Hello Mike

Concerning your e- mail and article about your understanding of the Godhead; I have read it and believe I grasp your view, although I’m not sure I agree with you. Even as you wrote, I am willing to have my understanding change if I am wrong. I wouldn’t believe in the Trinity simply because tradition threatened me with hell- fire if I didn’t.

Have you ever considered William Law’s understanding of the Trinity? It seems to make sense to me. Although this section deals with man created in the image of God, I believe it gives an understanding of the Trinity as he saw it.

I’ll quote:

“Nothing can so fully, and justly show us the true nature of our Fall, as the nature and manner of our Redemption. These things have such a necessary correspondence, as cannot be denied, but by a mind utterly indisposed to receive conviction.”

So let’s consider what Law says concerning the original of man in the image of God.

“Man was created by God after His own Image, and in His own Likeness, as a living mirror of the Divine Nature; where Father, Son and Holy Ghost, each brought forth their own nature in a creaturely manner. As the who is begotten of the Father, is the brightness of the Father’s glory, and the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and the Son, as an amiable moving Life of both; so it was in this created image of the holy trinity. In it the Father’s nature generated the nature of the Son, and the Holy Ghost proceeds from them both, as an amiable moving life of both. This was the likeness or Image of God, in which the first man was created, a true offspring of God, in whom the Divine Birth sprung up as in the Deity, where Father, Son and Holy Ghost saw themselves in a creaturely manner. In the Divine nature the Father cannot possibly be separated from the Son, nor the Holy Ghost from both, or either of them.

But such separation could and did come to pass in the trinity become creaturely, or in the created living image of the trinity.”

I understand this to mean that man, because of his likeness to God, could commune with God. Man’s soul in the likeness of God generated a life that was as God’s Life.

This seems correct to me, because man’s soul is constantly generating or giving forth a birth of some life. Now this life is either good or evil, depending on the state of his soul; whether it be good or evil. (So it seems to me.)

Now let’s consider what happened to the state of his soul after the fall, according to Law.

“Now by his transgression this image of the Holy Trinity was broken; the generation or birth of the Son or Word, and the proceeding of the Holy Ghost in him, were at an end; in the day that he sinned, in that day he died this death. And therefore what was he as to his soul? It was something that was deprived of that birth, which was the brightness of it’s glory, and which should be that in it, which the Son of God is to the Father; it wanted that Spirit which was it’s amiable life, and which was to be that to it, which the Holy Ghost is to the Father and Son….. This was the state of the soul after the fall, when the birth of the Son of God and the proceeding of the Holy Ghost, were no more to be found or felt in it.

Now it is a plain, manifest doctrine of the holy scriptures that man by the fall is in such a condition, that there was no help or remedy for him….. but by the Son of God’s becoming Incarnate, taking the fallen nature upon him. If this alone could be the remedy, does not this enough show us the disease? Does not this speak plainly enough, what it was that man had lost by his fall, namely, the birth of the Son of God in his soul and the procession of the Holy Ghost; and therefore it was that only the Son of God in so mysterious a manner, could be his Redeemer. If he had lost less, a less power could have redeemed him….. But since it is an open, undeniable doctrine of the Gospel, that there can be no salvation for mankind, but in the name and in the power of the Son of God, by His being united to the fallen nature, and so raising his own birth and life in it; is it not sufficiently shown us, that what was lost by the fall, was the birth of the Son of God in the soul?

It is said that we must be born again from above, born of God, born of the spirit; for this is expressly telling us what birth we have lost, and is only saying that the first birth is to be restored, or that divine birth is to arise, or to be brought again into us, as at the first, when the living image of the Holy Trinity was brought forth in us. – The Grounds and Reasons of Christian Regeneration“

I just want to add something here – I believe, if I am not mistaken, that you say that Christ is the Holy Spirit. But is this necessarily the case, though? It is true that Christ equates the coming of the Holy Spirit with His coming to them; but does this mean He is the Holy Spirit? Is it not merely the case that as the Holy Spirit can only proceed from Christ (and the Father, I know!) that He (the Holy Spirit) can only come to them when Christ comes to them? This seems right to me.

“When it is known that the triune nature of God was brought forth in the creation of man, that it was lost in his fall, that it is restored in his redemption, a never- failing light arises in all scripture, from Genesis to Revelation.

The doctrine of the Holy Trinity is wholly practical; it is revealed to us, to discover our high original, and the greatness of our fall, to show us the deep and profound operation of the triune God in the recovery of the divine life in our souls…. for as everything that is in us, whether it be heaven or hell, rises up in by a birth, and is generated in us by the will- spirit of our souls, which kindles itself either in heaven or in hell; so this mystery of a triune Deity manifesting itself, as a Father creating, as a Son or Word regenerating, as a Holy Spirit sanctifying us, is not to entertain our speculation with dry, metaphysical distinctions of the Deity, but to show us from what a height and depth we are fallen, and to excite such a prayer and faith…… after this triune fountain of all good, as may help to generate and bring forth in us that first image of the Holy Trinity in which we were created, and which must be born in us before we can enter into the state of the blessed…… No person has fitness, nor any pretense, nor any ground from scripture, to think, or say anything of the Trinity, till such time as he stands in the state of the penitent returning prodigal, weary of his own sinful shameful nature; and desiring to renounce the world, the flesh and the devil, and then he is first permitted to be baptized in the Name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost; this is the first time the Gospel teaches, or calls anyone to the acknowledgment of the Holy Trinity. – An Appeal to all who Doubt the Truths of the Gospel”

I also cannot see how Christ, the Son of God, if a created being, is able to dwell in all his creatures. All creation was created in and through Christ, and all creation must have Christ in it if it is to have any glory or perfection. I hope you believe that I have no intention of arguing with you or anyone; I merely want to know what the truth is, and I feel that William Law has explained the nature of the Trinity better than anyone I have ever read.

I also remember you mentioning something about Adam and Eve – how God creates through Christ, as Adam creates through Eve (I can’t remember exactly, so forgive me if I have gotten it wrong), as somehow proving that Christ is an inferior created being to the Father.

Consider the teaching of Jacob Boehme on this subject:

“God created His Image and Likeness in a single man. Adam was a man and also a woman;…. for God did not in the beginning make man and woman; He did not create them at the same time, because the life in which the two properties of masculine and feminine are united in one, constitutes man in the Image of God…. after the manner of the Father’s and Son’s property, which together are one God, not divided; for perfect love is not found in one property, but in the two, one entering into the other. – Man in the Image of the Heavenly (Treasures from the writings of Jacob Boehme)“

Please let me know what you think of all this, whether you agree or disagree.

K____

Hi K___,

It is good to hear from you again. Please weigh what I say against the scriptures, and don’t allow ‘scholarship,’ name recognition, or the fact that someone has been so helpful in the past, to keep you from “trying the spirits.”

How do we ‘try the spirits?’

1Jn 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.

‘Trying the spirits’ has to do with whether we should “believe” what we are being taught. I say all this with the greatest respect and appreciation for men like Andrew Jukes, William Law, and Jacob Boehme. But I never forget the need to “try the spirits.”

I am not ‘trying’ these men when I do this. One thing I am convinced of by Christ Himself is that we are not judged by what we produce. Rather we are judged by what we do with what we are given, as demonstrated in the parable of the talents.

What I mean by that is that God did not reveal to Andrew Jukes that “we are the circumcision” (Php 3:3). Andrew Jukes did not see nor fully comprehend the truth that “He is NOT a Jew which is one outwardly” (Rom 2:27-29). He did not fully understand that we “were [ past tense] Gentiles,” but now in Christ we “are made near [ to the] commonwealth of Israel [ and are now] fellowcitzens in the commonwealth of Israel” (Eph 2:11-19). Jukes did not see that the “Jerusalem that now is, is in bondage with her children … and we [ Gentile Galatians ] are the children of the free woman” (Gal 4:21-31)

Not being given this knowledge, Mr Jukes draws the erroneous conclusion that “Paul’s letters are ‘Katurah’. They ‘smell sweet,’ but they will never be allowed to inherit the promises given to Abraham because they were not born of Isaac.” (from ‘Types In Genesis’).

As much respect as I have for Mr Jukes, on this point he is dead wrong. “We, as Isaac, ARE children of promise.” “Israel [ Isaac’s descendants] have not obtained that which he sought after, but the election [ Gentiles in Christ] have obtained it.” “Now if ye [ Gentile Galatians] be in Christ THEN are ye Abraham’s seed and heirs according to the promise.” Mr Jukes missed all that. I do not hold that against him. I simply ‘try the spirits to see whether they be of God.’

Now I point all that out about Andrew Jukes so that you will see where I am coming from when I answer your question about William Law. Mr. Law obviously believes in the unscriptural doctrine of the ‘fall of man.’ Neither Christ nor any of his apostles ever mention “the fall.”

The reason is that all the New Covenant writers understood that:

Rom 8:20 For the creature was made [ right from the hand of the Creator] subject to vanity, not willingly [ not by choice, not by a ‘fall’], but by reason of him [ God, not by Adam’s fabled ‘free will’- Read After The Counsel of His Own Will] who hath subjected the same in hope,

This is what is meant when we read:

Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
Gen 3:19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return. [ Adam was mere dust from the ‘get- go.’]

This is what we are being told when we read:

Gen 2:25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.
Rev 3:17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:

Do you realize how few people believe these words? The whole Christian world believes that “He created man in His image” means that man was made perfect and immortal, and then he fell. The Truth of the scriptures is:

Rom 8:20 For the creature was made [ right from the hand of the Creator] subject to vanity, not willingly [ here is the Truth, it wasn’t by Adam’s ‘free choice,’ or his will], but by reason of him [ God Himself] who hath subjected the same in hope [ God’s original plan was for Adam to disobey Him and come to see his corruptible nature and his need for a Savior. So God had already provided this Savior, before he ever created naked, dusty Adam.]

Here are the scriptures for the statement in brackets:

Rev 13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
1Co 2:7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:
Eph 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
2Ti 1:9 Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,
Tit 1:2 In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;
1Pe 1:19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:
1Pe 1:20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,

Please take the time to read After The Counsel of His Own Will to see how God really worked out the events in the garden of Eden as well as all events of all time. God’s dealings with Adam were no different than they were with Pharaoh or you or me. They are “all … after the counsel of HIS OWN will” (Eph 1:11). We, like Adam, make many ‘choices.’ But to say that these choices are ‘free’ from the influences of God is to say that Joseph’s brothers decided “of their own free will” to sell Joseph into slavery. There is no denying that they decided to make that choice. Was that choice free? Not according to Joseph:

Gen 50:20 But as for you [ Joseph’s brothers], ye thought evil against me; but God meant it [ their evil thoughts and choices] unto good, to bring to pass, as it is this day, to save much people alive.

This verse explains the reason “God meant” for Eve to eat of the forbidden fruit. “God meant” for Adam to become aware of the fact that he was created in a form [ naked and out of the ground] that needed a Savior. The twin false doctrines of ‘free will’ and ‘the fall of man’ both deny the scriptural fact that Adam was “made [ by God] subject to vanity, not willingly [ not by choice], but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope [‘After the counsel of His own will’].”

Understanding The Shadows Of The Old Covenant

This brings us to the crux of William Law’s misunderstanding about “the image of God.” What Mr. Law and the entirety of christendom have missed is the fact that nothing in the old covenant is the fullness of Truth. Everything in the ‘law’, the first five books of the Bible, and the prophets was mere ‘shadow.’ A ‘shadow’ by definition is something that is blocking the light. Indeed in reality, a shadow is the lack of light.

Allow Christ to demonstrate the Truth of this principle. He has just fed 5000 people with five loaves and two fishes. When the people follow Christ across the sea in hopes of another free meal, Christ tells them that a free meal is really all they are after. In response the people, or one of their representatives, quotes word for word Exo 16:4.

Exo 16:4 Then said the LORD unto Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law, or no.

Now let’s read John and see if the people were telling the truth about what that scripture said:

Joh 6:31 Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat.

And what is Christ’s response to having His own words thrown back at Him? Pay close attention; they are very instructive if you want to understand the function of the old covenant. Here is Christ’s response to His own old covenant words:

Joh 6:32 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven.

Christ flatly contradicted His own words in ‘the law:’

Exo 16:4 Then said the LORD unto Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you;

How could He possibly do this? Here is how, and here is why:

Heb 10:1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things

Everything in ‘the law’ was a mere shadow of the Truth. That ‘Truth,’ that ‘true bread,’ those “good things to come” were one and all Christ! Everything else was something that blocked the true light. The manna was not the “true bread.” It was a shadow of the true. Now we can understand the depth of this statement:

Joh 1:17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

So when God says in ‘the law’ that He “created man in His own image,” what He is really saying is that He created a mere shadow of the true image of God. Adam was a mere type and a mere shadow of the true ‘Adam.’ Adam himself is called “the son of God.”

Luk 3:38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

But this was true only ‘in type.’ It was true only in ‘shadow.’

But Paul reveals to us that Adam was nothing more than a type of the true ‘Son of God:’

1Co 15:43 It is sown [ God is the ‘sower’] in dishonour [ naked and of the ground]; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
1Co 15:44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
1Co 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul [ a ‘living soul,’ is a ‘body of this death’ – Rom 7:24]; the last Adam [ the true ‘Son of God’] was made a quickening spirit.
1Co 15:46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual [ and eternal], but that which is natural [ and dying]; and afterward that which is spiritual.
1Co 15:47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.

The false doctrine of ‘the fall’ is based upon the serpent’s lie “You shall not surely die.” It was the serpent who told Adam that he was created perfect and immortal and in no need of a Savior.

The Truth of the scriptures is:

Psa 51:5 Behold, I was shapen [ by the hand of the creator] in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.

David understood that it is God who creates evil:

Isa 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

These scriptures are not for the “carnal [ Christian] babes” of 1Co 3:1-3. This is meaty Truth. But it is the Truth.

Rom 8:20 For the creature was made [ right from the hand of the Creator] subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,

Here is how man was made: 1) Of dust and 2) Naked. What is God telling us when He reveals these details to us?

Here is what that means:

1) Dust:

1Co 15:47 The first man is of the earth, [ dust] earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.
1Co 15:50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.
Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground,
Psa 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity.

‘Flesh’ equates in the scriptures with ‘corruption.’ The Lord God “formed man of the [ corruptible] dust of the ground.”

2) Naked:

Rev 3:17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:
Gen 2:25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and [ just like Laodicea] were not ashamed.
Rev 16:15 Behold, I come as a thief. Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame.
Rev 17:16 And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire.

Nakedness in the scriptures is equated with sin:

Rev 3:18 I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appea r; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.

Laodicea’s nakedness is in sharp contrast with the robes of “white linen … which is the righteousness of the saints.”

Rev 19:8 And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.

Adam was not created dressed in white linen. It was God Himself who brought Adam and Eve into this world ‘naked.’

If you want a thorough understanding of this subject, read the article on the Law and the Offerings on the web page. God reveals in these offerings how He wants us to view the sacrifice of Christ. That is why we are told that God gave Israel both a ‘sin offering,’ for what man IS, right from the hand of his Creator, before he ever does anything good or sinful, then, besides the ‘sin offering,’ for what we are, Israel was also given a ‘transgression offering,’ for what we DO.

I could go on to point out that in ‘the [ shadowy] law’, the Lord told Israel that if a man has a field and digs a pit in that field that the owner of the field is responsible for any harm that befalls the beast of his neighbor that might accidentally fall into that pit. This is merely a shadow of the fact that it is God who Christ tells us owns ‘the field,’ (“the field is the world” Mat 13:38). This shadowy law of Moses reveals the fact that God assumes responsibility for everything that happens in His ‘field,’ and that before he ever created man he had made provision for all the sins that He knew were to be committed. That provision was Christ, and He was “slain from the foundation of the world.”

This false doctrine of ‘the fall’ has the whole Christian world wanting to ‘go back’ to Eden. It has the whole world deceived into believing that we were originally immortal; that we cannot lose that immortality even if we must burn in hell for all eternity with no purpose or goal in view other than the continued suffering of most of mankind. God tells us that we must “love our enemies,” but He Himself will hate and torment our loved ones in hell forever?

God is not ‘going back’ to anything. He never intended to ‘go back.’ He is right on schedule with plan A. Here is plan A, and it has no room for ‘the fall of man’:

1Co 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
1Co 15:23 But every man in his own order: [ The ‘order’ laid out “before the foundation of the world”] Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming.
1Co 15:24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.
1Co 15:25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.
1Co 15:26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.
1Ti 4:10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially [ Not exclusively] of those that believe.
1Jn 2:2 And he is [ not ‘could be,’ but “is”] the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

God did not say, “In the day that you eat thereof you shall surely die. Here is what He did say: “Yet from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, you are not to be eating from it, for in the day you eat from it, to die shall you be dying” (Gen 2:17- CV). Adam was ‘to die‘ before he ever ate of that tree. That is why he ate of the tree. He ate because he was weak. He was weak because he was of the earth. He was of the earth because God made him that way.

Here is what Joh has to say of all the things that we experience in this world:

1Jn 2:16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.

All sins are within these three classes of sin: 1) The lust of the flesh, 2) The lust of the eyes, and 3) The pride of life.

Now notice what this ‘shadow’ of the ‘image of God’ did before she (Eve) ever touched the forbidden fruit:

Gen 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food [the lust of the flesh], and that it was pleasant to the eyes [the lust of the eyes], and a tree to be desired to make one wise [the pride of life], she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.
Gen 3:7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and [ then, and not were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.

Eve, and Adam through Eve, committed every sin mentioned in 1Jn 2:16 before she ever touched the tree that would open her eyes to see that she had been created in a sinful naked condition. Mr. Law simply was not given eyes to see this plain Biblical Truth.

This entire experience is nothing but an old covenant type and shadow of “the law… bringing us to Christ.”

Rom 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

God intended for the “first man Adam” to come to see that he had been “shapen in iniquity.” The law of Moses accomplishes that task, and it was typified in the garden by the ‘tree of the knowledge of good and evil.’

For an in depth study of this subject, read The Law of Moses Versus The Law of The Spirit on the web page.

A Mind Utterly Indisposed To Receive Conviction

To give a direct answer to your question: “Have you ever considered William Law’s understanding of the Trinity,” the answer is yes, I have.

The doctrine of the trinity is based on the doctrine of the ‘fall of man.’ Without believing in a triune man, there would be no doctrine of the ‘trinity’ of the Godhead.

Here are Mr Law’s words: “Nothing can so fully, and justly show us the true nature of our Fall, as the nature and manner of our Redemption. These things have such a necessary correspondence, as cannot be denied, but by a mind utterly indisposed to receive conviction.”

Now with that statement before us, let’s go to what the scriptures actually say about what happened to Adam:

Rom 8:20 For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly[ Not by his own ‘free’ will], but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,

And about the Godhead:

Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
1Co 8:6 But to us there is but one God, the Father [ not ‘One God the trinity], of whom are all things, and we in him; and [ besides God there is also “the beginning of His creation” (Rev 3:17)] one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

Go back and re- read that trinity paper. Critique it for me using the scriptures. I welcome such help.

You say this below:

I just want to add something here – I believe, if I am not mistaken, that you say that Christ is the Holy Spirit. But is this necessarily the case, though. It is true that Christ equates the coming of the Holy Spirit, with His coming to them; but does this mean He is the Holy Spirit? Is it not merely the case that as the Holy Spirit can only proceed from Christ (and the Father, I know!) that He (the Holy Spirit) can only come to them when Christ comes to them? This seems right to me.

I agree with you in one sense, insofar as God’s (the Father’s) spirit is not really Christ. When Christ was revealing the coming of the “parakleetos, which is the Holy Spirit,” He said, “the Father will take of mine and give to you”. Then He goes to all the trouble to explain what He means by “take of Mine.” “Because all the Father has [ He is speaking specifically of this ‘parakleetos’, this Comforter] He has given to Me [ Did the Father give Christ another third of the Godhead?], therefore I said that He will take of mine and give to you.” God the Father gave all he has to Christ, who in turn gives God’s spirit to us. But spirit is what God, the Father is, and it is not a person.

This “gift” under discussion by our Lord is the Holy Spirit. It is not a ‘personality’ but the very makeup of God the Father.

Joh 4:24 God is Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

I left off the indefinite article ‘a’ because it does not appear in the original. God is not ‘A’ spirit, but ‘IS’ SPIRIT. It is in His spirit that all things in heaven and on earth, ‘live and move and have their being’ (Act 17:28).

It has been the ‘good pleasure’ of the Father, to give all that He has to the Son.

Joh 16:15 All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew [ it] unto you.
1Co 15:27 For he [ the Father] hath put all things under his [ the Son’s] feet. But when he [ the Father] saith all things are put under him [ the Son], it is manifest that he [ the Father] is excepted, which did put all things under him [ the Son].
1Co 15:28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him [ the Son], then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him [ the Father] that put all things under him, that God [ the Father] may be all in all.

Does this sound like the Son is ‘co- equal ‘ with the Father. Christ is “equal with God” only because the Father says He is “equal.” He is not inherently ‘equal.’

Col 1:19 For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;
Col 1:20 And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.

This “all things under His feet,” is cited from Psalms :

Psa 8:6 Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet:

Without explanation, Paul applies this verse from the Psalms to Christ. But read this verse in its context:

Psa 8:4 What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him?
Psa 8:5 For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour.
Psa 8:6 Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet:

Paul takes a verse of scripture that talks of “man” and applies it to Christ. All the writers of the New Testament do this without explanation. To understand this principle used by every writer of the New Testament, read ‘Rightly Dividing The Word.” But I am digressing.

I did not say “Christ is the Holy Spirit” as you say. I quote 1Jn 2:1, which says Christ is the ‘parakleetos.’ I do not say that; John says that. All I do is point that out. Here is what I did say:

If the Holy Ghost, the hagios pneuma, which is the Comforter, the parakleetos, is really Christ in us, then there should be a scripture that calls Christ the parakleetos. It so happens that there is just such a scripture. But you would never know it by simply reading your King James Bible or for that matter, using your Strong’s concordance which is keyed to our King James English. If one uses Strong’s, one will see the four places where parakleetos appears in Joh 14, 15 and 16. These scriptures certainly reveal Christ as the parakleetos, as we have shown. You would need to use an Englishman’s Greek Concordance (Wigram’s) or America’s Online Bible to find the only other appearance of this Greek word in all of the scriptures. It’s not translated “comforter” there. Remember as you read this that, according to Joh 14:26, The Comforter (parakleetos)…is the Holy Ghost… The scripture before us is the First Epistle of John, chapter two verse one. My little children, these things I write unto you that you sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate (parakleetos – not even capitalized here in the KJV) with the Father, Jesus Christ the Righteous: There it is once again stated straight out. The sum of God’s Word tells us that Jesus Christ was given all His Father has which includes the parakleetos, “the Comforter which is the Holy Ghost.”

I can see how the first sentence of this paragraph could be construed to say that I said that Christ is the Holy Spirit. But to do so is the same thing as accusing Christ of claiming to be God the Father just because He claimed to be the Son of God. That last sentence is simply pointing to the verse I have just quoted. By the way, as I believe I point out in the Trinity article, Christ never claimed to be the son of the Holy Spirit in spite of the fact that we are told that he was conceived “of the Holy Spirit.”

Mat 1:18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
Luk 1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. [ Because it was God’s spirit that conceived Christ]

You make this statement below:

I understand this to mean that man because of his likeness to God, could commune with God. Man’s soul in the likeness of God generated a life that was as God’s Life.

This seems correct to me because man’s soul is constantly generating or giving forth a birth of some life. Now this life is either good or evil depending on the state of his soul; whether it be good or evil. ( So it seems to me)

Now lets consider what happened to the state of his soul after the fall, according to Law.

Paul tells us what ‘man’s soul’ generates, and he tells us why it is so:

Rom 7:24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?

There it is. The first Adam was made a living soul, but the last Adam was made a quickening spirit’. According to this formula a ‘living soul’ is nothing more than “the body of this death.” “To die you shall be dying” (Concordant Version).

And why is this so?

Rom 8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

Adam was created under the “law of sin and death” (Psa 51:5). He simply had no knowledge of that fact until he ate of the forbidden fruit. The ‘law,’ just as the ‘tree of the knowledge of good and evil,’ is not sin; it simply shows us that we are sin:

Psa 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.

Paul tells us that the church at Corinth was…:

1Co 1:2 …sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours:

Yet in his next breath he tells us that they are “yet carnal.”

1Co 3:1 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.
1Co 3:2 I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.
1Co 3:3 For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?
1Co 3:4 For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal?

In four verses Paul tells these Corinthian Christians that they are ‘carnal’ four times. And what does he tell us about being carnally minded?

Rom 8:6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

Christ, on the other hand, is the ‘tree of life:’

Joh 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Adam was never even tempted to partake of the ‘tree of life’ and yet the self- contradicting doctrine of the ‘fall of man’ teaches us that Adam once had life and then because of another false doctrine called ‘free moral agency,’ Adam, who we are told could have obeyed God ‘of his own free will,’ choose instead to rebel against God and eat of the forbidden fruit. Such doctrine would have you to believe that because God asked Adam “Where are you?” that God did this because He didn’t have a clue where Adam was.

This, of course, was not the case. God knew exactly where Adam was. And the fact that God told Adam not to eat of the forbidden fruit, does not mean that He did not know what Adam was going to do. He did know exactly what Adam was going to do. He had already prepared the sacrifice for the sin that He already knew Adam was about to commit.

God even knew exactly how many hairs were on Adam’s head. While every minister of Christ admits to this scriptural fact, they deny that He would ever dare to know what thoughts were in that head. What utter foolishness. God is not telling us that He knows how many hairs are on our heads so that we will know that He knows how many hairs are on our heads. He tells us this fact so that we will be aware of His omniscience of all things, especially the thoughts in our heads:

Psa 94:11 The LORD knoweth the thoughts of man, that they are vanity.

How does God know that the thoughts of man are vanity?

Rom 8:20 For the creature was made [ right from the hand of the Creator] subject to vanity, not willingly [ not by choice], but by reason of him [ God, not by Adams fabled ‘free will’] who subjected the same in hope.

Anyone who knows that something evil is about to happen and does nothing to prevent that evil is as responsible for that evil as the person who commits the evil. But God not only doesn’t prevent the evil, He tells us that He creates it!

Isa 45:6 That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else [ No ‘free’ will,. independent of God’s will].
Isa 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.
Pro 16:4 The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.
Eph 1:9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:
Eph 1:10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
Eph 1:11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:

Notice the similarities between what Joseph tells his brothers about their evil deed against him and what Paul tells us here about the “mystery of [ God’s] will” in Eph 1:10-11.

Eph 1:10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things [ meaning all men] in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
Eph 1:11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:
Gen 50:20 But as for you, ye thought evil against me; but God meant it [ Your evil thoughts and deeds] unto good, to bring to pass, as it is this day, to save much people alive.

This verse of scripture, is the most concise statement in scripture explaining the reason for all the evil we will ever witness

You ask this question:

I also cannot see how Christ, the Son of God, if a created being, is able to dwell in all his creatures. All creation was created in and through Christ, and all creation must have Christ in it if it is to have any glory or perfection. I hope you believe that I have no intention of arguing with you or anyone; I merely want to know what the truth is, and I feel that William Law has explained the nature of the Trinity better than anyone I have ever read.

For a better and more in- depth understanding of what I have referred to, you can look up these two books of William Law’s on the Internet and see whether you agree or disagree with him.

I too, “merely want to know the Truth.” But I know that though we may not see everything alike, we will agree that we must ‘try the spirits,’ not with either my writings or Law’s writings. We ‘try the spirits’ against the Word of God and the Truth, both titles given to Christ. I am not intending to cast Mr. Law in a bad light. But Christ’s explanation of the Holy Spirit is better than Mr. Law’s.

Joh 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
Joh 16:14 He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.
Joh 16:15 All things [ even God’s Spirit] that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

I don’t see what the connection is between being a created being and being therefore “[ un] able to dwell in all of His creatures”. Are you saying that if Christ is truly “the beginning of the creation of God” (Rev 3:14) that therefore “All things that the Father hath are mine,” cannot be? Is that not the equivalent of saying that ‘If Eve came forth of Adam, then it is not possible for all men to come forth of a woman.’ Christ is no longer flesh. Like His Father he is now capable of being in all of us. Being a ‘created’ spirit in no way impinges on that oneness with His Father. In fact Christ tells us that this is also true for us:

Joh 17:21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, [ art] in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
Joh 14:20 At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.

This is not what I say, this is what John is telling us. Paul tells us the same truth in 1Co 11 where he is explaining our relationship with Christ, and how it parallels Christ’s relationship with The Father:

1Co 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.
1Co 11:8 For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man.
1Co 11:9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.
1Co 11:12 For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God.

These are the “things that are made” referenced in Rom 1:20, by which we comprehend the Godhead. The man and his wife are the scriptural types of the “invisible things of him from the creation of the world.” Paul is not speaking of the unscriptural triune forms of such substances as water or gas. All such efforts to teach the unfounded doctrine of the ‘trinity’ are without scriptural basis:

Where in all of scripture is there so much as an allusion to such a contradictory doctrine as a three- person Godhead?

Finally you paraphrase what I said about 1Co 11:

I also remember you mentioning something about Adam and Eve – how God creates through Christ, as Adam creates through Eve (I can’t remember exactly, so forgive me if I have gotten it wrong), as somehow proving that Christ is an inferior created being to the Father.

Certainly I forgive you. I didn’t say that ‘Adam creates through Eve’ I simply point out the verse in 1Co 11 where Paul tells us that as God brings all into existence through Christ, the submissive ‘out- from- the- Father’ part of His creation, even so all men come through a woman, the weaker ideally submissive part of a marriage between two people of the opposite sex. It is the two sexes that are scriptural example of “the things that are made” referred to by Paul in Rom 1:20. I repeat, I simply point out that if there is any Truth to what Paul tells us about how to understand the Godhead, then there can be no truth to the trinity doctrine. Here is how he says we are to comprehend the Godhead:

Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Gal 4:4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman [ sinful flesh], made under the law [ the “church in the wilderness”]…

So when Paul tells us that Christ was “made to be sin for us …”

1Co 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

He is not talking about Christ being crucified; he is referring to His flesh. According to the law of the offerings, we are sin simply by virtue of our birth in Adam. Once again:

Psa 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.

Getting back to the purpose for marriage as it relates to our understanding of the Godhead, do you think I am misunderstanding Paul? Here are his own words concerning the lessons of married life:

Eph 5:22 Wives [ husbands], submit yourselves unto your own husbands [ Christ], as unto the Lord.
Eph 5:23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.
Eph 5:24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.
Eph 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
Eph 5:26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
Eph 5:27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.
Eph 5:28 So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.
Eph 5:29 For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church:
Eph 5:30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
Eph 5:31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two [ not three] shall be one flesh.
Eph 5:32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church. [ And according to 1Co 11, Christ and “His God.”

I dare say that even Law would be hard pressed to show how the tri nity is typical of a married couple! And while I respect Mr. Law and most of his writings, I cannot concede that 1+1+1=1.

To me “there is but one God, the Father, of whom is all things [ including the “one Lord”] and one Lord, Jesus Christ by whom are all things [ just as all men come into this world by a woman].

Finally you say:

All creation was created in and through Christ, and all creation must have Christ in it if it is to have any glory or perfection.

I could not agree more. As I said before, I don’t see what Christ being created has to do with this. Here is how Christ intends to use His ‘created Wife:’

Eph 2:6 and raised us up with him, and made us to sit with him in the heavenly places, in Christ Jesus:
Eph 2:7 that in the ages to come he might show the exceeding riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus:
Eph 3:8 Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, was this grace given, to preach unto the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ;
Eph 3:9 and to make all men see what is the dispensation of the mystery which for ages hath been hid in God who created all things;
Eph 3:10 to the intent that now unto the principalities and the powers in the heavenly places might be made known through the church the manifold wisdom of God,
1Pe 2:9 But ye are a elect race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession, that ye may show forth the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:[ not ‘out of light into darkness back into light, as ‘the fall’ teaches]
Psa 68:35 O God, thou art terrible out of thy holy places: The God of Israel, he giveth strength and power unto his people. Blessed be God.

And finally, one of my favorite scriptures:

1Jn 4:17 Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: because as he is, so are we in this world.

If Christ can do all this for those who come ‘out of’ Him, why could not God do the same for that which we are told “proceeded out from the Father” and is “the beginning of the creation of God?”

You asked what I thought. I have shown you the scriptures that lead me to these conclusions. I know that I speak with conviction, but one scripture to the contrary would, and has dished me up a nourishing plate of ‘crow.’ I apologize for the length of this e- mail. I hope I have expressed my thoughts in a spirit that has not offended you.

Your brother in Christ,

Mike