2nd Letter to Andrew Wilson, by Kerry Williams

2nd Letter to Andrew Wilson, by Kerry Williams

Dear Andrew,

Why do you persist in persecuting our Father? Why do you continue to betray the one who went to the cross over and over again to die for your sins? I have lost track of your neatly packaged transgressions: Sunday sermons, lectures in Korea and Europe, webinars in the United States, blogs on UTS websites – all are variations on your favorite theme of promoting a ditheistic god.

Although you did not respond to my previous letter, I am undeterred. The false kingdom which has claimed you as one of its defenders is collapsing, and I want to be remembered as someone who helped knock down a brick or two. I see the amused look on your face. Consider yourself slapped.

Yes, I am angry. Just like Lucifer, you have tried to place yourself above God by taking His words and twisting them to serve your self-centered agenda.

Trying to split God into two beings will not work, Andrew. He is Only One. Heavenly Mother is not a separate being from Heavenly Father. If they were two separate beings, God would have had no need to create. He would already have been happily fulfilled.

In 1957, under Father’s supervision, Hyo Won Eu edited the “Explanation of Divine Principle” and in 1966 “Exposition of the Divine Principle” based on the “Wolli Wonbon.” In Mr. Eu’s personal diary, he recorded this explanation from Father which “turned his [Mr. Eu’s] world upside down”:

If God already had Yin and Yang in Him, there would have been no creation…God exists as the harmony of Sungsang and Hyungsang, and is the Yang (male) type of existence. Therefore, God had to create the Yin (female) type of world. (Gil Ja Sa Eu, “A Testimony to God’s Word in Regard to Divine Principle” pp. 79-80).

This description of God’s nature did not change 30 years later in the 1996 retranslation of the “Exposition of the Divine Principle” (which you helped edit):

Before the creation, God existed alone as the internal and masculine subject partner. He therefore created the universe as His external and feminine objective partner. (Exposition of the Divine Principle, p. 19)

Father confirmed his belief that God was a single subjective being on many occasions:

What is the Subject Being of masculine character? Do you think it would be good if God were the Subject Being of feminine character? If there were a Subject Being of feminine character, there would necessarily be dualism because there must be a masculine (Subject) Being. Since God is the only God, God has an original masculine form with a subjective nature as a harmonious being of masculinity and femininity. (Reverend Moon, “The Path of Religion” 10/14/88)

Note the elegant simplicity with which he describes the oneness of our Creator, whose personality is the source of all the beautiful qualities we see in the hearts of men and women. When referring to God, the name Father most commonly used was “Hananim” i.e. “One God.”

The Han Mother, however, announced on January 7, 2013, that we should no longer address God as “Heavenly Father.” From now on, she declared, Unificationists must refer to God as “Heavenly Parents”:

We must change the name. When we pray to Heavenly Father from now, please say ‘Heavenly Parents.’ The name ‘Heavenly Parents’ is smooth in English and meaningful in Korean, too. Don’t you think?

The verdict is in: her God is two, not one. In one bold proclamation she disassociated herself from the 6,000 year foundation of monotheistic Judeo-Christian history.

Your newfound celebrity as the Han Mother’s pet theologian undoubtedly stems from your eagerness to champion her pluralistic view of the Creator. You write:

…the core resemblance in creation is between God whose essence is duality, and human beings who were created male and female. (Andrew Wilson, “God as Heavenly Parent in Rev. Moon’s Early Teachings” 2/22/16)

Since God has two genders, no individual of one gender can incarnate the full image of God. (ibid)

You appear peeved that your favorite god, Heavenly Mother, is practically non-existent in the misogynistic Bible. Genesis records that Heavenly Father cursed Eve after the fall, and doomed her to experience pain in childbirth. You state that another god, Heavenly Mother, “wanted to console Eve and help her recover,” as well as “instruct Eve how to raise her babies.” (Andrew Wilson, “Heavenly Parent and True Parents,” 2016)

In the Gospel according to Wilson, God appears to be an unhappily married couple with drastically different approaches to effective parenting.

Your explanation would be comical if you weren’t leading people away from Father with this nonsense.

In the future, faithful scholars will meticulously critique and correct your heretical writings; my purpose here is to simply show that having a PhD by your name is no guarantee of spiritual intelligence or academic integrity.

Did you think no one would notice your deliberate mistranslation of this passage from the Cheon Seong Gyeong in one of your recent presentations?

Externally God resembles man and internally God resembles women. While He is strong, all-knowing, and omnipotent, She also has a merciful heart that can embroider flowers on Buddha’s smile. God should also have a heart like that of the most feminine woman. Only then will these two sides have life. (Andrew Wilson, “Heavenly Father and True Parents,” 2016)

Your use of the pronoun “she” is disingenuous. In the original Korean, Father references God twice in the above paragraph by using the word “Hananim” both times (Korean CSG p. 62; English CSG p.69). By your insertion of the feminine pronoun, which actually does not exist in the Korean language, you are able to make yet another false claim for your ditheistic god.

Andrew, the subjective, masculine God does not have two genders, He created genders. Father taught us that God created Adam to be His actual body, and Eve was created to be His wife.

Adam, who was to have become God’s body, would have become the progenitor of humanity. In other words, he would have been God incarnate. For the invisible God to exercise dominion over the world of substance, He had to have a substantial form, namely a body, through which he would then be able to see and hear; hence He created Adam to become His embodiment. (CSG, p. 2,241)

Who was Eve, then? She was Adam’s wife, the wife of the substantial form. If Adam was to be God incarnate, then Eve was to be the wife of God incarnate. You may be dumbfounded by the idea of the holy God taking a wife, but Adam was the body of God incarnate, and Eve was created as the wife of God incarnate. (CSG, pp. 2,241-2,242)

The truth is, many Unificationists have misunderstood the dynamics of God, Adam, and Eve within the 4 Position Foundation by perceiving their relationships two-dimensionally. The two-dimensional yang/yin cookie-cutter image of God is misleading because it suggests God is 50% masculine and 50% feminine.

A more accurate depiction is found in a three-dimensional model of God, Adam, and his son existing on a vertical axis. The vertical axis represents the invisible God manifesting Himself in the corporeal form of Adam in order to stand as the subject in the substantial world. Through the seed of Adam, God’s spiritual lineage is transmitted to the physical lineage of Adam.

It was through Adam that God intended to establish His lineage on the earth:

The blood lineage through thousands of years of history is linked centered on a man who has a vertical relationship with God, not a woman. Woman cannot connect the blood lineage. Only a man! A man can do this because he resembles God. (Reverend Moon, “Sermon at the World Leaders’ Conference” 8/2/96)

In order to realize love, we must first inherit God’s blood lineage, which can only be accomplished through a man. This concept was the essence of “seed theology” taught in the “Original Substance of Divine Principle” which Father gave as one of his final revelations.

Father clarifies Adam’s subjective responsibility in the Wolli Wonbon when he writes:

Husbands! Your duty is to stand up as a person of beauty in order to receive love from God, and then return beauty in order to perfect goodness. If you do this as the representatives of Heaven and the Father with heavenly love, then you will manifest love towards your wife, who is the second object partner. Only if you do that will you become a principled man who is qualified to have dominion over your wife. (Wolli Wonbon, p. 172)

He continues by explaining the position of the wife:

The wife who relates to such a husband must appear as beauty and, as a representative body of Heavenly Mother, perfect the second goodness through love and unity and find an orbit around the basic goodness [i.e. the husband] in order to form the ideal goodness. (Wolli Wonbon, p. 172)

Just as an electron forms a common base with a proton and moves in a spherical motion around that proton in a three-dimensional pattern, so the position of Eve is fulfilled by existing in spherical rotation of love around Adam.

Through the union of man and woman, the seed from God becomes implanted in the woman’s womb, and God’s lineage is substantiated on the earth.

Father’s teaching ushers in a new age for women based on understanding the level of intimacy God desires to have with us. Our Heavenly Father’s motive for creating the entire universe was to seek for a love partner; He created Eve as the masterpiece of His creation so that He could love her through the body of Adam:

For God, Eve was His future wife, because Adam was meant to become God Himself by becoming united with Him. (“Blessed Family and the Ideal Kingdom,” p. 223)

It is not Adam and Eve’s bodies that God likes, but rather their love for each other. (CSG, p. 336)

Centering on love, God was to have dwelt in Adam and Eve, becoming the horizontal True Parents to all humankind. After Adam and Eve went to the spirit world, God would have continued to manifest as the divine Parent, now clothed in the image of Adam and Eve.

Father explains how husband and wife are able to manifest as the image of one God in the spiritual realm:

In the spirit world, God harmonizes with human beings through love and we become one with God through love. We become God-like. In the creation, we can see how God’s dual characteristics are divided, but when man and woman become completely united in love, they will be like one person in the spirit world. If you were to just glance at a person, he would clearly look like a man, but on closer inspection, you will find a woman harmonized inside him. (CSG, p. 864)

Jesus spoke of this marital union in Mark 10:8: “… and the two will become one flesh. So they are no longer two, but one flesh.”

Had Adam and Eve not fallen, their couple would have been the representative body of Heavenly Father and Mother. Had Eve perfected her role as loving object to Adam, she would have been able to stand as Heavenly Mother in the spiritual realm. However, her position as Heavenly Mother should be understood in the context of wife of God, who is not a separate being from the Godhead. In total unity with her husband, they ultimately are not two separate beings, but one through love.

As created beings still living in the physical world, we must be humble to the fact that we are “looking through a glass darkly” when attempting to understand God’s perfect plan of creation. The Messiah has the onerous task of communicating God’s pure principles using language that originated from the fallen world.

Although Father gave us this “seed theology” as one of his final revelations, it is not completely new. I believe it is best understood as the fulfillment of the teachings of Christ which appear in the New Testament:

No one who is born of God practices sin, because His seed abides in him; and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. (1 John 3:9)

Only through unity with Christ can we be reborn into God’s lineage.

I pray you can soon understand the heart of our Father who is still loving you and waiting for your return.

Sincerely,

Kerry Williams