B y Derrick Gillespie
In recent conversation with a certain theologian on the issue of the Godhead, it dawned on me that very many people are still confused, even theologians who should know better, about the implications of what a marriage unity in God’s eyes mean. I happened to ask this question of that certain theologian: “When God made man in the beginning, male and female, and called their name Adam, how many men did he create?” I was rather surprised to see that particular theologian somewhat uncertain about the issue. He lamely explained that while God made “one” (a singular) “male entity” called “Adam”, he also made “mankind”, as if to say because he made two separate beings, male and female called “Adam” (Gen. 5:2), then in effect God made more than one MAN or two “men”!! Yet, if that theologian had stopped to consider the real truth of the matter he would see why God initially used the family to illustrate that there is only one God, yet more than one divine being in the Godhead family from the very beginning. God never made two “men” when he made “Adam”, since there was only one (a singular) male entity called Adam, and yet when God made “mankind” called “Adam” he effectively created a plurality of persons deemed to be “one flesh” (a single kinship), but all sharing the name and nature “Adam”. Eve, while definable, discrete, and separate as a distinct person from Adam the male, yet she could never be considered essentially in isolation from Adam the male (her husband and “head”), or in isolation from the name and nature “Adam” (her own family name too). And while it was glaringly true that Eve, as a separate person, was fully human in specie, yet it was still true that God made only one(1) man, one humanity, one mankind, one substance of humanity, and one family; not more than one “man” (since Eve was not the male), or more than one “humanity”, or more than one “mankind”, or more than one “substance” of man, since Eve came directly from the very being and substance of her husband and “head” called “Adam”!! Can we then see why God made man in his own image as a family of separate beings, and yet there still remains one singular God who always spoke in unity by saying “LET US”? The same rules described above apply perfectly to the Godhead!!

There is only one (1) God, THE FATHER (a singular "Him"), not two or three of Him, but He has told us that he is known through and approached through His separate Son (who bears his name and nature, as sons naturally do), and He (united with His Son) is manifested everywhere invisibly by His distinct and personal Spirit. That’s why God spoke as "us" from the very beginning, since He could not deny whom he is united with. That, interestingly, fully explains why 1 Cor. 8:6 spoke of one God the Father, but immediately adds the conjunctive “AND”, to show God’s spiritual unity with another of His kind, and yet there still remains one God, as the Jews have always taught!! People who accept the truth of the whole Bible will never be able to escape the gradually revealed truth that the Godhead is “imaged” in the family; matters not if the Jews initially did not understand the full truth!! The Jews did understand God the Father to be one person (!!), but never fully understood the fact that God has a distinctly *divine Son who always Represented Him, despite the clear hints given to it in Proverbs 30:4 and Gen. 1:26. Remember that whenever someone introduces themselves they usually also introduce their direct family relations!! But God’s revelation was progressive (thus the need for the New Testament part of the Bible), and so the revelation of Jesus to them in the New Testament (Heb. 1:1-3) should not have but sadly it did become a "STUMBLIMG STONE" to many! And until they come to accept the second step in the revelation of the Godhead they would henceforth forever have a problem with the Father of the Son they faithfully served as monotheists in the Old Testament (2John 2:23; John 17:3).This new revelation does not in any way destroy what monotheism is, since to be the Son of God does not make Jesus the person of the Father Himself, or make Him another or second "God the Father"; Jesus simply represents the Father *FULLY to us, and (according to the Father’s will) deserves equal honor as the Father’s royal Son (a true Son who bears his Father’ divine nature, as all true sons naturally do in relation to their fathers)!! Today, “oneness Pentecostals”, Muslims, and others of similar thinking, seem to be stuck in the same ‘time warp’ that the unconverted Jews also find themselves, since the Jews too rejected the notion that God could have had a separate Son all along; even while the Father still remained the one true God of the Bible!! No wonder Jews were rejected in favor of the church!! BUT THE TIME HAS COME TO CLEAR THE AIR!! And here is the most profound truth of God’s Word: The One “true God” the Father (YAHWEH) is, by His very nature, revealed in and worshipped through His Eternal and “only begotten”

Son, and is present everywhere by His personal Holy Spirit. Think it through carefully. There is only one (1) God, THE FATHER (a singular "Him"), not two or three of Him, but He has told us that he is known through and approached through His separate Son (who bears his name and nature, as sons naturally do), and He (united with His Son) is manifested everywhere invisibly by His distinct and personal Spirit. That’s why God spoke as "us" from the very beginning, since He could not deny whom he is united with. That’s what the Biblical “trinity” is all about!! “Trinity” simply means “three of the same kind united” united in NAME (see Matthew 28:19). That's all!! This was the teaching of the earliest Christians *long before the Papacy or Roman Catholicism was born after the fourth century, after Constantine became “Christian” (signaling the early conception of Roman Catholicism). The historical evidence is undeniable, at least to one who is honest with himself. Let’s now explore the truth of how the family illustrates the Godhead, and remember a complete family unit is not two, but rather at least three, i.e. having one head of that family, and an offspring from the two others considered as “one”.

The Godhead, or divinity, is "imaged" in humanity, or the family, both in direct and indirect ways, since Man (generic) was made in God's image. See Gen. 1:26, 27 and ponder its implications. We should expect that the family is therefore a pattern, of sorts, of the love relationship which existed in a sort of 'blueprint' among those of the divine specie since "God is love", and love is a group principle (1 John 4:8); even though the human specie is finite and incapable of patterning FULLY the infinite. However the parallels are striking and cannot be ignored. And lest any think it is not proper to think of the Godhead as united in a principle similar to marriage let us remember it was God himself who presented his church (both of Old and New Testaments), consisting of both males and females, as his bride, and so the principle is simply a metaphor or imagery; not a discourteous comparing of human sexual relationship to God's nature. So here goes...

1. Jehovah God, the Father, is an individual, a he, and yet is inseparably joined in spirit to another of his own kind- Jesus. Likewise, Adam was made

in God's image, as an individual, a he, and yet was joined inseparably as "one flesh" to another of his own kind. How is it that two were still considered as one? God's arithmetic in the family is not 1+1=2, but rather 1x1 = 1. Once we understand this family principle then much becomes clear about the Godhead that Man was made "in the image" of. Compare Genesis 2:24 with John 4:24, John 10:30 and Romans 8:8-10. Can you see why God did not make two males initially, and why he directly took the female from the substance of the male? Simple!! To preserve the “oneness” in every sense of the word, except for the distinction in roles of the members of the family, all working together in diversity of functions, but in unity of purpose!!

2. Jehovah God, the Father, is the "Head" of the divine-human Christ, or Messiah, who is spiritually united with him, and this union was patterned by the family since Adam was made the "head" of the woman, as Christ is now the "head" of the church considered as his family and his spiritual body that is "one" with him (Eph. 5:29, 30). See 1 Cor. 11:3 and this principle is undeniable. The Church has always been God's spiritual bride, and so through Christ's simultaneous union with us and His Father, or His "Head", the same principle has carried over from the Old Testament. It is interesting however that there has been only one Israel (Gal.3:28-9) one church (Acts 7:38; Eph. 4:4), and thus only one "bride", and yet that bride was both the bride of God, the Father, and is now the bride of Christ His Son! How is it possible for a father and son to both have the same bride? Because the unity of Father and Son is so close that what belongs to one belongs to the other (John 16:15), despite they are separate beings. Remember, with God's type of family union 1x1 = 1; not 1+1 = 2. Note carefully however that while the earthly marriage union is sexual, God's family union with his Son is purely spiritual and yet seems to be deeper than the sexual union in a marriage can even begin to pattern. More on that later.

3. Jehovah God, the Father, will always be a numeric individual, a he, (1 Cor. 8:6) and yet cannot be divorced from those of his kind who are one with him (Matt. 28:19), and who share his divine attributes, and his name. Likewise, Adam will always be one numeric individual, and yet his wife Eve shared his name "Adam" equally with him (see Gen.5:2), since they obviously share the same human attributes or human nature, even if they function in different roles. The family today follows that pattern as well. It

is perfectly acceptable to say "Mr and Mrs. Derrick Gillespie”, since my wife shares my name "Gillespie", and so I cannot be divorced from her intended oneness with me. My son also is properly called "Gillespie", “the son” (of course), since he equally shares my name!! See any justification, then, in properly calling Jesus, "God, the Son", if the generic term "God" rightly functions as the name of His Father? It is simply to make the distinction since they are not the same person, or individual, as many misinterpret Trinitarians to mean when we say "God, the Son" to mean Christ. It would be similar to saying "Jehovah, the Son", since Jesus has/own his Father's own name, and is properly called "Lord" or "Jehovah", as His own Father testified to us in irrefutable tones in Heb. 1:10. See why in John 16:15. Remember, all sons take, and naturally *OWN the name of their father!!

4. Jehovah God, the Father, is one individual, yet His Son is so one with Him that Jesus, the Son, is exactly like His Father (Heb. 1:3 with Col. 2:9 and John 14:9), and it is never proper to think of God in isolation from His Son Jesus (or their Spirit). Remember 1x1x1 = 1!!! See John 17:3 and 1 Cor. 8:6 with Matt. 28:19, repeatedly using the conjunctive "and" when identifying the Deity, and think of God originally revealed to man as speaking as an "us" in Gen. 1:26, Gen.3:22-24 and in Gen. 11:6,7. Interesting, isn't it? Likewise, in the human family, a man is considered so one with his wife that for him to love his wife is considered as loving "himself" who is a part of him, as Eph. 5:28-30 plainly shows. Indeed 1x1 =1! The man cannot consider himself apart from his wife. This oneness is so close that though the "head” or the male gets the focus yet the united group is always considered. Notice in Gen. 2:22-24 how the individual pronouns "him", "his", and "he" are denoting "the man", "Adam", and yet literally we know God drove two separate individual persons out of the Garden of Eden. Even in Psalm 8, we still see how Man is considered in a group (generic) way even when the personal pronoun "him" is in focus. Today the family still patterns that too, since human sons logically take the family name of their father (as the wife does equally too), since they are together considered one. This explains a lot about how we should consider the Godhead in terms of God, the Father, a "him", but never divorced from His Son, and His Spirit. Matthew 28:19 therefore takes on potent meaning, since it is logical to see the "name" of the Father being the *SAME name of His Son and Spirit. Hence a "trinity"-- from the prefix "tri" for "three" or "threefold", and from the suffix "nity" denoting a close relationship and a unity of three! That's all trinitarianism should be about!! Can't see why all the fuss. And so it is not logical to think that the Father's name is not obviously His

Son's name too. See again Heb.1:10 with Father calling his Son his own name "Lord" or "Kurios" in Greek, as translated from "Jehovah" in Hebrew, in just the same way the Father calls Jesus "O God" in Heb. 1:8 to indicate they have the same nature as a family unit. Notice too that it is precisely here that God reveals that His Son deserves worship like himself in Heb.1:6 (even when he was a made a human). Compare John 5:23.

Can we see why in the final analysis all will bow and confess that Jesus is "Lord" or "Jehovah" in name too, as Philippians 2:11 prophecies, even if many are unwilling to confess that truth today? So many resist that *BIBLICAL fact today, and yet fail to realize they are *NOT true Christians for that simple denial, as 1 John 2:23 so plainly shows. Notice that Jesus is so much one with His Father that the Son is supposed to receive the same degree of honor (i.e. worship) ascribed to the Father. See John 5:23 with John 20:28!! To deny the Son anything rightfully his is to dishonor and deny the Father he is one with. A dangerous notion indeed!! The SDA church (my church group) is falsely accused by several offshoot dissidents of being "tri-theists", or believers in "three Gods", because we doctrinally "divide the substance" of the Godhead, when of course this is not so, since those very same critics usually have the Supreme being, the Father, as God, and yet also accept Jesus, another being, as "God" in nature, who is worthy of religious worship like the Father. This could also be called bi-theism, or the worship of two Gods, that is, if the arguments leveled against SDA trinitarianism, in which we believe in the separate being of Father and Son, were actually true. A binitarian and semi-Arian who believes Jesus deserves, as a separate being, religious worship, and is properly called "my Lord and *MY God" (John 20:28) is called upon to balance all those views in light of the first of the Ten Commandments! To properly do this they MUST accept the spiritual family union of the Father and Son as divine beings, or else polytheism stares both the binitarian and semi-Arian critics squarely in the face, since worship is exclusively reserved ONLY for the being called God .Only if Jesus is one with God in essence (like the husband and wife unity, in principle) could he share the same honor or receive the same degree of honor AS "MY GOD" (i.e. in possessive terms)!! See John again 5:23 compared with John 20:28, 29 and Heb.1:6, 8, 10. Is this awesome truth sinking into your spirit, dear reader?

Satan/Lucifer has always been opposed to "*ALL that is called God or that is worshipped"!! Again, a group principle is clearly presented by the very use of the plural *"ALL" when Paul spoke of "all that is called God, or that is worshipped" in the Bible!! See 2 Thess. 2:4!! Satan opposes "ALL that is called "God" by either denying the persons involved their proper place of homage or by setting up counterfeits with the aim of parodying, and or causing contempt for the very nature of divinity. Ever consider why so many so-called "divine threes" are in false religions? Remember, similarity does not always mean source, but counterfeits usually indicate "borrowed" features of the original. But back to my main point.

5. Jehovah God, the Father, is presented as creating by "himself" the universe, as seen in Isaiah 44:24, and yet while this sets him apart from false God's (who have no creative power) it is biblically proper to consider this creation as a 'group effort' of the divine family. Why? Simple! The Father Himself says in Heb. 1:10 that Jesus did the creating!! Contradiction? No!! Once we understand the foregoing principle of how the head of a family is attributed what applies to the family as a group then there is no contradiction. God created the world, united with and through His Son (Heb. 1:2; John 1:1-3), who both sent their Spirit to create on their behalf at the actual creation site (Psalm 104:30). To some it may appear that the Father simply 'sat back' and allowed the Son to exercise all the creative power on his behalf, while he got the credit, but it is because many fail to understand the love principle in operation (1 John 4:8) as the human family patterns the original divine family today. Among humans, the family lineage is traced through the man, or the head of the family (as even the Bible does trace family generations), and yet no male has ever procreated others of his kind without a union with his wife. In fact, it could be said the man simply 'sat back' while the woman did the work of bearing the child, yet the man gets the credit. Yet this is also not properly appreciating the scheme of things God ordained from the beginning, in which the offspring is never belonging to only one parent, the head of the family, but equally to both. In fact an offspring equally represents both parents, and so while the father "begot”, the woman "bore" the child in a love operation needing both parents. This is a classic imaging of the Godhead union of Father and Son cooperatively creating the universe by way of their Spirit (Heb 1:2 with 1 Cor. 8:6 and Ps. 104:30), yet only “one God” created the universe (Mal. 2:10), since the Father is accredited what the group does in union. This explains too why the Father is the “Father”

of the human Jesus, who “begot’ Him through the Agency of the Holy Spirit “overshadowing” Mary, and yet Jesus still has one “Father”; not two!! This then brings into sharp focus the relationship between the Father and His Son having the same Spirit in common (see Rom.8:9, 10 first).

6. Jehovah God, the Father has one Spirit (Eph.4:4), and yet this one Spirit is LITERALLY common to both the Father and his Son (as seen clearly in Rom. 8:9, 10). This is another aspect of the Godhead union which may have been patterned in the human family, on the finite level of course. While, I will tread softly and humbly here, since I believe the nature of the Spirit is indeed a mystery, yet a few things are clear, which force us to stop and think on how God may have conveyed truths about himself in the family even as it concerns the Holy Spirit. Humanly speaking no wife and husband share a common spirit literally, since they have separate spirits unique to each! Their union is physical, since they are material beings. So what is it that results from their physical union at the deepest level? Their physical union produces offspring which equally belongs to both, and represents the attributes of both wherever that offspring goes, with *"IT" (the offspring) even bearing the common family name they equally share-as a family. Incidentally, ever wonder why a baby is ACCEPTABLY called an "it", even though it/he is a living, personal entity from the two parents, which "it" is closely related to, and dependent on? Just 'picking your brain' since I am now looking closely at the controversial Holy Spirit, often called an "it", but only as far as the rules of Greek/Hebrew grammar goes (since the word for "Spirit" is neuter, i.e. it's not gender specific). Yet God is a Spirit, and is *THE Spirit, with the specific article, "the", being used (2 Cor. 3:17), and God is described by the same neuter word used for "Spirit", yet He is not an "it" literally, just as angels and demons are "spirits", but are not impersonal "its"!! Smile if that made sense!! But back to my main point. I am not saying the Spirit is an offspring/child of the Father and the Son, in just the same way I did not EARLIER mean the Father and Son are married like husband and wife. I am simply showing the parallels as far as the spiritual unity and love principles go, since God Himself made the human family in his/their image (Gen. 1:26). Since, as the Bible already shows us, the union between the Father and

Jesus is patterned, in principle (not literally), by the "headship" of the man with the woman (1 Cor. 11:3), then we may know that there is a possible similarity between the Father ("the Head") and Jesus, the Son, literally having the same Spirit in common resulting from their union at the deep spiritual level, just as human parents literally have an offspring in common from their union at the deep physical level. Notice it is not proper to think that the Holy Spirit is not the Son's as well the Father's *OWN spirit, or their presence being represented by the Holy Spirit, since the Bible makes it plain that when the Holy Spirit comes it will be like the Father and Son both coming to us to dwell within us (as temples). And remember the Spirit literally comes to live with us. See Ezekiel 3:24 of how the Spirit can personally "enter us"; not as an impersonal force, but as having personal attributes. See Ezekiel 8:2,3 even showing the Spirit appearing with human features (anthropomorhism)! Interesting indeed!! But is the Spirit a thing, or a distinct being? Now, notice in John 14:23 that right after Jesus promised the special "coming" of the Comforter (verses 16,17), i.e. the coming of the Spirit as "another"(from "allos" in Greek), or as Someone else distinct in personage (since that is what "allos" or "another" literally means, as in John 5:32), yet this "Comforter" would equally represent the presence of both Father and Son (while they remain in Heaven), as seen in verses 23 compared with verse 18. How is this possible? It must mean that the Spirit has the attributes similar to both Father and Son, so much so that "his" presence equally represents the presence of both Father and Son, just like the presence of Jesus represented the presence of His Father. The only difference is that while Jesus could only represent his Father in one location at any one time, the Holy Spirit is able to do that everywhere at once (see Psalm 139:7-12). Many think this Spirit is just an "extension" of God Himself, (or worse, a "split-personality" of God, as in a mad man), but is not a personal being and yet they can't *properly account for the Spirit being biblically presented as distinctly personal (Acts 5:2 & 13:2) while, more importantly, being enumerated separately over and over (e.g. Matt. 28:19; 2 Cor. 13:14; 1 Cor. 12:4-6; Isaiah 48:16), with him even appearing *SEPRATELY as the "sevenfold Spirit" in symbol "BEFORE [in front] of His [God's] throne" even in God's very enthroned presence in heaven, while equally, but *SEPARATELY sending greetings to the Church alongside the Father and the Son. Why, if the Spirit was just the Father himself, was there the reality of the Spirit noted as separate "before His [God's] throne", and was not just presented as on the throne inside of God Himself? Simple!! God,

and the Spirit are personally distinct, despite united in the one Godhead, and are as inseparable as a human and his own human spirit is in the human sphere!! But what is impossible in the human sphere is possible with God, since he is not bound by the laws of nature. Thus his Spirit can be separate from Him in terms of personal distinction, unlike yours and mine. See again Rev. 1:4 with Isaiah 48:16 and ponder deeply its implications. These texts strongly suggest that we're to deem the Spirit as a Personage who can be, and has been "sent" by Father and Son, as the result of their divine union. We cannot fully explain the nature of the Spirit who “proceedeth” from the Father but is equally "sent" by the Son (John 15:26). And it is no argument at all (as some seek to present) that the Spirit must be an “extension” of the Father (not a separate entity), since the Spirit is presented as that which "proceedeth" from the Father, and hence the word "proceedeth" must denote a present and continuous tense or action (or so they argue).Yet of the few places the word "proceedeth" appear in the K.J.V. Bible it does not mean that, for instance, that “every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God" are not separate entities from Him, or are continuously streaming from him literally in a present continuous tense. Gen.24:50 and Numbers 30:2 show how "proceedeth" can refer back to some action or event of the *PAST (past tense); not to something continuously going on (as some would have us believe). Also, if one looks closely at John 15:26 a number of plain truths make this aforementioned faulty argument even more 'non sequitur'. Remember, first of all, that Jesus made the point that those who bear witness of him satisfy the Jewish rule of two or more bearing true witness of Him. John 5:31-32 and John 8:17, 18 make the point that it takes "another" to properly bear witness or testify of him. So if Jesus was literally the Spirit in numeric personhood how could the Spirit bear witness or testify of Jesus as the disciples "also" do? John 15:27 shows the disciples testifying "also" as the Spirit does. It must mean they are personally separate to testify of Jesus!! Also remember that anything/anyone "sent" is usually distinct from the "sender", and this truth must be accepted of the Holy Spirit, even if we do not know exactly the mode of existence of the Spirit! It was the Spirit, denoted separately from God that also "sent" the Messiah in Isaiah 48:16. Thus Jesus and the Spirit are distinct, despite united, just as He and his Father are distinct, despite united. Thus the "sent" must be distinct from the sender!! That cannot be denied unless we twist the Scriptures, or be inconsistent in our thinking. It was the Spirit, denoted separately from God that also "sent" the Messiah in Isaiah 48:16.


But, don’t get me wrong!! The INSEPARABLE unity the Spirit shares with Father and Son, like what a human has with his own spirit, is clearly taught by the Bible. See 1 Cor. 2:11. Yet the Bible equally teaches the Spirit possessing a distinction in his personage separate from the Father and Son unlike in humans!! Both truths are in the Bible!! This reality is not our problem to solve and dissect logically by human science, since human logic will always fail with the things of God (Job. 11:7-9), but it is a reality simply calling upon us to, first, accept by faith as Christians, and, secondly, declare without fear of dissent coming from whatever source !! It would take much denial and twisting of the Bible on my part for this author to accept or declare otherwise. Now, how is all this patterned in the human family, if even in a faint way on the finite level? As already proven human parents equally share ownership of their distinct offspring, just as the Father and the Son share equal ownership of the distinct Holy Spirit. Consider too that human parents have their attributes represented in their offspring who equally came from them both, just as the Spirit represent equally the attributes of the Father and the Son from whom he proceeds. Adam, the first man, can now be considered as personally represented everywhere, in the billions, all over the globe, by his offspring resulting from the physical union he had with his wife, Eve, in just the same way the Holy Spirit personally represents both God, the Father, and Jesus everywhere, all over the universe as a result of the union God has with his Son; in the spiritual sense of course.

7. Finally, Jehovah God, the Father, will never divorce himself from his Son, whom he considers to be the "outshining of his glory" (Heb. 1:3), and whom he considers so much spiritually a part of himself that he has no problems with His Son being equally revered as "my Lord and *MY God" just like Himself (see John 20:28, 29; John 5:23). And of course we could never consider God apart from His Spirit (2 Cor. 3:17). In the same way, a man is to never divorce his wife whom he is to consider as his glory (1 Cor,

11:7), and whom should be so much a part of himself that she should never be ignored (Eph. 5:28, 29). Also, just as Jesus equally owns everything the Father has (John 16:15) including his name, honor, property, etc, so ought men to lovingly share all with their wives as the Godhead family has originally set the example for us, puny finite beings, made in the image of God, the Infinite. Ultimately, it cannot be ignored how the "First Family" of the Godhead did everything, and continues to do everything in harmony with each other, with each other seeking the glory of the other, while respecting the roles and functions of each other, but never disrespecting the leadership of the "Head", God, the Father of all. CAN YOU, THE READER SEE MORE PARALLELS BETWEEN THE GODHEAD AND THE HUMAN FAMILY THAT I MAY HAVE MISSED? FEEL FREE TO SHARE THEM WITH ME!!


Call: (876) 385-5982 E-mail:

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful