God has multiple sons

The Course uses the term "Sons" 82 times.

The Course uses the term "children" to refer to the "children of God" 42 times.

The term "Sonship" is used 104 times.

The course also uses the term "parts", "minds", "aspects", "extensions", "channels", "brothers", "God's thoughts", "souls", and more, on multiple occasions.

All of these are plural. There are HUNDREDS of references to the fact that God created MANY SONS. Many extensions, many minds, many souls, many parts/aspects of the sonship.

The sonship having multiple parts does NOT mean the parts are separate, or separated by bodies, or estranged from each other by illusions of ego, or illusions of multiplicity, or any other form of separation that we would recognize as separation.

The sonship, in Heaven, in its entirety, experienced all simultaneously by God, is often referred to as "THE Son of God" or the "One Son". This does NOT erase or cancel out the fact that God created MANY Sons. It is simply talking about how ALL of the Sons are capable of SHARING equally, how they experience a Oneness with all parts of God's creation.

Oneness does not mean... one big blob. If it did, God would not have ANY SONS. Not even ONE. If God is oneness, then there is not even a Son of God. Clearly that would be severely against the Course's teaching. It does not teach that there is "no son". In fact, it teaches that because of what it is, LOVE MUST EXTEND and be shared, and it must CREATE, and the natural result of that is the creation of AT LEAST one Son. And the Course has explained that there are MANY, MANY, MANY Sons, many minds, many souls, which GOD CREATED, and which are whole in and of themselves.

The problem our ego minds have, is that we can't get our head around this idea:

There are many sons, who are simultaneously ONE, and who experience oneness, and are each a whole, and yet also are part of a combined whole, yet each is still an individual will free will. .... The ego has NO WAY to understand how that makes sense or is possible, especially when it considers any HINT of "separation" or "multiple" to mean... some kind of ego concept.

That we can't understand logically HOW this makes sense, or how it is possible, or what it means, does not mean it is lying to us. The Course is not lying to us. This is simply one area that the ego cannot easily get its head around. The ego cannot understand oneness. So to dismiss is on grounds of EGO LOGIC, which arrives at a false conclusion here, is a mistake.

"But how can God have multiple Sons if Oneness is a single thing" ..... this is the same question as, "How could the tiny mad idea happen". The ego is asking. The ego wants to figure it out. The ego thinks that it is capable of seeing WITHOUT separation, and that when it LOOKS AT the Sonship - the multiple Sons of God one with each other, it is CAPABLE of seeing the truth. It can't. When the ego looks at Oneness, ALL IT SEES IS SEPARATION. It will never be able to SEE the oneness of the sonship at the same time as recognizing that God created MANY SONS WITH FREE WILL.

To then base an entire theological understanding of what the Course says and means, on the idea that there are NOT multiple sons, and none of them have free will, and any way that they are distinct is "separation" and therefore illusion, WILL RESULT IN a very warped interpretation of the Course's metaphysics.

When there is no room in the ego's grasp of the Course to accept multiple sons, there is no way to explain properly how perception works or how minds work or what illusions are or how people have free will or who is dreaming what or who is responsible for what sickness or who is making what body appear. It ALL becomes confused in one big blur.