Back to Mormonism Researched Page

ARE THE FATHER AND THE SON TWO DISTINCT PERSONS?

Discourse of Orson Pratt

This is a question which we proposed answering some months since, but circumstances have prevented us from devoting an article exclusively on this subject until now. We have, nevertheless, given our views in relation to this thing very clearly in our pamphlet entitled "Absurdities of Immaterialism"; it would seem, therefore, almost superfluous to resume this subject in a distinct article by itself.

We desire, however, that our readers and the public generally, may have correct views concerning the faith of the Saints: it is for this reason that we again refer to the personalities of the Father and the Son.

We have no hesitation in answering this question in the affirmative. All revelation, both ancient and modern, that has said anything on this subject, has represented the Father and Son as two distinct persons.

There are some, however, who believe that the Spirit of Christ, before taking a tabernacle, was the Father, exclusively of any other being. They suppose the fleshly tabernacle to be the Son, and the Spirit who came and dwelt in it to be the Father; hence they suppose the Father and Son were united in one person, and that when Jesus dwelt on the earth in the flesh, they suppose there was no distinct separate person from himself who was called the Father.

We shall proceed to show from the scriptures that this view of the subject is erroneous. Jesus addresses his Father in this language: "And now, 0 Father, glorify thou me with thine ownself, with the glory which I had with thee before the world was." From this we learn that the Spirit of Christ not only existed before the world was, but that there was another person called the Father with whom he existed, and with whom he had glory before this world was made. "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God." "And the Word was made flesh,

and dwelt among us and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth." The Word, who is Christ, was in the beginning with the Father; indeed, he was "the beginning of the creation of God," "the bright and morning star ... .. the first born of every creature."

The work of creation was performed by a plurality of persons, as is evident from the description given by Moses. "In the beginning, the Aleheern created the heaven and the earth." The translators of the English Bible have rendered the word "Aleheem" in the singular, whereas, in the Hebrew, it is Plural, and should be translated "Gods," instead of "God." It is universally admitted that the Hebrew word Aleheem is plural, and many learned translators have rendered it in the plural form in the English. "Some have translated it, The Testifiers-The Covenanters-The Sworn Ones; some The Divine Ones." Dr. Burgess, the late bishop of Salisbury, rendered it "Adorable Persons," or "The Adorable Ones." The great prophet of the last days, Joseph Smith, in his translation of Abraham's writings concerning the creation, has given the noun in the plural, showing that the Aleheem or Gods were engaged in the creation of the heaven and the earth.

If the Hebrew noun Aleheem, which has a plural termination, were a defective noun, used only in the singular number, then there might be some excuse for translating it God in the singular; but, "the singular, as well as the plural of this word frequently occurs in scripture. Reason, therefore, declares, that if there had been only one agent concerned in the creation of the world, the language here used is improper, and calculated to mislead. But if there were more agents than one, then the language is just what it ought to be, and it would not have answered in a different form How much more consistent with the Hebrew scriptures this passage would be, were it translated thus: "In the beginning, the Aleheem-the Gods-the Adorable Ones, or the Divine Ones, created the heaven and the earth. This word occurs in the first chapter of Genesis no less than thirty times, and in each place it is in the plural form, showing in the most positive manner that a plurality of persons were engaged throughout the whole process of creation. Moses in describing a portion of the sixth day's work uses the following language: "And the Aleheem (or Gods) said, Let US make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness." Here we find the pronouns us and our are in the plural form as well as Aleheem, which clearly confirms the idea contained in the previous passages. Again, after the fall of man, "The Lord God (Jehovah Aleheem) said, Behold, the man is become as ONE OF US, to know good and evil." ONE OF US is a form of expression which never could be applied to a single individual person. There is no principle by which this language could be distorted to mean only one person. To show that we are not alone in our views concerning a plurality of persons employed in the grand work of creation, we here give a quotation from the writings of the Rev. David James on the Trinity.

"Reason declares that, if such a plurality exists, the Divine Being could not have possibly adopted a more appropriate form of speech to clear up and confirm the intimations already given of it. But if such be not the case, her confidence in the language of scripture will soon be at an end, because it is so calculated to embarrass the understanding, and deceive the very persons whom it is intended to enlighten."

Our conviction, however, is, that such language was employed, simply because the fact itself required it. And we confidently anticipate other statements in a form of language that will perfectly harmonize. For if the fact required such form of language in one place, the same fact will require a corresponding mode of expression in another place. The following is a passage in the Book of the Proverbs: "The fear of the Lord (or Jehovah) is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the Holy One is understanding"-in the Hebrew it is, the knowledge of the HOLY ONES. Again we find similar language in the book of the Prophet Malachi: "A son honoreth his father, and a servant his master. If then I be a father, Where-is mine honor? and if I be a master, where is my fear?"-in the Hebrew: "If I be Masters, where is my fear? saith the Lord of Hosts."

But for as much as the first intimation of a plurality of persons in the Godhead was given in connection with the creation of the heavens and the earth, and especially of man, we will now turn our attention to such passages as contain direct allusions to that great and exclusive work of Deity.

The following is one: "Remember now thy creator in the days of thy youth." I imagine I hear many of you say, "A few moments ago the speaker attempted to show from the language of Scripture, "Let us make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness"-that more agents than one took part in the creation of man; if that view were correct, we might now expect to find the word Creator in the plural number; or, at any rate, the word ought to assume the plural form in some passage or other." Your expectation is fair; and, to your satisfaction, I beg to inform you, that the word in the original is not Creator, but Creators: "Remember now thy Creators in the days of thy youth."

A similar passage occurs in the book of the Prophet Isaiah. The Jews, whom God had chosen and espoused to be a people unto himself, are addressed in that character: "Thy Maker is thy husband; the Lord of Hosts is his name." In the Hebrew both the nouns are plural, Thy Makers-thy Husbands.

It is also written in the Psalms, "Let Israel rejoice in him that made him." In the Hebrew, "Let Israel rejoice in his Makers."

And in the Book of job, Elihu is stated to have said, "But none saith, Where is God my Maker, who giveth songs in the night?" In the original, "'Where is God my Makers."

It is now shown as plainly as language can do it, that a plurality of agents concurred and cooperated in the creation of man: for scripture speaks distinctly of Creators and Makers. Our next inquiry, therefore, is, Who were these creators, and what may have been their number? As there is no longer a doubt of their existence, it is not too much to expect that Holy Scripture will point them out one by one in connection with their peculiar work of creation, so as to settle the fact, and remove every scruple from the subject for ever. We shall indeed find it even so.

When the inhabitants of Lystra were about to offer sacrifice to Paul and Barnabas, supposing them to be gods, the apostles cried out, "Sirs, why do ye these things? We also are men of like passions with you, and preach unto you that we should turn from these vanities unto the living God, which made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are therein." If we ask: Who is intended here by the living God? the Unitarians reply: The same as is generally denominated Father in the New Testament. For the Apostle St. Paul has the expression, "the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him." With this explanation we feel satisfied. And thus one of the producing agents of the creation is ascertained the Father.

In other places, creation is ascribed to the Word, or the Lord Jesus Christ. Moses said: "In the beginning the Adorable Ones created the heaven and the earth." St. John writes: "In the beginning," meaning the same beginning, "the Word was with God: All things were made by him, and without him was not anything made that was made." And lest anyone should suppose that by this Word he meant divine wisdom, or any of the divine perfections, he adds immediately: "In him was life," a property which distinguishes a person from a mere attribute or quality. And this living agent, he afterwards informs us, "was made flesh," or became man, " and dwelt among the Jews, who beheld his glory, the glory as of the only-begotten of the Father." But how was he competent to assist the Father in the creation of all things? St. John gives the answer: "And the Word was Gad." St. Paul ascribes the creation of all things to the same person under his more usual name of Son, or the Son of God. "Giving thanks unto the Father, who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son; who is the image of the invisible God the first-born of every creature. for by him were A things eated, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, whether they be thrones, or dominions or principalities or powers all things were created by him, and for: him. And he is before all things, and by him all things consist." Thus another of the "Creators" is ascertained - the Word, or Son of God.

We proceed to inquire further, if any other agent was associated with these two in this great work. Moses, in describing the state of the new-made earth before the process of the six days' work had passed upon it, records: "And the earth was without form and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters." This "Spirit of God is throughout Scripture distinguished from the Father and the Son, so as to be viewed in the light of a distinct agent, as will be made to appear in a subsequent part of this discouree. The expression, "moved on the face of the waters," more literally rendered, would be "brooded over the wa- an expression which at once conveys to the mind a distinct idea of the part undertaken and achieved by this divine agent in the construction of the globe. It was his especial office, not only to reduce the elemental mass into order, and make matter to assume certain forms and mingle in certain combinations, but also to impregnate the whole with productive energy, fertility, and life, that the surface of the dry land might burst forth with vegetation, and the sea and air swarm with living things appointed for the use and support of innumerable human beings.

The following passage, which occurs in the Book of job, shows that the agency of this Divine Spirit was not confined to the earth beneath, but extended to the heavens above, and assisted in fixing the chambers of the sun and stars, and adjusting the orbits of the moon and planets. "For by his Spirit, observed that venerable patriarch, "he hath garnished the heavens." Again, the same Spirit was assistant to the Father and the Word in the formation of Man. This is positively asserted by Elihu: "The SPIRIT Of God hath made me and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life." Thus the third of the producing agents of creation is ascertained-"the Spirit of God."

When the Spirit of God descended upon Jesus after his baptism, a voice was heard from heaven, "Saying, this is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." Here then is a separate distinct person uttering his voice out of heaven at the same time that his Son was on the earth. Again, when Jesus was crucified, he said, "Father into thy hands I commend my SPIRIT." Here is proof, the most positive, that there was a person called the Father existing independently, not only of the flesh, but of the spirit of Jesus that dwelt in the flesh. How could Jesus commend his spirit into the hands of the Father, unless the Spirit of Jesus was one person and the Father another? Again, after the ascension of Christ, the martyr Stephen "being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up steadfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God." Stephen saw two persons, and one standing on the right hand of the other.

When Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon had the heavens opened to them on the 16th of February, 1832, they bore testimony as follows: "The Lord touched the eyes of our understanding, and they were opened, and the glory of the Lord shone round about; and we beheld the glory of the Son on the right hand of the Father, and received of his fulness; and saw the holy angels and they who are sanctified before his throne, worshiping God and the Lamb, who worship him for ever and ever. And now, after the many testimonies which have been given of him, this is the testimony, last of all, which we give of him, that he lives; for we saw him, even on the right hand of God and we heard the voice bearing record that he is the only begotten of the Father," etc.

In the first vision which Joseph Smith received in the spring of the year 1820, he being between fourteen and fifteen years of age, both the Father and the Son, while he was praying, appeared unto him. He said, "When the light rested upon me, I saw two personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name, and said (pointing to the other): This is my beloved Son, hear him." Thus we find that the visions both of the ancient and modern prophets agree, and clearly demonstrate, the existence of two distinct persons-the Father and Son.

But, says the objector, Jesus is frequently called God, not only in the Scriptures of the New Testament, but in the Book of Mormon, and if he is God, how can he have a Father who is also called God, unless there are more Gods than one? We answer, that so far as persons and substance are concerned, there are more Gods than one; but when we speak of their perfections, attributes, or nature, they are one. Jesus and the Father are two persons-two substances, but one in wisdom, one in power, one in glory. Jesus prayed that his disciples might be made one, as he and the Father are one. Now, if Jesus and the Father are one person, then if his prayer be answered, all his disciples will become one person, losing their individual identities. This would be a monstrous absurdity. Therefore, if his disciples retain their separate distinct identities, and yet are made perfect in one, even as the Father and Son are one, then it follows that the Father and Son are distinct persons as well as his disciples. If the oneness of the disciples consists, not in person, but in the nature of their power, and glory, and other perfections, then it must be in this sense alone, that the Father and Son are one; hence, there is one God, and only one, when we speak of the perfections and attributes, but there is a plurality of Gods, when we speak in reference to persons and substance.

Jesus says, they were called "Gods unto whom the word of God came"; and as there were a plurality of persons to "whom the word of God came," there must have been a plurality of Gods. Yet, all these inspired men or Gods, when they are exalted into the presence of God the Father and God the Son, will be one with them, not in person, but in glory and in concert of action, in the fulfilment of the great purposes of Jehovah. If, according to the words of Jesus, inspired men are Gods, there win be a great company of Gods redeemed from this creation, to say nothing of the countless myriads who have been redeemed from the infinity of worlds which have existed in the regions of endless space.

Both the Scriptures and the Book of Mormon represent Christ to be both the Father and Son. How, inquires the objector, can there be another person called the Father when Jesus is called Father? We reply, that Jesus is nowhere called his own Father, but he is called-"the Father," "the Eternal Father," "the everlasting Father," "the very Eternal Father of Heaven and of Earth." There is no mystery in all these expressions, any more than there would be in calling Adam or any other man with a family, both Father and Son. Adam is truly the father of the fleshy bodies of all the human race, and he is also just as truly a son of God by creation: indeed Matthew calls Adam a "son of God." Therefore, Adam, like every other man with a family, is both father and son. Because Adam was the father of the human family, this did not hinder him from being the son of another separate distinct personage called God: so likewise, because the Spirit of Jesus, before he dwelt in flesh, was the Father of the heaven and earth, by being its author and creator, this did not hinder him from having a Father of his own who was a distinct person from himself, as much so as every father and son.

The prophet Abinadi has beautifully illustrated this in a prediction relating to the first coming of Christ. He says: "God himself shall come down among the children of men, and shall redeem his people; and because he dwelleth in flesh, he shall be called the Son of God: and having subjected the flesh to the will of the Father, being the Father and the Son; the Father because he was conceived by the power of God; and the Son because of the flesh; thus becoming the Father and Son: and they are one God, yea, the very eternal Father of heaven and of earth; and thus the flesh becoming subject to the spirit, or the Son to the Father, being one God, suffereth temptations." Here we have the reasons given why he was called the Father: it was "because he was conceived by the power of God." Among the great family of spirits, Jesus was "the first-born of every creature." His spirit, being "conceived by the power of God" before the worlds were made, became the Father of the present heaven and earth, and afterwards came and dwelt in flesh, and became the Son. He subjected the flesh to the will of the spirit, or in other words, he subjected his own body of flesh wherein he became the Son, to the will of the spirit that dwelt in it, which was called the Father, not the Father of himself, but the Father of the heaven and earth, by being its Author, Creator, and Redeemer. The Father of this creation, in subjecting his own tabernacle of flesh to his own will, was at the same time subjecting both his body and spirit to the will of his Father who sent him. Thus, Jesus became both Father and Son, and at the same time, there was another being distinct from himself who was his Father, by whom he was conceived, and with whom he dwelt before the present order of creation existed.

He is called the "everlasting" or "Eternal Father" because he will throughout all ages of eternity remain the Father of his own creations: hence the relationship of Father must be "everlasting" or "eternal." Though this relationship may have had a beginning-it can have no end. Many have supposed that the terms "everlasting" and "eternal" when applied to the Father, must be without beginning as well as without end, but this is not necessarily true; for our bodies of flesh and bones after the resurrection will endure forever; that is, they are everlasting and eternal bodies, yet they had a beginning; so with the New Heavens and the New Earth; they will have a beginning, but will have no end; they will be everlasting and eternal: so likewise, there was a time when the Spirit of Jesus was begotten, and when he began to be the Father of this heaven and this earth, but there never will be an end to this relationship; hence it will be everlasting and eternal, having a beginning, but having no end.

Much more might be said, concerning the Father and Son, and the relation which they sustained to each other before the present worlds were made, and the relation which has since existed, and will continue to exist throughout all ages to come, but enough has been said to demonstrate beyond all successful controversy, that the Father and Son are two personages; no true believer in divine revelation, can, very easily, misunderstand these plain and pointed testimonies. With these remarks we close this brief article, praying that the word and Spirit of truth may enlighten every honest heart, that they may grow up in "the knowledge of things as they were, as they are, and as they are to come," until they are perfected and shall receive a fulness of the glory of the Father and the Son.

Millennial Star, 11:281-4, 309-12