The golden calf and the Trinity

[janc]

When was moses called Elohim in The Bible?

And God said unto Moses, Behold, I have made you AN ELOHIM unto Pharaoh, and Aaron your brother shall be your prophet.
Exodus 7:1

 

[CharismaticLady]

He spoke to the angels, who were created before man in the image of God.

I though about that before, but angels do not have creative ability.

God is only one person.

I agree, but with three parts all working together. I liken God to a person. We have a body, that can't do anything without a life force, and that can't do anything useful without a mind.

Father - Mind
Jesus - Body of all three
Spirit - Life Force

The three make up one person. Also, the three make up one God.

 

[101G]

These entities are indeed separate but joined together in unity.

The Holy Spirit defines a being of multiple entities. We have multiple Holy Spirits, like the seven Spirits which were sent to the seven churches Rev 1:4; the "seven lamps of fire burning before the throne, which are the seven Spirits of God." Rev 4:5; and also the seven spirits which emanate from the throne and the Lamb which had been slain, who are sent forth into all the earth. Rev 5:6: And those are only the ones who have been revealed to us. Certainly there is much more we don't know about.

It doesn't make sense to limit an infinite God, to a limited man-made construct in a 3-in-1 box!

ERROR, seven do not mean "UNITY", but completness, nothing outside of God. and no, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are titles of the ONE true God who's dispensation is three time in our history. but not three entities, John 1:3 and Isaiah 44:24 prove this without a doubt.

remember, titles are not persons.

and as for unity, that's a false assumption. for God is ONE Spirit, and ONE person, for Deuteronomy 6:4 clearly points this out, "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:" did you see it, ONE "LORD", not ONE "Lord". understand Jesus is LORD, and Lord, which is an ordinal of himself in Flesh. for the Hebrew word for "ONE" is not a unity, but an ordinal in time and place, listen.
ECHAD: H259 אֶחָד 'echad (ech-awd') adj.
1. (properly) united, i.e. one.
2. (as an ordinal) first.
[a numeral from H258]
KJV: a, alike, alone, altogether, and, any(-thing), apiece, a certain, (dai-)ly, each (one), + eleven, every, few, first, + highway, a man, once, one, only, other, some, together.
Root(s): H258

see the term "Father" means "FIRST", or "Chief "
H1 אָב 'ab (awɓ) n-m.
father.
{in a literal and immediate, or figurative and remote application}
[a primitive word. Compare names beginning with "Abi-"]
KJV: chief, (fore-)father(-less), X patrimony, principal.

see the term "CHIEF" here meaning "FIRST. now watch John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." that word "beginning" it means,
G746 ἀρχή arche (ar-chee') n.
1. (properly abstract) a commencement.
2. (concretely) chief (in various applications of order, time, place, or rank).
[from G756]
KJV: beginning, corner, (at the, the) first (estate), magistrate, power, principality, principle, rule
Root(s): G756

See, JESUS/the Word was the "FIRST", abstract/Spirit, ordinal "FIRST". and now by coming in flesh, he's the ordinal "LAST". same person, for he is the "First", and the "Last", the same one Person. Just Read,
Isaiah 41:4 "Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he."
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 48:12 "Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first, I also am the last."

the ordinal First is the ordinal Last, the same one Person, who is God. only as the ordinal Last he is in flesh.

PICJAG

 

[janc]

I though about that before, but angels do not have creative ability.

So you've been to the Kingdom of Heaven before? Or where does this claim come from?

 

[CharismaticLady]

When was moses called Elohim in The Bible?

Genesis 1:
26 Then God (Elohim) said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

Elohim is the plural name for God/god.

 

[2 Chr. 34:19]

And God said unto Moses, Behold, I have made you AN ELOHIM unto Pharaoh, and Aaron your brother shall be your prophet.
Exodus 7:1

Mmmm in the beginning moses created the heaven and the earth??

 

[Stan B]

Thus speaks God, your Redeemer, and He who formed you from the womb: It is I, God, who work all things, who stretched out the heavens, I alone stretched out the earth by myself.

Nobody was with God before creation, he was alone and is only one person, the only one who was with him was his Spirit and his Spirit is his personality and not another person.

That is a rather presumptuous, if not totally ridiculous!

Do you really believe that an eternal God was totally alone until Adam was born??

 

[101G]

Nobody was with God before creation, he was alone and is only one person, the only one who was with him was his Spirit and his Spirit is his personality and not another person.

not saying that you're right or wrong, the first one is TRUE, God who is the ONLY Spirit was alone and by himself. but his Spirit is him, for God is "a" Spirit, per John 4:24a. so ther is only one Spirit.

as for his personality, he was Manifested in flesh to show his personality, or character or characteristics in concrete form, who according to Phil 2:6 is his own equal self, "shared", or diversified in flesh as the offspring of David.

Angels can beget children with humans, which means that angels and humans have the same nature

I cannot agree with that assessment. angels and humans do not have the same nature. nor do angel marry, or is given in marriage, hence no children.

the Nature of angels as well as human are different as in the stars that are in heavens, read 1 Corinthians 15 and start around verses 35.

PICJAG.

 

[101G]

That is a rather presumptuous, if not totally ridiculous!

Do you really believe that an eternal God was totally alone until Adam was born??

stan janc is correct. you believe Jesus correct, list to what he said as to who was at the beginning when man was made? listen. Matthew 19:4 "And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,"
ok stan, how many is "he?"

and also, God himself said that he was alone, Nehemiah 9:6 "Thou, even thou, art LORD alone; thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth, and all things that are therein, the seas, and all that is therein, and thou preservest them all; and the host of heaven worshippeth thee."

Isaiah 45:12 "I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded."

Isaiah 51:13 "And forgettest the LORD thy maker, that hath stretched forth the heavens, and laid the foundations of the earth; and hast feared continually every day because of the fury of the oppressor, as if he were ready to destroy? and where is the fury of the oppressor?"

Jeremiah 10:12 "He hath made the earth by his power, he hath established the world by his wisdom, and hath stretched out the heavens by his discretion."

Isaiah 45:18 "For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else."

AND MY favorite,
Isaiah 44:24 "Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;"


PICJAG.

 

[Stan B]

stan janc is correct. you believe Jesus correct, list to what he said as to who was at the beginning when man was made? listen. Matthew 19:4 "And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,"
ok stan, how many is "he?"

Contextually crafted to help people with their understanding of the current era, but long before that he created angels and a whole lot of other weird beings, like "around the throne, on each side of the throne, are four living creatures, full of eyes in front and behind: the first living creature like a lion, the second living creature like an ox, the third living creature with the face of a man, and the fourth living creature like an eagle in flight. And the four living creatures, each of them with six wings, are full of eyes all around and within".

Man was certainly not God's first creation of living beings!

 

[101G]

Contextually crafted to help people with their understanding of the current era, but long before that he created angels and a whole lot of other weird beings, like "around the throne, on each side of the throne, are four living creatures, full of eyes in front and behind: the first living creature like a lion, the second living creature like an ox, the third living creature with the face of a man, and the fourth living creature like an eagle in flight. And the four living creatures, each of them with six wings, are full of eyes all around and within".

Man was certainly not God's first creation of living beings!

Please Give book chapter and verse to this claim. then we can get to the LIVING CREATURES.

PICJAG.

 

[Stan B]

Please Give book chapter and verse to this claim. then we can get to the LIVING CREATURES.
PICJAG.

The Book of Common Sense 31:7

God only reveals the tip of the iceberg. The first 12 chapters of Genesis covers 2500 years. "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which if they were written every one, I suppose that even the world itself would not contain the books that would be written."

 

[101G]

The Book of Common Sense 31:7

God only reveals the tip of the iceberg. The first 12 chapters of Genesis covers 2500 years. "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which if they were written every one, I suppose that even the world itself would not contain the books that would be written."

if it is not written then it's not there. and for common sense is don't speak ahead of itself, that's why it's called common sense.
the one who who speak ahead of themselves speak with assumption. and set themselves up for a fall.

I suggest also, "JUST SAY WHAT THE BIBLE SAY" don't add or take away from the word.

PICJAG.

 

[DNB]

Plural “God” (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, (“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

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 noted 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 [1865] 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.”

A work edited by Dr. James Hastings tells us, when discussing Elohim, that this Hebrew plural

“may be easiest explained as a pl[ural] of eminence, like adonim, bealim, ‘lord,’ teraphim, (1 Sam. 19:13, 16),….” - A Dictionary of the Bible, Vol. 2, p. 199.

And another prestigious work edited by James 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”).

For example: “I am the Lord thy God [elohim - plural of excellence in Hebrew becomes theos - singular in the Greek Septuagint]” - Ex. 20:2. And “know that the Lord he is God [as always, the plural elohim, as applied to the God of Israel, becomes the singular, theos in the Septuagint] he made us...” - Ps. 100:3.

But when elohim really does mean plural in number, we see it rendered into the Greek plural for “gods” in the Septuagint: “Thou shalt not worship their gods [elohim in Hebrew becomes theois - plural in the Greek Septuagint], nor serve them .... And thou shalt serve the Lord thy God [singular - Greek].” - Ex. 23:24-25.

We see exactly the same thing happening for translations of the plural elohim in the ancient Septuagint and in the Christian NT.

Yes, all the NT Bible writers, whether quoting from the OT or writing their own God-inspired NT scriptures, always used the singular “God” (theos) in NT Greek when speaking of the only true God of the Bible. (If the plural form had been used for the only true God, we would even discover a new “trinity” at John 10:34.)

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!

Yes, of course. An even if we allow such a misconstrued rendering of the word, as @theophilus suggested, then undeniably this denotes three gods, and not persons as they desperately try to adhere to. The trinitarians, as always, undermine their own doctrine every time they try to justify any aspect of it.
It is instrinsically and perpetually self-refuting. Utter diabolical nonsense!

 

[DNB]

That is a rather presumptuous, if not totally ridiculous!

Do you really believe that an eternal God was totally alone until Adam was born??

Of course, Stan. Are you implying that there are other transcendent and eternal beings outside the universe?
It's not that God was necessarily alone, but rather, He alone created everything. There was no let us make man... as though God is many, or that there are more than one creator. Only God can create, and God is one, the Father alone, indivisible, unquantifiable, and unconfused, the complete antithesis of trinitarian theology.

 

[Stan B]

It's not that God was necessarily alone, but rather, He alone created everything. There was no let us make man... as though God is many, or that there are more than one creator. Only God can create, and God is one, the Father alone, indivisible, unquantifiable, and unconfused, the complete antithesis of trinitarian theology.

>> There was no let us make man.

Seems to be in my Bible: "Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness;"

Jesus was the creator of all things: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind."

 

[DNB]

>> There was no let us make man.

Seems to be in my Bible: "Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness;"

Jesus was the creator of all things: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind."

I explained what I meant by the first verse.
Look up the literary convention called antanaclasis. Jesus did not create anything, he was nothing but a creature born around 4BC. Only God the Father is supreme and transcendent, omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent. Therefore, the only being with the ability to create.

 

[Cooper]

I explained what I meant by the first verse.
Look up the literary convention called antanaclasis. Jesus did not create anything, he was nothing but a creature born around 4BC. Only God the Father is supreme and transcendent, omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent. Therefore, the only being with the ability to create.

So tell me why the supreme, transcendent, omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, creator God cannot come amongst his own in the image of man. Or is this supreme being of yours who created all thing, incapable of doing that?
.

 

[theophilus]

When a woman says, "he has lost his marbles" does she suggest he had more than one? No. It's a figure of speech, a metaphor. She isn't talking about marbles at all. When Aaron says, "there are your gods" does he suggest there is more than one idol? No. It's a figure of speech, Synecdoche. The golden calf represents all the idols of Egypt.

There was only one statue but it represented a God who consisted of three persons. Aaron declared that it represented the LORD, not the gods of Egypt.

if God was a trinity of three separate and distinct persons he would have said, "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the names of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:" the word "name" is not plural, indicating only one person. "Father", "Son", and "Holy Ghost", are only titles and the appellatation of only one PERSON.

There is one God but he is made up of three persons. He can correctly be described as either singular or plural.

 

[theophilus]

‘If’ a non-believer comes on this site...

Reading some of the posts has convinced me that there are a lot of non-believers on this site who think that they are Christians.