Current Events

To Tell a Lie…

We have published a comprehensive booklet, titled, “Don’t Keep Christmas,” in which we explain, in detail, why Christmas celebrations are wrong and prohibited in Scripture. This booklet includes many quotes from historical records, proving that Christmas celebrations took place long before the birth of Christ. They were kept to honor pagan deities, such as the Persian sun god Mithras, who was born on December 25. By contrast, as our booklet proves on pages 23-25, Christ was not, and could not have been, born on December 25, or anywhere near that date.

Note the following quote regarding Mithras from pages 13 and 14 of our booklet, “Don’t Keep Christmas,” citing excerpts from an article of a popular magazine:

“Mithras is the name of that transcendent being from whom they expect salvation. And each year in the winter they celebrate his birthday: in the night of December 25 with a sort of service, which we could call today midnight mass… The birthday of Jesus was declared [by Emperor Constantine and the Council of Nice in 325AD] to be on the same day on which Mithras was supposedly born… Until then, Christians had not celebrated Christmas.”

In fact, early Christians refused to celebrate Christmas, as they considered it to be a pagan feast. Quoting from page 3 of our booklet, “Don’t Keep Christmas”: “Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, Vol. 3, concurs: ‘The celebration of Christmas on December 25 in the church begins only in the middle of the 4th century. Until then, the opposition against it was in some cases very severe…, since it was considered a pagan custom to celebrate with festivities the birthdays of kings.'”

Our booklet presents historical evidence that Christmas carols, Christmas gifts, Christmas candles and Christmas cakes, as well as the Christmas tree, are all of pagan origin, and had been used to worship pagan gods and goddesses. In regard to the Christmas tree, note this quote from page 22 of our booklet, “Don’t Keep Christmas”:

“Let’s also notice Jer. 10:2-5: ‘Thus says the Lord: ‘Do not learn the way [Note in the Lamsa Bible: ‘Religion’] of the Gentiles; do not be dismayed at the signs of heaven, for the Gentiles are dismayed at them. For the customs of the peoples are futile; for one cuts a tree from the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the ax. They decorate it with silver and gold; they fasten it with nails and hammers so that it will not topple. They are upright, like a palm tree, and they cannot speak; they must be carried, because they cannot go themselves. Do not be afraid of them, for they cannot do evil, nor can they do any good.’

“Here we find a description of the Christmas tree. Some have said, however, that Jer. 10 only talks about a wooden idol that was carved out of a tree, but that it does not refer to decorating a Christmas tree per se. Remember, though, that the pagans believed that their gods — Attis, Osiris, Dinosus — lived as tree spirits in pine trees. They believed that their gods actually changed into those trees, and they carried these sacred trees to a certain place of worship, decorated them, and adored them as deities.

“Jer. 10 condemns any kind of religious worship that includes the decoration of a pine tree or a ‘green tree’ (1 Kings 14:23), as well as the religious doctrines associated with such customs. Lamsa continues Jer. 10:8 as follows: ‘But altogether the vain doctrines of wooden image worship shall be utterly destroyed and consumed.'”

Our booklet also explains how gradually the Roman Catholic Church “adapted” those pagan customs to make the Christian faith more attractive to Gentiles. Quoting from Earl W. Count, 4000 Years of Christmas, it is stated on page 12 of our booklet: “‘The [Roman Catholic] Church finally succeeded in taking the merriment, the greenery, the lights, and the gifts from Saturn [a Roman sun god patterned after the Persian sun god Mithras] and giving them to the Babe of Bethlehem.'”

The age-old question is, however, why is it so important to know that Christmas and its customs were a pagan invention? What is wrong with “Christianizing” those pagan customs? We might not be able to bring Christ BACK into those customs (as He was never part of them in the first place), but why can’t we bring those customs to Christ and use them to worship Him in that way?

Simply, because the Bible prohibits us to do so. The concept of adding pagan practices to godly worship, known as “syncretism,” is condemned throughout Scripture. Again, we encourage our members, subscribers and friends to read or re-read our booklet, “Don’t Keep Christmas,” for a more comprehensive analysis of this important question.

In short, we read in Deuteronomy 12:29-32, that God commanded Israel that “you do not inquire after their [pagan] gods, saying, ‘How did these nations serve their gods? I also will do likewise.’ You shall not worship the Lord your God in that way…”

What could be clearer? God commands us NOT to worship Him in the way that the Gentiles did. Christmas was a pagan festival in honor of pagan gods. God FORBIDS us to worship Him in that way. We read in Matthew 15:7-9 that we worship Christ IN VAIN when we teach “as doctrines the commandments of men” or pagans. The Ryrie Study Bible comments regarding the passage in Deuteronomy 12:30: “The Israelites were not even to inquire about the worship of the Canaanites, lest they be tempted to INCORPORATE ASPECTS OF IT INTO THEIR WORSHIP OF GOD.”

That is, exactly, what the Roman Catholic Church did. That is exactly what God PROHIBITS His people from doing!

Throughout the Bible, God tells us NOT to ADD to God’s Word (Deuteronomy 4:1-2; Proverbs 30:5-6). This prohibition includes adding customs to our worship of God, which God did not prescribe, but which were used to honor pagan gods. Note this final quote from page 26 of our booklet, “Don’t Keep Christmas”:

“So if we contend that Christmas is a festival that honors God, then we add to God’s Word, which has nothing to say about the celebration of Christmas… Let’s also note how the apostle Paul approached the Christians in Corinth… he tells them in 1 Cor. 4:6: ‘… Do not go beyond what is written’ (NIV). A similar reminder is recorded in the second letter of John. He states in verse 9: ‘For if you wander beyond the teaching of Christ, you will leave God behind; while if you are loyal to Christ’s teachings, you will have God too’ (Living Bible). Those who do celebrate Christmas ‘go beyond what is written,’ and ‘wander beyond the teaching of Christ,’ thereby leaving ‘God behind.'”

Why Not Christmas

(Español: Por qué no la Navidad)

It’s Christmas time again. During the coldest and darkest season of the year, beautiful, colorful Christmas lights surround us. Some houses are decorated with breath-taking splendor, and one can hardly help oneself but to admire the display of electric lights in the midst of the cold and gloomy wintertime. Our children are introduced to the Christmas season as the time of peace and good will — as an important time of family unity and togetherness. In Washington, following an 80-year old tradition, national Christmas tree-lighting ceremonies are publicly held, and speeches are given talking about how Christmas celebrates the fact that Christ was born to bring peace to this world. When entering grocery stores, we hear famous and melodious Christmas songs, ranging from “Silent Night, Holy Night” to “O Christmas Tree,” or other well-known tunes. One sentence in a popular Christmas song may be especially telling, loudly proclaiming, “And man will live forevermore because of Christmas Day.”

Then, there are the Christmas presents. Especially children can hardly wait until Christmas Eve to see their presents displayed under the beautifully decorated Christmas tree. I still remember when my brother and I, as young children in Germany, were asked by my parents to go on an errand on Christmas Eve. When we returned, we were told that the little “Christ Child” had arrived at our home and had left behind a brand-new electric toy train, as well as other nice presents. Of course, in Germany and in certain other countries, children receive a double portion of presents, as they are being given a “foretaste” on St. Nicholas Day on December 6: An adult with a white beard, dressed in a red suit, appears to remind the children of their conduct throughout the year. He speaks of their good deeds, as well as, especially, their bad ones. Upon their promise “never to do it again,” the red-clothed Santa Claus puts his rod away and opens his big bag to present nice gifts. When St. Nicholas or Santa Claus appeared to us, we did not realize, at first, that our mother always “happened” to be away — and that she returned shortly after Santa Claus’ departure.

This sounds all so innocent, so well meaning, and it warms the heart of adults and brings back emotion-filled memories of years long gone by. But, could there be anything wrong with those celebrations?

Many, who support Christmas festivities, recognize their dark side. They point out that Christmas has become totally commercialized. The sale of Christmas merchandise begins right after Thanksgiving, in order to give all potential customers enough time to buy multiple presents for all their loved ones, their family and their friends. They also “need” to buy presents for those whom they are somehow “indebted to,” or from whom they hope to receive certain favors in return. People buy gifts, which they can’t afford, incurring credit card debts that they can never repay, only to fulfill their expected “obligations” to give presents to others. We also know that especially during Christmas season, more crimes are committed than at any other time of the year, and alcoholism runs rampant.

Religious people realize, too, that Christmas celebrations have become less and less focused on Christ, the alleged “cause” and “reason” for the holiday. And so, as we read in WorldNetDaily.com, “Every December, a call goes out from the nation’s pulpits to ‘put Christ back into Christmas.'”

But there is a problem with that call, as there is a problem with the entire Christmas festivities. The above-mentioned article continues, “… growing numbers of Americans — including fundamental Christians — are claiming Jesus Christ had nothing to do with the holiday.”

This brings us to the crux of the matter. What, if anything, does Christ have to do with Christmas? Was He born on December 25? Did He command, in the Bible, to keep Christmas holy? Where do all the different Christmas customs come from? Are they Biblical?

The fact that Christmas lights and candles look pretty is not the answer. If we can establish that Christmas celebrations are not commanded in Scripture — yes, that they are, in fact, prohibited and a counterfeit to true godly worship, then it is irrelevant how “nice” certain customs may look. Remember, we are told in 2 Corinthians 4:4 that there is a “god of this world” — Satan the devil — who has “blinded” the minds of those who don’t believe the gospel, “lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ… should shine on them.” If wrong, then Christmas lights would be a pitiful substitute for the true light of the gospel. Also, we are being told in 2 Corinthians 11:14, that “Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light.” What he offers does look nice and good and bright. In fact, sin has “passing pleasures” (Hebrews 11:25).

When researching the origin of Christmas and its customs, it becomes very soon abundantly clear that Christmas has absolutely nothing to do with the birth of Christ and the purpose for His First Coming. We discover that virtually every custom celebrated at Christmas time is of pagan origin, which had been used to worship pagan gods. Many of those who have studied the origin of Christmas have decided not to keep it any longer. Still, they are bombarded with Christmas customs, wherever they go. They may catch themselves, if they are not careful, humming or singing along with the Christmas tunes played in a supermarket. On the other hand, even professing Christians who strongly support Christmas celebrations are forced to admit the pagan origin of Christmas. They argue, however, that it does not matter. One article states:

“The true Origin of Christmas is filled with controversy and compromise. A quick study will reveal a number of disturbing roots… in short, the Christmas holiday we celebrate today is indicative of Christianity’s willingness to absorb the world’s customs and traditions, and forget its simple roots in the historical reality of Jesus Christ. Christmas should be nothing more than a simple, yet wonderful reminder of Christ’s humble beginning as a human child in this world… Whether it’s December 25th, sometime late in September, or any other day of the year, we should use each and every opportunity to reflect on Jesus Christ and His message of hope for all of us.”

But is this true? Should we use every opportunity, even if this means, embracing pagan customs? Is that the teaching of the Bible?

In this special Update on Christmas, we are addressing these important questions. Please be sure to carefully study the material, and read or re-read the booklet mentioned in this publication. Whether to celebrate Christmas or not, is man’s choice. However, to decree whether it is right or wrong to do so, is God’s prerogative.

Update 122

Who Do You Trust

On Saturday, December 20, 2003, Robb Harris will be presenting the sermon, titled, “Who Do You Trust.”

The services can be heard at www.cognetservices.org at the appropriate time, just click on “Connect to Live Stream.”

Back to top

Why Not Christmas

by Norbert Link

(Español: Por qué no la Navidad)

It’s Christmas time again. During the coldest and darkest season of the year, beautiful, colorful Christmas lights surround us. Some houses are decorated with breath-taking splendor, and one can hardly help oneself but to admire the display of electric lights in the midst of the cold and gloomy wintertime. Our children are introduced to the Christmas season as the time of peace and good will — as an important time of family unity and togetherness. In Washington, following an 80-year old tradition, national Christmas tree-lighting ceremonies are publicly held, and speeches are given talking about how Christmas celebrates the fact that Christ was born to bring peace to this world. When entering grocery stores, we hear famous and melodious Christmas songs, ranging from “Silent Night, Holy Night” to “O Christmas Tree,” or other well-known tunes. One sentence in a popular Christmas song may be especially telling, loudly proclaiming, “And man will live forevermore because of Christmas Day.”

Then, there are the Christmas presents. Especially children can hardly wait until Christmas Eve to see their presents displayed under the beautifully decorated Christmas tree. I still remember when my brother and I, as young children in Germany, were asked by my parents to go on an errand on Christmas Eve. When we returned, we were told that the little “Christ Child” had arrived at our home and had left behind a brand-new electric toy train, as well as other nice presents. Of course, in Germany and in certain other countries, children receive a double portion of presents, as they are being given a “foretaste” on St. Nicholas Day on December 6: An adult with a white beard, dressed in a red suit, appears to remind the children of their conduct throughout the year. He speaks of their good deeds, as well as, especially, their bad ones. Upon their promise “never to do it again,” the red-clothed Santa Claus puts his rod away and opens his big bag to present nice gifts. When St. Nicholas or Santa Claus appeared to us, we did not realize, at first, that our mother always “happened” to be away — and that she returned shortly after Santa Claus’ departure.

This sounds all so innocent, so well meaning, and it warms the heart of adults and brings back emotion-filled memories of years long gone by. But, could there be anything wrong with those celebrations?

Many, who support Christmas festivities, recognize their dark side. They point out that Christmas has become totally commercialized. The sale of Christmas merchandise begins right after Thanksgiving, in order to give all potential customers enough time to buy multiple presents for all their loved ones, their family and their friends. They also “need” to buy presents for those whom they are somehow “indebted to,” or from whom they hope to receive certain favors in return. People buy gifts, which they can’t afford, incurring credit card debts that they can never repay, only to fulfill their expected “obligations” to give presents to others. We also know that especially during Christmas season, more crimes are committed than at any other time of the year, and alcoholism runs rampant.

Religious people realize, too, that Christmas celebrations have become less and less focused on Christ, the alleged “cause” and “reason” for the holiday. And so, as we read in WorldNetDaily.com, “Every December, a call goes out from the nation’s pulpits to ‘put Christ back into Christmas.'”

But there is a problem with that call, as there is a problem with the entire Christmas festivities. The above-mentioned article continues, “… growing numbers of Americans — including fundamental Christians — are claiming Jesus Christ had nothing to do with the holiday.”

This brings us to the crux of the matter. What, if anything, does Christ have to do with Christmas? Was He born on December 25? Did He command, in the Bible, to keep Christmas holy? Where do all the different Christmas customs come from? Are they Biblical?

The fact that Christmas lights and candles look pretty is not the answer. If we can establish that Christmas celebrations are not commanded in Scripture — yes, that they are, in fact, prohibited and a counterfeit to true godly worship, then it is irrelevant how “nice” certain customs may look. Remember, we are told in 2 Corinthians 4:4 that there is a “god of this world” — Satan the devil — who has “blinded” the minds of those who don’t believe the gospel, “lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ… should shine on them.” If wrong, then Christmas lights would be a pitiful substitute for the true light of the gospel. Also, we are being told in 2 Corinthians 11:14, that “Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light.” What he offers does look nice and good and bright. In fact, sin has “passing pleasures” (Hebrews 11:25).

When researching the origin of Christmas and its customs, it becomes very soon abundantly clear that Christmas has absolutely nothing to do with the birth of Christ and the purpose for His First Coming. We discover that virtually every custom celebrated at Christmas time is of pagan origin, which had been used to worship pagan gods. Many of those who have studied the origin of Christmas have decided not to keep it any longer. Still, they are bombarded with Christmas customs, wherever they go. They may catch themselves, if they are not careful, humming or singing along with the Christmas tunes played in a supermarket. On the other hand, even professing Christians who strongly support Christmas celebrations are forced to admit the pagan origin of Christmas. They argue, however, that it does not matter. One article states:

“The true Origin of Christmas is filled with controversy and compromise. A quick study will reveal a number of disturbing roots… in short, the Christmas holiday we celebrate today is indicative of Christianity’s willingness to absorb the world’s customs and traditions, and forget its simple roots in the historical reality of Jesus Christ. Christmas should be nothing more than a simple, yet wonderful reminder of Christ’s humble beginning as a human child in this world… Whether it’s December 25th, sometime late in September, or any other day of the year, we should use each and every opportunity to reflect on Jesus Christ and His message of hope for all of us.”

But is this true? Should we use every opportunity, even if this means, embracing pagan customs? Is that the teaching of the Bible?

In this special Update on Christmas, we are addressing these important questions. Please be sure to carefully study the material, and read or re-read the booklet mentioned in this publication. Whether to celebrate Christmas or not, is man’s choice. However, to decree whether it is right or wrong to do so, is God’s prerogative.

Back to top

To Tell a Lie…

We have published a comprehensive booklet, titled, “Don’t Keep Christmas,” in which we explain, in detail, why Christmas celebrations are wrong and prohibited in Scripture. This booklet includes many quotes from historical records, proving that Christmas celebrations took place long before the birth of Christ. They were kept to honor pagan deities, such as the Persian sun god Mithras, who was born on December 25. By contrast, as our booklet proves on pages 23-25, Christ was not, and could not have been, born on December 25, or anywhere near that date.

Note the following quote regarding Mithras from pages 13 and 14 of our booklet, “Don’t Keep Christmas,” citing excerpts from an article of a popular magazine:

“Mithras is the name of that transcendent being from whom they expect salvation. And each year in the winter they celebrate his birthday: in the night of December 25 with a sort of service, which we could call today midnight mass… The birthday of Jesus was declared [by Emperor Constantine and the Council of Nice in 325AD] to be on the same day on which Mithras was supposedly born… Until then, Christians had not celebrated Christmas.”

In fact, early Christians refused to celebrate Christmas, as they considered it to be a pagan feast. Quoting from page 3 of our booklet, “Don’t Keep Christmas”: “Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, Vol. 3, concurs: ‘The celebration of Christmas on December 25 in the church begins only in the middle of the 4th century. Until then, the opposition against it was in some cases very severe…, since it was considered a pagan custom to celebrate with festivities the birthdays of kings.'”

Our booklet presents historical evidence that Christmas carols, Christmas gifts, Christmas candles and Christmas cakes, as well as the Christmas tree, are all of pagan origin, and had been used to worship pagan gods and goddesses. In regard to the Christmas tree, note this quote from page 22 of our booklet, “Don’t Keep Christmas”:

“Let’s also notice Jer. 10:2-5: ‘Thus says the Lord: ‘Do not learn the way [Note in the Lamsa Bible: ‘Religion’] of the Gentiles; do not be dismayed at the signs of heaven, for the Gentiles are dismayed at them. For the customs of the peoples are futile; for one cuts a tree from the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the ax. They decorate it with silver and gold; they fasten it with nails and hammers so that it will not topple. They are upright, like a palm tree, and they cannot speak; they must be carried, because they cannot go themselves. Do not be afraid of them, for they cannot do evil, nor can they do any good.’

“Here we find a description of the Christmas tree. Some have said, however, that Jer. 10 only talks about a wooden idol that was carved out of a tree, but that it does not refer to decorating a Christmas tree per se. Remember, though, that the pagans believed that their gods — Attis, Osiris, Dinosus — lived as tree spirits in pine trees. They believed that their gods actually changed into those trees, and they carried these sacred trees to a certain place of worship, decorated them, and adored them as deities.

“Jer. 10 condemns any kind of religious worship that includes the decoration of a pine tree or a ‘green tree’ (1 Kings 14:23), as well as the religious doctrines associated with such customs. Lamsa continues Jer. 10:8 as follows: ‘But altogether the vain doctrines of wooden image worship shall be utterly destroyed and consumed.'”

Our booklet also explains how gradually the Roman Catholic Church “adapted” those pagan customs to make the Christian faith more attractive to Gentiles. Quoting from Earl W. Count, 4000 Years of Christmas, it is stated on page 12 of our booklet: “‘The [Roman Catholic] Church finally succeeded in taking the merriment, the greenery, the lights, and the gifts from Saturn [a Roman sun god patterned after the Persian sun god Mithras] and giving them to the Babe of Bethlehem.'”

The age-old question is, however, why is it so important to know that Christmas and its customs were a pagan invention? What is wrong with “Christianizing” those pagan customs? We might not be able to bring Christ BACK into those customs (as He was never part of them in the first place), but why can’t we bring those customs to Christ and use them to worship Him in that way?

Simply, because the Bible prohibits us to do so. The concept of adding pagan practices to godly worship, known as “syncretism,” is condemned throughout Scripture. Again, we encourage our members, subscribers and friends to read or re-read our booklet, “Don’t Keep Christmas,” for a more comprehensive analysis of this important question.

In short, we read in Deuteronomy 12:29-32, that God commanded Israel that “you do not inquire after their [pagan] gods, saying, ‘How did these nations serve their gods? I also will do likewise.’ You shall not worship the Lord your God in that way…”

What could be clearer? God commands us NOT to worship Him in the way that the Gentiles did. Christmas was a pagan festival in honor of pagan gods. God FORBIDS us to worship Him in that way. We read in Matthew 15:7-9 that we worship Christ IN VAIN when we teach “as doctrines the commandments of men” or pagans. The Ryrie Study Bible comments regarding the passage in Deuteronomy 12:30: “The Israelites were not even to inquire about the worship of the Canaanites, lest they be tempted to INCORPORATE ASPECTS OF IT INTO THEIR WORSHIP OF GOD.”

That is, exactly, what the Roman Catholic Church did. That is exactly what God PROHIBITS His people from doing!

Throughout the Bible, God tells us NOT to ADD to God’s Word (Deuteronomy 4:1-2; Proverbs 30:5-6). This prohibition includes adding customs to our worship of God, which God did not prescribe, but which were used to honor pagan gods. Note this final quote from page 26 of our booklet, “Don’t Keep Christmas”:

“So if we contend that Christmas is a festival that honors God, then we add to God’s Word, which has nothing to say about the celebration of Christmas… Let’s also note how the apostle Paul approached the Christians in Corinth… he tells them in 1 Cor. 4:6: ‘… Do not go beyond what is written’ (NIV). A similar reminder is recorded in the second letter of John. He states in verse 9: ‘For if you wander beyond the teaching of Christ, you will leave God behind; while if you are loyal to Christ’s teachings, you will have God too’ (Living Bible). Those who do celebrate Christmas ‘go beyond what is written,’ and ‘wander beyond the teaching of Christ,’ thereby leaving ‘God behind.'”

Back to top

Why don't you celebrate Christmas?

We have published a comprehensive booklet, titled, “Don’t Keep Christmas,” in which we explain, in detail, why Christmas celebrations are wrong and prohibited in Scripture. This booklet includes many quotes from historical records, proving that Christmas celebrations took place long before the birth of Christ. They were kept to honor pagan deities, such as the Persian sun god Mithras, who was born on December 25. By contrast, as our booklet proves on pages 23-25, Christ was not, and could not have been, born on December 25, or anywhere near that date.

Note the following quote regarding Mithras from pages 13 and 14 of our booklet, “Don’t Keep Christmas,” citing excerpts from an article of a popular magazine:

“Mithras is the name of that transcendent being from whom they expect salvation. And each year in the winter they celebrate his birthday: in the night of December 25 with a sort of service, which we could call today midnight mass… The birthday of Jesus was declared [by Emperor Constantine and the Council of Nice in 325AD] to be on the same day on which Mithras was supposedly born… Until then, Christians had not celebrated Christmas.”

In fact, early Christians refused to celebrate Christmas, as they considered it to be a pagan feast. Quoting from page 3 of our booklet, “Don’t Keep Christmas”: “Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, Vol. 3, concurs: ‘The celebration of Christmas on December 25 in the church begins only in the middle of the 4th century. Until then, the opposition against it was in some cases very severe…, since it was considered a pagan custom to celebrate with festivities the birthdays of kings.'”

Our booklet presents historical evidence that Christmas carols, Christmas gifts, Christmas candles and Christmas cakes, as well as the Christmas tree, are all of pagan origin, and had been used to worship pagan gods and goddesses. In regard to the Christmas tree, note this quote from page 22 of our booklet, “Don’t Keep Christmas”:

“Let’s also notice Jer. 10:2-5: ‘Thus says the Lord: ‘Do not learn the way [Note in the Lamsa Bible: ‘Religion’] of the Gentiles; do not be dismayed at the signs of heaven, for the Gentiles are dismayed at them. For the customs of the peoples are futile; for one cuts a tree from the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the ax. They decorate it with silver and gold; they fasten it with nails and hammers so that it will not topple. They are upright, like a palm tree, and they cannot speak; they must be carried, because they cannot go themselves. Do not be afraid of them, for they cannot do evil, nor can they do any good.’

“Here we find a description of the Christmas tree. Some have said, however, that Jer. 10 only talks about a wooden idol that was carved out of a tree, but that it does not refer to decorating a Christmas tree per se. Remember, though, that the pagans believed that their gods — Attis, Osiris, Dinosus — lived as tree spirits in pine trees. They believed that their gods actually changed into those trees, and they carried these sacred trees to a certain place of worship, decorated them, and adored them as deities.

“Jer. 10 condemns any kind of religious worship that includes the decoration of a pine tree or a ‘green tree’ (1 Kings 14:23), as well as the religious doctrines associated with such customs. Lamsa continues Jer. 10:8 as follows: ‘But altogether the vain doctrines of wooden image worship shall be utterly destroyed and consumed.'”

Our booklet also explains how gradually the Roman Catholic Church “adapted” those pagan customs to make the Christian faith more attractive to Gentiles. Quoting from Earl W. Count, 4000 Years of Christmas, it is stated on page 12 of our booklet: “‘The [Roman Catholic] Church finally succeeded in taking the merriment, the greenery, the lights, and the gifts from Saturn [a Roman sun god patterned after the Persian sun god Mithras] and giving them to the Babe of Bethlehem.'”

The age-old question is, however, why is it so important to know that Christmas and its customs were a pagan invention? What is wrong with “Christianizing” those pagan customs? We might not be able to bring Christ BACK into those customs (as He was never part of them in the first place), but why can’t we bring those customs to Christ and use them to worship Him in that way?

Simply, because the Bible prohibits us to do so. The concept of adding pagan practices to godly worship, known as “syncretism,” is condemned throughout Scripture. Again, we encourage our members, subscribers and friends to read or re-read our booklet, “Don’t Keep Christmas,” for a more comprehensive analysis of this important question.

In short, we read in Deuteronomy 12:29-32, that God commanded Israel that “you do not inquire after their [pagan] gods, saying, ‘How did these nations serve their gods? I also will do likewise.’ You shall not worship the Lord your God in that way…”

What could be clearer? God commands us NOT to worship Him in the way that the Gentiles did. Christmas was a pagan festival in honor of pagan gods. God FORBIDS us to worship Him in that way. We read in Matthew 15:7-9 that we worship Christ IN VAIN when we teach “as doctrines the commandments of men” or pagans. The Ryrie Study Bible comments regarding the passage in Deuteronomy 12:30: “The Israelites were not even to inquire about the worship of the Canaanites, lest they be tempted to INCORPORATE ASPECTS OF IT INTO THEIR WORSHIP OF GOD.”

That is, exactly, what the Roman Catholic Church did. That is exactly what God PROHIBITS His people from doing!

Throughout the Bible, God tells us NOT to ADD to God’s Word (Deuteronomy 4:1-2; Proverbs 30:5-6). This prohibition includes adding customs to our worship of God, which God did not prescribe, but which were used to honor pagan gods. Note this final quote from page 26 of our booklet, “Don’t Keep Christmas”:

“So if we contend that Christmas is a festival that honors God, then we add to God’s Word, which has nothing to say about the celebration of Christmas… Let’s also note how the apostle Paul approached the Christians in Corinth… he tells them in 1 Cor. 4:6: ‘… Do not go beyond what is written’ (NIV). A similar reminder is recorded in the second letter of John. He states in verse 9: ‘For if you wander beyond the teaching of Christ, you will leave God behind; while if you are loyal to Christ’s teachings, you will have God too’ (Living Bible). Those who do celebrate Christmas ‘go beyond what is written,’ and ‘wander beyond the teaching of Christ,’ thereby leaving ‘God behind.'”

Back to top

New Booklet

Our new booklet, titled, “Are You Already Born Again?”, is finished and will be on its way to everyone on the mailing list shortly. If you would like to preview it, you can do so on our Website at: http://www.eternalgod.org/lit/booklets/bornagain.htm

In addition to several new German articles, two German booklets, titled, “Evolution — ein Märchen für Erwachsene,” and, “Deutschland in der Prophezeiung,” and a French booklet, titled, “Dieu est une Famille,” have been placed on our Website.

Back to top


How This Work is Financed

This Update is an official publication by the ministry of the Church of the Eternal God in the United States of America; the Church of God, a Christian Fellowship in Canada; and the Global Church of God in the United Kingdom.

Editorial Team: Norbert Link, Dave Harris, Rene Messier, Brian Gale, Johanna Link, Eric Rank, Michael Link, Anna Link, Kalon Mitchell, Manuela Mitchell, Dawn Thompson

Technical Team: Eric Rank, Shana Rank

Our activities and literature, including booklets, weekly updates, sermons on CD are provided free of charge. They are made possible by the tithes, offerings and contributions of Church members and others who have elected to support this Work.

While we do not solicit the general public for funds, contributions are gratefully welcomed and are tax-deductible in the U.S. and Canada.

Donations can be sent to the following addresses:

United States: Church of the Eternal God, P.O. Box 270519, San Diego, CA 92198

Canada: Church of God, ACF, Box 1480, Summerland, B.C. V0H 1Z0

United Kingdom: Global Church of God, PO Box 44, MABLETHORPE, LN12 9AN, United Kingdom

Europe – Now What

The European Union’s effort to seal its first-ever constitution collapsed Saturday, December 13, 2003, after leaders could not agree on the best way to divvy power once the 15-member bloc adds 10 new members next year. The key stumbling block was a proposal from Germany and France to scrap a complicated point system that was accepted in 2000 and gave Spain and Poland almost as many votes as Germany, which has twice as many people as either. French President Jacques Chirac called for smaller pioneer groups of countries to forge ahead with closer integration in defense, economic policy and justice. German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder predicted that there will emerge a Europe of two speeds. The Bible prophecies that in the end, ten nations or groups of nations will lead Europe. They will receive power for a very short time, and transfer it to the “Beast,” a political and military European leader. He is referred to as the king of the north, the beast, and King Jareb of Assyria.

Download Audio 

Current Events

Zimbabwe Resigns From Commonwealth

IRAQ WAR OPPONENTS BARRED FROM BIDDING

As Associated Press reported on December 9, 2003, “The Pentagon has formally barred companies from countries opposed to the Iraq war from bidding on $18.6 billion worth of reconstruction contracts… The ruling bars companies from U.S. allies such as France, Germany and Canada from bidding on the contracts because their governments opposed the American-led war that ousted Saddam Hussein’s regime.”

Reuters added the following in their report of December 9, 2003:

“The move is likely to anger France and Germany and other traditional allies in NATO and the U.N. Security Council who are being blocked out of prime contracts after their opposition to the war.” Procurement specialist Prof. Steven Schooner from George Washington University was quoted as saying, “This kind of decision just begs for RETALIATION and a TIT-FOR-TAT RESPONSE from countries (such as Germany, France and Russia).” The article also explained that there are “more than 60 countries eligible for contracts funded by the $18.6 billion appropriated by Congress to rebuild Iraq. The list included Britain, Australia, Poland, Japan, Italy, Norway, Spain, Turkey, Jordan, Egypt, South Korea, the Philippines, Romania and Saudi-Arabia.”

As could be expected, the European press of barred countries reacted furiously. Der Spiegel Online reported: “Governmental officials condemned the decision and announced resistance.” The German government spoke of an unacceptable decision and of “extremely selfish economic interests” of the United States. Associated Press added that Joschka Fischer said, “We will be speaking about it with the American side.” Russia reminded the United States of their promise to allow the entire international community to help reconstruct Iraq, according to Der Spiegel Online.

Associated Press added that it will be “difficult for [Canada] to give further money for the reconstruction of Iraq.” Canada has contributed so far $225 million to the rebuilding effort. The article also pointed out that “The White House… said Wednesday that countries wanting a slice of that lucrative pie must participate militarily in the post-war effort. Responding to the ANGRY RESPONSE FROM GERMANY, CANADA AND OTHER U.S. ALLIES, White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the policy was ‘appropriate and reasonable.'” Earlier, U.S. Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz had cited “national security reasons” for the decision.

Associated Press reported on December 11, 2003: “A conference of companies seeking $18.6 billion in reconstruction costs in Iraq has been delayed by eight days until December 19… The delay comes amid a FUROR over a Pentagon memo barring countries that didn’t support the U.S.-led war from bidding on the reconstruction contracts… [The government] declined to comment on whether the delay was linked to the dispute over the Pentagon directive.”

In a related article, Associated Press stated on December 11, 2003: “Europe’s foreign affairs chief… called the U.S. decision… ‘ [extremely] unhelpful.’… But the British government said Washington was fully entitled to limit construction contracts in Iraq to countries that were part of the U.S.-led coalition. The White House said THE BAN WAS NOT UP FOR RECONSIDERATION… The European Commission called the contract ban a ‘political mistake,’ and said it would examine the contracts to see if Washington had violated its commitments to the World Trade Organization… French President Jacques Chirac, German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and Russian President Vladimir Putin all raised the contracting issue during previously scheduled telephone calls with President Bush on Wednesday… [The] conservative French newspaper Le Figaro said Thursday the exclusion was ‘bordering on PROVOCATION.’ ‘For the United States, it is truly a shame that the politics of George W. Bush be presented, once again, in such a petty manner,’ the newspaper said. ‘THE ANTI-AMERICANISM THAT NEEDS TO BE COMBATED IS GOING TO BE REVIVED.’… Russia signaled it would take a hard line on reconstructing after being excluded from the contracts. ‘Iraq’s debt to the Russia Federation comes to $8 billion and as far as the Russian government’s position on this, it is not planning any kind of a write-off of that debt,’ [the Russian government stated]… [It] suggested the CONTRACT BAN COULD UNDERMINE THE INTERNATIONAL CAMPAIGN AGAINST TERRORISM.”

Der Spiegel Online published several articles on December 11, addressing the worldwide reactions to Washington’s decision. German politicians spoke of “REVENGE AND BLACKMAIL.” The magazine pointed out that German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder would like to see “constructive conduct” in accordance with “international law.” U.N. General-Secretary Kofi Annan, who was visiting Germany, asked the U.S. government to REVISE their decision. The magazine reported, too, that China is “angry,” and that they have voiced their concern. It added, “Pentagon Spokesman Larry Di Rita said that ‘this is not a final list. It might perhaps include additional countries.'”

Reuters reported on December 11 that President Bush rejected European criticism. He was quoted as follows: “It’s very simple. Our people risked their lives. Friendly coalition folks risked their lives, and therefore the contracting is going to reflect that, and that’s what the U.S. taxpayers expect.”

Not everyone in the United States agreed with the Pentagon’s ruling. As A.P. reported, “Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean… cited the policy as an example of the Bush administration’s ‘confrontation’ approach ‘all over the world.'” He added, “We are now the most feared country on the face of the earth but no longer the most respected.”

As God’s Church has announced for decades, the relationship between the United States and Europe WILL deteriorate. Some, who once understood this truth, have forgotten it and have looked for and begun to preach “alternative” end-time scenarios. However, there is NO ALTERNATIVE for the truth of the Bible.

UPDATE ON EUROPEAN CONSTITUTION

As FT.com reported on December 5, 2003, “The European Union risks falling apart if heads of government put in place a flawed constitution next week, according to Valery Giscard d’Estaing, the former French president who was the architect of the draft constitution.” The article continued: “Mr. Giscard d’Estaing told the European parliament: ‘History teaches us that bad constitutions, those which are felt to be unjust or ineffective by citizens, lead to revolution or rebellion.’… Should EU leaders fail to overcome their differences next week, Mr. Giscard d’Estaing suggested they should then allow ‘time for reflection,’ possibly until after the June parliamentary decisions, rather than rush into a new round of talks: ‘If there is no political will today… there would be nothing to expect from pushing the negotiations.'”

The article pointed out that “Germany is leading to push to have a system where voting clout is closely tied to population size… On the size of the future European Commission…, [Mr. Giscard d’Estaing] reiterated his belief that the EU’s executive could not operate effectively with as many as 31 commissioners… The draft constitution proposes having 15 commissioners with full voting powers.”

Associated Press reported on December 8 that “European Union foreign ministers admitted defeat Monday in their efforts to find a constitutional compromise between countries seeking greater integration and those who fear a European superstate. Their failure after nearly two months of arduous negotiations diminished hopes for a deal on a first-ever EU constitution despite a weekend deadline for action. The ministers said the issue was so divisive it could only be resolved by EU leaders, who arrive Friday for a two-day summit.”

The article continued:

“The countries also remained at odds over how to bolster the EU’s defense policy without endangering s
ecurity ties with the United States or trampling on some countries’ cherished neutrality. In an eleventh-hour appeal, neutral EU nations Sweden, Ireland, Finland and Austria objected strongly to a proposed mutual defense pledge, similar to NATO’S, stating that if one EU member is attacked, the others are obliged to provide assistance… Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini, who chaired the talks, said he would revise the clause for a new proposal… De Villepin [of France] WARNED Frattini NOT TO WATER IT DOWN… ‘The solidarity as expressed in this clause must not be downgraded,’ he told reporters.”

Der Spiegel Online reported on December 10, 2003, that “Great Britain’s Prime Minister Tony Blair is apparently concerned that he will be treated less than equal by Germany and France regarding the battle for the EU constitution.” The two countries stated, according to the article, that they would work together more closely if a EU Constitution should not become reality at this point.

In an additional article, Der Spiegel Online reported on December 10 about the “European Fear of ‘Francallemagne.'” It pointed out: “A new German-French power bloc is developing in Europe. Smaller nations are looking at this development with concern.” The article continued: “It’s all about power in Europe… Joschka Fischer declared that there would be smaller groups in Europe if a European Constitution should not be adopted… Especially Britain looks with suspicion at the new love between the former arch-enemies, Germany and France… The message: Be aware of a powerful Germany, and be even more aware of a powerful Germany together with an already powerful France… Former German Chancellor, Helmut Schmidt, is also not supportive of a German-French power bloc. ‘We need a new agreement for a greater Europe, and not one for France and Germany,'” he was quoted in the article.

Associated Press reported on December 11, 2003, that “a new draft constitution has failed to resolve divisions among European Union governments on a voting system for the enlarged union, with growing signs leaders will miss their weekend deadline for agreement. Instead nations hardened their positions as they prepared for the summit of EU leaders starting Friday to debate the union’s first-ever constitution. EU officials have said about 100 issues remain to be decided, including whether God should be mentioned in the charter and whether there should be a majority voting on foreign policy.”

Der Spiegel Online quoted Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi as saying, “If we reach an agreement, that would be a MIRACLE. But sometimes, miracles happen.” The magazine stated, too, that Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski announced that he does not agree with the current draft EU constitution. Jean-Claude Juncker, Prime Minister of Luxembourg, warned that a failure would be catastrophic for Europe. He was quoted as saying that this was the last chance for Europe to reach a political union for all European member states. Otherwise, he added, the core states of the EU might go their separate ways. This would then place a grave responsibility on the countries which originally founded the European Community in 1957, i.e., Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg.

Prophecy is marching on. The Bible reveals that ultimately, ten nations or groups of nations will lead Europe. It is exciting to see how this will work out on the political scene. It is important to watch these world events, as their fulfillment indicates the imminent return of Jesus Christ.

US RETREATS FROM GERMANY

Associated Press reported on December 8 that “the United States briefed NATO allies Monday on plans for an overhaul of American forces in Europe that may see tens of thousands of troops transferred from Cold War-era bases in Germany to new bases closer to potential trouble spots.” The article pointed out that “U.S. officials have previously said the realignment is likely to close or scale down many of the permanent bases set up in Germany and other NATO nations to face the Soviet threat. Instead troops will be shifted to smaller, lightly equipped centers ready for rapid deployment to places like the Middle East, the Balkans or Central Asia.”

AUSTRALIA JOINS U.S. MISSILE DEFENSE

Reuters reported on December 4, 2003, that “Australia has decided in principle to join a U.S.-led missile defense system, strengthening military ties with Washington.” The article pointed out, too, that “Australia has also joined the U.S. Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program to develop an advanced stealth fighter-bomber.” Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer was quoted as follows: “Our long and vigorous alliance with the United States benefits the security of both countries and will be strengthened by our participation in missile defense.” The article continued: “Canberra’s decision to join the U.S. program could spark renewed accusations by some Asian neighbors that Australia is playing ‘deputy sheriff’ for Washington in the Asia-Pacific region.”

ZIMBABWE RESIGNS FROM COMMONWEALTH

As Der Spiegel Online reported on December 8, 2003, the African state of Zimbabwe, formerly known as Rhodesia, resigned from the Commonwealth of Nations, after Zimbabwe’s membership had been suspended last year, due to alleged governmental election fraud and a refusal of President Mugabe to open the country to democratic reforms. During a Commonwealth summit in Nigeria, the vast majority of especially Western countries voted for a continuation of the suspension, while eight African countries were asking to revoke the suspension.

The Commonwealth of Nations represents one-third of the world population. It is a loose and voluntary confederation of currently 53 independent sovereign states, formed mostly by the United Kingdom and most of its former colonies. It was formerly known as the British Commonwealth, and many still call it mistakenly by that name.

As nationmaster.com explains, the Commonwealth is the successor of the British Empire and has its origins in the Imperial Conference of the late 1920s. After World War II, the Empire was gradually dismantled, “partly owing to the rise of independent movements in the then subject territories (most importantly India…), and partly owing to the British Government’s straitened circumstances resulting from the cost of the war. Burma (now Myanmar) (1948) and South Yemen (1967) are among the only former colonies that did not join the Commonwealth on independence. Ireland was a member, but left the Commonwealth upon becoming a republic in 1949.”

The article continued:

“India is the most populous member, with a billion people at the 2001 census, while Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nigeria each contain more than 100 million people. Tuvalu, in contrast, has only 11,000 inhabitants… One member of the present Commonwealth was never attached to the British Empire [i.e.,] Mozambique. [It] applied for and received membership in 1995… Fiji and Pakistan have had their memberships suspended in recent years because of military coups… South Africa’s membership was effectively suspended during the apartheid era… but was reinstated… in 1994. Nigeria was suspended between 1995 and 1999. Pakistan had earlier left on January 30, 1972… but rejoined in 1989. Zimbabwe was suspended in 2002 over concerns with the electoral and land reform policies of Robert Mugabe’s… government. Charles de Gaulle once suggested that France, though it was never a member of the British Empire (even if for centuries English/British monarchs claimed the title ‘King of France’), should apply for Commonwealth membership. This never happened.”

The current Commonwealth Members and their membership dates are as follows:

Antigua and Barbuda (1981); Australia (1931); The Bahamas (1973); Bangladesh (1972); Barbados (1966); Belize (1981); Botswana (1966); Brunei (1984); Cameroon (1995); Canada (1931); Cyprus (1961); Domini
ca (1978); Fiji (1970, left in 1987, rejoined in 1997); The Gambia (1965); Ghana (1957); Grenada (1974); Guyana (1966); India (1947); Jamaica (1962); Kenya (1963); Kiribati (1979); Lesotho (1966); Malawi (1964); Malaysia (1957); Maldives (1982); Malta (1964); Mauritius (1968); Mozambique (1995); Namibia (1990); Nauru (1999); New Zealand (1931); Nigeria (1960, was suspended in 1995, but readmitted in 1999); Pakistan (1947, left in 1972, rejoined in 1989); Papua New Guinea (1975); Samoa (1970); Seychelles (1976); Sierra Leone (1961); Singapore (1965); Solomon Islands (1978); South Africa (1931, left in 1961, rejoined in 1994); Sri Lanka (1948); St. Kitts and Nevis (1983); St. Lucia (1979); St. Vincent and The Grenadines (1979); Swaziland (1968); Tanzania (1961); Tonga (1979); Trinidad and Tobago (1962); Tuvalu (1978); Uganda (1962); United Kingdom (1931); Vanuatu (1980); Zambia (1964).

As mentioned above, Ireland left in 1949; Pakistan has been suspended since 1999; and Zimbabwe was suspended on March 20, 2002, and left on December 8, 2003.

From the above-mentioned Commonwealth Member states, the following 17 member states recognize the Queen of England, represented by a governor-general, as their Head of State, according to Swishweb.com, 2002:

Antigua and Barbuda; Australia; Bahamas; Bangladesh; Barbados; Belize; Canada; Grenada; Jamaica; New Zealand; Papua New Guinea; St. Kitts and Nevis; St. Lucia; St. Vincent and the Grenadines; Solomon Islands; Tavula; and Mauritius.

It may also not be widely known or commonly recognized that the following 20 member states are still monarchies, according to the Commonwealth of Learning, June 1999:

Antigua and Barbuda; Australia; The Bahamas; Barbados; Belize; Canada; Grenada; Jamaica; Lesotho; Malaysia; New Zealand; Papua New Guinea; St. Kitts and Nevis; St. Lucia; St. Vincent and the Grenadines; Solomon Islands; Swaziland; Tonga; Tuvalu; and the United Kingdom.

At one time the Commonwealth of Nations, formerly called the British Commonwealth, was a very powerful group of nations under British control. This is no longer the case, as nationmaster.com points out:

“With the mutual decline of interest in each other as former British colonies forge closer relationships with non-Commonwealth trading partners and close geographical neighbors, the Commonwealth’s direct political and economic importance has declined.”

Both Great Britain’s rise to power and the influential formation of a British-controlled Commonwealth, as well as Britain’s and the British Commonwealth’s political and economic decline were prophesied to occur thousands of years ago in the Bible. We will continue to inform our readers about these startling developments, as they are happening in front of our very eyes.

Update 121

The Armor of God

On Saturday, December 13, 2003, Rene Messier will be presenting the sermon, “The Armor of God.”

The services can be heard at www.cognetservices.org at the appropriate time, just click on “Connect to Live Stream.”

Back to top

Review and Future of UK Activities

by Brian Gale (United Kingdom)

As we approach the end of 2003, I feel that it is appropriate to review the last twelve months in the light of our UK activities. It has, in many ways, been a positive and fruitful year although, by comparison with activities when Mr. Herbert Armstrong was alive, our efforts and success are small indeed. But that is the way of the Church of God, organizationally, at this time.

In conjunction with our associates in the USA and Canada, 4 new booklets have been produced, two of which were printed in the UK. Another new booklet will be printed in the UK very soon. A number of further booklets are currently being considered for publication during 2004. We have advertised a number of booklets in different publications and have received many thousands of replies. Interestingly, the return to this office of booklets sent out has been very small and many requests for other booklets have been received. We also have a growing list of those, not church members, who have asked to be on our mailing list to automatically receive new booklets. This is hardly surprising as the quality of booklets produced is of a very high standard indeed and we really appreciate all the hard work in comprehensively covering each subject in minute, but very interesting detail.

Our web-site, www.globalchurchofgod.co.uk has been continually updated and improved and we are grateful to Mr. Paul Harris for his excellent work in this area. The site now has French and German sections which give it an international flavor and there are many sections that can be accessed including audio sermons, editorials, weekly questions and answers, prayer requests, booklets, member letters, the Feast sites and many other items.

The Feast of Tabernacles this year was held in the historic Pump Rooms in Royal Leamington Spa and the elegant Regency style complete with beautiful chandeliers provided a superb setting for Feastgoers from Bermuda, Canada, Portugal, the USA as well as the UK and the Republic of Ireland. The consensus of opinion was that the spiritual food was of a very high order indeed.

After much consideration, prayer and fasting, the decision has been made to take up the option we had for the Feast at Chatsworth House for 2004. Feast packs will be sent out in the near future and we look forward to returning to what is perhaps the most millennial site possible in the UK.

During the course of this year, the development of speakers has been pursued and this has paid handsome dividends with new speakers being encouraged and some men visiting different church areas to speak. This has not only encouraged the local groups but has assisted in developing the skills of those involved.

We now have circulation lists for people to receive audio sermon tapes (tapes from both the USA and those recorded in the UK), new booklets, weekly updates and member letters. If any recipient of this update does not receive any of these items and would like to do so, please let us know and we will be happy to include you on our circulation list(s).

We are pleased to be able to work closely with the Church of the Eternal God in the USA and the Church of God, a Christian Fellowship in Canada, who have been extremely supportive, encouraging, cooperative and helpful in our efforts and activities this year. Mr. Norbert Link from San Diego, California, will be visiting his parents in Germany in late January 2004 and will stop off in the UK and visit Derby on January 31st where he will give the sermon. All who want to meet up with Mr. Link and attend services that day will be made most welcome.

The year 2004 promises to be another interesting, and probably traumatic one with world events racing ever faster to the conclusion of man’s rule on this earth. We are, unquestionably, experiencing times more than ever before when society calls evil good and good evil (Isaiah 5:20).

Those with true Christian values are becoming more and more isolated in a society which has engaged in behavior and attitudes that strip away any pretence to its Judeo-Christian heritage as it engages in an “anything goes” society. One senior UK politician close to the Prime Minister rather famously, but shockingly and disparagingly remarked earlier this year: “We don’t do God.” This he said in spite of the Prime Minister’s public utterances that he is a Christian. Robert Knight, director of Concerned Women for America’s Culture and Family Institute, was quoted by Christianity Today, as follows: “Christians are sure to be targets of persecution for their beliefs if ‘gay’ marriage is given legal backing.” The article concluded, “In any case, this decision is huge news, both in itself and in its implications.” How much more will we, who keep the law of God and His weekly and annual Sabbaths, be a target for persecution in the months and years to come?

Much has been written about the appalling evils in society today and the evidence surrounding us in the UK. Films, videos, music, radio, television and newspapers in this area of the world are all party to a society that has surely just about cast off all restraint with much of the public baying for more. In our society’s ever accelerating downward spiral, the norms of yesteryear are now considered old fashioned as boundaries are pushed further and further back. We are instructed in Luke 21:36 to “Watch therefore, and pray always that you may be counted worthy to escape all these things that will come to pass, and to stand before the Son of Man.” This means that we have to watch world events which will help us to primarily, and most importantly, watch over our spiritual condition, as verses 34 and 35 emphasize. We have to be watchful ensuring that the cares of the world don’t affect us in any adverse way and that its ways don’t rub off on us. With the tests and trials that we experience, this may often be easier said than done but it is an essential element of our Christian calling.

Whatever happens during 2004, let us all resolve to continue to “grow in grace and knowledge” as we move forward in our Christian walk towards the Kingdom of God.

Back to top

Zimbabwe Resigns From Commonwealth

IRAQ WAR OPPONENTS BARRED FROM BIDDING

As Associated Press reported on December 9, 2003, “The Pentagon has formally barred companies from countries opposed to the Iraq war from bidding on $18.6 billion worth of reconstruction contracts… The ruling bars companies from U.S. allies such as France, Germany and Canada from bidding on the contracts because their governments opposed the American-led war that ousted Saddam Hussein’s regime.”

Reuters added the following in their report of December 9, 2003:

“The move is likely to anger France and Germany and other traditional allies in NATO and the U.N. Security Council who are being blocked out of prime contracts after their opposition to the war.” Procurement specialist Prof. Steven Schooner from George Washington University was quoted as saying, “This kind of decision just begs for RETALIATION and a TIT-FOR-TAT RESPONSE from countries (such as Germany, France and Russia).” The article also explained that there are “more than 60 countries eligible for contracts funded by the $18.6 billion appropriated by Congress to rebuild Iraq. The list included Britain, Australia, Poland, Japan, Italy, Norway, Spain, Turkey, Jordan, Egypt, South Korea, the Philippines, Romania and Saudi-Arabia.”

As could be expected, the European press of barred countries reacted furiously. Der Spiegel Online reported: “Governmental officials condemned the decision and announced resistance.” The German government spoke of an unacceptable decision and of “extremely selfish economic interests” of the United States. Associated Press added that Joschka Fischer said, “We will be speaking about it with the American side.” Russia reminded the United States of their promise to allow the entire international community to help reconstruct Iraq, according to Der Spiegel Online.

Associated Press added that it will be “difficult for [Canada] to give further money for the reconstruction of Iraq.” Canada has contributed so far $225 million to the rebuilding effort. The article also pointed out that “The White House… said Wednesday that countries wanting a slice of that lucrative pie must participate militarily in the post-war effort. Responding to the ANGRY RESPONSE FROM GERMANY, CANADA AND OTHER U.S. ALLIES, White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the policy was ‘appropriate and reasonable.'” Earlier, U.S. Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz had cited “national security reasons” for the decision.

Associated Press reported on December 11, 2003: “A conference of companies seeking $18.6 billion in reconstruction costs in Iraq has been delayed by eight days until December 19… The delay comes amid a FUROR over a Pentagon memo barring countries that didn’t support the U.S.-led war from bidding on the reconstruction contracts… [The government] declined to comment on whether the delay was linked to the dispute over the Pentagon directive.”

In a related article, Associated Press stated on December 11, 2003: “Europe’s foreign affairs chief… called the U.S. decision… ‘ [extremely] unhelpful.’… But the British government said Washington was fully entitled to limit construction contracts in Iraq to countries that were part of the U.S.-led coalition. The White House said THE BAN WAS NOT UP FOR RECONSIDERATION… The European Commission called the contract ban a ‘political mistake,’ and said it would examine the contracts to see if Washington had violated its commitments to the World Trade Organization… French President Jacques Chirac, German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and Russian President Vladimir Putin all raised the contracting issue during previously scheduled telephone calls with President Bush on Wednesday… [The] conservative French newspaper Le Figaro said Thursday the exclusion was ‘bordering on PROVOCATION.’ ‘For the United States, it is truly a shame that the politics of George W. Bush be presented, once again, in such a petty manner,’ the newspaper said. ‘THE ANTI-AMERICANISM THAT NEEDS TO BE COMBATED IS GOING TO BE REVIVED.’… Russia signaled it would take a hard line on reconstructing after being excluded from the contracts. ‘Iraq’s debt to the Russia Federation comes to $8 billion and as far as the Russian government’s position on this, it is not planning any kind of a write-off of that debt,’ [the Russian government stated]… [It] suggested the CONTRACT BAN COULD UNDERMINE THE INTERNATIONAL CAMPAIGN AGAINST TERRORISM.”

Der Spiegel Online published several articles on December 11, addressing the worldwide reactions to Washington’s decision. German politicians spoke of “REVENGE AND BLACKMAIL.” The magazine pointed out that German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder would like to see “constructive conduct” in accordance with “international law.” U.N. General-Secretary Kofi Annan, who was visiting Germany, asked the U.S. government to REVISE their decision. The magazine reported, too, that China is “angry,” and that they have voiced their concern. It added, “Pentagon Spokesman Larry Di Rita said that ‘this is not a final list. It might perhaps include additional countries.'”

Reuters reported on December 11 that President Bush rejected European criticism. He was quoted as follows: “It’s very simple. Our people risked their lives. Friendly coalition folks risked their lives, and therefore the contracting is going to reflect that, and that’s what the U.S. taxpayers expect.”

Not everyone in the United States agreed with the Pentagon’s ruling. As A.P. reported, “Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean… cited the policy as an example of the Bush administration’s ‘confrontation’ approach ‘all over the world.'” He added, “We are now the most feared country on the face of the earth but no longer the most respected.”

As God’s Church has announced for decades, the relationship between the United States and Europe WILL deteriorate. Some, who once understood this truth, have forgotten it and have looked for and begun to preach “alternative” end-time scenarios. However, there is NO ALTERNATIVE for the truth of the Bible.

UPDATE ON EUROPEAN CONSTITUTION

As FT.com reported on December 5, 2003, “The European Union risks falling apart if heads of government put in place a flawed constitution next week, according to Valery Giscard d’Estaing, the former French president who was the architect of the draft constitution.” The article continued: “Mr. Giscard d’Estaing told the European parliament: ‘History teaches us that bad constitutions, those which are felt to be unjust or ineffective by citizens, lead to revolution or rebellion.’… Should EU leaders fail to overcome their differences next week, Mr. Giscard d’Estaing suggested they should then allow ‘time for reflection,’ possibly until after the June parliamentary decisions, rather than rush into a new round of talks: ‘If there is no political will today… there would be nothing to expect from pushing the negotiations.'”

The article pointed out that “Germany is leading to push to have a system where voting clout is closely tied to population size… On the size of the future European Commission…, [Mr. Giscard d’Estaing] reiterated his belief that the EU’s executive could not operate effectively with as many as 31 commissioners… The draft constitution proposes having 15 commissioners with full voting powers.”

Associated Press reported on December 8 that “European Union foreign ministers admitted defeat Monday in their efforts to find a constitutional compromise between countries seeking greater integration and those who fear a European superstate. Their failure after nearly two months of arduous negotiations diminished hopes for a deal on a first-ever EU constitution despite a weekend deadline for action. The ministers said the issue was so divisive it could only be resolved by EU leaders, who arrive Friday for a two-day summit.”

The article continued:

“The countries also remained at odds over how to bolster the EU’s defense policy without endangering s
ecurity ties with the United States or trampling on some countries’ cherished neutrality. In an eleventh-hour appeal, neutral EU nations Sweden, Ireland, Finland and Austria objected strongly to a proposed mutual defense pledge, similar to NATO’S, stating that if one EU member is attacked, the others are obliged to provide assistance… Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini, who chaired the talks, said he would revise the clause for a new proposal… De Villepin [of France] WARNED Frattini NOT TO WATER IT DOWN… ‘The solidarity as expressed in this clause must not be downgraded,’ he told reporters.”

Der Spiegel Online reported on December 10, 2003, that “Great Britain’s Prime Minister Tony Blair is apparently concerned that he will be treated less than equal by Germany and France regarding the battle for the EU constitution.” The two countries stated, according to the article, that they would work together more closely if a EU Constitution should not become reality at this point.

In an additional article, Der Spiegel Online reported on December 10 about the “European Fear of ‘Francallemagne.'” It pointed out: “A new German-French power bloc is developing in Europe. Smaller nations are looking at this development with concern.” The article continued: “It’s all about power in Europe… Joschka Fischer declared that there would be smaller groups in Europe if a European Constitution should not be adopted… Especially Britain looks with suspicion at the new love between the former arch-enemies, Germany and France… The message: Be aware of a powerful Germany, and be even more aware of a powerful Germany together with an already powerful France… Former German Chancellor, Helmut Schmidt, is also not supportive of a German-French power bloc. ‘We need a new agreement for a greater Europe, and not one for France and Germany,'” he was quoted in the article.

Associated Press reported on December 11, 2003, that “a new draft constitution has failed to resolve divisions among European Union governments on a voting system for the enlarged union, with growing signs leaders will miss their weekend deadline for agreement. Instead nations hardened their positions as they prepared for the summit of EU leaders starting Friday to debate the union’s first-ever constitution. EU officials have said about 100 issues remain to be decided, including whether God should be mentioned in the charter and whether there should be a majority voting on foreign policy.”

Der Spiegel Online quoted Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi as saying, “If we reach an agreement, that would be a MIRACLE. But sometimes, miracles happen.” The magazine stated, too, that Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski announced that he does not agree with the current draft EU constitution. Jean-Claude Juncker, Prime Minister of Luxembourg, warned that a failure would be catastrophic for Europe. He was quoted as saying that this was the last chance for Europe to reach a political union for all European member states. Otherwise, he added, the core states of the EU might go their separate ways. This would then place a grave responsibility on the countries which originally founded the European Community in 1957, i.e., Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg.

Prophecy is marching on. The Bible reveals that ultimately, ten nations or groups of nations will lead Europe. It is exciting to see how this will work out on the political scene. It is important to watch these world events, as their fulfillment indicates the imminent return of Jesus Christ.

US RETREATS FROM GERMANY

Associated Press reported on December 8 that “the United States briefed NATO allies Monday on plans for an overhaul of American forces in Europe that may see tens of thousands of troops transferred from Cold War-era bases in Germany to new bases closer to potential trouble spots.” The article pointed out that “U.S. officials have previously said the realignment is likely to close or scale down many of the permanent bases set up in Germany and other NATO nations to face the Soviet threat. Instead troops will be shifted to smaller, lightly equipped centers ready for rapid deployment to places like the Middle East, the Balkans or Central Asia.”

AUSTRALIA JOINS U.S. MISSILE DEFENSE

Reuters reported on December 4, 2003, that “Australia has decided in principle to join a U.S.-led missile defense system, strengthening military ties with Washington.” The article pointed out, too, that “Australia has also joined the U.S. Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program to develop an advanced stealth fighter-bomber.” Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer was quoted as follows: “Our long and vigorous alliance with the United States benefits the security of both countries and will be strengthened by our participation in missile defense.” The article continued: “Canberra’s decision to join the U.S. program could spark renewed accusations by some Asian neighbors that Australia is playing ‘deputy sheriff’ for Washington in the Asia-Pacific region.”

ZIMBABWE RESIGNS FROM COMMONWEALTH

As Der Spiegel Online reported on December 8, 2003, the African state of Zimbabwe, formerly known as Rhodesia, resigned from the Commonwealth of Nations, after Zimbabwe’s membership had been suspended last year, due to alleged governmental election fraud and a refusal of President Mugabe to open the country to democratic reforms. During a Commonwealth summit in Nigeria, the vast majority of especially Western countries voted for a continuation of the suspension, while eight African countries were asking to revoke the suspension.

The Commonwealth of Nations represents one-third of the world population. It is a loose and voluntary confederation of currently 53 independent sovereign states, formed mostly by the United Kingdom and most of its former colonies. It was formerly known as the British Commonwealth, and many still call it mistakenly by that name.

As nationmaster.com explains, the Commonwealth is the successor of the British Empire and has its origins in the Imperial Conference of the late 1920s. After World War II, the Empire was gradually dismantled, “partly owing to the rise of independent movements in the then subject territories (most importantly India…), and partly owing to the British Government’s straitened circumstances resulting from the cost of the war. Burma (now Myanmar) (1948) and South Yemen (1967) are among the only former colonies that did not join the Commonwealth on independence. Ireland was a member, but left the Commonwealth upon becoming a republic in 1949.”

The article continued:

“India is the most populous member, with a billion people at the 2001 census, while Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nigeria each contain more than 100 million people. Tuvalu, in contrast, has only 11,000 inhabitants… One member of the present Commonwealth was never attached to the British Empire [i.e.,] Mozambique. [It] applied for and received membership in 1995… Fiji and Pakistan have had their memberships suspended in recent years because of military coups… South Africa’s membership was effectively suspended during the apartheid era… but was reinstated… in 1994. Nigeria was suspended between 1995 and 1999. Pakistan had earlier left on January 30, 1972… but rejoined in 1989. Zimbabwe was suspended in 2002 over concerns with the electoral and land reform policies of Robert Mugabe’s… government. Charles de Gaulle once suggested that France, though it was never a member of the British Empire (even if for centuries English/British monarchs claimed the title ‘King of France’), should apply for Commonwealth membership. This never happened.”

The current Commonwealth Members and their membership dates are as follows:

Antigua and Barbuda (1981); Australia (1931); The Bahamas (1973); Bangladesh (1972); Barbados (1966); Belize (1981); Botswana (1966); Brunei (1984); Cameroon (1995); Canada (1931); Cyprus (1961); Domini
ca (1978); Fiji (1970, left in 1987, rejoined in 1997); The Gambia (1965); Ghana (1957); Grenada (1974); Guyana (1966); India (1947); Jamaica (1962); Kenya (1963); Kiribati (1979); Lesotho (1966); Malawi (1964); Malaysia (1957); Maldives (1982); Malta (1964); Mauritius (1968); Mozambique (1995); Namibia (1990); Nauru (1999); New Zealand (1931); Nigeria (1960, was suspended in 1995, but readmitted in 1999); Pakistan (1947, left in 1972, rejoined in 1989); Papua New Guinea (1975); Samoa (1970); Seychelles (1976); Sierra Leone (1961); Singapore (1965); Solomon Islands (1978); South Africa (1931, left in 1961, rejoined in 1994); Sri Lanka (1948); St. Kitts and Nevis (1983); St. Lucia (1979); St. Vincent and The Grenadines (1979); Swaziland (1968); Tanzania (1961); Tonga (1979); Trinidad and Tobago (1962); Tuvalu (1978); Uganda (1962); United Kingdom (1931); Vanuatu (1980); Zambia (1964).

As mentioned above, Ireland left in 1949; Pakistan has been suspended since 1999; and Zimbabwe was suspended on March 20, 2002, and left on December 8, 2003.

From the above-mentioned Commonwealth Member states, the following 17 member states recognize the Queen of England, represented by a governor-general, as their Head of State, according to Swishweb.com, 2002:

Antigua and Barbuda; Australia; Bahamas; Bangladesh; Barbados; Belize; Canada; Grenada; Jamaica; New Zealand; Papua New Guinea; St. Kitts and Nevis; St. Lucia; St. Vincent and the Grenadines; Solomon Islands; Tavula; and Mauritius.

It may also not be widely known or commonly recognized that the following 20 member states are still monarchies, according to the Commonwealth of Learning, June 1999:

Antigua and Barbuda; Australia; The Bahamas; Barbados; Belize; Canada; Grenada; Jamaica; Lesotho; Malaysia; New Zealand; Papua New Guinea; St. Kitts and Nevis; St. Lucia; St. Vincent and the Grenadines; Solomon Islands; Swaziland; Tonga; Tuvalu; and the United Kingdom.

At one time the Commonwealth of Nations, formerly called the British Commonwealth, was a very powerful group of nations under British control. This is no longer the case, as nationmaster.com points out:

“With the mutual decline of interest in each other as former British colonies forge closer relationships with non-Commonwealth trading partners and close geographical neighbors, the Commonwealth’s direct political and economic importance has declined.”

Both Great Britain’s rise to power and the influential formation of a British-controlled Commonwealth, as well as Britain’s and the British Commonwealth’s political and economic decline were prophesied to occur thousands of years ago in the Bible. We will continue to inform our readers about these startling developments, as they are happening in front of our very eyes.

Back to top

What is the "key of David," spoken of in Scripture?

The term “key of David” is only mentioned once in the New Testament, in Revelation 3:7, and a deviation of the term, i.e., “key of the house of David,” is only mentioned once in the Old Testament, in Isaiah 22:22.

Before analyzing the meaning of the phrase, “key of David,” or, “key of the house of David,” let us review Scriptures first which use the term, “key.” In the Old Testament, the Hebrew word for “key” (in the phrase, “key of the house of David”), is “maphteach” It is defined by Young’s Analytical Concordance of the Bible, as, “key, opener” or “opening.” In addition to Isaiah 22:22, the word is only used two more times, in Judges 3:25, and in 1 Chronicles 9:27. In both cases, the word describes a literal key that opens a literal door to a literal building or room.

In the New Testament, the Greek word for “key,” as used in Revelation 3:7, is “kleis.” It is a female word and defined by Young’s as, “a key.” It is used 6 times in the New Testament. In addition to Revelation 3:7, we find it three more times in the book of Revelation, i.e., in Revelation 1:18; 9:1; and 20:1. We also find it used in Matthew 16:19 and in Luke 11:52.

Revelation 9:1 and Revelation 20:1 speak about “the key of the bottomless pit.” The “bottomless pit” is the location where Satan and his demons will be bound for a thousand years, after Christ’s return (compare, too, Luke 8:31, where the word is translated as, “abyss.”). The bottomless pit or abyss describes a (spiritual) future prison for fallen angels, and the “key” to the bottomless pit describes a (spiritual) key to open and shut this prison. The concept of “key” is used in a similar fashion here, as it is used in Judges 3:25 and 1 Chronicles 9:27.

In addition, we read in Matthew 16:19 that Christ gave Peter “the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” The context shows that He was revealing to Peter and the other disciples the KNOWLEDGE as to how to enter the Kingdom of God. (For more information, please study our free booklet, “The Gospel of the Kingdom of God.”) In Luke 11:52, Christ clarifies this, by saying: “Woe to you lawyers! For you have taken away the key of KNOWLEDGE. You did not enter in, and those who were entering in you hindered.” (The parallel scripture in Matthew 23:13 shows that Christ was talking about entering the Kingdom of God).

Turning to the book of Revelation, Christ said in Revelation 1:18 that He has the “keys of Hades and Death.” In other words, He has the KNOWLEDGE to bestow on us, of how to escape death. Psalm 68:20 tells us: “Our God is the God of salvation; and to God the LORD belong escapes from death.” Further, Christ decides, of course, who will be found worthy to enter into eternal life.

We have seen so far that a key opens and shuts a literal building or room, and that it unlocks or opens to our understanding the knowledge of how to escape death and how to enter the kingdom of God.

Turning to Revelation 3:7-8, we find that the word, “key” is used in exactly the same way, when it talks about the “key of David.” The passage reads, “And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write, “These things says He who is holy, He who is true, He who has the key of David, He who opens and no one shuts, and shuts and no one opens: ‘I know your works. See, I have set before you an open door, and no one can shut it; for you have a little strength, have kept My word, and have not denied My name.'”

Christ reveals that it is He who has the key of David, and that it is He who opens and shuts. We also read that Christ gave “the church in Philadelphia” (Revelation 3:7) “an open door.”

Our Update # 107 discusses in detail the concept of the “open door.” One of the meanings is the ongoing obligation and ability of God’s Church to preach the gospel of the kingdom of God. In the process of preaching the gospel message, some will be called and obtain the knowledge of how to enter the Kingdom. The key of David, then, has to have some kind of nexus with the preaching of the gospel message and the response by some to the message.

As we explain on pages 39-42 of our booklet, “And Lawlessness Will Abound,” God made a covenant with David and his descendants. According to that covenant, there would always sit a descendant of David on the throne of David. This throne exists today on earth, and Jesus Christ will return to an existing throne, and He, as a descendant of David, will then sit on that throne and rule from it. Therefore, the “key of David” is associated with the knowledge of where the throne of David is today, and who are today the modern nations of the houses of Israel and Judah (as the throne of David would always rule over “Israel.”). The booklet also explains that God made His covenant with David because David kept God’s Law. In Isaiah 55:3, the new or “everlasting” covenant is described as “the sure mercies of David.”

We are told in Scripture that we will rule on this earth, with and under Christ, sitting on thrones (compare Matthew 19:28). The rule of the saints on this earth is clearly part of the gospel message. In fact, only when we have entered the Kingdom of God as Spirit beings, will we be able to rule with Christ on this earth. We will then be part of the Kingdom or Family of God, ruling – as God beings – over man. King David will be in the Kingdom of God. He, too, will be a member of the God Family at that time. Jeremiah 30:9 prophesies: “But they shall serve the LORD their God, And David their king, Whom I will RAISE UP for them.” (Compare, too, Hosea 3:5).

God’s covenant with David makes it possible that Christians, when they are born again as Spirit beings, can rule, with and under Christ, in the Kingdom of God. Christ came as a human being to qualify so that God the Father would “give Him the throne of His father David. And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there will be no end” (Luke 1:32-33). We will share in Christ’s rule in Jerusalem (Daniel 7:27; Isaiah 2:1-4), which will be established first over the modern houses of Israel and Judah. We understand, of course, that God’s government and rule “upon the throne of David and over His kingdom” (Isaiah 9:7) will increase and finally include all nations (compare Isaiah 66:18-20).

Turning to Isaiah 22, we find a description of the judgment on Shebna, a scribe and steward over the king’s house. Although Shebna was a historical figure (Isaiah 36:3; 2 Kings 18:37), this judgment could very well also be directed at an end-time personality, as the context of the prophecy is the Day of the Lord (verses 8, 12 and 20 speak of “that day,” a prophetic reference to the Day of the Lord). This end-time “Shebna” could be an unworthy political leader over the modern house of Israel or Judah, or it could perhaps refer to a religious figure in the spiritual house of God – the Church. Isaiah 22 prophesies that “the LORD will throw you [Shebna] away violently, O mighty man, And will surely seize you. He will surely turn violently and toss you like a ball Into a large country; there you shall die, and there your glorious chariots Shall be the shame of your master’s house. So I will drive you out of your office And from your position he will pull you down” (verses 17-19).

This remarkable prophecy continues in verses 20-25: “Then it shall be IN THAT DAY That I will call My servant Eliakim the son of Hilkiah; I will clothe him with your robe And strengthen him with your belt; I will commit your responsibility into his hand. He shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem And to the house of Judah. The key of the house of David I will lay on his shoulder; So he shall open, and no one shall shut, And he shall shut, and no one shall open. I will fasten him as a peg in a secure place, And he will become a glorious throne to his father’s house. They will hang on him all the glory of his father’s house, the offspring and the posterity, all vessels of small quantity, from the cups to all the pitchers. IN THAT DAY, says the LORD of hosts, the peg that is fastened in the secure place will be removed and be cut down and fall, and the burden that was on it will be cut off; for the LORD has spoken.”

Eliakim, the son of Hilkiah, was a historical figure who became the steward or prefect over the palace, as had been foretold by Isaiah (compare 2 Kings 18:18; Isaiah 36:3, 22; 37:2). Since the prophecy in Isaiah 22:20 talks about the Day of the Lord, it seems to refer to an additional “Eliakim” who is still to appear. The context of the passage deals with the rulership of the house of David over Israel. Originally, Shebna had been in a trustworthy position in the king’s rule. The Nelson Study Bible explains that “the steward had the key that gave him an audience with the king.” Scripture foretold that Shebna would be replaced by Eliakim, and that Eliakim was to become “a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah.” Eliakim would receive the key of the house of David, so “he shall open, and no one shall shut, And he shall shut, and no one shall open.” We know from Revelation 3:7 that Jesus Christ is in possession of that very key. It is therefore obvious that the “end-time” Eliakim is none other than Jesus Christ Himself.

Jamieson, Fausset and Brown, Commentary on the Whole Bible, points out:

“‘key’ — emblem of his office over the house; to ‘open’ or ‘shut’; access rested with him. Upon… shoulder – So keys are sometimes carried in the East, hanging from the kerchief on the shoulder. But the phrase is rather figurative for sustaining the government on one’s shoulders. Eliakim, as his name implies, is here plainly a type of… Christ, the Son of ‘David,’ of whom Isaiah (9:6) uses the same language as the former clause of this verse. In Revelation 3:7, the same language as the latter clause is found.”

In reference to Revelation 3:7, Jamieson, Fausset and Brown states:

“…he that hath the key of David – the antitype of Eliakim, to whom the ‘key,’ the emblem of authority ‘over the house of David’ was transferred from Shebna, who was removed from the office of chamberlain or treasurer, as unworthy of it. Christ, the Heir of the throne of David, shall supplant all the less worthy stewards [or one particular steward, perhaps a political or religious figure, see discussion above] who have abused their trust in God’s spiritual house, and ‘shall reign over the house of Jacob,’ literal and spiritual (Luke 1:32, 33), ‘for ever,’ ‘as a Son over His own house’ (Heb. 3:2-6). It rests with Christ to open or shut the heavenly palace [the heavenly Jerusalem, verse 12, which will come down to this earth; Revelation 21:9-10], deciding who is, and who is not, to be admitted: as He also opens, or shuts… ‘having the keys of hell (the grave) and death (ch. 1:18).”

The New Bible Commentary: Revised, adds the following:

“Jesus is true in the sense of ‘true to His word’, i.e. faithful. This is spoken in connection with His possessing the key of David, a phrase that recalls 1:18 but actually quotes Is. 22:22; it claims for Christ the power of admitting individuals or shutting them out from the city of David, the new Jerusalem, the Messianic kingdom.”

The Nelson Study Bible agrees: “The key of David represents authority as the One who opens and shuts the door in the Davidic kingdom (see Is. 22:22), a prerogative that is Christ’s as the rightful ‘Son of David’ (see Matt. 1:1).”

The Broadman Bible Commentary concurs: “To say that Christ is the one who has the key of David is to affirm his messianic authority to admit or exclude from the messianic kingdom. The Old Testament passage to which this refers (Isa. 22:22) indicated that Eliakim held the keys to David’s house… The figure of keys was used elsewhere ([Revelation]1:18) and reference to David is at the close of the book ([Revelation] 22:16).”

In conclusion, Isaiah 22 and Revelation 3 confirm, in light of all the Scriptures quoted herein, that the “key of David” has to do with the knowledge that Christ, the “Son of David,” will rule over the nations of Israel and Judah, as well as over the entire earth. It includes the understanding as to who the modern houses of Israel and Judah are, where they are located today, and where the throne of David can be found. It includes the knowledge that only Christ has the power to give us access to, or reject us from entering God’s Kingdom (compare Acts 4:12). It reveals to us how we can avoid paying the death penalty for our sins (compare Romans 6:23; John 8:24); how we can inherit eternal life by entering and becoming members of the Kingdom of God; and how we can qualify to rule, with and under Christ, over the houses of Israel and Judah, and the entire earth.

Back to top

New Booklet and Member Letter

A new Standing Watch program, titled, “Who Are You?”, has been posted on the Website.

A new member letter was sent out this week. You can find a version of the letter at: http://www.eternalgod.org/lit/letters/brethren-20031210.pdf

Our new booklet, titled, “Are You Already Born Again?”, is finished and on its way to the printer in the United Kingdom. It has been placed on our Website at: http://www.eternalgod.org/lit/booklets/bornagain.htm

Back to top


How This Work is Financed

This Update is an official publication by the ministry of the Church of the Eternal God in the United States of America; the Church of God, a Christian Fellowship in Canada; and the Global Church of God in the United Kingdom.

Editorial Team: Norbert Link, Dave Harris, Rene Messier, Brian Gale, Johanna Link, Eric Rank, Michael Link, Anna Link, Kalon Mitchell, Manuela Mitchell, Dawn Thompson

Technical Team: Eric Rank, Shana Rank

Our activities and literature, including booklets, weekly updates, sermons on CD are provided free of charge. They are made possible by the tithes, offerings and contributions of Church members and others who have elected to support this Work.

While we do not solicit the general public for funds, contributions are gratefully welcomed and are tax-deductible in the U.S. and Canada.

Donations can be sent to the following addresses:

United States: Church of the Eternal God, P.O. Box 270519, San Diego, CA 92198

Canada: Church of God, ACF, Box 1480, Summerland, B.C. V0H 1Z0

United Kingdom: Global Church of God, PO Box 44, MABLETHORPE, LN12 9AN, United Kingdom

Current Events

EU WARNS ISRAEL

As AFP reported on December 3, “The EU delivered a stern warning to Israel, declaring that its security barrier ‘must not invade’ Palestinian territory.” The article continued: “While Israel’s ‘fundamental’ security needs were obvious, ‘the route of the wall must not invade Palestinian territory,’ … [Italy’s Foreign Minister] Franco Frattini [said]. ‘We have repeated that frankly and many times to our Israeli friends,’ he added.”

EU MILITARY

Although a meeting of the European Foreign Affairs Ministers of last Friday and Saturday in Naples, Italy, did not reach agreement on the final wording of the European Constitution in such areas as voting powers and a reference to Christian heritage in the Constitution, much was accomplished during the meeting. As AP reported on November 29, “A plan by France, Britain and Germany to craft an INDEPENDENT MILITARY ROLE FOR THE EUROPEAN UNION while keeping NATO as the continent’s primary defender WON BROAD SUPPORT Saturday from foreign ministers meeting to draft a new EU constitution.” The article continued:

“The plan would create a planning and command cell for the EU at NATO’S military headquarters in southern Belgium… The draft text reads: ‘If a member state is the victim of an armed aggression on its territory, the other member states shall give it aid and assistance by all the means of their power.'”

Donald Rumsfeld criticized this proposal. The United States is very skeptical regarding the European desires for an independent army. As Der Spiegel Online reported on December 1, 2003, German Foreign Minister Peter Struck rejected Mr. Rumsfeld’s concerns, stating that the proposal intends to”strengthen the European pillar of NATO. The proposal does not intend to compete with NATO, but it is an addition.”

EU CONSTITUTION IN DOUBT?

As AP reported on November 29, “[fifteen] foreign ministers facing a deadline in two weeks for a final draft European Union constitution must still decide whether it should provide for a foreign minister or mention God when the expanded grouping [of ten new member states] enters the world stage [next May].” If the charter would be agreed on during the next summit in Brussels on December 12 and 13, it would take effect January 1, 2005. As Zenit reported on November 26, “at least eight countries — Spain, Italy, Ireland, Malta, Poland, Portugal, the Czech Republic and Slovakia — of the 25 that will make up the European Union beginning next May are calling for the introduction of a reference to Christianity in the preamble of the future Constitution. The Pope has voiced his support for this proposal repeatedly. France and Belgium have rejected the proposal.”

Another hurdle is the allocation of voting power. German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder said in November: “You can’t just go and give 82 million Germans 29 votes, and then give a combined 80 million Poles and Spaniards 54 votes.” On foreign policy, Great Britain objects to the title of foreign minister, arguing it suggests a European super-state.

FISCHER PREDESTINED TO BE EU FOREIGN MINISTER?

As euobserver.com reported on December 1, 2003, “the current German Foreign Minister, Joschka Fischer is ‘pre-destined’ to be the EU’s first Foreign Minister, according to close friend and colleague Daniel Cohn-Bendit.” The article quoted Cohn-Bendit as saying, “You can hear it all over Europe.” He predicted that once Schroeder and Fischer win the next German elections in 2006, thereby guaranteeing Fischer’s continued post as German Foreign Minister, Fischer could then go to Brussels. Der Spiegel Online reported that, according to close friends of Fischer, Fischer never gave up his goal to become EU Foreign Minister.

US ANTI-TERRORISM PROGRAM ENDED

As USA Today reported on December 2, 2003, “The Bush administration is ending an anti-terrorism program that required tens of thousands of foreigners to register and stay in contact with the government while visiting the USA. The program, created after the 2001 terrorist attacks, required men and boys from 25 mostly Middle Eastern countries to re-register after 30 days and again one year after arrival.”

Those 25 countries are:

Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Egypt, Eritrea, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Libya, Lebanon, Morocco, North Korea, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Somalia, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates and Yemen.

The article pointed out the relative failure of this program, as follows: “But critics noted that would-be terrorists were least likely to register with the government and get fingerprinted and photographed. And on Monday, Asa Hutchinson, the Department of Homeland Security’s border and transportation chief, acknowledged that no ‘national security leads’ came out of it.” In addition, the negative side-effects of the program were described as follows:

“Of the 83,519 visitors registered since November 2002, nearly 14,000 were told to appear in court. Officials said most of those likely will be deported for minor visa violations.”

Beginning in January, the US government will enforce a new “entry-exit program for visitors” at airports and seaports nationwide. According to the article, “visitors with visas will be digitally photographed and fingerprinted. Those who would have been required to register under the old program [men and boys from 25 mostly Middle Eastern countries, listed above] will be put through a second, more detailed round of questioning.” 
 

Update 120

Before Now

On Saturday, December 6, 2003, Dave Harris will be presenting the sermon, “Before Now.”

The services can be heard at www.cognetservices.org at the appropriate time, just click on “Connect to Live Stream.”
 

Back to top

"Destined To Become Family"

by Edwin Pope

Having just returned from a few days in Boise, Idaho, where my wife and I spent Thanksgiving this year with our daughter and two of our grandchildren, I am reminded once again of the importance of family and why God gives such credence to this institution throughout His written Word.

God shows, in Exodus 20:12 that we are to show honor and respect to our parents, even stating that obedience to this command is rewarded with long life, no doubt taking into consideration that obedience to this command is a requirement for eternal life in His Kingdom. He illustrates in Malachi 4:5-6 that He intends sending the prophet Elijah, before the great and dreadful day of the Lord for the purpose of turning the hearts of the fathers to the children and the hearts of the children to the fathers.

In Ephesians 5:22 God shows that wives are to submit to their husbands and in verse 28 that husbands are to love their wives as they love themselves. In chapter 6 of Ephesians, verses 1-3 children are told, again, to obey and to honor their parents and, in verse 4, fathers are admonished not to provoke their children but to bring them up in the Ways of God. Additional instruction is given to family members as to the way they should conduct their lives together as they seek to build the family relationship in obedience to their God.

Man was created some 6,000 years ago with the ability to reproduce himself after his own kind and able to replenish the earth and to rule over it (Genesis 1:26-28). Prior to the creation of man, this world was inhabited by angels (Psalms 148:1-6). Angels ruled on the face of the earth under the leadership of the arch-angel, Lucifer, whose name was changed, later, to Satan, after his rebellion from God’s Ways (Isaiah 14:12-14). Satan continues to rule this world, today (John14:30). (See also, Luke 4:5-9; 2 Corinthians 4:4; Ephesians 2:2-3).

However, it is not God’s purpose that the world should be under the rule of angels, forever. In fact, angels are created to be helpers to mankind, especially as men are called to God’s Way for the purpose of salvation. Angels are created beings who will never have an opportunity to be part of a family. They neither marry nor are given in marriage and they are not capable of the reproductive process (Luke 20:34-36).

Yet, God has an ultimate plan of rulership which will exist down through eternity. The Family of God will rule this world throughout eternity, and God is presently in the process of creating sons and daughters to be a part of that family. God is reproducing Himself through the conversion process of which we now have a part. And when one is called of God, it is for that very purpose! We read in Ephesians 3:14-15, “For this cause I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, from whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named.” Of course, the present family in heaven consists of God the Father and Jesus Christ. The family present on earth today includes all of those who are begotten members of the family who received God’s Spirit upon baptism and the laying on of hands, whether living or having died “in Christ” and now awaiting the resurrection. These, along with any who are called and chosen in the future and remain faithful to God and His Way will be born of God at the time of the “resurrection of the just” which will occur at Christ’s second coming.

In Hebrews chapter 2, verses 10-11 we read; “For it was fitting for Him, for whom are all things and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons to glory, to make the author of their salvation perfect through sufferings. For both He who sanctifies and those who are being sanctified are all one, for which reason He is not ashamed to call them brethren…”

John tells us in 1 John 3:2; “Beloved, now we are children of God; and it has not yet been revealed what we shall be, but we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is.” And Paul reveals in Ephesians 1:4-6; “just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love, having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will, to the praise of the glory of His grace, by which He has made us accepted in the Beloved.”

In the meantime brethren, we must ourselves continue to be faithful to God’s Way, faithfully building and caring for our own family relationships. If we do these things we are destined to become members of the Family of God!
 

Back to top

EU WARNS ISRAEL

As AFP reported on December 3, “The EU delivered a stern warning to Israel, declaring that its security barrier ‘must not invade’ Palestinian territory.” The article continued: “While Israel’s ‘fundamental’ security needs were obvious, ‘the route of the wall must not invade Palestinian territory,’ … [Italy’s Foreign Minister] Franco Frattini [said]. ‘We have repeated that frankly and many times to our Israeli friends,’ he added.”

EU MILITARY

Although a meeting of the European Foreign Affairs Ministers of last Friday and Saturday in Naples, Italy, did not reach agreement on the final wording of the European Constitution in such areas as voting powers and a reference to Christian heritage in the Constitution, much was accomplished during the meeting. As AP reported on November 29, “A plan by France, Britain and Germany to craft an INDEPENDENT MILITARY ROLE FOR THE EUROPEAN UNION while keeping NATO as the continent’s primary defender WON BROAD SUPPORT Saturday from foreign ministers meeting to draft a new EU constitution.” The article continued:

“The plan would create a planning and command cell for the EU at NATO’S military headquarters in southern Belgium… The draft text reads: ‘If a member state is the victim of an armed aggression on its territory, the other member states shall give it aid and assistance by all the means of their power.'”

Donald Rumsfeld criticized this proposal. The United States is very skeptical regarding the European desires for an independent army. As Der Spiegel Online reported on December 1, 2003, German Foreign Minister Peter Struck rejected Mr. Rumsfeld’s concerns, stating that the proposal intends to”strengthen the European pillar of NATO. The proposal does not intend to compete with NATO, but it is an addition.”

EU CONSTITUTION IN DOUBT?

As AP reported on November 29, “[fifteen] foreign ministers facing a deadline in two weeks for a final draft European Union constitution must still decide whether it should provide for a foreign minister or mention God when the expanded grouping [of ten new member states] enters the world stage [next May].” If the charter would be agreed on during the next summit in Brussels on December 12 and 13, it would take effect January 1, 2005. As Zenit reported on November 26, “at least eight countries — Spain, Italy, Ireland, Malta, Poland, Portugal, the Czech Republic and Slovakia — of the 25 that will make up the European Union beginning next May are calling for the introduction of a reference to Christianity in the preamble of the future Constitution. The Pope has voiced his support for this proposal repeatedly. France and Belgium have rejected the proposal.”

Another hurdle is the allocation of voting power. German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder said in November: “You can’t just go and give 82 million Germans 29 votes, and then give a combined 80 million Poles and Spaniards 54 votes.” On foreign policy, Great Britain objects to the title of foreign minister, arguing it suggests a European super-state.

FISCHER PREDESTINED TO BE EU FOREIGN MINISTER?

As euobserver.com reported on December 1, 2003, “the current German Foreign Minister, Joschka Fischer is ‘pre-destined’ to be the EU’s first Foreign Minister, according to close friend and colleague Daniel Cohn-Bendit.” The article quoted Cohn-Bendit as saying, “You can hear it all over Europe.” He predicted that once Schroeder and Fischer win the next German elections in 2006, thereby guaranteeing Fischer’s continued post as German Foreign Minister, Fischer could then go to Brussels. Der Spiegel Online reported that, according to close friends of Fischer, Fischer never gave up his goal to become EU Foreign Minister.

US ANTI-TERRORISM PROGRAM ENDED

As USA Today reported on December 2, 2003, “The Bush administration is ending an anti-terrorism program that required tens of thousands of foreigners to register and stay in contact with the government while visiting the USA. The program, created after the 2001 terrorist attacks, required men and boys from 25 mostly Middle Eastern countries to re-register after 30 days and again one year after arrival.”

Those 25 countries are:

Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Egypt, Eritrea, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Libya, Lebanon, Morocco, North Korea, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Somalia, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates and Yemen.

The article pointed out the relative failure of this program, as follows: “But critics noted that would-be terrorists were least likely to register with the government and get fingerprinted and photographed. And on Monday, Asa Hutchinson, the Department of Homeland Security’s border and transportation chief, acknowledged that no ‘national security leads’ came out of it.” In addition, the negative side-effects of the program were described as follows:

“Of the 83,519 visitors registered since November 2002, nearly 14,000 were told to appear in court. Officials said most of those likely will be deported for minor visa violations.”

Beginning in January, the US government will enforce a new “entry-exit program for visitors” at airports and seaports nationwide. According to the article, “visitors with visas will be digitally photographed and fingerprinted. Those who would have been required to register under the old program [men and boys from 25 mostly Middle Eastern countries, listed above] will be put through a second, more detailed round of questioning.” 
 

Back to top

Sermons by Women?

Is it in accordance with the Bible for Christian women to give sermons or Bible studies, or to publish, or have published, their Biblical or spiritual articles?

The Bible is very clear that such conduct would be in violation of Scripture. We are setting forth below excerpts from pages 13-14 of our booklet, “The Keys to Happy Marriages and Families”:

“Notice 1 Timothy 2:11-15 where Paul says, ‘Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence…’ Notice, too, the parallel passage in 1 Corinthians 14:34-35, ‘Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak… And if they want to learn something, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is shameful for women to speak in church.'”

These passages clearly teach that women are not to give sermons or Bible studies in church. Older women can teach younger women in private, but not from the pulpit (compare Titus 2:1-5). We also note that Aquilla and Priscilla took Apollos aside to explain to him the Way of God more accurately (Acts 18:24-26). Priscilla did not teach Apollos publicly, in front of others.

In addition, women are not to teach Biblical or spiritual matters in a public forum, such as television, the Internet, or the printing press. This conduct would not be in accordance with the spirit of God’s law instructing women to “keep silent in the churches” (compare, again, 1 Corinthians 14:34). To continue with our excerpts from pages 14 and 15 of our booklet, “The Keys to Happy Marriages and Families”:

“In today’s world of mass communication, churches often use radio, television, the printing press or even the Internet to publish spiritual material. Women should not deliver sermons on radio or television, either, nor should they write Biblical, prophetic, ecclesiastical or spiritual articles. They could write articles in addressing topics such as child rearing, homemaking, cooking, or other matters relating more to our physical lives, thereby avoiding a possible conflict in writing about spiritual matters…

“Rienecker’s Lexikon zur Bibel points out, under ‘Women,’ ‘The relationship between man and woman, ordained by God, can also be seen in the role of service and function within the church… Paul does not allow the women to teach, that is, to fill the office of teacher in the church (1 Timothy 2:12). It is different when Apollos is introduced more fully, in a personal conversation with Aquilla and Priscilla, to the teachings of God. (Acts 18:26).'”

The message of Scripture is unambiguous: Christian women are not to teach Biblical or spiritual matters in church or in a public forum. It may be difficult for some to accept and apply God’s Word on this issue. Sadly, due to the violation of these clear instructions, unhappy or failed marriages have been the result in many cases. If you want to read more about the God-given roles and functions of husbands and wives in a Christian marriage, as well as the Biblical rules of childrearing, please read our free booklet, “The Keys to Happy Marriages and Family.”

Back to top

Preaching the Gospel, Feeding The Flock

The final batch of responses for the Global Church of God’s recent advertising campaign in the UK were received recently. An additional 449 responses for the booklet “God’s Commanded Holy Days” were received, giving a final total of 2049. A small booklet reprint was necessary to accommodate these further requests.
 

Back to top


How This Work is Financed

This Update is an official publication by the ministry of the Church of the Eternal God in the United States of America; the Church of God, a Christian Fellowship in Canada; and the Global Church of God in the United Kingdom.

Editorial Team: Norbert Link, Dave Harris, Rene Messier, Brian Gale, Johanna Link, Eric Rank, Michael Link, Anna Link, Kalon Mitchell, Manuela Mitchell, Dawn Thompson

Technical Team: Eric Rank, Shana Rank

Our activities and literature, including booklets, weekly updates, sermons on CD are provided free of charge. They are made possible by the tithes, offerings and contributions of Church members and others who have elected to support this Work.

While we do not solicit the general public for funds, contributions are gratefully welcomed and are tax-deductible in the U.S. and Canada.

Donations can be sent to the following addresses:

United States: Church of the Eternal God, P.O. Box 270519, San Diego, CA 92198

Canada: Church of God, ACF, Box 1480, Summerland, B.C. V0H 1Z0

United Kingdom: Global Church of God, PO Box 44, MABLETHORPE, LN12 9AN, United Kingdom

God is a Family

Viewable PDF
Printable PDF

To Request a FREE hard copy of this booklet, please write to: contact@eternalgod.org

Introduction

The Bible reveals that God is not just a single being, but is comprised of two separate beings. These two beings are often referred to as the “Father” and the “Son,” illustrating the fact that God is actually a Family. While the Bible reveals that God is, in fact, a Family, it also shows that God is not a trinity. The Holy Spirit is not God, nor is it a separate being within the God Family. It is literally the power of God through which the God Family works.

When we pray to God, asking that He give His Holy Spirit to us so that we might live more effectively in His way of life, we are asking for God’s power that emanates directly from the Father and from the Son.

We will show in this booklet that the New Testament Scriptures, as well as the Old Testament Scriptures, clearly reveal that God IS a Family, presently comprised of two separate beings. Many who erroneously believe that the Old Testament teaches the existence of only one God being, have glossed over some very revealing passages without realizing the full meaning of what they are reading.

In the very first chapter of the Bible we are introduced to the fact that God is a FAMILY, consisting of more than just one person. We are also taught the mind-boggling truth that God wants to enlarge His Family—through US! It’s an awesome thing to understand that God created man to ultimately make him a part of His very Family!

“Let Us Make Man in Our Image…”

Notice what God says in Genesis 1:26: “Then God said, ‘Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness…’” Why does God use the plural form when talking about the creation of man? Why does He say, “Let US make man in OUR image, according to OUR likeness…”?

We find the same terminology in Genesis 3:22, after Adam and Eve had eaten from the forbidden fruit, “Then the LORD God said, ‘Behold the man has become like one of US, to know good and evil…’”

To whom is God speaking in these passages?

Is God Speaking to Angels?

Some claim that the words “Us” and “Our” in Genesis 1:26 and 3:22 refer to God and His angels. They say that God is speaking here to angels. However, we know from Scripture that many angels do not look like men at all, especially the highest-ranking angels—the cherubim. They don’t look like men, but rather like certain animals; and sometimes their appearance reveals a combination of different animal features. Would God, then, have told those angels to create man in “their” image and according to their “likeness”?

Note, for instance, that Lucifer, a former high-ranking cherub (Isaiah 14:12; Ezekiel 28:14, 16), who became Satan the devil, looks like a serpent or a dragon (compare Genesis 3:1; Revelation 12:3, 9). The book of Ezekiel describes four cherubs or cherubim. First, Ezekiel 1:5 tells us that the “likeness of four living creatures” or cherubs appeared in “the likeness of a man.” The account continues, however, to point out important differences, “As for the likeness of their faces, each had the face of a man; each of the four had the face of a lion on the right side, each of the four had the face of an ox on the left side, and each of the four had the face of an eagle” (Ezekiel 1:10).

The predominant facial characteristic of these four cherubs was that of an ox, as Ezekiel 10:14 and 20–21 reveal: “Each one had four faces: the first face was the face of a cherub, the second face the face of a man, the third the face of a lion, and the fourth the face of an eagle… This is the living creature I saw under the God of Israel by the River Chebar, and I knew they were cherubim. Each one had four faces and each one four wings.”  Comparing Ezekiel 1:10 with Ezekiel 10:14, we note that the “face of an ox on the left side” is equated with the “face of a cherub.”

We see, then, that the appearance of the four cherubim, described as the “likeness of a man,” only referred to their relative form, but not to their individual characteristics. They showed a combination of human and animal features. They did not reflect the image of a man—therefore, they did not reflect the image of God.

In the fourth chapter of the book of Revelation, four high ranking spirit beings are described before the very throne of God: “The first living creature was like a lion, the second living creature like a calf, the third living creature had a face like a man, and the fourth living creature was like a flying eagle” (Revelation 4:7). Only one of these high-ranking spirit beings is referred to as having the face of a man, implying that his overall appearance does not reflect human features.

We also read about seven spirit beings who are sent out into all the earth (Revelation 5:6). Their appearance is that of horses, as parallel Scriptures in the book of Zechariah reveal (compare Zechariah 1:8–11; 6:1–8).

Wouldn’t it be strange if God had told His angels to create man after their image and according to their likeness, when many of them don’t look like men at all, while others show a combination of animal and human features?

Additionally, consider this: IF God were speaking to angels in Genesis 1:26, then that means that angels would have been participating in the creation of man. Nowhere does the Bible teach that angels participated in the creation of man. In fact, we are told that God created everything through Jesus Christ—not through angels (compare Ephesians 3:9; Colossians 1:16; Hebrews 1:1–2). The Bible specifically reveals who created man. We read in Genesis 2:7: “And the LORD GOD [i.e., Jesus Christ—not angels] formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.”

We also read that God made man a little lower than the angels for the present time, but with the goal to be superior to, and to actually rule over angels (Hebrews 2:5–9). Angels were created by God as “ministering spirits sent forth to minister for those who will inherit salvation” (Hebrews 1:14).

Again, wouldn’t it seem strange to assume that God used angels to create man, with man’s ultimate goal and purpose to rule over angels? Keep in mind that what is created is below the creator—not above him. Christ pointed out that the disciple is not over his master (compare Matthew 10:24). At best, the disciple is like his master (Matthew 10:25). Angels, however, will be under man, and man will actually judge angels (1 Corinthians 6:3).

Adam Clarke confirms in his “Commentary on the Old Testament,” on pages 38 and 39, that God could not have been speaking to angels in Genesis 1 and 3, because the Bible nowhere says that angels are created in the image and likeness of God. In fact, Adam Clarke emphasizes that no other creature but man was made in God’s image, according to the express testimony of Scripture.

Did God Use “Pluralis Maiestatis”?

Some claim that the statement, “Let Us make man in Our image,” does not reveal a plurality of persons in the Godhead, but that it is like an expression of a king who speaks of himself in the plural form. They point out, for instance, that the queen of England might say something like, “We have decreed…” She is referring to herself, but she says, “we.” This way of speaking is called “pluralis maiestatis” or “pluralis maiestaticus.”

The problem with applying this concept to God’s statements in Genesis 1 and 3 is that God did not use this kind of speaking in His inspired word, the Bible—in fact, the early Hebrews knew nothing about this way of speaking. The concept that a king speaks of himself in a plural form was only developed much later by the Greeks, and then adopted by the Romans, as noted in a German encyclopedia, the dtv-Lexikon: “The pluralis maiestatis was created at Greek courts and reached the kingly titles of modern times through Rome.”

George Knight wrote a book in 1959, published in England, entitled, “A Christian Theology of the Old Testament.” He points out on page 66 that we cannot assume God was speaking by using the grammatical form of pluralis maiestatis, as this would mean to read into the Hebrew a modern way of speaking. He explains that if we look strictly at the Bible, we find that the kings of Israel and Judah are exclusively referred to by others—and exclusively refer to themselves—in the singular form, never in the plural.

God Created Man in His Image

Having ruled out the possibility that God was speaking to angels, or that He was referring to Himself by using a plural form as a manner of speaking, we are left with the understanding that God is, in fact, not just one being.  We might say that the word, “God,” itself is a “name,” rather than just a reference to a single being. In other words, God is a Family. Man was created in God’s image with the very potential of becoming part of His Family. The God Family presently consists of God the Father and Jesus Christ the Son (Hebrews 1:1–2, 5; Luke 1:30–33).

The God Family is destined to grow. Once we become converted, we become begotten children of God—to be born into the very God Family at the time of our resurrection or change to immortality. Once we fully understand the fact that God is a Family and that converted Christians are destined to become a part of this Family, we can appreciate why Jesus Christ is called our elder brother—the firstborn among many brethren (Romans 8:29)—and why we are called the children of God (1 John 3:1–2; John 1:12–13). We also understand why we are called sons and daughters of God (2 Corinthians 6:18), and why we are privileged to call God our Father (Romans 8:15–17; Galatians 4:6).

In addition, Christ is referred to as the bridegroom who is to marry His bride—the church (Revelation 19:7–9; Matthew 9:15; 25:1, 5, 6, 10; John 3:22–30). The church is comprised of all those who have God’s Spirit—including those who will be called after Christ’s return. (Note that the new or heavenly Jerusalem, mentioned in Hebrews 12:22 and Revelation 3:12, will descend from heaven to this earth long after Christ’s return. However, it is still associated at that time with the “bride”—the church—in Revelation 21:9. We are told, in Revelation 21:24; 22:14, that all those will be able to enter the holy city, “who are written in the Lamb’s Book of Life,” and “who do His commandments.”) The Bible tells us that Christ will actually marry His begotten disciples in whom His Spirit dwells.

The amazing truth is that it is God’s plan and desire to bring all of mankind to salvation (1 Timothy 2:4). In talking about the ancient and modern house of Israel and using it as a symbol for all mankind, Paul makes clear that “all Israel will be saved” (Romans 11:26). Christ is the “Savior of all men” (1 Timothy 4:10). He died for “the world”—not only for those who have responded to God’s calling today and who have become His disciples (John 3:16). However, no one can be saved unless he or she accepts Jesus Christ as his or her personal Savior (Acts 4:12). Also, “no one can come” to Christ “unless the Father… draws him” (John 6:44). Therefore, God planned that those who have died without having heard the truth prior to their death will have the same potential of becoming God members in His Family in due time.

Revelation 20:5, 11–12 reveals that those people will be resurrected in a “second resurrection” for the purpose of learning and accepting God’s way of life. If they choose to obey God, they, too, will become God beings in the Family of God. After God’s plan will have reached its completion, God says this about all of His children: “He who overcomes shall inherit all things, and I will be his God and he shall be My son” (Revelation 21:7). We also read that all of them “shall reign forever and ever” (Revelation 22:5). (For more information on God’s awesome plan of salvation for all mankind, please read our free booklets, Do We Have an Immortal Soul?” and God’s Commanded Holy Days.”)

What we can see from all of these statements is that God is a Family, and that He is in the process of enlarging His Family—through man.

Man Looks Like God

The fact that God created man in His image and likeness is to be understood quite literally, showing that man looks like God. Of course, man is a physical being, while God is Spirit (John 4:24; 2 Corinthians 3:17). Still, when God manifests Himself so that He can be seen with human eyes, His appearance is that of a man, having a head with white hair, a mouth, eyes, chest, arms, hands, waist, legs, and feet. The Bible confirms that God has “form and shape”—although He is Spirit. It is difficult for physical beings to understand that Spirit can have “form and shape”—but it does, and the Bible clearly reveals this truth to us. Notice God’s own testimony in Numbers 12:8: “‘I speak with him [Moses] face to face, Even plainly, and not in dark sayings; And he sees the form of the LORD.’” Indeed, God spoke to Moses “face to face,” that is, “plainly, and not in dark sayings” (compare, too, Deuteronomy 34:10–12), and Moses did quite literally see “the form of the LORD.” We read about that account in Exodus 33:18–23:

“And he [Moses] said, ‘Please, show me your glory.’ Then He said, ‘I will make all My goodness pass before you…’ But He said, ‘You cannot see My face; for no man shall see Me, and live.’ And the LORD said, ‘Here is a place by Me, and you shall stand on the rock. So it shall be, while My glory passes by, that I will put you in the cleft of the rock, and will cover you with My hand while I pass by. Then I will take away My hand, and you shall see My back; but My face shall not be seen.’”

God the Father is described in His glorified state in the book of Revelation. The Father is described as the “Lord God Almighty,” sitting on a throne, having a scroll in His “right hand” (Revelation 4:8; 5:1). He is also described in the book of Daniel as the “Ancient of Days,” with the “hair of His head… like pure wool” (Daniel 7:9).

In addition, the Bible contains numerous descriptions of Jesus Christ in His glorified state. As we will prove in this booklet, Jesus Christ is God—the second member of the God Family. He is the image of God the Father (2 Corinthians 4:4; Colossians 1:15). Christ told His disciple Philip in John 14:9, “He who has seen Me has seen the Father.” God the Father and Jesus Christ the Son look the same—in their outward appearance. Now note how Jesus Christ manifested Himself in His glorified state:

In Revelation 1:13–16, John sees Christ as “One like the Son of Man, clothed with a garment down to the feet and girded about the chest with a golden band. His head and hair were white like wool, as white as snow, and His eyes like a flame of fire; His feet were like fine brass, as if refined in a furnace, and His voice as the sound of many waters; He had in His right hand seven stars, out of His mouth went a sharp two-edged sword, and His countenance was like the sun shining in its strength.”

We find an almost identical description of God in His glorified state in the book of Ezekiel. As we will see later in this booklet, the personage who manifested Himself in this passage (as well as in the previous passage in Exodus 33) was, in fact, Jesus Christ. We read: “And above the firmament over their heads [the heads of the cherubim] was the likeness of a throne, in appearance like a sapphire stone; on the likeness of the throne was a likeness with the appearance of a man high above it. Also from the appearance of His waist and upward I saw, as it were, the color of amber with the appearance of fire all around within it; and from the appearance of His waist and downward I saw, as it were, the appearance of fire with brightness all around… This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the LORD” (Ezekiel 1:26–28).

God Reproduces Himself Through Man

We read that God created man in His image and after His likeness. We saw that God looks like a man (or more correctly phrased, man looks like God), though God is, of course, a glorified Spirit being, while man is matter, made of the dust of the ground. In addition, Genesis 5:3 explains what it means to be created in the image and likeness of someone else: “And Adam lived one hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth.”

As Adam’s son Seth looked like Adam, so Adam, when God created him, looked like God. Both God and Adam were “reproducing” themselves in their own likeness, after their image.

Genesis 1 reveals that God began to reproduce Himself through man, by first creating man physically—in His image and after His likeness—and with the potential to become a spirit being and a full member of the God Family.

In reading the entire account of Genesis 1, beginning in verse 3, we find that God created plants and animals according to their own kind. He created great sea creatures according to their kind. He created every winged bird according to their kind. He created cattle, and creeping things, and beasts of the earth according to their kind. However, when it came to the creation of man, God said: “Let Us make man in Our image!” So, God created man according to the God kind. That is why Adam is called the “son of God” in Luke 3:38. Also, mankind is called “the offspring of God” in Acts 17:28–29.

So then, rightly understood, the Bible reveals in the very first chapter that God IS a Family, and that man was created for the purpose of ultimately joining the Family of God.

This truth is confirmed throughout the Bible, including the New Testament. Ephesians 3:14–15 tells us, “For this cause I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, from whom the whole family in heaven [presently God the Father and Jesus Christ] and earth [begotten children of God, to be born into the very Family of God at the time of their resurrection, or change, to immortality] is named.”

At this time, the Family of God in heaven consists of God the Father and Jesus Christ the Son. In one sense, angels are also called “sons of God” (Job 1:6), since God created them, as He created man. However, angels are not part of the FAMILY of God of which we speak. We read in Hebrews 1:14 that angels are “all ministering spirits sent forth to minister for those who will inherit salvation.” Angels were not created to inherit salvation—to become members of the Family of God.  In the same way, the passage just quoted in the letter to the Ephesians speaks about those who are already begotten members of the Family of God here on earth—those, who are already “children of God” (1 John 3:2). It describes converted Christians, in whom God’s Spirit dwells, which Spirit is a guarantee, a down payment or an earnest toward their salvation (Ephesians 1:13–14). In a more general sense, though, unconverted people are also “sons of God”—since God created them as well (compare Luke 3:38, calling Adam the “son of God”). However, they are not (yet) begotten members of the God Family. The only distinction between unconverted people and angels is that unconverted people—unlike angels—can become members of the God Family, after they repent, believe, become baptized, and receive the Holy Spirit which is to continue to dwell in them until the time of their death or change (Romans 8:8–11).

Note, too, how the New International Version renders Hebrews 2:11, “Both the one who makes men holy [God] and those who are made holy [God’s chosen disciples] are of the same family.”

Our free booklet, “The Gospel of the Kingdom of God,” proves from the Bible, in much more detail than we can provide here, man’s incredible potential of becoming a born again member of the God Family.

“Elohim”—Proof that God Is More than One Being

The very Hebrew word translated “God” in Genesis 1:26 reveals that God consists of more than one person. That Hebrew word is “Elohim,” which can be used as a plural word. It can be singular in grammar, but plural in meaning. For example, some English words that are singular in grammar are “church,” “club,” “family,” “school,” “government,” or “nation.” However, these words are all plural in meaning, or at least, the plural meaning is included. It is understood that the unit consists of more than one person. Unless there is more than one person, it is not considered a family, or a nation, or a church, etc.

The same is true for the Hebrew word “Elohim.” Grammatically, it can be a singular word, but it can have a plural meaning. Some reject this understanding, falsely claiming that the word “Elohim,” as used in Genesis 1:26 and translated as “God,” cannot convey a plural meaning. But this objection has been correctly refuted by many commentaries, pointing out that the word “Elohim” does most certainly convey a plural meaning. They explain that the Hebrew word “Elohim” is the plural form of the singular Hebrew words “El” or “Eloah,” concluding that many theologians have understood this to refer to a plurality within the Godhead.

“Elohim”—Singular in Grammar but Plural in Meaning

George Knight writes in his book, cited earlier, that the word “Elohim” is clearly a plural word. He explains that the same is true for the word “Adam.” Normally, “Adam” is translated as “man.” The word “Adam” can refer to the individual; it can refer to both man and woman; and it can even refer to “man-kind.” That the Bible refers to man and woman as “Adam” is remarkable, because the Bible also says that the two are to become “one.” [We might interject here that Jesus said on numerous occasions that the Father and He were “one” (compare John 10:30). In fact, He said that His disciples should also be “one,” as the Father and Christ are “one” (John 17:20–22). Christ was not saying, of course, that the Father and He are one being; neither was He saying that all the members of the Church should become one being. Rather, He was talking about unity, harmony, purpose, goal, and mindset. This will become clearer, as we proceed.]

George Knight goes on to explain that there are several words in the Hebrew, all ending with “-im,” which are derived from a grammatically singular word that conveys plural meaning. One of these words is “Cherubim,” the plural form of “Cherub.” Another word is “Elohim.” Other words are “ne’urim,” meaning “youth,” or “mayim,” meaning “water.” The concept of water, in particular, is very interesting, as it can refer to a single drop of water or to a vast ocean. We understand though that it is the same kind of water in either case, and it is always referred to as “water.” In that sense, water is both singular and plural. Knight goes on to point out that the same is true for the word “Elohim.” When we read that “Elohim,” or “God,” said: “Let US make man in Our image,” we should realize that the word for man, “Adam, as well as the word for God, “Elohim, can be singular or plural in meaning, depending on the context.

Some disagree. They claim that when the word “Elohim” refers to the God of Israel, it only conveys singular meaning, stating that the word “Elohim” is allegedly always connected with a singular verb. (We will see later that this statement is false, since the word “Elohim,” when referring to the God of Israel, can very well be connected with a plural verb.) They cite, in particular, Genesis 1:27: “So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.” In this passage, the verb for “created” is, indeed, in the singular.

“Elohim” Followed by a Singular Verb

The objection that “Elohim” cannot describe more than one God being, since it is followed by a singular verb in Genesis 1:27, is without merit, for several reasons. Let’s take a closer look.

Adam Clarke points out in his Commentary that the singular verb “created” does not necessarily reduce God or “Elohim” to a single person, as it could refer to the unity or oneness of more than one acting person. In other words, there was total harmony between the God beings when they created man. Further, the word for man, “Adam,” is also first referred to in the singular, but it includes both male and female, and the statement ends with the concept that God created “THEM.”

In addition, the fact that a singular verb follows a noun that is plural in meaning is not unusual. This is a question of grammar, not of meaning. We don’t say, “The family ARE big,” but rather we say, “The family IS big.” We still understand, however, that the word “family,” although followed by a singular verb, conveys a plural meaning, because a family must consist of more than one person in order to be called a family.

We also need to remember that the word “Elohim,” or “God,” can refer to either one of the two beings in the Godhead. Each one is called, and referred to as “Elohim,” or “God.” In Genesis 1:26, God, or “Elohim,” says, “Let US make man in OUR image.” One God being speaks to the other God being, referring to both of them as “Us.” When we read in Genesis 1:27 that GOD, or “Elohim,” created man in HIS image, we understand that it was the one God being who actually did the creating, and we already know from the New Testament that God the Father created everything through Jesus Christ.

It was God the Father who spoke to the One who is also called Jesus Christ, the Son of God, or the “Word” (John 1:1–3, 14; Revelation 19:11–13). God the Father said to Christ, “Let Us make man in Our image.” [If we were to conclude that Christ spoke these words, rather than the Father, then we would have to say that it was Christ who was in control and who gave command to the Father—a conclusion not supported in Scripture. It was God the Father who created everything THROUGH Jesus Christ.] It was Christ, then, who did the actual work of creating man, and He created man in His image. Remember, though, that Christ is also the image of the Father (compare 2 Corinthians 4:3–4 and Colossians 1:15). Therefore, when Christ created man in His image, He also created man in the image of the Father. Man, then, was created in the image of GOD—in the image of both God the Father and God the Son.

“Elohim” Followed by a Plural Verb

We saw earlier that the word “Elohim,” although singular in grammar, can be plural in meaning. We saw, too, that “Elohim” can be followed by a singular Hebrew verb—as this is a matter of grammar, and not of meaning. Some claim that because of the fact that “Elohim” is often followed by a singular Hebrew verb, this somehow proves that the word “Elohim” cannot have a plural meaning. We have seen the falsity of this argument. However, there are Scriptures where the word Elohim,” referring to the God of Israel, is accompanied by a plural Hebrew verb, not a singular Hebrew verb. This fact totally rules out the possibility that the word “Elohim, when referring to the true God, can only have singular meaning.

Note the following examples:

In Genesis 20:13, Abraham states, “And it came to pass, when God caused me to wander from my father’s house, that I said to her [Abraham’s wife, Sarah], This is your kindness that you should do for me: in every place, wherever we go, say of me, He is my brother.” The Hebrew word for “God” here is “Elohim.” The word for “caused” is in the plural in the original Hebrew, not in the singular.

In Genesis 35:6–7, we read, “So Jacob came to Luz (that is, Bethel), which is in the land of Canaan, he and all the people who were with him. And he built an altar there and called the place El Bethel, because there God appeared to him when he fled from the face of his brother.” The Hebrew word for “God” is “Elohim.” The word for “appeared” is in the plural in the original Hebrew, not in the singular.

In 2 Samuel 7:23, we read this prayer of David: “And who is like Your people, like Israel, the one nation on the earth whom God went to redeem for Himself as a people, to make for Himself a name…” The Hebrew word for “God,” “Elohim,” is followed by a plural Hebrew verb, translated as “went” in the English.

The fact that the word “Elohim,” when referring to the God of Israel, can be accompanied in the Hebrew by a plural word is important, as it rejects the claim that the God of Israel (“Elohim”) can only be one personage. The above-cited examples of plural Hebrew words (the Hebrew expressions for “caused,” “appeared” and “went”) make this very clear. In the Hebrew, the words for “caused,” “appeared” and “went” are distinctively plural, and cannot be understood to be singular. The same can be seen in other languages, for instance in German (a language related to Hebrew), although it might not be all that clear in English. In German, we might say, “Der Hund bellte.” (“The dog barked.”) The word “dog” or “Hund” is clearly accompanied by a singular verb (“barked” or “bellte”). Then, we might say, “Die Hunde bellten.” (“The dogs barked.”) In the English language, it is not clear, strictly judging by the word “barked,” whether the subject is singular or plural, as the verb is “barked” in either case. In German, however, it is clear that the verb (“bellten”) refers to a plural noun (if one wants to refer to a single dog, one would have to say, “bellte”—not “bellten”).  The same is true for Hebrew. The fact that the Hebrew word “Elohim” is at times accompanied by a plural (not a singular) Hebrew verb proves that “Elohim” consists of more than just one being.

Another Lesson in Grammar from the German Language

It is true, however, that in most cases, the Hebrew word “Elohim,” when referring to the God of Israel, is accompanied by a singular verb. This fact—that the word “Elohim” can be either singular or plural, and the verb that follows the noun “Elohim” may be in the singular in either case—should not surprise us. For instance, in German, we can observe the same principle when looking at the word for “police,” which is “Polizei.” One can refer to “Polizei” as conveying a singular or a plural meaning, but the verb in German is always in the singular. As an example, a single policeman could say: “Hier steht die Polizei,” meaning, “Here are the police.” Note that in German, the verb is in the singular. Or, the policeman could say, “Die Polizei befiehlt.” (“The police order you.”) Note again, that in German, the verb is in the singular, although now the single officer who gives the order speaks on behalf of the entire police force. At the same time, a group of police officers could all refer to themselves as “the police.” When they do, the verb associated with “Polizei” is still singular in German.

So now we have clearly established the fact that the Hebrew word for God, “Elohim,” can refer to more than one God being, or it can refer to either one of the two God beings. The verb associated with “Elohim” may be singular. Again, this is a matter of grammar, not of meaning.

Plural Nouns Referring to God—”Elohim”

We also saw, however, that the word “Elohim,” when referring to the God of Israel, does at times associate with a plural verb, showing clearly that God must consist of more than one person. In addition, there are several nouns that refer to and describe the God of Israel that are used in the plural, again showing that the God of Israel must consist of more than one person.

Ecclesiastes 12:1 reads, “Remember now your Creator in the days of your youth.” In the original Hebrew, the word for “Creator” is in the plural, which should be translated as “Creators.” Both the Father and the Son are Creators. God the Father created everything, including man, through Jesus Christ.

Notice, too, Isaiah 54:5, “For your Maker is your husband, The LORD of hosts is His name.” Translating literally from the Hebrew, it should read: “For your Makers [are] your husbands.” Both “Maker” and “husband” are plural nouns in the original. There is no verb in the Hebrew, but it needs to be implied as a plural verb, since both the subject and the object are in the plural in the original Hebrew.

We find a similar statement in Job 35:10, “But no one says, Where is God my Maker…?” In the original, it says, “Where is God my Makers?”

In addition, Proverbs 9:10 states, “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, And the knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.” The original says, however: “The fear of the LORD (is) the beginning of wisdom; and the knowledge of the Holy Ones [or: “of the Holies”] (is) understanding.” “Holy” or “Holy One” is a plural noun in the original Hebrew. Similar passages can be found in Proverbs 30:3 and in Hosea 11:12.

These passages provide additional evidence that God is not just one being, but that He is a Family, consisting of the Father and of the Son.

Jesus Christ WAS—and IS—God!

Yes, Jesus Christ WAS—and IS—God! This is a profound statement that many may not have heard before! Some may well believe that God the Father created everything Himself. Many may have been taught that God is only one being, and that Christ is, at best, an angel, or, that He did not even exist before He was born as a human being. You may have heard those who claim that Jesus Christ is not God, therefore God the Father did not create everything through another God being—Jesus Christ.

The Bible clearly reveals, however, that both the Father and Jesus Christ ARE God, and that they have ALWAYS been God throughout eternity!

Reading from John 1:1, “In the beginning was the Word [the “Logos” in Greek, meaning “Spokesman”], and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” We see that it is Jesus Christ—the “Word”—the One who “SPOKE, and it was done” (Psalm 33:9), and the One who later became flesh (John 1:14), who is referred to in John 1:1 as “God.”

Some say that the phrase in John 1:1 should be translated as, “The Word was divine,” in the sense that everything that God says is divine. That proposal is wrong. The Greek word for “divine” is “theios,” while the term for “God,” as used in John 1:1, is “theos.” The term “theos” can only mean “God.” The “Word” was not only “divine”—the “Word” was “God.”

There are many other passages that clearly reveal that Jesus Christ always was, and now is, God. He was God before He was changed into flesh and blood—a human being like us—to live for a short while on this earth. Then after His resurrection, He again became the powerful God being that He had been prior to His human birth.

John 1:18 tells us: “No one has ever seen God [the Father]. It is God the only Son, who is close to the Father’s heart, who has made him known” (New Revised Standard Version). Notice the rendering of this passage in the New American Bible: “No one has ever seen God. The only Son, God, who is at the Father’s side, has revealed him.”

Additionally, Romans 9:5 refers to Jesus Christ as “the eternally blessed God.” Philippians 2:5–7 explains that Christ was “equal with God” the Father, but that He took the “form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men.” Hebrews 1:8 refers to Jesus Christ, the Son of God, as “God.”

In John 20:28–29, Thomas calls the resurrected Christ “God,” and Titus 2:13 speaks of Jesus Christ as “our great God and Savior.” Christ is also referred to in the Old Testament, in Isaiah 7:14, as “God with us,” or “Immanuel,” and He is referred to as the “Mighty God” (in Hebrew, “El”), in Isaiah 9:6.

Clearly, it is Jesus Christ who is “the same yesterday, today, and forever” (Hebrews 13:8). He is the second God being in the God Family. It is He who created man, but in doing so, He followed the instruction of God the Father, who is the Highest in the God Family (compare 1 Corinthians 3:23; 1 Corinthians 11: 3; 1 Corinthians 15:20–28; John 14:28).

Jesus Came to Reveal the Father

The Jews at the time of Christ did not know—and most still don’t know today—that God is a Family, presently consisting of two God beings. Christ came to REVEAL the Father to them (Matthew 11:27; Luke 10:22). The Jews thought they knew the Father, not realizing that the God of the Old Testament, who directly worked with and dealt with Israel, was Jesus Christ—not God the Father.

We have already read in John 1:18 that “no one has seen God at any time.” John 5:37 confirms that “you have neither heard His [the Father’s] voice at any time, nor seen His form.” Again, we read in John 6:46: “Not that anyone has seen the Father, except He who is from God,” that is, Jesus Christ. Finally, 1 John 4:12 repeats, “No one has seen God at any time.”

Still, we have read that God did appear to the ancient Israelites. They did hear His voice many times. Some even saw the form of God, to an extent, in His glorified state (compare Genesis 32:30; Exodus 33:11, 17–23; 34:6–8; Numbers 12:8; Deuteronomy 34:10; Isaiah 6:1–10; Ezekiel 1:26–28; 3:23; 8:4).

According to Biblical testimony, some did see “God” in Old Testament times, and they did hear His voice.  On the other hand, Christ and the apostles taught that no human has ever seen or heard the voice of “God.” Since God does not contradict Himself in His Word, He is obviously talking about two different personages here. Indeed, the Bible clarifies that no one has ever seen God the Father (compare again John 5:37; 6:46). But some did see “God”—that is, the second being in the God Family—Jesus Christ, in His glorified state.

The Bible confirms that it was Jesus Christ who appeared to people and spoke with them in Old Testament times (compare John 8:56–58; 1 Corinthians 10:4, 9). In doing so, the Bible emphasizes again that Jesus Christ was GOD before He became a man, and that God is a Family, consisting of God the Father and God the Son, Jesus Christ. It was, in fact, Christ who dealt directly with Israel.

Did the Ancients Understand the Duality in the Godhead?

Did Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, David, Daniel, and the other prophets understand that God, or “Elohim,” is more than one person? The Bible reveals that they did know.

Acts 3:13 states that the “God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of our fathers, glorified His servant Jesus.” Abraham, Isaac and Jacob understood that their God was the Father, who would later glorify Jesus Christ, the Son. They also understood—as we will see in a moment—that the God being who directly dealt with and appeared to them, was Jesus Christ—not the Father.

Notice Psalm 45. The sons of Korah wrote this Psalm, but it stands to reason that David knew it. Psalm 45:6–7 reads, “Your throne, O God [“Elohim”], is forever and ever; A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom. You love righteousness and hate wickedness; therefore God [“Elohim”], Your God [“Elohim”] has anointed You With the oil of gladness more than Your companions.”

These verses refer to one of the persons in the Godhead, calling Him God or “Elohim,” and then to a second person in the Godhead, calling Him also God or “Elohim.” We are told here that “Elohim” anointed “Elohim” with the oil of gladness. The one being, “Elohim,” is also identified as God or “Elohim” of the other being, also referred to as “Elohim.” Here we see a reference to the Word or the Son, Jesus Christ—Himself God—and to the Father, who is also God. The Father is above all. He is the Head of Jesus Christ (compare 1 Corinthians 11:3). So we learn from this that God the Father is God of the Son, or the Word, who is also God.

The word “Elohim” is used for both personages in the Godhead. The patriarchs, David, and other Biblical writers did, indeed, understand this duality in the Godhead.

Note, for instance, Isaiah 41:21–26, where God is challenging the futility of idols: “Present your case, says the LORD. Bring forth your strong reasons, says the King of Jacob. Let them bring forth and show US what will happen; Let them show the former things, what they were, That WE may consider them, And know the latter end of them; Or declare to US things to come. Show the things that are to come hereafter, That WE may know that you are gods; Yes, do good or do evil, That WE may be dismayed and see it TOGETHER… Who has declared from the beginning, that WE may know? And former things, that WE may say, He is righteous?”

God is using the plural in this passage to reveal that God is more than one being. Isaiah is not referring here to God and himself. Note that Isaiah quotes verbatim a statement from God (Note Isaiah 41:21: “Present your case, says the LORD…”). We find a similar statement by Jesus Christ, when He talked to the Pharisee Nicodemus, a “ruler of the Jews” (John 3:1). Nicodemus had visited Christ privately by night. Christ told him: “‘Most assuredly, I say to you, WE speak what WE know and testify what WE have seen, and you do not receive OUR witness’” (John 3:11). Christ was referring to God the Father and Himself (compare verse 16).

The Prophet Daniel Understood

God repeatedly refers to Himself in the plural. It is made very clear in the book of Daniel, who these two God beings are. Notice the vision in Daniel 7:9–10, 13–14: “I watched till thrones were put in place, And the Ancient of Days [a reference here to God the Father] was seated; His garment was white as snow, And the hair of His head was like pure wool. His throne was a fiery flame, Its wheels a burning fire; A fiery stream issued And came forth from before Him. A thousand thousands ministered to Him; Ten thousand times ten thousand stood before Him. The court was seated, And the books were opened… I was watching in the night visions, And behold, One like the Son of Man [a reference to the resurrected Jesus Christ, appearing before God the Father in heaven], Coming with the clouds of heaven! He came to the Ancient of Days, And they brought Him near before Him. Then to Him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, That all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, Which shall not pass away, And His kingdom the one Which shall not be destroyed.”

Jesus Christ—the future King of Kings and Lord of Lords (Revelation 19:16)—is described as ruling in the Kingdom of God over man. The Father will give Him the kingdom. Daniel knew and understood that the God Family presently consists of two God beings. He knew that God is not just one being.

The Prophet Zechariah Understood

Reading in Zechariah 4:8–9: “Moreover the word of the LORD [in Hebrew, “Yahweh”] came to me, saying: The hands of Zerubbabel Have laid the foundation of this temple; His hands shall also finish it. Then you will know That the LORD [in Hebrew, “Yahweh”] of hosts has sent Me [“Yahweh”] to you.”

We see in this passage that the LORD [“Yahweh”] sent the LORD [“Yahweh”]. The expression, “Yahweh,” then is applied to both God beings. As we will see in more detail, both God the Father and Jesus Christ are referred to in Scripture as “Yahweh”—the “I AM” (compare Exodus 3:14)—basically meaning, “the Eternal,” or, “the Ever-living One.” This fact alone proves that both the Father and Jesus Christ have always existed—that they are God beings, and that the Old Testament teaches that there is more than just one God being.

Zechariah 6:9, 12–15 confirms this conclusion: “Then the word of the LORD [“Yahweh”] came to me, saying… (v. 12) Then speak to him, saying, Thus says the LORD [“Yahweh”] of hosts, saying: Behold, the Man whose name is the BRANCH! From His place He shall branch out, And He shall build the temple of the LORD [“Yahweh”]; Yes, He shall build the temple of the LORD [“Yahweh”]. He shall bear the glory, And shall sit and rule on His throne; So He shall be a priest on His throne, And the counsel of peace shall be between them both. Now the elaborate crown shall be for a memorial in the temple of the LORD [“Yahweh”]… Even those from afar shall come and build the temple of the LORD [“Yahweh”]. Then you shall know that the LORD [“Yahweh”] of hosts has sent Me to you. And this shall come to pass if you diligently obey the voice of the LORD [“Yahweh”] your God.”

Again, we see, that the God being, referred to as “Yahweh” here, sent the second God being, also referred to as “Yahweh.” It is “Yahweh” who says that “Yahweh” sent Him to the people. This passage does not refer to just a human messenger, or to an angel to convey the “word of the LORD,” while the “LORD” is speaking about Himself. Note that the New King James Bible capitalizes the word “Me” in “…the LORD of hosts has sent Me to you.” They convey the intended meaning that the word “Me” refers to one of the two God beings, and not to a human or angelic messenger.

A third passage in the book of Zechariah, proving that the word “Yahweh” applies to both God beings, can be found in chapter 2, verses 8–11. Again, we read what the LORD [“Yahweh”] says, “And I will dwell in your midst. Then you will know that the LORD [“Yahweh”] of hosts has sent Me to you” (verse 11).

The Prophet Jeremiah Understood

Notice in Jeremiah 23:5–6 where the term “Yahweh” is used for both God beings in the same context: “Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD [“Yahweh”], That I will raise to David a Branch of righteousness; A King shall reign and prosper, And execute judgment and righteousness in the earth. In His days Judah will be saved, And Israel will dwell safely; Now this is His name by which He will be called: THE LORD [“Yahweh”] OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.”

Jeremiah shows that the LORD (“Yahweh”—the Father) will raise a “Branch of righteousness,” to also be called the “LORD” (“Yahweh”Jesus Christ).

The Prophet Micah Understood

Reading from Micah 5:2–4: “But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Though you are little among the thousands of Judah, Yet out of you shall come forth to Me The One to be Ruler in Israel, whose goings forth are from of old, From everlasting. Therefore He shall give them up, until the time that she who is in labor has given birth; then the remnant of His brethren shall return to the children of Israel. And He shall stand and feed His flock in the strength of the LORD [“Yahweh”], in the majesty of the name of the LORD [“Yahweh”] His God; and they shall abide, for now He shall be great To the ends of the earth.”

Christ is identified in this passage as the Ruler in Israel, whose “goings forth are from of old, From everlasting.” In the original Hebrew it states, “from days of eternity.” Again, we are told that Christ has lived forever—which means, that He is God. Further, He is described as coming “in the majesty of the name of the LORD His God.”  This is a reference to God the Father, who is called here LORD or “Yahweh.” The word for “GOD” is “Elohim.” Again, we see the structure within the Godhead—God the Father is the “Most High God” (compare Mark 5:7), and Jesus Christ, although a God being Himself, refers to the Father as His God (notice, too, John 20:17).

The Prophet Isaiah Understood

There are certain passages in the book of Isaiah, which, at first sight, may not seem to reveal the plurality in the Godhead, but they do just that, if we study them carefully.

Isaiah 34:16 reads: “Search from the book of the LORD, and read: Not one of these shall fail; not one shall lack her mate. For My mouth has commanded it, and His Spirit has gathered them.” If this passage were only addressing one God being, we would expect to read: “My mouth has commanded it, and My Spirit has gathered them.” Interestingly, a distinction is made between “My mouth” and “His Spirit.”

Isaiah 45:1 states: “Thus says the LORD to His anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have held.” Again, if the passage were to only speak about one God being, we would expect to read: “Thus says the LORD to His anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand He has held.” However, God does not say it that way. He makes a distinction between “His anointed” and the fact that “I have held” his hand. In other words, it was the Father who gave Christ a command (“Thus says the LORD”), and it was Christ who quotes this command to Cyrus, and who holds Cyrus’ hand, in obedience of God the Father’s command. (Remember that the word “LORD”—“Yahweh”—can refer to both the Father and to Jesus Christ.)

Once we realize that those changes in reference are not merely “accidental,” we can find many more passages in the Old Testament along the same line that reveal that God is not just one person.

For example, Isaiah 29:22–23 says: “Therefore thus says the LORD, who redeemed Abraham, concerning the house of Jacob: Jacob shall not now be ashamed, Nor shall his face now grow pale; But when he sees his children, the work of My hands, in his midst, They will hallow My name, and hallow the Holy One of Jacob, and fear the God of Israel.” Notice the distinction between “My hands” and “My name” on the one hand, and “the Holy One of Jacob” and the “God of Israel” on the other hand. In the future, the children of Israel will recognize and believe in both the Father and Jesus Christ.

In Isaiah 62:6–7, God reveals that He has set watchmen on the walls of Jerusalem. Notice, what else the LORD is revealing in this passage: “I have set watchmen on your walls, O Jerusalem; they shall never hold their peace day or night. You who make mention of the LORD [ note that it does not say, “of Me”], do not keep silent, And give Him no rest [ note again, it does not say, “And give Me no rest”] till He [not, “I”] establishes And till He [not, “I”] makes Jerusalem a praise in the earth.”

Does Deuteronomy 6:4 Teach that God Is Only One Being?

Deuteronomy 6:4 reads: “Hear, O Israel, The LORD [“Yahweh”] our God, the LORD [“Yahweh”] is one!” Many perceive that this Scripture teaches monotheism—that is, the existence of only one God. And indeed, it does. There is only one God. But in our thorough study until now, we have learned that God is a Family, consisting of more than one being. Since God does not contradict Himself in His Word, what can we learn from Deuteronomy 6:4? “Yahweh” is one being. The being who dealt directly with Israel was Jesus Christ. He was called “Yahweh”—He was and is one being. So, it is true that “Yahweh”—Jesus Christ—is one being.

In addition, “Yahweh” refers to the Father as well—and the Father is, of course, also one being. Thirdly, since “Yahweh” refers to both the Father and the Son, they are also “one”—one in purpose, goal, mindset, willpower and determination. They are unified. There is no division in the God Family.

Recall that Christ said that the Father and He are ONE. Christ was not saying that the Father and He were one being. In fact, He won a legal argument with the Pharisees by proving that the Father and He were TWO beings (John 8:17–18). Recall, too, that Christ prayed to the Father that His disciples should become “one” (John 17:20–23). We also know that Adam and Eve were to become “one” flesh (Genesis 2:24). We can learn from these examples that the disciples, or Adam and Eve, were not to become one being, but they were to reach, or achieve, oneness in mindset, in purpose, and in action.

Further, many commentaries, including the Jewish Bible or Tanakh, feel that the passage in Deuteronomy 6:4 should be translated, “The LORD is our God, the LORD alone.” This would make sense too, given the fact that both God the Father and Jesus Christ are referred to as “LORD” or “Yahweh” in Scripture. In this sense, the prohibition is against worshipping other gods. Deuteronomy 6:4 definitively DOES NOT teach that there is only one God being, as this would contradict all the other Scriptures in the Bible that establish a duality in the Godhead.

Usually, the Term “Yahweh” Applies to Jesus Christ

We should take note of the fact that in most cases, the expression LORD or “Yahweh” does not refer to the Father, but actually refers to Jesus Christ. Notice, for instance, in Hebrews 1:1–12 where God the Father (vv. 1, 5) says to the Son, Jesus Christ (v. 10): “You, LORD, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth…” This is a quote from Psalm 102:25–27, referring to “Yahweh’s” creation of the earth. Paul, in the book of Hebrews, applies this Psalm, and the term LORD or “Yahweh,” to Jesus Christ, again confirming that it was Christ who did the work of creation.

There are a few statements in the Old Testament, however, as we have seen in the books of Zechariah and Jeremiah, which use the expression LORD or “Yahweh” to also describe God the Father. Additional Scriptures that refer to the Father as “Yahweh” are to be found in Psalm 2:2, 7, 11. There, Christ is identified as “Yahweh’s” Anointed, and as “My Son.” We might also note Psalm 110:1, which is quoted by Christ in Matthew 22:42–45, referring to the Father as the LORD or “Yahweh,” while referring to Christ as “Lord” (“adon” in the Hebrew, meaning, “Lord, sir, master”).

Does Isaiah 48:16 Teach a Trinity?

Another passage that proves that there is more than one person in the Godhead is Isaiah 48:16. Some claim, however, that this passage shows that the Holy Spirit is also a God being, and a third member of the Godhead. The passage reads: “Come near to Me, hear this: I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; From the time that it was, I was there. And now the Lord GOD and His Spirit Have sent Me.”

This translation may give the impression that the Holy Spirit is a separate entity. However, in the original Hebrew, the words “Have sent” are in the singular, as the margin of the New King James Bible points out. As a consequence, the New International Version translates this passage more accurately as: “The Sovereign God has sent Me with His Spirit.” The Jewish Bible or Tanakh renders this passage as follows, “And now the Lord God has sent me, endowed with His spirit.”

Others claim that 1 John 5:7 teaches the Trinity. This passage is quoted as stating that “there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.” Although this statement would not teach a Trinity, even if it were genuine, most scholars agree that these words were added by the Catholic Church to “prove” the Trinity, and that these words are not in the original writings. Our free booklet “Is God a Trinity?” discusses this passage in detail and proves from the Bible that the Holy Spirit is not God or a person—but is the power of God through which the God Family works.

Who and What Was Jesus Before His Human Birth?

Some deny that God always has been a Family. They might perhaps admit that God is a Family now, but they state that there was a time when God was not a Family. The Bible is clear, however, that God always has been a Family—and that the Father and the Son existed as members of the God Family throughout all eternity.

Some say that Jesus Christ did not exist prior to His birth as a human being. They teach that there was only one God being—now known as the Father—who created Christ in Mary’s womb. Others admit that Christ did exist prior to His human birth, but teach that He was an angel. Even though some teach that Jesus BECAME a God being upon His resurrection from the dead, they deny that Christ was God PRIOR to His human birth.

As we have seen in this booklet, the Bible teaches clearly that Jesus Christ existed on the God plane BEFORE He gave up His divinity for a short while to become a human being.

In passing, some deny that Christ gave up His divinity, when He became a human being, claiming that He was “fully God and fully man.” This concept is false, too. If Christ had not given up His divinity to become “fully man,” He could not have died (as God cannot die—and neither can we, once we are God beings, compare Luke 20:35–36). If Christ did not die, and if He was not subsequently brought back to life by a resurrection from the dead, then our faith is “empty” and “futile” (compare 1 Corinthians 15:3–4, 12–18). In addition, you and I would not have a Savior, as it was necessary for Christ to overcome sin in the flesh (compare Romans 8:3). He “was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin” (Hebrews 4:15).

The truth is that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, BECAME a human being. He was not “fully God” and “fully man,” possessing two natures—rather, we read in John 1:14 that “the Word BECAME flesh.” He gave up His divinity and His divine glory. The only way in which He was still the “Son of God” was that He was the person that had been God, BEFORE He became human. A king who becomes a beggar is still the person that had been the king at one time. In other words, Christ knew of His existence prior to His human birth—He knew of the person that He had been. Christ was that person. However, He laid aside His divinity and became FULLY man. When Christ BECAME flesh, He ceased to be what He had been—a divine glorified being. For additional information, please read our free booklet, “The Gospel of the Kingdom of God.”

Since it is very important to clearly understand that Christ existed prior to His birth as a human being, let us notice some additional proof:

I John 4:9 states: “In this the love of God was manifested toward us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him.” WHO was sent into the world? According to this verse, it was the Son—God’s Son! Both the Father and the Son planned for Christ’s coming into the world, as 2 Timothy 1:9 explains: “[God] who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began.” Again, we read in Revelation 13:8, Christ—the Lamb of God—was “…slain from the foundation of the world.”

John 17:5 adds these words of Christ, “‘And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.’” Earlier, Jesus had this to say while instructing His disciples: “’I came forth from the Father and have come into the world.  Again, I leave the world and go to the Father’” (John 16:28).

As we continue to follow the story of Jesus Christ, we find a scene depicted in the fifth chapter of the book of Revelation that actually shows that Jesus Christ was glorified by the Father. The seventh chapter of the book of Daniel also describes the time after Christ’s resurrection when that former glory was restored to Him by the Father. There are many other Scriptures that refer to Christ being glorified (compare John 12:16; John 20:17; Hebrews 4:14; Hebrews 8:1; Ephesians 1:20).

There is another incontrovertible proof that Jesus was willingly sent into the world—leaving His place as the spiritual Son of God to become a flesh and blood, physical man (begotten in the flesh) who would live a sinless life in order to save all of mankind. No other sacrifice than that of God Himself—the Creator of man—could pay the price for man’s sins and allow man to have access to the gift of eternal life. Yet, in order to be able to die, Christ, the Son of God, had to become flesh and blood.

Philippians 2:6–8, documents this: “…who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross” (New American Standard translation). Notice, too, Hebrews 2:9, “But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower [or, for a little while lower] than the angels, FOR THE SUFFERING OF DEATH, crowned with glory and honor, that He, by the grace of God, MIGHT TASTE DEATH FOR EVERYONE.”

To believe that Jesus Christ did not exist as a God being before His physical life is to deny the very meaning of the priceless sacrifice both He and the Father made. Alarmingly, at the core of this false belief, there lies the danger of one actually denying the Father and the Son, and that is the belief in and practice of “antichrist” (compare 1 John 2:22–23). The Father and the Son have existed throughout time—even before “time” itself existed.

Jesus Christ spoke of His own pre-existence over and over again. At one time, He stated boldly that He—AS God—had lived before Abraham. The Jews were so outraged that they were willing to stone Jesus. Notice the dialogue and the reaction of the Jews to Christ’s words in John 8:56–58: “[Jesus said,] ‘Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad.’ Then the Jews said to Him, ‘You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?’ Jesus said to them, ‘Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.’” When Jesus said, “I AM,” rather than, “I WAS,” the Jews understood that He identified Himself as God—as “Yahweh,” the “I AM” or Eternal of the Old Testament. That is why they “took up stones to throw at Him” (verse 59).

Consider, too, this statement that He made to His disciples very early in His three and one-half year ministry: “’I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven’” (Luke 10:18). This event marking Satan’s failed rebellion against the Family of God happened long before even mankind was created. However, deeply rooted in this rebellion was Satan’s attempt to stop the great master plan of God in enlarging His kind to actually stop the future development of the sons and daughters of God. In that struggle, Satan lost—yet he continues to deceive and fight against the will of God. However, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, has fulfilled a great step in the plan of God that is only open to mankind. It is not open to Satan and his demons, although they obviously have wanted to attain what was not offered them. Christ has become the firstborn of many brethren. Understanding and acting on this truth will assure that none of us denies either the Father or the Son!

A Spiritual World Before Christ?

In addition, the Bible reveals a very intriguing insight for us to consider. Hebrews 9:11 states: “But Christ came as High Priest of the good things to come, with the greater and more perfect tabernacle not made with hands, that is, NOT OF THIS CREATION.”  Later, in Hebrews 11:3, we find that “By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were NOT made of things which are visible.”  What the Bible states here is that the physical world was formed from the spirit world.  Even science acknowledges that the entire physical creation is winding down, and that—given enough time—would all return to energy.

The book of Hebrews reveals even more in showing that spiritual things exist in addition to physical things.  In the eighth chapter of Hebrews, in verse 5, the ancient earthly tabernacle and priesthood are categorized collectively as “the COPY and SHADOW of the heavenly things, as Moses was divinely instructed when he was about to make the tabernacle.  For He said, ‘See that you make all things according to the pattern shown you on the mountain.’”  (Compare, for further proof, Acts 7:44–50.)  Christ is called “a Minister of the sanctuary and of the TRUE TABERNACLE which the LORD ERECTED, and not man” (Hebrews 8:2).

Hebrews 9 continues to explain: “Therefore it was necessary that the copies of the things in the heavens should be purified (cleansed) with these, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.  For Christ has not entered the holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us” (verses 23 and 24).

What these verses show us is that there is a spiritual world—and that this spiritual world already existed prior to the birth of Jesus Christ as a human being. Most Biblical “scholars” won’t deny this—yet, paradoxically, some deny that Jesus Christ existed on a spiritual plane prior to His birth as a human being! The Bible is very clear, however, that Christ did exist as a God being prior to His human birth. We read that God (the Father) created everything that was created—including in the spiritual world—by and through Jesus Christ.

Let’s read again Colossians 1:16: “For by Him [Christ] all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, VISIBLE AND INVISIBLE, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him.” Jesus Christ is identified, in Revelation 3:14, as the “beginner of the creation of God,” as it should be correctly rendered. The Authorized Version translates this passage as, “the beginning of the creation of God,” falsely implying that Christ had a beginning. Christ, however, had no beginning. He is identified in Hebrews 7:1 as “Melchizedek,” the “priest of the Most High God.” Hebrews 7:3 explains that He had “neither beginning of days nor end of life.” Therefore, Revelation 3:14 is more accurately translated as “beginning” or “source” of God’s creation (compare, for instance, Revised Standard Version; New Revised Standard Version; Revised English Bible; and New American Bible). Christ EXISTED as a God being from all eternity, and it was He—the second member of the God Family—who began the creation of everything.

Was the Father Always the Father—and Was Christ Always the Son?

Some advance another argument in an effort to disprove the Biblical truth that God has always been a Family. Although they might admit that God has always consisted of two beings, they state that God was not a Family before Christ’s human existence, as Christ was allegedly not the Son and the Father was allegedly not the Father prior to Christ’s human existence—hence, God could not have been a Family prior to Christ’s human existence.

Is it true that Christ BECAME the Son, and that the Father BECAME the Father at one given moment in time—or does the Bible teach that the two God beings ALWAYS were the Father and the Son?

Some quote Romans 1:4 as proof of the concept that Jesus Christ—the second being in the Godhead—BECAME the Son of God at the time of His resurrection from the dead.

In Romans 1:3–4, Paul states that God made a promise before “concerning HIS SON Jesus Christ our Lord who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh, and declared to be the Son of God with power according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection of the dead.” Does this Scripture say that Christ became the Son of God through the resurrection of the dead? Without analyzing the rest of the Scriptures, and focusing on this passage alone, another possible way of understanding Paul’s statement could also be that the Son, who had been flesh, became again a powerful being through the resurrection from the dead. In other words, Romans 1:3–4 is not conclusive proof that Jesus Christ BECAME the Son of God at the time of His resurrection from the dead.

Before we clearly present from the Bible what Romans 1:3–4 is saying, let us note another passage, Hebrews 1:5, which has been used in an attempt to prove that Christ BECAME the Son of God—that He was not the Son of God from all eternity. Hebrews 1:5 states, “For to which of the angels did He ever say: ‘You are My Son, Today I have begotten you’? And again: ‘I will be to Him a Father, And He shall be to Me a Son’?”

Does this passage mean that Christ became the Son of God when He came into the world (verse 6), and that God became the Father at that time? Another explanation—again, just looking at this passage alone—could be that God the Father begot the Son, Jesus Christ, as a human being at that time, and that God the Father will be, and has been, to Christ a Father in the truest sense of the word, as Christ showed through obedience in His human life that He was an obedient Son, even while in the flesh.

 When we view the passages in Romans 1 and Hebrews 1 in context with the other Biblical testimony, we must conclude that they cannot be used to validate the concept that Christ BECAME the Son of God at the time of His resurrection. If it were true that Christ became the Son of God through the resurrection, why did God the Father say before Christ’s resurrection, “This is My beloved SON, in whom I am well pleased.” (Matthew 3:17)? When this event occurred, John the Baptist exclaimed, “’And I have seen and testified that this is the SON OF GOD’” (John 1:34). Christ is identified many times in the New Testament as the “Son of God,” prior to His death and resurrection (compare John 1:49; Matthew 4:3, 6; Matthew 8:29; Matthew 14:33).

Notice Christ’s own words in John 3:17, “’For God did not send HIS SON into the world to condemn the world…’” Another remarkable dialogue is recorded between Christ and Peter. Christ asked Peter, “’But who do you say that I am?’ Simon Peter answered and said, ‘You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ Jesus answered and said to him, ‘Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven’” (Matthew 16:15–17).

Christ is not saying here that He would BECOME the Son of God at the time of His resurrection. Peter had identified Him as “the Son of the living God,” and Christ told Peter that God the Father had revealed this truth to him. Compare, too, John 6:68–69.

The Jews KNEW that Christ claimed that He WAS the Son of God (compare Matthew 27:40, 43; Luke 22:70; John 9:35–37; John 10:33–36; John 11:4; John 19:7). When Christ died, the centurion recognized that Christ was “the Son of God” (Matthew 27:54).

In addition, we find a few Scriptures in the Old Testament that refer to Christ—the second being in the God Family—as the Son (compare Psalm 2:1–2, 7, 11–12; Proverbs 30:4).

Generally, however, this terminology is not used in the Old Testament, as God was not clearly revealed as Father and Son in ancient times.

Christ, as the Son of God, had to come to reveal the Father. The Jews were under the misimpression that they were worshipping “the Father.” They did not understand that the God being functioning as the Messenger or Spokesperson of the Father and the God Family, who had been dealing directly with the ancients, was actually Jesus Christ. (Compare Christ’s words in John 8:54, “’It is My Father who honors Me, of whom you say that He is your God.’”)

Still, there are Old Testament passages that speak about God as “the Father.” References to “the Father” in the Old Testament can be found in Isaiah 63:16; Malachi 1:6; 2:10; 2 Samuel 7:13–14; 1 Chronicles 22:10; and Deuteronomy 32:6. In those passages, Christ—the “Word” or Spokesman for the Father—communicated to the people the words of the Father.

Since God created everything through Christ, it is also said in Isaiah 9:6 that Christ will be called in the future—after His Second Coming—the “Everlasting Father.” This statement proves, too, that Christ existed for all eternity. He is referred to here as the “everlasting Father” or “the everlasting Source” of everything—the “beginning of the creation of God.” However, when the Bible speaks of the “Father,” it normally refers strictly and exclusively to the highest God being in the God Family.

We find, then, that God was identified in Scripture as the Father and the Son prior to the human existence of Jesus Christ. God has been a Family for all eternity.

We should also note that Christ spoke, of course, about God as His FATHER. He made repeated statements to this effect PRIOR to His death and subsequent resurrection. We might also recall that He told the Jews that they had never seen the FATHER or heard the FATHER’S voice (John 5:37).

Returning to Romans 1:3–4, Paul is addressing the fact that Jesus was resurrected from the dead. This showed WHO Christ was. Notice again what Romans 1:2–4 really says. God the Father made a promise concerning His Son Jesus Christ. We read that the SON was born of the seed of David according to the flesh. We also read that the SON was declared to be the Son of God WITH POWER according to the Spirit by the resurrection from the dead. Christ was already the SON when He was born as a human being—but He became POWERFUL when He became once again a glorified God being. He came back to His disciples after His resurrection to prove who He was, that God the Father had raised Him back to life, and that all authority or “POWER” had been given to Him by the Father (compare Matthew 28:18 in the Authorized Version; see also Hebrews 1:3).

We also read in Romans 8:3 that God sent “His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh.” Note whom God the Father sent to become a human being. It says, He sent “His own Son.” Notice the same statement in Galatians 4:4: “When the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth HIS SON, born of a woman, born under the law.” Hebrews 5:8 also emphasizes that Christ had to suffer in the flesh, although He was “a Son.” He was already the Son of God PRIOR to His resurrection.

In light of the foregoing, we understand that Hebrews 1 does not state that Christ was not the Son prior to His human existence. Rather, the Bible teaches consistently that the Son of God came into the world. He became a human being. Thus, He became the Son of Man as well.

In thinking about Jesus in His preincarnate life, it is hard to describe the Father and Son relationship that existed from eternity in physical analogies. It is plain that although Christ was equal to God in one sense, He still said that God the Father was greater than He was (John 14:28). Also, Christ is and always has been the Spokesman for the Father and the Family of God. John 1:1 states: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was WITH God, and the Word WAS God.”  What is important to understand from this verse is that Jesus was with God (the Father) at the beginning of creation. Further, Christ will be known again to the nations as the Word of God, when He returns to this earth. Revelation 19:13 describes His Second Coming in this way: “He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God.”

God the Father holds a superior position in the God Family in that He represents the final authority. Christ was, always is, and always will be subject to the Father—a structure of relationship that has always existed.

The role in the Family of God between Father and Son not only stretches back through eternity, but it is a role that will continue forever into the future.  Several decades after the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, we find a statement that was recorded by John, an apostle of Jesus Christ: “The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which GOD GAVE HIM to show His servants—things which must shortly take place.  And He sent and signified it by His angel to His servant John” (Revelation 1:1).  Jesus is not doing this by Himself. Rather, the revelation is received from God the Father, and Christ, as Spokesman for the Family of God, then sends it through His angel to John.

We read in 1 Corinthians 15:24, 27–28, “Then comes the end, when He [Christ] delivers the kingdom to God the Father… For ‘He [the Father] has put all things under His [Christ’s] feet.’ But when He says ‘all things are put under Him,’ it is evident that He who put all things under Him is excepted. Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.” The head of Christ is and will be—and always has been—God the Father  (1 Corinthians 11:3).

It may be difficult for us to comprehend that Christ WAS always the Son, and that the Father WAS always the Father. We may not be able to explain how that could have been the case, thinking, in using a human analogy, that God the Father must of necessity have existed prior to the Son’s birth.” This is not true, however, since the Bible tells us that the Son—Jesus Christ, the Word— did not have a beginning. The Bible teaches us that God the Father was always the Father and that Christ was always the Son. We cannot explain this revelation with our limited human understanding. Neither can we explain how God could have lived from all eternity, or that there were even two God beings from all eternity. However, we know this to be true. The Bible teaches it, and we must accept it “by faith” (Hebrews 11:6), although the human mind might not be able to fully comprehend it (compare Romans 11:33; 1 Corinthians 13:12).

We have also learned from the Bible that God the Father is the highest in the Godhead. The Bible nowhere says that He was NOT the highest from all eternity. In fact, we read that God the Father created everything THROUGH Jesus Christ—so the highest God being created everything, including the spiritual world, through a God being “lower” than He. If we were to speculate, we could imagine, perhaps, that BEFORE anything was created, the two totally “equal” God beings decided between themselves that one should become the highest. However, the Biblical record does not leave room for such speculation. We are clearly taught that the Father always was the highest. We can’t explain or comprehend how that could be. Likewise, we might not understand how Christ could have always been the Son, or how the Father could have always been the Father. Still, the Biblical record is clear in this regard.

Therefore, we must conclude that God HAS ALWAYS BEEN a Family—and that God IS a Family today, presently consisting of the Father and the Son.  The great hidden knowledge—the mystery hidden since the foundation of the world—is that God has begun a process that will lead to the vast increase of His Family!  As we have seen in 1 John 3:2, “now we are children of God.”  We are now begotten—not yet born!  However, a few people throughout the time from the creation of man and leading up to the return of Jesus Christ have already been called, and they have also been chosen, and they have proven themselves faithful (compare Revelation 17:14). These, and yet others still to come, will join the Family of God in the first resurrection.

These are the ones who have received God’s Holy Spirit prior to Christ’s First Coming. We read that the Spirit of Christ was IN the prophets of old (1 Peter 1:11). [This proves, too, that Christ existed at that time, prior to His human existence, and that He gave His Spirit to the prophets.] These prophets were already BEGOTTEN children of the God Family PRIOR to Christ’s First Coming. Again, this shows that God WAS a Family, and that He was already in the process of enlarging His Family, PRIOR to Christ’s birth as a human being.

The Bible also indicates that the vast majority of all of mankind who have ever lived, or who shall ever live, will come up in the second resurrection (compare Revelation 20:5) and will be given an opportunity to enter the Family of God as well (Please read our free booklets, “Do We Have An Immortal Soul? and, “God’s Commanded Holy Days,” which explain the truth of the “second resurrection” in more detail.)

Just as the Father reveals the Son, and the Son reveals the Father, the resounding truth of just who God is can be understood by us!  God has indeed given us a future and a hope.  We, too, can become a part of what God IS—the GOD FAMILY!

Man’s Ultimate Potential and Destiny

In Hebrews 1, verse 2, it says of Jesus Christ that God the Father “…has appointed [Him] heir of all things.” It is further revealed in Hebrews 2:7 that although man was created “for a little while” lower than the angels, as the margin has it correctly, he will ultimately have “’…all things in subjection under his feet’” (verse 8).

 The eighth chapter of the book of Romans presents us with even more astounding proof of the tremendous future God has in store for man. “For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. For you did not receive the spirit of bondage again to fear, but you received the Spirit of adoption [correctly translated, “son-ship”] by whom we cry out ‘Abba, Father.’ The Spirit Himself [Itself] bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs—heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him, that we may also be glorified together” (verses 14–17).

Romans 8:18–19 continues: “For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God.”

These two short verses open up the truth of the vast master plan of God and the very purpose for man’s creation—to increase His Family by having sons and daughters born into His very Family! We are told in 2 Corinthians 6:17–18, “Therefore ‘Come out from among them And be separate, says the Lord. Do not touch what is unclean, And I will receive you.’ ‘I will be a Father to you, And you shall be My sons and daughters, Says the LORD Almighty.’”

After explaining that mankind was to become conformed to the image of His Son, Jesus Christ, God shows the underlying purpose in His plan in Romans 8:29: Christ was to “be the firstborn among many brethren.” So important is the purpose of God in bringing many sons and daughters to glory that He was willing to give His only begotten Son in fulfillment of His objective (compare John 3:16). Romans 8:32 also clarifies this point: “He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, how shall He not with Him also freely give us all things?”

“All things” means exactly that—it includes rule over the entire universe AND the unending future of God’s Kingdom. Man is to become a “joint heir” with Christ in “all things”! John, an apostle of Jesus Christ, was fervently aware of man’s tremendous future. In 1 John 3:1–2, he writes: “Behold what manner of love the Father has bestowed on us, that we should be called children of God! Therefore the world does not know us, because it did not know Him. Beloved, now we are children of God; and it has not yet been revealed what we shall be, but we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is.”

Paul also addressed this tremendous future transformation: “For our citizenship is in heaven, from which we also eagerly wait for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will transform our lowly body that it may be conformed to His glorious body, according to the working by which He is able even to subdue all things to Himself” (Philippians 3:20–21).

Notice again God’s promise to man in Revelation 21:7: “‘He who overcomes shall inherit all things, and I will be his God and he shall be My son.” Revelation 22:5 adds, “And they shall reign forever and ever.” A careful analysis of the entire passage in Revelation 22:3–5 shows that the reference of eternal rulership is indeed to God’s children who will have been made immortal. While “God and the Lamb” are referred to in the singular in this passage—in order to show God the Father’s rule over everything and everybody, including the Lamb, Jesus Christ—the children of God are referred to in the plural. Notice the entire passage in Revelation 21:3–5: “And there shall be no more curse, but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it, and His servants shall serve Him. They shall see His face, and His name shall be on their foreheads. There shall be no light there: They need no lamp nor light of the sun, for the Lord God gives them light. And they shall reign forever and ever.”

The Bible reveals that God is a growing Family, currently comprised of God the Father and Jesus Christ. God made man so that man could eventually become part of the God Family. God’s purpose for man is introduced to us in His own words at the very beginning of the Bible: “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness.” The Bible is given to help us understand the reason we exist, and to help us to reach our ultimate potential.

We would like to encourage our readers to read or re-read our free booklet, “The Gospel of the Kingdom of God,” which proves from the Bible that it is indeed the potential of man to enter the kingdom of God—by becoming a member of the Family of God.

The very last book of the Bible tells us the destiny of those who become born again members, that is, Spirit beings—God beings—in the God Family. We read in Revelation 3:12, “He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he shall go out no more. I will write on him the name of My God.” They will receive God’s name—they will enter the very Family of God as born again spirit beings. Revelation 22:4 confirms this, “They shall see His face, and His name shall be on their foreheads.” At that time, they will be truly “born again”—and not before then. At that time, they will truly have inherited “all things.”

Yes, God IS a Family—and He wants YOU to truly become a born again member of His Family—His spiritual offspring. This is the reason WHY you were born. Just imagine YOUR awesome potential and destiny—to become, and to be named, GOD!

We Will Succeed

God has called us to bring us into His kingdom. He has called us to succeed. If God had any doubt whether or not we will succeed, He would not have called us in this day and age. God is sure and certain that we will make it into His kingdom. How certain are we about it? Only one person can prevent you from making it — and that person is you yourself. That is why we need to conquer our fears and doubts. That is why we need to overcome. But, in God’s eyes, this battle will be won.

Download Audio 
©2024 Church of the Eternal God