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.
The SPIRIT of GOD moved upon the face of the water and GOD SAID let there........
There it is: God = Father - Spirit=Holy Ghost - Said = Word
If YOU move your SELF, and SPEAK, do you become 3 persons?
If you don't become 3 people, then why does God become 3 people?
This is what makes us look like fools in the eyes of the Jew, Muslim, and the rest of the world.
The Trinity is just another pagan tradition like Christmas trees, Easter bunnies, bowing down to Idols / Saints, Mother of God,and on and on ............ Learn not the way of the heathen, for their customs are vain.
Echad is simply a different spelling of ’e·ḥāḏ - אֶחָֽד׃. Since you've now indicated that nothing forbids ’e·ḥāḏ in Deut. 6:4 from having the meaning of a united one, you can't argue that it absolutely doesn't.
Actually, I said that it would have been possible for Moses to use echad/achod/aichod/ehad (it's not an English word so there is no standardized English transliteration) to mean unity if that had been his point, but it wasn't. As I have said unity as a meaning for the word "one" demands a context in which someone or something is identified as the one being unified to. There is no such context to this verse, and the actual point of the verse is to warn Israel against returning to any affiliation with the false gods they knew of in Egypt, and that is why singularity not unity is the context.
I made no suggestion in post #227 that their hearts caused them to miss the point.
Actually, your right about this. I was confusing one of Rbb1's comments with yours, my apologies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
The unity is that of the three 'Persons' who are the one God. Therefore, of course no one else is mentioned.
Unfortunately, you cannot brush off the need for specific mention of the person or persons supposedly being united to. You are citing information not entered into evidence. The Jews knew of no other persons in the Godhead, and therefore they couldn't have been expected to have this as knowledge with which to guide their understanding of echad in this verse. Therefore, since the Almighty God would certainly have been aware that the Jews had no prior knowledge of His supposed three person status, what you are saying is that God, knowing that the Jews were not possessed of the knowledge necessary for them to come to the conclusion that He was speaking of Unity and not singularity, decided to leave them in the dark even though His being clear about what He was getting at would have ended their confusion and given them a clear understanding of him. You make God out to be a trickster who is going to punish them for not knowing information about Himself that He never gave them! This is asinine!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
And the point is that since the word ’e·ḥāḏ can refer to a united one, that meaning cannot be ruled out in Deut. 6:4.
That's ridiculous and completely illogical. In order for it to be "ruled out" it would first have to be ruled in. You have provided no evidence that the Jews could have reasonably been expected to have this understanding and thus be able to form this conclusion of unity to anyone, let alone two persons of a godhead they were completely unaware of, which is good since they don't exist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
The language is that of the word ’e·ḥāḏ carrying the meaning of two or more being a united one as in Genesis 2:24 which uses ’e·ḥāḏ to describe the man and woman as one. A united one.
Wow, this is getting really redundant. First of all, you have merely asserted that the language of Deuteronomy 6:4 carries the meaning of being united. You have produced no evidence to support this conclusion. Simply continuing to reassert the same point over and over again does not show that it is true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
That meaning cannot be ruled out in Deut. 6:4 since Moses spoke of God in a plural sense in Genesis 1:26 ''Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness;'
You also have only asserted, that Moses spoke of God in a plural sense in Genesis 1:26. You have not shown this to be true. The most common understanding of this language (especially since no persons that He is speaking to are identified in the verse) is that this is language spoken in the plural of Majesty. Just as a King or Queen might be imagined saying something like "We are not amused" or "Our patience is being tested by this knave" when they are actually referring to themselves only. This is for the purpose of magnifying their position above those they are speaking to. And likewise God uses this language, not to identify His plurality, but to magnify His Glory and Majesty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
As I pointed out in post #227, Terullian recognized the plurality of God indicated in Gen. 1:26
You must be cutting and pasting, because that is the second time you have misspelled Tertullian. What Tertullian believed is of no consequence to me. Tertullian, just as all the supposed "Church Fathers" was a fallible man and what He wrote was not God breathed. The "Church Fathers" believed many things that have no basis in scripture, and their writings quite often disagree with each other on a wide variety of subjects. I place no stock in what Tertullian or any of the supposed Church Fathers had to say, just as I put no stock in post Biblical creeds. They are men's opinions that I can take or leave, mostly leave!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
While the New Testament more clearly shows the fact that there are three 'Persons' in the Godhead, verses such as Genesis 1:26 suggest a plurality in the Godhead.
The New Testament doesn't show any such fact. Your extra biblical creeds provide a pre-conception that shapes (corrupts) your understanding of what scripture says, but there is no statement to the affect of a three person God in scripture. This idea must be pieced together from widely dispersed verses that are read through the lens of your creed informed indoctrination.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
And no, the Jews in Old Testament times did not have a clear understanding of God, since God more clearly revealed Himself through Jesus, and through the apostles.
There is nothing in scripture that suggests that the Jews did not understand who and what God is. There are a number of things they didn't understand, such as the "sacred secret" (Musterion) that the Gentiles would be grafted into the stock of Israel, but who God is, is not one of their Misunderstandings. This is your biased belief, but it is not said anywhere in scripture.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
Your scholar is entitled to his opinion, but the New Testament writers, themselves Jews with the probable exception of Luke, understood and identified three 'Persons' as God. Not as other gods, or lesser gods, but as God.
It's not my scholar. Gesenius was a world renowned Hebrew Scholar, whose classic Hebrew Chaldee Lexicon is the basis of the Brown Driver Briggs lexicon used by nearly everyone. He also authored a famous Hebrew Grammar text of similar renown. You'd be hard pressed to find anyone to criticize his authority on the subject. Once again, you are asserting things you have not proven to be factual. You cannot prove or even show a single statement that identifies any of the Apostles or disciples as being believers in a three person God. There is no "God" in scripture, there is only "god." Capitalization is an English convention not found in scripture. The word god is Elohim, which means "mighty one" and it applies to angels, Satan, judges, spiritual leaders, and other men of authority. There is no statement in scripture that says that God is three persons. Once again, you piece that idea together. I don't believe in a Trinity so why would I say that they are called "gods" or lesser Gods? As Jesus said, "The Father is the only one who is true God" all others are therefore gods (collectively) in a lesser sense. This is a fact that you ignore or try to mitigate. Jesus said only the father is true God. He didn't say the Father and myself and the Holy Spirit are all the only God. Only His father is called true God which is another way of saying God Almighty the creator. All others who are called god, are god in a lesser sense. Jesus is never called the Almighty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
There has been no double talk.
It is not that God is united with someone else. The unity, the tri-unity is between the three 'Persons' of the Godhead. The tri-unity is between the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
I'm sorry, but this itself is double talk. You are conveniently ignoring that it is specifically Yahweh that this verse refers to. You ARE saying that Yahweh is united to someone else i.e. the other two persons of the Trinity. A person is a someone is it not? There is always double talk involved in defending the Trinity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
And again, since Moses did use language indicating that God is a plurality in Genesis 1:26, his use of the word ’e·ḥāḏ in Deut. 6:4 can certainly refer to God being a united one.
Moses language is the Plural of Majesty as most honest Trinitarians will agree, and does not refer to unity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
I'll end this post by reposting what Tertullian had to say about the plurality of God which is suggested in the Old Testament.
CHAPTER 12 -- OTHER QUOTATIONS FROM HOLY SCRIPTURE ADDUCED IN PROOF OF THE PLURALITY OF PERSONS IN THE GODHEAD.
If the number of the Trinity also offends you, as if it were not connected in the simple Unity, I ask you how it is possible for a Being who is merely and absolutely One and Singular, to speak in plural phrase, saying, "Let us make man in our own image, and after our own likeness;" whereas He ought to have said, "Let me make man in my own image, and after my own likeness," as being a unique and singular Being? In the following passage, however, "Behold the man is become as one of us," He is either deceiving or amusing us in speaking plurally, if He is One only and singular. Or was it to the angels that He spoke, as the Jews interpret the passage, because these also acknowledge not the Son? Or was it because He was at once the Father, the Son, and the Spirit, that He spoke to Himself in plural terms, making Himself plural on that very account? Nay, it was because He had already His Son close at His side, as a second Person, His own Word, and a third Person also, the Spirit in the Word, that He purposely adopted the plural phrase, "Let us make;" and, "in our image;" and, "become as one of us." For with whom did He make man? and to whom did He make him like? (The answer must be), the Son on the one hand, who was one day to put on human nature; and the Spirit on the other, who was to sanctify man. With these did He then speak, in the Unity of the Trinity, as with His ministers and witnesses In the following text also He distinguishes among the Persons: "So God created man in His own image; in the image of God created He him." Tertullian (Roberts-Donaldson)
100% unsupported opinion. Nobody can be their own authority!
Introduction
One of the most frequently recited verses in Scripture is Deuteronomy 6:4. In other words, that verse is spoken – out loud from memory – on an extremely frequent basis. For example, observant Orthodox Jews will recite that verse at least twice a day – once in the morning, and once in the evening.
The Hebrew in that verse is pronounced as follows:
Sh’ma Yis’ra’eil Adonai Eloheinu Adonai echad.
Here is the translation of that verse, from the ESV:
“Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.
All of the other common English translations of the Bible have extremely similar renderings of that verse.
Deuteronomy 6:4 is sometimes referred to as “the sh’ma” (or “the shema”) – since it is referenced so frequently.
Interestingly, Jesus himself also recited the sh’ma. Note the following passage:
Mark 12:28-30 (ESV):
28 And one of the scribes came up and heard them disputing with one another, and seeing that he answered them well, asked him, “Which commandment is the most important of all?” 29 Jesus answered, “The most important is, ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. 30 And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’
At this point, the obvious question is: why is that verse recited so frequently? The general answer to that question is that the sh’ma very succinctly summarizes the difference between the God of the Bible – Yahweh – and the pagan gods of other religions. Basically, that verse explicitly states that there is only ONEAlmighty God. This is in stark contrast to the multiple, competing gods, in the pantheons of most other religions.
As a result, reciting the sh’ma is a very simple, convenient way for a person to re-confirm that he believes in the God of the Bible – rather than believing in multiple, pagan gods.
The Hebrew word “echad”
The very last word in the sh’ma is the Hebrew word echad. That word is rendered as “one” in most English translations of the Bible; some translations use “alone” instead. In either case, the straightforward, common-sense understanding of echad in the sh’ma tells us that only one person is Almighty God – and that one person is our Heavenly Father – Yahweh.
Some groups have an alternate belief about echad, though. In essence, those groups assert that echad refers to a “compound unity”. In other words, they believe that echad refers to one group, which contains multiple members. For example, they state that echad means “one” as in “one baseball team”; as opposed to “one” as in “one chair”.
So, according to that understanding of echad, the sh’ma could be translated this way:
“Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is a compound unity.
Of course, the reason why this alternate understanding of echad is important is because it allows some groups to “spin” the sh’ma – into an endorsement for the Trinity! In other words, some groups state the following: “The sh’ma tells us that God is one. That is true – but that “one” refers to a compound unity. So, the sh’ma is telling us that there is only one God – but He is comprised of multiple persons.”
How is echad actually used in Scripture?
The crux of the above argument is that “echad” refers to a “compound unity”. Of course, in order to determine if that argument has any merit, it is necessary to examine how that word is actually used in Scripture.
The word echad (and its feminine version achat) appears 970 times in Scripture. In the vast majority of cases – over 600 times – the word echad explicitly refers to a simple, unitaryone. In other words, in almost every case, echad refers to one single item – rather than to one group of items.
This concept is usually expressed in English translations with the word “one”; but the words “single”, “unique” and “first” are used as well, depending on the context. Here are some examples of echad meaning a simple, unitary one:
And God said, “Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one (echad) place, and let the dry land appear.” And it was so. (Genesis 1:9, ESV)
So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one (achat) of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh. (Genesis 2:21, ESV)
We are all sons of one (echad) man. We are honest men. Your servants have never been spies.” (Genesis 42:11, ESV)
“My servant David shall be king over them, and they shall all have one (echad) shepherd. They shall walk in my rules and be careful to obey my statutes. (Ezekiel 37:24, ESV)
It [the Passover meal] is to be eaten in a single (echad) house (Exodus 12:46, NASB)
I will remove the iniquity of this land in a single (echad) day (Zechariah 3:9, ESV)
For it will be a unique (echad) day which is known to the Lord (Zechariah 14:7, ESV) But my dove, my perfect one, is unique (achat) (Song of Solomon 6:9, NASB)
The name of the first (echad) [river] is Pishon; it flows around the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold. (Genesis 2:11, ESV)
And the waters continued to abate until the tenth month; in the tenth month, on the first (echad) day of the month, the tops of the mountains were seen. (Genesis 8:5, ESV)
Clearly, all of the above examples refer to one single person, place or thing – not to one group of items.
What about these cases?
As mentioned, in the vast majority of cases, echad refers to one single item. However, in a small minority of cases, echad refers to one group of items. Here are three examples of this:
Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one (echad) flesh. (Genesis 2:24, ESV)
God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first (echad) day. (Genesis 1:5, ESV)
And they came to the Valley of Eshcol and cut down from there a branch with a single (echad) cluster of grapes (Numbers 13:23, ESV)
Here is a “summary” of the above examples:
Example 1: Echad is used to describe a husband and a wife – together – as one flesh. Example 2: Echad is used to describe an evening and a morning – together – as the first day. Example 3: Echad is used to describe a singlecluster of grapes.
Some groups point to those specificexamples, to try to prove that echad – in the sh’ma – refers to the Trinity. In other words, they assert the following:
Echad, in the sh’ma, is used to describe the Father, Son and Holy Spirit – together – as one God.
However, is the above assertion really true? Do the three examples listed above actually describe the doctrine of the Trinity?
Consider those three examples again. In example 1, Scripture states that a husband and wife – together – become “one flesh”. This means that the husband – by himself – does not fully comprise the one flesh; and that the wife – by herself – also does notfully comprise the one flesh. Instead, the husband and the wife, by themselves, are only parts – or “halves” – of the one flesh.
Similarly, in example 2, Scripture states that an evening and a morning – together – became the “first day”. This means that the evening – by itself – does notfully comprise the first day; and that the morning – by itself – also does notfully comprise the first day. Instead, the evening and the morning – by themselves – are only “subsets” of the first day.
The same principle applies to example 3. One single grape – by itself – does not fully comprise the entire cluster; one grape is just a single member – a subset – of a cluster of grapes.
The reason why the above items are important is because the doctrine of the Trinity asserts the following:
The Father is fully God, the Son is fully God, and the Holy Spirit is fully God. However, there are not three Gods, but one God.
Of course, that doctrine is entirely differentthan the examples provided above. Consider example 1 again – it states that the husband and the wife – by themselves – are NOTfully the “one flesh”. The Trinity doctrine, though, states that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit – by themselves – ARE fully the “one God”.
To make the contrast even more clear, consider the following: In order to cause example 2 to agree with the Trinity doctrine, Scripture would have to say something like this:
The evening fully comprised one entire day, and the morning fully comprised one entire day. However, there were not two days, but one day.
Of course, the above assertion is pure nonsense. What Scripture actually states is that the evening was just part of the day, and the morning was just part of the day – and that the two of them, together, comprised one full day.
Now, consider this: In order to cause the Trinity concept to agree with the examples above, one would have to say something like this:
The Father is “one third” of God, the Son is “one third” of God, and the Holy Spirit is “one third” of God; and the three of them – together – comprise one God.
However, most Trinity proponents strongly disagree with the above statement. This is because they are completely focused on the idea that each “person” of the Trinity is fully God – and that there are not three Gods, but one God. That concept is not expressedby the word echad at all – not in any of the places where it appears in Scripture.
Conclusion
Some mainstream expositors make the following type of blunt assertion, whenever they discuss the sh’ma: Echad means a compound unity – period.
The implication of that assertion, of course, is that echad only means a compound unity. In other words, that assertion implies that in every case where echad is used, it always refers to one group of items – rather than to one single item. However, as mentioned above, in the vast majority of cases, echad actually refers to just one single item.
So, the implication that echad always refers to a “compound unity” is demonstrably false.
Not only that, but even in the minority of cases where echad does refer to a compound unity, the meaning still does not conform to the doctrine of the Trinity. Basically, in the cases where echad refers to one group of items, it is clear that each member of the group is only a subset of the listed “compound unity”.
For example, Scripture states that a husband and a wife – together – become “one flesh”. This indicates that the husband and wife are each “subsets” of the one flesh – but that together they comprise a “complete” one flesh. This is the opposite of the Trinity doctrine – which states that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are eachfully God – but there is still just one God.
The final item to note is that many other passages in Scripture state that only our Heavenly Father is Almighty God. That, in turn, tells us that echad – in the sh’ma – refers to just one person: our Heavenly Father.
First of all, note that the phrase “God the Father” does appear in Scripture – in many places – but the phrases “God the Son” and “God the Holy Spirit” do NOT appear anywhere in Scripture. The terms that actually do appear in Scripture are the Son ofGod and the Spirit of God.
Next, consider the two passages below. In the first, Jesus himself states that our Heavenly Father is the only true God, while Jesus is the one who was sent by God. Similarly, Paul tells us that the Father is our God – while Jesus is our Lord – i.e., our “master”, or “boss”:
John 17:1-3 (ESV):
1 When Jesus had spoken these words, he lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, “Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you, 2 since you have given him authority over all flesh, to give eternal life to all whom you have given him. 3 And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent. 1 Corinthians 8:5-6 (ESV):
5 For although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth—as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”— 6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.
Finally, Jesus explicitly denied that he was Almighty God; and he even stated that our Heavenly Father was his God – just like He is our God. Consider the following passages:
Mark 10:17-18 (ESV):
17 And as he [Jesus] was setting out on his journey, a man ran up and knelt before him and asked him, “Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” 18 And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone. John 20:17 (ESV):
17 Jesus said to her, “Do not cling to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’”
The information in this post will hopefully prove useful, if one encounters the argument of “Echad in the sh’ma proves the Trinity”.
Actually, I said that it would have been possible for Moses to use echad/achod/aichod/ehad (it's not an English word so there is no standardized English transliteration) to mean unity if that had been his point, but it wasn't.
No, that is not what you said. What you said was, ''If Moses had wanted to suggest unified plurality in the Godhood, or unification with the people he could have used echad/one to mean unified if that was his point.''
And Moses DID use the word echad in Deut. 6:4.
Furthermore, you didn't realize that 'echad' and 'ehad' were the same word as indicated by the fact that you replied to my use of ’e·ḥāḏ by saying in post #229, ''If Moses had wanted to suggest unified plurality in the Godhood, or unification with the people he could have used echad/one to mean unified if that was his point.''
Quote:
As I have said unity as a meaning for the word "one" demands a context in which someone or something is identified as the one being unified to. There is no such context to this verse, and the actual point of the verse is to warn Israel against returning to any affiliation with the false gods they knew of in Egypt, and that is why singularity not unity is the context. Unfortunately, you cannot brush off the need for specific mention of the person or persons supposedly being united to.
In other words, you are now contradicting your earlier statement in which you implied that you didn't think that anything forbids Deut. 6:4 from implying a plurality in the Godhead. At the beginning of post #229 you said, ''I didn't say there was anything that forbids it did I?'' in reply to my statement in post #227 ''There is nothing in the context of Deuteronomy 6 that forbids the word ’e·ḥāḏ from referring to a plurality of 'Persons' within the Godhead in which that plurality is one God in a united sense.''
It is not that the word ’e·ḥāḏ in Deut. 6:4 could be implying that God is united to someone or something apart from Himself, but that there is a plurality within the Godhead in which the three 'Persons' within the Godhead are united as one God.
Quote:
You are citing information not entered into evidence. The Jews knew of no other persons in the Godhead, and therefore they couldn't have been expected to have this as knowledge with which to guide their understanding of echad in this verse. Therefore, since the Almighty God would certainly have been aware that the Jews had no prior knowledge of His supposed three person status, what you are saying is that God, knowing that the Jews were not possessed of the knowledge necessary for them to come to the conclusion that He was speaking of Unity and not singularity, decided to leave them in the dark even though His being clear about what He was getting at would have ended their confusion and given them a clear understanding of him. You make God out to be a trickster who is going to punish them for not knowing information about Himself that He never gave them! This is asinine!
Actually, you don't know the degree to which Moses himself understood God. Again, Moses, who wrote Genesis implied that God is a plurality in Genesis 1:26 when he wrote, ''Then God said, ''Let Us make man in our own image, according to Our likeness. . .''
Furthermore, even if Moses himself didn't necessarily understand exactly what that meant, he recorded what God had said. And God spoke of Himself as 'Us' and 'our' which implies a plurality.
Quote:
That's ridiculous and completely illogical. In order for it to be "ruled out" it would first have to be ruled in. You have provided no evidence that the Jews could have reasonably been expected to have this understanding and thus be able to form this conclusion of unity to anyone, let alone two persons of a godhead they were completely unaware of, which is good since they don't exist.
Refer to my comment immediately above.
Quote:
Wow, this is getting really redundant. First of all, you have merely asserted that the language of Deuteronomy 6:4 carries the meaning of being united. You have produced no evidence to support this conclusion. Simply continuing to reassert the same point over and over again does not show that it is true.
Actually, what I said in post # 210, in my reply to another poster was simply that Deut. 6:4 cannot be used to argue against the Trinity. And then you replied in argument against what I said in that post, and so I am now explaining to you that Deut. 6:4 cannot be used to argue against the Trinity, but very well could be implying plurality within the Godhead just as Genesis 1:26 does.
Quote:
You also have only asserted, that Moses spoke of God in a plural sense in Genesis 1:26. You have not shown this to be true. The most common understanding of this language (especially since no persons that He is speaking to are identified in the verse) is that this is language spoken in the plural of Majesty.
That is only YOUR assertion. The differing opinions are that 1. God was speaking to the angels. 2. God was speaking in plural of Majesty. 3. That God was speaking to the other 'Persons' within the Godhead who are a united one.
Sense it is clearly shown in the New Testament, such as in Hebrews 1 where God the Father is speaking to the Son and stating that it was the Son who created the heavens and the earth, and in Romans 8:27 where Paul states that the Father knows the mind of the Spirit, and that the Spirit intercedes on behalf of believers, this demonstates plurality within the Godhead. And in John 1:1 where the Word is declared to not only be God Himself, but to be with God. John 1:1 is demonstrating two 'Persons' within the Godhead. These three passages, Hebrews chapter one, Romans 8:27, and John 1:1 clearly show God to be a plurality of 'Persons' while being one in terms of His nature or essence. Therefore, Genesis 1:26 refers to a plurality.
Quote:
You must be cutting and pasting, because that is the second time you have misspelled Tertullian. What Tertullian believed is of no consequence to me. Tertullian, just as all the supposed "Church Fathers" was a fallible man and what He wrote was not God breathed. The "Church Fathers" believed many things that have no basis in scripture, and their writings quite often disagree with each other on a wide variety of subjects. I place no stock in what Tertullian or any of the supposed Church Fathers had to say, just as I put no stock in post Biblical creeds. They are men's opinions that I can take or leave, mostly leave!
No kidding? Of course I cut and pasted the quote of Tertullian. Here. I will quote him again. And I didn't misspell Tertullian twice. I accidentally left out the second 't' in Tertullian in post #227. That's one misspelling.
CHAPTER 12 -- OTHER QUOTATIONS FROM HOLY SCRIPTURE ADDUCED IN PROOF OF THE PLURALITY OF PERSONS IN THE GODHEAD.
If the number of the Trinity also offends you, as if it were not connected in the simple Unity, I ask you how it is possible for a Being who is merely and absolutely One and Singular, to speak in plural phrase, saying, "Let us make man in our own image, and after our own likeness;" whereas He ought to have said, "Let me make man in my own image, and after my own likeness," as being a unique and singular Being? In the following passage, however, "Behold the man is become as one of us," He is either deceiving or amusing us in speaking plurally, if He is One only and singular. Or was it to the angels that He spoke, as the Jews interpret the passage, because these also acknowledge not the Son? Or was it because He was at once the Father, the Son, and the Spirit, that He spoke to Himself in plural terms, making Himself plural on that very account? Nay, it was because He had already His Son close at His side, as a second Person, His own Word, and a third Person also, the Spirit in the Word, that He purposely adopted the plural phrase, "Let us make;" and, "in our image;" and, "become as one of us."
You may leave Tertullian's opinion if you wish, and your opinion is just as easily disregarded as nothing but your opinion. You've been shown from the above mentioned New Testament passages that there is a plurality within the Godhead. Those passages again are, Hebrews chapter one, Romans 8:27, and John 1:1.
Quote:
The New Testament doesn't show any such fact. Your extra biblical creeds provide a pre-conception that shapes (corrupts) your understanding of what scripture says, but there is no statement to the affect of a three person God in scripture. This idea must be pieced together from widely dispersed verses that are read through the lens of your creed informed indoctrination.
The New Testament absolutely does show a plurality within the Godhead. I've already pointed out Hebrews chapter one, Romans 8:27, and John 1:1.
Quote:
There is nothing in scripture that suggests that the Jews did not understand who and what God is. There are a number of things they didn't understand, such as the "sacred secret" (Musterion) that the Gentiles would be grafted into the stock of Israel, but who God is, is not one of their Misunderstandings. This is your biased belief, but it is not said anywhere in scripture.
Everyone has some degree of bias. That includes you. Since Jesus more clearly revealed who and what the Father is, it stands to reason that the Jews in Old Testament times didn't have the same degree of understanding about God that was possible to have after Jesus came.
Quote:
It's not my scholar. Gesenius was a world renowned Hebrew Scholar, whose classic Hebrew Chaldee Lexicon is the basis of the Brown Driver Briggs lexicon used by nearly everyone. He also authored a famous Hebrew Grammar text of similar renown. You'd be hard pressed to find anyone to criticize his authority on the subject. Once again, you are asserting things you have not proven to be factual. You cannot prove or even show a single statement that identifies any of the Apostles or disciples as being believers in a three person God. There is no "God" in scripture, there is only "god." Capitalization is an English convention not found in scripture. The word god is Elohim, which means "mighty one" and it applies to angels, Satan, judges, spiritual leaders, and other men of authority. There is no statement in scripture that says that God is three persons. Once again, you piece that idea together. I don't believe in a Trinity so why would I say that they are called "gods" or lesser Gods? As Jesus said, "The Father is the only one who is true God" all others are therefore gods (collectively) in a lesser sense. This is a fact that you ignore or try to mitigate. Jesus said only the father is true God. He didn't say the Father and myself and the Holy Spirit are all the only God. Only His father is called true God which is another way of saying God Almighty the creator. All others who are called god, are god in a lesser sense. Jesus is never called the Almighty.
Again, it's your scholar against the New Testament writers who clearly show a plurality within the Godhead.
Quote:
I'm sorry, but this itself is double talk. You are conveniently ignoring that it is specifically Yahweh that this verse refers to. You ARE saying that Yahweh is united to someone else i.e. the other two persons of the Trinity. A person is a someone is it not? There is always double talk involved in defending the Trinity.
No, it is not double talk. And I am not saying that Yahweh is united to someone else. I am saying that the three 'Persons' of the Godhead ARE Yahweh.
As I pointed out at the bottom of post #227,
In Hebrews chapter one, the writer of Hebrews has the Father speaking to the Son, and stating that He (the Son) laid the foundation of the earth, and that the heavens are the works of His (the Son's) hands. The Father states that the Son, the pre-incarnate Word, whose human name is Jesus created the heavens and the earth. Hebrews 1:10-12 quotes Psalm 102:25-27 which speaks of Yahweh. The writer of Hebrews applies it to Jesus. In other words, Jesus is Yahweh just as the Father is. And for that matter, just as the Holy Spirit is.
The writer of Hebrews understood that it was the pre-incarnate Word (a reference to Jesus before His incarnation) who did the actual act of creation. God created the heavens and the earth (Genesis 1:1). Jesus created the heavens and the earth. Hebrews 1:10, John 1:3, Col. 1:16.
Syllogism:
God created the heavens and the earth. Genesis 1:1
Jesus created the heavens and the earth. Hebrews 1:10, John 1:3, Col. 1:16.
Jesus is God.
And Jesus is clearly stated to be God in John 1:1 and in Hebrews chapter one.
Last edited by Michael Way; 11-19-2016 at 08:16 AM..
Introduction
One of the most frequently recited verses in Scripture is Deuteronomy 6:4. In other words, that verse is spoken – out loud from memory – on an extremely frequent basis. For example, observant Orthodox Jews will recite that verse at least twice a day – once in the morning, and once in the evening.
The Hebrew in that verse is pronounced as follows:
Sh’ma Yis’ra’eil Adonai Eloheinu Adonai echad.
Here is the translation of that verse, from the ESV:
“Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.
All of the other common English translations of the Bible have extremely similar renderings of that verse.
Deuteronomy 6:4 is sometimes referred to as “the sh’ma” (or “the shema”) – since it is referenced so frequently.
Interestingly, Jesus himself also recited the sh’ma. Note the following passage:
Mark 12:28-30 (ESV):
28 And one of the scribes came up and heard them disputing with one another, and seeing that he answered them well, asked him, “Which commandment is the most important of all?” 29 Jesus answered, “The most important is, ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. 30 And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’
At this point, the obvious question is: why is that verse recited so frequently? The general answer to that question is that the sh’ma very succinctly summarizes the difference between the God of the Bible – Yahweh – and the pagan gods of other religions. Basically, that verse explicitly states that there is only ONEAlmighty God. This is in stark contrast to the multiple, competing gods, in the pantheons of most other religions.
As a result, reciting the sh’ma is a very simple, convenient way for a person to re-confirm that he believes in the God of the Bible – rather than believing in multiple, pagan gods.
The Hebrew word “echad”
The very last word in the sh’ma is the Hebrew word echad. That word is rendered as “one” in most English translations of the Bible; some translations use “alone” instead. In either case, the straightforward, common-sense understanding of echad in the sh’ma tells us that only one person is Almighty God – and that one person is our Heavenly Father – Yahweh.
Some groups have an alternate belief about echad, though. In essence, those groups assert that echad refers to a “compound unity”. In other words, they believe that echad refers to one group, which contains multiple members. For example, they state that echad means “one” as in “one baseball team”; as opposed to “one” as in “one chair”.
So, according to that understanding of echad, the sh’ma could be translated this way:
“Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is a compound unity.
Of course, the reason why this alternate understanding of echad is important is because it allows some groups to “spin” the sh’ma – into an endorsement for the Trinity! In other words, some groups state the following: “The sh’ma tells us that God is one. That is true – but that “one” refers to a compound unity. So, the sh’ma is telling us that there is only one God – but He is comprised of multiple persons.”
How is echad actually used in Scripture?
The crux of the above argument is that “echad” refers to a “compound unity”. Of course, in order to determine if that argument has any merit, it is necessary to examine how that word is actually used in Scripture.
The word echad (and its feminine version achat) appears 970 times in Scripture. In the vast majority of cases – over 600 times – the word echad explicitly refers to a simple, unitaryone. In other words, in almost every case, echad refers to one single item – rather than to one group of items.
This concept is usually expressed in English translations with the word “one”; but the words “single”, “unique” and “first” are used as well, depending on the context. Here are some examples of echad meaning a simple, unitary one:
And God said, “Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one (echad) place, and let the dry land appear.” And it was so. (Genesis 1:9, ESV)
So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one (achat) of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh. (Genesis 2:21, ESV)
We are all sons of one (echad) man. We are honest men. Your servants have never been spies.” (Genesis 42:11, ESV)
“My servant David shall be king over them, and they shall all have one (echad) shepherd. They shall walk in my rules and be careful to obey my statutes. (Ezekiel 37:24, ESV)
It [the Passover meal] is to be eaten in a single (echad) house (Exodus 12:46, NASB)
I will remove the iniquity of this land in a single (echad) day (Zechariah 3:9, ESV)
For it will be a unique (echad) day which is known to the Lord (Zechariah 14:7, ESV) But my dove, my perfect one, is unique (achat) (Song of Solomon 6:9, NASB)
The name of the first (echad) [river] is Pishon; it flows around the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold. (Genesis 2:11, ESV)
And the waters continued to abate until the tenth month; in the tenth month, on the first (echad) day of the month, the tops of the mountains were seen. (Genesis 8:5, ESV)
Clearly, all of the above examples refer to one single person, place or thing – not to one group of items.
What about these cases?
As mentioned, in the vast majority of cases, echad refers to one single item. However, in a small minority of cases, echad refers to one group of items. Here are three examples of this:
Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one (echad) flesh. (Genesis 2:24, ESV)
God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first (echad) day. (Genesis 1:5, ESV)
And they came to the Valley of Eshcol and cut down from there a branch with a single (echad) cluster of grapes (Numbers 13:23, ESV)
Here is a “summary” of the above examples:
Example 1: Echad is used to describe a husband and a wife – together – as one flesh. Example 2: Echad is used to describe an evening and a morning – together – as the first day. Example 3: Echad is used to describe a singlecluster of grapes.
Some groups point to those specificexamples, to try to prove that echad – in the sh’ma – refers to the Trinity. In other words, they assert the following:
Echad, in the sh’ma, is used to describe the Father, Son and Holy Spirit – together – as one God.
However, is the above assertion really true? Do the three examples listed above actually describe the doctrine of the Trinity?
Consider those three examples again. In example 1, Scripture states that a husband and wife – together – become “one flesh”. This means that the husband – by himself – does not fully comprise the one flesh; and that the wife – by herself – also does notfully comprise the one flesh. Instead, the husband and the wife, by themselves, are only parts – or “halves” – of the one flesh.
Similarly, in example 2, Scripture states that an evening and a morning – together – became the “first day”. This means that the evening – by itself – does notfully comprise the first day; and that the morning – by itself – also does notfully comprise the first day. Instead, the evening and the morning – by themselves – are only “subsets” of the first day.
The same principle applies to example 3. One single grape – by itself – does not fully comprise the entire cluster; one grape is just a single member – a subset – of a cluster of grapes.
The reason why the above items are important is because the doctrine of the Trinity asserts the following:
The Father is fully God, the Son is fully God, and the Holy Spirit is fully God. However, there are not three Gods, but one God.
Of course, that doctrine is entirely differentthan the examples provided above. Consider example 1 again – it states that the husband and the wife – by themselves – are NOTfully the “one flesh”. The Trinity doctrine, though, states that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit – by themselves – ARE fully the “one God”.
To make the contrast even more clear, consider the following: In order to cause example 2 to agree with the Trinity doctrine, Scripture would have to say something like this:
The evening fully comprised one entire day, and the morning fully comprised one entire day. However, there were not two days, but one day.
Of course, the above assertion is pure nonsense. What Scripture actually states is that the evening was just part of the day, and the morning was just part of the day – and that the two of them, together, comprised one full day.
Now, consider this: In order to cause the Trinity concept to agree with the examples above, one would have to say something like this:
The Father is “one third” of God, the Son is “one third” of God, and the Holy Spirit is “one third” of God; and the three of them – together – comprise one God.
However, most Trinity proponents strongly disagree with the above statement. This is because they are completely focused on the idea that each “person” of the Trinity is fully God – and that there are not three Gods, but one God. That concept is not expressedby the word echad at all – not in any of the places where it appears in Scripture.
Conclusion
Some mainstream expositors make the following type of blunt assertion, whenever they discuss the sh’ma: Echad means a compound unity – period.
The implication of that assertion, of course, is that echad only means a compound unity. In other words, that assertion implies that in every case where echad is used, it always refers to one group of items – rather than to one single item. However, as mentioned above, in the vast majority of cases, echad actually refers to just one single item.
So, the implication that echad always refers to a “compound unity” is demonstrably false.
Not only that, but even in the minority of cases where echad does refer to a compound unity, the meaning still does not conform to the doctrine of the Trinity. Basically, in the cases where echad refers to one group of items, it is clear that each member of the group is only a subset of the listed “compound unity”.
For example, Scripture states that a husband and a wife – together – become “one flesh”. This indicates that the husband and wife are each “subsets” of the one flesh – but that together they comprise a “complete” one flesh. This is the opposite of the Trinity doctrine – which states that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are eachfully God – but there is still just one God.
The final item to note is that many other passages in Scripture state that only our Heavenly Father is Almighty God. That, in turn, tells us that echad – in the sh’ma – refers to just one person: our Heavenly Father.
First of all, note that the phrase “God the Father” does appear in Scripture – in many places – but the phrases “God the Son” and “God the Holy Spirit” do NOT appear anywhere in Scripture. The terms that actually do appear in Scripture are the Son ofGod and the Spirit of God.
Next, consider the two passages below. In the first, Jesus himself states that our Heavenly Father is the only true God, while Jesus is the one who was sent by God. Similarly, Paul tells us that the Father is our God – while Jesus is our Lord – i.e., our “master”, or “boss”:
John 17:1-3 (ESV):
1 When Jesus had spoken these words, he lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, “Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you, 2 since you have given him authority over all flesh, to give eternal life to all whom you have given him. 3 And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent. 1 Corinthians 8:5-6 (ESV):
5 For although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth—as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”— 6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.
Finally, Jesus explicitly denied that he was Almighty God; and he even stated that our Heavenly Father was his God – just like He is our God. Consider the following passages:
Mark 10:17-18 (ESV):
17 And as he [Jesus] was setting out on his journey, a man ran up and knelt before him and asked him, “Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” 18 And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone. John 20:17 (ESV):
17 Jesus said to her, “Do not cling to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’”
The information in this post will hopefully prove useful, if one encounters the argument of “Echad in the sh’ma proves the Trinity”.
As I pointed out in post #210 it is not that the word ’e·ḥāḏ in Deut. 6:4 proves the Trinity, but that Deut. 6:4 cannot be used to argue against the Trinity. As was also stated, the word ’e·ḥāḏ does not always refer to a united one, but it is at times used that way as it is in Gen. 2:24.
Repeating post #10 which was a reply to a different poster than Nivram,
While you are correct that Jesus is God, your appeal to Deuteronomy 6:4 to support a non-Trinitarian view is invalid.
Deut. 6:4 "Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD is one (’e·ḥāḏ)!
The word 'one' is the Hebrew word אֶחָֽד׃ - ’e·ḥāḏ.
While there are instances in which ’e·ḥāḏ may carry the meaning of 'one' in a numeric absolute sense, there are instances in which ’e·ḥāḏ is used in a united sense, in which two or more are united as one, as in Genesis 2:24 in which the man and woman are one flesh.
Gen. 2:24 For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one (’e·ḥāḏ) flesh.
Since ’e·ḥāḏ is also used in the sense of a united one, you can't argue against the trinity based on Deut. 6:4's proclamation that God is one.
The doctrine of the Trinity is based upon the fact that while God is one (in terms of His essence or nature), and that there is only one true God, yet three distinct 'Persons' are identified as God, with the three being a united One.
And so, again, Deut. 6:4 cannot be used to argue against the Trinity.
No worries. I can be impatient at times. At any rate, I'm no longer worried about my thread being a flop.
And here you were worried about your threads being poison Katz.
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.
