PopsWeb » Page 39 of 106

THE DEFINITION OF MONOTHEISM is the worship and support of one God. The definition of polytheism is the worship and support of more than one God. These are clear definitions of monotheism and polytheism. Some sincere believers admit that polytheism is the worship of "many" gods but say that their worship of two individual Gods ("binitarianism": Father and Son) is not polytheism: it is monotheism. However, the basic and necessary definition of polytheism is the worship of "two or more" gods. To give "two-god" worship a name that would take it out of the realm of polytheism might make it more palatable for some, but at the end of the day, it doesn't work. The old saw, "A rose by any other name is still a rose," comes into play here. Redefining a basic term does not afford escape from the charge of polytheism. The "two-god" hypothesis called "binitarianism" is still polytheism, all arguments to the contrary notwithstanding. The polytheist, even the "closet" polytheist, can run but he cannot hide. Actually, I have coined a new word for this worship model. It is "Poly-Binitarianism."

Folks, we cannot simply redefine terms to suit our whims or fancies and expect others (including Webster and Yahweh our God) to go along with it. The Hebrew Scriptures clearly dictate that there is only one God, not two or three, that this God (Yahweh) is a jealous God, and further emphatically state that he (singular) does not tolerate the worship of other gods before him, with him, or in his place (Ex.20:1-7).

What is your definition of God? Precisely defining our terms is crucial to any real understanding. Your theology depends upon your definition of God. But if you redefine God away from His oneness, as some have done, the effect is to change virtually all the passages pertaining to God. A person adhering to polytheism, clearly and unmistakably defined as the belief in two or more gods (poly = many, more than one), will have a different belief system than will a believer in mono-theism, defined as the belief in one God (mono = one).

Some believers have created another category called "binitarianism." The Latin word bini means "double." Although "binitarianism" is a non-word according to my dictionary, it will be referred to here because many in the Sabbatarian community have adopted the term as a characterization of their belief system over against trinitarianism. "Bitheism" is the belief in two gods. They could be unequal gods. A "ditheist" is a "dualist" or one who practices "ditheism," the Double-God Doctrine that states there are two Supreme Gods. (Dualism sometimes refers to opposing gods of good and evil.) Presumably, these two gods are equal in most respects. But whether you believe in a "three-in-one" god, a "two-in-one" god, or two or more individual gods (especially with many more to come in a future family of gods), you are an advocate of polytheism. By definition, if you endorse and support the worship of two or more gods, you are practicing polytheism, however you may choose to define the word "God." The only reliable key to the definition of the word "God" is within the context where it is found.

The essence of the "family of gods" teaching that proliferates in many of the various Sabbatarian churches of God is polytheism just as much as was the essence of the family of gods or "pantheon of gods" in ancient Greek/Roman mythology and practice. ("Zeus" was a supreme god with lesser gods following behind him in a hierarchical order.) At any rate, those following this view believe in two Gods now and multiple Gods later, i.e., polytheism, clearly defined as worship of two or more gods. This fact can hardly be contested. Even a child can add one and one and come up with two, and then add more to that and come up with a greater number than "one." Let's be up front with our doctrines, shall we? It does not matter that the worship of more than two gods is slated for the future, and only two are worshiped now; the fact remains, those that accept this doctrine believe in and support multiple gods. This conclusion is not even arguable. Multiple gods now or multiple gods later, what's the difference when your mind already accepts the basic premise? And redefining the word "God" (as they do!) does not help.

Case in point: The 1955 booklet "Just What do you Mean …Born Again?" is being redistributed far and wide today by certain church groups. In it, the original author Herbert W. Armstrong (HWA) of the Worldwide Church of God (WCG) states, "Yes, and as a born Son of God, Christ is God! God Almighty his Father is God. They are two separate and individual Persons." According to this booklet, two individual Gods are now in heaven (with more to come later in a family or pantheon of gods).

HWA wrote, "Man has the potentiality of becoming GOD! … By the very fact that God, through man, is reproducing Himself, we know MAN, when his spiritual creation is completed, shall actually become GOD!" (The Good News, 9/79, article, "Your Children-FUTURE GODS?" p.4). There is more. "But we shall also be, as priests, co-saviors with him in saving the world" (Mystery of the Ages, pp.198-199). According to popular Armstrong false teaching and tradition, certain humans are to become Gods, Creators, and Co-Saviors. Has the human deification scheme surfaced before? Yes. The human ruler-god concept was widespread in Greece and Rome many years ago: (Continued...).