- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 21 2011,19:30) One source says that Moses knew nothing of the majestic plural, also, adonai is not the plural of adown, and adonai and adown are very closely written. I will continue to look into it while I find more compound unity examples.
Hi Kathi,It seems to me that you must concede at least one point. Either the word in Gen 39:2 is the plural of adon, indicating a plural of majesty. Or the word is “adonai”, indicating that God is NOT the only one called by this title.
At least that's what I'm gathering from your words here.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Sep. 23 2011,16:17) Kathi, Plural of majesty?
Mike,
I think it is possible that the writer made a word plural for emphasis or greatness, and they also pluralized a word to express more than one. I think that the verses about kings can mean to include princes also as I have pointed out previously. I still need to learn a ton more about Hebrew and still feel very unqualified to say too much about it. I want to study the compound unities that we know to be compound unities in the OT, like Deut 9:1“Hear, O Israel! You are crossing over the Jordan today to go in to dispossess nations greater and mightier than you, great cities fortified to heaven,
Israel is not just one person but a compound unity of many. The Hebrew morphology shows that the pronouns for Israel are masculine and singular as well as the verb forms in this verse. This goes along with Jehovah having singular, masculine pronouns with singular verbs also and still be a compound unity made up of more than one person. So therefore, when it seems like Jehovah is one person because of the use of masculine, singular pronouns and singular verbs, it is not necessarily so, possible, but it doesn't provide proof that Jehovah is not a compound unity of more than one person.
Now about Isaiah 54:5:
“For your husband is your Maker, Whose name is the LORD of hosts; And your Redeemer is the Holy One of Israel, Who is called the God of all the earth.
Just because the word translated 'husband' can mean ruler does not prove that 'husband' isn't the right translation. Also note that the 'your' pronouns refer to Jerusalem, according to the scholars, and are all singular but this time, feminine and not masculine. So here is another example of a compound unity expressed with singular pronouns. It is interesting that 'Israel' is 'male' and Jerusalem is 'feminine.' I believe that Jerusalem represents the church in some passages and we already know that the church is spoken of with feminine pronouns.
Anyway, husband is really the correct translation if you look at verse 1 in that chapter and notice the theme of marriage throughout the passage:
1“Sing, O barren woman,
you who never bore a child;
burst into song, shout for joy,
you who were never in labor;
because more are the children of the desolate woman
than of her who has a husband,
2“Enlarge the place of your tent,
stretch your tent curtains wide,
do not hold back;
lengthen your cords,
strengthen your stakes.
3For you will spread out to the right and to the left;
your descendants will dispossess nations
and settle in their desolate cities.
4“Do not be afraid; you will not suffer shame.
Do not fear disgrace; you will not be humiliated.
You will forget the shame of your youth
and remember no more the reproach of your widowhood.
5For your Maker is your husband—
the Lord Almighty is his name—
the Holy One of Israel is your Redeemer;
he is called the God of all the earth.
6The Lord will call you back
as if you were a wife deserted and distressed in spirit—
a wife who married young,
only to be rejected,” says your God. ”
says the Lord.
You can see by the context that 'husband' is intended and not 'ruler.'
Jesus is the husband to the church…He is the bridegroom and the church is the bride.Kathi
Okay Kathi,
Concerning the plural of majesty: It is a fact that Dagon, Milcom (Molech) and Asteroth were SINGULAR gods who were called by the plural “elohim”. So that one fact alone will cancel any thought of Jehovah being a plural God – at least based on the use of the word “elohim”.
Now, rememeber that “elohim” can either refer to more than one god, or a great god. The word cannot refer to “more than one PERSON in a godhead”. So “Jehovah, your Elohim” either means “Jehovah your Great God” or it means “Jehovah your Gods”. It cannot possibly mean “Jehovah your PERSONS in ONE Godhead”.
So…………….to you, is Jehovah your Great God? Or is Jehovah your Gods – as in more than one God?
Concerning the compound unity: Israel is a nation. It is not a PERSON. The church is a conglomeration of multiple people, not a PERSON. I consider God to be a PERSON, not a “government” made up of many. To you, is “God” a PERSON, or a conglomeration?
Also, don't let the gendered words take over your understanding of scripture, Kathi. In Romans 4:22, the Greek word “righteousness” is a female word, but that doesn't mean that everyone who is righteous is female. In Mark 3:10, the word “diseases” is female, but that doesn't mean a disease has a sexual persuasion. The Hebrew word “ruach” is a female word, but that doesn't mean God's Holy Spirit is a female.
You need to take the genders of these words with a grain of salt, and not let them alter the meaning of the scriptures, IMO.
Mike
should go in french,were many words are either masculine or feminine but it is merely for phonetics or distinction
and many Latin root languages are similarPierre
Kathi, you said:
Quote You can see by the context that 'husband' is intended and not 'ruler.'
Abraham, who was the “husband” of Sarah, was the “lord” of Sarah. A husband WAS the lord of his wife, and Sarah called Abraham “my lord”. (Gen 18:12, 1 Peter 3:6)
And we all know that “lord” means “master/ruler”.You said:
Quote Jesus is the husband to the church…He is the bridegroom and the church is the bride. But let's investigate the “husband” rendering of 54:5 for a minute. You claim that the Father is the “God part” of Jehovah, and Jesus is the “Lord part”. Yet 54:5 says that this “husband” is the GOD of all the earth. How can that be Jesus, according to your doctrine?
Quote (terraricca @ Sep. 24 2011,09:03) Mike should go in french,were many words are either masculine or feminine but it is merely for phonetics or distinction
and many Latin root languages are similarPierre
Yes Pierre!
That is exactly my point. Thank you for helping me to drive it home.Mike,
Quote Either the word in Gen 39:2 is the plural of adon, indicating a plural of majesty. I would say that this would be the correct choice, but again, I am not educated in the Hebrew language but I am willing to learn and grow in this. That is why I spent big $$ for a Hebrew morphological study with the grammar labels and Hebrew/English interlinear and reverse interlinear.
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Sep. 24 2011,09:51) Excellent post Kathi! Keith
Thank you Keith, nice to see that you are still alive!Blessings,
KathiQuote (mikeboll64 @ Sep. 24 2011,10:11) Kathi, you said: Quote You can see by the context that 'husband' is intended and not 'ruler.'
Abraham, who was the “husband” of Sarah, was the “lord” of Sarah. A husband WAS the lord of his wife, and Sarah called Abraham “my lord”. (Gen 18:12, 1 Peter 3:6)
And we all know that “lord” means “master/ruler”.You said:
Quote Jesus is the husband to the church…He is the bridegroom and the church is the bride. But let's investigate the “husband” rendering of 54:5 for a minute. You claim that the Father is the “God part” of Jehovah, and Jesus is the “Lord part”. Yet 54:5 says that this “husband” is the GOD of all the earth. How can that be Jesus, according to your doctrine?
Mike,
God and Lord are interchangeable words applied to both the Father and the Son. The Father is the God of gods in Deut 10:17 and the Son is the Lord of lords in Deut 10:17, from what I can tell, yet they are both called Theos and Adonai in other places. Context helps us know at times, and at other times God or Lord may apply to the unity, i.e. more than one person.As I have shown you with Israel and Jerusalem, they are both compound unities with many members but are referred to in the singular pronouns and verbs. That is a main reason for me to spend the big $$ on the Hebrew grammar and morphology.
The name 'Israel' sometimes refers to Jacob, sometimes the land, and sometimes the people as a nation. Context rules here also.
The name 'Jerusalem' sometimes refers to the city, or the inhabitants of the city, or the church. Context rules here also.
I don't disagree with you about the husband being the lord of his wife but lord doesn't always mean husband yet husband always means lord of a wife. Husband is clearly the best translation given the context in Isaiah 54:5.
Kathi
Mike,
Quote Also, don't let the gendered words take over your understanding of scripture, Kathi. In Romans 4:22, the Greek word “righteousness” is a female word, but that doesn't mean that everyone who is righteous is female. In Mark 3:10, the word “diseases” is female, but that doesn't mean a disease has a sexual persuasion. The Hebrew word “ruach” is a female word, but that doesn't mean God's Holy Spirit is a female. You need to take the genders of these words with a grain of salt, and not let them alter the meaning of the scriptures, IMO.
I agree about the gender not necessarily meaning something is male or female but sometimes it does. My emphasis is on whether the word is singular with singular pronouns and singular verbs yet we know the noun/proper noun is a name of a compound unity representing many members, i.e. Israel and Jerusalem in some contexts.
Isaiah 10:22
For though your people, O Israel, may be like the sand of the sea, Only a remnant within them will return; A destruction is determined, overflowing with righteousness.
Isaiah 52:2
Shake yourself from the dust, rise up, O captive Jerusalem; Loose yourself from the chains around your neck, O captive daughter of Zion.
Mike,
Quote Concerning the plural of majesty: It is a fact that Dagon, Milcom (Molech) and Asteroth were SINGULAR gods who were called by the plural “elohim”. So that one fact alone will cancel any thought of Jehovah being a plural God – at least based on the use of the word “elohim”. Now, rememeber that “elohim” can either refer to more than one god, or a great god. The word cannot refer to “more than one PERSON in a godhead”. So “Jehovah, your Elohim” either means “Jehovah your Great God” or it means “Jehovah your Gods”. It cannot possibly mean “Jehovah your PERSONS in ONE Godhead”.
So…………….to you, is Jehovah your Great God? Or is Jehovah your Gods – as in more than one God?
I agree with this but I would add to the part that I bolded by saying, “elohim can refer to more than one God/god, or a great God/god.” I would also add that the word elohim could refer to the unity of more than one God.
Kathi
Mike,
Quote So…………….to you, is Jehovah your Great God? Or is Jehovah your Gods – as in more than one God? Well, as I have told you before, and more than once…Jehovah can be the name of the unity of two persons who are both a God, or Jehovah can refer to one or the other person within the unity.
The Father has the name Jehovah.
The Son has the name Jehovah.
The unity of the Father and the Son has the name Jehovah.Similar to:
The body of believers in Ephesus has the name 'the Church.'
The body of believers in Corinth has the name 'the Church.'
The unity of the body of believers at large has the name 'the Church.'Mike,
Quote Concerning the compound unity: Israel is a nation. It is not a PERSON. The church is a conglomeration of multiple people, not a PERSON. I consider God to be a PERSON, not a “government” made up of many. To you, is “God” a PERSON, or a conglomeration? Again,
God can be what the unity is called, or either person is called. The word God/elohim/theos can mean supreme authority and as the unity of the Father and the Son with their Spirit, there would be supreme authority.Kathi
Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 24 2011,22:39) Well, as I have told you before, and more than once…Jehovah can be the name of the unity of two persons who are both a God,
Then that is really the bottom line of your doctrine, and all I needed to know. You believe that Jehovah is the unity of TWO completely separate and individual Gods.Yet for US, there is but ONE God, the Father. For YOU, there are TWO Gods, the Father AND the Son.
You worship them BOTH, against all scriptural teaching – including the teaching of Jesus himself.
You will find none on this site and none in your church that will worship TWO Gods along with you Kathi.
Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 24 2011,22:43) Mike, Quote Concerning the compound unity: Israel is a nation. It is not a PERSON. The church is a conglomeration of multiple people, not a PERSON. I consider God to be a PERSON, not a “government” made up of many. To you, is “God” a PERSON, or a conglomeration? Again,
God can be what the unity is called, or either person is called. The word God/elohim/theos can mean supreme authority and as the unity of the Father and the Son with their Spirit, there would be supreme authority.Kathi
My God has a name, Kathi. That name is YHWH. My God also has a Son whose name is Jesus.When I ask my God for help, I am asking a PERSON whose name is Jehovah. I make the request THROUGH a PERSON named Jesus.
We are no longer allowed to approach our God directly, because mankind's sins have piled up all the way to heaven. That is why I approach our ONE God THROUGH the Mediator and Priest He set up for us. That Servant of God acts as a filter for us, carrying our petitions on to God Himself, who will no longer deal with us directly. He does this with PLEADING and PETITIONS and PRAYERS to our ONE God, who also happens to be HIS God. (Romans 8:34)
But in your mind, by the time your prayers have reached the Priest, they have already reached one of your Gods. Why would the Mediator BETWEEN you and one of your Gods be the other one of your Gods?
Why would one of your Gods be the Priest to the other One? And if Jesus is equally God, then surely he can do for us whatever the Father could do for us, right? So why bother trying to go THROUGH Jesus to get to the Father in the first place? Who needs the Father at all if we have direct contact with a different God who can do for us anything the Father could do for us? Why not just forget about the Father altogether since our other God can answer our prayers on his own? Whether you recognize it our not, THIS is exactly the end result of the Trinity Doctrine that Satan so delicately put into the minds of certain people. And Satan's plan has been working perfectly for years. Which of the “Jesus is God” people out there need the Father? Listen to your contemporary Christian music station, Kathi. Spend a day listening to these beautiful songs about how God did this and God does that for us. And then notice in the chorus how the “God” they're singing so wonderfully to is actually Jesus, not Jehovah. People think that Jesus IS God, and sing God's praises to God's Son instead of to Him. A few of them make vague references to “Father, Spirit and Son”, but they seem to think the NAME of this trinity is JESUS! It's appalling to us who have but one God, the Father, and the Lord HE set in place – His begotten Son.
Kathi, I believe it's time for you to change your signature once again. You are now claiming that “God” can refer to Jesus, the Father, or the unity of the two. And “Lord” can refer to any of those three choices also. Which puts a HEAVY damper on your Deut 10:17 “proof text” – a damper which you now address by leaving all scripture open to “the interpretation of Kathi – according to how well it fits into the doctrine you've created”.
What? This scripture calls the Father “Lord”? Oh, that's okay now, because my doctrine no longer insists that Jesus is the “Lord part of Jehovah”. I have now adjusted my doctrine to the point that I can make any claim I want: Jesus can be “God”. The Father can be “Lord”. Either one of them can be “Jehovah”. In fact, sometimes they can BOTH be “God” or “Lord” or “Jehovah”. With this kind of flexibility, I can now make any scripture claim what I WANT it to claim!
Kathi, Jehovah is the Most High God. (Gen 14:22) And Jesus is the SON OF the Most High God. (Mark 5:7) This is the scriptural TRUTH of the matter, no matter how often you want to twist various scriptures to your liking.
peace,
mikeQuote (mikeboll64 @ Sep. 25 2011,10:45) Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 24 2011,22:39) Well, as I have told you before, and more than once…Jehovah can be the name of the unity of two persons who are both a God,
Then that is really the bottom line of your doctrine, and all I needed to know. You believe that Jehovah is the unity of TWO completely separate and individual Gods.Yet for US, there is but ONE God, the Father. For YOU, there are TWO Gods, the Father AND the Son.
You worship them BOTH, against all scriptural teaching – including the teaching of Jesus himself.
You will find none on this site and none in your church that will worship TWO Gods along with you Kathi.
Mike,
1. Do you believe that the Father and the Son are two separate persons?2. Do you believe that the description/title 'theos' is applied to the Father in scripture and to the Son in scripture?
3. Do you believe that the description/title 'kurios' is applied to the Father in scripture and to the Son in scripture?
Kathi
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
