You are on page 1of 5


By Derrick Gillespie INTRODUCTION: The title of this article/manuscript may strike you as absurd, and indeed it would certainly be if that is what this writer was meant to say (of which I certainly am not for one moment saying). But this title was chosen to show the absolute absurdity of those who believe that the Godhead of the Bible (presented biblically as the Father, but with him united with and represented by His Son and the Holy Spirit) is simply one Godhead Being or one Godhead Person only. It was also chosen to show that this is also what is being unwittingly taught by those (like binitarians and semi-Arians/homoeans), despite correctly teaching the Father and Son to be separate beings, yet rejecting the separate being or personhood of the Holy Spirit (even while declaring the Deity and personality of Gods Spirit)!! This I will show in this article/manuscript as I set out to prove the necessity of there being not just two, but indeed a THIRD separate person of the Godhead who is inseparably united with the Father and Son; WITH ALL THREE UNITED NOT AS ONE INDIVISIBLE SUBSTANCE, BUT AS THREE SEPARATE DIVINE BEINGS (a doctrine mistakenly labeled as tri-theism by critics)!! Hence this article will not only seek to refute the oneness Pentecostals in their Unitarian viewpoint, but also orthodox Trinitarians who teach one tri-personal indivisible Being or divine organism of the Godhead, as well as refute binitarians and semi-Arians who teach only two separate Godhead beings while presenting the Holy Spirit as simply the Father and Son in actual essence or actual personage, i.e. the Spirit is simply the ACTUAL personage or being of the two Godhead persons of the Father and Son AT THE SAME TIME who extend themselves to us as their Spirit. For too long too many Christians have been either afraid, cant be bothered, or lacked the research material or polemic and insight to confront fully the issue of who really is the God of the Bible!! In this article/manuscript the tough questions will be asked, and the seemingly tough questions posed by some will be addressed without fear or favor. It is my hope that in the end the reader of this article/manuscript will allow good sense and the truth of the Bible to prevail, even as you search the Scriptures for yourself to prove who really our God is!!

HOW WOULD JESUS BE HIS OWN FATHER? Any doctrine which declares Jesus (the Son of God) to be literally God the Father himself, or even that the Spirit is literally and actually Jesus Himself, or is Jesus extended essence then that doctrine is in effect declaring Jesus to be His own Father (since essence means what a person or thing literally is)!! Why? Because it was the Father who begot Jesus through the agency of the Holy Spirit, and thus for the above described doctrines it would logically mean that Jesus begot Himself as literally His own Father, or literally by Himself as the Holy Spirit. Oneness Pentecostals (sometimes called Jesus Only believers) or, more technically, modalists or Sabellians, are the most obvious teachers of this absurdity; even though they will

deny it vehemently. However a little application of logical deduction or syllogism will prove this to be true, no matter how much they try to get away from it, or explain it away. All Oneness Pentecostals will freely admit that they do believe that Jesus is the Father, Jesus is the Son, and that Jesus is the Holy Spirit. Now it is obvious that if Jesus is all three literally then it is INESCAPABLE that He (as Son) had Himself (as the Father) as is His own Father. And only dishonestly seeks to deny that this is the natural and obvious conclusion. Oneness Pentecostals try to avoid this glaring reality by lamely trying to explain that the Eternal spirit Father is not the human Son, but the spirit Father was IN the Son whom He begot as a human Son by way of the Spirit overshadowing Mary. But this is simply trying to play semantic hopscotch, or trying to display theological gymnastics. So why do they labor so much to prove Jesus is the Everlasting Father (i.e. God the Father himself) by misapplying Isaiah 9:6? It is obvious they do believe that the person we know as Jesus (the Son of God) is also the Father of that Son!! The truth of the matter is that Jesus is the name or label for a divine person, and if that person we call Jesus is (by the oneness argumentation) both the spirit Father, the human Son, and He is also the Fathers Spirit, or all three literally, and as the one God, then it is INESCAPABLE that Jesus is His own Father, if he is both the Father and the Son as Jehovah God. One can see then why people justifiably accuse the oneness Pentecostals of making Jesus send Himself to earth, then pray to Himself (or to His Spirit self within his human self), and later resurrect Himself to sit at His own right hand. All rather absurd realities if you ask me!! What is true also is that not only oneness Pentecostals are guilty of this chief absurdity under consideration (i.e. making Jesus out to be His own Father), but also binitarians (like certain Armstrongites or Church of God affiliates who have recently reformed H.W. Armstrongs earlier stance on the Holy Spirit), as well as semi-Arians who believe in the Deity of the Spirit, but in only two Godhead beings (since the Spirit, they argue, is the literally the personal Father and the personal Son in actual personage at the same time). Thus when the Spirit begot Jesus, if that Spirit was the literal personhood of Jesus Himself then, tadaa, Jesus was begetting His human self as His own Spirit Father (since, as so-called binitarian Armstrongites argue, the Spirit is Father and Son in literal personage at the same time). I will show too that if orthodox Trinitarians insist that the Father, Son, and Spirit are literally the same organism, the one numeric indivisible substance, or one indivisible Being called God, then they too are guilty of making this one Being CONTINUOUSLY beget a part of Himself called Jesus the Son, thus orthodox Trinitarians too make Jesus His own Father (as the traditional pictures/paintings of the orthodox Trinity shows three faces of Jesus on the same neck or body).

WHICH DOCTRINE LOGICALLY SOLVES THIS PROBLEM? This then raises the question? Which doctrine effectively avoids teaching the above described absurdity? Obviously the one which does not make Jesus either His Father literally, or make Jesus the Spirit literally, but simply accepts that the Spirit is a third separate person of the Godhead who REPRESENTS and acts on behalf of both the Father and Son. This therefore means that the Spirit could have acted on the Fathers behalf to beget Jesus (but with the Father being naturally accredited the Fatherhood of Jesus as the Head of divinity, just as the Father, as the Head of divinity, is accredited the Creatorship of the universe despite it was done on His behalf by Jesus operating through the power of the Spirit) and thus Jesus is in no way absurdly seen as begetting Himself as the one Spirit, or sending Himself as the one Spirit to earth, or

sending the Father as the one Spirit to earth (which could never happen). By now you would realize that it is this belief that this writer subscribes to (as PROUDLY held by Seventh-day Adventists), despite it is labeled as UNORTHODOX Trinitarianism, and even castigated by the Papacy as tri-theism or polytheism, simply because we believe in the separate personhood of Father, Son and Spirit as the one Godhead. But I am never the one to welcome being called orthodox by the Papacy or general Christendom, and I am comfortable with the Roman Catholics labeling us as heretics (when ironically they are the ones who are heretics when the truth of the Bible is seen for what it is). What is clear though is that binitarians cannot effectively accuse Seventh-day Adventists of being polytheists when they themselves CORRECTLY believe that Father and Son are two separate beings worthy of divine worship equally (see John 5:23), and who are CORRECTLY seen equally as our God; but not properly considered as two Gods. Therefore binitarians (like reformed Armstrongites) avoid using this polemic against SD Adventists and seek to criticize Adventist beliefs about God by using other forms of argumentation. But I will expose those arguments as lacking foundation (not matter how strong they may appear) even as I delve further into the issues related to who really our God is.

A WARNING ABOUT ARMSTRONGITE TEACHING ON THE GODHEAD! But before moving on let me say one important thing about Armstrongites. Of all the Godhead doctrines in Christianity I do believe theirs is the most eclectic, the most convoluted, and the most deceptive, since it poses as so many things it really is not, and is actually very subtle in its errors. For instance, Christians, generally speaking, are either Trinitarians, Binitarians, or Unitarians (i.e. believing respectively in three, two, or one being (s) as comprising the one Godhead). Armstrongites however, while declaring themselves to be Binitarians (or so-called), yet they actually believe that the Godhead is presently incomplete (i.e. only PRESENTLY consisting of two beings), and that eventually millions of saved humans will become God (capitalized) in Paradise, and they will actually become the Creator, and God, even as Jesus, and the Father are God (as H.W. Armstrong presented the so-called PLAIN TRUTH initially). Thus Armstrongites are none of the above three labels for Godhead doctrines, but in fact they are millionarians as it were (to coin an appropriate phrase, since there is actually no official theological label for this rather strange belief)!! Also, you will notice the way Armstrongites all over display varying degrees of adherence to the original Armstrong teaching on the Godhead. For instance, Armstrong initially taught that the Holy Spirit was just a force use by God, yet today some Armstrongites are reforming this so-called PLAIN TRUTH to declare otherwise (i.e. declaring that the Spirit is not a force, and is not a third person of the Godhead, but that he is the actual person of Jesus Himself, while being the actual person of the Father Himself at the same time). All of this is now taking place even while some Armstrongites are now fully declared orthodox Trinitarians (as they have come full circle to recant the earlier beliefs). Obviously it is a misnomer to be calling oneself an Armstrongite WHILE denying or reforming certain of Armstrongs own teachings as he declared them to be the so-called PLAIN TRUTH!! Also, you will find certain Armstrongites decrying the creeds of Trinitarians, and yet they borrow many of the same expressions to refer to the God, or to the persons of the Godhead whom they declare is ONLY PRESENTLY a binity (i.e. AT THE MOMENT consisting of two Godhead beings). Thus you will hear them regularly accepting Jesus as being very God of very God, as being co-eternal, co-essential, and co-equal with his Father (all terms borrowed from the Trinitarian creed but tailored to apply to their socalled Binity). And yet while none of these expressions are in the Bible itself, you will then hear

them turning around to argue that the expression Trinity is not in the bible. How laughable!! The words co-eternal, co-equal, co-essential, omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, etc, are all not there (which they freely use), but the meanings behind the expressions are certainly there. They will even be heard using the expression triadic when referring to God revealed as Father, Son, and Spirit, but then turn around and deny the very meaning of triadic, and also deny that this word is a synonym for a trinity (despite respected dictionaries declare the truth to be otherwise). You will often see them using sleight of hand tactics in their polemics (which is often missed by the listener or reader who is not quick to pick up on this very subtle form of sophistry). For instance, while certain of the new Armstrongites deny H.W. Armstrongs initial teaching that the Holy Spirit is a force, some will today go even halfway with the Trinitarian in accepting that the Holy Spirit is God, and is personal (and he couldnt be a force or an impersonal entity), but declare him as only personal in so far as the Father and Son are persons whom the Spirit literally is in extension as their personal essence. But you will notice that the new Armstrongites never take up the dictionary to define what the essence of a person really is, and what the extension of someone would be, and they will never admit that the Father or Son could not be separate beings (but rather would be more like Siamese twins) if they are both the one Spirit literally in personage (as they espouse). And they will not admit that the Father and Son could not send themselves if they literally are the one Spirit whom they both send as their so-called essence. You will notice too that they will declare how very interchangeable the Spirit of the Father and the Son is, as the extension of their persons at the very same time, and so whatever the Spirit does it is actually the literal person of the Father and Son doing that equally at the same time. But notice how they quickly stop short of saying that when the Spirit overshadowed Mary and begot Jesus, then it would also HAVE TO mean that the person of Jesus (as the Spirit) ALSO begot or fathered that only begotten Son on earth. That is what I call crafty sleight of hand in polemics. But this article/manuscript will not hesitate to call a spade a spade. Ones hermeneutics must be consistent, and if it really is the truth it should not deceive (whether wittingly or unwittingly). WHAT OF UNITARIANS? There are different types of Unitarians, or believers who seek to preserve the oneness of God as simply one literal Being or one numeric Person only, and this group include Jehovahs Witnesses (also called Arians), oneness Pentecostals (also called Jesus only believers, sabellians or modalists), among other groups (with so-called semi-Arians believers forming a large part of the remaining groups). Jehovahs Witnesses are the most strident Unitarian group, but are also the most blatantly erroneous, since they blasphemously make Jesus a creature like ourselves (by misapplying Rev. 3:14 and Prov. 8:22-31), and they deny the absolute divinity, and truly begotten and natural but eternal Sonship of Jesus in order to preserve the Father as the only One to be considered as our God, even while vehemently denying that John 20:28,29 compared with Heb. 1:2-3,6,8,10, and John 3:16 compared with Prov. 30:4, as well as Is. 9:6 compared with Micah 5:2 (just to quote a few texts) prove their doctrine to be offensively heretical. But they dont teach that the Spirit is personal, nor is even the person of the Father and the Son, but they teach that the Spirit is Jehovahs impersonal or active force he uses to accomplish his will. Thus, even while they are clearly in error to hold this view (to be proven later in this discourse), yet they cant be accused of teaching Jesus to be His own Father. Thus we can move on to the oneness Pentecostals; Unitarians who are most brazenly forthright in teaching that Jesus as the spirit Father begot the human Son also called Jesus. My opening remarks has already proved that simple deduction would make them guilty of teaching Jesus to be His own Father. But what of their stubborn refusal to see the Godhead as consisting of more

than one divine person who can each be properly called God in and of themselves, and yet be unitedly comprising the one Godhead? I think it noble of them to want to preserve the oneness of the Godhead that the Jews are noted for, but the problem is that they seem to think the Jews had it all right, and in fact fail to see that the Jews stopped accepting further revelations from God to clarify and expand on the oneness of the Godhead to the point of rejecting His own Son who was with Him all along speaking s an us, as seen in Gen. 1:26,27 or in Gen. 3:22-24 compared with Prov. 30:4. This is because they, like the Jews, fail to appreciate the legitimate meaning of the word one as also being a composite union (as a married couple or family is) when the Godhead is considered in FULL revelation.