People listen up there is no unity, or any kind of truine, of any persons in the Godhead, get that silliness out of your heads.
Isaiah 45:21 "Tell ye, and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel together: who hath declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from that time? have not I the LORD? and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me."
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."
Isaiah 44:8 "Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any."
if God don't know of anyone else beside him, then why you insist on believing a lie?
the Word "beside" is clear as day... 1. at the side of; next to. 2. in addition to; apart from.
my God how hard is this to understand?
if there is no additional "person" along by him, then there is no unity, or triune, are the light bulbs coming on?
and if there is no one apart from him then it's just him. can we get an amen here... (smile)... go on you can do it.
I'm asking, what's so hard to understand about "BESIDE?".
PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"
For Israel there was to be no God Beside YHWH - and this was at a time when Israel was worshiping mostly other Gods .. and things were not going well.. worship if these other God's being blamed for the downfall - as was custom.
There is no "Trinity" in Isaiah .. and Isaiah has zero bearing on Genesis - Zero Nada Zilch...
I will grant that the passage does have a more monotheistic tone than previous time period - "assuming these passages were not doctored like other passages where monotheism is the subject matter - and this is a stretch" - but, we are not talking about this time period .. we are talking about Genesis.
"The terms used by the author of
Deutero-Isaiah are reminiscent of certain passages in the Cyrus Cylinder:
[2] Traditionally, these passages in
Isaiah were believed to predate the rule of Cyrus by about 100 years, however, most modern scholars date
Isaiah 40–
55 (often referred to as
Deutero-Isaiah), toward the end of the Babylonian exile (c. 536 BC).
[9] Whereas Isaiah 1–39 (referred to as
Proto-Isaiah) saw the destruction of Israel as imminent, and the restoration in the future, Deutero-Isaiah speaks of the destruction in the past (
Isaiah 42:24–25), and the restoration as imminent (
Isaiah 42:1–9). Notice, for example, the change in temporal perspective from (
Isaiah 39:6–7), where the Babylonian Captivity is cast far in the future, to (
Isaiah 43:14), where the Israelites are spoken of as already in Babylon.
[10] According to scholar
R. N. Whybray, the author of Deutero-Isaiah (chapters 40–55) was mistaken for he thought that Cyrus would destroy Babylon but he did not. Cyrus made it more splendid than ever. But he did allow the Jewish exiles to return home, though not in the triumphant manner which Deutero-Isaiah expected"
So as I stated to you previously - the passaged you are referring to were written during Persian times - which is when the conversion to monotheism was being completed - and so this is exactly what we would expect from Isaiah.
Zero bearing has this to Genesis .. nice try though :)