˒ĕlōhı̂m: Plural Persons, or Majesty?

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

My argument isn't that the LXX was divinely inspired, but rather that it gives insight into the meaning and understanding of the Hebrew text, particularly with regards to it's grammar, syntax and idioms.

This "man-made translation" that you eschew/criticize of having "little value" was used and quoted repeatedly by the NT writers (some 90 times, verbatim if memory serves), and who were divinely inspired by the Holy Spirit to do so.

A sample of these quotes that you assert as having "little-value", are found here:

Septuagint Quotes in the New Testament

I find it amazing that you, living some 2,300 years after the LXX was first translated from the Hebrew, believe that you possess more knowledge, understanding and insight into the Hebrew text, as pertaining to it's vocabulary, grammar and syntax, than the 70 who translated it into Greek.

BGTF, you simply cannot be taken seriously, and I hope you realize this.

IF, as some who are ignorant of the FACTS, like you, claim that the LXX was used in the New Testament, then either the LXX is EQUALLY Inspired by the Holy Spirit, as the Original Hebrew Old Testament is; or, the New Testament Writers used a UNINSPIRED man-made TRANSLATION, to quote from, which means that the New Testament is not fully Inspired by God the Holy Spirit. Can you understand the HUGE problems what this means?

You said, "My argument isn't that the LXX was divinely inspired, but rather that it gives insight into the meaning and understanding of the Hebrew text, particularly with regards to it's grammar, syntax and idioms"

Let me show how you are WRONG

Exodus 3:14 in the Hebrew, "’ehəyeh ’ăšer ’ehəyeh"

The LXX reads, "ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν", literally, "I am the Eternal One". It does not correspond to the Hebrew, which should read in Greek, "ἐγώ εἰμι ο ἐγώ εἰμι". What the LXX has done, is to give the SENSE of what the Hebrew is, and not the literal reading.

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

I'm not so sure that's the definition of the trinity by the way. Here is how I understand what the trinity is:

Definition of Trinity (taken from Merriam-Webster Dictionary)

1 : the unity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as three persons in one Godhead according to Christian dogma.

Has this definition changed? And if so, when and why? Is it one Godhead in three persons, or three persons in one Godhead?

Let's get your dogma settled first...

sounds that you are confused! There is nothing that Websters says, that contradicts what I have said!

 

[TahitiRun]

IF, as some who are ignorant of the FACTS, like you, claim that the LXX was used in the New Testament, then either the LXX is EQUALLY Inspired by the Holy Spirit, as the Original Hebrew Old Testament is; or, the New Testament Writers used a UNINSPIRED man-made TRANSLATION, to quote from, which means that the New Testament is not fully Inspired by God the Holy Spirit. Can you understand the HUGE problems what this means?

The LXX need not have been directly inspired by God to convey truths of the underlying Hebrew Text. Truth can emerge from a variety of sources without necessarily having to be "divinely inspired", and yet at the same time remain true.

An example of this is found in scripture, here:

Act 17:28 for in Him we live, and move, and are; as also certain of your poets have said: For of Him also we are offspring.
Act 17:29 'Being, therefore, offspring of God, we ought not to think the Godhead to be like to gold, or silver, or stone, graving of art and device of man;

In this example, Paul uses statements from Greek poets that now have become part of his sermon on Mars Hill (Areopagus), and thus divinely inspired and recorded in the NT text. In like manner, the LXX is used and quoted throughout the NT scriptures by the NT authors, and in so doing those truths now become part of inspired scripture.

You said, "My argument isn't that the LXX was divinely inspired, but rather that it gives insight into the meaning and understanding of the Hebrew text, particularly with regards to it's grammar, syntax and idioms"

Let me show how you are WRONG

Exodus 3:14 in the Hebrew, "’ehəyeh ’ăšer ’ehəyeh"

The LXX reads, "ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν", literally, "I am the Eternal One". It does not correspond to the Hebrew, which should read in Greek, "ἐγώ εἰμι ο ἐγώ εἰμι". What the LXX has done, is to give the SENSE of what the Hebrew is, and not the literal reading.

Actually, you've established the point I was making, and thank-you for doing so.

Here, the LXX translates the Hebrew phrase/idiom, rather than using a direct word-for-word literal translation, something the 70 could have done, but choose not to. And, in so doing it gave the Greek reader a better understanding of what the Hebrew phrase means. And that is what I was conveying to you.

 

[TahitiRun]

sounds that you are confused! There is nothing that Websters says, that contradicts what I have said!

I think you're rather the one confused here...lol

You stated the trinity as being: "one Godhead in three persons". That is quite different than the dictionary's: "three persons in one Godhead". Don't you think?

For instance, if I say: All things are in Christ (Col 1:16, Act 17:28) which is true, that statement is quite different than saying: Christ is in all things, of which is not true (Rom 8:10), not yet anyway. Would you agree?

So who's definition is correct? Is it your definition or the one given in the dictionary/encyclopedia? Seriously, if you don't understand what is meant by the term "trinity" or can't define it correctly, how do you expect your readers to?

I recall seeing a thread where there were as many ideas on the trinity, and how to define it, as there were posters.

Many of the posters on that thread claimed to have had special enlightenment/tutoring on the trinity, some claimed they had acquired advanced knowledge on the subject and set out to prove it (most of their knowledge came from Wikipedia if I recall).

There were the usual diagrams and pictures being displayed with many technical words and phrases to augment the arguments. There were appeals to 3rd and 4th century monks, many saints were raised up for evidence (some duly deified for their contributions on the subject), and then lots of scholars chimed in using boat loads of Greek/Hebrew texts with lexicons and dictionaries, and yet after many, many posts there was no agreement as to what trinitarianism actually was or how best to define it.

Anyway, I don't mean to rain on your parade here. I've heard it all before though. Like Solomon said, there is nothing new under the sun (Ecc 1:9).

 

[GEN2REV]

This is all from the Holy Bible, God's Word!

Don't be a smart a$$.

All of the word translations, and explanations, that you are using are NOT FROM THE BIBLE. And you knew exactly what I meant.

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

Don't be a smart a$$.

All of the word translations, and explanations, that you are using are NOT FROM THE BIBLE. And you knew exactly what I meant.

all I do know, is that you DON'T know what you are talking about. Your "theology" is FALSE!

 

[GEN2REV]

all I do know, is that you DON'T know what you are talking about. Your "theology" is FALSE!

Have you ever responded to John 14:21-23 yet? Jesus and the Father ARE the Holy Spirit?

And can you tell me which of the 3 is The Lord from a trinitarian definition? Or in some older texts than the KJV, it'd be Jehovah or Yahweh.

Scripture tells us that He is the ONLY God; there is no other. That's pretty plain.
1 Kings 8:60

And it does not allow for the trinitarian nonsense that they're ALL 3 (distinctly/differently) Lord/Jehovah/Yahweh.

 

[Desire Of All Nations]

Your argument became a theological train wreck the moment you said the Jews only recognized the Father as God. John's gospel account says Jesus came to reveal the Father because no one has ever seen His form or heard His voice. They didn't know that the Father existed for the entirety of their history as a people, so how could they have known or recognized Him?

 

[Truman]

I think Genesis 1:26 shows that the word Elohim is plural.
I was reading something the other day where they stated that somewhere in the Talmud, the Lord is described as being triune, though it is never taught. I wonder what would happen if it was.
Lord, I pray it would be...in Yeshua's name.

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

Have you ever responded to John 14:21-23 yet? Jesus and the Father ARE the Holy Spirit?

And can you tell me which of the 3 is The Lord from a trinitarian definition? Or in some older texts than the KJV, it'd be Jehovah or Yahweh.

Scripture tells us that He is the ONLY God; there is no other. That's pretty plain.
1 Kings 8:60

And it does not allow for the trinitarian nonsense that they're ALL 3 (distinctly/differently) Lord/Jehovah/Yahweh.

John 15:26 is very clear and important

"When the Counselor Comes, the One I will send to you from the Father—the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father—He will testify about Me"

Here we have Jesus Christ Who is the Speaker, Who is talking about the Coming of the Holy Spirit, at The Day of Pentecost.

"το πνευμα" (the Spirit) is in Greek in the neuter gender, which grammatically, would require "Counselor", to be, "παράκλητον", which is also neuter. Jesus says, "ὁ παράκλητος", which is masculine. If, as some falsely teach, that the Holy Spirit is a "thing", like "power", and "impersonal", then Jesus would not have used the masculine "ὁ παράκλητος". By doing so, Jesus is not only saying that the Holy Spirit is a PERSON, but that He is MALE, like Himself. This is seen when Jesus says the Holy Spirit is "ANOTHER Councelor", Again, Jesus did not use "ἕτερος", which is "another of a different kind", but, "ἄλλος", which is, "another like Himself". There is no doubt that Jesus Christ is a PERSON, which makes the Holy Spirit a PERSON. Also note, that Jesus says in 15:26, "from the Father", twice, which is in the Greek, "παρὰ τοῦ πατρός", the Greek preposition, "παρὰ", is used for "from beside, near another", which shows a clear DISTINCTION between the Father and Holy Spirit, and that they CANNOT be one and the same Person.

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

I think Genesis 1:26 shows that the word Elohim is plural.
I was reading something the other day where they stated that somewhere in the Talmud, the Lord is described as being triune, though it is never taught. I wonder what would happen if it was.
Lord, I pray it would be...in Yeshua's name.

Genesis 1:26 is very clear that God is not "UniPersonal"

The Jews have their Aramaic Targum translations, of the Hebrew Old Testament, which date from before BC. It is very clear in these works, that the older Jewish scholars believed that the God of the Old Testament, is more than One Person. There are many instances, where they use the Term "Memra", which is what John says in his Gospel, "Word", Who is a Person.

Genesis 1:27, the Targum Jerusalem reads, "And the Word of the Lord created man in His likeness, in the likeness of the presence of the Lord He created him, the male and his yoke-fellow He created them"

Genesis 3:8, both Targum Onkelos and Palestinian, reads: "And they heard the voice of the Word of the Lord God walking in thegarden in the evening of the day". In the next verse, Targum Jerusalem reads, "And the Word of the Lord God called to Adam, and said to him, Behold, the world which I have created is manifest before Me, the darkness and the light are manifest before Me; and how thinkest thou that the place in the midst whereof thou art, is not revealed before Me? Where is the commandment which I taught thee?"

Exodus 19:17, Targum Onkelos, "And Mosheh led forth the people out of the camp to meet the Word of the Lord; and they stood at the lower parts of the mount"

Etc, etc.

 

[TahitiRun]

I think Genesis 1:26 shows that the word Elohim is plural...

It is plural, there is really no question about that. The question is: plural what? Instead of thinking of the Godhead as plural persons, think of the Godhead like a Corporation. A single owner Corporation.

If we explore this Corporation further, the single owner Corporation consists of Shareholders (in this case a single Shareholder who also happens to be the single owner). The Shareholder elects a Director (the Director also being the single owner) to oversee and direct the Corporations business objectives, goals and directions communicated by it's Shareholder.

In turn, this Director appoints Officers (plural) to run the day to day operations of the Corporation. The Officers for this Corporation will consist of a President (also the single owner) who oversees day to day operations and profitability, and a Secretary (also the single owner) who manages the corporate records, account holdings, required meetings between officers, corporate agendas, business development and oversees outreach to the community it serves.

Obviously, in this example, there is a single owner for everything that pertains to this Corporation. Here, our Godhead Corporation analogy consists of Elohim (with plural Director/Officers) and corresponds to:

Corporation = Elohim (all plural forms of God, Lord, His names, titles, etc., as used/found throughout scripture)

Director/Officers (each in the singular form)
Director = Father
President = Son
Secretary = Holy Spirit

And, this Corporation manifests itself and dwells fully as the Godhead bodily in the single owner: Jesus, the Christ (Col 2:9).

I've thought about this all morning, so please let your criticisms be constructive.

 

[Truman]

I believe He can be one, and at other times He can be 3 people. I call Him Yahweh-Elohim.
In my mind's eye, I've seen Him go from one to three and then back to one.
Daniel and Enoch talk about a vision of two people, one described as the ancient or head of days, the other as a son of man. I believe that they are talking about the Father and the Son. The Holy Spirit is invisible. It's my guess that He's at the left hand of the Father.
We are talking about a being who has no beginning and no end, and lives in eternity. I've found that if I try too hard to understand Him, I get a headache. So what I can't understand, I accept by faith.
I believe like this due to decades of study and personal experience with the Almighty. Shalom.

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

It is plural, there is really no question about that. The question is: plural what? Instead of thinking of the Godhead as plural persons, think of the Godhead like a Corporation. A single owner Corporation.

If we explore this Corporation further, the single owner Corporation consists of Shareholders (in this case a single Shareholder who also happens to be the single owner). The Shareholder elects a Director (the Director also being the single owner) to oversee and direct the Corporations business objectives, goals and directions communicated by it's Shareholder.

In turn, this Director appoints Officers (plural) to run the day to day operations of the Corporation. The Officers for this Corporation will consist of a President (also the single owner) who oversees day to day operations and profitability, and a Secretary (also the single owner) who manages the corporate records, account holdings, required meetings between officers, corporate agendas, business development and oversees outreach to the community it serves.

Obviously, in this example, there is a single owner for everything that pertains to this Corporation. Here, our Godhead Corporation analogy consists of Elohim (having a Director and plural Officers) and corresponds to:

Corporation = Elohim (all plural forms of God, Lord, His names, titles, etc., as used/found throughout scripture)

Director = Father (singular)
Officers (each used in the singular form)
President = Son
Secretary = Holy Spirit

And, this Corporation manifests itself and dwells fully as the Godhead bodily in the single owner: Jesus, the Christ (Col 2:9).

I've thought about this all morning, so please let your criticisms be constructive.

more unbiblical nonsense!

 

[TahitiRun]

more unbiblical nonsense!

Do you understand the concept of a single owner/person corporation? You might not have them in the UK. If I recall, the UK only has single owner businesses as Sole Trader, unincorporated.

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

Do you understand the concept of a single owner/person corporation? You might not have them in the UK. If I recall, the UK only has single owner businesses as Sole Trader, unincorporated.

instead of trying to force your unbiblical views on the God of the Bible, why not accept that the Bible does not teach anywhere in its 66 Books, that God is UNIPERSONAL. If you know the first thing about grammar, you will know, for example, when Jesus speaks, He does so in the first person; and when He speaks of the Father and Holy Spirit, it is in the 3rd person. This in itself tells you that Jesus Christ cannot be the same PERSON as either the Father or Holy Spirit. Also, as Jesus Christ is SENT by the Father, Who SENDS Him, it is clear that He Who SENDS, cannot be the same PERSON, as the One Who is SENT. There is a clear distinction as to their PERSONS. John 1:1, has Two Who are GOD, and the One is WITH (at the side of) the Other. They cannot be the same PERSON.

This is FACT, not as you try to force the Bible into your system!

 

[GEN2REV]

John 15:26 is very clear and important

"When the Counselor Comes, the One I will send to you from the Father—the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father—He will testify about Me"

Here we have Jesus Christ Who is the Speaker, Who is talking about the Coming of the Holy Spirit, at The Day of Pentecost.

"το πνευμα" (the Spirit) is in Greek in the neuter gender, which grammatically, would require "Counselor", to be, "παράκλητον", which is also neuter. Jesus says, "ὁ παράκλητος", which is masculine. If, as some falsely teach, that the Holy Spirit is a "thing", like "power", and "impersonal", then Jesus would not have used the masculine "ὁ παράκλητος". By doing so, Jesus is not only saying that the Holy Spirit is a PERSON, but that He is MALE, like Himself. This is seen when Jesus says the Holy Spirit is "ANOTHER Councelor", Again, Jesus did not use "ἕτερος", which is "another of a different kind", but, "ἄλλος", which is, "another like Himself". There is no doubt that Jesus Christ is a PERSON, which makes the Holy Spirit a PERSON. Also note, that Jesus says in 15:26, "from the Father", twice, which is in the Greek, "παρὰ τοῦ πατρός", the Greek preposition, "παρὰ", is used for "from beside, near another", which shows a clear DISTINCTION between the Father and Holy Spirit, and that they CANNOT be one and the same Person.

Wow, it's really intimidating how you say so much, and use all that greek alphabet, etc.

BUT, you're really not saying much.

I showed you John 14:21-23 where Jesus makes clear that He and the Father ARE the Holy Spirit.

You came back with John 15:26 as if it contradicts that.

You say the Spirit is a male. Yes, He is. Because He is God, He is Christ. Just as John 14:21-23 tells us.

Compare to John 10:30. "I and the Father are one."
John 14:21-23 = The Father and I ARE the Holy Spirit.

When the Bible refers to knowing someone, in a carnal way, it is referring to sex, but it is also referring to a spiritual entering of that person. To know someone spiritually is to enter them.

Jesus tells us in John 14:21-23 what the conditions are for His Spirit to enter into, and live within, someone. Therefore, if it's conditional, which it clearly is, that means not everyone has the Holy Spirit living inside of them.

What does Jesus tell us about the "Many" who will say "Lord, Lord" and be turned away? Check it out:
"...then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me , ye that work iniquity (you that lived in habitual breaking of the Commandments so that I could never enter into and live with you.)."
Matthew 7:22-23

Take a look at Romans 8:9.
"... ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His."

Here we have the Spirit referred to multiple ways. (the only Spirit, there is only one). He is referred to as the Spirit of God and as the Spirit of Christ. They are one and the same.

Again, in John 14:21-23, Jesus Himself tells us that He and the Father ARE the Holy Spirit.

Therefore, your conclusion that the Spirit is separate, and another person, than the Father, OR the Son, is inaccurate.

 

[TahitiRun]

more unbiblical nonsense!

Can you explain why it has to be "plural persons", and it must be so without exception? I've read your posts in this thread and the other threads you've linked to. Every scripture you've supplied so far can be understood within the framework of a single owner Corporation concept. And in so doing, preserve Mar 12:29, here:

Mar 12:29 Jesus answered, "The first is, 'Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one;

Again, as I previously posted, the nouns "Lord" and "God" as well as the verb "is" are all being used in the singular. Not plural but singular. And further, the Lord is directly said to be "εις", ie: one, the numerical/number one. And not anything other than one.

For me, that settles it. And, unless you can (you can't) provide a scripture that unequivocally states that "The Lord is three persons", I'm going to believe what Jesus said: "The Lord is one".

However, being open minded to other's opinions I'll even consider a scripture that specifically says: "The Lord is three". If you can provide that, we'll discuss "three what?".

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

Wow, it's really intimidating how you say so much, and use all that greek alphabet, etc.

BUT, you're really not saying much.

I showed you John 14:21-23 where Jesus makes clear that He and the Father ARE the Holy Spirit.

You came back with John 15:26 as if it contradicts that.

You say the Spirit is a male. Yes, He is. Because He is God, He is Christ. Just as John 14:21-23 tells us.

Compare to John 10:30. "I and the Father are one."
John 14:21-23 = The Father and I ARE the Holy Spirit.

When the Bible refers to knowing someone, in a carnal way, it is referring to sex, but it is also referring to a spiritual entering of that person. To know someone spiritually is to enter them.

Jesus tells us in John 14:21-23 what the conditions are for His Spirit to enter into, and live within, someone. Therefore, if it's conditional, which it clearly is, that means not everyone has the Holy Spirit living inside of them.

What does Jesus tell us about the "Many" who will say "Lord, Lord" and be turned away? Check it out:
"...then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me , ye that work iniquity (you that lived in habitual breaking of the Commandments so that I could never enter into and live with you.)."
Matthew 7:22-23

Take a look at Romans 8:9.
"... ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His."

Here we have the Spirit referred to multiple ways. (the only Spirit, there is only one). He is referred to as the Spirit of God and as the Spirit of Christ. They are one and the same.

Again, in John 14:21-23, Jesus Himself tells us that He and the Father ARE the Holy Spirit.

Therefore, your conclusion that the Spirit is separate, and another person, than the Father, OR the Son, is inaccurate.

you are ADDING to what the Bible says! The Holy Spirit is not in John 14:21-23! what you are saying is RANK HERESY

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

Can you explain why it has to be "plural persons", and it must be so without exception? I've read your posts in this thread and the other threads you've linked to. Every scripture you've supplied so far can be understood within the framework of a single owner Corporation concept. And in so doing, preserve Mar 12:29, here:

Mar 12:29 Jesus answered, "The first is, 'Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one;

Again, as I previously posted, the nouns "Lord" and "God" as well as the verb "is" are all being used in the singular. Not plural but singular. And further, the Lord is directly said to be "εις", ie: one, the numerical/number one. And not anything other than one.

For me, that settles it. And, unless you can (you can't) provide a scripture that unequivocally states that "The Lord is three persons", I'm going to believe what Jesus said: "The Lord is one".

However, being open minded to other's opinions I'll even consider a scripture that specifically says: "The Lord is three". If you can provide that, we'll discuss "three what?".

did you even bother to read the WHOLE of the OP? I am dealing with the OLD TESTAMENT use of ˒ĕlōhı̂m, and NOT the Greek θεος, which even the LXX misuses!