FATHER AND SON MARRYING THE SAME WOMAN, AND

YET ARE NOT ONE BEING?

Dear pastor C (a Oneness or Jesus Only/Sabellian believer),
The fact that God chose to parallel (IN IMAGERY) the Godhead
in operation with not just the idea of a single unitary being in
operation (with imageries of the head of Christ, the Father,
controlling the arm of the Lord, the Son, and the finger of
God, the Spirit, see 1 Cor. 12:4-6), but also with the family and
Church unity in group terms, makes it absolutely plain that
there is meant to be a distinction of Godhead persons or
beings (no matter how limited these human-related words
may be when applied to divinity; it is all we have to work with).
This reality will forever haunt the theology of the oneness
Pentecostal.
It is true that it is tempting to see the entire Godhead as
literally one being only, with three members united indivisibly
in substance, because on earth no two beings naturally share
one spirit, or one mind, or speak, and act in unison as the
Father and Son of the Godhead does, but for the rather
enlightening spiritual illustration we have in the Church family
of Christ; it having many beings or members of the one body
or unity called Christ (1 Cor. 12:12,13), all united under one
head and sharing one mind or one Spirit (Rom. 15:6;1 Cor.
2:16;Phill. 2:5), and yet the individuality of the beings involved
is never lost. And Christ having many members of the one
body, does not mean there are many Christs (theres still just

one), in just same way the Godhead having three members

does not mean there are three Gods (theres still just one).
To better appreciate how the Godhead, as a family, is pictured
in imagery as if there is just one divine being involved, think on
these illustrative questions very, very carefully:
1. Was it Jesus only (as a human son) who was "begotten" by
His Father, or do his followers too (the Church) need to share in
this 'begetting' process as well?
2. Did Jesus actually baptize, or did his disciples (the Church) on
his behalf?
3. Was it only Jesus that was considered by God as "crucified"
or his followers (the Church) as well?
4. Was it only Jesus who will be miraculously resurrected with a
body to prove his 'sonship' with God, or his followers (the
Church) as well?
5. Was Jesus actually persecuted after he ascended, or was it
his body (the Church)?
6. Was Daniel 7:13, 14 a scene about Jesus, or was it about his
Church (Dan. 7:22, 27)?
7. Is Jesus alone called "Christ" (the anointed), or his followers
(the Church) as well (1 Cor. 12:12)?

8. Is Jesus the only one filled with the fullness of God (Col. 2:9),
or his followers (the Church) too (Eph. 3:19)?
9. Will Jesus be the only one to sit on His Father's throne, or will
his followers (the Church) do as well (Rev. 3:21)?
10. Will Jesus be the only one to judge the (lost) world, or will
his followers too (Dan. 7:22; 1 Cor. 6:3)?
11. Will Jesus be the only one to bear his Father's name in his
being, or his followers (the Church) too (Rev. 14:1)?
12. Was it only Jesus that was "sent" by the Father, on whose
behalf he acted as His mystical body, house, or tabernacle, in
order to reveal his character, or does this also applies to the
Church as the mystical body of Christ "sent" by him to do his
bidding, and to reveal his character to the lost world? Stated
another way, is it only Jesus whom is considered "one" with His
"Head" (the Father), or does this principle also apply to the
Church as the body of Christ (Heb. 2:11-14)?
Obviously, the answers you give to these searching questions
bro C will begin to show you why "oneness" theology is not
seeing the big picture, and hence "Oneness Pentecostals" need
to consider that your theology is probably not comprehensive
enough, contrary to your belief that you had it all right, and
that (according to your reasoning) it is either Trinitarians, or

Binitarians who have it incorrect (or so you thought).

Obviously, since Jesus is a divine being, then his human
followers cannot fully share in his divine attributes in the
absolute sense (since they are not "God" in nature), but you
will appreciate that ON JESUS' HUMAN SIDE almost every
experience he has had is either somewhat similar to that of
His followers, or is credited to his followers, the body of
Christ, the Church, as if the same one literal being is involved.
And yet Jesus and His body (the Church members) are distinct
beings. Does this begin to show you the errors of your theology
on Jesus' divine side? It certainly does not mean that simply
because the actions of Jesus is identified with His "Head", i.e.
God, the Father, that we are here dealing with the same literal
person!! We must never let the truth of God ever using imagery
to communicate deep spiritual themes escape us. And so what
we find is that the Godhead is revealed both in family terms, as
well in terms which seem to picture one unitary divine being at
work!! And yet we must accept the full picture; not just one
side of the coin. "Oneness" theology has sought only to run
with one side of the story, and has missed the big picture.
However, it is binitarianism, and Trinitarianism that has sought
to grapple with both realities as they existed from eternity. And
while the road to understanding has had many twists and turns
over the centuries (and this is obviously understandable, since
we are dealing with tough theological issues), yet the path of
the just is like a shining light that shines brighter and brighter to
a perfect day.

It is absolutely clear to me about the potent truths in the

following bro C:
1. Christians, or the body of Christ, are also "begotten" of God,
or "begotten again", and are actually "begotten" within the
"seed of the woman" (the Church). It is obvious that a woman
does not literally produce "seed", but when it is considered that
the Old and New Testament Church is considered both as the
bride of Christ (a female in imagery), and as his body as if they
are one being ("the seed of Abraham"), then it is seen how
Jesus uses the Church as the medium to 'beget' sons and
daughters on his Father's behalf. And of course we all must be
"born again" as God's spiritual sons (in order to no longer be
subject to death), just as Jesus was initially "born" as the
Father's divine "descent" from all eternity (Micah 5:2), but later
born a second time as the Father's earthly Son (in order to
become subject to death, so he could save us from death).
2. It is interesting that the Bible says that Jesus did baptize, but
explains it to mean it was his disciples who did it on his behalf.
Confusing? No!! Once we understand how the body is
identified with the Head, as if they are one being. Thus the
same with the Godhead family, with Jesus being identified with
the Father as if they are the same being carrying out the same
actions (despite they are separate beings).

3. It is also interesting that it was Jesus who was crucified as

the penalty for our sins, and yet Paul says we are crucified
with Christ, and his resurrected life is now ours, and his mind
(center of consciousness), as the Head of the body, is now
ours. Why? Because the body (the Church) is credited with the
merits of the Head (Jesus Himself), and so is identified with
Jesus as if we have already paid for our sins, but of course only
through him, the Righteous One who became sin for us. Thus
the same picture is plain in Godhead terms. Thats why the
Fathers own blood purchased the Church, as it were, and yet
it was Jesus who acted on His behalf as a separate being. It is no
mysterious concept to see ones literal son as your own flesh
and blood, or your own right hand, and yet you are separate
beings!! It is both a normal everyday imagery, and metaphor
used by humans. So why not see the same with the Godhead?
Only the stubborn and biased in mind fails to see this similarity.
And I am sure by now you can begin to see how I could answer
questions 5-12 in a similar way (and applying the same principle
to the Godhead) without doing any injustice to the Bible, or
assaulting common sense. In the human sphere we must all be
filled with the fullness of God, just as Jesus was filled by way
of the Spirits indwelling; a Spirit who is sent to live in us on
the Fathers and Sons behalf AS IF they are the one Being. But
in the same way we distinguish on the material side the
personal distinction of the Head (Christ) and body (the Church),
we must distinguish on the immaterial side of spirit, the Father,
and Son, and their sent Holy Spirit who operates as if they are
one being with one name (Matthew 28:19). It is interesting that

spirit, words (unless recorded in print), and wisdom are

intangibles, and it is these that God used to illustrate the
Godhead as if one literal Godhead Being is involved, and yet the
fact that God chose to parallel (IN IMAGERY) the Godhead with
not just the idea of a unitary being in operation, but also with
the family and Church unity in group terms makes it absolutely
plain that there is meant to be a distinction of persons or
beings (no matter how limited these human-related words
may be when applied to divinity; it is all we have to work with).
And I repeat, this reality will forever haunt the theology of the
oneness Pentecostal, and thus the reason why I have rejected,
and will forever reject Dr. Bernards theology, and his book on
the Oneness of God.
In closing, I see where Dr. Bernard, in this above mentioned
book, spoke of Iraneaus as an early second century Christian
apologist who could be seen as never believing in an eternal
trinity, but rather in an economic trinity that was temporary
for the purposes of Gods activities in the world. And hence, Dr.
Bernard tries to present the view that to Iranaeus Jesus as the
Son was just a temporary role of the Father Himself, but
realized only at Jesus incarnation. But having read Iranaeus
myself I must say what a blatant falsehood that is. Iranaeus did
see Jesus and the Father as the same Godhead Being, but this is
understandable in light of all I have explained above. But notice
how the truth was dawning on Iranaeus when he himself
admitted that the Son of God co-existed with the Father from
eternity, and that the Son of God was active in the world as
distinct from the Father in Heaven long before Jesus was

incarnated. And remember that co-exist means two separate

things/principles, if even united in imagery as one being (like
the Church with Christ):

180 AD
"But the Son, eternally *co-existing with the Father,
[thus co-eternal] from of old, even from everlasting,
yea, from the beginning, always reveals the Father to
Angels, Archangels, Powers, Virtues..."
-Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book II, ch. 30, section 9
180 A.D.
Christ Himself, therefore, together with the
Father, is the God of the living, who spoke to Moses,
and who was also manifested to the fathers [thus he
pre-existed as the Son]
-Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book 4, Chapter 5,
Section 2
180 A.D.
The Father is truly Lord [despite there is one Lord
Jesus Christ], and the Son truly Lord. The Holy Spirit
has fitly designated them by the title of Lord
Referring to the destruction of the Sodomites,
Scripture says, then the LORD [Jehovah] rained upon
Sodom and upon Gomorrah fire and brimstone from
the LORD [another Person also called LORD, or
Jehovah] out of Heaven. For it here points out that
the Son, who had also been talking with Abraham

[Gen 18:1] had received power [obviously from His

Head, the Father] to judge the Sodomites And this
[next text also] does declare the same truth: thy
throne O God is forever [Heb. 1:8, 10; thus the Son, as
God, has been in existence from eternity] For the
Spirit designates both [of them, Father and Son] by
the name of God [i.e. Jehovah]
Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book 3, Chapter 6
THEREFORE IT DOESNT MATTER WHERE YOU TURN BRO C,
YOUR JESUS ONLY DOCTRINE IS FILLED WIYTH HOLES ALL
OVER, AND IT IS TIME YOU WAKE UP TO THAT TRUTH!!
PLEASE DONT HATE ME BECAUSE I TELL YOU THE TRUTH. IT IS
BECAUSE I LOVE YOU WHY I AM DOING SO.

Yours in Christ
Brother Derrick Gillespie