Hello again Brothers and Sisters.
Now that you have had a chance to pray and realize that part 1 of this lesson was true and accurate, I will continue.
You may have noticed in part 1 of this lesson, my use of plural pronouns when summarizing God’s creation of man in chapter 1. This is simply due to God’s use of similar pronouns when dictating the story to Moses:
26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. (Genesis 1:26-27)
As shown by the following passage from Genesis 3, this use of plural pronouns is not an anomaly:
22 And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
Your having missed this detail is quite understandable, considering that most people who claim to have read the Bible, haven’t actually done so, and many of those who have, did so through a lens distorted by prior beliefs. Most people read their beliefs into the Bible instead of deriving their beliefs from a careful reading of the Bible, because of their having been taught what their beliefs were, before being able to read. This is OK, but only if the beliefs you are reading into, or drawing from it agree 100% with what I say. To do otherwise is to show that Satan has clouded your mind and set you on a path to Hell.
Once you are reading things correctly, these passages clearly show the plurality of God. Some of you might say that this is a reference to Jesus, and I concur, others might say that it is an obvious reference to other gods, they are sinners. What most people don’t, or won’t, notice is that such a reference clearly points to the Jesus part of God as being female. This is made most apparent when they make ‘man‘ in their image and likeness as ‘male and female.’ They are clearly talking about “man” as ‘mankind’ in this passage, because they refer to “the” man in chapter 3 as a way to differentiate between male and female.
When you quit hyperventilating you might say something along the lines of ‘Jesus presents himself as the son of God, not the daughter or wife of God.’ Once again you would be right, but you are also denying God’s true power and wisdom. Obviously, the female half of God had to present herself as a man when she came to Earth. The male half of God had made his people extremely misogynistic, so they wouldn’t have paid attention if she had done otherwise.
Eve gets blamed for the fall of man when it was clearly ManGod’s fault for creating the serpent which led her to it; Lot’s daughters get blamed for their father getting them pregnant; it’s always blamed on the women when someone in the Bible can’t have kids instead of on E.D., low sperm count, or other such male problems; all of these things show the male bias which was ingrained into the society into which Jesus presented herself, so she had no choice but to appear male.
To say that the glorified, or heavenly, form of Jesus is not female is to deny God’s power and his word. God is all-powerful, and the Bible is all right. If God had the power to take human form and come to Earth, then surely she had the power to present herself as a man, just as the male half appeared as a man, as a burning bush, talked through a donkey, etc. But, even in male form, the maternal nature of the female half is clearly shown in the healing and other forms of compassion and kindness she shows throughout the New Testament, which contrasts with the male half’s penchant for genocide, rape, incest, torture, killing, war, anger, jealousy, revenge, mutilation, infanticide, disease, a fascination with wombs and foreskin and other forms of sexual depravity and sadism displayed in the stories about him in the Old Testament.
We also see the whole punishment and reward thing change when the female half shows up. In the Old Testament the primary protagonist is the jealous, angry, and spiteful male half of God, whose only reward system revolves around black and white concepts. If you are good, you are rewarded with power and wealth. If you are bad, you die. And no matter what, when your life is over, you are put in the ground (hell) and that’s that.
When the more maternal side steps in, we get compassion, hope, love, charity, and other girly, touchy-feely views about God. We also get a reward system based on such things, and a promise of another life in a newly inclusive Heaven. Though she did have to make a concession and allow for a new type of Hell in which ManGod gets to take out his sadistic side on people he doesn’t like.
We also see women portrayed a little better in the New Testament than in the Old Testament they are mostly shown as covetous, lustful, greedy, whores who can’t have children unless God touches their wombs.
You might still be resisting the truth of God’s word so I give you this: Revelation 1:9-16
9 I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.
10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,
11 Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.
12 And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks;
13 And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle.
14 His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire;
15 And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters.
16 And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength.
This is, of course, John’s vision of the glorified form of Jesus. When John uses pronouns, he is clearly using male ones, but remember John, to this point, only knew the Jesus form presented on Earth, so it would be natural for him to make this assumption. The important word in this whole description is “paps.”
The word paps is only used three other times in the correctly translated, inerrant, King James Version of the Bible: Ezekiel 23:21, Luke 11:27, and Luke 23:29. In each of these cases “paps” is referred to as mothers’ breasts which give milk. This is opposed to the word ‘breast’ which can refer to a woman’s breasts or a man’s chest, as in the word breastplate, which is an armored covering for the chest. Never, in the Bible is the plural form of breast used to refer to a single male. (A girdle is merely a covering, and can refer to a cover for any part of the torso.)
If John were referring to a male chest in his description of the heavenly Jesus, then his hand as guided by God would have said “breast” as in his description of angelic coverings in chapter 15 . But, since what he was seeing was clearly a set of female breasts wrapped in gold, he used the clearly maternal and feminine description of God’s rack as “paps.”
Now that I have shown that the Bible clearly states that the Jesus half of God is female, I will move on to the confusion this causes our Lord.
God’s confusion about sexual identity is apparent throughout the Bible. He allows and even commands rape, yet requires you to marry someone you rape, while commanding you to kill a girl who has been raped if she isn’t able to stop the rapist; he allows for the burning of prostitutes, but then chooses one as a companion and the deliverer of the news of his/her resurrection; provides the death penalty for masturbation; and allows men to commit adultery, but punishes women who do, then later on decides to punish both. But, nowhere is his identity crisis more apparent than his condemnation of homosexuals.
In Leviticus 18:22 a gay man is an abomination comparable to eating shellfish, or seeing a woman on her period naked, and the punishment is banishment. But in the next chapter the punishment becomes death, just as for adulterers, kids who talk back to their parents, and those who sleep with their mother or son, daughter-in-law or father-in-law, mother-in-law or son-in-law, and those women unfortunate enough to be married to a man who sleeps with her mother whether she knows or not. 
This shows a clear confusion about punishment by giving us a choice about punishment for some things. This confusion is reflected in our own good Christian society which doesn’t try to prevent adulterers, or estranged offspring, from getting married while trying to prevent others from doing so. It is also shown by God him/herself and his/her representatives on Earth when they condemn homosexuals as bad, but forgive men like Ted Haggard, Mark Foley, Bob Allen, and Larry Craig for homosexual adultery. This seems to imply that it is OK to be homosexual and commit adultery, just as long as you are married to a woman first.
Hitler killed homosexuals, are you saying that God would act like Hitler? Surely not. Despite his being a good Christian, Hitler’s saying he was doing the “Lords work” doesn’t mean he was, just as others claiming the same thing are often lying.
Clearly God is confused about his own sexual identity. He does the same as many religious closet-homosexuals, like the men mentioned above, and cries for the heads of homosexuals the loudest to defer scrutiny away from themselves. The phrase: “The lady doth protest too much, methinks” comes immediately to mind. But, it is an understandable confusion since the male and female halves of God are fused just as man and woman, whom he created, are symbolically fused by marriage in Genesis 2:24
This concludes this lesson. Now that I have undeniably shown the ways in which God is a confused creator as well as the reasons for this confusion I will leave you to further reflection and prayer.
Yours in Christ,
Brother Ron, PhD, MD, DDS, BfF, LLC, STd 
1. The plural form here does not imply that each angel had multiple breasts, it is referring to all seven ‘breasts’ or ‘chests’, one each.
2. Gay women are never referred to by the Bible in any way, much less as an abomination. Every form of adult sexual activity from masturbation to sleeping with one’s mother, that God feels is wrong, is adequately covered, so it can be safely inferred that God sees nothing wrong with a little girl on girl action. Bisexuals are OK, but only if they are women. Transgenders are OK, but only if they don’t wear clothing of the opposite sex or, in the case of males, trim their beards, but this latter caveat applies to all men anyway.
3. It is however OK, according to God to sleep with one’s grandparent, grandchild, any cousin, niece, or nephew. In the case of sleeping with one’s sister-in-law, or aunt the punishment is merely not having the ability to have children. Obviously in the case of sleeping with an aunt it is the nephew being punished because the aunt is doing nothing wrong. The punishment for sleeping with a sister is the same as sleeping with a woman on her period, banishment. Sleeping with one’s daughter seems to also be OK. This would all be negated of course if the person were married because the punishment would then revert back to death.
4. This, of course stands for “saved through divinity” and not what your foul, evil, minds thought it was.
- God the Confused Creator: Part I (arguingforatheism.wordpress.com)