Proof that Jesus is God

[Cooper]

TWO Who are GOD, and yet DISTINCT!

There is only One God, it would be silly to say otherwise, who is Spirit. Whether visible or not, does not matter, it is still the same omnipresent God.
.

 

[Wrangler]

The proof that Jesus is not God is overwhelming. Below is what I call Christianity's end game. Notice here, even at the end, Jesus is not referred to as God and God is not even referred to as Father but God - in his unitarian nature, a part and superior to the Son. (I know some will respond with 'but John 1:1' or invent some duality of extra-Biblical explanation).


23 But there is an order to this resurrection: Christ was raised as the first of the harvest; then all who belong to Christ will be raised when he comes back.

24 After that the end will come, when he will turn the Kingdom over to God the Father, having destroyed every ruler and authority and power. 25 For Christ must reign until he humbles all his enemies beneath his feet. 26 And the last enemy to be destroyed is death. 27 For the Scriptures say, “God has put all things under his authority.”[a] (Of course, when it says “all things are under his authority,” that does not include God himself, who gave Christ his authority.) 28 Then, when all things are under his authority, the Son will put himself under God’s authority, so that God, who gave his Son authority over all things, will be utterly supreme over everything everywhere.
1 Corinthians 15:23-28 (NLT)

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

Does not refute one thing I wrote.

I speak English. I am Groot. In English, Hebrew and Greek, 1,000's of times God is referred to using the singular pronoun.

GOD in Hebrew is MASCULINE PLURAL!!!

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

There is only One God, it would be silly to say otherwise, who is Spirit. Whether visible or not, does not matter, it is still the same omnipresent God.
.

Silly to your mind, but ACTUAL in the Bible!

 

[Cooper]

TWO Who are GOD, and yet DISTINCT!

Do you not know about first-person pronouns.

First-Person Point of View
When we talk about ourselves, our opinions, and the things that happen to us, we generally speak in the first person. The biggest clue that a sentence is written in the first person is the use of first-person pronouns. In the first sentence of this paragraph, the pronouns appear in bold text. We, us, our,and ourselves are all first-person pronouns. Specifically, they are plural first-person pronouns. Singular first-person pronouns include I, me, my, mine and myself.

When authors use the first-person point of view in their writing, they use I, me and my to show that the narrator is a character in the story. The writer may also use the plural first person: we, us and our. The narrator may be the main character, an antagonist or a minor character observing the action.
.

 

[Cooper]

Silly to your mind, but ACTUAL in the Bible!

Read it again.
.

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

Do you not know about first-person pronouns.

First-Person Point of View
When we talk about ourselves, our opinions, and the things that happen to us, we generally speak in the first person. The biggest clue that a sentence is written in the first person is the use of first-person pronouns. In the first sentence of this paragraph, the pronouns appear in bold text. We, us, our,and ourselves are all first-person pronouns. Specifically, they are plural first-person pronouns. Singular first-person pronouns include I, me, my, mine and myself.

When authors use the first-person point of view in their writing, they use I, me and my to show that the narrator is a character in the story. The writer may also use the plural first person: we, us and our. The narrator may be the main character, an antagonist or a minor character observing the action.
.

Here is Jesus speaking to the Jews about God the Father, in John chapter 8

"Yet you have not known Him (αὐτόν, 3rd person singular), but I (ἐγὼ, first person singular) know (οἶδα, first person singular) Him (αὐτόν,3rd person singular) . And if I say (εἴπω, first person singular), ‘I do not know (οἶδα, first person singular) Him, (αὐτόν,3rd person singular)’ I shall be a liar like you; but I do know (οἶδα, first person singular) Him (αὐτόν, 3rd person singular) and I keep (τηρῶ, first person singular) His (αὐτοῦ, 3rd person singular) word" (verse 55)

Jesus Speaking Himself in the first person singular; speaks of God the Father in the 3rd person singular!

Either you accept what the Bible Teaches, or reject it as per your theology!

 

[Wrangler]

GOD in Hebrew is MASCULINE PLURAL!!!

No. Elohim is not God but heavenly beings. Beyond that, there are thousands of times God is referred to using singular pronouns. Sad that you change languages to try to support your doctrine.

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

No. Elohim is not God but heavenly beings

In the beginning ELOHIM Created the heavens and the earth Genesis 1:1. Is this not Almighty God?

 

[Wrangler]

In the beginning ELOHIM Created the heavens and the earth Genesis 1:1. Is this not Almighty God?

Still intent on changing languages in a desperate attempt to support your doctrine while ignoring the 1,000's of singular pronouns and this post below (and the one that said I am groot and speak English). The LORD, Adonai is singular. See Exodus 6.3.

God ≠ gods. See Ex 20:3 where Elohim is gods, not God.

gods
אֱלֹהִ֥֨ים (’ĕ·lō·hîm)
Noun - masculine plural
Strong's 430: gods -- the supreme God, magistrates, a superlative

The proof that Jesus is not God is overwhelming. Below is what I call Christianity's end game. Notice here, even at the end, Jesus is not referred to as God and God is not even referred to as Father but God - in his unitarian nature, a part and superior to the Son. (I know some will respond with 'but John 1:1' or invent some duality of extra-Biblical explanation).


23 But there is an order to this resurrection: Christ was raised as the first of the harvest; then all who belong to Christ will be raised when he comes back.

24 After that the end will come, when he will turn the Kingdom over to God the Father, having destroyed every ruler and authority and power. 25 For Christ must reign until he humbles all his enemies beneath his feet. 26 And the last enemy to be destroyed is death. 27 For the Scriptures say, “God has put all things under his authority.”[a] (Of course, when it says “all things are under his authority,” that does not include God himself, who gave Christ his authority.) 28 Then, when all things are under his authority, the Son will put himself under God’s authority, so that God, who gave his Son authority over all things, will be utterly supreme over everything everywhere.
1 Corinthians 15:23-28 (NLT)

So, no response to the above post huh? It specifically says Jesus is under God's authority, which would be impossible if he were God.

 

[kcnalp]

Jeremiah 17:10 (NKJV)
10 I, the LORD, search the heart, I test the mind, Even to give every man according to his ways, According to the fruit of his doings.
Revelation 2:18-23 (NKJV)
'These things says the Son of God, … 23 I will kill her children with death, and all the churches shall know that I am He who searches the minds and hearts.

Amen Jesus, You are God!

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

The LORD, Adonai is singular

אֲדֹנִי, adoni, singular noun, singular suffix, which is translated, "my lord", or "my Lord"

אֲדֹנָי - adonai, plural noun, singular suffix, which is translated as "my Lords", or "my Lord"

Both are used in the Old Testament for the One True God.

 

[tigger 2]

Elohim

Many trinitarian apologists will tell us that the Hebrew word for God (Elohim) is plural because it shows that God is a trinity. For example:

"Among Trinitarian Christian writers it is [often] seen as evidence for the doctrine of the Trinity, a plurality in the Godhead." - Theopedia, "Elohim."
......................................................

That the Hebrew plural is often used for a singular noun to denote “a ‘plural’ of majesty or excellence” is well-known by all Biblical Hebrew language experts and has been known from at least the time of Gesenius (1786-1842), who is still regarded as one of the best authorities for Biblical Hebrew!

Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament (“long regarded as a standard work for students”), p. 49, tells us:

“The plural of majesty [for elohim], occurs, on the other hand, more than two thousand times.” And that elohim when used in that sense “occurs in a [numerically] singular sense” and is “constr[ued] with a verb ... and adjective in the singular.”

Gesenius - Kautzsch’s Hebrew Grammar, 1949 ed., pp. 398, 399, says:
“The pluralis excellentiae or maiestatis ... is properly a variety of the abstract plural, since it sums up the several characteristics belonging to the idea, besides possessing the secondary sense of an intensification of the original idea. It is thus closely related to the plurals of amplification .... So, especially Elohim ... ‘God’ (to be distinguished from the plural ‘gods’, Ex. 12:12, etc.) .... That the language has entirely rejected the idea of numerical plurality in Elohim (whenever it denotes one God) is proved especially by its being almost invariably joined with a singular attribute.”

Peloubet’s Bible Dictionary, 1925 ed. Pg. 224:

Elohim "is either what grammarians call the plural of majesty, or it denotes the fullness of divine strength, the sum of the powers displayed by God."

More modern publications (trinitarian Protestant and Catholic) also make similar acknowledgments of the intended plural of majesty or excellence meaning for elohim. (See the New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. v., p. 287.)

Nelson’s Expository Dictionary of the Old Testament, describes elohim:

“The common plural form ‘elohim,’ a plural of majesty.” - Unger and White, 1980, p. 159.

Pluralis Majestatis: Biblical Hebrew
"The term ‘majestic plural’ or pluralis majestatis refers to the use of a plural word to refer honorifically to a single person or entity. It is also called the ‘plural of respect’, the ‘honorific plural’, the ‘plural of excellence’, or the ‘plural of intensity’. In the Hebrew Bible such plural forms are most commonly used when referring to the God of Israel, e.g., adonim ‘I am a master (lit. ‘masters’)’ (Mal. 1.6), although it can also be used when referring to a human, e.g., abraham adonaw ‘Abraham his master (lit. ‘masters’)’ (Gen. 24.9), an object, e.g. gibroteka ‘your grave (lit. ‘graves’)’ (2 Kgs 22.20), ...." - ENCYCLOPEDIA OF HEBREW LANGUAGE AND LINGUISTICS, p. 145, vol. 3, 2013.

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia says:

“It is characteristic of Heb[rew] that extension, magnitude, and dignity, as well as actual multiplicity, are expressed by the pl[ural].” - Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1984 ed., Vol. II, p. 1265.

Today’s Dictionary of the Bible, 1982, Bethany House Publishers, written by trinitarian scholars, says of elohim:

“Applied to the one true God, it is the result in the Hebrew idiom of a plural magnitude or majesty. When applied to the heathen gods, angels, or judges ..., Elohim is plural in sense as well as form.” - p. 208.

The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures, Vol. xxi, July 1905 (Aaron Ember) tells us: “several phenomena in the universe were designated in Hebrew by plural expressions because they inspired the Hebrew mind with the idea of greatness, majesty, grandeur, and holiness.”

The famous trinitarian scholar, Robert Young, (Young’s Analytical Concordance and Young’s Literal Translation of the Bible) wrote in his Young’s Concise Critical Commentary, p. 1,

“Heb. elohim, a plural noun ... it seems to point out a superabundance of qualities in the Divine Being rather than a plurality of persons .... It is found almost invariably accompanied by a verb in the singular number.”

Both Exodus 4:16 and 7:1 show God calling Moses "a god" (elohim). This alone shows the error of some that the plural elohim must mean a "plural oneness" unless we want to believe Moses was a multiple-person Moses!

And The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Zondervan Publishing, 1986, tells us:

“Elohim, though plural in form, is seldom used in the OT as such (i.e. ‘gods’). Even a single heathen god can be designated with the plural elohim (e.g. Jdg. 11:24; 1 Ki. 11:5; 2 Ki. 1:2). In Israel the plural is understood as the plural of fullness; God is the God who really, and in the fullest sense of the word, is God.” - p. 67, Vol. 2.

The NIV Study Bible says about elohim in its footnote for Gen. 1:1:

“This use of the plural expresses intensification rather than number and has been called the plural of majesty, or of potentiality.” – p. 6, Zondervan Publ., 1985.

And the New American Bible (St. Joseph ed.) tells us in its “Bible Dictionary” in the appendix:

“ELOHIM. Ordinary Hebrew word for God. It is the plural of majesty.” – Catholic Book Publishing Co., 1970.

A Dictionary of the Bible by William Smith (Smith’s Bible Dictionary, p. 220, Hendrickson Publ.) declares:

“The fanciful idea that [elohim] referred to the trinity of persons in the Godhead hardly finds now a supporter among scholars. It is either what grammarians call the plural of majesty, or it denotes the fullness of divine strength, the sum of the powers displayed by God.”

And the prestigious work edited by Hastings says about this:

"It is exegesis of a mischievous if pious sort that would find the doctrine of the Trinity in the plural form elohim [God]" ("God," Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics).

To show how ancient Jewish scholars themselves understood this we can look at the work of the seventy Hebrew scholars who translated the ancient Hebrew Scriptures (OT) into Greek several centuries before the time of Christ. The Greek language did not use the “plural of excellence” that the Hebrew did. So, if we see a plural used in the Greek Septuagint, it was really intended to represent more than one individual!

So how is elohim rendered in the Greek Septuagint by those ancient Hebrew scholars? Whenever it clearly refers to Jehovah God, it is always found to be singular in number (just as in New Testament Greek): theos ! Whenever elohim clearly refers to a plural (in number) noun, it is always found to be plural in number in Greek (just as in the New Testament Greek): theoi or theois (“gods”).

The same holds true for NT quotes from the OT 'elohim.'

It is absolutely incredible that John, Paul, and the other inspired NT writers would not have used the plural Greek form to translate the plural Hebrew form of “God” if they had intended in any degree to imply that God was in any way more than one person!

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

Elohim

Many trinitarian apologists will tell us that the Hebrew word for God (Elohim) is plural because it shows that God is a trinity. For example:

"Among Trinitarian Christian writers it is [often] seen as evidence for the doctrine of the Trinity, a plurality in the Godhead." - Theopedia, "Elohim."
......................................................

That the Hebrew plural is often used for a singular noun to denote “a ‘plural’ of majesty or excellence” is well-known by all Biblical Hebrew language experts and has been known from at least the time of Gesenius (1786-1842), who is still regarded as one of the best authorities for Biblical Hebrew!


Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament (“long regarded as a standard work for students”), p. 49, shows that elohim, ~yhla (“God/gods”) is sometimes used in a numerically plural sense for angels, judges, and false gods. But it also says,


“The plural of majesty [for elohim], occurs, on the other hand, more than two thousand times.” And that elohim when used in that sense “occurs in a [numerically] singular sense” and is “constr[ued] with a verb ... and adjective in the singular.”


Gesenius - Kautzsch’s Hebrew Grammar, 1949 ed., pp. 398, 399, says:
“The pluralis excellentiae or maiestatis ... is properly a variety of the abstract plural, since it sums up the several characteristics belonging to the idea, besides possessing the secondary sense of an intensification of the original idea. It is thus closely related to the plurals of amplification .... So, especially Elohim ... ‘God’ (to be distinguished from the plural ‘gods’, Ex. 12:12, etc.) .... That the language has entirely rejected the idea of numerical plurality in Elohim (whenever it denotes one God) is proved especially by its being almost invariably joined with a singular attribute.”


Peloubet’s Bible Dictionary, 1925 ed. Pg. 224:

Elohim "is either what grammarians call the plural of majesty, or it denotes the fullness of divine strength, the sum of the powers displayed by God."

More modern publications (trinitarian Protestant and Catholic) also make similar acknowledgments of the intended plural of majesty or excellence meaning for elohim. (See the New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. v., p. 287.)


Nelson’s Expository Dictionary of the Old Testament, describes elohim:


“The common plural form ‘elohim,’ a plural of majesty.” - Unger and White, 1980, p. 159.


Pluralis Majestatis: Biblical Hebrew
"The term ‘majestic plural’ or pluralis majestatis refers to the use of a plural word to refer


honorifically to a single person or entity. It is also called the ‘plural of respect’, the ‘honorific

plural’, the ‘plural of excellence’, or the ‘plural of intensity’. In the Hebrew Bible such plural

forms are most commonly used when referring to the God of Israel, e.g., adonim ‘I am a master (lit. ‘masters’)’ (Mal. 1.6), although it can also be used when referring to a human, e.g., abraham adonaw

‘Abraham his master (lit. ‘masters’)’ (Gen. 24.9), an object, e.g. gibroteka ‘your grave (lit. ‘graves’)’ (2 Kgs 22.20), ...." - ENCYCLOPEDIA OF HEBREW LANGUAGE AND LINGUISTICS, p. 145, vol. 3, 2013.


The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia says:


“It is characteristic of Heb[rew] that extension, magnitude, and dignity, as well as actual multiplicity, are expressed by the pl[ural].” - Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1984 ed., Vol. II, p. 1265.


Today’s Dictionary of the Bible, 1982, Bethany House Publishers, written by trinitarian scholars, says of elohim:


“Applied to the one true God, it is the result in the Hebrew idiom of a plural magnitude or majesty. When applied to the heathen gods, angels, or judges ..., Elohim is plural in sense as well as form.” - p. 208.


The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures, Vol. xxi, July 1905 (Aaron Ember) tells us: “several phenomena in the universe were designated in Hebrew by plural expressions because they inspired the Hebrew mind with the idea of greatness, majesty, grandeur, and holiness.”

The famous trinitarian scholar, Robert Young, (Young’s Analytical Concordance and Young’s Literal Translation of the Bible) wrote in his Young’s Concise Critical Commentary, p. 1,


“Heb. elohim, a plural noun ... it seems to point out a superabundance of qualities in the Divine Being rather than a plurality of persons .... It is found almost invariably accompanied by a verb in the singular number.”


Both Exodus 4:16 and 7:1 show God calling Moses "a god" (elohim). This alone shows the error of some that the plural elohim must mean a "plural oneness" unless we want to believe Moses was a multiple-person Moses!


And The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Zondervan Publishing, 1986, tells us:


“Elohim, though plural in form, is seldom used in the OT as such (i.e. ‘gods’). Even a single heathen god can be designated with the plural elohim (e.g. Jdg. 11:24; 1 Ki. 11:5; 2 Ki. 1:2). In Israel the plural is understood as the plural of fullness; God is the God who really, and in the fullest sense of the word, is God.” - p. 67, Vol. 2.


The NIV Study Bible says about elohim in its footnote for Gen. 1:1:


“This use of the plural expresses intensification rather than number and has been called the plural of majesty, or of potentiality.” – p. 6, Zondervan Publ., 1985.


And the New American Bible (St. Joseph ed.) tells us in its “Bible Dictionary” in the appendix:


“ELOHIM. Ordinary Hebrew word for God. It is the plural of majesty.” – Catholic Book Publishing Co., 1970.


A Dictionary of the Bible by William Smith (Smith’s Bible Dictionary, p. 220, Hendrickson Publ.) declares:


“The fanciful idea that [elohim] referred to the trinity of persons in the Godhead hardly finds now a supporter among scholars. It is either what grammarians call the plural of majesty, or it denotes the fullness of divine strength, the sum of the powers displayed by God.”


And the prestigious work edited by Hastings says about this:


"It is exegesis of a mischievous if pious sort that would find the doctrine of the Trinity in the plural form elohim [God]" ("God," Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics).


To show how ancient Jewish scholars themselves understood this we can look at the work of the seventy Hebrew scholars who translated the ancient Hebrew Scriptures (OT) into Greek several centuries before the time of Christ. The Greek language did not use the “plural of excellence” that the Hebrew did. So, if we see a plural used in the Greek Septuagint, it was really intended to represent more than one individual!


So how is elohim rendered in the Greek Septuagint by those ancient Hebrew scholars? Whenever it clearly refers to Jehovah God, it is always found to be singular in number (just as in New Testament Greek): theos ! Whenever elohim clearly refers to a plural (in number) noun, it is always found to be plural in number in Greek (just as in the New Testament Greek): theoi or theois (“gods”).

The same holds true for NT quotes from the OT 'elohim.'

It is absolutely incredible that John, Paul, and the other inspired NT writers would not have used the plural Greek form to translate the plural Hebrew form of “God” if they had intended in any degree to imply that God was in any way more than one person!

This "plural of Majesties" is complete RUBBISH! Look at Genesis chapters 18 and 19, and you will see that in 18 YHWH was on earth with Abraham, and ate and drank with Him. YHWH is used here about 10 times. Then in chapter 19, we read,

“Then YHWH He made to rain, on Sodom and on Gomorrah, sulfur and fire, with YHWH out of the heaven. And He overthrew the Cities…” (verses 24-25). Clear that there are TWO YHWH. One on earth, and the other "out of heaven"! Notice WITH YHWH, showing a DISTINCTION between the One YHWH on earth, and the Other YHWH in heaven!

Now prove this wrong.

 

[Wrangler]

Both are used in the Old Testament for the One True God.

Still ignoring singular pronouns huh?!

 

[tigger 2]

This "plural of Majesties" is complete RUBBISH! Look at Genesis chapters 18 and 19, and you will see that in 18 YHWH was on earth with Abraham, and ate and drank with Him. YHWH is used here about 10 times. Then in chapter 19, we read,

“Then YHWH He made to rain, on Sodom and on Gomorrah, sulfur and fire, with YHWH out of the heaven. And He overthrew the Cities…” (verses 24-25). Clear that there are TWO YHWH. One on earth, and the other "out of heaven"! Notice WITH YHWH, showing a DISTINCTION between the One YHWH on earth, and the Other YHWH in heaven!

Now prove this wrong.

Gen. 19:24 ("Jehovah rained down fire ... from Jehovah")

"Then the LORD rained down upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven." - KJV.

This one seems too ridiculous to even bother with, but some trinitarians appear to be serious about it. It goes this way: when we read Gen. 19:24, we find there are two different persons who have the only personal name of God, "Jehovah," (or "LORD" in some mistranslations). Therefore these two different persons with God's personal name show the "plural personality" of that one God.

Even if we assume this to be a correct translation, it seems obvious that it can be honestly interpreted as a simple repetition of the same person's name. That is, the very same person who produced the brimstone and fire, Jehovah, is also the one who rained it down upon these cities.

The explanatory note by trinitarian Dr. Young in Young's Concise Critical Bible Commentary, Baker Book House, for this verse states: "JEHOVAH...JEHOVAH, i.e. from Himself."

If that is the correct explanation, then this scripture might provide a somewhat parallel example: "And King Solomon gave to the Queen of Sheba all that she desired, whatever she asked besides what was given her by the bounty of King Solomon." - 1 Kings 10:13, RSV. (Cf. KJV.) Even though this is a very literal translation of the original manuscripts and the one personal name of King Solomon is actually used twice, we surely don't believe there were two different persons making up the one King Solomon! Wouldn't we interpret this as Dr. Young (and others) have done with "Jehovah" above? That is obviously how the Living Bible, NIV, MLB, NASB, etc. have interpreted it. ("King Solomon gave her everything she asked him for, besides the presents he had already planned." - LB.)

Another honest explanation for Gen. 19:24 given by trinitarian scholars themselves is that the use of the phrase in question ("from the LORD out of heaven") is in doubt. The very trinitarian New American Bible, 1970 ed. (Catholic) encloses the last part of Gen. 19:24 in brackets: "the LORD rained down sulphurous fire upon Sodom and Gomorrah [from the LORD out of heaven]." And the preface to the NAB tells us: "Doubtful readings ... appear within brackets." - p. 45, St. Joseph Edition.

That is why these trinitarian Bible translations have actually omitted that doubtful portion: NEB, REB, AT, Mo, LB, and GNB. (E.g. "then the LORD rained down fire and brimstone from the skies on Sodom and Gomorrah." - New English Bible.) And others, like the NJB, have rendered it "[Jehovah] rained down on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire of his own sending." Certainly no trinitarian Bible translation would do this if it could possibly be used as honest trinitarian evidence!

 

[Cooper]

Here is Jesus speaking to the Jews about God the Father, in John chapter 8

"Yet you have not known Him (αὐτόν, 3rd person singular), but I (ἐγὼ, first person singular) know (οἶδα, first person singular) Him (αὐτόν,3rd person singular) . And if I say (εἴπω, first person singular), ‘I do not know (οἶδα, first person singular) Him, (αὐτόν,3rd person singular)’ I shall be a liar like you; but I do know (οἶδα, first person singular) Him (αὐτόν, 3rd person singular) and I keep (τηρῶ, first person singular) His (αὐτοῦ, 3rd person singular) word" (verse 55)

Jesus Speaking Himself in the first person singular; speaks of God the Father in the 3rd person singular!

Either you accept what the Bible Teaches, or reject it as per your theology!

The same can be said about Cliff Richard and Harry Web. Two names but One person.
.

 

[Cooper]

This "plural of Majesties" is complete RUBBISH! Look at Genesis chapters 18 and 19, and you will see that in 18 YHWH was on earth with Abraham, and ate and drank with Him. YHWH is used here about 10 times. Then in chapter 19, we read,

“Then YHWH He made to rain, on Sodom and on Gomorrah, sulfur and fire, with YHWH out of the heaven. And He overthrew the Cities…” (verses 24-25). Clear that there are TWO YHWH. One on earth, and the other "out of heaven"! Notice WITH YHWH, showing a DISTINCTION between the One YHWH on earth, and the Other YHWH in heaven!

Now prove this wrong.

Harry Web in India and Cliff Richard in England are One and the same. His (singular) music is omnipresent. Do not let name or place deceive you.

We both know there is One omnipresent God in heaven and on earth, but to monotheists it looks as though Trinitarians have three gods.

Monotheists have an additional problem in-as-much as they do not believe Jesus pre-existed. That is like saying Harry Web is not Cliff Richard.

Now would be a good time to set about bridging the gap between the two groups who worship the same omnipresent God, while denying God on earth.
.

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

There is One omnipresent God.

You know that, and I know that, but to monotheists it looks as though Trinitarians have three gods.

Monotheists have an additional problem in-as-much as they do not believe Jesus is God with us.

Now would be a good time to set about bridging the gap between the two groups who worship the same Father God, while some reject the presence of the omnipresent God with us on earth.
.

you are TOTALLY deceived by the devil! My LAST response to you, because you REJECT what the Bible Teaches!

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

Gen. 19:24 ("Jehovah rained down fire ... from Jehovah")

"Then the LORD rained down upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven." - KJV.

This one seems too ridiculous to even bother with, but some trinitarians appear to be serious about it. It goes this way: when we read Gen. 19:24, we find there are two different persons who have the only personal name of God, "Jehovah," (or "LORD" in some mistranslations). Therefore these two different persons with God's personal name show the "plural personality" of that one God.

Even if we assume this to be a correct translation, it seems obvious that it can be honestly interpreted as a simple repetition of the same person's name. That is, the very same person who produced the brimstone and fire, Jehovah, is also the one who rained it down upon these cities.

The explanatory note by trinitarian Dr. Young in Young's Concise Critical Bible Commentary, Baker Book House, for this verse states: "JEHOVAH...JEHOVAH, i.e. from Himself."

If that is the correct explanation, then this scripture might provide a somewhat parallel example: "And King Solomon gave to the Queen of Sheba all that she desired, whatever she asked besides what was given her by the bounty of King Solomon." - 1 Kings 10:13, RSV. (Cf. KJV.) Even though this is a very literal translation of the original manuscripts and the one personal name of King Solomon is actually used twice, we surely don't believe there were two different persons making up the one King Solomon! Wouldn't we interpret this as Dr. Young (and others) have done with "Jehovah" above? That is obviously how the Living Bible, NIV, MLB, NASB, etc. have interpreted it. ("King Solomon gave her everything she asked him for, besides the presents he had already planned." - LB.)

Another honest explanation for Gen. 19:24 given by trinitarian scholars themselves is that the use of the phrase in question ("from the LORD out of heaven") is in doubt. The very trinitarian New American Bible, 1970 ed. (Catholic) encloses the last part of Gen. 19:24 in brackets: "the LORD rained down sulphurous fire upon Sodom and Gomorrah [from the LORD out of heaven]." And the preface to the NAB tells us: "Doubtful readings ... appear within brackets." - p. 45, St. Joseph Edition.

That is why these trinitarian Bible translations have actually omitted that doubtful portion: NEB, REB, AT, Mo, LB, and GNB. (E.g. "then the LORD rained down fire and brimstone from the skies on Sodom and Gomorrah." - New English Bible.) And others, like the NJB, have rendered it "[Jehovah] rained down on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire of his own sending." Certainly no trinitarian Bible translation would do this if it could possibly be used as honest trinitarian evidence!

do you agree that no one can or has seen God at any time? The Person Who was with Abraham ON EARTH in Genesis chapter 18, Spoke as YHWH, and in verse 8 we read, "And he took butter, and milk, and the calf which he had dressed, and set it before them; and he stood by them under the tree, and they did eat". In verse 22, "And the men turned their faces from thence, and went toward Sodom: but Abraham stood yet before the Lord". and in verse 33, "And the Lord went His way, as soon as he had left communing with Abraham: and Abraham returned unto his place". These verses show that this was not some dream or vision that Abraham had here. as these three men, One being YHWH, was PHYSICALLY with them on earth, and ATE food, etc. WHO then is this YHWH on earth, Whom Abraham SAW?