The Nature of God

Since my initial exposure to the Song of God material back in 1996, I have remained captivated with the content of this new book of scripture and the questions arising from the life and efforts of its author, Archie D. Wood, Sr.

Wood claims to have had multiple, face-to-face, sensorial interactions with highly evolved, glorified, exalted human beings who identified themselves as “God”.^[1]Wood, Song of God (2015), p xiv-xv; Refer to: “Personal Testimony“ Throughout my years as Wood’s personal assistant, I never witnessed him in communion with trans-dimensional beings. Yet, I have come to believe that his book, the Song of God, represents a highly sophisticated, theo-mythical advance capable of uniting humanity and guiding us towards a future that reflects our highest ideals and potentials.

Throughout its sweeping narrative, Wood’s book of gnosis portrays God in ways that are familiar, but also in ways that deviate quite radically from conventional conceptions. In many respects, Wood’s corpus redefines the nature of God.

Given this assertion, and how frequently the term ‘God’ is used in my writings and Wood’s teachings, it seems appropriate (even necessary) to establish some degree of clarity about the nature of God and what the word ‘God’ refers to in the context of Wood’s cosmology.

I realize that defining ‘God’ is problematic, as any such attempt on my part will be overly simplistic and incomplete. Nevertheless, as I have attempted previously with the terms ‘soul‘ and ‘spirit‘, I will endeavor in this article to distinguish certain fundamental characteristics attributed to ‘God’ throughout Wood’s writings, and arrive at a set of concise definitions for the word ‘God’ that are congruent with the broad scope of Wood’s theosophy.

---

Context and Review

As the scripture narrative unfolds, a foundational premise is revealed that may initially seem preposterous to many readers, as it reframes common conceptions of ‘God’. I’ve attempted to capture this premise with the following statements:

• There was a time when God did not exist.
• Life preceded God.
• God arose from natural, evolutionary processes.
• God had a beginning and continues to evolve.

Consider the following declaration included in a list of tenets written by the author and included in the preface of the book:^[2]Wood, Song of God (2015), p viii

Evolution and natural selection are correct principles of creation, and it is through this process that God and Heaven came into existence and continues to evolve. All things which are real must of necessity have a beginning. To say that God has no beginning is to say that God is not real. As true Gnostics, we believe that God is very real.
~Basic Beliefs: Article #4~

The inevitable inquiry arising from this declaration is:

If life preceded God, and God evolved from life, what brought the universe into existence?
How did life begin?
Why does the universe exist?

In previous entries I have introduced what is referred to in Wood’s cosmology as the “Areta” [pronounced: AH-<r>-tay]. This feminine mind is described as a mysterious anomaly that awoke midst a cold, dark sea of ‘nothingness’ (7:1:1-4). Referred to by Wood as the ‘Great Intender'^[3]Origins manuscript (2013), ch. 9 of the First Creation, the Areta is presented as the First Observer, the First Primary Cause from which all life and creation ensued. She is the First Eternal Mind, the transcendent, fundamental Consciousness underlying the creation and evolution of the universe (3:1:19-49; 4:1:36-44; 1:7:16-18).

The Song of God relates how that before the birth of creation, this primordial Awareness was the first and only consciousness, the only Observer, the only mind that was alive and self-aware. Coming to the realization that she was alone, the Areta yearned for relationship and communion, meaning and purpose. Through trial and error, she determined a way, a mechanism, to create life outside of herself. Us humans have recognized and named this mechanism as the universe.

Despite the Areta’s role in bringing forth the first successful universe, this primordial Consciousness is not presented in scripture as an all-knowing, all-powerful entity. Areta did not possess innate concerns about right and wrong, or good and evil. As the Great Intender of the First Cosmos, Areta is not characterized as ‘God’, but rather, the Eternal Mind and Power embedded in the creation that gave rise to God. This is an important distinction to note in our efforts to understand Wood’s conception of the Divine.

The intentions of the Universal Consciousness were fueled by certain desires. It was her primary hope that the universe would not only bring about other forms of life, but more specifically, some other mind similar to her own whereby she might achieve communion and oneness. As life evolved throughout the cosmos, she eagerly awaited the rise of some other noble consciousness, a second observer worthy of her consideration.

Life evolving throughout the First Cosmos was a miraculous development underscored by countless failures. However, it was the advent of a particular anomaly that marked the greatest miracle of all. As previously reviewed, an evolutionary mutation occurred within a particular species that resulted in the preservation of mind and memory beyond physical death. Wood refers to this mutation as ‘soul’.^[4]Wood (2015); Soul Creation manuscript The engenderment of this ‘soul’ mutation resulted in the preservation of an individual’s memory and identity beyond the dictates of death and time.

During the evolution of the First Cosmos, the soul mutation issuing from any life form was unprecedented and perhaps even unexpected by the Universal Consciousness (E:5:32; 1:9:25-26; 3:4:59-60). Before the advent of soul, death marked the end of an organism’s evolutionary struggle to adapt, reproduce and survive. However, the initial soul anomaly perpetuated aspects of individual consciousness and identity beyond corporeal, temporal constraints. In Wood’s conception, the first natural occurrence of the soul mutation is directly correlated with the birth of the ‘God‘ concept.

Another key point that must be revisited here is this: the epiphenomenon of soul was first engendered by a human. This premise serves as a foundation for Wood’s cosmology and points not only to the innate connection between humans and God, but the inherent potential of all humankind.

Thus in the man and in the woman is there together found the seedling of God’s beginning, for have you not heard among yourselves already, how that God was once a man, even as you?
~Wisdom 9:35~

It is morally wrong to kill a human in the name of religion, nationalism or justice, for whenever we kill our fellow man, we strike at the very birthseed of God.^[5]Wood, Song of God (2015), p viii, Article #3
~Basic Beliefs: Article #3~

---

Thoughts on Areta, Soul, God and Time

The movement of matter through space creates ‘time’. Without this movement, ‘time’ cannot exist. Memories are fashioned in time, with time. Wood’s theosophy presents the soul as a mysterious situation that preserves aspects of individual memory and identity beyond the dictates of time. Even though soul-memory transcends the rule of time, it can only be engendered and magnified with time, in time — specifically, in time midst a vast array of potential experiences (i.e. opposition), and a mind’s capacity to make choices (E:5:42-43; 1:10:6; 1:5:33; 6:6:42).

Scripture indicates that Areta, as the Universal Consciousness underlying creation, exists not only as the first Eternal Mind (7:1:15), but as the original prototype of the ‘soul’ (epi)phenomenon (4:1:38-43; 3:1:34-41; 3:14:41). The Areta is intrinsically unbound by ‘time’. She is incorporeal, ethereal and free from the rule of time. Although space/time came about as a result of the Areta’s desires and intentions, and was utilized by her in order to achieve her objectives, the Areta is inherently an eternal entity separate and apart from space/time and its dictates (4:1:42, 54).

Another intrinsic quality unique to the Areta — a feature that becomes central to Wood’s theosophy — is this: Areta’s true self, her intrinsic nature, came to reveal itself as pure goodness and incorruptible virtue (5:2:58; 5:3:4-5; 1:7:19). This element is key as we contemplate the engenderment of soul, i.e., how aspects of individual memory, love and virtue become preserved (and perhaps ‘entangled’) beyond the limitations of death and time.

How then are we to think about ‘God’ in relation to the Areta? In the context of Wood’s writings, the Areta is first and foremost a transcendent and timeless entity, whereas ‘God’ is relative in nature and contingent upon time.

In some respect, the terms ‘God’ and ‘Heaven’ might be understood as general pointings to the ever-evolving, supreme, spatiotemporal expression of that Grand Intelligence which is timeless, ethereal, incorporeal, and nonlocal.

I think the Song of God, in its radical portrayal of ‘God’, offers an explanation for how the Universal Consciousness — the transcendent, Eternal Soul-Mind — achieves self-definition, meaning, purpose, expression, form and communion. For the Areta, ‘God’ represents and provides the ultimate fulfillment of these things.

In Wood’s scripture, the birth and evolution of ‘God’ is correlated with that other, subsequent, similar soul-mind that eventually provided the Universal Consciousness with meaningful communion, and ultimately, oneness. The evolution of a subsequent noble mind provided opportunity for Areta to refine the purpose behind her timeless, transcendent and, hitherto, solitary existence.

Areta, as the First and only Mind, could not create meaning and purpose in a vacuum. For this, she needed something beyond herself, some other mind outside herself. Wood’s conception presents ‘God’ as the supreme point of reference by which the Universal Consciousness achieves meaning, purpose, expression and oneness. As Wood often stated: “God creates meaning. God defines purpose.”^[6]Wood (2013); Five Radical Propositions (unpublished manuscript)

In an attempt to codify these ideas and describe, in a general sense, what ‘God’ represents in the context of Wood’s cosmology, I submit the following statements (based on my own current understanding and interpretations) for consideration and refinement. More specific definitions for ‘God’ will be offered later on in this post.

God represents the supreme evolving oneness between that which is incorporeal and eternal, and that which is corporeal and temporal.^[7]Expanding on this idea, I wonder if the following expressions accurately describe Wood’s cosmology: “God represents the supreme evolving oneness and harmony between the Areta and the … Continue reading

God represents the supreme evolving oneness between form and formlessness, time and timelessness, mortality and immortality, the measurable and the immeasurable.

God represents the supreme expression of Areta’s eternal pursuit towards greater oneness.

The distinction (and relationship) between Areta and God presents a multi-faceted mystery filled with sparkling nuance. In the joyful contemplation of this mystery, consider the potent subtlety of the following passages:

⁴ I am Areta, eternal Mother, Supreme and Sovereign, the singer of songs within the dreams of God; weaving through most subtle thoughts a deep and great design, sudden light of inspiration, I touch and gently guide, ever seeking that greater oneness filled with light and life and love.

7th Endowment 1:4

¹⁴ Endless Soul have I become, for the realm of Eidos have I placed as a footstool beneath my feet, while the Areta I have set as a crown upon my head.

Enlightenment 14:14

---

A God with a Beginning

The Song of God is not only a grand exposition about the nature God, it’s about the genesis of apotheosis, the origination of deification. It’s about how God became God, and why that process is especially relevant to the human species.

According to Wood’s theology, there was a beginning to all of it: spirit, soul, God, Heaven, exaltation, eternal progression — there was a point in space and time wherein none of these things existed. God wasn’t always God. God had a beginning. This idea is heretical on its own, but Wood’s conception goes even further by claiming this earth and the human species as the place of origin, the birthseed, of that which evolved to become ‘God’. In Wood’s cosmology, the seed of intelligence that gave rise to God was, and is, contained in the human species.

The notion that earth-dwelling humans gave rise to God doesn’t make much sense until it is paired with the concept of time-travel. This is one of the “Radical Propositions” Wood allegedly arrived at prior to his first theophany experience in 1979.^[8]Wood (2013); Five Radical Propositions (unpublished essay)

According to Wood^[9]Ibid, the “Radical Propositions” became the framework for what would later become the Song of God. While the Propositions don’t necessarily define ‘God’, I will list them here, as they summarize major themes presented in scripture and introduce key elements crucial to understanding Wood’s conception of God.

FIVE RADICAL PROPOSITIONS
by Archie D. Wood Sr

I. God exists, but God did not create this universe or the world we live on.

II. God did not create the universe because at the time of its creation, God did not exist. God had a beginning. God evolved.

III. This world we call Earth is the place where God began. God evolved from the human species.

IV. God traveled back through time, bringing some of Their children with them, in an effort to save the world on which God began.

V. Without death, eternal life is not worth having.

These propositions might at first seem ludicrous, but upon further examination a conception of God begins to emerge that is supported by an alluring rationale. The idea that God originated from the human species seems ridiculous, but according to Wood, this proposition is simply a practical inference from the evidence at hand.

Wood taught that in the absence of a beginning, nothing can exist which is said to exist. If God is real, then God must have evolved from some point of origin. If God exists, then when and where was God’s beginning? According to Wood’s 3rd Proposition, God began on this earth and evolved from the human species. Wood claims to have arrived at this idea by simply looking at the evidence at hand.^[10]Wood (2013); Five Radical Propositions: Proposition III; (unpublished manuscript). See also the YouTube video: Eroel 2.3 – Birth of God: Back To The Beginning^[11]Wood maintained that humans are presently the most advanced species on earth when it comes to thinking and communicating in abstract, symbolic ways. We know of only one species engaged in science and … Continue reading

One might object to the idea of a god-like civilization evolving from the human species, arguing that the vastness of space would most certainly accommodate the evolution of some other species more advanced, more intelligent than ours. But Wood countered this objection with an appeal to evidence, asking that if such a species exists, where is it? Where did it evolve? Presently, there is simply no evidence to support this argument.

While indeed radical, the notion that God had a beginning and evolved from the human species possesses a degree of parsimony and factual significance typically absent in common forms of theism. Wood’s concept of God rests on two obvious and undeniable factors: the existence of the human species and the forward movement of time.

In Wood’s cosmology, ‘God’ is not so much a religious concept, but a rational one.^[12]Wood (2013); Origins manuscript, ch.14 God exists because ‘time’ and humans exist. Humans represent the birthseed of God. To believe in humankind — and the future of humankind — is to believe in God.

This notion is epitomized in Wood’s first article of faith:

We believe that the only proper religion for mankind is humanity itself, for it is from this humanity that God first evolved.
God, who is our future, came from humans, who are Their past.^[13]Wood, Song of God (2015), p viii, Article #1
~Basic Beliefs: Article #1~

---

God as Both: Abstract and Object

Wood’s conception presents ‘God’ as the supreme manifestation of our future state. God not only represents the future, but the fullest expression of future time — the highest expression of humanity’s best, brightest and most praiseworthy attributes.

In this sense, the word ‘God’ points to an abstract concept that continues to evolve and mature along with the human species. Wood taught that the concept of ‘God’ functions as an enduring point of reference that reminds us of our humanity and the goodness we are capable of.

“Our ideas of God serve very much the same function as our ideas of beauty. Beauty is always represented by some object, such as a painting or a sculpture, a score of music or a sunset. Our senses can always perceive the object, but it is the heart which experiences the beauty. It is the same with our understanding of God.

When we see the goodness of our fellow man, we see the likeness and image of God in future time. When we see the evil that men do, we see the things which we must overcome, both as individuals and as a species, so that we may draw ever more closely to God.[…]

When all is said and done, the concept of God allows us to define ourselves. This is the primary function behind any belief in God. God helps us to see and to realize what we as a species might become, given enough time.” [emphasis added]

Wood (2015); Soul Creation manuscript

Although Wood describes the idea of ‘God’ as an abstract concept with functional value, the word ‘God’ is used primarily throughout his book of scripture in reference to a tangible, concrete entity. After all, Wood claims to have seen and spoken with ‘God’ face-to-face. It becomes apparent then that ‘God’ refers to both the abstract concept and the representation (the object) of that abstract concept.

So what then is Wood referring to when he uses the term ‘God’ to describe the representation, the object? You may have wondered why Wood sometimes uses the pronouns ‘They’ and ‘Their’ when speaking about God. Is God a singular entity? A duo? A triune? A collective? What are we to make of this?

Before addressing this question, I’d like to briefly speak to a certain aspect that some may be unaccustomed to considering when it comes to ‘God’, and that is temporal context. Wood’s gnosis portrays the evolution of God — both the abstract concept and the representation of ‘God’ — over an immense period of time. Since ‘God’ is presented as something that continued/is continuing to progress and evolve from a temporal point of origin, then certain things about the who, what and where of God will depend upon the when of God.

In the sections that follow, I will present four significant ‘snapshots’ taken from the expansive evolutionary timeline of God as portrayed in Wood’s cosmology. These four views serve as chronologically ordered points of semantic development in relation to the evolution of both the abstract concept and the representation of ‘God’.

---

Four Chronological / Semantic Developments

1) God as a Name

To know the Eternal, you must know the Beginning.
~Book of Pearls 13:2~

The Song of God depicts the beginning of ‘God’ as an emergence preceded by several notable ‘events’, for example: the awakening of Areta as the First Primary Cause, the successful creation of a life-supporting universe, the evolution of intelligent life, the epiphenomenon of human soul, the formation of the streams of intelligence, the creation of the first spirit body — each of these were significant developments that led to the beginning of what we will come to understand as ‘God’.

According to the 3rd Endowment, the word ‘God’ was originally the birthname of the first naturally born^[14]I say ‘naturally born’ because the first human to engender soul was the mortal manifestation of Areta, whose human body (it could be argued) was not the result of a natural conception and … Continue reading human to engender soul and survive death with personality intact. During his life on the world of the First Power, the man became known as “Kronus”, but this was not the name given to him by his biological mother.

…and unto the son did [Areta] give a small and tender name; calling him God, midst smiles and gentle laughter, which in the language of Areta means Noble One.

3rd Endowment 4:30

Scripture presents this event as the original use of the word ‘God’. In the beginning, ‘God’ was simply the name which mortal Areta gave to her infant son — a name that carried the hopes and dreams of all creation, but a name nonetheless (1:7:17-18).

Those familiar with the narrative will recall how the son becomes the first human to fashion an eternal soul-bond with a Beloved other, which bond of love transcended the powers of death. The following passage provides context surrounding the inaugural union of the first two spirit-empowered souls:

⁴⁰…“From this day, my Love, shall I cease to call you Kronus; for this name did violent men deign to give. Therefore, I shall be to you as Areta only, while you to me shall I call God.

⁴¹ For in the days of your childhood did the Mother call you such, finding in you that noble person from which all things good are made to live in the affairs of men; to find in you that full expression of love and life together blended.“

3rd Endowment 32:40-41

The first human to engender soul became treasured and loved by Areta as “that noble person from which all things good [were] made to live in the affairs of men”. Areta found in this unique human a “full expression of love and life together blended” (vs 41).

These verses depict certain original connotations that Areta associated with the name and concept of ‘God’. But, as the scripture narrative proceeds, astute readers will notice how the name begins to encompass more nuanced and expansive meanings as Areta and God (the individual) continue to nurture their love for each other and pursue their dreams.

---

2) God as a Beloved Couple

For together were they as one God, being united through the Oneness of their souls…
~4th Endowment 1:19~

Scripture portrays how Areta and God (the individual), united in love and devotion, continued to mature in their relationship to become the co-creators of a new cosmos, the progenitors of spirit procreation, and the architects of eternal progression (4th Endowment).

Areta and God existed as the first and only of their kind. As these original spirit-embodied souls continued to progress and develop their oneness, to become the Supreme Mother and Father of Heaven, a semantic expansion of the word-name ‘God’ ensued.

The harmonious union and mutual expression of love and devotion between the first male and female spirit-empowered souls represent a significant advance of the ‘God concept’.

The following excerpts portray this shift in meaning — how the term ‘God’ expands from serving as a personal name to serving as a designation for two souls, both male and female, forever united in love and harmonious devotion. Notice how the male consort of Areta, originally referred to as ‘God’, comes to be identified by the author as “The One”.

¹⁹ For together were they as one God, being united through the Oneness of their souls; for in this Emzahdeah did each surrender the demands of the self, to find in the loving of each other the only thing worthy of desiring or fully needed;

²⁰ Causing that The One should speak to his Beloved, saying: “Come, my Love, and let us be as God together, both male and female, most strongly bound in love and true devotion; for in you alone am I complete, even as you do find completeness in me.

²¹ Let us, therefore, be fully bound midst all our love and life together, being ourselves that endless fount from which all good things must flow, causing that we should draw from the depths of all our love this Heaven which we would make.

²² For all I am give I to thee, to be for you that truest Love which dwells within your dreams, to place in you a song to sing; for in the bosom of forever shall I love you always, to see in you the sum of my desiring.”

4th Endowment 1:19-22

³⁵ And Areta spoke…saying: […]

³⁷ “See this, my Love, which stands beside me and this most fully know, that together are we made as God forever, being to each as gentle lovers and fairest friends.

³⁸ And though we appear as separate and in ourselves complete in every fashion, yet together do we stand as one only, being forged through fiery passions and kind regard to give as gifts to each the other the sum of who we are, I in him and he in me in love forever bound.”

4th Endowment 3:37-38

These verses begin to illustrate how ‘God’ expands from being utilized as a personal name, to that of a concept represented by two distinct and sovereign individuals, united as one in love and purpose.

I think it’s interesting how the semantic expansion of the word ‘God’ is shown throughout scripture to be intimately connected with relationship and experience. For Areta and God, new opportunities for self-definition and self-refinement arose with exposure to new points of reference, new experiences. This general notion is pretty obvious, as we are each engaged in this type of exercise to varying degrees. It’s just thought-provoking when the idea is applied to God, i.e., God was not/is not exempt from this relational process of self-refinement.

---

3) God as a Heavenly Mother and Father

“For what is this ‘Forever’ worth without our little babes, who will, themselves, most surely add to all our work and many wonders the fulfillment of all our purpose, to fashion of our living seed a world of Gods and Goddesses.“
~4th Endowment 4:15~

Wood’s gnosis presents ‘God’ as the end result of a natural evolutionary process. This process of exaltation, this pathway of eternal progression, eventually gave rise to the advent of spirit procreation and the opportunity for spirit offspring to become parents themselves.

In the context of Wood’s cosmology, Areta and The One are presented as the very first spirit parents and the co-creators of a way whereby their progeny could follow in their steps and become in similitude to the Father and Mother which brought them forth.

With this development, the term ‘God’ began to take on even broader connotations designating not only a Beloved couple, but more specifically, a Heavenly Mother and Father together united in their love and devotion for their children.

In contemplating ‘God’ as a concept represented by both a Heavenly Father and Mother devoted to the well-being of their children, we begin to arrive at a more prominent meaning with regard to how the term is construed throughout Wood’s cosmology.

Consider this excerpt taken from Wood’s “Personal Testimony”, describing a moment of conversation that allegedly took place during his first theophany experience in 1979:

…And God the Father spoke to me again, saying:

“Behold my own Beloved, even the Heavenly Mother; and know this thing for yourself; for even as you see before you the Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother, yet are we together made but one God unto the children of men.

For even as a man and a woman are made one flesh in marriage, even so are we become as one God. Know then that whosoever shall pray unto the Father, even then shall the Mother hear also. And whosoever shall pray unto the Mother, even unto that child shall I attend with all gentle affection.

For how shall you believe in the Father and not the Mother also? For together are we made as one God forever unto the children of men.”

Song of God (2015); Personal Testimony; p xiv

Understanding the word ‘God’ as a reference to both the Heavenly Mother and Heavenly Father together can serve as a standard interpretation within the framework of Wood’s gnosis. However, there is still more to consider about the meaning of ‘God’ given the overarching theme of eternal progression as presented in the Song of God.

For example, if spirit children can mature and advance to become Gods and Goddesses like their parents, ad infinitum, what meaning then should be ascribed to terms like ‘God’, ‘Gods’ or ‘Godhead’? How would a plurality of Gods and Goddesses function? How would a process of eternal increase and progression operate? What would it look like? And in what way would the mortal human experience be relevant to any of it?^[15]These are the types of questions addressed in the Song of God.

With these questions in mind, let’s move to my fourth and final semantic examination, which will lead us to a more specific understanding of what the term ‘God’ refers to within a framework of eternal progression.

---

4) God as a Collective Will

“For in small and careful stages shall our children most surely grow, adding through needful measures one glory upon another, even till they should receive a fullness, to become themselves as Heavenly Fathers and Heavenly Mothers in holiness and joy forever, being attended themselves by a deep and knowing wisdom.“
~4th Endowment 1:32~

You may have noticed instances throughout Wood’s writings wherein the pronouns “they” and “their” are used in reference to God. For example:

“God traveled back through time, bringing some of Their children with them, in an effort to save the world on which God began.” (Proposition IV)

“God, who is our future, came from humans, who are Their past.” (Basic Beliefs: Article #1)

The use of these pronouns, along with the term ‘God’, is not simply a reference to the first spirit parents, Areta and The One.

While the word ‘God’ is often used throughout scripture to designate a single divine being, like a Heavenly Father for example, the author taught that it is more accurate to consider ‘God’ as the representation of a Supreme Collective wherein a single individual (or Beloved couple) is chosen to speak for the whole.

Wood expands upon this idea in the Commentary section of the Song of God. The following quote contains several words and concepts I have yet to introduce in this blog, and for those new to the Song of God material it might be a bit much. Nevertheless, I’ve chosen to include this excerpt (along with my own footnotes and links to glossary entries) so as to portray and provide access to the depth and richness of Wood’s gnosis.

[…] It has been rightly observed by some believers that throughout my writings I will often be speaking of Heavenly Father or Heavenly Mother, and in the next instant speak of “God” as though “God” were separate and apart from the Heavenly Father or Heavenly Mother I am speaking of at the time.

This astute observation reveals an interesting though subtle truth. And this truth is simply this: that “God” is not a single celestial being, but rather, “God” is the representation of a collective and divine will. This collective will is a reflection of either the Council of Elohim, or of the Seven Councils of Light, of which the Elohim are a part.

Individual members of the Council of Elohim are called: “Eloi”. This Adamic word refers to an exalted man or woman who sits on the Council. [In referring to a male member,] [t]he word “Eloi” is pronounced as ĕlˈ-ō-ēē. In referring to a female member the pronunciation is ĕlˈ-ō-ī.

The word “Elohim” is plural and refers to all members of the Council. However, this word also has two distinctly different pronunciations. If a man is speaking, such as myself, the word “Elohim” is pronounced ĕlˈ-ō-him. If a woman is speaking, the word is pronounced ĕlˈ-ō-hīme (spelled: “Eloheim”).

With all this now understood, there is a word which represents the collective will of the Elohim. This Adamic word is: “Elohanu”. This word has only one pronunciation and is not gender specific. The word is pronounced: ĕl-ō-hāyˈ-nu.

Not all members of the Elohim may speak the Elohanu. Only an Archon may do so.^[16]I am confident Wood is using the term “Archon” here as a general reference to either a male or a female Arch-Angel. Technically, the term “Archon” is masculine and denotes a … Continue reading And whenever such an Archon is appointed by the Elohim to speak the Elohanu, then that Archon is “God”, the Noble One.

Behind every celestial being, whether spoken or unspoken, is the Elohanu: the will of God as represented by the Elohim or the Seven Councils of Light.

It does not really matter if I am speaking of Heavenly Father or Heavenly Mother; it does not matter if I am in the presence of Emmanuel or Michael or Ahman or Galendriel; I know instinctively that beyond them stirs the Elohanu, the collective and divine will of God waiting to be spoken into the ears of mortal men and women.[…]

Wood; “Song of God” (2015), Commentary: “God” (excerpt); p 800

Wood’s teaching is clear. The term ‘God’ serves as an entitlement of authority which represents the will of a Supreme Collective rather than designating a single divine being or a triune entity.

This God concept achieves even greater clarity with Wood’s advancement of the Hebrew term “Elohanu”. Claiming the word to have Adamic origins, Wood taught that the “Elohanu” — the will of the Supreme Collective — is arrived at through a voting system that includes all members of a celestial Council. Once a resolution is passed, it is granted the mantle of “Elohanu”: the will of God.

Most often, it is the responsibility of the presiding Heavenly Father and/or Mother of the celestial Council (referred to as the “Ahman“) who is responsible for carrying out the Elohanu. In carrying out the Elohanu, the Ahman takes upon himself or herself the title of “God”, the Noble One.^[17]Wood, Song of God (2015), Commentary: “Elohim“; p 796-797

---

In review, I have presented four chronological developments with regard to both the abstract concept and the representation designated by the word ‘God’:

1) God as the personal name of the first human to engender soul, meaning: “Noble One”

2) God as a Beloved Couple

3) God as both a Heavenly Mother and Heavenly Father together united in devotion to their children

4) God as the represented will of a Supreme Collective

Given all that’s been explored pertaining to these developments, I will now attempt to provide general definitions for the word ‘God’ that are congruent within the grand scope of Wood’s cosmology.

---

Defining God

The truth which can be spoken is not Eternal Truth.
The name revealed and made most common is not the Eternal Name.
And mysteries spoken and passed about are not Eternal Mystery.
~Book of Pearls 8:1~

I realize any attempt at defining ‘God’ is a precarious endeavor that will ultimately fail to capture what ‘God’ is. Nevertheless, I offer these definitions as a humble effort to provide clarity around the nuanced ways ‘God’ is portrayed in the context of Wood’s radical theology.

Scripture often makes reference to “Gods” and “Goddesses” of the Elohim, or more broadly, the Celestial Kingdom. This presents yet another facet of meaning related to the term “God” that extends beyond what has been listed above. To account for this, I offer the following definitions:

Some of the definitions for “God” listed above were derived from a statement provided by Wood, himself, which I’ve included below:

People have often asked me what my definition is for the word God. If the Universal Consciousness is not God, but something else instead, then what do I mean when I use the word God? Perhaps it is time to put my definition in printed form. So here it is, for all True Gnostics everywhere, this is just for you.

“God is the source of all truly great mysteries. God has become the supreme mathematician, the supreme scientist, the supreme conductor behind the symphony of creation.

God is the supreme manifestation of the Supreme Collective. God represents that supreme civilization which is so old, so advanced, that the dictates of time itself have lost their hold; for this supreme civilization has become itself eternal and the only font from which eternal life is made to spring.

God, therefore, is the supreme manifestation of the human race; for God who is our future, came from humans who are their past.”

This is what the word ‘God’ means to a True Gnostic. This is the God we adore, and the only God worthy of admiration and devotion. As True Gnostics, we believe that the only real pathway capable of leading us to God is through the laws and conditions imposed upon us through intelligent discourse; and while it is certain that all True Gnostics have deep feelings and emotions which pertain to the subject of God, these feelings and emotions are occasioned by the laws which govern intelligent thought.

Wood (2013); Origins manuscript, ch.14

---

Attributes of God

For God is greater than the smallness of men, being greater than all your dreams and expectations together; and the wonders and glories of Heaven far beyond the imaginings and philosophies of every man and every woman.
~3rd Endowment 1:17~

…For God is not willing that even one should be lost.
~2nd Endowment 6:44~

The following list is my attempt to derive and compile certain notable attributes of God according to my interpretation of the Song of God and other of Wood’s writings. This is not meant to be a strict or comprehensive list of beliefs, but rather, a brief overview or introduction. The language of certain points may need refinement. References are not comprehensive. If a reference is not included, that doesn’t mean the point is not supported throughout the corpus of Wood’s writings.

Attributes of God

1. God wasn’t always God. God had a beginning and continues to evolve and increase in wisdom, power, holiness and glory (4:4:11).

2. “God who is our future, came from humans who are Their past.” (Basic Beliefs: Article #1)

3. God represents the highest, most noble expressions of the human race.

4. God represents the fullest expression of future time.^[20]Wood (2015); Soul Creation manuscript

5. God communicates in the language of science, beauty and wisdom.^[21]Ibid.

6. “The glory of God is intelligence, which intelligence is the light of truth.” (W:14:15)

7. “The concept of God is represented by two distinct and separate persons, our Heavenly Father and our Heavenly Mother.” (Article #7; 2:11:58)

8. It is holiness, benevolence and wisdom which more appropriately define the nature of God, not anger, hate, or unlimited power. (Article #10)

9. God is not omnipotent, omniscient or omnipresent.

10. God does not possess an exhaustive foreknowledge. (5:14:42-46)

11. God is not wrathful, jealous, vengeful, hateful, murderous, mischievous or controlling.

12. Agency given by God does not nor cannot result in acts of inhumanity. (W:22:23-24)

13. God is filled continually with love and blessing towards all creation. God is love. The love of God never fails; it endures forever, and is untouched by anger, strife, or hurtful pride. The love of God is pure and undefiled, patient and filled with kindness. God’s devotion towards their children is constant. The glory of God is built upon love. (4:6:7-9; 4:11:9-14; W:23:50; W:9:82; 1:11:52)

14. The justice of God is drawn from love, “being itself rooted deeply in mercy, understanding and compassion, being of itself the healer and restorer of every child which comes from God.” (4:21:26; 4:22:24)

15. God beckons, woos, charms, enraptures, guides, enchants, nurtures, inspires, empowers. God does not manipulate, coerce, or force the will of others, i.e. engage in unrighteous dominion. (4:6:8-9; 5:14:45-46, 49-50)

16. Gods and Goddesses are glorified, exalted human beings. (Article #2)

17. Gods and Goddesses possess “celestial bodies of flesh and bone unlike the natural man”. (W:14:22; W:16:9)

18. Gods and Goddesses are not perfect. (1:4:4-14; 5:2:36; 5:4:43)

19. Gods and Goddesses have the capacity to do both good and evil.^[22]Scripture reveals how Areta and (eventually) The One, who exist as the Supreme Father and Mother of Heaven, are an exception to this declaration, possessing “neither shadow nor vice”. … Continue reading (See previous references.)

20. Gods and Goddesses are not completely exempt from the possibility of death.^[23]This point is alluded to in Wood’s 5th Proposition: “Without death, eternal life is not worth having.” Implications of this proposition are thoroughly expounded upon in the 1st, … Continue reading

21. A primary aspect of divine power has to do with spatiotemporal freedom, ability and opportunity — specifically, the spatiotemporal ability to preserve, restore and redeem that which is good and holy (E:14:11; 1:5:29; 1:4:6-7; E:5:34-35; 6:7:64-65; refer to dimensionalism).

---

Closing Remarks

Yet does the true God perceive in man the beginning of some greater hope made rich with promise, being in themselves the very seed from which shall spring a far more noble human filled with glory and light; being forever added upon from eternity to eternity, even exaltation and worlds without end.
~1st Endowment 11:26~

A plurality or echelon of divine beings is certainly not a new idea, even throughout the scope of Abrahamic religions. However, this concept has never before been coherently developed (or revealed) within a framework grounded in the notion that ‘God’ — as a supremely wise and benevolent Collective — had a beginning, evolved from the human species, and is engaged in a process of eternal increase, progression and redemption.

In redefining the nature of God, Wood postulates something deeply profound, not only about who and what we are, but where and when we are.^[24]Scripture places our current existence in a world/cosmos pre-existing God. Refer to the Glossary entry: “First World” and this post introducing the world of the First Power. One reason Wood’s conception of God is unique is that it takes into account a certain element that is often overlooked in conventional theologies, and that element is time.

God does not exist without time.
God and time are inextricably bound.
God has become the grandmaster of both time and timelessness.

These premises make for a stirring theological advance when coherently integrated with the idea that God had a beginning, continued to evolve, and has come back in time to save the world where it all began.

A radical humanism is unveiled at the center of Wood’s gnosis, as humankind represents the birthseed of something beautiful, wondrous, noble and eternal — a Magnificent Goodness that has come back in time to gently touch Their far distant past, to offer us Their future.

Guiding the way to this future is the Song of God.

---

From my perspective, a notable weakness of conventional theologies — and the scriptural texts from which they are derived — stems from the lack of a clear, rational, congruent portrayal regarding the nature of God.

For every quality or virtue ascribed to God throughout established canon, there is a doctrine or scriptural interpretation that confuses the issue entirely. The god of conventional theism is a mess of ambiguity and contradiction.

Literal interpretations of “sacred” texts render oppressive, anti-human systems of belief that justify slavery, inequality, oppression of women, even genocide. Standards of compassion, beauty and justice are continually distorted by appeals to religious nonsense. Our intuitions about the nature of God’s love rise in stark contrast to convoluted perversions presented so sincerely as the ‘Truth’.

If we agree that the concept of God helps us to define ourselves, and if we hope to become a more ethical, moral society, then any God worthy of belief should represent the noblest and most endearing qualities of our humanity.

For me, Wood’s book of gnosis reveals such a God.

Though I cannot prove he communed face-to-face with divine beings, Wood has provided a scriptural text that offers a coherent explanation of good and evil, notably aligns with observable fact, and affirms my deepest intuitions about life, love and the nature of God.

The God presented in this new book of scripture is exceedingly expansive and ineffable, yet accessible, relatable and knowable. In the knowing of this God, my fear is diminished, my peace is preserved, and my love is empowered. With the knowledge imparted by this unique book, I am gifted with an inner strength, a steadfast hope, and a vivid, steady, moral example worthy of imitation and adoration.

The Song of God helps me to understand not only what God loves, but how God loves. This luminous revelation shows me what the love of my Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother looks like, and it makes a lot of sense. It’s a love that is pure and consistent — a love so rich in meaning, so beautiful in expression, my heart aches to share in its radiance.

---

GOD

Noble One, Collective Supreme
the highest and brightest expression
ever evolving, progressing, redeeming
pursuing the greater reflection
maker of meaning, the purpose definer
the source of endless wonder
holding hands through endless time
the Father and the Mother
the vow and its fulfillment
a joyful tender dream
a steadfast love transcending death
commingling in the stream
a destiny filled with hope and promise
yearning for a chase
this Miracle, this Mystery
born of the human race.