Echad and elohyim

Participant

Quote (martian @ April 09 2010,04:59)

“Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God , the LORD is one!
OR
“Hear, O Israel: The LORD our mighty above other Gods , the LORD is one singular!

oppps —
I meant to say in the last line
“Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God singular who is mighty above other Gods , the LORD is one singular!

April 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm#186360

Participant

Martian said:

Quote

If you read my answers you will see conclusively that echad is not plural in any way.

TO ALL: If there is so much as one statement in the Bible that contradicts Martian, then we can send him home in his spaceship.

Well there is:

From the “One Flesh” thread:

The anti-trinitarians here argue that the word “ONE LORD” (Deut. 6:4) argues that Christ cannot be God. WJ and I have tried to show you time and time again that the Hebrew word for “one” is “echad” and often refers to a plural one. We have given the example of Moses saying that the husband and his wife shall be “one flesh.”

But some of you guys have explained this statement away saying that it does not mean one flesh but “one in purpose.” A scripture came to me that blows away your theory that “one flesh” means “one in purpose.”

8 The nakedness of your father’s wife you shall not uncover; it is your father’s nakedness. Leviticus 18:8

Read it and weep! The man and his wife are one FLESH.

Now take a closer look at Deuteronomy 6:4:

4 “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God (plural), the LORD is one!

The word “God” is plural. It says that the plural God is one LORD. Get with God's word guys!

Love you Martian

But it's time to send you off

thinker

April 8, 2010 at 6:58 pm#186369

JustAskin

Participant

TT,
You must feel that your flying high – be careful of the sun (Or indeed, “The Son” for the father loves him dearly)

Quote

“8 The nakedness of your father’s wife you shall not uncover; it is your father’s nakedness. Leviticus 18:8”

Please explain to me what you think this means?

This is what I think: “When you uncover your wife” – YOU, as the MAN, is the one who will be embarrased because everyone will know what your 'Private Pleasure' looks like (I daren't say anything else but there is more!)

When one marries another person (of the opposite sex …) God regards them as ONE UNIT, One BODY in which to unite for the purpose of procreation and friendship. He organised one to be the head of the other just as the rest of ALL OF his organisation is replicated:
God above all (Including Jesus)
Jesus above all (Mankind)
Man above Woman
————————
Mankind above Animals
————————
Each of the above (?) is IN the One below (Yeah, everyone got a bit of ANIMAL in them, wouldn't you say?)

All are indeed ONE in the Other by virute of unity and rank but are not physically so – There is spiritual Oneness and there is Physical Oneness – many of the arguments are related to misunderstanding of the context that ONE is being used – and also one person mis-using ONE as Plural unity (Like you(single) and YOU (Plural) (Caps mine)).

Perhaps it would be useful to have a 'Definition Session' before the debate starts where ambiguousness could be an issue.
(Mind you, I bet the debate would then never get started….)

April 8, 2010 at 7:13 pm#186371

Participant

Quote (JustAskin @ April 09 2010,06:58)

TT,
You must feel that your flying high – be careful of the sun (Or indeed, “The Son” for the father loves him dearly)

Quote

“8 The nakedness of your father’s wife you shall not uncover; it is your father’s nakedness. Leviticus 18:8”

Please explain to me what you think this means?

Perhaps it would be useful to have a 'Definition Session' before the debate starts where ambiguousness could be an issue.
(Mind you, I bet the debate would then never get started….)

JA,

That's right just explain it away. In the reckoning of God the TWO shall be ONE flesh.

In the reckoning of God to uncover the father's nakedness is to uncover his wife's nakedness. The TWO are indeed ONE flesh in the sight of God.

thinker

April 9, 2010 at 4:45 am#186464

Blocked

Hi thinker,

Here's the scoop from the Jehovah's Witnesses:

JESUS called God “the only true God.” (John 17:3) Never did he refer to God as a deity of plural persons. That is why nowhere in the Bible is anyone but Jehovah called Almighty. Otherwise, it voids the meaning of the word “almighty.” Neither Jesus nor the holy spirit is ever called that, for Jehovah alone is supreme. At Genesis 17:1 he declares: “I am God Almighty.” And Exodus 18:11 says: “Jehovah is greater than all the other gods.”

In the Hebrew Scriptures, the word ’eloh′ah (god) has two plural forms, namely, ’elo‧him′ (gods) and ’elo‧heh′ (gods of). These plural forms generally refer to Jehovah, in which case they are translated in the singular as “God.” Do these plural forms indicate a Trinity? No, they do not. In A Dictionary of the Bible, William Smith says: “The fanciful idea that [’elo‧him′] 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.”

The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures says of ’elo‧him′: “It is almost invariably construed with a singular verbal predicate, and takes a singular adjectival attribute.” To illustrate this, the title ’elo‧him′ appears 35 times by itself in the account of creation, and every time the verb describing what God said and did is singular. (Genesis 1:1–2:4) Thus, that publication concludes: “[’Elo‧him′] must rather be explained as an intensive plural, denoting greatness and majesty.”

’Elo‧him′ means, not “persons,” but “gods.” So those who argue that this word implies a Trinity make themselves polytheists, worshipers of more than one God. Why? Because it would mean that there were three gods in the Trinity. But nearly all Trinity supporters reject the view that the Trinity is made up of three separate gods.

The Bible also uses the words ’elo‧him′ and ’elo‧heh′ when referring to a number of false idol gods. (Exodus 12:12; 20:23) But at other times it may refer to just a single false god, as when the Philistines referred to “Dagon their god [’elo‧heh′].” (Judges 16:23, 24) Baal is called “a god [’elo‧him′].” (1 Kings 18:27) In addition, the term is used for humans. (Psalm 82:1, 6) Moses was told that he was to serve as “God” [’elo‧him′] to Aaron and to Pharaoh.—Exodus 4:16; 7:1.

Obviously, using the titles ’elo‧him′ and ’elo‧heh′ for false gods, and even humans, did not imply that each was a plurality of gods; neither does applying ’elo‧him′ or ’elo‧heh′ to Jehovah mean that he is more than one person, especially when we consider the testimony of the rest of the Bible on this subject.

What do you think, Jack? Was Moses a plurality of gods?
I especially like the elohim means gods, not persons part. Who's the polytheist now, thinker?

Gotta love those Witnesses

peace and love,
mike

April 9, 2010 at 8:39 am#186474

Participant

Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 09 2010,16:45)

Hi thinker,

Here's the scoop from the Jehovah's Witnesses:

What do you think, Jack? Was Moses a plurality of gods?
I especially like the elohim means gods, not persons part. Who's the polytheist now, thinker?

Gotta love those Witnesses

peace and love,
mike

Mike,

You are trespassing our agreement. We are supposed to discuss this under the “Is God Plural” subject in our one on one debate. So I will not give you a full reply here.

However, I will give you a little foretaste of the beating you will receive when we finally get to the subject in the debates thread.

In Exodus 3 the Messenger of Jehovah appeared to Moses in the burning bush and identified Himself as the “God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.” Then in verse 14 the Messenger says OF HIMSELF, “I am that I am.”

Now here is the death blow to your Arain goo ga goo ga. In Exodus 23:20-25 Jehovah said that He will send His Messenger to bring the people into the land that He has prepared for them. Then in verse 25 Jehovah Himself calls His Messenger by the name “Jehovah.” He said,

Quote

20 “Behold, I send My Messenger before you to keep you in the way and to bring you into the place which I have prepared. 21 Beware of Him and obey His voice; do not provoke Him, for He will not pardon your transgressions; for My name is in Him. 22 But if you indeed obey His voice and do all that I speak, then I will be an enemy to your enemies and an adversary to your adversaries. 23 For My Messenger will go before you and bring you in to the Amorites and the Hittites and the Perizzites and the Canaanites and the Hivites and the Jebusites; and I will cut them off. 24 You shall not bow down to their gods, nor serve them, nor do according to their works; but you shall utterly overthrow them and completely break down their sacred pillars.
25 “So you shall serve Jehovah your God, and HE will bless your bread and your water. And I will take sickness away from the midst of you.

There it is Mike! Jehovah refers to His Messenger by the same name saying, “serve Jehovah your God and HE will bless you.” Then He switches to the first person and says, “And I will take away your sickness.”

Note these well Mike:

1. Jehovah said that His Messenger has His name. (vs. 21)

2. The people shall not serve false gods but shall serve Jehovah's Messenger (vs.24-25).

3. Note the first and third persons “HE will bless you” and, “I will heal you.” Then note that Jehovah the first person called the third person, “Jehovah your God.”

This is just a foretaste of the brutal beating you will receive when we get to this subject. But we will go no where UNTIL you concede that Jesus is the firstborn of mankind ALONE.

Please do not reply here! You are trespassing our agreement. We agreed to debate one on one so we would not be interrupted by the little pests here. You posted to me on this thread. I gave a sample reply of what is to come. Now let's both honor our agreement after this and not discuss it with each other here.

thinker

April 9, 2010 at 2:32 pm#186491

Participant

Quote (thethinker @ April 09 2010,06:00)

Martian said:

Quote

If you read my answers you will see conclusively that echad is not plural in any way.

TO ALL: If there is so much as one statement in the Bible that contradicts Martian, then we can send him home in his spaceship.

Well there is:

From the “One Flesh” thread:

8 The nakedness of your father’s wife you shall not uncover; it is your father’s nakedness. Leviticus 18:8

Read it and weep! The man and his wife are one FLESH.

Now take a closer look at Deuteronomy 6:4:

4 “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God (plural), the LORD is one!

The word “God” is plural. It says that the plural God is one LORD. Get with God's word guys!

Love you Martian http://images.paraorkut.com/img….mg]

But it's time to send you off http://images.paraorkut.com/img….mg]

thinker

Your argument is based on Elohyim being plural. You assume from ignorance that plural Elohyim means more then one. You do not understand the Hebrew language. As I have posted before Plurals are used in Hebrew to indicate both number and majesty. The same Hebrew word is used plural trees as is used for one majestic tree. It is a plural of majesty. In the case of Elohyim it is used to point out the majesty of the one true God. He is above other Gods in power and majesty.
Echad is used in the shima because it is the numeral one. It can be used to say one person or one bunch of grapes, but when referring to a group Echad is still singular.
Echad is singular and Elohyim is singular. Where can you get any plural indication from it other then your own imagination or Catholic dogma that you have not yet been set free of.

April 9, 2010 at 2:53 pm#186493

Participant

Quote (martian @ April 10 2010,02:32)

Quote (thethinker @ April 09 2010,06:00)

Martian said:

Quote

If you read my answers you will see conclusively that echad is not plural in any way.

TO ALL: If there is so much as one statement in the Bible that contradicts Martian, then we can send him home in his spaceship.

Well there is:

From the “One Flesh” thread:

8 The nakedness of your father’s wife you shall not uncover; it is your father’s nakedness. Leviticus 18:8

Read it and weep! The man and his wife are one FLESH.

Now take a closer look at Deuteronomy 6:4:

4 “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God (plural), the LORD is one!

The word “God” is plural. It says that the plural God is one LORD. Get with God's word guys!

Love you Martian http://images.paraorkut.com/img….mg]

But it's time to send you off http://images.paraorkut.com/img….mg]

thinker

Martian,

Elohim is indeed plural. This is bolstered by the fact that Elohim said, “Let US create man in OUR image.” Why didn't Moses use the singular form “Eloah?”

I understand the language fine. You must manipulate the language to suit your Arain presupositions.

It has been shown that “echad' indeed may refer to a plural one. “The two shall be one flesh.” And here is another thing for you. Later on some Jewish scribes revised the text and put “yachid” in the place of “echad.” If “echad” always meant a solitary one, then this revision would not have been necessary.

Why did scribes later dump “echad” if it sufficiently communicated absolutely the idea of a solitary one?

God was never alone. He always had His companion “at His side” (John 1:1).

thinker

April 9, 2010 at 3:17 pm#186494

GeneBalthrop

Participant

To All………The original pictorial language used by the Hebrews to picture their God, was a OX head with a Staff alongside it. The Ox was a symbol of POWER and the Staff was What they leaned on. Another words Elohim meant THE POWER OR POWERS THEY LEANED OR TRUSTED ON. Its Just that simple. GOD is the Power above all Powers in short the word Elohim simply means Powers. The LORD (YHVH) controls these POWERS , therefore it is written “HEAR O ISREAL THE LORD (YHVH) (he exists) OUR GOD (ELOHIM) (power) IS ONE LORD (YHVH)
When we say the LORD GOD, we are saying, HE EXISTS With POWERS. This is what Israel and we Trust in. GOD or Power is in all things that has life to one degree or another, some as in the case of Moses and Jesus and Judges and leaders have been given more then others they are gods to the degree of their powers, but to us and Jesus, their is ONLY ONE (TRUE) ELOHIM OR POWER And that is the LORD OUR GOD, the ALMIGHTY GOD or POWER. IMO

peace and love……………..gene

April 9, 2010 at 4:32 pm#186505

http://www.israelofgod.org/elohim1.htm

Participant

Quote (thethinker @ April 09 2010,06:00)

Martian said:

Quote

If you read my answers you will see conclusively that echad is not plural in any way.

TO ALL: If there is so much as one statement in the Bible that contradicts Martian, then we can send him home in his spaceship.

Well there is:

From the “One Flesh” thread:

8 The nakedness of your father’s wife you shall not uncover; it is your father’s nakedness. Leviticus 18:8

Read it and weep! The man and his wife are one FLESH.

Now take a closer look at Deuteronomy 6:4:

4 “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God (plural), the LORD is one!

The word “God” is plural. It says that the plural God is one LORD. Get with God's word guys!

Love you Martian http://images.paraorkut.com/img….mg]

But it's time to send you off http://images.paraorkut.com/img….mg]

thinker

For the poorly educated among us. (That's you Thinker)
The Hebrew word for God is Elohim. Elohim ends with the masculine plural suffix “-ִים” From this we might conclude that Elohim signifies a numerical plural (i.e. denoting multiplicity) and translate it accordingly as gods. But before we determine whether the world was created by a single God or multiple gods, we must consider whether Elohim is really a numerical plural.
In Hebrew, a numerically plural noun has three characteristics:
1.It receives a plural suffix;
2.It receives a plural verb;
3.It receives a plural adjective.
The first characteristic, the plural suffix, is familiar to the English speaker. In English, most nouns have the plural suffix “s” or “es”. For example, dog is the singular while dogs is the plural. Hebrew adds another dimension by matching adjectives and verbs to the noun. In Hebrew, a plural noun gets a plural verb and plural adjective. In contrast, English verbs and adjectives do not change to match the noun. For example, in English:
Singular: The big dog guarded.
Plural: The big dogs guarded.
But in Hebrew:
Singular: The big (sg) dog (he) guarded. שָׁמַר הַכֶּלֶב הַגָּדוֹל
Plural: The big (pl) dogs (they) guarded. שָׁמְרוּ הַכְּלָבִים הַגְּדוֹלִים

So the first thing we must check about Elohim is whether it gets a plural adjective and plural verb, because this will tell us whether or not it is a numerical plural denoting multiplicity. In the very first verse of the Torah we read בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים meaning “Elohim (he) created”. Were Elohim a numerical plural, the verse would have to say בָּרְאוּ אֱלֹהִים “Elohim (they) created”. Indeed, the word Elohim appears in its plural form over 2000 times throughout the Hebrew Scriptures and in virtually every instance it has a singular verb. It is always “And Elohim (he) spoke to Moses ” and never “And Elohim (they) spoke to Moses “. The same thing can be found with the adjective. The adjective for Elohim is singular, not plural. Thus we find אֱלֹהִים צַדִּיק “righteous (sg) Elohim” (Ps 7:10) and not אֱלֹהִים צַדִּיקִים “righteous (pl) Elohim”.
So why does Elohim have a plural suffix if it is numerically singular with a singular verb and singular adjective? It turns out there is a special type of plural in Hebrew that has a plural suffix even though it is numerically singular with a singular verb and singular adjective. These nouns are called majestic plurals. The meaning of the plural suffix in the majestic plural is not that there is more than one of the noun, but that the noun is “great, absolute, or majestic”. For example, אָדוֹן means “master” while אֲדוֹנִים (Isa 19:4; Mal 1:6) with the masculine plural suffix means “great master, lord”. Thus we read, “I will imprison the Egyptians in the hand of a harsh lord; and a fierce king shall rule over them” (Isa 19:4). In this verse the fierce king that will enslave Egypt is described as an ?ֲדֹנִים קָשֶׁה “a harsh (sg) lord (pl)”. In this verse, the plural suffix attached to the word ?ֲדֹנִים does not make it a numerical plural (“masters”) but instead magnifies the meaning (“great master, lord”). Because אֲדֹנִים is a majestic plural it receives the singular adjective קָשֶׁה (harsh) and not the plural adjective קָשִׁים that would be required for a numerical plural. The word בַּעַל also means “master” while בְּעָלִים with the masculine plural suffix means “great master, owner”. For example, in Exodus 21 the owner of the “goring ox” is repeatedly referred to as the בְּעָלִים “owner”. The word בְּעָלִים has the plural suffix even though the ox is only owned by one person. In this case, the plural suffix magnifies the noun imbuing it with a connotation of “absolute owner, complete master”. Because בְּעָלִים “owner” is a majestic plural it gets a singular verb. Thus we read concerning the negligent owner whose ox has killed, “the ox shall be stoned and the owner (he) will be put to death” (Ex 21:29). The verb ?וּמָת meaning “he will be put to death” is in the singular even though the word for “owner” בְּעָלִים has the plural suffix. The common characteristic of majestic plurals is that they have the plural suffix while denoting singular objects and as a result they receive singular adjectives and singular verbs. Elohim is quite simply a
n example of the majestic plural and means “great God”.
It is worth noting that the word Elohim is not always a majestic plural. When referring to the pagan gods, the term Elohim is usually a numerical plural. For example, the second commandment forbids us to worship אֱלֹהִים אֲחֵרִים “other (pl) gods”. In this phrase, not only does Elohim have the plural suffix, but it receives a plural adjective אֲחֵרִים other (pl). This tells us that in the second commandment Elohim is used not as an majestic plural but as a numerical plural denoting multiplicity. The prohibition is not against a specific “other (sg) god” but against any “other (pl) gods”. Elohim is used numerous times throughout the Tanach to refer to pagan gods and in most of these instances it is a numerical plural denoting multiple (false) gods. So we see that when the Tanach speaks about YHWH it uses Elohim as the majestic plural meaning “great God” but when it speaks about pagan gods it uses Elohim as a numerical plural meaning “gods”. In both instances the accompanying verbs and adjectives reveal to us which meaning is intended.
Does the majestic plural form of Elohim implies that there is anything multiple about God? To help clarify this it is worth looking at the few instances where the majestic plural form of Elohim is used to refer to someone other than YHWH. The clearest example of this is in Exodus 7:1. In this passage YHWH tells Moses that he will make him an Elohim to Pharaoh: “Behold I have made you an Elohim to Pharaoh, and Aaron your brother shall be your prophet” (Exodus 7:1). Certainly this does not mean that YHWH made Moses into a god, but rather that he would speak to Pharaoh with authority through Aaron who would serve as his mouth-piece in the way that the prophets serve as the mouth-pieces of YHWH. In any event, there is clearly nothing multiple about Moses, even though he was made an Elohim to Pharaoh.
On rare occasions Elohim is used as majestic plural even when referring to pagan gods. For example, “And they bowed down to Ashtoret the Elohim of the Sidonians, to Kemosh the Elohim of Moab, and to Milkom the Elohim of the children of Amon.” (1Ki 11:33). Here we see three pagan deities each of which is referred to as an Elohim. Obviously the book of Kings is not saying that any of these false deities is a “great God”. On the contrary, the verse goes on to rebuke the Israelites for worshipping them. The meaning is that the Sidonians, Moabites, and Ammonites looked upon their deities as great Gods and in this instance Scripture employs the terms used by the pagans themselves to refer to their own deities. At the same time we must observe that Ashtoret, Kemosh, and Milkom are each referred to as Elohim even though there is nothing multiple about any one of them.
Clearly the word Elohim, when it refers to YHWH, is an majestic plural which is numerically singular, having a singular verb and a singular adjective. This majestic plural is simply a grammatical form that denotes greatness without any implication that the object itself is a plurality or multiplicity. If we maintain that Elohim implies multiplicity then we must concede that Moses was also a multiplicity along with Kemosh the pagan deity of the Moabites and Milkom the pagan deity of the Amonites.
That YHWH is a single individual and not a multiplicity of gods or personalities is consistent with what we find throughout the Hebrew Scriptures. Moses declares to the children of Israel, “YHWH is our Elohim, YHWH is one” (Dt 6:4). Were YHWH a multiplicity of gods or personalities what would be the point of saying that He is “one”? It is worth noting that it does not say YHWH is one of something (one god, one personality). He is just simply “one”, in every respect of the word. Similarly, the prophet Zechariah tells us about the universal worship of YHWH at the end of days, “And YHWH will be king over the entire earth; at that time YHWH will be one and his name will be one” (Zech 14:9). Zechariah is saying that today people multiply YHWH but at the end-time all mankind will know that YHWH is a single individual deity with one single name. We are taught in the book of Isaiah that YHWH is the one and only, “I am YHWH and besides me there is no savior” (Isa 43:11). Elsewhere in Isaiah, YHWH poses the rhetorical question, “Is there an Eloha (God) besides me?” (Isa 44:8). Similarly we read in the Psalms, “Who is an Eloha (God) besides YHWH and who is a rock (=savior) besides our Elohim?” (Ps 18:32). In these verses the word for “God” is Eloha ?ֱלוֹהַּ, the singular form of Elohim. These passages are saying that YHWH is an Eloha and besides Him there is no other Eloha. Indeed, YHWH is called by the singular Eloha (God) some 47 times throughout the Hebrew Scriptures which proves that He is not a plurality or multiplicity. This and the fact that the verbs and adjectives connected with Elohim are always singular confirm our conclusion that Elohim is an majestic plural denoting a singular individual but with a connotation of greatness.

April 9, 2010 at 5:13 pm#186513

Participant

The Theological Workbook of the Old Testament says,
This word [elohim], which is generally viewed as the plural of eloah [Strong's #433], is found far more frequently in Scripture than either el or eloah for the true God. The plural ending is usually described as a plural of majesty and not intended as a true plural when used of God. This is seen in the fact that the noun elohim is consistently used with singular verb forms and with adjectives and pronouns in the singular. [4]
The New International Version Study Bible tells us,
“God created. The Hebrew noun Elohim is plural but the verb is singular, a normal usage in the OT when reference is to the one true God. This use of the plural expresses intensification rather than number and has been called the plural of majesty, or of potentiality.” [5]
Mercer Dictionary of the Bible states,
“The plural Elohim is used frequently, a phenomenon sometimes called the majestic plural. Although the form is plural the one referred to or who is speaking is singular.” [6]
The New Catholic Encyclopedia states,
“The Divine name (’Elohim) most frequently used in the Old Testament, a plural form of Eloah, which appears only in poetical books (34 of the 57 times in Job alone). The form Elohim, when used of the God of Israel, is a plural of majesty, signifying the one God who embodies in Himself all the qualities of divinity, and is almost always accompanied by singular verbs and adjectives.” [7]
HarperCollins’ Bible Dictionary says,
“Elohim is one of the three common generic names for God in the OT, occuring almost 2600 times. The term is a plural, probably of El or Eloah, hebrew words for “god”, and on occassions means “gods” (e.g. Exod. 20:3). Most often it is a plural of majesty for israel’s “God” (e.g. , Gen. 1:1) and thus is translated in the singular.” [8]

April 9, 2010 at 9:57 pm#186535

Participant

Quote (martian @ April 10 2010,05:13)

Martian,

I am well aware of these sources which promote the “plural of majesty” theory. Did you notice that the sources give no examples from the scripture where a human king spoke in such a manner? God accomadated Himself to the culture and the speech which the people used. So we must find an example where human kings used the so called “plural of majesty.”

We are not obliged to consider any theory that is without examples from scripture.

“Some have seen the solution of the difficulty to lie in calling this the majestic plural, such as sovereigns are wont to employ edicts. This type of plural, cannot be demonstrated as used in the scriptures….” Genesis, vol. 1, p. 86-87, H.C. Leupold D.D.

The majestic plural cannot be shown from the scriptures. Therefore, it is just a theory that cannot be proven.

Then there is the problem with Jehovah calling His Messenger “Jehovah your God.” I duplicate a post from earlier today:

In Exodus 23:20-25 Jehovah said that He will send His Messenger to bring the people into the land that He has prepared for them. Then in verse 25 Jehovah Himself calls His Messenger by the name “Jehovah.” He said,

Quote

Jehovah refers to His Messenger by the same name saying, “serve Jehovah your God and HE will bless you.” Then He switches to the first person and says, “And I will take away your sickness.”

Note these three points:

1. Jehovah said that His Messenger has His name. (vs. 21)

2. The people shall not serve false gods but shall serve Jehovah's Messenger (vs.24-25).

3. Note the first and third persons “HE will bless you” and, “I will heal you.” Then note that Jehovah the first person called the third person, “Jehovah your God.”

Jehovah is indeed a plural unity.

thinker

April 9, 2010 at 11:49 pm#186552

Blocked

Quote (thethinker @ April 09 2010,20:39)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 09 2010,16:45)

Hi thinker,

Here's the scoop from the Jehovah's Witnesses:

What do you think, Jack? Was Moses a plurality of gods?
I especially like the elohim means gods, not persons part. Who's the polytheist now, thinker?

Gotta love those Witnesses

peace and love,
mike

Mike,

You are trespassing our agreement. We are supposed to discuss this under the “Is God Plural” subject in our one on one debate. So I will not give you a full reply here.

However, I will give you a little foretaste of the beating you will receive when we finally get to the subject in the debates thread.

Quote

Note these well Mike:

1. Jehovah said that His Messenger has His name. (vs. 21)

2. The people shall not serve false gods but shall serve Jehovah's Messenger (vs.24-25).

3. Note the first and third persons “HE will bless you” and, “I will heal you.” Then note that Jehovah the first person called the third person, “Jehovah your God.”

This is just a foretaste of the brutal beating you will receive when we get to this subject. But we will go no where UNTIL you concede that Jesus is the firstborn of mankind ALONE.

thinker

Hi Thinker,

You sound like WJ. You guys add your thoughts to an open post, then when I respond, you say “Save it for the debate”. You responded on plural God first, Jack!

About your post:

First you didn't answer the question about Moses, the fact that it means “gods” not “persons in a godhead”, or the fact that all the accompanying verbs and adjectives are singular.

Second, your rant proves nothing because it doesn't even say what you think it does.

If you want to save the rest for the debate, don't reply to this post. If you do, I'll reply also. It's probably better to just do it here – we've been on one topic forever in the debate, but you decide.

peace and love,
mike

April 10, 2010 at 12:09 am#186555

Participant

Quote (thethinker @ April 10 2010,09:57)

Quote (martian @ April 10 2010,05:13)

Martian,

We are not obliged to consider any theory that is without examples from scripture.

The majestic plural cannot be shown from the scriptures. Therefore, it is just a theory that cannot be proven.

Then there is the problem with Jehovah calling His Messenger “Jehovah your God.” I duplicate a post from earlier today:

Quote

Jehovah refers to His Messenger by the same name saying, “serve Jehovah your God and HE will bless you.” Then He switches to the first person and says, “And I will take away your sickness.”

Note these three points:

1. Jehovah said that His Messenger has His name. (vs. 21)

2. The people shall not serve false gods but shall serve Jehovah's Messenger (vs.24-25).

3. Note the first and third persons “HE will bless you” and, “I will heal you.” Then note that Jehovah the first person called the third person, “Jehovah your God.”

Jehovah is indeed a plural unity.

thinker

If you are going to continue in an uneducated tirade be my guest. You can ignore proper language studies and ignore proper cultural content. You are just a clanging gong that leads people away.
If I am the alien you are the village idiot. LOL
I will only point out one fact. the term name (shem Heb) means character. It is not an identifier of deity but rather proclaims that the messenger had the character of God in him.
That is enough to throw out your theory altogether.
Get over yourself man. You lose.

April 10, 2010 at 12:15 am#186558

Blocked

Quote (martian @ April 10 2010,04:32)

For the poorly educated among us.

Hi Martian,

I am as well poorly educated. But unlike thinker, I am eagerly willing to learn ever more about the Scriptures.

Thank you for your post! I loved and deeply appreciated gaining this knowledge.

peace and love,
mike

April 10, 2010 at 12:16 am#186560

Participant

Thinker,
Honestly I am having a hard time following your posts. They seem like so much unconnected trains of thought. What does looking for a human king have to do with our discussion. I think sometimes you have a few wires crossed up or something. I am not going to waste my time answering silliness that has no meaning. The readers can see that my posts are concise and easy to understand. I will let them discern the truth.

April 10, 2010 at 12:23 am#186562

Blocked

Quote (thethinker @ April 10 2010,09:57)

So we must find an example where human kings used the so called “plural of majesty.”

Hi Thinker,

Isn't the Moses example close enough? Does it have to be a king? And you apparently are willing to blow off the fact that if it isn't a “plural of majesty”, then we all have more than one God. The word means “gods”. Do you worship gods? Or do you worship only one as the Scriptures teach?

peace and love,
mike

April 10, 2010 at 12:36 am#186567