The Deception of the Teaching of the Trinity

[aspen]

I made the term up to describe a core value of Western civilization; dialectic reasoning - challenging ideas. Hyper-dialectic is never moving past being a critic

 

[OzSpen]

I made the term up to describe a core value of Western civilization; dialectic reasoning - challenging ideas. Hyper-dialectic is never moving past being a critic

Hyper-dialectic is an actual word. See:
"The Hyper-Dialectic in Merleau-Ponty's Ontology of the Flesh" by ...

Oz

 

[bbyrd009]

i saw that, but i note that i couldn't get a definition of the term. Wonder if ol' Merleau meant the same thing?

 

[jaybird]

I see the Trinity teaching as a hold over of the ancient Roman polytheistic pantheon. There is no scripture that actually confirms such a thing. In fact, the old testament refutes it from the beginning. "Hear oh Israel, our God, our God, is one." Not three.

what do you think the Israelites were trying to say when they proclaimed the shema daily?
our G-D is one? one opposed to what?
its interesting the shema was such a big part of the faith in those days. how often is it proclaimed in Christian churches today? not often, i wonder why?

 

[bbyrd009]

what do you think the Israelites were trying to say when they proclaimed the shema daily?
our G-D is one? one opposed to what?
its interesting the shema was such a big part of the faith in those days. how often is it proclaimed in Christian churches today? not often, i wonder why?

um...OPs would hafta stop praying to Jesus then, i guess

 

[KBCid]

what do you think the Israelites were trying to say when they proclaimed the shema daily?
our G-D is one? one opposed to what?
its interesting the shema was such a big part of the faith in those days. how often is it proclaimed in Christian churches today? not often, i wonder why?

that was because of all the pagan religions who had multiple god's but since the pagan religions have been successfully integrated into Christianity from long in its past there is no need for that action any more. Now the pagans can simply look at God as a trinity even though God states that their image is two... Male and female are their image and the twain (2) will be considered one.

 

[ScottA]

I see the Trinity teaching as a hold over of the ancient Roman polytheistic pantheon. There is no scripture that actually confirms such a thing. In fact, the old testament refutes it from the beginning. "Hear oh Israel, our God, our God, is one." Not three.

"This is your father."
"Your father is a fine tailor."
"Your father is a good golfer."

Oh no - I have THREE fathers?!

No...you have ONE father, but he is known for many things.

 

[jaybird]

that was because of all the pagan religions who had multiple god's but since the pagan religions have been successfully integrated into Christianity from long in its past there is no need for that action any more. Now the pagans can simply look at God as a trinity even though God states that their image is two... Male and female are their image and the twain (2) will be considered one.

you think the shema is the Jews saying they worship one G-D and not many gods? i dont see that, IMO the shema is a statement about their one G-D, He is one as opposed to many gods as one.
the canaanites were right next door, they had three gods at the top of their belief system and those three were one. the scriptures tell us the canaanites were involved in dark ways and the Jews were warned many times never to follow those ways. i think the shema is a statement against the canaanite belief system.

 

[KBCid]

you think the shema is the Jews saying they worship one G-D and not many gods? i dont see that, IMO the shema is a statement about their one G-D, He is one as opposed to many gods as one.
the canaanites were right next door, they had three gods at the top of their belief system and those three were one. the scriptures tell us the canaanites were involved in dark ways and the Jews were warned many times never to follow those ways. i think the shema is a statement against the canaanite belief system.

Yes.
This is based on how they dealt with Christ when he told them in essence that he was the Fathers Son. They were mad that he was apparently trying to make himself equal with the Father (a second being as God) as all first born sons would be in a Jewish family. So the error for the Jews is the belief in a single being as God.

Yes the 3 in one gods of the pagans made their way into Christianity very early in the process.

 

[Richard_oti]

Yes.
This is based on how they dealt with Christ when he told them in essence that he was the Fathers Son. They were mad that he was apparently trying to make himself equal with the Father (a second being as God) as all first born sons would be in a Jewish family. So the error for the Jews is the belief in a single being as God.

Yes the 3 in one gods of the pagans made their way into Christianity very early in the process.

I see a single 'Elohim who alone hath immortality. And His son, who was brought forth as the first of his works of old, from before the foundation of the world. The image of YHVH, and the firstborn of all of creation.

Pro 30:2 Surely I am more brutish than any man, And have not the understanding of a man;
Pro 30:3 And I have not learned wisdom, Neither have I the knowledge of the Holy One.
Pro 30:4 Who hath ascended up into heaven, and descended? Who hath gathered the wind in his fists? Who hath bound the waters in his garment? Who hath established all the ends of the earth? What is his name, and what is his son's name, if thou knowest?


Col 1:15 who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; 16 for in him were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and unto him; 17 and he is before all things, and in him all things consist. 18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.


Proverbs 9:10 The fear of YHVH is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.

Psalms 89:18 For YHVH is our defence; and the Holy One of Israel is our king.

1 Corinthians 2:7 But we speak God's wisdom in a mystery, the wisdom that has been hidden, which God foreordained before the worlds for our glory, 8 which none of the rulers of this world has known. For had they known it, they wouldn't have crucified the Lord of glory.

Colossians 2:2b in order that they may know the mystery of God, namely, Christ, 3 in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.

Pro 8:22 YHVH possessed me in the beginning of his way, Before his works of old.

Pro 8:25 Before the mountains were settled, Before the hills was I brought forth;

Pro 8:30 Then I was by him, as a master workman; And I was daily his delight, Rejoicing always before him, 31 Rejoicing in his habitable earth; And my delight was with the sons of men.

 

[KBCid]

I see a single 'Elohim who alone hath immortality. And His son, who was brought forth as the first of his works of old, from before the foundation of the world. The image of YHVH, and the firstborn of all of creation.
Pro 30:2 Surely I am more brutish than any man, And have not the understanding of a man;
Pro 30:3 And I have not learned wisdom, Neither have I the knowledge of the Holy One.
Pro 30:4 Who hath ascended up into heaven, and descended? Who hath gathered the wind in his fists? Who hath bound the waters in his garment? Who hath established all the ends of the earth? What is his name, and what is his son's name, if thou knowest?
Col 1:15 who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; 16 for in him were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and unto him; 17 and he is before all things, and in him all things consist. 18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
Proverbs 9:10 The fear of YHVH is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.
Psalms 89:18 For YHVH is our defence; and the Holy One of Israel is our king.
1 Corinthians 2:7 But we speak God's wisdom in a mystery, the wisdom that has been hidden, which God foreordained before the worlds for our glory, 8 which none of the rulers of this world has known. For had they known it, they wouldn't have crucified the Lord of glory.
Colossians 2:2b in order that they may know the mystery of God, namely, Christ, 3 in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.
Pro 8:22 YHVH possessed me in the beginning of his way, Before his works of old.
Pro 8:25 Before the mountains were settled, Before the hills was I brought forth;
Pro 8:30 Then I was by him, as a master workman; And I was daily his delight, Rejoicing always before him, 31 Rejoicing in his habitable earth; And my delight was with the sons of men.[/QUOTE]

His body will be of one mind
Indeed all you state is truth.
There is one Father who alone was immortal and from his being he bore a Son into existence and His Son being the firstborn among many beings whose life was "given" to them from the Fathers own essence are also gods just not immortal gods. This is why Christ was able to die and it is also why satan is considered a god of this world.

All things that have come into existence owe it to a first cause that is itself uncaused.... God the Father is the uncaused cause and the uncaused cause has determined that being alone is not good thus he has formed a help meet for himself and a family meet for them both and he caused the image of the heavenly to be shown to men so that they may understand God.

 

[Richard_oti]

All things that have come into existence owe it to a first cause that is itself uncaused.... God the Father is the uncaused cause and the uncaused cause has determined that being alone is not good thus he has formed a help meet for himself and a family meet for them both and he caused the image of the heavenly to be shown to men so that they may understand God.

I am deeply moved by your reply ...

May YHVH through His beloved son continue to richly bless you upon your path ...

 

[101G]

I see a single 'Elohim who alone hath immortality. And His son, who was brought forth as the first of his works of old, from before the foundation of the world. The image of YHVH, and the firstborn of all of creation.

I have one problem with your definition of Elohim. is not Elohim when applied to the one true God with the article is a plurality? listen to the definition.
אֱלֹהֵי 'elohiy (el-o-hee') [alternate plural]
1. (literally) supreme ones.
2. (hence, in the ordinary sense) gods.
3. (specifically, in the plural, especially with the article) the Supreme God (i.e. the all supreme).
4. (sometimes) supreme, used as a superlative.
5. (occasionally, by way of deference) supreme magistrates, the highest magistrates of the land.
6. (also) the supreme angels (entities of unspecified type).
[plural of H433]
KJV: angels, X exceeding, God (gods)(-dess, -ly), X (very) great, judges, X mighty.

so how do you explain God/Elohim H430 used with the article. especially with the definite article in Hebrew 1:8 when applied to the Son. for you said, "I see a single 'Elohim who alone hath immortality. And His son". well the Son have this same oneness alone applied to him, as well as the ONLY ONE with immortality, (see 1 Timothy 6:16) but start at verse 13 to get the context as to it is speaking of.

so please explain.

 

[Richard_oti]

I have one problem with your definition of Elohim. is not Elohim when applied to the one true God with the article is a plurality? listen to the definition.
אֱלֹהֵי 'elohiy (el-o-hee') [alternate plural]
1. (literally) supreme ones.
2. (hence, in the ordinary sense) gods.
3. (specifically, in the plural, especially with the article) the Supreme God (i.e. the all supreme).
4. (sometimes) supreme, used as a superlative.
5. (occasionally, by way of deference) supreme magistrates, the highest magistrates of the land.
6. (also) the supreme angels (entities of unspecified type).
[plural of H433]
KJV: angels, X exceeding, God (gods)(-dess, -ly), X (very) great, judges, X mighty.

so how do you explain God/Elohim H430 used with the article. especially with the definite article in Hebrew 1:8 when applied to the Son. for you said, "I see a single 'Elohim who alone hath immortality. And His son". well the Son have this same oneness alone applied to him, as well as the ONLY ONE with immortality, (see 1 Timothy 6:16) but start at verse 13 to get the context as to it is speaking of.

so please explain.

No problem. I understand you having a problem with it.

First off, you are obviously using a source from the web. May I inquire as to which just for the sake of curiosity. It is reminiscent of the Strongest Strongs that I have seen used. I haven't used a Strong's in well over 20 years. For myself, I still to this day use hard copies, and Strong's isn't amoung them.


'elohey above, is the plural construct.

In Genesis 31:30, you have 'elohay, which is a pl. masc. noun: gods; with the 1st person masc. sing. pronominal suffix: my. my gods.

In Genesis 31:32 you have 'eloheyka, which is the masc. pl: gods; with the masc. sing. pronominal suffix: your. your gods.

Yes, I realize you are inquiring with regard to 'Elohim. However I am also laying out some basics. Further, you will also know that I do not speak from mere ignorance nor merely the use of a concordance.


ha-'Elohim is literally "The God", no different really than the Greek masc. accusative Ton Theon when speaking of YHVH. However, it is also used in speaking of "the gods".

'Elohim is what some call an intensive plural, which has a singular meaning. According to others, it is a plural of majesty yet still singular of meaning when referring to Ton Theon. According to some scholars, 'elohim is the plural of 'el. However as 'el has the plural of 'elim, it is likely according to some scholars that 'elohim was formed from 'eloah. According to yet other scholars, 'eloah was back formed from 'elohim. Thus, as you can see, there is truly no consensus upon the matter.


In Bere'shit (Genesis) 1:1, it is 'Elohim, without the definite article. Same in 1:2.

In Bere'shit 2:4, we have the first use of YHVH 'Elohim.

In Shemot (Exodus) 3:12-13 it is ha-'Elohim: The "God" / Ton Theon. I'll let you look it up for yourself. Besides, I would expect nothing less of you than to do so, even if I did post it here.

In Shemot 18:11, it is ha-'elohim: the gods

In Shemot 15:11, it is ba-'elim: (loosely) as-the-gods. When the preposition beit introduces a definite noun, it forms a contraction with the definite article. Here, we see the plural form of 'el.

In Devarim (Deuteronomy) 1:6, we come to such as YHVH 'Eloheynu, which is: YHVH our "God". We could examine 'Eloheyka: sing. pronoun your "God"; 'Eloheykem: pl. pronoun your "God". I can list all the pronominal suffixes for you, in fact, I shall. Perhaps you may find it useful one day.


Basic pronominal suffix endings:

Sefer (sepher): masc. sing. noun; book

sifri ; my book
sifreka ; your book (masc sing)
sifreke ; your book (fem sing)
sifro ; his book
sifrah ; her book
sifrenu ; our book
sifrekem ; your book (masc pl)
sifreken ; your book (fem pl)
sifram ; their book (masc pl)
sifran ; their book (fem pl)


Sefarim (sepharim): masc. pl. noun; books

sefaray ; my books
sefareyka ; your books (masc sing)
sefaraike ; your books (fem sing)
sefarayv ; his books
sefareyah ; her books
sefareynu ; our books
sifreykem ; your books (masc pl)
sifreyken ; your books (fem pl)
sifreyhem ; their books (masc pl)
sifreyhen ; their books (fem pl)

If you will notice in the couple examples of pronominal suffix endings with regard to 'elohim that I gave above, they are all of the masc. pl. subject. as in xx books. They are not a sing. subject suffix as in xx book.


Consider if you will "natural" plurals such as mayim (water), shamayim (heaven) and panim (face). All of those are plurals with a singular meaning in most cases.

You have a panim, are you 2 faced? No, nor am I implying that you are. Nobody asks, would you like a glass of waters? The construct of panim is paney, just as you see with regard to 'elohim / 'elohey above.


So here we come to the crux of the problem. If 'Elohim is referring to a plural of any form, and given that the pronominal suffixes used are of a pl. subject, then we must translate 'elohim as gods. My gods, your gods, our gods, his gods, their gods.

Either we must accept that 'elohim refers to a singular entity. However, to attempt to render 'elohim as a singular entity with three "personalities" couched inside, just doesn't work from my perspective.

In Genesis 1:3, light was formed by the "word" of YHVH.
What in your opinion is that "light"?


As for Hebrews 1:8, ton uihon (acc. case) ... ho theos (nom case). Hebrews 1:8, is not a direct quote from anywhere within the TaNaKh that I am aware of, perhaps there is something that I do not recall or missed. It perhaps alludes to several places, inclusive of Tehillim (Psalms) 89. We could argue the semantics of it for days, but it would not serve either of us, nor anyone else. The results of which, would from my perspective be inconclusive.

However:

1Co 15:24 Then cometh the end, when he shall deliver up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have abolished all rule and all authority and power. 25 For he must reign, till he hath put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy that shall be abolished is death. 27 For, He put all things in subjection under his feet. But when he saith, All things are put in subjection, it is evident that he is excepted who did subject all things unto him. 28 And when all things have been subjected unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subjected to him that did subject all things unto him, that God may be all in all.

Can we reconcile Hebrews 1:8 with 1 Corinthians 15:24-28? If we can do that, then from my perspective we shall perhaps gain insight.


With regard to 1 Timothy 6, from my perspective, it can only be referring to YHVH alone who hath immortality.

1Tim 6:16 who only hath immortality, dwelling in light unapproachable; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honor and power eternal. Amen.

Jesus has been seen. Mosheh (Moses) only saw the back of YHVH. Not Panayv: His Face.

Panayv is used in Bere'shit 17:3 speaking of Abram falling on his face. Again, the pronominal suffix for a pl. subject, literally his faces. Remember, panim (face) is a "natural" plural. Did Avram have multiple faces, was he two faced, or did Avram fall on his face? Thus, like 'Elohim, it refers to a singular thing. And yes, I do realize that you can use there are two sides to a face in an attempt to justify such. Of course, there are two sides to a coin as well.

There is little I have not seen with regard to this. I am not looking to make converts to my perspective. My apologies for the length.

 

[101G]

GINIOLC, to all. @Richard. no reason to lay anything, but thanks. see, the scriptures don't change. I would like to discuss one point at a time.
#1. you said, "In Bere'shit (Genesis) 1:1, it is 'Elohim, without the definite article. Same in 1:2.". I suggest you check the original Hebrew, which God is referred to the aleph and the tav there. in English, it means the "First" and the "Last" which is a plurality of the same one. now, my source for the Hebrew scriptures Genesis 1:1 is found in the Hebrew Interlinear Bible which can be found online at Online Hebrew Interlinear Bible.
In the center of this verse (Genesis 1:1) of these seven Hebrew words, after B-re'shiyt bara Elohim there is a fourth untranslatable word. That fourth word is actually two Hebrew letters: the aleph and the tav ,(

). Just click on Genesis 1:1 in Hebrew Interlinear Bible online. now, if you need to, google what the aleph and the Tav mean, don't take my word for it. once you get through with your research come back and we can discuss the Aleph and the Tav, or the first and the last which is a Plurality of God's ONESELF, who really is the Lord Jesus...... (smile). but do the research first and then come back to discuss.

#2. Then we can get to 1Tim 6:16.

 

[bbyrd009]

@Richard.

wrong richard

 

[tigger 2]

Good post, Richard. Heb. 1:8 is a quote from Psalm 45:6 and it, like Heb. 1:8, is sometimes translated as "God is your throne" or "Your Throne is God."

University of Cambridge professor and noted New Testament language scholar, Dr. C. F. D. Moule writes that Heb. 1:8 may be “construed so as to mean Thy throne is God” - p. 32, An Idiom Book of New Testament Greek, Cambridge University Press, 1990 printing.

“In Heb. 1:8 it is not certain whether (Ὁ θρόνος σου ὁ θεὸς) ὁ θεὸς is vocative or nominative.” - A.T. Robertson, Grammar, p. 465. In other words, Trinitarian scholar A.T. Robertson is saying that Heb. 1:8 could be rendered as either “Your throne, O God (vocative)” OR “God is your throne (nominative).”

An American Translation (Smith-Goodspeed), renders it: “God is your throne....”

The Bible in Living English (Byington) reads: “God is your throne....”

The Message reads: “Your throne is God’s throne….”

NSB - God is your throne

Mace - "God is thy throne….”

Twentieth Century Translation - ‘God is thy throne….’

In addition to these admissions by trinitarian translators concerning Heb. 1:8, we need to look back at the Old Testament Hebrew scripture (Ps. 45:6) that Paul was quoting when he wrote Heb. 1:8.

The RSV renders it as “Your Divine throne” and a footnote provides this alternate reading: “Or ‘your throne is a throne of God.’”

The NRSV says in a footnote: “Or ‘your throne is a throne of God.’”

The NEB says: “Your throne is like God’s throne.”

The Holy Scriptures (JPS version) says: “Thy throne given of God.”

The Bible in Living English (Byington) says: “God is your throne.”

New International Reader’s Version (NIRV): “Your throne is the very throne of God.”

The Good News Bible (GNB), a paraphrase Bible, renders it: “The kingdom that God has given you will last forever and ever.”

The REB has: “God has enthroned you for all eternity.”

The NJB gives us: “your throne is from God.”

Leeser - “Thy throne, given of God, endureth for ever.”


We also see the following statement by respected trinitarian scholars in a footnote for this passage:
“45:6 O God. Possibly the king’s throne is called God’s throne because he is God’s appointed regent. But it is also possible that the king himself is addressed as ‘god.’” - Ps. 45:6 f.n. in the NIV Study Bible (1985).

 

[tigger 2]

GINIOLC, to all. @Richard. no reason to lay anything, but thanks. see, the scriptures don't change. I would like to discuss one point at a time.
#1. you said, "In Bere'shit (Genesis) 1:1, it is 'Elohim, without the definite article. Same in 1:2.". I suggest you check the original Hebrew, which God is referred to the aleph and the tav there. in English, it means the "First" and the "Last" which is a plurality of the same one. now, my source for the Hebrew scriptures Genesis 1:1 is found in the Hebrew Interlinear Bible which can be found online at Online Hebrew Interlinear Bible.
In the center of this verse (Genesis 1:1) of these seven Hebrew words, after B-re'shiyt bara Elohim there is a fourth untranslatable word. That fourth word is actually two Hebrew letters: the aleph and the tav ,(

). Just click on Genesis 1:1 in Hebrew Interlinear Bible online. now, if you need to, google what the aleph and the Tav mean, don't take my word for it. once you get through with your research come back and we can discuss the Aleph and the Tav, or the first and the last which is a Plurality of God's ONESELF, who really is the Lord Jesus...... (smile). but do the research first and then come back to discuss.

#2. Then we can get to 1Tim 6:16.

I have seen a few other references to the “aleph tau” found in OT Hebrew manuscripts and left ‘untranslated’ in all Bibles. Some Trinitarians have selected a verse where this usage is found in connection with God or the Messiah and claim that this is falsely left untranslated and should be translated as “the Alpha and the Omega” or the “first and the last,” or “Jesus.”

But “Aleph Tau” (or “Aleph Tav” in modern Hebrew - sometimes transliterated into English as “et”) is not meant to be translated into English.

"[Alef Tau], the definite direct object indicator, is never translated. When standing independently, it is rendered [in this source] with three asterisks (***, e.g., Gen. 1:1)." – p. xxvii, The NIV Interlinear Hebrew-English Old Testament, Vol. 1, Zondervan Publ., 1979.

“In this article, we’re going to look at a part of Hebrew grammar that beginning students often want to know. There’s a particle in Hebrew (אֵת) that isn’t translated into English. This particle indicates that a ‘direct object’ is ahead in that sentence.” -
A Look at Grammar: The Direct Object

Also see p. 84 (#853), The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew English Lexicon. Also p. 31, A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament. (Acc. or Accus. are abbreviations for the Accusative noun case. That means, essentially, the direct object in English.)

It is found numerous times throughout the Hebrew Scriptures and is often used with someone other than God or the Messiah! For example, in Gen. 13:11 it is associated with Lot (and indicates that he chose the whole plain). At Gen. 14:16 it is used with Abram (not God). Gen. 17:26 uses this same indicator with Ishmael (not God). And so it goes throughout the Hebrew scriptures.

'Alef Tau' as used in this manner has absolutely nothing to do with "first and last," "alpha and Omega," "beginning," etc., and any serious Hebrew OT scholar (even beginners) should be aware of this!

 

[101G]

“In Heb. 1:8 it is not certain whether (Ὁ θρόνος σου ὁ θεὸς) ὁ θεὸς is vocative or nominative.”

makes no difference, the definite article is used. so your assessment is reproved.

'Alef Tau' as used in this manner has absolutely nothing to do with "first and last," "alpha and Omega," "beginning," etc., and any serious Hebrew OT scholar (even beginners) should be aware of this!

we will see, so lets hear from Richard...... (smile)

 

[101G]

but in the meantime tigger 2 may i ask you a simple question until Richard answer, and give you a heads up. I ask a Revelation Question last night, maybe you can answer it. read Revelation 1:1 and tell us who sent "HIS" angel to John. . now the Angel tell us and John who sent him in Revelation 22:6. so tigger 2, who was it that sent his angel to John was it the One whom you call "God" assuming the Father in verse 1:1 of revelation or was it the son the lord Jesus. please answer.