete Biblical Library: Springfield, MO

The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, 1968, Edward Gibbon: Washington Square Press,
Inc.: NY, NY

The Early History of Christianity, 1927, Charles Guignebert: Twayne Pub.: NY, NY

The Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1910, 1972, Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc.: NY, NY

The Encyclopedia of the Jewish Religion, 1965, editors R. J. Werblowsky & Geoffrey Wigoder:
Holt, Rinehart & Winston: NY

The Encyclopedia of Religion, 1987, chief editor Mircea Eliade: Macmillan Pub. Co.: NY

The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, 1928 & 1951, James Hastings, ed.: Charles
Scribners Sons: NY, NY

The Ethnic Trinities [and Their Relations to the Christian Trinity], 1901, Levi L. Paine: Houghton,
Mifflin & Co.: NY, NY

The Expositors Greek Testament, 1974, editor W. R. Nicolli: William. B. Eerdmans: Grand
Rapids, MI

The History of Magic, 1960, Eliphas Levi: Samuel Weisser Inc.: NY

The Jewish Encyclopedia, 1905, Chief Editor Isidore Singer: Funk & Wagnalls Co.: NY
161

The Kingdom of the Cults, 1985, Walter Martin: Bethany House Pub.: Minneapolis, MN

The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, 1976, Alfred Edersheim: William B. Eerdmans:
Grand Rapids, MI

The Mission and Expansion of Christianity, 1962, Adolf Harnack: Harper & Brothers: NY,
NY

The Mythology of All Races, 1927, John A. MacCulloch: Archaeological Institute Of America:
Boston, MA

The Philosophy of the Church Fathers, 1964, Harry A. Wolfson: Harvard University Press:
Cambridge, MA

The Roots of Witchcraft, 1974, Michael Harrison: Citadel Press: Secaucus, NJ

The Two Babylons, 1959, Alexander Hislop: Loizeaux Brothers: Neptune, NJ

The Trinity and the Eternal Sonship of Christ, 1993, Bob L. Ross, Pilgrim Publications,
Pasadena, TX 77501

The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, 1943, editors Isaac Landman & Simon Cohen: Universal
Jewish Encyclopedia Inc.: NY.

The Works of John Adams, John Adams

The Zohar, 1949, tr. Harry Sperling & Maurice Simon: The Soncino Press: London

Witchcraft in History, 1977, Ronald Holmes: Citadel: Secaucus, NJ

What Is Christianity, 1978, Adolph Harnack: Peter Smith: Gloucester, MA

Who Is Who in Church History, 1974, Elgin S. Moyer: Keats Publishing, Inc.: New Canaan,
CN

Word Studies in the New Testament, 2sd ed., M. R. Vincent: Mac Donald Pub. Co.: Mac Dill
AFB, Florida

Zoroastrian Theology, 1975, Maneckji N. Dhalla, AMS Press: NY

BIBLES

New World Translation Of The Holy Scriptures, 1970, Watchtower Bible & Tract Society:
Brooklyn, NY

The Amplified Bible, 1974, Zondervan Bible Pub.: Grand Rapids, MI

162
The Emphasized Bible, 1971 editor Joseph Rotherham: Kregel Pub.: Grand Rapids, MI

The Emphatic Diaglott, 1942, Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, Brooklyn, NY

The Four Translation New Testament, 1966, World Wide Pub.: Minneapolis, MN

The Holy Bible, New International Version, 1978, Zondervan Bible Pub.: Grand Rapids, MI

The Holy Bible, Revised Standard Version, 1952, Thomas Nelson & Sons: NY

The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures, 1969, Watchtower Bible & Tract
Society: Brooklyn, NY

The New Testament Octapla, 1946, editor Luther Weigle: Thomas Nelson & Sons: NY

Youngs Literal Translation of The Holy Bible, Revised Ed., Baker Books House: Grand Rapids,
MI

The New Testament from 26 Translations, 1967, Curtis Vaughan, ed.: Zondervan: Grand
Rapids, MI

ENDNOTES

All quotes from the Ante Nicene Fathers, and Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers are from the Sage Digital Library,
1996, Sage Software, Albany, OR.
All Lexicons, Dictionaries, and Translations of the Bible are from BibleWorks software program, that is:
BibleWorks, LLC, P.O. box 6158, Norfolk, VA 23508: Lexicons: 1) Analytical Lexicon to the New Testament, by
Timothy & Barbara Friberg; 2) A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, by Joseph Henry J. Thayer; 3)
Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, by Walter Bauer, edited by
Frederick W. Danker; 4) Word Pictures in the Greek New Testament, A.T. Robertson; 5) Louw-Nida Greek-English
Lexicon of the New Testament; 6) Greek-English Dictionary, Barclay M. Newman; 7) Greek Grammar Beyond the
Basics, Wallace; 8) The Theological Workbook of the Old Testament, by R. Laid Harris, Gleason L. Archer, &
Bruce K. Waltke; 9) The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, by Ludwig Koehler & Walter
Baumgartner; 10) The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, by James Orr (new editor Stanley Morris); 11)
Easton Bible Dictionary; 12) Faussett Bible Dictionary; 13) All translations of the Bible.


1
Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament, Friberg, (#20053).
2
Life of Christ, Jones, pg i [the foreword].
3
A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, Thayer.
4
The Early History of Christianity, Guignebert, pp 12, 13.
5
The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1911, vol 10, pg 450.
6
Who Was Who in Church History, Moyer, pg 338.
7
History of Dogma, Harnack, vol 3, pg 60.
8
Ante Nicene Fathers, vol 3, pt 2, Tertullian: Against Praxeas, bk 9, chp 1, pg 1119.
9
Ante Nicene Fathers, vol 3, pt 2, Tertullian: Against Praxeas, bk 9, chp 8, Appendix, pp 1228-1229.
10
Ib., vol 3, pt 2, Tertullian: Against Praxeas, bk 7, chps 2 & 3, pp 1120-1122, chp 9, pg 1131.
11
Ib., vol 3, pt 2, Tertullian: Against Praxeas, bk 7, chp 27, pg 1169.
12
Ib., vol 1, Ignatius, Epistle to the Philippians, chp 2, pg 230.
13
Ib., vol 1, Ignatius, Epistle to the Trallians chp 6, pg 143, long ver.
14
Ib., vol 5, Hippolytus, The Refutation of all Heresies, bk 9, chp 5, pp 263-264.
15
Ib., vol 5, Hippolytus, The Refutation of all Heresies, bk 9, chp 2, pg 259.
16
Ib., vol 5, Hippolytus, The Refutation of all Heresies, bk 9, chp 6, pg 265
163

17
Ib., vol 5, Hippolytus, The Refutation of all Heresies, bk 9, chp 7, pg 269.
18
Ante Nicene Fathers, vol 5, Hippolytus, The Refutation of all Heresies, bk 9, chps 6-7, pp 264-268.
19
Ib., ser 2, vol 4, Selected Works of Athanasius, De Synodis, History of Arian Opinions, sec 6, pp 1119.
20
Ib., vol 1, Ignatius, Epistle to the Trallians, chp 6, pg 143, long ver.
21
Ib., vol 1, Justin Martyr, First Apology, chp 63, pg 352.
22
Cyclopaedia of Biblical Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature, vol 6, pp 448-449.
23
History of Dogma, Harnack, vol 3, pp 51- 54.
24
Essays and Sketches, Newman, vol 1, pg 152.
25
Ante Nicene Fathers, vol 5, Novatian, Concerning the Trinity, chp 23, pg 1332.
26
The Philosophy of the Church Fathers, pg 191.
27
The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, heading Trinity section 22.
28
Ante Nicene Fathers, vol 1, Ignatius, Epistle to the Magnesians, chp 6, pg 129, also chp 11, pg 134, long ver.
29
Ib., vol 1, Ignatius, Epistle to the Ephesians, chp 15, pg 136, short ver., & pg 137, long ver.
30
Ante Nicene Fathers, Justins First Apology, vol 1, chp 33, pg 326.
31
Ib., vol 1, Justins Second Apology, chp 6, pg 364, & chp 13, pg 370.
32
Ib., vol 1, Justins Second Apology, chp 61, pp 453, 454; chp 62, pg 455; chp 130, pg 540; chp 128, pg 539.
33
Ib., vol 1, Dialogue with Trypho a Jew, chp 61, pp 453, 454; chp 62, pg 455; chp 130, pg 540;
chp 128, pg 539.
34
Ib., vol 2, Titian, Address to the Greeks, chp 5, pg 133.
35
Ib., vol 2, Theophilus, To Autolycus, bk 2, chp 10, pg 195
36
Ib., vol 2, Theophilus, to Autolycus, bk 2, chp 22, pg 207.
37
Ib., vol 2, Theophilus, To Autolycus, bk 2, chp 15, pg 201
38
Ib., vol 1, Irenaeus Against Heresies, bk 2, chp 27, pg 830.
39
Ib., vol 1, Irenaeus Frag. 39, pg 1191; Frag. 53, pg 1195.
40
Ib., vol 1, Irenaeus Against Heresies, bk4, chp 20, sec 3-5, pp 1008-1009.
41
Ib., vol 1, Irenaeus, bk4, chp 20, sec 11, pp 1013.
42
Ib., vol 1, Irenaeus, bk 3, chp 10, pg 878.
43
Ib., vol. 1, Irenaeus, bk 4, chp 38,pg 1075, sec 1, &2.
44
History of the Christian Church, Schaff, vol. 2, pg. 555.
45
Ante Nicene Fathers, Ante Nicene Fathers, Ib., vol 3, pt 2, Tertullian: Against Praxeas, bk 9, chp 5, pp 1124-1127.
46
Ib., vol 3, pt 2, Tertullian: Against Praxeas, bk 9, chp 7, pp 1128-1129, chp 9, pp 1131-1132.
47
Ib., vol 3, pt 2, Tertullian: Against Praxeas, bk 9, chp 7, pg 1129, chp 26, pg 1167, chp 14, pg 1142.
48
History of Dogma, Harnack, vol 2, pp 228, 175.
49
Who Was Who In Church History, Moyer, pp 331-332.
50
The Ethnic Trinities, Paine, pp 131, 130.
51
The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, vol 4, pg 2382
52
The Philosophy of the Church Fathers, pp 582, 292.
53
The Trinity and the Eternal Sonship of Christ, pg 56.
54
The Ethnic Trinities, Paine, pp 131, 130.
55
Ante Nicene Fathers, vol 1, Justin Martyr, First Apology, chp 60, pg 183.
56
The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, article Zoroastrianism, #9373, sec 2.
57
The Ethnic Trinities, pp 80, 81.
58
Secret Societies, Daraul, pg 80.
59
Ante Nicene Fathers, vol. 7, pg. 105.
60
History of Dogma, Harnack, vol 3, pp 71, 72, 79.
61
History of the Christian Church, Schaff, vol. III, pp. 663-664).
62
The Early History of Christianity, pp 167, 168.
63
The Cambridge Medieval History, pp 10-11.
64
The Mission and Expansion of Christianity, Harnack, pg 293.
65
What Is Christianity, Harnack, pg 207, 221, 220.
66
The Early History of Christianity, pp 116, 170.
67
The Early History of Christianity, pg 68.
68
Witchcraft in History, Holmes, pg 34.
69
The Babylonian Connection, Jones, pg 48.
70
The Works of John Adams, Adams, vol 10, pp 44, 84, 100.
71
The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, vol. 1, pp 17, 375.
72
Nicene & Post Nicene Fathers, vol. 2, ser 2, Socrates Scholasticus, bk 1, chp 8, pp. 51, 53.
164

73
Ib., vol 2, ser 2, Socrates Scholasticus, bk 1, chp 8, pg 55.
74
Ib., vol 2, ser 2, Socrates Scholasticus, bk 1, chp 8, pg 56.
75
I.b., vol 2, ser 2, Socrates Scholasticus, bk 1, chp 8, pp 56, 58.
76
Ib., vol. 2, ser 2, Socrates Scholasticus, bk 1, chp 8, pp 54, 57.
77
Ib., vol 2, ser 2, Socrates Scholasticus, bk 1, chp 8, pp56-58.
78
Ib., vol 2, ser 2, Socrates Scholasticus, bk2, chp 30, pp 155-156
79
New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol 14, pp 296-297.
80
History of the Christian Church, Schaff, vol. 3, pg 664.
81
Nicene & Post Nicene Fathers, vol 1, series 2, Eusebius, Life of Constantine, chp 65, pg 983.
82
History of the Christian Church, Schaff, vol 2, pg 73; vol 3, pg 142.
83
The Church Teaches, pp. 125-127.
84
Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers, vol. 6, pg 326.
85
The Works of John Adams, Adams, vol 10, pp 44, 84, 100.
86
The Two Babylons, Hislop, pp. 14-18.
87
The Jewish Encyclopedia, vol. 4, pg. 54.
88
The Encyclopedia Britannica, 1910 ed., vol. 2, pg 285.
89
The Encyclopedia of Religion, Heading Trinity, vol 15, pg 54.
90
Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, Hastings, vol. 12, pp 458-460.
91
Cyclopedia of Biblical Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature, Heading of Trinity, vol. 10, pg. 553.
92
History of Dogma, 1910 ed., vol. 4, appendix i; vol. 2, pg. 209.
93
Essays and Sketches, Newman, vol 1, pg 142.
94
Ib., vol 1, pp 218, 232
95
Ib., vol 1, pg 205
96
Ib., vol 1, pp 209, 232
97
Strongs Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, #2937.
98
Ante Nicene Fathers, vol 6, Arnobius, Seven Books Against the Heathen, bk 1, pg 886
99
The Babylonian Connection, pg. 2.
100
Ante Nicene Fathers, vol 8, Recognition of Clement, bk 4, chps 27-29, pp 269-270.
101
The Two Babylons, pp. 58-59, 69, 21.
102
Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, #3466.
103
Encyclopedia of Occultism and Parapsychology, vol. 2, pg. 920.
104
Secret Societies and Subversive Movements, Webster, pg. 4.
105
Dictionary of Sects, Heresies, Ecclesiastical Parties, and Schools of Religious Thought, pg. 399.
106
Ante Nicene Father, vol 2, Athenagoras, A plea for the Christians, chp 18, pg 274.
107
The Encyclopedia of Religion, vol. 1, pg. 108.
108
The Jewish Encyclopedia, vol. 12, pg. 131.
109
Evolution of Trinitarianism, Paine, pg. 86-87.
110
The Expositors Greek Testament, edited by W. R. Nicolli, vol. 3, pg. 523.
111
The Jewish Encyclopedia, vol. 6, pg. 447.
112
The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, vol. 5, pp. 2837-2838, 2841-2842.
113
Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, #3335.
114
Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, #1521
115
Strongs Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, #3441
116
The Kingdom of the Cults, pp. 117, 119.
117
The Biblical Repository, pp. 139, 141-142, 168-169, 167, 151.
118
The Trinity and the Eternal Sonship of Christ, pp 4, 98.
119
The Trinity and the Eternal Sonship of Christ, pg 84.
120
Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament, Friberg, #1270.
121
The Trinity and the Eternal Sonship of Christ, pg 87.
122
The Theological Workbook of the Old Testament, Harris, #867
123
Louw-Nida Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, #5344.
124
Nicene & Post Nicene Fathers, vol 2, ser 2, Socrates Scholasticus, bk 1, chp 8, pp56-58.
125
The Trinity and the Eternal Sonship of Christ, pp 91-92.
126
The Theological Workbook of the Old Testament, Harris #852.
127
Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament, Friberg, #24393
128
Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament, Friberg, #6164.
129
Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament, Friberg, #27626.
165

130
Ib., #18726.
131
Ib., #22746
132
Greek-English Lexicon of the NT & Other Early Christian Literature; Bauer #5377.
133
Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament, Friberg, #6904.
134
Ib., #14794.
135
Word Pictures in the Greek New Testament, Robertson, Heb 1:5.
136
The Kingdom of the Cults, pg. 118.
137
Strongs Exhaustive Concordance of The Bible, #2316.
138
The Kingdom Interlinear of the Greek Scriptures, pg. 1159.
139
The Kingdom of the Cults, pp. 84-85.
140
The Kingdom of the Cults, pp. 84-85.
141
Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, Wallace, The Perfect Tense, pg 573.
142
Greek-English Lexicon of the NT & Other Early Christian Literature; Bauer #4816.
143
Biblical Repository, January 1840, article The Sonship Of Christ, pp. 160-161.
144
The Kingdom Interlinear of the Greek Scriptures, pg. 1158.
145
Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, Wallace, Absence of the Article, pp 257.
146
Biblical Repository, January 1840, article The Sonship Of Christ, pp. 145-146.
147
Biblical Repository, January 1840, article The Sonship Of Christ, pg. 145.
148
The Expositors Greek Testament, edited by W. R. Nicolli, vol. 3, pg. 523.
149
Synonyms of the New Testament, Trench, pp. 245, 247-249.
150
The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, vol. 2, pp. 1269-1270.
151
A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, Dana & Mantey, pg. 105.
152
God in Christ, Bushnell, pg. 107.
153
God Wrote Only One Bible, Ray, pp. 27-28.
154
Joseph Smith Begins His Works, First Book of Nephi, chp 2, pg 25; in new ed., chp 11:13-24.
155
Ib., First Book of Nephi, chp 3, pg 2.
156
Ib., Book of Mosiah , chp 1, pg 160.
157
Ib., Book of Mosiah, chp 8, pg 186; new ed., chp 15:1-6.
158
Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament, Friberg, #18715.
159
The Kingdom of the Cults, pg. 91.
160
Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, #3441
161
The Kingdom of the Cults, pg. 91.
162
Ib., pg. 87.
163
Ib., pg. 87.
164
The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, vol. 5, pp. 2837-2838.
165
ANF, vol 4, Origen, bk 2, chp 8, pg 595.
166
Ante Nicene Fathers, vol. 1, Dialogue of Justin with Trypho a Jew, chp 114, pg 520.
167
Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain, Edwards, pp 29-32
168
A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, Thayer, # 3533, Phi 2:6.
169
Synonyms of the New Testament, pp. 245-246.
170
The Biblical Repository, July 1846, pp. 486-487.
171
The Expositor's Greek Testament, vol. 3, pg. 435.
172
The Kingdom of the Cults, pg. 83-85, 94.
173
Ante Nicene Fathers, vol 4, Origen against Celsus, bk 4, chp 15, pg 1032.
174
Ib., vol 4, Origens Commentary on Matthew, bk 12, chp 37, pg 838.
175
N. & P.N.F., ser 1, vol 3, Augustine, Doctrinal Treatises, On the Trinity, bk 1, chp 13, sec 29, pg 58.
176
The Zohar, vol. 3, pg. 130 or 42a; even though the majority of the Jewish Zohar is allegorical trash,
and the Babylonian Talmud also, every now and then you can find some truth.
177
Ante Nicene Fathers, vol. 1, Dialogue of Justin with Trypho a Jew, chp 114, pg 520.
178
Word Pictures in the Greek New Testament, Robertson, Jn 1:1.
179
The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. Edersheim, bk 2, chp 5, sec 6.
180
Strongs Exhaustive Concordance Of The Bible, #5258, #2342, #6440.
181
The Theological Workbook of the Old Testament, Harris, #2039.0.
182
A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, Thayer, #3110.
183
Greek-English Lexicon of the NT & Other Early Christian Literature, Bauer #1624.
184
Louw-Nida Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, #8.59.
185
Ante Nicene Fathers, vol 3, pt 2, Tertullian: Against Praxeas, chp 7, pp 1127-1129
166

186
Ib., vol 3, pt 2, bk 7, Against Praxeas, chp 7, pp 1127-1129
187
Dictionary of Sects, Heresies, Ecclesiastical Parties, and Schools of Religious Though, Blunt, pp 512,513.
188
Ante Nicene Fathers, vol 6, Alexander, Of the Manichaeans, chp 1, sec 12, pp 589-590.
189
ANF, vol 6, Gregory Thaumaturgus, part 2, Dubious Writings, A Sectional Confession of Faith, chp 7, pg 102.
190
Ib., pp 426, 427.
191
Nicene & Post Nicene Fathers, ser 2, vol 2, Socrates Scholasticus, bk2, chp 30, pp 155-156.
192
Ib., ser 2, vol 4, Selected Works of Athanasius, De Synodis, History of Arian Opinions, sec 5, 8, pp 1119.
193
Antitrinitarian Biography, Wallace, vol 1, pp 442-444.
194
Who Was Who In Church History, Moyer, pp 370, 371.
195
The Two Treatises Of Servetus On The Trinity, tr by Earl Wilbur, pp 173-174
196
Nicene & Post Nicene Fathers, ser 2, vol 4, Select Writings and Letters of Athanasius, Prolegomena, pp 52, 54.
197
Ante Nicene Fathers, vol 1, Ignatius, Epistle to the Tarsians, chp 5, pg 212, chp 6, pg 213, Sage.
198
Ib., vol 1, Ignatius, Epistle to the Magnesians chp 6, pg 129; chp 8, pg 131; also chp 11, pg 134.

long ver.
199
Ib., vol 1, Dialogue of Justin with Trypho a Jew, chps 129, pg 539; 128, pg 538; chp 61, pg 453.
200
Ib., vol 2, Theophilus, to Autolycus, bk 2, chp 22, pg 207; also see Titian, Address to the Greeks, chp 5, pg 133.
201
The Philosophy of the Church Fathers, pp 582, 292.
202
Ante Nicene Fathers, Ib., vol 1, Irenaeus Against the Heresies, bk4, chp 20, sec 3, 7, pg 1009; sec 11, pg 1013.
203
Ib., vol. 3, Tertullian, pt 2, Against Praxeas, chp 5, pp 1124-1126; chp 6, pg 1126; chp 7, pg 1127.
204
Ib., vol. 3, Tertullian, pt 2, Against Praxeas, chp 9, pp 1131-1132; chp 7, pp 1127-1129.
205
History of the Christian Church, Schaff, vol. 2, pg. 555.
206
Nicene & Post Nicene Fathers, ser 2, vol 9, Hilary of Poitiers, bk 4, On the Trinity, sec 11-13, pp 288-289.
207
Ib., vol 2, ser 2, Socrates Scholasticus, bk 1, chp 8, pp 56, 58.
208
Theological Workbook of the Old Testament, Harris, #898b
209
Word Pictures in the Greek New Testament, Robertson, comment on Jn 1:18.
210
Word Studies in the New Testament, Vincent, vol 1, pg. 397.
211
Ante Nicene Fathers, vol 2, Theophilus, to Autolycus, bk 2, chp 22, pg 207.
212
Nicene & Post Nicene Fathers, Series 2, vol 1, Eusebius, Contents of Church History, bk 1, chp 2, pp 155-156
213
Greek-English Lexicon of the NT & Other Early Christian Literature; Bauer, #1153, sec 3
214
The Kingdom of the Cults, pg. 83-85, 94.
215
Nicene & Post Nicene Fathers, ser 2, vol 2, Socrates Scholasticus, bk2, chp 30, pp 155-156.
216
A God I Can Understand, Willhoite, pp 20-21.
217
God in Christ Jesus, Ferguson, pp 13, 15, 20.
218
Is God A Trinity, Miller, pp 22, 15-21, 82-83, 66.
219
God in Christ Jesus, Paterson, pp 9-11.
220
Between the Testaments, pg 89.
221
Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, #8544; #5027.
222
Is God A Trinity, Miller, pp 22, 15-21, 82-83, 66.
223
Is God A Trinity, Miller, pp 22, 15-21, 82-83, 66.
224
God in Christ Jesus, Paterson, pp 9-11.
225
I.S.B.E., title Angel, sec II, 3, Angel of the Theophany
226
God in Christ Jesus, Ferguson, pg 23.
227
The Jewish Encyclopedia, vol. 6, pp. 447-449.
228
Ante Nicene Fathers, vol. 1, Irenaeus Against Heresies, bk 3, chp 14 pg 905.
229
A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, Thayer, #1113.
230
Greek-English Lexicon of the NT & Other Early Christian Literature, Bauer # 7709; sec 5.
231
Greek-English Dictionary, Barclay & Neuman, (#3169).
232
Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament, Friberg, (#18715), (#7264)
233
The Jewish Encyclopedia, vol. 6, pg. 5.
234
Theological Workbook of the Old Testament, Harris, #118.0.
235
The Babylon Talmud, vol. 3, pp. 244-245 or Sanhedrin 38b.
236
Ib., vol. 3, pg. 7, see footnote 2.
237
The Two Babylons, pp. 58-59, 69, 21.
238
Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament, Friberg, (#20053).
167