It also describes him as a chicken.
We’ve got brains for a reason.
And God spoke though a mule, in the Old Testament. Should we make an inference, from that incident 
or
youtube.com/watch?v=9Pw5gUCJk5w
Le’ts look at the Wiki definition of personal god
When theologians refer to God in 3 persons, it’s better understood as God in 3 aspects. God is coming down to our level - to communicate.
Whether it’s:
A loud voice of the Holy Spirit - that I’ve heard
The audio voice talking to Father A. Who is the Roman Catholic priest, that has the gift of healing.
Moses and the burning bush
Etc.
Now the RC priest Father A., talks about God telling him,
But then he thought about it:
It’s God coming down to our level - to communicate. And it is a distinctive voice, spirit, personality, aspect, etc. Whatever label you wish to put on it. Even the “Calvinisim in disquise” site Got Questions, at Is God a person?, says this:
As St. Dionysios the Areopagite explained, all language applied to God is inexact because God transcends language. When we say that God is three Persons, it does not mean that the Persons are less personal than are you or me. It means that the divine Persons are more personal than you or me. God goes above our language, not below.
There have been 2 historically significant ways of understanding God. One is ‘perfect Being theology’ and the other is ‘apophatic’ theology.
The first can be over-simply stated: “Perfect being theology is the attempt to decide questions about the nature of God by. employing the Anselmian formula that God is the greatest possible being, which we can conceive .” - a wiki somewhere
The second can be over-simply stated: “Negative theology, also known as Apophatic theology, is a theological approach that describes God by negation, speaking of God only in terms of what He is not (apophasis) rather than presuming to describe what God is.” - Theopedia
Each of these approaches are subject to powerful critique, which we could get into; but the critiques are challenging.
There is a way between these extremes, and it’s called the doctrine of Simplicty - and it is a mind-bender. I may start a thread on it sometime. For the nonce, here: plato.stanford.edu/entries/divine-simplicity/
That is a book. I’ll need to put it in my queue. (I had to look that one up also) 
Person-hood is an important concept as it relates to being created in God’s image, but it is larger than that because not all persons are human. Angels are persons, but not human. Jesus is a person and also human, though not before the incarnation. God the Father and God the Holy Spirit are likewise persons, but not human. This is very interesting tangent discussion, but it does relate back to the initial post title concerning ‘will’. Some of the elements of person-hood include mind, will, emotion, distinct identity, etc. For example the angels have all these things including personal names, yet they are not human. Now regarding man’s will and God’s will the Scriptures teach that God’s will to save all mankind is guaranteed to happen because his will cannot be thwarted. At times there may be the appearance that he is losing the contest, but he is merely holding back his muscles to roll out his plan demonstrating loving grace in the most glorious way. Now mankind, however, is running away from God. Their will is to follow Adam and Eve and hide behind their fig leaves. The good news is that both God and man are persons with will, but the will of God prevails over the will of man! Happy day!
Right you are, Jeff.
So for you, does that fact imply that God might be a non-person? Hmmmm… I wonder how a non-person could have spoken to Adam, to Abraham, and to Jesus?
No, Christ said He would like to gather Israel AS a hen gathers her brood. But God literally is spirit.
Metaphorically, without using words “like” or “as” God is said to have feathers. Of course spirit doesn’t literally have feathers. Psalm 91:4 involves using a metaphor. Yes, we do have brains for a reason. Some just use it more than others. 
The Bible says “God speaks to us using His Son.” Jesus is the Word of God. He is God’s mouthpiece. God did not speak to Adam or Abraham but He spoke to them using intermediaries. It may say “God visited them” but He visited them through intermediaries. The Bible says “No one has ever seen God.” Why? Because God is invisible spirit. But people have seen representations of God via Jesus Who is the image of God.
The Bible says “God is not a man.”
Are you saying then that Jesus is not very God?
The Bible doesn’t call angels “persons,” unless, of course, they are human messengers. John the Baptist was called an angel but more literally he was a “messenger.” It would be better to call angels “beings.” We humans are called “human beings.”
The bible never calls God or the holy spirit a “person.” Neither should we. God is intangible spirit and power.
Good points on God’s sovereignty to save all. However, Scripurally speaking, man often goes against God’s will. However, in so doing they unwittingly fulfill His intention. No one has withstood His intention (Rom.9:19).
Jesus has a God. He said so. Jesus is allowed to carry the title “God” because He is the perfect image OF God. However, Jesus always insists He has a God and so cannot be THAT God. If you have E-sword with the Concordant Literal New Testament loaded into it, do a search for “my God.”
The Bible never says Jesus is “very God.”
Yet more falsehoods…
And read the rest of the account Eusebius… 
Welcome to the world of crazy theology. 
Search revealed this…
Thomas worshiped Jesus as God, not merely as the vicar or image of God. Further, Paul called Christ God in Romans 9:5 and elsewhere.
Eusebius, following this forum would be a great challenge to create a fellowship based on everyone’s unique understandings of the truth. For example, you and I have great agreement on the sovereignty of God over all including his sovereignty over evil. In fact most posting in this forum disagree with our mutual agreement on that point. Yet sadly we part ways in our understanding of the person-hood and diety of the Trinity. Please consider that the word ‘person’ does not even need to be in the Bible for us to use it in our discussion. We can define the concept of a ‘person’ and then consider who fits the description.
You say
Yet He calls himself our Heavenly Father. God is not a mere force, but he has mind, will, emotion, and personality. He is a personal God, one of his main distinctions from Allah. Further the point of the incarnation is the tangibility of God, 1 John 1:1-4. The first major Christian heresy was the Gnostics who rejected the incarnation.
Now I want to remove all offense from this next statement, but I am familiar with a lot of the angle you come from and much of it is from Knoch who wrote “All in All” and lead out with the Concordant Bible. I have the Concordant Bible on my bookshelf and highly respect this initiative. I am actually engaged in a very similar Bible translation work personally right now and would welcome help from any who are interested 
. I have also read “All and All” and written a balanced review. For myself I have gained much from Knoch, but I have not become a Knochite! Knoch has much to contribute to the salvation of all discussion, but in my opinion he also muddies the waters on a host of issues, including his rejection of the Trinity. Could I challenge you to round out your reading by weighing Knoch against the ideas of others? Check out my own reading list at dgjc.org/optimism/book-reviews.
Actually, Jeff, I find your theology a bit more digestible, then that of Eusebius. Having said that, I see where Eusebius adopts his theology. We just need to look at the Wiki article at Adolph Ernst Knoch:
http://wp.patheos.com.s3.amazonaws.com/blogs/nakedpastor/files/2012/07/theology-god.jpg
The problem comes when one person (I.e. Knoch, Jeff), tries creating a bible translation. Same problem comes with the Jevevoh Witnesses bible translation. The way the big six (i.e. NIV, KJV, NKJV, ESV, NASB and NLT) minimize bias, is they have translators from different church denominations. And they need to arrive at a consensus.
In fact, you will find a strong criticism of his work at A.E. KNOCH’S ERRORS IN DOCTRINE. Let me highlight some key elements, the author expands upon:
And he even causes major disagreements with other universalists. Like the one at The Unknown Character of Christ and His Word. And the author goes on to explain the scriptural and theological differences.
Hopefully discussion continues in iron sharpening fashion to grow towards the truth and not simply to enjoy sectarian victories. Frankly that is exactly what lead to Knoch’s sectarian following. Christian truth actually may not be that digestible, but instead both a poison pill to kill the old man and vitamin to bring the new man to life. So instead, lets challenge one another to know Christ better and to make Him known. Personally I also think it is fair discussion to say that one does not think another view or even another person is Christian as long as the discussion proceeds with gentleness and respect. We are big boys and girls here and so hopefully can speak honestly and truthfully even if painfully, but hopefully still courteously. Yes, Christ did use a whip, but I am not convinced that he whipped people, but only drove the cattle from the temple, though of course he was willing to upset people as we all know.
The point is that no one was ever won to Christ by a punch in the face. Instead I am confident that the Lord Christ has forgiven my sin and also the sins of all mankind. I hope my discussion here only ever serves to promote that message and court any unbelieving to share this joy.
Yahweh spoke to Adam through Jesus. “God no one has ever seen.” Adam spoke with Jesus. Adam saw Jesus. Jesus created all on the earth and so is the God spoken of in Genesis.
HFPZ quoted:
“Knoch’s views on what happens to a person at death are different from the teachings of most other Christians: “Unless our Lord comes, the souls of all believers will return to hades, as their spirits return to God, and the bodies return to the soil. Death is still a return. Our bodies came from the soil and may return thither. Our spirits came from God and must return to Him. Our souls came from hades (“hell!”) and they cannot possibly return elsewhere!”[1]”
Knoch didn’t teach our souls came from hades (“hell”). He taught that “soul” is the result of body and spirit coming together such as when Adam was created. First, he was formed flesh and then God (Jesus) breathed into Adam spirit and the Bible says: “Adam became a living soul.”
Just before Jesus met up with Thomas He told Mary to tell the disciples “I am ascending to My God and your God” (John 20:17). Jesus’s God and the disciples’ God was in heaven while Jesus was on the earth.
“God” is merely a title, an office. It is one who subjects or places. Jesus was Thomas’ subjector or placer. Jesus told Thomas He is not his God prior to this meeting. So Thomas’ words must be understood in light of what Jesus said, not the other way around.
That’s okay, it won’t always be that way that we disagree. Until the day when we do agree, we need to keep “the unity of the spirit with the tie of peace.”
You say
I never said God is a force. God is spirit. He is intangible and inaudible. That is why He needs Jesus to reveal Him as His Word and Image. Yes God has feelings and is wise and thinks etc.
[size=150]God sent His Son into the world. God did not send Himself.[/size]
Since “Trinity” is not in the Bible, why do you consider it something I should believe in? And since it was crafted as a political statement to keep the Arians out of the early church from re-gaining control, that should tell you something as to its sordid origin.