"The word was a god"?
- Thread starter Jack
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Not sure there was a question. Elohim is a word that means 'heavenly being.' It may or may not pertain to the sole Creator (singular) as it could refer to angels (plural).
DanielConway
Member
Let us consider a few quotes from the bible in building a case that Jesus had to have been God. God said in the old testament "Thou shall have no other Gods before me", establishing that he could not continence any prophet who accepted worship for himself, much less describe him as a Son in whom he is well pleased. Please note trinity deniers that Jesus several times in the new testament accepted and thereby tacitly condoned worship of himself as God. If you think this is of only incidental concern please note that any time an Angel was offered worship, he immedeately told the would be worshiper to cease and desist under penalty of death what he was doing. Furthermore, Christ six times in the new testament is labeled as the perfect Mediator between God and Man, superior even to Melchizedek or Moses. In order for a Mediator to function perfectly in his role he must "have a foot in both camps", in this case he must be both man and God.
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Where does the presumption come from that one is obligated to deny worship for himself? The Christian claim that only God is worshipped is totally false. Daniel, David and Nebachanzer were all worshipped without denying it. No one claims that means they are God.
DanielConway
Member
OK, care to back up that assertion with some scripture? Nebachanezer I can believe, he was sentenced to live as a beast for seven years for his impertenence, but Daniel and David? Ehhh...
RLT63
Well-Known Member
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
RLT63
Well-Known Member
When someone else addresses a topic intelligently what's wrong with posting a link? You dismiss it without addressing it.
tigger 2
Well-Known Member
Echad (‘Plural’ Oneness)
See posts 898 and 902.
I have seen Deut. 6:4 - “YHWH [Jehovah/Yahweh] our God, YHWH [Jehovah/Yahweh] one [Echad] in Hebrew]” - rendered in several ways. (I prefer "Jehovah [is] our God, Jehovah alone.") Some trinitarians misinterpret this. They often say something like this: “At Deut. 6:4 the word ‘one’ is echad in Biblical Hebrew, which means [they say] ‘composite unity’ or ‘plural oneness’.”
First, it certainly wouldn’t be surprising to find that some noted trinitarian authority on Biblical Hebrew had written somewhere that echad means “united or plural oneness.” But I haven’t found one yet!
Here is what I have found written about echad by authorities on Biblical Hebrew:
The only definition given for echad in the trinitarian New American Standard Exhaustive Concordance is: “a prim[ary] card[inal] number; one”. We find no “plural oneness” there!
The highly respected Biblical Hebrew authority, Gesenius, says that echad is “a numeral having the power of an adjective, one.” He then lists the various meanings of echad as:
“(1) The same,”
“(2) first,”
“(3) some one,”
“(4) it acts the part of an indefinite article,”
“(5) one only of its kind,”
“(6) when repeated [echad ... echad] ‘one ... another’,”
“(7) [K echad] AS one man.” [The initial consonant of this word, “K,” (or כּ in Hebrew) actually means “as” or “like,” so in this special form the meaning is close to that of a plural oneness. But this is not the form used at Deut. 6:4 !! ]
Gesenius also lists a plural form of the word (achadim, which means “joined in one, united.” This, too, is not the form used at Deut. 6:4 which context shows, instead, to have meaning #5 above. - See Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament, #259, Baker Book House. Surely, if God (or Jehovah) were really a union of persons, a united one, this form which truly means “united one” would have been used to describe “Him” repeatedly in the Holy Scriptures. But it and all other words with similar meanings were never used for God (or Jehovah)!
By using a good Bible Concordance (such as Strong’s or Young’s) we can find all the uses of echad in the Bible. Unfortunately (due to space limitations), Young’s and Strong’s both list the rare plural form (achadim,) and the “AS one” (Kechad), form along with the common singular form (echad) without distinguishing among them.
Nevertheless, since both the plural form and the kechad form are used quite rarely (see Ezek. 37:17 and 2 Chronicles 5:13 for examples), we can see that the overwhelming majority of the uses of echad listed in these concordances (over 500) obviously have the meaning of singleness just as we normally use the word “one” today.
If you should find a scripture listed as using echad in your concordance that definitely has the meaning “plural oneness” or “together,” or “as one,” you should check it out in an interlinear Hebrew-English Bible. If the word in question is really the echad form of the word (as at Deut. 6:4), then it will end with the Hebrew letter for “d” (דּ ) in the Hebrew portion of your interlinear. If, however, it is really the plural form of the word (achadim), then it will end in the Hebrew letter for “m” (ם). And if the word is really Kechad (“AS one”), it will begin with the Hebrew letter for “k” (כּ). Remember, though, that Hebrew reads from right to left (so the LAST letter of a Hebrew word is really the letter at the extreme LEFT.)
Using your concordance along with an interlinear Hebrew-English Bible in this manner, I don’t believe you will ever find echad (as used at Deut. 6:4) literally meaning “plural oneness”!
Further emphasizing the impropriety of this “plural oneness” interpretation of echad are the many trinitarian renderings of Deut. 6:4. In the dozens of different trinitarian Bible translations that I have examined none of them have rendered Deut. 6:4 (or Mark 12:29) in such a way as to show anything even faintly resembling a “plural oneness”!!
Even the highly trinitarian The Living Bible, which, being a paraphrase Bible, is able to (and frequently does) take great liberties with the literal Greek and Hebrew meanings in order to make better trinitarian interpretations, renders Deut. 6:4 as “Jehovah is our God, Jehovah alone.” Notice that there’s not even a hint of a “plural oneness” Jehovah!
The equally trinitarian (and nearly as “freely” translated as The Living Bible) Good News Bible (GNB) renders it: “The LORD - and the LORD alone - is our God.” - Compare the equally “free-handed” (and trinitarian) The Amplified Bible.
And even among the more literal trinitarian translations of Deut 6:4 we find:
“The LORD is our God, the LORD alone.” - New Revised Standard Version.
“The LORD is our God, the LORD alone!” - New American Bible.
“The LORD is our God, the LORD alone.” - The Holy Bible in the Language of Today, Beck (Lutheran).
“Yahweh our God is the one, the only Yahweh.” - New Jerusalem Bible.
“Yahweh is our God, - Yahweh alone.” - The Emphasized Bible, Rotherham.
“The LORD is our God, the LORD alone.” - An American Translation (Smith-Goodspeed).
“The Eternal, the Eternal alone, is our God.” - A New Transation, Moffatt .
The trinitarian ASV (also the RSV) gives 4 different possible renderings of Deut. 6:4. One of them is identical with The Living Bible, and none of them includes an understanding of a “plural oneness” God!
The paraphrased The Living Bible also renders Mark 12:29 (where Jesus quotes Deut. 6:4 and an excellent spot for him to reveal a “trinity” God --- or even just a “plural oneness” God) as: “The Lord our God is the one and only God.” Notice the further explanation of the intended meaning of this scripture at Mark 12:32, 34. “’... you have spoken a true word in saying that there is only one God and no other...’ Realizing this man’s understanding, Jesus said to him, ‘You are not far from the Kingdom of God.’”
Why doesn’t this highly interpretive trinitarian paraphrase Bible (or any other Bible for that matter) bring out a “plural oneness” meaning at these scriptures (Deut. 6:4; Mark 12:29) if that can be a proper interpretation for echad?
Surely, if the trinitarian scholars who made this Bible had thought there was even the slightest justification for an echad = “plural oneness” interpretation, they would have rendered it that way: “Jehovah is a composite unity;” or “Jehovah is the United One;” or “Jehovah is a plural oneness;” etc.
Instead they have clearly shown that God (who inspired it), Moses (who wrote it under inspiration), and even Jesus himself (who taught that it was part of the most important commandment of all - Mark 12:28-29, LB; GNB; etc.) intended this scripture to show God as a single person only!
Similarly, the three annotated trinitarian study Bibles I own would certainly explain any intended “multiple-oneness” meaning for echad at Deut. 6:4 (if there were any possibility of such an interpretation). But the extremely trinitarian New American Bible, St. Joseph ed., gives no hint of such an understanding of echad in its footnote for Deut. 6:4 (or anywhere else). And the trinitarian The New Oxford Annotated Bible, 1977 ed., likewise gives no hint of such an understanding in its footnote for Deut. 6:4 (or anywhere else). And that trinitarian favorite: The NIV Study Bible, 1985, also gives no hint of such a meaning for echad in its footnote for Deut. 6:4 (or anywhere else). The only possible reason for all these trinitarian study Bibles ignoring this “proof” is that it simply is not true!
See posts 898 and 902.
I have seen Deut. 6:4 - “YHWH [Jehovah/Yahweh] our God, YHWH [Jehovah/Yahweh] one [Echad] in Hebrew]” - rendered in several ways. (I prefer "Jehovah [is] our God, Jehovah alone.") Some trinitarians misinterpret this. They often say something like this: “At Deut. 6:4 the word ‘one’ is echad in Biblical Hebrew, which means [they say] ‘composite unity’ or ‘plural oneness’.”
First, it certainly wouldn’t be surprising to find that some noted trinitarian authority on Biblical Hebrew had written somewhere that echad means “united or plural oneness.” But I haven’t found one yet!
Here is what I have found written about echad by authorities on Biblical Hebrew:
The only definition given for echad in the trinitarian New American Standard Exhaustive Concordance is: “a prim[ary] card[inal] number; one”. We find no “plural oneness” there!
The highly respected Biblical Hebrew authority, Gesenius, says that echad is “a numeral having the power of an adjective, one.” He then lists the various meanings of echad as:
“(1) The same,”
“(2) first,”
“(3) some one,”
“(4) it acts the part of an indefinite article,”
“(5) one only of its kind,”
“(6) when repeated [echad ... echad] ‘one ... another’,”
“(7) [K echad] AS one man.” [The initial consonant of this word, “K,” (or כּ in Hebrew) actually means “as” or “like,” so in this special form the meaning is close to that of a plural oneness. But this is not the form used at Deut. 6:4 !! ]
Gesenius also lists a plural form of the word (achadim, which means “joined in one, united.” This, too, is not the form used at Deut. 6:4 which context shows, instead, to have meaning #5 above. - See Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament, #259, Baker Book House. Surely, if God (or Jehovah) were really a union of persons, a united one, this form which truly means “united one” would have been used to describe “Him” repeatedly in the Holy Scriptures. But it and all other words with similar meanings were never used for God (or Jehovah)!
By using a good Bible Concordance (such as Strong’s or Young’s) we can find all the uses of echad in the Bible. Unfortunately (due to space limitations), Young’s and Strong’s both list the rare plural form (achadim,) and the “AS one” (Kechad), form along with the common singular form (echad) without distinguishing among them.
Nevertheless, since both the plural form and the kechad form are used quite rarely (see Ezek. 37:17 and 2 Chronicles 5:13 for examples), we can see that the overwhelming majority of the uses of echad listed in these concordances (over 500) obviously have the meaning of singleness just as we normally use the word “one” today.
If you should find a scripture listed as using echad in your concordance that definitely has the meaning “plural oneness” or “together,” or “as one,” you should check it out in an interlinear Hebrew-English Bible. If the word in question is really the echad form of the word (as at Deut. 6:4), then it will end with the Hebrew letter for “d” (דּ ) in the Hebrew portion of your interlinear. If, however, it is really the plural form of the word (achadim), then it will end in the Hebrew letter for “m” (ם). And if the word is really Kechad (“AS one”), it will begin with the Hebrew letter for “k” (כּ). Remember, though, that Hebrew reads from right to left (so the LAST letter of a Hebrew word is really the letter at the extreme LEFT.)
Using your concordance along with an interlinear Hebrew-English Bible in this manner, I don’t believe you will ever find echad (as used at Deut. 6:4) literally meaning “plural oneness”!
Further emphasizing the impropriety of this “plural oneness” interpretation of echad are the many trinitarian renderings of Deut. 6:4. In the dozens of different trinitarian Bible translations that I have examined none of them have rendered Deut. 6:4 (or Mark 12:29) in such a way as to show anything even faintly resembling a “plural oneness”!!
Even the highly trinitarian The Living Bible, which, being a paraphrase Bible, is able to (and frequently does) take great liberties with the literal Greek and Hebrew meanings in order to make better trinitarian interpretations, renders Deut. 6:4 as “Jehovah is our God, Jehovah alone.” Notice that there’s not even a hint of a “plural oneness” Jehovah!
The equally trinitarian (and nearly as “freely” translated as The Living Bible) Good News Bible (GNB) renders it: “The LORD - and the LORD alone - is our God.” - Compare the equally “free-handed” (and trinitarian) The Amplified Bible.
And even among the more literal trinitarian translations of Deut 6:4 we find:
“The LORD is our God, the LORD alone.” - New Revised Standard Version.
“The LORD is our God, the LORD alone!” - New American Bible.
“The LORD is our God, the LORD alone.” - The Holy Bible in the Language of Today, Beck (Lutheran).
“Yahweh our God is the one, the only Yahweh.” - New Jerusalem Bible.
“Yahweh is our God, - Yahweh alone.” - The Emphasized Bible, Rotherham.
“The LORD is our God, the LORD alone.” - An American Translation (Smith-Goodspeed).
“The Eternal, the Eternal alone, is our God.” - A New Transation, Moffatt .
The trinitarian ASV (also the RSV) gives 4 different possible renderings of Deut. 6:4. One of them is identical with The Living Bible, and none of them includes an understanding of a “plural oneness” God!
The paraphrased The Living Bible also renders Mark 12:29 (where Jesus quotes Deut. 6:4 and an excellent spot for him to reveal a “trinity” God --- or even just a “plural oneness” God) as: “The Lord our God is the one and only God.” Notice the further explanation of the intended meaning of this scripture at Mark 12:32, 34. “’... you have spoken a true word in saying that there is only one God and no other...’ Realizing this man’s understanding, Jesus said to him, ‘You are not far from the Kingdom of God.’”
Why doesn’t this highly interpretive trinitarian paraphrase Bible (or any other Bible for that matter) bring out a “plural oneness” meaning at these scriptures (Deut. 6:4; Mark 12:29) if that can be a proper interpretation for echad?
Surely, if the trinitarian scholars who made this Bible had thought there was even the slightest justification for an echad = “plural oneness” interpretation, they would have rendered it that way: “Jehovah is a composite unity;” or “Jehovah is the United One;” or “Jehovah is a plural oneness;” etc.
Instead they have clearly shown that God (who inspired it), Moses (who wrote it under inspiration), and even Jesus himself (who taught that it was part of the most important commandment of all - Mark 12:28-29, LB; GNB; etc.) intended this scripture to show God as a single person only!
Similarly, the three annotated trinitarian study Bibles I own would certainly explain any intended “multiple-oneness” meaning for echad at Deut. 6:4 (if there were any possibility of such an interpretation). But the extremely trinitarian New American Bible, St. Joseph ed., gives no hint of such an understanding of echad in its footnote for Deut. 6:4 (or anywhere else). And the trinitarian The New Oxford Annotated Bible, 1977 ed., likewise gives no hint of such an understanding in its footnote for Deut. 6:4 (or anywhere else). And that trinitarian favorite: The NIV Study Bible, 1985, also gives no hint of such a meaning for echad in its footnote for Deut. 6:4 (or anywhere else). The only possible reason for all these trinitarian study Bibles ignoring this “proof” is that it simply is not true!
Last edited:
tigger 2
Well-Known Member
Yachid
A few trinitarians insist that not only does echad mean “plural oneness,” but that, if singleness were intended by the Bible writer, the Hebrew word yachid would have been used at Deut. 6:4.
Here is how it was presented to me by one trinitarian:
“The word for ‘one’ in this great declaration [Deut. 6:4] is not Yachid which is an absolute oneness but rather echad which means ‘united one.’ Had the Holy Spirit desired to state absolute mathematical oneness in this all-important declaration, He could have easily used the word yachid, couldn’t He?”
We have already seen the absolute falsity of the “echad-means-’plural-oneness’” idea. But what about yachid? Did the Bible writers really use it whenever they meant “absolute mathematical oneness”? We have already seen that they really used echad for “absolute mathematical oneness,” and a good concordance will show they did this consistently—many hundreds of times!
Yachid, on the other hand, is only used about 12 times in the entire Bible and then only in a narrow, specific sense.
The Old Testament language authority, Gesenius, tells us that yachid is used in three very specialized ways: (1) “only” but primarily in the sense of “only begotten”! - Gen. 22:2, 12, 16; Jer. 6:26; and Zech. 12:10. (2) “solitary” but with the connotation of “forsaken” or “wretched” ! - Ps. 25:16; 68:6. (3) As yachidah (feminine form) meaning “only one” as something most dear and used “poet[ically] for ‘life’ - Ps. 22:20; 35:17.” - p. 345 b.
We find yachid is never used to describe God anywhere in the entire Bible! But it is used to describe Isaac in his prefigured representation of the Messiah (and ‘only-begotten’): Gen. 22:2, 12, 16. It is also used at Judges 11:34 for an only-begotten child. The ancient Greek Septuagint translates yachid at Judges 11:34 as monogenes (“only-begotten”): the same NT Greek word repeatedly used to describe Christ (even in his pre-human heavenly existence - 1 John 4:9). Monogenes, however, like the Hebrew yachid, is never used to describe the only true God, Jehovah (who is the Father alone).
So, if Jehovah were to describe himself as “forsaken” or “wretched,” or were speaking poetically about his “dear life,” or were describing himself as the “only-begotten son” (which he never does anywhere in the Bible!), then he might have used yachid.
But since he was describing his “mathematical oneness” at Deut. 6:4, he properly used echad!
A few trinitarians insist that not only does echad mean “plural oneness,” but that, if singleness were intended by the Bible writer, the Hebrew word yachid would have been used at Deut. 6:4.
Here is how it was presented to me by one trinitarian:
“The word for ‘one’ in this great declaration [Deut. 6:4] is not Yachid which is an absolute oneness but rather echad which means ‘united one.’ Had the Holy Spirit desired to state absolute mathematical oneness in this all-important declaration, He could have easily used the word yachid, couldn’t He?”
We have already seen the absolute falsity of the “echad-means-’plural-oneness’” idea. But what about yachid? Did the Bible writers really use it whenever they meant “absolute mathematical oneness”? We have already seen that they really used echad for “absolute mathematical oneness,” and a good concordance will show they did this consistently—many hundreds of times!
Yachid, on the other hand, is only used about 12 times in the entire Bible and then only in a narrow, specific sense.
The Old Testament language authority, Gesenius, tells us that yachid is used in three very specialized ways: (1) “only” but primarily in the sense of “only begotten”! - Gen. 22:2, 12, 16; Jer. 6:26; and Zech. 12:10. (2) “solitary” but with the connotation of “forsaken” or “wretched” ! - Ps. 25:16; 68:6. (3) As yachidah (feminine form) meaning “only one” as something most dear and used “poet[ically] for ‘life’ - Ps. 22:20; 35:17.” - p. 345 b.
We find yachid is never used to describe God anywhere in the entire Bible! But it is used to describe Isaac in his prefigured representation of the Messiah (and ‘only-begotten’): Gen. 22:2, 12, 16. It is also used at Judges 11:34 for an only-begotten child. The ancient Greek Septuagint translates yachid at Judges 11:34 as monogenes (“only-begotten”): the same NT Greek word repeatedly used to describe Christ (even in his pre-human heavenly existence - 1 John 4:9). Monogenes, however, like the Hebrew yachid, is never used to describe the only true God, Jehovah (who is the Father alone).
So, if Jehovah were to describe himself as “forsaken” or “wretched,” or were speaking poetically about his “dear life,” or were describing himself as the “only-begotten son” (which he never does anywhere in the Bible!), then he might have used yachid.
But since he was describing his “mathematical oneness” at Deut. 6:4, he properly used echad!
DanielConway
Member
Don't believe a word of the preceding. It is a complete fabrication, check his references. Recent updates.
DanielConway
Member
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
I've already explained what is wrong with this. Because it is wrong, I dismiss it without addressing it. How about I copy and paste a bunch of websites and expect you to address it point by point and declare victory until you do? Not very friendly or conversational, right?
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
RLT63
Well-Known Member
Someone else does that but to be fair it's his websiteI've already explained what is wrong with this. Because it is wrong, I dismiss it without addressing it. How about I copy and paste a bunch of websites and expect you to address it point by point and declare victory until you do? Not very friendly or conversational, right?
I’ve met trinitarians who don’t subscribe to the Apostles’ Creed. I think the majority of trinitarians would say that they do.
In honor of the recently deceased Queen of England: the Apostles’ Creed, from the Church of England website.
“I believe in God, the Father almighty,
creator of heaven and earth.
I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord,
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,
born of the virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried;
he descended to the dead.
On the third day he rose again;
he ascended into heaven,
he is seated at the right hand of the Father,
and he will come again to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy catholic Church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting.
Amen.”
The Apostles’ Creed | The Church of England
Who does the Creed identify as creator of heaven and earth?
Who do trinitarians routinely identify as creator of heaven and earth?
DanielConway
Member
Damn but I'm glad there's there's someone else out there who still knows how to pay a good and basic homage to a passed. Pray for the King. And please pardon my French. As far as who trinitarians identify as the creator of heavens and earth most would hold that it was a dual affair, instigated by Father and outworked by the Son. "For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him." Note the use of the word through here, implying a motive force behind the instigator. Greek Concordance: δι' (di') -- 148 Occurrences
Last edited:
Johann
Well-Known Member
T - TITLES OF DIVINITY
1. ALPHA AND OMEGA
Rev.22:13
13 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.
2. BEGINNING AND END
Rev.22:13
13 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.
3. FIRST AND LAST
Rev.1:17
17 And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand
upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last:
4. ALMIGHTY
Rev.1:8
8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which
is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.
5. I AM
John 8:58
58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I
am.
6. MIGHTY GOD
Is.9:6
6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall
be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The
mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
7. WORD OF GOD
Rev.19:13
13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called
The Word of God.
8. KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS
Rev 19:16
16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF
KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.
These verses irrefutably claims the Deity of Christ Jesus, as to the Triune Godhead, The "Oneness" cannot answer, but resort to circular reasoning.
Similar threads
