Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Don't rise to it, mate. Where he loses in valid facts, he gains in challenging you to force him to accept them. I always found it best to leave it to others, because that's really what it is all about, and leaveing him shouting "I win" to an audience that knows he lost, is a bit of a hoot. Now back to the Elohim debate...if anyone even cares.
This is not a game to win or lose. It is about discussing various views. How do you determine which facts valid? Let me guess, if you agree, they are valid; if you disagree, they are not. How self serving.
I am torn - see what Insane and Cupper pointed out. There is good in that. But there is also a power that you give to radical Fundamentalists when you acknowledge that any of their concerns are worth considering. They excused themselves from the ongoing religious/philosophical discourse that has been happening for hundreds of years, by their very creation little over a hundred years ago.
What is the difference between a radical fundamentalist and a radical secularists?
That fact that Christians continue to debate the subject indicates they have not excused themselves. Actually it is the "know it all" PC secularists who think the have won and have excused themselves.
See my note above in the entry from DDD. Before you set out to offer examples "proving" your view, make sure your view is at least built upon a foundation that acknowledges what we know about the term ʾĕlōhîm in the Bible and other cognate languages.
What do you think Elohim means that I do not understand. For Biblical purposes, all I need to understand is that it is a plural noun. Then it is necessary to know why God used a plural noun for one of His names. What does that teach us. IMO it points to the Trinity. If you don't accept that, that's fine with me. In a forum, everyone, gets to express what they believe and why their believe it.
I think you've missed the fact that the Hebrew Bible uses the word ʾĕlōhîm in different ways. That is why I offered the very short citation from the DDD. If you wish to confirm the conclusions of the DDD, then there are a few Biblical references supplied. I think it's harmful to one's exegesis ("critical explanation or interpretation of a text, especially of scripture") if you focus on one meaning and claim that it is "all [you] need to understand".
I already noted that the idea of the Trinity can work within the framework of ancient Israelite beliefs of deity - as the Hebrew Bible frequently shows evidence that God can exhibit an hypostasis (a part of himself manifests itself). See Benjamin Somner's The Bodies of God and the World of Ancient Israel (2011 Cambridge) or his lectures here: https://biblicalstudiesonline.wordpr...-on-gods-body/. You would find much to support the Trinitarian possibility there.
But it is only a possibility - the concept of the Trinity is never explicitly stated within the Hebrew Bible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by omega2xx
While the word trinity is not in the Bible , it concept is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by omega2xx
"Elohim" is a plural noun with a singular meaning. Then Gen 1:16 God says let US make man in OUR image...
Who is the US and OUR?
This is a complex question that cannot be competently summed up without a fuller investigation of what the word ʾĕlōhîm meant to the Biblical authors and the ancient Israelites. I offered several beginning points to expand one's understanding of it (the DDD entry and the link to D. McClellan's thread on it). To try to skip the above and jump straight to later Christian ideas of the Trinity that are largely post-Biblical... is not a good basis for interpreting the Word. Any Biblical exegete worth their salt will tell you this. This is why in Seminars they teach Biblical Hebrew and other cognate languages from the ancient Near East. Insane pointed this out:
Quote:
Originally Posted by InsaneInDaMembrane
Omega, you are making the classic Christian mistake of reading LATER Christian theology back into ancient Hebrew theology...
Quote:
Originally Posted by omega2xx
Jn 1:1 says "in the beginning was the Word...and the Word was God. Then 1:14 identifies the Word as Jesus.
Acts 5:3 says Ananias lied to the Holy Spirit. Then verse 4 says he lied to God.
Jn 10:30 - I(Jesus) and the Father are one.
Jn 14:9 - ...He who has seen Me(Jesus) has seen the Father.
There are a couple more but you are not going to believe any of them, so I will stop here.
Unfortunately, it is dangerous to use later Christian and Platonic ideas of Trinitarianism to interpret a text produced by ancient Israelites.
Quote:
Originally Posted by omega2xx
If have quoted verse to support what I believe and I have offered my opinions. It seems like that is all you do. Why is yours substantive and mine are not? I have been in various forums for many years and not one has ever said my posts were not substantive. I think you make such a foolish accusation because the refute what you say.
The verses you have offered have not been convincing, and unfortunately are based on unsound hermeneutical principles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by omega2xx
IMO it points to the Trinity. If you don't accept that, that's fine with me. In a forum, everyone, gets to express what they believe and why their believe it.
You are free to believe anything you want, of course. But the evidence that the word ʾĕlōhîm "proves" the Trinity is just not there. This does not negate the Trinity! It simply means that we are unable to use the word ʾĕlōhîm to prove it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by omega2xx
Those are comments based on one thing. You think your view is right and mine is not. You have not offered any reasons why I am wrong. Same with Insane. Don't tell me my view is ignorant, show me. Otherwise all you are doing is pontificating. What basics am I ignoring? Why are they basics? What qualifies you to make such determinations? So far you have not impressed me as an expert in the subject of this discussion. Why should I take your word that my view is ignorant and yous is not?
What is your view? You have not mentioned that yet , but I need to know so I can evaluate it. The chances are I will disagree with your view, but I will tell you why. I may say it is wrong, but I will not call it ignorant and I will tell you why.
I'm not interested in proving that one view is better than another. I'm interested in what the evidence can show us. My beliefs must follow the evidence. Offering one's own beliefs is not evidence, however. As for basics, I've already pointed out what is missing. You don't have to take my word for it. Ask anyone who has been to Seminary or University and has spent their life dedicated to the subject, especially in an academic setting. I've already given some references and citations. Again, see the thread of D. McClellan to broaden your "basics".
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,928,903 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by omega2xx
If you know of anything in the Bible that is not accurate, feel free to post it. Perhaps your problems is a lack of understanding.
Oh, let's start with that the sun will not "stand still". Or the earth stop spinning, which is that only way the sun COULD appear to stand still is IF the earth could stand still.
Wait, is that Eusebius??? If that is the case, Whoppers, feel free to drop the silent treatment of you so desire. I failed to mention in my plea to you to be patient was that a fundy, I was NEVER rude to anyone or gave off that smug attitude. When that happens, well, let the chips fall where they may.
Ok, my bad. Funny enough, I have not had much back and forth with Eusebius in recent years. I've forgotten his writing style.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
