- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (TrinitarianCalvinist27 @ Aug. 02 2009,05:35) Quote (kerwin @ July 31 2009,21:42) If you wish to get somewhat more informed to check out what wikipedia states here about the word Elohim instead of embracing outdated notions that did not take into effect the context of word use. If you do not want to do the research then I see no reason to discuss it.
Kerwin,If all you do is research through Wikipedia then you prove your own ignorance of what is reliable information. A Hebrew Interlinear Bible is more substantial than Wikipedia. Sorry.
TC27
TC,
In the past Kerwin has admitted when his sources are wrong. He is one of the most honest and fair minded anti-trinitarinas on this board. I have a lot of respect for him.thinker
Quote (kerwin @ Aug. 01 2009,17:42) If you wish to get somewhat more informed to check out what wikipedia states here about the word Elohim instead of embracing outdated notions that did not take into effect the context of word use. If you do not want to do the research then I see no reason to discuss it.
Kerwin,
In Genesis 1:26 “elohim” must be a reference to a plural God. It says “Let US make man in OUR image.” The “us” cannot include angels for we are not in the image of God and of angels. The next phrase says, “So God created man in HIS own image.” We are in the image of God ALONE!thinker
Hi TT,
Really?
Was God alone and speaking just to your god community?Does that not mean you actually have several gods?
Christian Biker wrote:
Quote And most colleges these days will not accept wikipedia as a reliable source on term papers.
Your information is flawed on this point since what I have heard is that Wikipedia is not accepted as a primary source for term papers but is considered acceptable as a supporting source. There is good reason for this as Wikipedia is a encyclopedia and primary sources should be White papers or others that are less distant from the original source and thus more authorities.
Christian Biker wrote:
Quote Actually I was pointing out that anyone can edit wikipedia but my edit was edited. Also anyone can create a page there.
That is correct and that is both its strength and its weakness as you have found out as one person can make and error and another person can come along and correct that error.
Christian Biker wrote:
Quote So I’m not saying your source is false just that it is not considered a credible source.
I am going to disagree since a scientific study was done comparing Wikipedia and Britannica on science articles and reported in the journal nature and the two encyclopedias were found comparative though Britannica which you pay for was found to be somewhat superior in factual errors but not serious errors.
In the end Wikipedia does in fact make you as I said ‘somewhat more informed on this issue‘. If you really are serious about this issue then the more authorities sources would be what you should be consulting.. I have no idea how to contact those sources and do not expect our debate here to be elevated to that level.
To All………My suggestion to all here is to purchase Jeff Benners book on the (Mechanical Translation of Genesis) He deals with the root Hebrew language and i know MOST Here will find it every enlightening. It should add more to your understanding of scripture.
Peace and love to you alll……………………….gene
Quote (Gene @ Aug. 04 2009,23:06) To All………My suggestion to all here is to purchase Jeff Benners book on the (Mechanical Translation of Genesis) He deals with the root Hebrew language and i know MOST Here will find it every enlightening. It should add more to your understanding of scripture. Peace and love to you alll……………………….gene
Of you are short on cash the I believe this is a Microsoft Word Document that has his point of view in it. I don't have access to Word at this time so I cannot verify it.Now I have access to Word I will quote the point I was getting to.
Jeff Benner in Biblical Hebrew e-Magazine issue #28 on June 2006 wrote:
Quote The name Daniel is pronounced Dah-nee-eyl in the Hebrew text of the Bible. This name is composed of two words – ynd (dah-nee) and la (eyl). The Hebrew word Nd (dahn) means a judge. When the letter y (iy) is placed after a noun, the noun becomes first person possessive hence, ynd (dah-nee) means “my judge.” The word la (eyl) literally means one of power and authority but is usually translated as “God.” When these two words are combined into the proper name Daniel it means “my judge is God.”
That only gives us par of elohim which has the root “el” without the “y” indicating first person possessive as it does in the word “Daniel”. Still you have a compound word I have been told the first word is singular while the second word is plural.
Kerwin…….we can ascribe a lots of forms of Powers , but the simplest form of the word (Elohim) is POWERS and it fit most all scripture. Jeff uses it that way in his Mechanical translation of Genesis. And as i have found it pretty much meant all uses of the word. IMO
peace and love…………………gene
Quote (kerwin @ Aug. 05 2009,10:25) Quote (Gene @ Aug. 04 2009,23:06) To All………My suggestion to all here is to purchase Jeff Benners book on the (Mechanical Translation of Genesis) He deals with the root Hebrew language and i know MOST Here will find it every enlightening. It should add more to your understanding of scripture. Peace and love to you alll……………………….gene
Of you are short on cash the I believe this is a Microsoft Word Document that has his point of view in it. I don't have access to Word at this time so I cannot verify it.
You can download Openoffice for free and read MSoffice documents.Quote (Christian Biker @ Aug. 06 2009,00:46) Quote (kerwin @ Aug. 05 2009,10:25) Quote (Gene @ Aug. 04 2009,23:06) To All………My suggestion to all here is to purchase Jeff Benners book on the (Mechanical Translation of Genesis) He deals with the root Hebrew language and i know MOST Here will find it every enlightening. It should add more to your understanding of scripture. Peace and love to you alll……………………….gene
Of you are short on cash the I believe this is a Microsoft Word Document that has his point of view in it. I don't have access to Word at this time so I cannot verify it.
You can download Openoffice for free and read MSoffice documents.
Thank you!Quote (Gene @ Aug. 05 2009,20:59) Kerwin…….we can ascribe a lots of forms of Powers , but the simplest form of the word (Elohim) is POWERS and it fit most all scripture. Jeff uses it that way in his Mechanical translation of Genesis. And as i have found it pretty much meant all uses of the word. IMO peace and love…………………gene
The question I would like answered is what does “ohim” mean. Elohim was a word used by other people as well as by the Hebrew people.Here is a .pdf file you can take a look at.
Edited to add link to .pdf file.
Kerwin………I was reading last night on the Pictorial Hebrew word for Elohim, It's first pictorial letter is of an (OX) the (EL) and is a symbolic for POWER, the second picture symbol was of a Staff symbolic for support and a Sheppard's that watches over . So in the simplest form it they probably considered GOD or Elohim as the ONE with Powers that Shepherded Israel. But Jeff Benner uses it as POWERS in His mechanical translations of Genesis . Israel considered Elohim as the Powers of the LORD. HEAR O ISRAEL THE LORD OUR ELOHIM IS ONE LORD. So the term LORD GOD, can be translated as LORD (HE EXISTS) WITH ELOHIM (POWERS). Kerwin this seems to fit most scriptures if uses in context. IMO
peace and love to you and yoiurs……………………….gene
Gene wrote:
Quote So the term LORD GOD, can be translated as LORD (HE EXISTS) WITH ELOHIM (POWERS). Kerwin this seems to fit most scriptures if uses in context.
I am going to have to disagree as Elohim is used to refer to many people and items that are not God. I can see calling a angel or even a Hebrew “a power” but that breaks down when referring to a possession or work of God.
In the King James version Elohim is translated to 10 or so different words though “God” is the main one. The others are mighty, great, judge, godly, goddess, exceedingly, angels, and God-ward.
Kerwin………No i am not saying the word GOD is used to refer to many ,the word represents what God has given them (the power) to be in there positions, as He told Moses “you shall be a God unto Pharaoh, He also told Him He shall be in His (place) to Aron. The reason GOD is translated in different ways is because it's all about types of POWERS. But to us there is (ONLY) ONE (TRUE) GOD or POWER. Why is that, it is because (ALL) power comes from GOD< he is the ONLY true source of it all, without Him there would be (NO) Power to do anything in all creation. GOD the FATHER is the source of our Power , our strength, and our salvation, it is from him we have the power of life and breath, our bodies, our minds (everything we have is from ) His Power, Him and HIM alone. IMO
peace and love…………………gene
Gene said:
Quote So the term LORD GOD, can be translated as LORD (HE EXISTS) WITH ELOHIM (POWERS). Kerwin this seems to fit most scriptures if uses in context. Gene,
It doesn't fit well at all. Adam and Eve heard the sound of LORD GOD walking in the garden in the cool of the day. LORD GOD called out to them with a voice like theirs. Therefore, LORD GOD can take human form.thinker
thinker……….We are talking about the word (GOD) here by it self, The LORD is another Subject. The LORD is the ONE that posses and administers His (ELOHIM) or POWERS. GOD is NOT a Person, GOD is Spirit ( intellect) connected with POWER, Jesus now Has the seven eyes (Spirit or intellect, with the seven Horns of Power connected with them. These are the Seven Spirits of GOD that are before the throne of GOD that go forth into all the earth. As shown in Revelations. Thinker here is something for you to think about , notice in revelations that Jesus HIMSELF is pictured as Slain before the throne of GOD , ask yourself why is that? let me help you here, it is because Jesus put his own WILL to DEATH and Now Does (ONLY) the WILL of the LORD who sits on the throne by the seven Spirits given HIM from The FATHER who the LORD of ALL, including Jesus and US. If Jesus was GOD HIMSELF he would (NOT) be pictured as a SLAIN LAMB> I think you have a problem distinguishing between the LORD and HIS ELOHIM. Notice Scripture says HERE O ISREAL THE LORD OUR GOD IS ONE LORD. See the LORD is OUR ELOHIM (POWER)> And He is ONE, not two or three anythings. Elohim can indwell anyone and when that happens, it is then Elohim in all and through all. ELOHIM IS SPIRIT (INTELLECT) CONNECTED WITH POWER, “after you have recieved (POWER) or Elohim from on high”. Is that not what Jesus said, remember?.
peace and love……………………gene
To all! I find it so ironic that in all the Books we have I cannot find Elohim anywhere.
Not in Strong's Concordance, or Strong's Bible Dictionary, not in King James Concordance or Britannica Encyclopedia. Or in the New International Bible.But I did not believe my eyes, it is in the Catholic Bible. It says:” Elohim is one of the names for God,
corresponding to the Greek Theos and the Latin Deus. In the Old Testament, the title implies great
significance and is broader in scope then the name Javeh.
Surprise, Surprise.But I don't think that Elohim is plural, just like God is not. They are titles. God the Father will always be greater then the Son and ALL.
No Trinity.Peace and Love Irene
Irene said:
Quote God the Father will always be greater then the Son and ALL Irene,
Your statement amounts to the denial that Jesus has been exalted to His Father's right hand. Your belief system is not Christian. Kathi is teaching that there were two Gods involved in creation and you don't attack that. All you prove is that you are anti-trinitarian. You do not show that you care about truth. If you did you would speak out about Kathi's polytheism.thinker
thinker Since Kathi's post is no another page I did not read Her post. So before you jump all over me, get the facts straight first. The tread is about Elohim not Kathi. Did you not find it ironic that I found Elohim only in my Catholic Bible. We were Catholics until my Husband was 47 and I was 46. We both are thankful to God that He brought us out of that system. That to me is wonderful and I want to share that with all. I will read Kathi's post, but responding to it, why should I? She did not say that to me now did She?
Peace and Love Irene
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
