published - 1990 “letfactsbesubmittedtoacandidworld.“ · – when you say “father”do you...

1THE AM ERICAN CHRISTIAN • IS JESUS GOD? • SPECIAL ISSUE

“... let facts be submitted to a candid world.“PUBLISHED - 1990

AMERICAN CHRISTIAN MINISTRIES • POST OFFICE BOX 740 • GRANGEVILLE, IDAHO 835302

Is Jesus God?by Ben Wil liams

– Have the Catholics been right all along about Mary being “theMother of God”?

– When you say “Father” do you really mean “Son”? - or does itmake any difference?

– If Jesus is Yahweh, can we pray in either name? - or does itmake any difference?

– Who died on the cross ... Yahweh or Jesus? or does it makeany difference?

– If Yahweh can’t die, then is it possible that no one really diedon the cross?

________________________________________________________

Don’t be too quick to answer, espe-cially if you are counting on church

tradition to help you. Some of the mostessential elements of this issue are of-ten glossed over by the churches.

By the time you’ve finished thisstudy, you will have the pertinent datayou need to draw your own conclusions.

Since I have dared to expose theseelements, some have labeled me irrev-erent, heretical and even blasphemous.Religions have certain taboos that can-not be broached without offending thebrethren of Priestcraft. However, if youare not a timid religious slave, you shouldfind this interesting reading.

If popularity were my goal, my mes-sage would be useless. I’d tell you onlywhat you already believe. I’d make youfeel good. But, I’m not a con man so I’llleave that to others. I may not be build-ing up a retirement, but as Paul said, “Ihave not shunned to declare unto youall the counsel of God.”

Rev. Robert (Profit At Any Cost)Shuller, of the Crystal Cathedral, con-ducts seminars on building churchgroups. He claims that any doctrine

which could offend anyone and keepthem out of your church should beavoided.He says, “When truth offends,don’t preach it!”

I cannot agree with Mr. Shuller.Shuller reasons that to help people

you must bring them into the church,and you can’t bring them in if you of-fend them with truth. Church builderswant churches and profit – not truth.

My esteemed former colleague,Sheldon Emry, once asked, “Canchurches help people by teachingthem false doctrine?” I guess Sheldonwould have flunked Schuller’s coursetoo.

We also hear the siren call to “uniteand compromise!” Again, Sheldonasked, “Why is it that the person whopreaches the truth is always the onewho is expected to compromise?” Itseems that truth must be seasoned withlies to be palatable.

Churches have loaded us down withuseless baggage (invented myths). Mostof us are still packing some of that oldbaggage we brought with us out of ourold churches. All that old baggage must

be reexamined and scrutinized for er-ror! We must not be squeamish aboutit, nor should we fear the loss of petdoctrines and idols.

The “Is Jesus God?” question is oneof those “old baggage” issues whichneeds fair examination. We are all stilllearning, and we must be individuals –not herd followers and groupies – if weare to avoid the pit fal ls of popular“democratic” doctrine determined byconsent of the herd. Such doctrine isalmost always wrong.

We are on the move. We are notstatic and dead like the old churches wehave left. Those who join the march tofreedom must be ready to keep movingand learning, or they will be left behindclinging to their old idols and sacredcows. Each person must grow andchange independently, following Christ– not some group or preacher.

This study begins at, centers on, andrevolves around the One with whom itwill also end: Jesus – the center of allChristian thought. The life of Jesusshines brighter and brighter the morewe understand it. There is no better sub-


ject to ponder, and I guarantee this onewill make you think. So, put on yourthinking cap, and let’s begin.

THE HISTORY OFCHRISTOLOGY

In the writtenhistoryof what’scalled“the Church,” the essence of Jesus ispossibly the oldest and greatest debateon record. From the time Jesus becamethe central feature of history, man hasbeen struggling with the question of whoand what Jesus actually was and is.Unfortunately, where scripture has spo-ken clearly about Christ, the supersti-tious masses have soughtmysticism,andchurch leaders have tried to fit Christinto pagan parameters.

In the se cond centur y A. D. ,Irenaeus (known as the earliest theologi-cal leader of distinction in the CatholicChurch) said “The Son of God was withthe Father from the beginning.”

Thus, the earliest renowned theo-logian of the CatholicChurch taught thatJesus was beside God. Thus, they weretwo beings – apparently co-equal.

Later in the 2nd century, after thetime of Irenaeus, another leader by thename of Tertullian gained notoriety as

a prominent theologian of theChurch. From Walker’s HISTORY OFTHE CHRISTIAN CHURCH, we readof Tertullian’s thinking concerning theessence of “Christ and the Godhead.”This set the stage for confusing debateson how to define “the Trinity”:

“All are of one, by unity of substance;while the mystery of the dispensation isstill guarded which distributes the unityinto a Trinity, placing in their order thethree, the Father, the Son, and the HolySpirit; three, however ... not in substancebut in form; not in power but in appear-ance, for they are of one substance andone essence and one power, inasmuchas He is one God from whom thesedegrees and forms and aspects arereckoned under the name of the Father,and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.”

“Trinity” is the Church’s title forGod. They claim that God is a three-part entity. Trying to define it in com-prehensible terms, however, has provenan insurmountable challenge. The de-bate on this issue was expanded to in-clude the question of the essence of theCatholic communion, or Eucharist: the

wafer and the wine. They couldn’t de-cide whether it was the actual blood andbody of Jesus, or the virtual blood andbody. Those who believed they wereeating the actual flesh and blood, then,had a further question: “Did the breadand the wine become Jesus’ flesh andblood at the instant the priest blessed it,or only after it was eaten?” This issuewas argued for centuries.

Adding to this confusion was theAthanasion Creed which described theTrinity this way (now see if you can fol-low this):

“The father incomprehensible, the sonincomprehensible, and the holy ghostincomprehensible.”

(Ok so far? Keep reading.)

“The father eternal, the son eternaland the holy ghost eternal. And yet thereare not three eternals but one eternal, asalso there are not three uncreated, northree incomprehensibles, but oneuncreated and one incomprehensible.”

You may want to read itt one moretime just to make sure you got it all.However, if it seems “incomprehensible”to you, don’t feel bad!

Less than a century later, the Catho-lic Church adopted an official statement

of the Trinity doctrine which describedJesus as one-third of a “Triune God-head” comprised of “God the Father,God the Son and God the Holy Ghost.”Today most churchgoers accept thisTrinity doctrine without question.

In the 4th century, James Ariusappear ed on the scen e as anantitrinitarian. He made a great impres-sion upon the establishment church, andwas persecuted for his efforts. He is yettoday considered possibly the greatestadversary of the orthodox Trinitarians.Arius taught that Yahwehcreated Jesus,and then Jesus created the earth. There-fore, he contended that Jesus was notco-eternal; not coequalwith Yahweh andnot one-third of a so- called tr iunegodhead made up of three equal com-ponents.

Arius didn’t have it right either.However, his theories were a little morereasonable than the Trinitarians’.

There has never been an under-standable explanation of the Trinity.However, Christians seem to be willingto accept things that they don’t under-stand. The trouble is, this causes an in-ability to develop a true faith. How canthey believe in something they cannotunderstand? So, in lieu of true faith, theydevelope a blind mystic acceptance ofthe unknown. That alone is the root ofa lot of problems in Christendom.

ABOUT THE COVER

We chose the two-faced Roman god,Janus (for whom the Roman month ofJanuary was named) to illustrate ourcover because it reflects the paganconcept of two gods equaling onegod, and one god equaling two gods.It is the dual-headed counterpart tothe triple-headed Trinity.

This god had two faces, and he waspurported to have transformed into aflesh-andblood man.

It has proven entirely too easy, and too common, for churchgoers toaccept pagan concepts for their god models. The Biblical God is not likethe gods of the Pagans! Logically, then, if Pagans believe in a two-facedgod (or two gods blended into one god), or a variation thereof, thenChristians should not.


Religion has made a science of us-ing words in such a way as to renderthem meaningless, and then use themas scare tactics to threaten you into com-pliance with their demands. Politicianshave picked up on this double-speak andactual ly improved upon it. ThomasJefferson (a politician himself) had thisto say about the mystic descriptions ofthe controversial Trinity doctrine:

“It is too late in the day for men ofsincerity to pretend that they believe inthe Platonic mysticisms that three areone and that one is three.”

During Jefferson’s day, a group whocalled themselves Unitarians organizedto oppose Trinitarianism. When read-ing history relating to that era, keep inmind that Unitar ians, backthen, were not the same aswhat’s cal led the UnitarianChurch today. They were sim-ply people reacting against theTrinity doctrine. Unitar ianssaid that God was One (i.e. asingle unit). Trinitarians saidthat God was Three. Not thatthe Unitar ian Church is anoble model for us, but it doesillustrate the point that evenchurches cannot agree.

Wi th in the Ca thol icChurch, the Trinity issue de-veloped factions. Names weregiven to those on each side ofthe issue. Debates intensified.Confusion spread. Once theybecame confused about whator who Jesus was, everythingconnected with Jesus becameconvoluted.

There were two Greekwords used to define, and di-vide, the two main factions.One si de used th e word“Homousion” and the otherused “Homoiousion” – just a slight dif-ference in spelling. One means “sameas” and the other one means “similarto” – in reference to Jesus’ relationshipto his Father. Those on one side believedJesus was the same as the Father, andpeople on the other side believed Hewas similar to the Father. Being “simi-lar” to the Father is a great deal differ-ent from being the “same as” the Fa-ther. Only two letters divide the words,but he concepts are worlds apart.

How can we believe something thatis unknown? I may say that I believe in

something, but, in reality, ignorance ofa thing prevents me from having faithin it. The true test of faith in somethingis when you come up against a situa-tion where you have to make a vital de-cision based upon that. At that point, ifyou can’t understand the issue, then itis impossible to have faith in it becausethe decision cannot be based upon in-telligent data. Words are cheap, andchurches are purveyors of cheap words.

One doe s not need exhaustiveknowledge of God in order to haveenough intelligent data upon which tobase reasonable faith. However, onemust have at least SOME intelligent datafrom which to work. I certainly cannotfathom the depths of Yahweh’s won-ders, but I do have a large body of evi-dence – both tangible and mental –upon

which to base my belief in his laws.Therefore, while I do not fully under-stand all his wonders, ample proofs ofhis existence and purposes are open tome. Thus, He is not a mystery, althoughsome people have tried to describe Himas such.

Recently, in a published rebuttal tomy teaching on the manhood of Jesus,a minister quoted the famous Federalist(i.e. Centralist) lawyer, Daniel Webster,as a witness for the necessity of mys-tery concerning Jesus. Webster wasquoted as saying:

“I could never believe in a Jesuswhom I could understand!”

In other words, he claimed thatJesus was an unknowable mystery.Webster, and apparently the ministerwho quoted Webster, both agreed thattheir Christ must be unknowable in or-der to believe in Him. Thus, their lovefor mystery brought them both to theabsurd conclusion that Jesus must be anenigma to be credible!

Obviously, mystery religions flour-ish yet today … often cloaked in “Chris-tian” trappings.

Jesus said “I AM THE WAY, THETRUTH AND THE LIFE!” Turn thatinto an unknowable mystery and it be-comes patent nonsense!

Je su s re buke d thewoman at the well for notknowing what she was wor-shipping (John 4:22). Paulwarned the Corinthians tonot be beguiled away from“the simplicity that is inChri st” (I I Co rinthi an s11:3).

The Gospel , as de -scribed in I John 5:20, wasthat God was making Him-self more known to men:

20. The Son of God iscome, and has given usan understanding, thatwe may know Him that istrue, and we are in Himthat is true, in his SonJesus Christ. This is thetrue God, and eonian life.(This is the Bible defini-tion of “eonian life” —usually mistranslated“eternal life”)

Again in John 17:

1. These words spoke Jesus, andlifted up his eyes to heaven, andsaid, Father, the hour is come;glorify your Son, that your Son alsomay glorify you:

2. As you have given him authorityover all flesh, that he should giveeonian life to as many as you havegiven him.

3. And this is eonian life: * that theymight know you the only trueGod, and Jesus Christ, whomyou have sent.


In Acts 17, Paul publicly confrontedthe falacy of worshipping MYSTERI-OUS (unknowable) GODS.

22. Then Paul stood in the midst ofMars’ hill, and said, You men ofAthens, I perceive that in all thingsyou are very demon-fearing.

23. For as I passed by, and beheldyour devotions, I found an altarwith this inscription, TO THEUNKNOWN GOD. Whom thereforeyou ignorantly worship, him declareI unto you!”

Churches claim that belief in Jesusand Yahweh as ONE-and-the-same isthe primary test for being a Christian.However, James 2:19 says:

19. You believe that there is ONEGOD; you do well: the devils(Judaizers) also believe, andtremble.

So much for that test!Faithful Christians were executed as

“heretics” by religious tyrants whoruledEngland and Rome not too long ago.These Christians were martyred for re-fusing to confess an “unknowable” godthe church called THE TRINITY.

Do you have an “UNKNOWNGOD?” Jesus prayed to Yahweh:

3. And this is eonian life, that theymight know you, the only true God,AND Jesus Christ, whom you havesent.

Jesus says this understanding isequated with “LIFE.” If we forget thiswe lose the light of Christ!

“But, it is impossible to fully un-derstand God!” you may say. So what?Man has not fully understood anything!Try fully understanding a commonflower some day. Or smaller yet, try“knowing” all there is to know about ahuman cell – or smaller yet, DNA. Shall

we class these things as “mysterious”(unknowable) along with “the unknowngod”? You see, it means nothing to saythat we can’t know all there is to knowabout God. That’s a given. So what’sthe point?

The issue is whether or not God isknowable – not whether we can under-stand Him exhaustively! The simple,reasonable answer is YES! God hasmade Himsel f knowab le – no texhaustiv ley, but knowable. In fact,Yahweh’s express purpose in creatingJesus was to reveal more of Himself tomankind!

Playwrights and magicians needmystery. Christians don’t!

Scriptures un-mysteriously show usprinciples of truth which identify ourCrea tor. We should focus on thatport ion of God which has been re-vealed. It is this portion to which we canre late rational ly. It is il logica l andunproductive to focus upon any other.To focus upon those dimensions of Godwhich we cannot understand is to giveourselves to blind speculation. It is likesetting sail on a ship without a rudderand without a map. If you like mysteryand mysticism … then have at it. Youand your descendants will continue sail-ing in circles for ever.

If your god is unknowable and youcannot identify him, then you don’tknow what you are worshipping! If youcannot know him, how will you knowwhen some serpent preacher slips thewrong god into your life? Or, has it al-ready happened?

THE GUARDED MYSTERY?

Church organizations have survived,and still exist today, on their ability toconfuse, frighten and plant in the mindsof the people an insurmountable wallof mystery around the Bible. For centu-ries, the CatholicChurch didn’t want theBible, or writings from the Bible, in the

possession of the common man. Untilthe printing press, Bibles had to be cop-ied by hand and were not generally avail-able for the people.

In the 1600’s and 1700’s someChristian men began to question theformerly unquestioned “mystery” of theBible and Christianity in general. Dur-ing that time, several challenges to the“incomprehensibleness” of the Scrip-tures were raised. John Toland, an hon-est and learned man, was one who ques-tioned this mystery. In 1696, he wrote:CHRISTIANITY NOT MYSTERIOUS– or – A TREATISE SHOWING THATTHERE IS NOTHING IN THE GOS-PEL CONTRARY TO REASON –NOT ABOVE IT: AND THAT NOCHRISTIAN DOCTRINE CAN BEPROPERLY CALLED A MYSTERY(books had long titles in those days).

According to John Toland, you can-not claim a mystery as your doctrine,nor can you reasonably say that youbelieve in it. This, then, would indicatethat the condition called “blind faith” isactually a misnomer since it is impos-sible to believe in something you can-not fathom. What is usually called “blindfaith” is actually nothing more than“gambling” – and that, with no skill andno attempt to learn the rules of the gameor the odds against you.

The religious establishment of JohnToland’s and Thomas Jefferson’s daywas almost as powerful as government.These two recognized the threat, andhad enough presence of mind to stayalert. Today, Americans are lulled tosleep and are unwilling to even thinkcritically. The battle is being lost becausetoo few on the side of reason and logicare willing to engage it.

Religious people seem to love mys-tery. They fight against the thinking, rea-soning Christianwho dislike mystery andprefer answers and concise definitions.I’m one of those people who has no usefor mysteries. Mysteries do me no good.I live by knowledge and understanding.

Jesus said, “Behold I show you (Iexplain) the mystery” (I Cor. 15:51). A“mystery,” in the Bible, is not an un-solvable enigma. It is not hidden truth.Rather it is truth we have yet to under-stand. The atom was once a “mystery,”to mankind, but now scientists knowquite a bit about it. It is no longer a“mystery.” In this passage, Jesus wasshowing them how to understand anddispel the “mystery.” And that’s whatthe Bible is all about: understanding!

* “EONIAN LIFE” appears several times in the New Testament, and in EnglishBibles is usually mistranslated “eternal life.” However, an “eon” is an “age . An“age” has a beginning and an end, and therefore is not eternal . “Eonian life” iscorrectly “eon life”; “age life”; or “life of the age .” It refers specifically to thenew life with which Christ “raises” his people in this New Covenant Age. “Eonianlife” is defined in Romans 5:21; John 17:3; I John 5:20. It is the present spiri tuallife in those who are “born from above,” and is not to be confused with thefuture “raising” to immortality.


A cardinal rule for the thinking manis: “Never build upon a doctrine thatyou don’t understand.” And since thereare still many things we don’t under-stand, this caution will prevent us frommaking many mistakes.

John Toland said it this way: “Re-serve judgment on whatever is uncer-tain and assent only to clear precepts.”That philosophy is great advice for any-one, especially a Christian. However, itappears that Christians today are satis-fied to sit back, go to sleep, and let oth-ers do their thinking for them. If some-how they could be convinced to not ac-cept anything they don’t understand,you’d see a revival immediately. If theywould take their Bibles in their hands,instead of leaving them on the coffeetable, and begin to discover truth by rea-son, rather than relying on the mysti-cism of priest-craft, we would see achange.

In this study, we are looking forreasonable answers. Hopefully, reason-able Christians will investigate it. How-ever, those who believe that Jesus andhis Father are one-and-the-same maydismiss the question out of hand and callit blasphemy.

The Bible advises us to hear a mat-ter before we attempt to answer it –oth-erwise, we prove ourselves to be fools(Proverbs 18:13).

DEITY? -OR- MAN?

The Bible says, in Matthew 19:

16. And, behold, one came and saidto him, (to Jesus) Good Master,what good thing shall I do, that Imay have eonian life?

17. And he said to him, (Jesusanswered) Why do you call megood? there is none good but one,and that is God:

Jesus excluded himself from the sta-tus of “good,” and by that same actionalso excluded himself from the positionof “the Father.” He said ONLY his Fa-ther was good! Here is a clear distinc-tion between Jesus and the Father.

From our perspective, we’d tend tosay that Jesus was good. However, fromJesus’ perspective, He insistedthat therewas still a difference between Yahwehand man. Yahweh, only, was “good” inthat sense.

Hebrews 2:

17. Wherefore in all things it behovedhim (Jesus) to be made like untohis brethren, that he might be amerciful and faithful high priest inthings pertaining to God, to makereconciliation for the sins of thepeople.

18. For in that he himself has suf-fered being tempted, he is able tosuccour them that are tempted.

Jesus was tempted to sin. God, onthe other hand, cannot be tempted –according to James 1:13:

13. Let no man say when he istempted, I am tempted of God: forGod cannot be tempted with evil,neither does He tempt any man.

Now look at Phi lippians 2:5-6.Those of you who normally read theKing James Version may be surprisedat how this differs from the Greek text.For the sake of clarity, we’ll read fromthe King James first, then correct itaccording to the Greek text. You willsee the confusion the translators causedon this question.

King James Version:

5. Let this mind be in you, which wasalso in Christ Jesus:

6. Who, being in the form of God,thought it not robbery to be equalwith God:

The KJV translators made it soundlike Jesus equals God. But the Greekreads quite differently.

Corrected according to the Greek:


6. Who, subsisting (existing under), inthe form (image) of God, thoughtnot to seize equality with God.

The Greek text says the oppositeof the KJV. Jesus, the man – the “sec-ond Adam” – followed the way of hu-mility as a servant. This was in contrastto the way of the “first Adam” who triedto “seize” godship – as in Genesis 3.

Remember the serpent’s lie:

5. ...in the day that you eat thereof,then your eyes shall be opened(you’ll gain wisdom), and you shallbe as gods...

Eve took of the fruit and ate, andgave it also to Adam and he ate.

Adam fell for the line – i.e., he be-lieved that he could be his own god –his own law maker. Jesus, in contrast,knew better. He resisted the temptationand rejected the serpent’s lie. Jesus suc-ceeded where Adam failed.

Chr ist’s sta tement aga ins t manreaching for godship is shown clearly inPhilippians 2:

7. But (Jesus) humbled himself, andtook the form of a servant, andcame in the likeness of men.


Jesus could have laid claim to hisroyal heritage. But, instead, He chose alife of humility. He became a servant.

This makes perfect sense when youread it the way it was meant. But itdoesn’t make a bit of sense if you readit straight from the King James Version.The King James translators would havehad us think that it was Yahweh whohumbled himself before man.What non-sense! Yahweh was glorified! He did notlimit himself in Jesus; rather, He dis-played his limit less power by raisingJesus to immortality.

8. And being found in fashion as aman, he (Jesus) humbled himselfand became obedient unto death,even the death of the cross.

The Son died. The Father didn’t.The churches have muddied the wa-

ters. They incorporated paganism, con-fused scripture, and sold the pagan no-tion of gods becoming human. Theyrewrote scripture and incorporated theirmysteries and mysticism. Pagan theol-ogy was adopted into churches.

We read a warning concerning thisin II Corinthians 11:

3. But I fear, lest by any means, asthe serpent (a religious con man)beguiled Eve through his subtilty,so your minds should be corruptedfrom the simplicity that is in Christ.

Now if Paul described Christ with aterm like “simplicity,” he certainlywasn’treferring to an incomprehensible “Trin-ity” – the very antithesis of simplicity.

In verse 4, Paul continues explain-ing this point:

4. For if he (a false prophet) thatcomes preaches another Jesus,whom we have not preached, or ifyou receive another spirit, whichyou have not received, or anothergospel, which you have not ac-cepted, (I fear that) you might welltolerate him .

In other words, Paul feared theCorinthians might tolerate, or acceptfalse prophets who preached “otherchrists.” There were other christs intheworld. There were false christs and pa-gan christs . BUT TO US THERE ISONLY ONE TRUE JESUS – THECHRIST OF ISRAEL . Thus , Paulwarned them against religious serpentsand con men.

THE TRINITY

Unfortunately, the popular transla-tions of the Bible today were compiledby translators who wanted to sell Biblesmore than they wanted to uphold truth.Prejudiced by church tradition, theytwisted the translations to fit acceptedchurch doctrines. Thus, they promoted“other christs.” We find this in severalcases ... some of which we shall show.

One such perversion, which wehave shown, is Philippians 2:6. In thispassage, the King James Version saysthat Jesus thought it was OK to claimequality with God. But in the Greek, itsays He thought NOT to claim (seize)equality with God (Yahweh). Its the op-posite meaning.

In my sermon, “The Essence andthe Operations of the Holy Spirit,” I ex-plained the definition of “holy spirit.”That study showed the impossibility ofthe Trinitydoctrine by proving that “holyspirit” is not a person, but rather powerand motivation from God. When youtake one of the three elements awayfrom the Trinity, you lose the Trinity.

However, some people may still tryto imagine a Trinity with one-third ofitself (the holy spirit part) missing. TheTrinity is generally symbolized by a tri-angle, so to illustrate this, you can breakoff one side of a triangle, leaving theother two sides – thus, two-thirds of aTrinity. There you have a symbol forthosewho will acknowledge that the holyspirit is not a person, but still try to hangon to the other two parts. This , of

course, is equally impossible.John addresses Christian Gnostics

in I John 4. Gnostics had the strangebelief that Jesus was not material (physi-cal). They believed that anything mate-rial (anything they could touch and see)was evil. By the same token, everythinggood had to be “spirit” and “invisible.”

They reasoned, then, that Jesus wasgood and, therefore, couldn’t have beenmaterial (in the flesh). A natural conse-quence of this “spiritism” doctrine is theGnostic doctrine of the immortal soul.In the case of Jesus, they said that Hedid not come “in the flesh.” His physi-cal body was not really Him. It was onlya “shadow” of his true self which wasan “invisible spirit being,” or “soul” thatdwelled behind, somewhere near or in-side of the flesh body.

Now, let’s logically consider theirbelief compared with modern churchteachings. If that body was not Jesus,then what died on the cross? Was it onlysome discarded flesh? Or, did the realJesus die?

This, then, brings us to the bottomli ne : DID JESUS DIE ON THECROSS? That’s really the issue. Askyourself! Settle that in your mind – oneway or the other.

You may be surprised to learn thatmany churchorganizations denyChrist’sdeath on the cross. Think about it. IfJesus was Yahweh, or one-third of animmortal Trinity God, or one-half of anunknowable double god, He could nothave died on thecross!At most He couldhave only “half died.”


Yahweh cannot die! Immortal is notmortal.

So, the question is NOT, “Did someflesh die?” The question is, “Did Jesusdi e? ” Most chur chgoer s, li ke theGnostics, agree that He didn’t. Theyclaim that only some flesh died – Jesuscontinued living in another form.

However, the Bible attributes no im-mortality to Jesus until after Yahwehraised Him from the dead.

I John 4, says this concern ingGnostics:

1. Beloved, believe not every spirit(intent of the heart), but try thespirits (test them) whether they areof God: because many falseprophets (serpents) are gone outinto the world.

2. Hereby know you the Spirit of God:Every spirit that confesses thatJesus Christ is come in the fleshis of God:

3. And every spirit that confesses notthat Jesus Christ is come in theflesh is not of God: and this is thatspirit of antechrist, whereof youhave heard that it should come;and even now already it is in theworld.

The word translated “antichrist” inEnglish Bibles is actually from the Greekantechrist which means “in place ofChrist.” It doesn’tmean “againstChrist”– it means “in place of Christ.” What,then, John te ll ing us about theseGnostics? They were preaching “an-other Christ” (ante) in place of the trueChrist. The Christ they preached wasnot the one who died on the cross.

II John addresses this too:

7. For many deceivers are enteredinto the world, who confess not thatJesus Christ is come in theflesh. This is a deceiver and anantechrist.

9. Whosoever transgresses andabides not in the doctrine ofChrist, has not God. He thatabides in the doctrine of Christ hehas both the Father and the Son.

10. If there come any unto you, andbring not this doctrine, receive himnot into your house, neither bid himGod speed:

11. For he that bids him God speed is

partaker of his evil deeds.

Now, notice! This is NOT talkingabout Yahweh coming in the flesh. It istalking about Jesus coming “in theflesh.” Some folks seemingly read theword “Yahweh” into the place where“Jesus” appears, assuming that it meansthe same thing. This is due to the pre-conditioning of their minds by churchtradition.

This is not talking about Yahweh.“In the flesh” is a phrase meaning thatJesus was a flesh-and-blood man whowas 100% mortal. It does not mean aflesh body with a so-cal led immortal“spiri t” inside it. Paul was warningagainst that kind of teaching. As in IJohn 4 (above), this Gnostic doctrine is“antechrist.”

The Gnostics portrayed a christ thatdidn’t die. They claimed He was an eter-nal spirit being occupying “a flesh en-velope,” and that He escaped the fleshwhen it died on the cross. Therefore,He didn’t really die, and any christ thatdid not die on the cross is ANOTHERCHRIST — not our Savior.

So, here is a good question for you:“Did your Christ die on the cross?” Ifnot, you have “another christ.” Youthink about that because there is noquestion more important to your abilityto understand scripture and serve theKing.

II Corinthians, chapter 5:

18. And all things are of God, whohath reconciled us to himself byJesus Christ, and hath given to usthe ministry of reconciliation;

19. To wit, that God was in Christ,reconciling the world unto himself...

The Father was IN Jesus. However,not ALL of Him was in Jesus since theinfinite Yahweh cannot be contained orlimited. To say that He was “in” Jesusis not the same as saying “He wasJesus.” Yahweh is in us too, but thatdoesn’t make us Yahweh.

Remember, our question is notwhether Jesus had the Father in him,but rather, “Was Jesus the Father?

WHAT IS A GOD?

We have shown some of the in-comprehensible ramblings of the Trini-tarians. Another branch of Gnostic-re-

lated doctrine teaches that Jesus is one-half of a two-part god. It is a form ofDualism, with two equal parts as com-pared to three parts in the Trinity. Mostof Churchianity falls somewhere underTriunism or Dualism. Both concepts arepagan and pre-date Christ.

Before we can settle the questionof who Jesus was, and is, we must firstdefine some terms. Without definingterms we can’t be sure that we’re ask-ing the right questions.

The first term we must define is theword “God.” This old English word isfrom Anglo-Saxon origin. It means“thatwhich is invoked”;“anyone oranythingthat is worshipped.” “Invoked” means“to be called upon, or praised.”

The word “god”can apply to Israel’sCreator God: Yahweh. It can also fit anyof the gods of other nations. In fact, itcan fit anything, or any person, that’scalled upon or prayed to.

In I Corinthians 8:5, we read,“thereare many gods and many lords.” TheGreek word for “god,” is “theos.”“Theos” means deity, or anyone whois es teemed and held above thepeople. Different cultures and differentpeople have different deities that theycall upon and worship. “Theos” is al-ways rendered “god” in English. Its usedin the New Testament for any and allgods. When you read the word “theos”in the Greek New Testament remem-ber that the word comes from a lan-guage that was based on pagan usageas well as Christian. It can refer to apagan god, or it can refer to Yahweh –depending upon the context.

In English, “god” is as broad inscope as the Greek “theos.” Therefore,it works well as an English translationof “theos.” The words were applied thesame in both cultures. Both cultures hadvarious, multiple gods. The old Saxongods, Thor and Odin, are examples ofhow it was applied by our Europeanancestors.

The Old Testament Hebrew wordfor “god” is “elohim.” Again, the En-glish “god” is an adequate translation ifone understands its historical meaning.“Elohim” means mighty one, or mightyones. It can be singu lar or plural .“Elohim” is used in the Old Testamentto refer to the Creator, as well as to othergods. In other words, the Creator iscalled “elohim,” and so are heathengodsand idols such as Baal,Chemosh,Dagonand others. And what’s even more sur-prising is that “elohim” is also commonly


used for judges and kings, as in Psalms82:

1. GOD stands in the congregationof the mighty; he judges among thegods (elohim).

This body of “gods” refers to thejudges in Israel. Some Bibles indicatethis in their marginal references. Yah-weh judges the judges.

2. How long will ye judge unjustly,and accept the persons of thewicked? Selah.

3. Defend the poor and fatherless: dojustice to the afflicted and needy.

4. Deliver the poor and needy: ridthem out of the hand of the wicked(unjust judges; flesh-and-bloodmen).

5. They know not, neither will theyunderstand; they walk on indarkness: all the foundations of theearth are out of course.

6. I have said, You are gods(elohim); and all of you are childrenof the most High.

Even Moses was an “elohim.” Exo-dus 7:

1. And the Lord said to Moses, See, Ihave made you a god (elohim) toPharaoh: and Aaron your brothershall be your prophet.

In John 10, we find another refer-ence to this:

34. Jesus answered them, Is it notwritten in your law (the Old Testa-ment), I said, You are gods?

Websters 1828 Dictionary defines“god” as:

1) The supreme being; Jehovah.2) A false god or a heathen deity.3) A prince, a ruler, a magistrate or a

judge.

Thus, we can see deeper into thedefinition and historical usage of thisword. The historical aspect is especiallyimportant because we’re considering itsusage in our most ancient document: theBible.

Now, when we ask the question,“ISJESUS GOD?” what are we asking?

A. Is Jesus called upon? Yes, Heis. We call upon Jesus. When we praywe call upon Him.

B. Is Jesus worshipped? Yes, Jesusis worshipped.

C. Is Jesus a mighty one? Oh yes,He certainly is a Mighty One! He is ourMighty King!

Thus, by this criteria Jesus can cer-tainly be considered a “god” – but, onlyif you have an adequate understandingof the meaning and Bible usage of theterm. Otherwise, such a statementcouldlead you to the wrong conclusion.

Thus, from the evidence that we’vefound, we can say that Jesus is a god(i.e. one who is worshipped; a mightyone). However, that is quite differentfrom saying that Jesus is Yahweh!

CONTRASTS

Now that we’ve defined “god,” itbecomes apparent that our orig inalquestion is inadequate. It is now clearthat we must ask more than whetherJesus is “God.” We must know if Jesusis YAHWEH! We must de te rminewhether Jesus and Yahweh are two be-ings, or onlyone being. That is the cruxof this issue.

The word “god” is not a name (nota proper noun). It’s a title. It is genericand can refer to ANY god. Therefore,in order to help keep this issue clear aswe study it, we’ll need to use the propernames whenever possible so we’ll knowwhich “god” we are talking about at thatmoment.

The name of the Creator God ofIsrael isYahweh. The name of our Sav-ior is Jesus. So, for the sake of claritywe should use their proper names,rather than their titles, as much as pos-sible.

Let’s consider some identi fyingcharacteristics of both Jesus and Yah-weh. Are they identical, or different?

_________________________________

1 One is the Father; Oneis the Son_________________________________

John 5:

19. Then answered Jesus and said tothem, Verily, verily, I say to you,The Son can do nothing of himself,

but what He sees the Father do:for what things soever He does,these also the Son does likewise.

I Corinthians 8:

4b, ...an idol is nothing in the world,and there is none other God butone.

5. For though there be that are calledgods, whether in heaven or inearth, (as there be gods many, andlords many,)

6. But to us there is but one God, theFather, of whom are all things, andwe in him; AND one Lord JesusChrist, through whom are allthings, and we through him.

1 John 4:

15. Whosoever shall confess thatJesus is the Son of God, Goddwells in him, and he in God.

Many similar scriptures clearly de-lineate between Father and Son - iden-tifying them as two, separate, distinctpersonalities. By definition, sons issueforth from fathers, and fathers precedetheir sons. Otherwise, a father is not afather, and a son is not a son. A soncannot be his own father, nor can a fa-ther be his own son. Such an absurditywould nullify the meanings of the terms“father” and “son” and render the lan-guage useless.

_________________________________

2 One is the Creator; Oneis the Creation

_________________________________

Colossians 1:

12. Giving thanks unto the Father,which hath made us meet to bepartakers of the inheritance of thesaints in light:

13. Who has delivered us from thepower of darkness, and hastranslated us into the kingdom ofhis dear Son:

14. In whom we have redemptionthrough his blood, even the forgive-ness of sins:


15. Who is the image of the invisibleGod, the firstborn of all creation.

This says that Jesus was created.He is “the firstborn” (greatest) of all crea-tures (i.e. things created). If Jesus wascreated, then it had to be Yahweh whocreated Him. If Yahweh created Jesus,then Jesus cannot be Yahweh. The Cre-ator is not the Created. The logic issimple.

Of course, someone might argue,“But, doesn’t this scripture go on to tellus that Jesus created all things that arein heaven and earth? That must meanthat Jesus was the Creator!”

16. For in him were all things cre-ated, that are in heaven, and thatare in earth, visible and invisible,whether they be thrones, ordominions, or principalities, orpowers: all things were createdthrough him, and for him:

“All things created” (i.e. this uni-verse) were created ultimately for theSon who was to inherit all things. Thisverse has been used by some to suggestthat Jesus was the Creator in Genesis.

But what does it really say? Yahwehcreated all things for Jesus the Son –inheritor of all things. They were cre-ated in (for) Him. Dominions,principali-ties, thrones, powers – all things are IN/FOR Him.

_________________________________

3 One knows all; theother doesn’t

_________________________________

Matthew 24:

3. And as he sat upon the mount ofOlives, the disciples came to Him(Jesus) privately, saying, Tell us,when shall these things be? andwhat shall be the sign of yourpresence (judgment), and of theend of the age (fall of Jerusalem)?

The disciples were asking about thecoming judgment and destruction uponJerusalem. They wanted to know whento expect the prophesied judgment.Jesus’ answer was interesting. In verses3-36, He gave them some detail as towhat they should watch for. Then, Hefinally answers their question directly inverse 36:

36. But of that day and hour knowsno man, no, not the angels ofheaven, but my Father only.

The Father knew, but Jesus didn’t._________________________________

4 One was invisible; theother wasn’t

____________________________

John 1:

1. In the beginning was the logos(i.e. the communication), and thelogos was for (not “with”) God, andGod was the logos (i.e. the com-munication expressed the personof God).

14. And the logos (the communica-tion) was made flesh, (manifestedin a man) and dwelt among us, andwe beheld his glory, the glory asof the only begotten of the Father,full of grace and truth.

Men beheld Jesus: the Logos ofGod. They saw Him and touched Him.But, no man has seen Yahweh.

18. No man has seen Yahweh atany time; the only begotten Son,which is in the bosom of theFather, he has declared him.

1 John 1:

1. That which was from the beginning(i.e. Yahweh’s logos), which wehave heard, which we have seenwith our eyes, which we havelooked upon, and our hands havehandled, of the logos of life;

2. For the life (in the logos) wasmanifested, and we have seen it,and bear witness, and show to youthat *eonian life (the spiritualawakening), which was with theFather, and was manifested tous;

John 5:37, Jesus said:

37. And the Father himself, which hassent me, has borne witness of me.You have neither heard his voiceat any time, nor seen his shape.

1 John 4:

12. No man has seen God at anytime...

No man has seen or heard the ac-tual form or voice of the Father at anytime. But, Jesus was both seen andheard. We are never directed to con-fess that Jesus is the Father. We arecommanded to confess that Jesus isTHE SON!

_________________________________

5 One is “ever existant”;the other isn’t

_________________________________

The name “Yahweh” is a Hebrewword meaning “ONE WHO EXISTS,”or “SELF-EXISTENT ONE” ... from aprime root “to exist,” or “to be,” in thesense of non-ending. His nature, as wellas his self -proclaimed name, clearlyshows the impossibility of Him ceasingto exist – even for a minute. Yahwehcannot die unless He is a fraud! Hisname declares it! His Word declares it!He simply cannot cease to be! Jesus,on the other hand, died and ceased toexist for several hours. That establishesa big difference between Yahweh andJesus.

It is a basic premise of scripture thatYahweh cannot die.

Psalm 102 speaks of Yahweh:

25. Of old have you laid the founda-tion of the earth: and the heavensare the work of your hands.

26. They shall perish, but You shallendure: yea, all of them shall waxold like a garment; as a vestureshall you change them, and theyshall be changed:

27. But you are the same, and youryears shall have no end.

Exodus 3:

14. And God said to Moses, I am theOne that exists. Thus shall yousay to the children of Israel, Hewho exists sends me to you.

Yahweh EXISTS! He never stopsexisting. He is Yahweh! But Jesus died.

I Corinthians 15:

3. For I delivered to you first of all thatwhich I also received, how thatChrist died for our sins accordingto the scriptures;


_________________________________

6 One became “hungry”;the other didn’t

_________________________________

Matthew 4:

1. Then was Jesus led up byinspiriation into the wilderness tobe tempted of the devil.

2. And when he had fasted forty daysand forty nights, he was afterwardhungry.

Hunger is one of the commonneedsof a flesh-and-blood mortal. It’s an in-teresting point when comparing the dif-ference between Yahweh and man.

_________________________________

7 One was tempted; onecannot be tempted

_____________________________

1. Then was Jesus led up of the spiritinto the wilderness to be temptedof the devil.

3. And when the tempter came tohim, (when He was hungry) hesaid, If you are the Son of God,command that these stones bemade bread.

In Hebrews, we find the reason itwas necessary for Him to be tempted.Hebrews 2:

14. Forasmuch then as the childrenhave shared of flesh and blood,he (Jesus) also himself likewiseshared of the same; (He was fleshand blood, the same as his broth-ers) that through death he mightdestroy him that had the power ofdeath, that is, the devil;

15. And deliver them who throughfear of death were all their lifetimesubject to bondage.

16. For verily he is not somewhereministering to angels, but he isministering to the seed of Abra-ham.

17. Wherefore in all things it behovedhim to be made like unto hisbrethren, that he might be amerciful and faithful high priest inthings pertaining to God, to make

reconciliation for the sins of thepeople.

18. For in that he himself has suf-fered being tempted, he is able tosuccour them that are tempted.

Jesus resisted sin, but He wastempted. Temptation, initself, is not sin.“Sin” is when we give in to temptation,as in James 1:

14. But every man is tempted, whenhe is drawn away of his own lust,and enticed.

15. Then when lust has conceived, itbrings forth sin: and sin, when it isfinished, brings forth death.

Yahweh cannot be tempted! Hecould not have been Jesus.

James 1:13:

13. Let no man say when he istempted, I am tempted of God(Yahweh): for God cannot betempted with evil, neither temptshe any man:

_________________________________

8 One slept; the otherdoesn’t

_________________________________

Matthew 8:

23. And when He (Jesus) wasentered into a ship, his disciplesfollowed him,

24. And, behold, there arose a greattempest in the sea, insomuch thatthe ship was covered with thewaves: but He (Jesus) wasasleep.

Jesus must have been pretty tiredto fall asleep in one of those little boatsbeing tossed about in a storm on theSea of Galilee. He became weary andHe slept. Yahweh doesn’t get weary orsleep.

Psalm 121:

4. Behold, He (Yahweh) that keepsIsrael shall neither slumber norsleep.

Isaiah 40:

28. Have you not known? have younot heard, that the Everlasting

God, Yahweh, the Creator of theends of the earth, faints not,neither is weary?

_________________________________

9 One prayed to theother

_____________________________

Luke 22:

41. And He (Jesus) ... knelt down,and prayed,

42. Saying, Father, if You are willing,remove this cup from me: never-theless not my will, but yours, bedone.

Jesus prayed to his Father for help.He acknowledged two sets of wills:

a. His will, andb. His Father’s will.

John 17:

1. These words spoke Jesus, andlifted up his eyes to heaven, andsaid, Father, the hour is come;glorify your Son, that Your Son alsomay glorify You:

And then Jesus went on, in chap-ter 17, to pray a long prayer to his Fa-ther, asking for strength and guidancepertaining to his ministry and help forhis disciples._________________________________

10 One “increased”; theother “changes not”

_________________________________

Luke 2:

52. And Jesus increased in wisdomand stature and in favour with Godand man.

If Jesus could increase, or learnsomething, it meant that He was notomniscient (all-knowing). In order to in-crease in wisdom Jesus could not havebeen Yahweh.

Psalm 147:

5. Great is our Lord, and of greatstrength: his understanding isinfinite (unlimited).

Yahweh does not increase! Yahwehis omniscient (all knowing).


_________________________________

11 One was a man; theother wasn’t

_________________________________

John 8:

40. But now you seek to kill me(Jesus), a man that has told youthe truth, which I have heard ofGod:

Acts 2:

22. You men of Israel, hear thesewords; Jesus of Nazareth, a manapproved of God among you bymiracles and wonders and signs,which God did by him in the midstof you, as you yourselves alsoknow.

Some might protest, “If you say thatJesus was a man, then you’re worship-ping a man.”

It was Jesus himself who said Hewas a man. However, He was a veryspecial “man.” He was a natural manfor 33 years. Then He was raised im-mortal and was no more a natural man.The risen, immortal Jesus then was nolonger “just a man” … and the Christ Iworship is now an Immortal.

But Yahweh NEVER was a man!Numbers 23:

19. Yahweh is not a man that heshould lie, neither the son ofman, that he should repent...

Yahweh is not a man, nor the sonof man. On the other hand, Jesus WAS“a man,” and “the Son of man.”

_________________________________

12 One has “authority”;the other has “power”

_________________________________

There is an important differencebetween the two.

Matthew 28:

18. And Jesus came and spoke tothem, saying, All authority (not“power”) is given to me in heavenand in earth.

Jesus was givenauthority [“exousia”-Gk]. Authority comes from a highersource. It must be delegated downward.

Authority exists only when a highersource delegates it. Like links in a chain,positions of authority are completely de-pendent upon the higher links. Cut oneof the higher links and all support is cutoff for the lower links.

Authority always comes from ahigher authority, or a power that isabove all. Jesus was given authority ...which could not have been given unlessthere was someone higher to give it.That higher source was Yahweh.

Bible translators have confused “au-thority” with “power.” The King JamesVersion translators were some of theworst offenders in this. The KJV trans-lators indiscriminately used both wordsinterchangeably! But they are clearlyNOT interchangeable, and some latertranslators have corrected that error.

As I pointed out, “authority” comesfrom the Greek “exousia.” Power, onthe other hand, comes from the Greekword, “dunamis,” from which we getour English word, “dynamite.” If youknow how dynamite works, you knowhow power works. Dynamite doesn’trequire authority – its power is intrinsic.

“Power” exists on its own ... asYahweh exists on his own. He has allpower. No one delegates authority toYahweh. There is no one above Yah-weh. Yahweh’s “power” stands by vir-tue of intr insic strength. He has allpower and strength. No one is bigenough to overpower Yahweh.

There is no group, nor anything,anywhere, that can equal or surpassYahweh’s power. There are lesser pow-ers, but Yahweh is the ultimate power.Powers can delegate authority to lesserentities.

Understanding the difference be-tween power and authority will help youalso to understand Romans 13:

1. Let every soul be subject to thehigher authorities. For there is noauthority but of God: the authori-ties that be are ordained of God.

We recognize all higher authorities.But remember, there is no viable author-ity except under Yahweh. That is justcommon sense. If Yahweh is the ulti-mate power, then He must delegate allauthority. All authority must come fromHim.

Can any lawful authority exist ex-cept under Yahweh? No! It is impossible!

By the same token, if Yahwehvested Jesus with “al l au thor it y in

heaven and earth,” can there exist anytrue authority except under Jesus? No!It is impossible! Thus, there are manyfalse “authorities” who claim be such,but have no true authority because theyare not in accord with Jesus.

Some men say they get their au-thority from a State Government, orfrom the Federal Government, or fromthe Constitution, or from the Soviet Po-litburo, or from the United Nations orsome other source. But, these are notunder Jesus, and their “authority” is bo-gus. It is not true authority! It is coun-terfeit because no authority can existunless it is aligned under Yahweh andhis Son.

The only way that authority canwork is if a “power” delegates it. Anauthority must be ordained of God inorder to be viable. Any so-called author-ity that is not ordained (authorized) ofGod is fake and we should not honor it.

John 17:

1. These words spoke Jesus, andlifted up his eyes to heaven, andsaid, Father, the hour is come;glorify your Son, that your Son alsomay glorify you:

2. As you have given him authorityover all flesh, that he should giveeonian life to as many as you havegiven him.

3. And this is eonian life: that theymight know You the only true God,and Jesus Christ, whom You havesent. (Here is the Bible definition of“eonian life”– usually mistranslated“eternal life”)

18. As You have sent Me into theworld, even so have I also sentthem (the disciples) into the world.

Yahweh sent (authorized) Jesus.Jesus then sent (authorized) the disciples.This shows the order of authority: theorder of rank.

DEFINE YOUR TERMS

Is Jesus God? The question raisesmany thoughts. However, we haveshown that the question, as posed, isinadequate since the word “god” is notdefinitive. We have approached this sub-ject this way to teach you the pitfalls ofillogic so no one can put you on the spot


by tricking you into trying to answer thewrong questions, or questions you don’tunderstand. You must make them de-fine their terms so you can understandwhat they’re asking, and, in turn, theycan understand your answer.

This is especially true with the iden-tity of God. It is not enough to call some-one “God.” To fully identify him youmust be more specific.

I Corinthians 8:

2. As concerning therefore the eatingof those things that are offered insacrifice to idols, we know that anidol is nothing in the world, and thatthere is no other God but one.

3. For though there be that are calledgods, whether in heaven or inearth, (as there be gods many,and lords many).

4. But to us there is but one God, theFather, of whom are all things, andwe in him; and one Lord Jesusthe Christ, by whom are all things,and we by him.

If we’re going to use the word“god,” or if we’re going to refer to some-thing or someone as “a god,” we mustdefine our terms. Otherwise we’re go-ing to be misunderstood. There aremany gods out there in the world, butto us there is only one Yahweh. Also,there is only one Lord Jesus Christ.

By the way, the term “deity” is an-othe r non-Bibl ic al wo rd that thechurches borrowed from pagan sources.

_________________________________

13 One raised the otherfrom the grave

____________________________

While one was dead in the grave,the other was alive.

Acts 2:

22. Ye men of Israel, hear thesewords; Jesus of Nazareth, a manapproved of God among you ...

23. Him, ... you have taken, and bywicked hands have crucified andslain:

24. Whom God (Yahweh) hasraised up, having loosed the painsof death: because it was not pos-sible that he should be held by it.

The Ever-existing Yahweh raised upthe dead Jesus.

32. This Jesus has God raised up,whereof we all are witnesses.

Of all the differences between Jesusand Yahweh, this is the most dramatic.Jesus was dead! Then, He was raisedback to life by the One that cannot die.

Acts 4:10:

10. Be it known to you all, and to allthe people of Israel, that by thename of Jesus Christ of Nazareth,whom you crucified, whom Godraised from the dead, even byhim does this man stand herebefore you whole.

Chapter 5:

30. The God of our fathers raisedup Jesus, whom you slew andhanged on a tree.

31. Him has God exalted with hisright hand to be a Prince and aSaviour, for to give repentance toIsrael, and forgiveness of sins.

I Corinthians 15:

14. And if Christ is not risen, then isour preaching vain, and your faithis also vain.

15. Yea, and we are found falsewitnesses of God; because wehave testified of God that Heraised up Christ: whom He raisednot up, if be so that the dead risenot.

Hebrews 13:

20. Now the God of peace, thatbrought again from the dead ourLord Jesus, that great shepherd ofthe sheep, through the blood of theeonian covenant, (i.e., the NewCovenant)

Ephesians 1:

19. And what is the exceedinggreatness of his power toward uswho believe, according to theworking of his mighty power,

20. Which He wrought in Christ, whenHe raised Him from the dead,and set Him at his own right handin the heavenly places,There are

many more verses like the above,but these few should be sufficientto establish the fact that Yahwehwas alive and well during the timethat Jesus was dead – which wasan impossibility if they were oneand the same person.

At this point, someone may ask,“But didn’t Jesus say that He had powerto lay down his own life and that Hehad power to take it again?” This wouldindicate that Jesus raised himself fromthe grave. Admittedly, the King JamesVersion does lend itself to that – at leasta little bit. However, an honest readingof the passage, again, relieves us of thiserror – especially when it is translatedcorrectly.

John 10 is the scripture in question:

17. Therefore does my Father loveme, because I am laying downmy soul that I might receive itagain.

18. No man took it from me, but I amlaying it down of myself. I haveauthority to lay it down, and I haveauthority to receive it again. Thiscommandment (authorization)have I received of my Father.

His Father authorized Him to laydown his soul. That meant more thanmerely dying, as it appears to be sayingin most English versions. Verses 7-16use the illustration of a shepherd who“lays down his soul for the sheep.”This shepherd is not dying to protectthe sheep from the wolves. He was risk-ing more than death for their sakes, tobe sure. “Laying down his soul” meantHe was commiting his whole life (hissoul) to the protection of the sheep.

Again, one must have an accuratedefinition of the word “soul” to under-stand what Jesus said. Quoting ACM’sANTI-THOUGHTCONTROL DICTIO-NARY, the word “soul” is defined:

“Soul” is an identity; how a person ora thing is known. It is the whole compos-ite of traits, characteristics and formwhich define a person or a thing, It is theessential, intrinsic identity that distin-guishes one creature from another.

When Jesus referred to himself asour Shepherd who “lays down his soulfor us,” He was saying that He dedi-cated his whole being for the good and


well being of the sheep. Foregoing hisown pleasure to help the sheep, He “laiddown his soul” for them. The Fatherauthorized Jesus to do this. His deathwas only temporary.

Scripture says that Jesus had “au-thority to receive.” It doesn’t say He had“Power to take,” as the KJV wronglyrenders it. Jesus received “authority.”By the same token, for one to “receive,”another must “GIVE.” Giving and tak-ing requires two parties. Jesus “receivedagain” his soul when his Father raisedHim and gave Him the throne.

Jesus tells us in Matthew 16:

24. Then said Jesus to his disciples,If any man will come after me, lethim deny himself, and take up hiscross, and follow me.

25. For whosoever will save hissoul shall lose it: and whoso-ever will lose his soul for mysake shall find it.

26. For what is a man profited, if heshall gain the whole world, andlose his own soul? or what shall aman give in exchange for his soul?

27. For now the Son of man is to becoming in the glory of his Fatherwith his messengers; and then hewill be giving back to every manaccording to his works.

In exchange for trading in ourworthless souls, Jesus gives back to us anew soul patterned after his own. Thus,we share in the life and spirit ofJesus.That is why Paul said inGalatians 2:

20. I am crucified with Christ: never-theless I live; yet not I, but Christlives in me: and the life which Inow live in the flesh I live by thefaith of the Son of God, who lovedme, and gave himself for me.

(For more on the subject of the soul,see Kingdom Bible Lessons #14 & 15.)

_________________________________

14 One received hisstatus from the other

_________________________________

Acts 2:

36. Therefore let all the house ofIsrael know assuredly, that God

has made that same Jesus,whom you have crucified, bothLord and Christ.

These titles were auathorized (del-egated) by Yahweh.

Philippians 2:

9. Wherefore God also has highlyexalted Him, and given Him aname which is above every name.

10. That at the name of Jesus everyknee should bow, of things inheaven, and things in earth, andthings under the earth;

11. And that every tongue shouldconfess that Jesus the Christ isLord, to the glory of God theFather.

Yahweh was the power of thethrone and the glory. He shared it withJesus by delegating to Him the highestposition of authority under Him.

_________________________________

15 One is “greater” thanthe other

_________________________________

John 14:

28. You have heard how I said to you,I go away (depart life), and comeagain to you (rise again). If youloved me, you would rejoice,because I said, I follow the Father,for my Father is greater than I.

In “going away” (dying) and com-ing again (rising from the grave) Jesus“followed” the Father’s will.

_________________________________

16 One is subject to theother

_____________________________

1 Corinthians 15:

25. For he (Jesus) must reign, till hehas put all enemies under his feet.

26. The last enemy, death, is beingmade powerless.

27. For He (Yahweh) has put allthings, under His (Jesus’) feet. Butwhen He says all things are putunder Him, it is manifest that He

(Yahweh) is excepted, which didput all things under Him (Jesus).

28. And when all things shall besubdued to him (Jesus), then shallthe Son also himself be subjectto Him (Yahweh) that put all thingsunder Him (Jesus), that God maybe all in all.

This tells us that everything, andeveryone, is under Jesus’ authority –except “Him” (Yahweh) to whom evenJesus is subject. Two personalities areindicated here; one in subjection to theother.

_________________________________

17 Onelearned obedience;the other didn’t

_________________________________

1 Timothy 2:

8. Though He were a Son, yetlearned He obedience by thethings which He suffered;

The Son learned discipline. I daresay that even churchgoers would not goso far as to say that Yahweh needed tolearn discipline. Yahweh did not needto grow up or to learn. Jesus, on theother hand, grew up and learned. Thatmeans that He came into the world as anormal child. His conception was super-natural, but his life wasn’t. Jesus grewup naturally, learning obedience throughYahweh’s guidance.

Philippians 2:

8. And being found in fashion as aman, he humbled himself, andbecame obedient unto death,even the death of the cross.

Christ’s obedience is an examplefor us. We can strive to grow in obedi-ence, using him as our example, know-ing He was human just as we are.

_________________________________

18 One mediates for theother

_____________________________

1 Timothy 2:

5. For there is one God, and onemediator between God and men:the man Christ Jesus.


God is above. Man is below. Andthe risen Jesus is the mediator betweenthe two. Here are three levels, if youwill: 1. Yahweh (above); 2. The risenJesus (between); 3. Natural man (below).Three UNEQUAL levels.

It would have been deceptive, if notludicrous, to call Jesus a “mediator” forthe Father if He was actually the Fatherhimself. Furthermore, this illustrationshows the great difference betweenYah-weh and man. The difference is so greatthat Yahweh needed to raise Jesus aboveman to be a Mediator to bridge that gulfbetween Him and man.

Man is not Yahweh, and neither isYahweh a man. Since Jesus was a man,He could not have been Yahweh.

There are scores more scriptures Icould cite. However, these have shownenough contrast to establish a clear dif-ference. If these contrasts have not con-vinced you, then neither will a hundredmore.

RATIONAL THINKING

It should be obvious from both scrip-ture and reason that there are manyholes in the “Jesus is Yahweh” doctrine.No honest Bible student can ignorethem. To ignore these disparities andstubbornly accept the churches’ unex-plainable, undefined doctrine can causea malfunction in your mind.

Mental malfunction can result whenpeople reject obvious truth and hold toobvious error. Such a breach of logic cancreate a psychopathy in the mind. Man’smind is naturally built to work alongchannels of logic and faith. To be healthyand productive the mind requires faithand logic .

Take one, or both, away from amind – or force feed it illogical data, orlies, or force it to ignore or reject obvi-ous truth consistently, and it will blow afuse. It will become ill. It will malfunc-tion. Thus, in churches today, mostbrains are malfunctioning on a regularbasis due to the lies and illogic fed tothem consistently. Churchgoers possessburned-out, defective brains. They areincapacitated. And, the Jesus-Is-Goddoctrine is one of the typical poisonsthat have damaged them.

We who believe that Jesus is notYahweh have been accused of using“rationalistic thinking.”

RATIONALISM: —n, the doctrine that

human reason, unaided by divinerevelation, is an adequate or the soleguide to all attainable religious truth.

As you can see by the dictionarydefinition, I have not argued for “Ratio-nalism” ... for I completely agree thatin order to understand God’s Word weneed guidance from Him.

But God’s Word does instruct us to“reason together ” (Isaiah 1:18). Whenstudying God’s Word it is important touse reason and a sound mind, and toavoid nonsensical myths and false doc-trines. This requires logic and commonsense along with God’s guidance.

Man’s reasoning abil ities are farbelow God’s. Nonetheless, that does notmean we should abandon reason.

By way of illustration, one could askthe question: it is wrong for man toswim, since we cannot swim as good asthe fishes? I suppose this argument couldbe used to keep one out of the wateraltogether. However, man’s inability toswim as good as a fish does not, in it-self, make it wrong for us to swim toshore when we fall into a lake.

By the same token, my inability toplumb the depths of God’s mind doesn’t,in itself, make it a sin for me to learn asmuch as I can about Him.

Where does that leave us? Well,we’ve set the stage for some elemen-tary deductions:

A. Yahweh the Creator is supreme.He is the Father – before all,over all. He can’t die, nor canHe cease to exist.

B. Jesus, the Son, was begotten bya miracle from Yahweh. He wasborn and lived a natural, mortallife ... special, but mortal. Hesuffered natural pains ofmankind, including temptations.

C. Yahweh projected himselfthrough Jesus to reveal himselfto mankind. Jesus (the “secondAdam”) resisted the temptationto try to seize equal ity withYahweh as did his ancestor, the“first Adam.”

D. Jesus suffered and died in orderto convict mankind of sin. He wasraised immortal in order to inheritthe promised throne, and thusreign over New Jerusalem (i.e.Christendom).

E. Jesus is the Mediator; theCommunicator betweenYahweh and man. He isYahweh’s Declarat ion to man:the living Logos.

F. Both Yahweh and Jesus quali fyfor the title “God” according todefinition. They are bothworshipped, called upon, andconsidered “mighty ones.” Butthere is only ONE Yahweh.

G. The terms “Father” and “Son”were used in the Bible becauseof their inherent meanings. Theseterms describe the relat ionshipbetween Yahweh and Jesus. Tosuggest that there is nodistinct ion between them is toignore the meanings of wordsand take in vain the inspiredwords of Scripture.

I’ve shown that Yahweh is the oneSupreme Being: the Creator. He quali-fies for the title “God.” Also, I’ve shownthat Jesus is not the Creator, but ratherone of Yahweh’s creations. Jesus (theCreated) cannot be equal to Yahweh (theCreator). However, in the same Hebrewsense that Moses, the Judges and Davidwere called “gods,” Jesus is also a god.In fact, any powerful man, like a judge,could be called “a god” by this defini-tion. But only if you define the termcorrectly.

In the same sense that Moses was a“mighty one” – an “elohim” – Jesus canalso be called an “elohim.” But neitherJesus, nor the Judges, could be equatedwith Yahweh.

To clarify this, turn to Psalm 45:

6. Your throne, 0 god (David), is ageenduring (i.e., eonian): the sceptreof your kingdom is a right sceptre.

7. You love righteousness, and hatewickedness: therefore God (Yah-weh), your God (David’s God), hasanointed you with the oil of glad-ness above your fellows.

Here, David and Yahweh are bothcalled gods (elohim) in the same breath.Now, that’s interesting!

We know this speaks of David be-cause of the context of the precedingverses. These show plainly that the king,who is called “god” in verse six, is David– not Yahweh.


Here are “gods” in places mostChristians would never expect.

Now, we are faced with a questionabout the first commandment: “Youshall have no other gods before me.’

The key word here is “before.” Weare prohibited from putting other godsbefore Yahweh.

Yahweh personally gave Israel sev-eral “gods” in the form of judges andkings. These “gods” were under Yah-weh, and not “before” or “ahead” ofHim. By the same token, Jesus wasbeneath Yahweh, and therefore couldbe a “god” without offending the law.

Churchgoers generally accept thisterm – “God” – as if it were a name.But it is not a name. It is a broadly-usedTITLE for one who is “mighty” (orthought to be mighty) including pagangods. We must be careful to define theterms we use ... especially Bible terms.We mustalso remember Yahweh’s right-ful priority. He is always Highest: theOne and only Omnipotent.

“I AND MY FATHERARE ONE”

Someone may yet argue, “But,didn’t Jesus say that He and his Fatherwere one?”

Yes, Jesus did say that in Jn. 10:30:

30. I and my Father are one.

But what did He mean by it? DidHe mean “one” in number ... or “one”in spirit and purpose? Obviously, Hemeant the latter.

Here, again, churchgoers seem togravitate toward dark mystical interpre-tations. To turn this alleged mystery intocommon sense, we only need to readsome related scriptures.

Verse 29 says that the Father gavedisciples to Jesus. Jesus didn’t give

them to himself. Remember, give andtake requires two parties: the giver, andthe taker. Also, Jesus says that Yahwehis GREATER than all.

Reason and common sense mustprevail lest we find ourselves lost inmindless, pagan mysticism. In the inca-pacitated mind of the pagan, two canequal one, and three can equal one. Infact, multiple gods can simultaneouslybe one god, or 10,000 gods can equalONE god – as in Hinduism. This canhappen in their minds because theirminds have been handicapped. Their

minds no longer seek logical answers.Christians need sound minds. Are

we to believe that Jesus was a dual god,like the Roman god Janus? Was He say-ing that two equals one? No, of coursenot! He was simply using a commonform of expression that makes goodsense unless taken out of context. Youcan find these common expressionsthroughout the Bible.

For instance, John 17:

11. ...Holy Father, keep through yourown name those whom you havegiven me, that they may be one,as we.

21. That they all may be one; asYou, Father, are in Me, and I inYou, that they also may be onein us...

22. And the glory which you gave meI have given them; that they may be

one, even as we are one:

In this case the churchgoer mightdeclare Yahweh, Jesus, and the disciplesALL part of one big god???

Matthew 19:

4. ...Have you not read, that he whichmade them at the beginning madethem male and female,

5. And said, For this cause shall aman leave father and mother, andshall cleave to his wife: and theytwain (two) shall be one flesh?

6. Wherefore they are no moretwain, but one flesh...

One flesh? Literally? Of course not!What is meant is that they are one inspirit (purpose and intent).

Galatians 3:

27. For as many of you as have beenbaptized into Christ have put onChrist.

28. There is neither Judean norGreek, there is neither bond norfree, there is neither male norfemale: for you are all one inChrist Jesus.

Obviously, being “one” with some-one does not mean in number. It signi-fies something other than quantity.Jesuswas not claiming a mystical numericalidentification with Yahweh, any morethan He was suggesting that all his dis-ciples were only one in number. Rather,He meant that they were one in pur-pose and spirit. Don’t let pagan non-sense confuse you.

God’s Word directs us to, “Comenow, and let us reason together, ...”(Isa iah 1:18 ). Also, remember JohnToland’s sage advice: “Reserve judg-ment on whatever is uncertain andassent only to clear precepts .”

Myst icism and mystery have noplace in our approach to Scripture. Youcannot build an honest belief structureon mystery. If we are honest we remainsilent concerning that of which we pos-sess no intelligent data.


Building on a mystery is like shoot-ing in the dark. Odds are overwhelm-ingly against you hitting a target youcannot see. Ministers who build on mys-tery are shooting in the dark.

Continuing in John 10:

31. Then the Judeans took up stonesagain to stone him (Jesus).

32. Jesus answered them, Manygood works have I shown you frommy Father; for which of thoseworks do you stone Me?

33. The Judeans answered Him,saying, For a good work we stoneyou not; but for blasphemy; andbecause that you, being a man,make yourself God.

Here is an interest ing statement.The Judeans were accusing Jesus of thesame thing of which the churches todayaccuse Him – namely, that He claimedto be God. The difference is that today’schurches like the concept.

But Jesus didn’t claim to be Yah-weh; He claimed to be “one” with Him– an expressionmeaning to share inpur-pose or spirit. He then goes on to ad-dress the term “god” itself:

34. ...Is it not written in your law (inPsalms 82:6), I (Yahweh) said, youare gods?

Who were “gods”? Jesus was re-minding the Judeans that Yahweh hadcalled their ancestors “gods.” Howcouldmortal men be “gods”?

35. If he called them gods, to whomthe word of God came, and thescripture cannot be broken;

36. Say you of him (Jesus), whom theFather has sanctified, and sent intothe world, You blaspheme; be-cause I said, I am the Son of God?

Obviously, those particular Israelitesto whom the Psalmist and Jesus referredwere not supernatural gods. They werejust “elohim” (mighty ones) in their day.Jesus pointed out that if Yahweh hadcalled their ancestors “gods,” then itcertainly wasn’t blasphemy for Him toclaim to be the Son of God.

37. If I do not the works of my Father,believe me not.

38. But if I do, though you believe notme, believe the works: that youmay know, and believe, that theFather is in me, and I in him .

If those Judeans had been listeningthey would have heard what was meantby “being one” with someone. Theywould have also learned what the word“god” (“elohim” in Hebrew; “theos” inGreek) really meant. But, the Phariseesweren’t listening, and neither are thechurches today.

In several clear passages, Jesus de-clares that He and Yahweh, together,equal TWO in number.

John 8:

15. You judge after the flesh; I judgeno man.

16. And yet if I judge, my judgment istrue: for I am not alone, but I andthe Father that sent me.

17. It is also written in your law, thatthe testimony of TWO men is true.

18. I am one that bears witness ofmyself, AND the Father that sentme bears witness of me (twowitnesses).

28. Then said Jesus to them, Whenyou have lifted up the Son of man,then shall you know that I am He,and that I do nothing of myself butas my Father has taught me, Ispeak these things.

29. And He that sent me is with me:the Father has not left me alone;for I do always those things thatplease Him.

42. Jesus said to them, If God wereyour Father, you would love me: forI proceeded forth and came fromGod; neither came I of myself,but He sent me.

54. Jesus answered, If I honormyself, my honor is nothing: it ismy Father that honors me...

Someone may still wonder, “Withall these scriptures showing clearly thatJesus and Yahweh are two beings, howis it then that the idea came to be sowide spread? And how is it that so manypeople think the Bible actually teachesit? Why is it such a popular doctrine if

it’s so glaringly wrong?”Well, there are yet several scriptures

that we haven’t addressed. Also, ourEnglish versions of the Bible have beentranslated (or rather mistranslated) tomake certain scriptures appear to saythat Yahweh himself became a flesh-and-blood man. Of course, it is easierto accept them that way if you are al-ready prejudiced. But, at this point wemust admit that someone who readsonly the English versions of the Biblecould feasibly be led into that error un-knowingly.

INCARNATIONAt the root of the matter, is the doc-

trine referred to as “incarnation.” We’veheard preachers refer to Jesus as “Godincarnate.” However, it is a pagan term– a phrase that is not in the Bible.

“Incarnation” is a Latin term mean-ing: 1. to become flesh; 2. a “spiritbeing” taking possession of a body offlesh. The term is obviously a religiousone deriving its only published defini-tion from its creators: the churches. Ithas no meaning, or use, otherwise.

“Carnae” is the Latin word for meat(flesh). “Incar nat ion,” then, simplymeans to change into flesh (i.e. meat).Its only usage, or application, is in reli-gious terms referring to mythical godsand goddesses descending from heavenand taking possession of human bod-ies. It implies that a god or a spirit be-ing (existing in the form of a ghost) cantake possession of a flesh body. This isthe pagan concept of “demon posses-sion” as well as “human deification.”

Through this process religions havecreated thousands of gods in their fer-tile imaginations. Many were in stone.Some were in flesh. Believers attributesupernatural powers to them and wor-ship them as if they are real. Romanand Greek Emperors were called “dei-ties,” as were the Egyptian pharaohs.

That is “incarnation” as churchesadopted it from the pagans. Incarnationis not a Biblical concept.

According to the Bible, Yahweh in-spires men and directs them by his in-fluence and power. He can direct yoursteps. He can protect you from harm,or He can cause you to get in trouble.He can, and does, motivate us to act.However, He does not “possess” us inthe fashion that pagans believe.

Yahweh can inspire a thousandpeople at once, or a million people for


that matter. He is in each of us at thesame time. His spirit abides in us. It isthe spark; the motivation that drivespeople and moves them to do his will.

Yahweh was in Jesus, but not all ofHim was in Jesus. While Yahweh wasin Jesus He was also in the rest of theuniverse. To suggest otherwise wouldlead us to ask, where was Yahweh dur-ing the hours when Jesus was dead?

Pagans invent human deities. But,Jesus was a man – not a human deity.He was a specially-created man sent byGod! He was a man directed by God!He was a man commissioned by God!He was “the Lamb of God,” and wassent to explain the Father to mankind.But Jesus was not a superman. He wasnot a god-man. He was a man! And ifsomeone tries to tell you that He wassome kind of a superman, or god-man,then ask them how a superman, or de-ity, could represent mortal flesh-and-blood men? Supermen and deities arenot “made like unto” mortal men.

The supernatural works that Jesusdid were not his own, nor were they byhis own power. Yahweh worked themthrough Jesus.

Philippians 2:


6. Who, subsisting (existing under), inthe form (image) of God, thoughtnot to seize equality with God.

7. But made himself of no reputation,and took upon him the form of aservant, and was made in thelikeness of men:

Again in Hebrews 2:

17. Wherefore in all things it behovedHim (Jesus) to be made like untohis brethren, that he might be amerciful and faithful high priest inthings pertaining to God, to makereconciliation for the sins of thepeople.

18. For in that he himself hathsuffered being tempted, he isable to succour them that aretempted.

Jesus had to be like us in order tobe tempted, as we are tempted.

Hebrews 4:

15. For we have not an high priest

which cannot be touched with thefeeling of our infirmities; but was inall points tempted like as we are,yet without sin.

Je su s wa s te mp te d IN AL LPOINTS. Can you imagine that? He wastempted in the same ways that YOU aretempted! You can probably think ofsome pretty degrading ways in whichyou have been tempted in your lifetime.Jesus was tempted to sin in the verysame ways. However, Jesus withstoodthe temptations and remained sinless.

If Jesus had been a god-man Hewould have had no real temptation.Jesus had to be a man in order to betempted like us.

James 1:

13. Let no man say when he istempted, I am tempted of God: forGod cannot be tempted withevil, ...

Now, that’s a pretty solid argumentas I see it. A + B = C.

A. Jesus was tempted with evil.B. Yahweh cannot be tempted with evil.

–Therefore,C. Jesus is not Yahweh.

ALLEGED PROOFS

Now, let’s take a look at some ofthe alleged proofs used to support thetheory that Jesus is Yahweh.

Let’s start with John 17:

5. And now, 0 Father, glorify thou mewith thine own self with the glorywhich I had with thee before theworld was. (KJV)

On the face of it, this may appearto be saying that Jesus livedWITH (alongside) Yahweh before the Earth was cre-ated. However, if that were the case, itwould also do great violence to thetheory that Jesus and Yahweh are oneand the same ... since being “with” Yah-weh is not being Him.

So let us translate this passage cor-rectly, in context, to see its meaning.

Staring in verse 3:

3. And this is eonian life, that theymight know You the only true God,and Jesus Christ, whom You havesent.

That “eonian life” is described asan awakening to “know the only trueGod (Yahweh),AND Jesus Christ, whomYahweh sent.” Eonian life = the spiri-tual awakening in this New CovenantAge. Now, keep that point squarely inyour mind.

4. I have glorified You on the Earth: Ihave finished the work which Yougave me to do.

5. And now, 0 Father, glorify you mealong with your glory which I amsharing with you before (in front of)the world.

What Yahweh had already accom-plished through Jesus had been glori-ous. Now, Jesus was praying for agreat er glor y to be accomp li shedthrough his death, raising and ascent toKingship.

But this passage does not say whatthe KJV translators insinuated. Trans-lated correctly it fits in the context nicely.

What did Jesus really say?

1. Yahweh was glorified in Jesus ashis witness before the entire world.

2. Jesus had completed the work thatHe, as a mortal, was created to do.

3. Jesus was now looking forward toa greater glory (i.e. the expectedglory of being raised immortal andascending the throne).

We are a word-controlled people.People can be controlled just by chang-ing the meanings of words they use.

The Bible is a very old document.Even the English translation of the Bibleis very old. To understand this old docu-ment we must have accurate definitionsfor its words. We can’t ignore them, norcan we assume that translators havebeen honest with them. The WORDMEANINGS are more important thangold! We should be at least as protec-tive and responsible over these wordsof life as we would that much gold. Thisrequires more than just casual readingfrom one of the many English versions.

In this passage, just as in others, themost sensible and logical conclusion isthe right one, and we can dispense withthe so-called mystery.

John 1:

18. No man has seen God at anytime; the only begotten Son, whichis in the bosom of the Father, Hehas declared Him.


Jesusdeclared Yahweh to men. But,NO MAN has literally seen Yahweh.Now, don’t miss this point.

Has any man seen Jesus? Yes, ofcourse.

Has any man seen Yahweh? No!What, then, was Jesus? Was He

Yahweh? No, because men saw Jesus.What was He then? John says He

was THE DECLARATION OF GOD (i.e.the LOGOS)!

John 17:

6. I have manifested your name tothe men which thou gave me outof the world: yours they were, andyou gave them me; and they havekept your word.

Jesus refers to Yahweh as “You” –obviously not referring to himself. Jesussays He had manifested the Father’sname (i.e. He made clear Yahweh’s“name”; his “authority”). His Fathergave Him authority to represent Him.A representative is not the one beingrepresented!

The next passage in question isJohn 14:

6. Jesus said to him, I am the way,the truth, and the life: no mancomes to the Father, but by me.

7. If you had known me, you shouldhave known my Father also: andfrom henceforth you know Him,and have seen Him.

We just read in John 1 that no onehad seen the Father. If we accept thepremise that Jesus does not contradicthimself, then in John 14 He must betelling us something else.

8. Philip said to him, Lord show usthe Father, and it suffices us.

9. Jesus said to him, Have I been solong time with you, and yet haveyou not known me, Philip? he thathas seen me has seen the Father;and how say you then, Show usthe Father?

Is Jesus contradicting himself? Is Hesaying that men HAVE seen Yahweh?

Now understand, we can’t disregardany of these scriptures. If there appearsto be a contradiction, we must haveenough faith in God’s Word to believethat the error comes from man – not

from God. We must believe that thescriptures make sense ... if we don’t mis-use them. Therefore, contradictionscome from erroneous translations and/or interpretations – not from God. So,we only need to find, and correct, theerror that men have caused.

Furthermore, to interpret the scrip-tures correctly, we should read them incontext. So, let’s see what else is saidin this passage.

Notice verse 10:

10. Believe you not that I am in theFather? ...

Now wait a minute! Which is it? IsHe the Father? Or is He IN the Father?Being “in the Father” is not the sameas “being the Father.” If Jesus WAS theFather, wouldn’t He have said “... I AMthe Father?” rather than “... I am INthe Father”? If He was the Father, Hemissed a good opportunity to clarify it.

10. Believe you not that I am in theFather, and the Father in me? thewords that I speak to you I speakNOT OF MYSELF: but the Fatherthat dwells in me, He does theworks.

When He spoke of the Father Hespoke NOT OF HIMSELF! Tha t isstraight forward and easy to understand.

Again, in John 7, Jesus makes adistinction between himself andYahweh:

16. ...My doctrine is not mine, buthis that sent me.

17. If any man will do his will, he shallknow of the doctrine, whether itbe of God, or whether I speak ofmyself.

Jesus’ doctrine was not his! Whatdid He mean by that? If Jesus was Yah-weh, then He would not have said thatHe spoke NOT of himself. Whose doc-trine was Jesus teaching? Where mightthis impossible scenario take us? I’ll tellyou where it might lead. For the gullibleit will lead right into the churches (Jew-ish Churchianity).

However, if Jesus was Yahweh’sSon, then it all makes perfect sense. TheSon got his doctrine from the Father.The works and the words that flowedfrom Jesus were the manifestwords andworks of Yahweh. They were done inthe Father’s name. The words “de-

clared” Yahweh to the world. They werethe works and the words of the Father– manifested through Jesus. Jesus wasnot the Father; rather He spoke for theFather. Keep that straight! The Fatherwas in Jesus!

Remember, no one has seen God.But, men did see Jesus. They saw andtouched Him. Many people saw Jesus.But, no man has seen the Father.

When Philip looked upon Jesus, hewas looking at AN IMAGE of the Fa-ther. An image...not in the physicalsense, but in the spiritual sense. Yah-weh cannot be manifested in the physi-cal sense because He is not physical.

If God looked physically like Jesus,then men could have looked upon Himjust as they looked upon Jesus. But theycouldn’t! Jesus was the image of Yah-weh in spirit. Just remember: an imageof a thing is not the thing itself. Jesuswas the image – not the Father himself.

Next, Hebrews 1:

1. God, who at sundry times and indiverse manners spoke in timepast to the fathers by the prophets,

2. Has in these last days spoken tous by his Son, whom He hasappointed heir of all things, throughwhom He also makes the ages.

3. Who being the brightness of hisglory, and the express image ofhis person, and upholding allthings by the word of his power,when he had by himself purged oursins, sat down on the right hand ofthe Majesty on high;

Jesus was “the express image” ofhis Father. An image of a thing is notthe thing itself. It is a reflection of thething itself. Jesus reflected Yahweh.

II Corinthians 4:

3. But if our gospel be hid, it is hid tothem that are lost:

4. In whom the god of this age hasblinded the minds of them whichbelieve not, lest the light of theglorious gospel of Christ, who isthe image of God, should shineunto them. (Jesus = image).

Colossians 1:

12. Giving thanks to the Father, whichhas prepared us to be partakers of


the inheritance of the saints in light:

13. Who has delivered us from thepower of darkness, and hastranslated us into the kingdom ofhis dear Son:

14. In whom we have redemptionthrough his blood, even the forgive-ness of sins:

15. Who is the image of the invis-ible God, the firstborn of allcreation .

16. For in Him were all things cre-ated, that are in heaven, and thatare in earth, visible and invisible,whether they be thrones, ordominions, or principalities, orpowers: all things were createdthrough Him, and for Him:

Again, the image of a thing is NOTthe thing itself.

Also, we must remember thatAdamshared the same status – that of beingthe image of God. For that matter, WETOO share that status, as sons of God.Obviously, “being in the image of God”does not equate to “being God.”

“All things created” (i.e. this uni-verse, if you will) were created ultimatelyfor the Son who was to inherit all things.Yahweh created all things for Jesus. (Fora more detailed explanation of “in theFather,” “in him” and “through him” seesection titled “IN THE NAME” on page22.)

Now, read verse 17:

17. And He is preeminent in all things(referring to status, not time), andin Him all things consist.

18. And He is the head of the body,the ecclesia, who is the beginning,the firstborn from the dead; that inall things He might have preemi-nence.

19. For it pleased the Father that inHim should all fullness dwell;

It pleased the Father to place allfullness in the person of Jesus. Jesus waslike a vessel filled to the very top. Butyou see, no matter how great an imagi-nation you may have, you cannot imag-ine a vessel large enough to contain allof Yahweh. Jesus couldnot containHim;Yahweh cannot be limited andcontained

in a vessel. The Father is limitless andun-containable. Yet, all fullness was inJesus.

Chapter 2:

9. For in Him (Jesus) dwells all thefullness of Godship bodily (not“Godhead”).

I Kings 8:27 & II Chronicles 6:18:

But will God in very deed dwell withmen on the earth? behold, heavenand the heaven of heavenscannot contain You; how muchless this house which I have built!

If heaven and earth cannot containYahweh, then neither can a mortal bodyof a man. Jesus was filled with God …but not all of God. Furthermore, thatwhich is pourred into a vessel is not thevessel itself. Jesus was the vessel andthe spirit of his Father was received intoHim.

The word, “Godhead” (as in theKJV) is another mistranslation – possi-bly a prejudice held over from the pa-gan Roman concept of a “Godhead”made up of a “forum of gods.”

In I Timothy 3, we find a relatedscripture which is often quoted to sup-port the idea of a mysterious “God-head.” Correctly translated from theGreek it reads:

16. And without question, great is thewonder of godliness which (not“God” as in KJV) is manifest in theflesh, justified in spirit, witnessedby messengers, preached innations, believed in the world andreceived in glory.”

Again the KJV threw in the word“God” when the Gr eek te xt sa id“which.” This is not talking about God,or a so-called “Godhead.” It is talkingabout “godliness” or “piety” – i.e., faithmanifest in men. The KJV translatorscompletely perverted the meaning ofthis scripture. Such translational anoma-lies confuse people. Inaccurate transla-tions make it hard for everyone.

What is “The wonder of godli-ness?” It is the miracle of a man receiv-ing inspiration and a new mindset fromGod. The implanted desire to seek Godis unnatural to man. It is a miracle whenGod causes a man to desire godliness.This miracle, or “wonder,” is manifestin flesh when a man’s nature is turnedfrom self-worship to godliness.

In 2 Peter 1:3-4, we are told thatwe acquire the “divine nature” (godli-ness) through gaining “the knowledgeof Him that has called us to glory andvirtue.” This is the wonder of godlinessamong men.

Remember these basic premises:

1. An image of a thing is not the thingitself.

2. The content of a vessel is not thevessel itself.

3. A “full” vessel shows the limit ofthe vessel – not the limit of thatwhich fills the vessel.

4. The Creator is not the creation.5. The Infinite is not finite.6. The Eternal does not cease to

exist.7. The Father is not the Son.


THE SON

Jesus is “the Son.” In Hebrew cul-ture, being “a Son” meant somethingvery specific. Jesus is called “the first-born Son.” “Firstborn” equates to “pre-eminent.” What, then, is “a son”?

Galatians 4:

1. Now I say, that the heir, as long ashe is a child, differs nothing from aservant, though he be lord of all;

While the heir is a “child” he is nota “son.” A child is simply an offspring.But, a SON is an offspring who hascome to the age of accountability andhas inherited the right to bear the name(authority) of his father.

A son can conduct business in thename of his father and use his father’sauthority in transactions. A “child” can-not do that. He must become a SON.Not until he becomes a son is he an in-heritor.

When a child comes of age and re-ceives the father’s spirit, he is then au-thorized to speak and act for his father.Until then he may be a child and an heir,but he cannot receive his inheritance as“the firstborn” until he becomes “a son.”

2. But is under tutors and governorsuntil the time appointed of theFather.

3. Even so we, when we werechildren, were in bondage underthe elements of the world:

4. But when the fullness of the timewas come, God (the Father) sentforth his Son, made of a woman,made under the law, (born a“child,” but grew to become a“Son”).

5. To redeem them that were underthe law, that we might receivesonship.

The word “adoption” (as in KJV) isan inappropriate word. The word inGreek is “sonship,” and has no relationto our modern concept of “adoption.”Sonship was a custom in Israel. When achild came of age and was of a mind tofollow the faith of his father, the fatherpublicly declared Him to be a son.

Jesus’ sonship was publicly declaredat the time of his baptism. A voice washeard from heaven saying, “This is my

beloved SON in whom I am wellpleased.” (Matthew 3:17)

6. And because you are sons, Godhas sent forth the Spirit of his Soninto your hearts, crying, Abba,Father.

7. Wherefore you are no more aservant, but a son; and if a son,then an heir of God throughChrist.

A “son” is an inheritor. Jesus was aSon in the full sense of the word. Hewas filled with the spirit of his Father.He inherited the throne and Kingship(“Reign”) over his Father’s creation. Heinheri ted responsibility and authorityunder Yahweh the Father.

Hebrews 1:

2. Has in these last days spoken tous by his Son, whom He hasappointed heir of all things,through whom He also makes theages.

The Son is heir of all things becauseall things are for the Son. It’s very com-mon to hear of a man who builds up hisestate, and then turns it over to his son.Jesus was the Heir; the Firstborn. Hewas the heir of the Father’s estate (i.e.all of creation).

An heir must receive his inheritancefrom a benefactor. The benefactor pre-cedes the recipient. The recipient is notthe benefactor.

Now, let’s go back to John 1. Thisis probably the most widely quoted scrip-ture to try to say that Jesus and Yah-weh were one entity, or somehowcoeternal.

1. In the beginning was the word...(KJV)

Again, the King James Version isinadequate. “Word” is not an adequatetranslation of the Greek “logos.” Itshould read like this:

1. In the beginning was the logos ...(i.e., “the communication”)

“Logos,” in Greek, is not merely “aword.” It is “communication with under-standing” ... the difference being that a“word” may not necessarily communi-cate to the hearer. I can speak words involumes and perhaps none of them willreach your heart or your mind or becommunicated to you. God’s “logos” issomething that communicates – and itcan come in different forms.

1. ...and the communication waspertaining to (not “with”) God, AndGod was the communication (i.e.,He was communicating).


God’s communication with man iswhat the Bible is about. That communi-cation pertains to God. It MANIFESTSGod. That expression of God is the sub-ject of this verse. How did that expres-sion appear?

We read in Hebrews 1, that in timespast, “God spoke...”

He spoke! That was his communi-cation! That was his “logos” at the time.Yahweh spoke to man (Adam).

He spoke to Adam. He spoke toNoah. He communicated with Abrahamand Moses. His LAW came by “com-munication”; by “logos.”

In the beginning, was “the logos.”The “logos” (the communication) shineda LIGHT into man’s mind. But man’sability to grasp that light was limited tothe scope of “hearing by the word.”

In Romans 10:17, Paul explainsthat “faith comes by the hearing of theword” (in this case the Greek word is“rhema”– a different Greek term moreequiva lent to our modern En lgish“word.”) In Greek, “rhema” (word) is theword uttered or spoken, with sound.This applies also to the written word.Man perceives this form of “word” byempirical observation. But it is NOT “thelogos.”

“The logos” is more than a mereword spoken or written. “The logos” isperceived through spiritual commicationwhich transcends the empirical. This isthe kind of communication to whichScripture refers as “eyes that see” and“ears tha t hear” (Mt t. 13:6-7; Lk.10:21-24). In John 8:43, Jesus tellssome Pharisees that they cannot hear(perceive) his “logos” ... obviously be-cause they had no spiritual perception.

In the beginning, Yahweh madehimself known to Adam by his spiritualcommunication (logos). Scripture refersto this as “the breath of life” (Gen 2:7).Adam then chose to reject God’s lawand was declared spiritually “dead.”

Adam, and his descendants, thenstruggled in the ir state of spi ritual“death”whereinGod’swords were avail-able to them in the inferior form of theuttered or spoken word (“rhema”).

By means of “rhema” (the spokenword) God expressed his word and hisLAW to Israel via the Old Covenant.Men couldn’t see Him – their under-standing of Him was limited – but Hemade himself known to them by thespoken/written word (rhema).

Until Christ, men developed theirconcept of Yahweh from that form of

communication. Their mental conceptof Yahweh was limited to the param-eters of their conceptual ability to graspthe spirit and import of the spoken/writ-ten word. This understanding of Godproved insufficient … and needed togrow.

In time, that communication wasdramatically improved and took on anew form. Yahweh’s “logos” (commu-nication) was vested in flesh. In otherwords, He upgraded his communicationto man by making the logos more thanjust audible or written words. It becamemore than just thoughts and concepts.The upgraded “logos” became vested ina visible, living man. The logos becameflesh. Yahweh’s communication wasvested in Jesus. The Father didn’t be-come flesh – his logos became flesh.

Jesus is the ultimate expression ofYahweh’s Logos — his best Communi-cation with man.

That Communication (Logos) livedand walked among men. Jesus was theFather’s Communication: his Self Ex-pression to men. Jesus was a livingMessage from Yahweh – more than justspoken or written words. Jesus was thespiritual Expression of Yahweh himself.But, again, “The Expression” of Yah-weh does not equal Yahweh.

To the limit of man’s comprehen-sion, Jesus expressed (declared) Yahwehto us. No, He was not the totality ofYahweh. He was as much of the Fatheras could be expressed in flesh. He wasGod’s best communication (logos) toman considering our limitations.

JESUS WAS “THE IMAGE”

For instance, take a photograph ofyourself. If you ask someone to identifyit, usually, the reply will be “That is you”!But, in fact, the photograph is NOT you– it is merely an image of you. It is atwo-dimensional image on paper. If youturn it around to the back, you see noth-ing but paper. It is not you. The size isnot equal. The composition is different.Nor can it move, or speak. It isn’t at allequal to you even though it is an IM-AGE of you.

To the extent that you can print animage of yourself on a piece of paper, itis accurate. But, it’s not you – it’s onlyan “express image” of you. There ismuch more to you than can be put onthe photo paper. The picture can bedestroyed without destroying yourself.

And yet, that image on the paper isthought of as “you.”

Thus, it was with Jesus. Yahweh’simage – his Son – is not Yahweh, anymore than your photograph is you. Youare bigger than your photo, and Yah-weh is bigger than his Son Jesus. None-theless, Jesus was the express image ofYahweh as accurately as He could beexpressed in flesh form.

“IN THE NAME”

Jesus (the Son; the Inheritor) hadauthority IN THE NAME of the Father.

Messengers (angels) al so wereYahweh’s “logos” to men. They, too,spoke in Yahweh’s name. But they werenot Yahweh. They were expressions ofYahweh, to be sure. They spoke thewords of Yahweh. They had authorityfrom Yahweh. They issued Yahweh’scommands as if from Yahweh himself.BUT THEY WERE THE MESSAGECARRIERS – NOT THE MESSAGESENDER! That is an important distinc-tion. Jesus, also, spoke for Yahweh. Hewas the living Message itself in fleshform. But let’s not confuse the message(Jesus) with the message sender (Yah-weh).

We see more of this direct repre-sentation of Yahweh in Revelation 21:

9. And there came to me one of theseven messengers ...

The messenger (angel) was talkingto John. The conversation carries overinto chapter 22:

6. And he (the messenger) said to me(John), These sayings are faithfuland true: and the Lord God of theholy prophets sent his angel toshow to his servants the thingswhich must shortly be done.

7. Behold, I (Yahweh) come quickly:blessed is he that keeps thesayings of the prophesy of thisbook.

8. And I John saw these things, andheard them. And when I had heardand seen, I fell down to worshipbefore the feet of the messenger(angel) which showed me thesethings.

9. Then he said to me, See you do it


not: for I am your fellowservant, andof your brethren the prophets, andof them which keep the saying ofthis book: worship God.

Here’s a fellow servant, saying “Icome quickly”! John thought, “This mustbe God himself.” So he fell down toworship before Him and the messengersays, “No, I’m not God – I am the mes-senger of God.”

John misunderstood. He made anerror. In fact, John’s error of assumingthe angel to be Yahweh is similar to thechurches’ error of assuming that Jesusis Yahweh. Nonetheless, both the mes-senger and Jesus spoke for Yahweh.

The book of Revelation was acommunication delivered to John by amessenger sent by Jesus (Revelation22:16), and by the Father (Revelation21:6). The messenger spoke for bothJesus and his Father. The messengerspoke as if God were actually speaking.In that capacity, the messenger wouldfrequently use phrases like: “I am theAlpha and Omega,” or “I am the firstand the last.” These phrases are idi-omatic expressions, used in both the oldand new scriptures, to mean “I amwith-out peer”; “I am above all.”

Now look at John 8:

56. Your father Abraham rejoiced tosee my day: and he saw it, andwas glad.

This verse is sometimes used to sug-gest that Jesus was Yahweh at the timeof Abraham. But, again, upon fair con-sideration, we find that it does not saythat. In the first place, it did not projectJesus back in time. Rather, it projectsAbraham forward in time – to Jesus’day. We find help to understand this bylooking at Hebrews 11.

Here, we read of faithful Abraham.In verse 8 it says, “By faith Abraham”– and then it goes on to explain howAbraham was called-out into a new land.In verse 9 it starts: “By faith he so-journed in the land of promise,...”

Abraham acted upon faith. He isknown as “the father of the faithful.”

Notice the definition of faith as it isstated in verse one:

1. Now faith is assurance of thingsexpected; contemplation of thingsnot in sight.

Also, Genesis 15:

5. And He (Yahweh in a vision)brought him (Abram) forth abroad,and said, Look now towardheaven, and tell the stars, if youare able to number them: and Hesaid to him, So shall your seed be.

6. And he believed Yahweh; and Hecounted it to him for righteousness.

By faith, Abraham was assured ofthings that he expected, and he contem-plated things that he hadn’t seen.

But Abraham’s faith was not blind!He believed the promise of his Godwhom he knew, by personal experience,to be capable of fulfilling promises anddoing the impossible.

In II Corinthians 5:7, we learn thatgodly Abraham didn’t need to physicallyexperience “Jesus’ day” in order to“see” it. Faithful Abraham saw Jesus’day – not by sight, but he saw it by faith.By the same token, verse 10 says: “Forhe (Abraham) looked for a city whichhad foundations, whose builder andmaker is God.” This was the city ofGod: New Jerusalem. By faith, Abra-ham saw that city that was not physi-cal. In this same way, Abraham lookedforward by faith and saw the New Cov-enant Age: “the day of Jesus’s Reign.”

Also, in Romans 4:17, Paul speaksof Abraham’s faith in God who “callsthose things which don’t exist asthough they exist .” In other words,through faith God caused Abraham tosee future things that were not yetphysi-cally in existence.

Continuing in John 8, we find an-other disputed passage:

58. Jesus said unto them, Verily,verily, I say to you, Before Abra-ham was, I am. (KJV)

Churchgoers claim that Jesus usedthe term “I am” to show that He wasYahweh and therefore existed before thetime of Abraham. They point to Exo-dus 3:14, where Yahweh said his namewas “I am that I am.” They claim thatboth Old Testament and New Testamentterm are synonymous, and both referto Yahweh ... and thus, through a subtlelinguistic bridge Jesus was telling us thatHe is Yahweh.

But, once again careful and fairanalysis, reding in context, leads us awayfrom the mysterious and toward plaincommon sense.

Let’s go back and read from verse

50 to see howJesus leadsup to this state-ment:

50. And I seek not my own glory:there is one (another one) thatseeks and judges.

He sought not his own glory, butrather Yahweh’s – a strange statementif Jesus was Yahweh.

Also, verse 54:

54. Jesus answered, If I glorifymyself, my glory is nothing: it is myFather that glorifies me; ...

Jesus eschewed the glory and insist-ing that it belonged with the Father –away from himself.

Would it make sense in verse 54 tosay, “... my Father deserves glory, butnot I,” and then turn around in verse58 and say, “I am the Father ... thus Ideserve glory”? No! Of course not!

Furthermore, the syntax of thephrases in both Hebrew and Greek,show that the phrase “I am” in John8:58 is different from the phrase in Exo-dus 3:14.

In Exodus 3:14, Yahweh tells Mosesthat his name is “Haya”– which literallymeans “I am” or “I exist.” The Hebrewphrase (rendered “I am that I am” inthe KJV) is best translated “I am theone who is,” or “I am He who exists.”

On the other hand, the Greekphrase in John 8:58 reads literally:“...Before (ahead of) Abraham, I amto be,” or “I am to be before (aheadof) Abraham.” “Before/ahead” (Gk:prin) means to precede either in timeor rank (status).

As you can see, this phrase signi-fies that Jesus ranked ahead of Abra-ham. Jesus did not say, “I existed in timebefore Abraham.”

Furthermore, the phrase in Exodusdoes not match the one in John whenread from the Greek. This is evidentfr om the Exodus phra se in theSeptuagint Greek Old Testament com-pared to John 8:58:

58. ...before Abraham, I am (EGOEMI) to be (GENESTHAI ). (i.e. amto be greater than Abraham”)

Here, notice that the verb is not“was” (past tense), but rather “to be”(aorist infinitive).

Jesus was saying “I am to be...” inthe sense of “it is my lot.”


The Greek construction bears thisou t. Je su s sa id “EGO EM IGENESTHAI” (I am to be) (i.e., “it ismy lot”). Now, compare the Greek con-struction of Exodus 3:14 as taken fromthe Septuagint Greek Old Testament.

14. And God spoke to Moses, saying,EGO EMI HO ON (I am the oneexisting); and he said, Thus shallyou say to the children of Israel,HO ON (the one existing) has sentme to you.

When Yahweh told Moses He was“The Existing One,” He used the Greekterm “HO ON” – not “GENESTHAI.“According to Greek usage, if Jesus hadwanted to say in John 8:58 that He was“The Existing One,” He would have said“EGO EMI HO ON.”

What, then, was Jesus saying inJohn 8: 58? He was stating, “It is mylot to be” (i.e., “my Father has deter-mined that I am to be) greater thanAbraham:

58. ... Ahead of Abraham (I.e.,greater), I am to be.

Jesus is greater than Abraham. Inhis ministry, his sacrifice and his risingfrom the dead – in all that He did, Hewas the greatest of Yahweh’s creation.

THE SPIRITUAL ROCK INTHE WILDERNESS

Another scripture passage whichrequires our attention is I Corinthians10. Here, due to the English renderingin most Bibles, it can appear to be say-ing that Jesus, himself, was “following”the Israelites at the time of the Exodus.If Jesus was there at that time, thatwould be proof positive that He wasimmortal and in existence during thetime of Moses. This argument, however,does absolutely no good for those whomaintain that Jesus is Yahweh for it saysnothing about that. In the King JamesVersion, however, it does seem to sug-gest that Jesus existed separately at thetime of Moses.

But, in the Greek, as usual, it readsdifferently. Here are the key verses asrendered in the KJV:

1. Moreover, brethren, I would notthat you should be ignorant, howthat all our fathers were under the

cloud, and all passed through thesea;

2. And were all baptized unto Mosesin the cloud and in the sea;

3. And did all eat the same spiritualmeat;

4. And did all drink the same spiritualdrink: for they drank of that spiritualRock that followed them: and theRock was Christ.

As you can see, verse four is thecritical one. Here is verse four correctlytranslated:

4. And did all drink the same spiritualdrink: for they drank of thatspiritual-conforming rock thatfollowed them: and the Rock wasChrist. (i.e., it symbolized orforshadowed Him)

In the KJV, the phrase, “...that fol-lowed them:” comes from the Greekword, “akoluthuo,” which means “toconform,” “imitate” or “to pattern af-ter,” and is usually translated “follow”in the sense of “join” or “side with”rather than physically walk with or be-hind. Taking the phrase meaning “spiri-tual-conforming rock,” and turning itinto the phrase, “Rock that followed,”is taking license with God’s Word. Butthat is what the translators did. This turnof the phrase has confused many ...which may have been their intent.

The word “following” is the sameword that Jesus used when He said to“take up your cross and follow him.”

Now, He did not mean to physicallyfollow around after him through villageand field dragging a literal cross behindyou. He obviously meant to conform tohis ways, and imitate him.

Thus, we see that Jesus was not“following” (trailing around after) Israel.Rather, Israel was spiritually drinking(getting strength) from the spiritual wa-ters of God – as typified by the Rock ofMeribah, and later by Christ.

The “stone monolith” at Meribahwas not literally following around afterIsrael, as if it were something alive. Thiswas not a walking mountain, nor was ita “pre-existent” Jesus, as the fundamen-talists have asserted. Rather, Paul is re-ferring to the “cl iff,” or “rock” atMeribah which Moses struck with a rodand God caused fresh water to gush out

of it for the thirsty Israelitesto drink (Exo-dus 17:1-7).

Paul was explaining to the Corin-th ians that the “rock” at Meribahforshadowed Christ (i.e. it prefiguredhim). It was a figure, or a shadow of theSavior in the same way that the Pass-over lamb also prefigured Him.

The rock (cliff) at Meribah was aspiritual pre-pattern of Jesus. The “rockmass” was struck with a rod for the sakeof Israel, so also did Jesus suffer “stripes”for our sakes (I Peter 2:24). Life-givingwaters flowed from out of the “rockmass” at Meribah, so also did Jesus giveus the “waters of life,” (John4:10; 7:37-39; Revelation 22:17).

REMARRYING THEOLD WIFE?

Finally, we must address the argu-ment of those who claim that Yahwehhad to die so He could remarry Israel:his Old Covenant wife. The British Is-rael and Identi ty movements are themain purveyors of this teaching. Thesedenominations have correctly identifiedthemselves as racial descendents of Ja-cob Israel, but they have misconstruedScripture in an effort to claim a salva-tion based upon racial merit.

The Identi ty and Brit ish Is raelchurches have certain elements of truthconcerning our racial connection backto Israel. However, they have also beenlured, by a false teaching, into believingthat Yahweh had to re-marry old Israel.The scripture they use for this teachingis Romans 7:

1. Know you not, brethren, (for Ispeak to them that know the law,)how that the law has dominion overa man as long as he lives?

2. For the woman which has ahusband is bound by the law to herhusband so long as he lives; but ifthe husband be dead, she isloosed from the law of her hus-band.

3. So then if, while her husband lives,she be married to another man,she shall be called an adulteress:but if her husband be dead, she isfree from that law; so that she is noadulteress, though she be marriedto another man.


4. Wherefore, my brethren, you alsoare become dead to the law by thebody of Christ; that you should bemarried to another, even to Himwho is raised from the dead, thatwe should bring forth fruit to God.

The faulty British Israel reasoning,based upon this passage, goes like this:

1. Israel was Yahweh’s OldCovenant wife.

2. Yahweh had to divorce Israel forher harlotry.

3. According to law, a man cannotremarry his wif e after hedivorced her and she was withanother man.

4. Yahweh had promised Israel aNew Covenant which requiredthat He remarry her.

5. Yahweh became a mortal man(Jesus) so He could dieaccording to Romans 7:3 torelease Israel so she would befree to lawfully marry again.

6. Jesus (Yahweh) was raised againso he could marry Israel via theNew Covenant.

This interpretation contains interest-ing facets , and just enough correctpoints, to make it seem almost credible.But it is fatally flawed and will not work– as I will show.

First, it is correct that Yahweh wasIsrael’s Old Covenant husband. It is alsocorrect that He divorced her for her har-lotry. But, while Romans 7:1-4 doesaddress this issue, the churches havemisinterpreted verses 3 and 4 so as tototally pervert their true meaning.

Yahweh did, indeed, promise Israela New Covenant, and thus, a new mar-riage. However, it was not Yahweh thatwas to remarry Israel. Nor was it Yah-weh who was destined to die. Rather, itwas Israel, the old sin-ridden wife, whowas to die and be reborn anew. Israelhad become “dead in trespasses andsins.” Christ redeemed her and gave her“life” again ... a process called “rebirth.”They were “raised” / “reborn” as theBride of Christ (i.e., New Jerusalem).

To restate this: it was not Yahweh(the Husband) who was destined to die,but rather Israel (the sinful wife) had to

die and be reborn.This transformation is prophesied

in Ezekie l 37 where the dead “drybones” of Israel were given new “life.”

Paul also addresses the death of OldIsrael in Ephesians 2:

1. And you (Israel) has He made alivewho were dead in trespasses andsins;

5. Even when we (Israel) were deadin sins, has (Yahweh) made usalive together with Christ, (bygrace you are saved;)

Also, Colossians 2:

12. Buried with Him (Christ) inbaptism, wherein also you arerisen with him through the faith ofthe operation of God, who hasraised Him from the dead.

13. And you, being dead in your sinsand the uncircumcision of yourflesh, has he quickened (madealive) together with Him, havingforgiven you all trespasses;

14. Blotting out the handwriting ofordinances (sin debt) that wasagainst us (Israel), which wascontrary to us, and took it out ofthe way, nailing it to His cross;

Colossians 3:

3. For you are dead, and your life ishid with Christ in God.

Israel died spiritually. Yahweh didnot die! Then when Israelites were re-born/raised in Christ as new creatures,they became new members of NewJerusalem, the Bride of Christ. This isthe meaning of Romans 7:1-3. Chris-tians (reborn Israelites) were new crea-tures (II Corinthians 5:17), raised by thelife of Jesus. This body of reborn Israelis married by covenant to the risen Jesus– the Bridegroom whom Yahweh pro-vided for her.

Now, look aga in at Romans 7.Verses one through three explain thatIsrael (the wife) is bound to her husband(Yahweh) as long as they both live. Now,look at verse four:

4. Wherefore, my brethren (Israel-ites), YOU ALSO ARE BECOMEDEAD...

Do you see? The husband wasn’t theone who died! It was “YOU” – Israel –who died, as we read in Ephesians andColossians. Also, Romans 6:

3. Know you not, that so many of usas were baptized into Jesus Christwere baptized into his death?

4. Therefore we are buried with himby baptism into death: that like asChrist was raised up from the deadby the glory of the Father, even sowe also should walk in newness oflife.

7. For he that is dead is freed fromsin.

8. Now if we be dead with Christ, webelieve that we shall also live withhim:

11. Likewise, reckon you also your-selves to be dead indeed to sin,but alive to God through JesusChrist our Lord.

Reborn Israelites are New Jerusa-lem. She is the bride. Jesus is the bride-groom. The marriage is completelyclean and new. The wife is new. Thegroom is new. If you consider this, you’llfind that it fits scripture.

The thory that Yahweh had to dieto remarry old Israel is so wrong it is offthe charts. For instance:

1. Yahweh cannot die, and thereforecannot be raised from the dead.

2. Even if Yahweh could die, therewould be no God left alive toraise him back to life.

3. Even if, by the stretch of the imagi-nation, Yahweh could die, and beraised back to life, He could notremarry old fleshly Israel becauseshe is an old whore and has beendivorced. There are specific lawsagainst High Pr iests marryingwhores and divorced wives. (seeLeviticus 21:1-7)

4. You may say, “Well, maybe Yahwehwould marry the new, reborn Israel,instead of the old whore.” But, yousee, reborn Israel (New Jerusalem)is not the old wife.According to Brit-ish Israeli tes’ doctrine, Yahwehmust remarry the Old Israel. But,


the law prevents it – even if the olddivorcedwife repentedand washedup a bit, she is still unfit for a highpriest.

New Israel (i.e. New Jerusalem) isnot Old Israel (Old Jerusalem). Old Is-rael is the racial descendants of Jacob.New Israel is the RAISED/REBORNREMNANT in Christ. Not all of Old Is-rael has been reborn. Therefore, theyare two entities distinguished from oneanother. New Jerusalem is a remnantof Old Israel, but not ALL of Old Israel.

See Romans 9:6-8:

6. ...For they are not all (New) Israelwhich are of (Jacob) Israel:

7. Neither, because they are the seedof Abraham, are they all children:but, In Isaac shall your seed bycalled.

8. That is, They which are the chil-dren of the flesh, these are not thechildren of God: but the childrenof the promise are counted forthe seed.

Reborn Israel is identified as “thechildren of the promise.” Old Israel isidentified as “the children of the flesh”(i.e. physical descendants of Jacob).Therefore, the old wife is not the newwife. Romans 7:4 says that the NewWife is to be married to ANOTHER(other than the old husband – Yahweh).Thus, New Jerusalem is married to theSon; the risen Jesus – heir of all cre-ation.

Yahweh did not die! Scripture doesnot say He died! He cannot die! Thosewho claim He died simply do not un-derstand scripture.

Questions for Critics:

1. Is Yahweh eternal and infinite(endless and limitless)? If so, howcould He die?

ETERNAL: without beginning or end;that has always existed and alwayswill exist; esp. of God.

INFINITE: boundless; limitless;endless.

FINITE: having bounds, ends orlimits; opposite of infinite.

DIE: to lose life; cease to live; sufferdeath.

—Oxford Universal English Dictionary

2. If Yahweh died, who ran theuniverse while He was dead?

3. If He died, who raised Him fromthe grave?

4. If He raised Himself, could Hehave been truly dead? [Life ema-nates only from life. A dead Godhas NO LIFE!] If He didn’t die100%, then He wasn’t really dead.

5. Where in the Bible does it say“God became flesh”? [It says “thelogos (God’s communication)became flesh. It does not sayYahweh/God became flesh.]

6. If Yaheh would have become flesh,would that have constituted a“change”? If so, how does thatsquare with Malachai 3:6? “I amYahweh, I change not.”

7. When Jesus “grew and waxedstrong in spirit, filled with wisdom”(Lk. 2:40), was He changing? If so,how does that square withMalachai 3:6?

8. Was Jesus different in death thanin life? If so, how could He havebeen Yahweh in light of Mal. 3:6?

9. Was Jesus different after beingraised from the grave? If so, howdoes Mal. 3:6 apply?

10. If Jesus was not changed in thedying and rising to immortality, thenexplain how He could have been a)mortal, b) dead, and then c)immortal —all without changing.

11. Was the infinite Yahweh changedwhen He allegedly became a finite,mortal embryo in Mary’s womb? IfHe was, then how does Mal. 3:6apply?

12. If Yahweh was not changed in theprocess of his alleged “incarna-tion,” “death” and subsequent


“resurrection,” how then could Hehave become a NEW husband forold Israel, as some claim? Wouldnot the act of becoming “a newhusband” constitute a change?

13. If Yahweh (the old God) died, andbecame Jesus (the new God), howdoes that differ from the paganbelief of reincarnation and “trans-migration”?

14. If Yahweh died so He couldremarry Israel, as some claim, thenthe New Covenant Bride (NewJerusalem) would be the OldCovenant Bride (Israel). If so, thenwouldn’t Jesus be marrying adivorced, defiled woman? Where inthe law does it say it is OK for ourHigh Priest (Jesus) to marry adivorced, impure, defiled woman?[See Lev. 21:1-7]

15. Who died – Yahweh, or Israel? -(Rom. 7:4: “... you [Israel] also arebecome dead . . .” ). Who wasraised – Yahweh, or Israel? - (Ez.37:5 “I will cause breath to enterinto you, and you [Israel] shalllive.”) Which one died, raised andbecame new – Yahweh, or Israel?(Mal. 3:6 “I am Yahweh, I changenot;’)

16. Who is the God of Jesus inHebrews 1:9 and in the prophecyof Micah 5:4?

17. When Jesus called himself “theSon,” did He really mean “theFather”? If so, didn’t He knowinglytrick and confuse his listeners?Wouldn’t it have been deceptive tosay “Son” if He meant “Father”?

18. Why did Jesus say He came fromthe Father if He was the Father?

19. Did God choose the words “son,”“begotten,” and “father” for theirdistinct meaning? Or do they referto only ONE person?

20. How can a father beget a childwho is actually himself?

21. Was Jesus “the Mediator be-tween God and man” (read I Tim.2:5)? If so, was God mediating forhimself?

—MEDIATOR: one who is intermedi-ate in position, rank, quality, time,etc.

—INTERMEDIATE: coming oroccurring between two things,places, times, numbers, membersof a series, etc; holding the middleplace or degree between twoextremes.

—Oxford Universal English Dictionary

22. Can a son be his own father? Ifso, can God be man? If so, canthat son-father-god-man alsomediate between Himself (as God)and Himself (as man)? Does thisnot constitute a complete loss ofword meanings and communica-tion?

23. How could Jesus “inherit” or“receive” anything if He wasalready Creator and Possessor ofheaven and earth?

24. Did Jesus pray to Himself inGethsemene? Was He askingHimself for help?

25. Can Yahweh sin, or be tempted tosin (Jms. 1:13)? If Jesus wasYahweh, how was He ”tempted”?(Mtt. 4:1; Heb. 2:18 & 4:15).

26. If Yahweh cannot sin, and if Jesusis Yahweh, what test or victory wasthere in Jesus being “tested” andproved “sinless” and “obedient”?

27. If the death of a god was neededto save Israel, and if He becomemortal before He died, then wasn’tit just a mortal man (and not a god)who died?

28. If men killed Yahweh, how couldthat have freed them from theirsin? Or did it just free them fromtheir accuser? Was it just man’sattempt to sidestep judgment andcorrection?

29. If God is a mystery and none ofthis is supposed to be logical orreasonable to man, how can weknow anything about our God?How can we know whether or notthe God we worship is the right oneamong all the counterfeit gods ofall the people of the Earth?

30. Some say that Jesus was “thevisible part of the invisible God.” IfHe was, then was He invisible andvisible simultaneously? If so, wasHe also mortal and immortalsimultaneously? And was He finiteand infinite simultaneously? etc.?

31. Where in Scripture does it saythat the “Deity of Jesus” is thefoundational doctrine of Christian-ity? And isn’t “deity” a paganRoman (Latin) term; never used inScripture to refer to Yahweh orJesus?

ACTS 14:

11. And when the people saw what Paul had done, they lifted up their voices, saying in the speech ofLycaonia, The gods are come down to us in the likeness of men.

12. And they were calling Barnabas, Zeus; and Paul, Hermes, because he was the chief speaker (Gk.“logos”).

14. Which when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of, they rent their clothes, and ran in amongthe people, crying out,

15. And saying, Sirs, why do you these things? We also are men of like passions with you, andpreach to you that you should turn from these vanities, to the living God, ...

P aulscolded

the men ofLycaonia fortheir paganbelief thatgods comedown toEarth as men.


THE AMERICAN CHRISTIANpublished by

American Christian MinistriesPO Box 740

Grangeville, Idaho 83530______________

Editor: Ben Williams

Yahwehchangesintoa man.

A

ALL OF YAHWEHBECAME JESUS

B

A PIECE OF YAHWEHBECAME JESUS

C

JESUS + YAHWEHEQUAL ONE GOD

D

JESUS WAS THEIMAGE OF YAHWEH(manifest in the flesh)

Yahweh transformed himselfinto Jesus. He gave up hispower and immortality and

became mortal.

Yahweh’s power remainedimmortal while his personality

became mortal in Jesus.

Jesus/Yahweh are two namesfor the same being. Jesus was

a God-Man ... natural andsupernatural simultaneously.

Jesus is a separate creationdesigned to spiritually ref lect

Yahweh.

– ANALYSIS

Yahweh could haveconceivably turned into a

man. However, a man cannotturn into Yahweh. Once

Yahweh became a man Hecould not return. Thus, withYahweh dead there wouldhave been no God to raiseJesus up from the dead.

– ANALYSIS

Like the “Trinity,” this claimhas impossible features.

1. Yahweh splits in half (whichis impossible)

2. Part of Him remainsimmorta l; part becomes

mortal – but both are sti ll onebeing (again, impossible).

3. If only half of Yahweh died,He did not truly die.

– ANALYSIS

This scenario claims thatJesus was a flesh facet ofYahweh. However, there

could have been no actualdeath on the cross since animmortal being cannot die.Also, it is impossible to be

flesh (mortal) and immortal atthe same time. The two are

mutually exclusive.

–ANALYSIS

Yahweh is immortal:unchanged. Jesus was born amortal, capable of sin (but Hedid not sin). He died, and wasraised to immorta l life by hisFather. Jesus is Yahweh’sSON, not Yahweh. He nowreigns as King at Yahweh’s

“right hand.“ This fits scriptureand creates no contradictions.

published - 1990 “letfactsbesubmittedtoacandidworld.“ · – when you say “father”do you...

Documents