HOW MANY GODS IN HEAVEN

ARE THERE?
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 IN THE

FAMILY
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...

A SEPARATE FATHER AND SON, YET

ONE GOD
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.

A FAMILY IS ONE, DESPITE PLURALITY OF

PERSONAGE
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.

MANY OPPOSE THE GODHEAD BEING SEEN

AS A FAMILY
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.

UNITY OF OPERATION OF THE

GODHEAD
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).

THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE DIVINE

FAMILY
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, WHILE WE MAY NOT KNOW "WHAT" THE SPIRIT IS, BUT WE KNOW WHO HE IS--HE IS
"ANOTHER" COMFORTER EXACTLY LIKE JESUS (IN CHARACTER), AND WHO IS ENUMERATED
SEPARATELY ALONGSIDE THE FATHER AND SON, AND AS HAVING THE SAME "NAME" THEY
BEAR!! PARALLELISM IN MEANING MAKES IT PLAIN THAT THE SPIRIT IS PERSONALLY
SEPARATE FROM FATHER AND SON (AS IN WHEN WE COUNT "1, 2, 3...") EVEN WHILE
UNITED WITH THEM!!

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.

THE GODHEAD FAMILY IS

INSEPARABALE
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!!

Write to:

DERRICK GILLESPIE (Mr.)

MUNRO COLLEGE P.O.
ST ELIZABETH
JAMAICA, WEST INDIES

Call: (876) 385-5982

E-mail: ddgillespie@live.com