A Brief Evaluation of Gods Two Images of World Mission Society

Church of God in Genesis 1:26, 27

Jaymark John D. Molo

World Mission Society Church of God (WMSCOG or also known as

Church of God) is a church that originated in South Korea. The church was
established by Ahn Sahng-hong in 1964.1 Interestingly, this church does not
only believe in God the Father but also adheres to God the Mother. Among
the verses they frequently use to prove this case can be found in Genesis
1:26, 27. This will be the sole interest of this paper.

God the Mother in Genesis 1:26, 27

This text is pivotal in WMSCOGs belief of God the Mother. They argue
that the above verses states that God has two imagesa male image and
female image. Thus, according to them there are two Gods here, one namely
God the Father, second namely God the Mother.2 Their line of reasoning
goes like this.

First, they note the word us is a plural term.3 Since it is in plural

termit can fairly accommodate the plurality of Gods. This is important to
them because they cannot establish their God the Mother theology without
establishing first the plurality of Gods.

Second, they argue that the word Elohim can be directly translated as
Gods.4 This is again an argument for polytheism.

Thirdly, they will argue that there are only two types of God because
there are only two types of people: men and women.5 Therefore, according
to them, the Gods mentioned in Genesis 1:26 are the male image of God
and female image of GodGod the Father and God the Mother.

1
http://english.watv.org/mission/worldwide.asp. Accessed on July 25, 2014.
2
http://english.watv.org/truth/truth_life/content_mother.asp. Accessed on July 25,
2014.
3
Ibid.
4
Ibid.
5
Ibid.
A Brief Reply to the Arguments of WMSCOG in Genesis 1:26, 27

The theology of WMSCOG is found faulty based on several reasons:

First, although the plurality of God in Genesis 1:26 does not

necessarily argue with the two images of God, it does entertain the plurality
of God. But what plurality are we talking here?

WMSCOG fails to recognize the plurality of God refers not to His being,
but to His person. If WMSCG will insist plurality of Gods being is true, then it
is a clear contradiction with the strict monotheistic tradition of the
Bible.[7]6 There is no simply room for progressive thinking from polytheism
to monotheism or monotheism to polytheism. If one will claim that the God
the Mother has come in the 21st century believersshe should be subjected
under the scrutiny of the Scripture (cf. Isa. 8:20)!

Second, there is merit in the argument of WMSCG that Elohim can be

translated as Gods7 in some cases; however, it can never be applied with
Genesis 1:26. The grammatical analysis of the text would reveal that it
should still be translated as God (singular). For example, In the beginning
God [plural] created [singular] the heaven and the earth (Gen. 1:1). We
can notice that Elohim is used with a verb in the singular form. The same is
true about the ten expressions of vayomer Elohim meaning and God
[plural] said [singular] in the first Creation account. Thus, the translation
should be God not gods.8

Third, now that we have eliminated the notion of having two Gods in
Genesis 1:26, 27; we can logically conclude that two images here cannot be
equated as God the Father and God the Mother. One has to establish first
the plurality of Gods as biblically grounded before entertaining the two
images of God as male and female to assert that there were two gods in the
said verses.

6
Exo. 8:20; Deut 4:35, 39; 6:4; 32:39, etc.
7
Dmitri Slivniak, Our God(s) Is One: Biblical Elohim and the Indeterminacy
of Meaning,Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament vol. 19 (2005), p. 4.
8
Jiri Moskala, The Trinity in the Old Testament
(http://www.perspectivedigest.org/article/109/archives/18-3/the-trinity-in-the-old-
testament). Accessed on July 25, 2014.
 Fourthly, the term "image" in Genesis 1:26, 27 is never to be found in
plural form. The passage always refers to a singular image of God. Further,
this singular image is attached to the masculine, singular pronoun "He" for
both the creation of male humans and female humans.

Lastly, the phrase image of God is found four times in the OT

Genesis 1:26, 27 and 9:6. In the Pentateuch the Hebrew term image
occurs also in Genesis 5:3 and in Numbers 33:22. These verses has nothing
to do with God the Mother Theology. Now, if we cannot entertain the
interpretation of WMSCGs teaching, what does the image stands for? The
immediate context would suggest that the term image likely refers to man
as Gods representative (cf. 1:28 and 2:2-3) on earth.

Conclusion

Several reasons have been raised to reject the theology of God the
Mother of WMSCOG: (1) The failure to recognize the plurality of God
refers not to His being, but to His person; (2) The failure to see the
grammatical relationship of plural subject to singular verb; (3) The failure to
establish the plurality of God as the entrance of two images of God as male
and female; (4) The term "image" in Genesis 1:26, 27 is never to be found
in plural form; (5) The image of God most likely refers to man being Gods
representative.

May we ask Christ to find the balance of being straight and being
gentle as we present this truth to WMSCOG members.