The Deception of the Teaching of the Trinity

[bbyrd009]

ha what you gotta beg ppl to answer your lawyer questions nowadays

 

[101G]

ha what you gotta beg ppl to answer your lawyer questions nowadays

no need in asking you, because you don't have a clue. so just sit on the sideline and learn.

 

[bbyrd009]

no need in asking you, because you don't have a clue. so just sit on the sideline and learn.

ah, we were talking about you though, and no offense was meant

 

[Richard_oti]

wrong richard

Thanks bbyrd009! Yeah, it's not that Richard, it's "me" / "oti".

 

[pia]

no need in asking you, because you don't have a clue. so just sit on the sideline and learn.

Seems you need to re-read 1Cor13...Love is patient and kind. Love is NOT rude etc....

 

[Richard_oti]

GINIOLC, to all. <snip user>Richard. no reason to lay anything, but thanks. see, the scriptures don't change. I would like to discuss one point at a time.

Fair enough.

#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.

You suggest I check it? I can transliterate it from memory, there is nothing to check. Nor, is there any "mysticism" to it as you are implying above.

Second, 'et is not referring to 'Elohim in Bere'shit 1:1. 'et is referring to ha-shamayim in the instance you are referring too. There are two occurences of 'et in Bere'shit 1:1. Did you notice the sixth word? It also is 'et, though a conjunctive vav is attached. That occurrence refers to ha'eretz.

The verb is bara, if 'et was refering to 'Elohim, then 'Elohim would have been the one being formed. However, it was 'Elohim doing the forming. You can render it:

'Elohim formed 'et the heaven(s) and_'et the earth.

Heaven and earth are the direct objects of the verb, they are what was being formed. That which you present, would actually make 'Elohim the one being formed. No wonder you would have a problem with my use of "who alone hath immortality", for by that reasoning, 'Elohim would not be immortal, since He was formed "in the beginning". <grin>

How many occurrences of 'et are in the TaNaKh? If I weren't so lazy, I could supply you a multitude that do not refer to YHVH in any manner.

As I previously stated, in Bere'shit 1:1, it is 'Elohim without the definite article. An example would be: ha'Elohim. That is the article as in definition 3 of that which you previously quoted.

We can also look to the cognates: Compare the Moabite 'at, 'ayt in Phoenician, see also Syriac, Aramaic and Arabic.

Personally, from what I have read of you, I am surprised to hear this nonsense from you.

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.

That is not what I asked for. I asked for the source of your definition(s). Like I said, it appears like a "Strongest Strong's" from what I have from others. However, thank you for your interlinear source. For now I know what codex you are using. Perhaps you would be so kind as to provide the source from which you C&P H430.

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.

There was nothing to research. As I said, I truly can't believe you bought into that junk. I first heard something with regard to that nonsense perhaps 17 years ago.

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

Almost your turn. I asked a question in my previous reply, and I am still curious with regard to it from your perspective:

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

 

[Richard_oti]

Good post, Richard.

Thank you kindly.

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."

Thank you!! I had a feeling that I was not remembering something! I guess I could have attempted to look it up. But that would not have left room for your excellent reply here.

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….’

Thank you for sharing! It is appreciated.

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.”

Those I recall now. For myself, if something is quoted within the N.T. from the TaNaKh, it is the reading from the TaNaKh that carries the most weight from my perspective.

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).

Concurred. Of which, Tehillim 45:8 (7) is the deciding factor from my perspective: `al_ken meshakheka 'Elohim 'Eloheyka: ... therefore God, your God, he anointed you ...

So regardless of in which manner it is rendered, it is made perfectly clear by the following verse.

 

[Richard_oti]

<snip for brevity only>
'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!

Indubitably! Good post Tigger.

 

[Richard_oti]

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

Yet, 1 Corinthians 15 makes it abundantly clear:

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.

Thus the "reproval" may not be as clear as thought.

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

Huh? Did you say something?

 

[101G]

Seems you need to re-read 1Cor13...Love is patient and kind. Love is NOT rude etc....

no, Just 2 Timothy 2:16. that's the reason why I responded no more.

 

[101G]

You suggest I check it? I can transliterate it from memory, there is nothing to check. Nor, is there any "mysticism" to it as you are implying above.

Second, 'et is not referring to 'Elohim in Bere'shit 1:1. 'et is referring to ha-shamayim in the instance you are referring too. There are two occurences of 'et in Bere'shit 1:1. Did you notice the sixth word? It also is 'et, though a conjunctive vav is attached. That occurrence refers to ha'eretz.

The verb is bara, if 'et was refering to 'Elohim, then 'Elohim would have been the one being formed. However, it was 'Elohim doing the forming. You can render it:

'Elohim formed 'et the heaven(s) and_'et the earth.

Heaven and earth are the direct objects of the verb, they are what was being formed. That which you present, would actually make 'Elohim the one being formed. No wonder you would have a problem with my use of "who alone hath immortality", for by that reasoning, 'Elohim would not be immortal, since He was formed "in the beginning". <grin>

How many occurrences of 'et are in the TaNaKh? If I weren't so lazy, I could supply you a multitude that do not refer to YHVH in any manner.

As I previously stated, in Bere'shit 1:1, it is 'Elohim without the definite article. An example would be: ha'Elohim. That is the article as in definition 3 of that which you previously quoted.

We can also look to the cognates: Compare the Moabite 'at, 'ayt in Phoenician, see also Syriac, Aramaic and Arabic.

Personally, from what I have read of you, I am surprised to hear this nonsense from you.

I suggest you read the original pictograph, but to help you out, here is a simple straight forward not complicate link to help you, I have many more, but this one makes it very simple. "The Hidden Word in Genesis", The Hidden Word in Genesis

and this one just for starters.

"The silent and hidden “Aleph and Tav”" The silent and hidden “Aleph and Tav”…

et, you need to know, it is a direct object maker.

 

[tigger 2]

Alef Tau is a direct object marker

"The Aleph and Taw spell what is known as the accusative (direct object) marker (and scholars have known it for millennia - no mystery here). It is not translated since it is a grammatical/syntactical pointer. There is also an identical preposition in Biblical Hebrew [sometimes translated 'with']. The direct object marker occurs just under 11,000 times, while the preposition is just under 900." - Dr. Michael Heiser received an MA and PhD in the Hebrew Bible and Semitic Languages from the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

For meanings of aleph tau, see p. 2:
http://www.kreuzer-siegfried.de/hilfsmittel/hebr-500-engl.pdf
- "accusative particle" (definite direct object marker) and "together with, along with."

Also see: https://www.torahresource.com/pdf-articles/the-untranslatable-et.pdf and

http://www.torahresource.com/pdf-articles/seven-steps-to-the-aleph-tav.pdf and,

א ת BS | Dr. Michael Heiser and,

Hebrew Concordance: ’êṯ -- 7034 Occurrences and,

https://www.torahresourcesinternational.info/pdf/aleftav.pdf

Some examples: Exodus 2:1, 5, 6, 8, 9, 12, 14, 15, 16, etc. - Exodus 2:1 Interlinear: And there goeth a man of the house of Levi, and he taketh the daughter of Levi,

 

[101G]

"The Aleph and Taw spell what is known as the accusative (direct object) marker (and scholars have known it for millennia - no mystery here).

if it was such a mystery why they did't translate it in Genesis 1:1?.

 

[101G]

Well maybe they didn't see what it meant then as a direct object marker. because if they did, it would read like this. "In the beginning God (the A and Z, the beginning and the end) created the heavens and the earth." and that would have thrown everyone's theology in the sea. because the ONE who is the beginning and the end is the LORD JESUS/YESHUA GOD. Yes, JESUS is the First, and the Last, the alpha and the omega.

 

[101G]

@tigger 2, Understand, Genesis 1:1 is a straightforward grammatical expression. it is used to relate the subject of a sentence to its direct object. So in Genesis 1 verse 1, God is the subject of the sentence, He is doing the creating. The object of His creating is the Heavens an the earth. And the grammatical technique for joining the two in Hebrew is to use the "direct object marker".

with this being know, hence the elimination of any second or third person in any Godhead. for it was the Lord Jesus who created and made everything. and scripture support this.

 

[bbyrd009]

Alef Tau is a direct object marker

"The Aleph and Taw spell what is known as the accusative (direct object) marker (and scholars have known it for millennia - no mystery here). It is not translated since it is a grammatical/syntactical pointer. There is also an identical preposition in Biblical Hebrew [sometimes translated 'with']. The direct object marker occurs just under 11,000 times, while the preposition is just under 900." - Dr. Michael Heiser received an MA and PhD in the Hebrew Bible and Semitic Languages from the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

For meanings of aleph tau, see p. 2:
http://www.kreuzer-siegfried.de/hilfsmittel/hebr-500-engl.pdf
- "accusative particle" (definite direct object marker) and "together with, along with."

Also see: https://www.torahresource.com/pdf-articles/the-untranslatable-et.pdf and

http://www.torahresource.com/pdf-articles/seven-steps-to-the-aleph-tav.pdf and,

א ת BS | Dr. Michael Heiser and,

Hebrew Concordance: ’êṯ -- 7034 Occurrences and,

https://www.torahresourcesinternational.info/pdf/aleftav.pdf

Some examples: Exodus 2:1, 5, 6, 8, 9, 12, 14, 15, 16, etc. - Exodus 2:1 Interlinear: And there goeth a man of the house of Levi, and he taketh the daughter of Levi,

so, this is kind of clear, but could you give us an example of a corrected text? ty

 

[101G]

so, this is kind of clear, but could you give us an example of a corrected text? ty

I usually don't answer U, but all need help, Isaiah 41:4 just for starters. and read for your edification, The Real Jesus - The One you have never known!

 

[bbyrd009]

I usually don't answer U, but all need help, Isaiah 41:4 just for starters. and read for your edification, The Real Jesus - The One you have never known!

seems to me that your translation of Isaiah here is ezackly what tigger is on about?

 

[101G]

seems to me that your translation of Isaiah here is ezackly what tigger is on about?

LOL, LOL, LOL. You Need the (AHLB) Ancient Hebrew Lexicon of the Bible. It describe the original words in pictograph…. (smile). this way one can confirm the true meaning.

 

[101G]

@bbyrd009, also Isaiah 44:6 "Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God".
now bbyrd009, is this two person, or one?....... (smile).