- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Tow
Quote Sorry, but miracles and commands of genocide aside, I can still show Jesus is NOT the Jewish King Messiah. None of the passages on the messianic age have anything to do with miracles (except for resurrection of the dead) or genocide. But it makes you feel safer to attack my 'credibility' than to face the truth. That is OK, most Christians are riding on the river of denial. Like an alcoholic, drug addict, or person with a mental condition, the first step is to stop denying. 
And what is it you are here to do but attack believers and the GT and their credibility?
You use Hebrew scriptures that is botched in your opinion, and expect men to believe that what you say as true when you quote from your botched Text.
So all you have is your own opinion with out the authority of the scriptures since you do not believe in them as being inspired by God through men.
Again, I believe all scripture OT and GT.
Want to have a trinity debate, lets go.
For even the Torah speaks of the Trinity.
Gen 1:1
In the beginning *God* created the heaven and the earth.Yet we read…
And God said, *Let us make man in our image*, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.Moses had some understanding I believe that there was more than “one person” in the Godhead, yet there is “One God”.
Moses said “God” yet Moses quoted God “Let us” “in our”.
Moses also said the “Spirit of God”, “Moved”, which is an indication that the Spirit of God had life.
Gen 1:2
…And the Spirit of God *moved* upon the face of the watersThe Hebrew word for “Moved” literally means to hover over, or brood over as a mother hen over her chicks.
Yet Moses all through his account of the creation says 'God”.
Then we read…
Isa 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*;Isa 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*.So who is the “US” Tow?
I have the answer according to Jn 1:1-3.
But of course you will say something like it must have been sons of god or angels or its just Moses imagination.
Since the Torah says man is made in the image of God and no other, then when it says ” *Let us make man in our image*, after our likeness” then only Yeshua fits the bill.
So again, deny it or believe it or live with the contradiction that only God created all things yet their was someone else present that took part in the creation.
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 28 2007,10:03) Tow Quote Sorry, but miracles and commands of genocide aside, I can still show Jesus is NOT the Jewish King Messiah. None of the passages on the messianic age have anything to do with miracles (except for resurrection of the dead) or genocide. But it makes you feel safer to attack my 'credibility' than to face the truth. That is OK, most Christians are riding on the river of denial. Like an alcoholic, drug addict, or person with a mental condition, the first step is to stop denying. And what is it you are here to do but attack believers and the GT and their credibility?
Listen, I'm not attacking believers, just what they believe in. It dishonors G-d. If Christians were to attach themselves to a different god and leave YHVH out of their religion, I wouldn't care if 2.1 billion people were Christians. But since they dishonor the G-d I worship by turning Him into a trinity and believing he copulated with a human and then allowed His offspring as a human sacrifice, I will continue to counter such fallaciousness.
Quote You use Hebrew scriptures that is botched in your opinion, and expect men to believe that what you say as true when you quote from your botched Text. Again, you misrepresent. I said the Christian translations are botched. You and Nick really like to misrepresent and I find I'm taking more time defending your twists than anything else. Is it a comprehension problem or a tactic to keep me from discussing the fallaciousness of Jesus' claim to the throne of David?
Quote So all you have is your own opinion with out the authority of the scriptures since you do not believe in them as being inspired by God through men. Again, none of what I do not believe has a bearing on the messianic passages. NONE. So take your complaints elsewhere.
Quote Again, I believe all scripture OT and GT. And extra-scriptural ideas too
.Quote Want to have a trinity debate, lets go. For even the Torah speaks of the Trinity.
This should be fun since I don't believe in the GT Jesus. Since this is the case, where is the trinity?
Quote Gen 1:1
In the beginning *God* created the heaven and the earth.Yet we read…
And God said, *Let us make man in our image*, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.Moses had some understanding I believe that there was more than “one person” in the Godhead, yet there is “One God”.
Moses said “God” yet Moses quoted God “Let us” “in our”.
Moses also said the “Spirit of God”, “Moved”, which is an indication that the Spirit of God had life.
Gen 1:2
…And the Spirit of God *moved* upon the face of the watersThe Hebrew word for “Moved” literally means to hover over, or brood over as a mother hen over her chicks.
Yet Moses all through his account of the creation says 'God”.
More than one? So that automatically means three? Why not seven or ten or 1 million? After all, how many angels are there? Even most Christian scholars have given up on using the above to prove trinity yet you seem to hold on tenaciously.
Sorry, no 'three' here so you failed on your first attempt. Next.
Quote Then we read… Isa 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*;Isa 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*.So who is the “US” Tow?
Uh, you forgot the next verse after Gen 1:26
Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.
What happened to your 'us'? He was speaking either to the heavenly host in Gen 1:26 or 'us' was a plural form of majesty, just as a king might speak before his court. But then it was G-d alone who created in Gen 1:27, just like the passages from Isaiah above say.
Quote I have the answer according to Jn 1:1-3. Really? Even so, I only see two there, not three. Where does the trinity come in?
Quote But of course you will say something like it must have been sons of god or angels or its just Moses imagination. Hey you got part of it right! And many Christians agree because most have left Gen 1:26 behind long ago as proof of trinity. You must be primitive baptist or something.
Quote Since the Torah says man is made in the image of God and no other, then when it says ” *Let us make man in our image*, after our likeness” then only Yeshua fits the bill. So again, deny it or believe it or live with the contradiction that only God created all things yet their was someone else present that took part in the creation.
All explained above.
Tow
Quote
Uh, you forgot the next verse after Gen 1:26Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.
What happened to your 'us'? He was speaking either to the heavenly host in Gen 1:26 or 'us' was a plural form of majesty, just as a king might speak before his court. But then it was G-d alone who created in Gen 1:27, just like the passages from Isaiah above say.
You just made my point.
“let us make“
It dosnt say I will make man in our image.
Now unless you believe the hevenly host helped God in the creation to make man after “Their Image”
Then you have a contradiction.
So God “Eloyim” (plural) not “El” (singular) made man in his own image and after his likeness.
Only man was made in the image of God.
Do you know of any other?
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 28 2007,14:22) Tow Quote
Uh, you forgot the next verse after Gen 1:26Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.
What happened to your 'us'? He was speaking either to the heavenly host in Gen 1:26 or 'us' was a plural form of majesty, just as a king might speak before his court. But then it was G-d alone who created in Gen 1:27, just like the passages from Isaiah above say.
You just made my point.
“let us make“
It dosnt say I will make man in our image.
Now unless you believe the hevenly host helped God in the creation to make man after “Their Image”
Then you have a contradiction.
So God “Eloyim” (plural) not “El” (singular) made man in his own image and after his likeness.
Only man was made in the image of God.
Do you know of any other?
How does 'us' plural in 1:26 become 'his' and 'he', singular, in the next verse? He said 'let us' but it was only 'he' that created. So your point was not made except in your own biased mind.And this blows your other theory. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_God_in_Judaism#Elohim
===============================
Despite the -im ending common to many plural nouns in Hebrew, the word Elohim, when referring to God is grammatically singular, and takes a singular verb in the Hebrew Bible. The word is identical to the usual plural of el meaning a god or magistrate, and is cognate to the 'lhm found in Ugaritic, where it is used for the pantheon of Canaanite Gods, the children of El and conventionally vocalized as “Elohim” although the original Ugaritic vowels are unknown. When the Hebrew Bible uses elohim not in reference to God, it is plural (for example, Exodus 20:3).Other scholars interpret the -im ending as an expression of majesty (pluralis majestatis) or excellence (pluralis excellentiae), expressing high dignity or greatness: compare with the similar use of plurals of ba`al (master) and adon (lord). For these reasons many Trinitarians cite the apparent plurality of elohim as evidence for the basic Trinitarian doctrine of the Trinity. This was a traditional position but modern Christian theologians now largely accept that this is an exegetical fallacy.
=======================================Quote (Towshab @ Dec. 29 2007,08:16) [/quote] WorshippingJesus,Dec. wrote:Tow
Quote
Uh, you forgot the next verse after Gen 1:26Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.
What happened to your 'us'? He was speaking either to the heavenly host in Gen 1:26 or 'us' was a plural form of majesty, just as a king might speak before his court. But then it was G-d alone who created in Gen 1:27, just like the passages from Isaiah above say.
You just made my point.
“let us make“
It dosnt say I will make man in our image.
Now unless you believe the hevenly host helped God in the creation to make man after “Their Image”
Then you have a contradiction.
So God “Eloyim” (plural) not “El” (singular) made man in his own image and after his likeness.
Only man was made in the image of God.
Do you know of any other?
Quote How does 'us' plural in 1:26 become 'his' and 'he', singular, in the next verse? He said 'let us' but it was only 'he' that created. So your point was not made except in your own biased mind. Not so. How does “In our image” and “after our likeness” become “In his own image” “in the image of God” ?
Do you believe man was made in the image of other created beings and not God alone?
The Holy Spirit (Gen 1:1,2) and Yeshua (Jn 1:1-3) who is the image of the invisible God (Col 1:15-17) was present and took part in the creation of all things.
Quote And this blows your other theory. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_God_in_Judaism#Elohim
===============================
Despite the -im ending common to many plural nouns in Hebrew, the word Elohim, when referring to God is grammatically singular, and takes a singular verb in the Hebrew Bible. The word is identical to the usual plural of el meaning a god or magistrate, and is cognate to the 'lhm found in Ugaritic, where it is used for the pantheon of Canaanite Gods, the children of El and conventionally vocalized as “Elohim” although the original Ugaritic vowels are unknown. When the Hebrew Bible uses elohim not in reference to God, it is plural (for example, Exodus 20:3).Other scholars interpret the -im ending as an expression of majesty (pluralis majestatis) or excellence (pluralis excellentiae), expressing high dignity or greatness: compare with the similar use of plurals of ba`al (master) and adon (lord). For these reasons many Trinitarians cite the apparent plurality of elohim as evidence for the basic Trinitarian doctrine of the Trinity. This was a traditional position but modern Christian theologians now largely accept that this is an exegetical fallacy.
And this blows my theory you say?
You of all people should know that wikipedia is not such a reliable source and that there is many different “Opinions” regarding the nature of the word “Eloyim”
Check this source out which contradicts your source…
Range of Meanings
Jewish1.The word `eloha “God” and its plural, `elohim, is apparently a lengthened form of `El (cf. Aramaic `elah, Arabic `ilah). The singular `eloha is a relatively rare occurrence in the Bible outside of Job, where it is found about forty times. It is very seldom used in reference to a pagan god and then only in a late period (Dan. 11:37ff; II Chron. 32:15). In all other cases it refers to the God of Israel (e.g. Deut. 32:15; Ps. 50:22; 139:19; Prov. 30:5; Job 3:4, 23). The plural form `elohim is used not only of pagan “gods” (Ex. 12:12; 18:11; 20:31), but also of an individual pagan “god” (Judg. 11:24, II Kings 1:2ff.) and even a “goddess” (I Kings 11:5). In reference to Israel's “God” it is used extremely often — more than 2,000 times — and often with the article, ha-`elohim, “the [true] God.” Occasionally, the plural form `elohim, even when used of the God of Israel, is construed with a plural verb or adjective (e.g., Gen. 20:13; 35:7; Ex. 32:4, 8; II Sam. 7:23; Ps. 58:12), especially in the expression `elohim hayyim, “the living God.” In the vast majority of cases, however, the plural form is treated as if it were a noun in the singular. The odd fact that Hebrew uses a plural noun to designate the sole God of Israel has been explained in various ways. It is not to be understood as a remnant of the polytheism of Abraham's ancestors, or hardly as a “plural of majesty” — if there is such a thing in Hebrew. SOURCE: Encyclopedia Judaica 7:679So let me quote the last part again….
The odd fact that Hebrew uses a plural noun to designate the sole God of Israel has been explained in various ways. It is not to be understood as a remnant of the polytheism of Abraham's ancestors, or hardly as a “plural of majesty” — if there is such a thing in Hebrew. SOURCE: Encyclopedia Judaica 7:679
This contradicts you and your definition of “Plural Majesty”.
I would think you would go with the Jewish understanding of the word “Elohyim”.
It seems you have the bias here.
So then you still have to answer the “Let us make” “in Our Image” after “Our likeness”,
With the “So God” created man in “His own Image” in the “Image of God”, question.
Who were they? For apparently the text says there is more than one yet we see there is only one.
Kinda looks like “pluratity of Oneness” to me.
The building blocks of creation reveals this concept and in fact reveals the Glory of God.
Hi WJ,
So if it looks like some sort of trinity it must be so?
Sorry but greek logic carries little weight here compared with scripture.
The Word of God does not anywhere teach a trinity and that is where truth is taught.Quote (Nick Hassan @ Dec. 29 2007,09:26) Hi WJ,
So if it looks like some sort of trinity it must be so?
Sorry but greek logic carries little weight here compared with scripture.
The Word of God does not anywhere teach a trinity and that is where truth is taught.
NHSo I take it by this statement you dont believe that Jesus and the Holy Spirit was present in Gen 1:26,27!
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 28 2007,16:14) And this blows my theory you say? You of all people should know that wikipedia is not such a reliable source and that there is many different “Opinions” regarding the nature of the word “Eloyim”
Check this source out which contradicts your source…
Range of Meanings
Jewish1.The word `eloha “God” and its plural, `elohim, is apparently a lengthened form of `El (cf. Aramaic `elah, Arabic `ilah). The singular `eloha is a relatively rare occurrence in the Bible outside of Job, where it is found about forty times. It is very seldom used in reference to a pagan god and then only in a late period (Dan. 11:37ff; II Chron. 32:15). In all other cases it refers to the God of Israel (e.g. Deut. 32:15; Ps. 50:22; 139:19; Prov. 30:5; Job 3:4, 23). The plural form `elohim is used not only of pagan “gods” (Ex. 12:12; 18:11; 20:31), but also of an individual pagan “god” (Judg. 11:24, II Kings 1:2ff.) and even a “goddess” (I Kings 11:5). In reference to Israel's “God” it is used extremely often — more than 2,000 times — and often with the article, ha-`elohim, “the [true] God.” Occasionally, the plural form `elohim, even when used of the God of Israel, is construed with a plural verb or adjective (e.g., Gen. 20:13; 35:7; Ex. 32:4, 8; II Sam. 7:23; Ps. 58:12), especially in the expression `elohim hayyim, “the living God.” In the vast majority of cases, however, the plural form is treated as if it were a noun in the singular. The odd fact that Hebrew uses a plural noun to designate the sole God of Israel has been explained in various ways. It is not to be understood as a remnant of the polytheism of Abraham's ancestors, or hardly as a “plural of majesty” — if there is such a thing in Hebrew. SOURCE: Encyclopedia Judaica 7:679So let me quote the last part again….
The odd fact that Hebrew uses a plural noun to designate the sole God of Israel has been explained in various ways. It is not to be understood as a remnant of the polytheism of Abraham's ancestors, or hardly as a “plural of majesty” — if there is such a thing in Hebrew. SOURCE: Encyclopedia Judaica 7:679
This contradicts you and your definition of “Plural Majesty”.
I would think you would go with the Jewish understanding of the word “Elohyim”.
It seems you have the bias here.
Did you miss the other sentence, or is that YOUR bias?
“In the vast majority of cases, however, the plural form is treated as if it were a noun in the singular“
Quote So then you still have to answer the “Let us make” “in Our Image” after “Our likeness”, With the “So God” created man in “His own Image” in the “Image of God”, question.
Who were they? For apparently the text says there is more than one yet we see there is only one.
Kinda looks like “pluratity of Oneness” to me.
The building blocks of creation reveals this concept and in fact reveals the Glory of God.
He spoke to others, He created. If I am giving a speech and say “let us begin” but I'm the only one talking, what does this mean? I am giving the speech, no one us. So in Gen 1:27 you have G-d in in the singular creating.From http://www.aish.com/torahpo….766.asp
===================================
Hashem is referred to as Elohim in the plural, as a sign of respect (in English this is called “the Royal We”). Just as “Adonoi,” another name for Hashem, literally means “my Lords” in the plural. But whenever Hashem is called Elohim, in the Torah, the verb is always in the singular. As in the oft repeated phrase “Va'y'daber Elohim…” – “And God spoke…” – the verb “spoke” is in the singular. But in our verse the people used the plural “they will go,” indicating that they desired many gods. This is the basis for Rashi's interpretation.
===================================But here is another interesting turn from http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/premo.html
===================================
Early Hebrew religion was polytheistic; the curious plural form of the name of God, Elohim rather than El, leads them to believe that the original Hebrew religion involved several gods. This plural form, however, can be explained as a “royal” plural. Several other aspects of the account of Hebrew religion in Genesis also imply a polytheistic faith.Early Hebrew religion eventually became anthropomorphic, that is, god or the gods took human forms; in later Hebrew religion, Yahweh becomes a figure that transcends the human and material worlds. Individual tribes probably worshiped different gods; there is no evidence in Genesis that anything like a national God existed in the time of the patriarchs.
===================================So if you agree with this then agree that the the trinity is indeed polytheistic if you wish to view 'elohim' in this manner. Of course most know that the trinity is polytheistic in any case but some do try to fool themselves.
Quote (Towshab @ Dec. 29 2007,12:09) [/quote] WorshippingJesus,Dec. wrote:And this blows my theory you say?
You of all people should know that wikipedia is not such a reliable source and that there is many different “Opinions” regarding the nature of the word “Eloyim”
Check this source out which contradicts your source…
Range of Meanings
Jewish1.The word `eloha “God” and its plural, `elohim, is apparently a lengthened form of `El (cf. Aramaic `elah, Arabic `ilah). The singular `eloha is a relatively rare occurrence in the Bible outside of Job, where it is found about forty times. It is very seldom used in reference to a pagan god and then only in a late period (Dan. 11:37ff; II Chron. 32:15). In all other cases it refers to the God of Israel (e.g. Deut. 32:15; Ps. 50:22; 139:19; Prov. 30:5; Job 3:4, 23). The plural form `elohim is used not only of pagan “gods” (Ex. 12:12; 18:11; 20:31), but also of an individual pagan “god” (Judg. 11:24, II Kings 1:2ff.) and even a “goddess” (I Kings 11:5). In reference to Israel's “God” it is used extremely often — more than 2,000 times — and often with the article, ha-`elohim, “the [true] God.” Occasionally, the plural form `elohim, even when used of the God of Israel, is construed with a plural verb or adjective (e.g., Gen. 20:13; 35:7; Ex. 32:4, 8; II Sam. 7:23; Ps. 58:12), especially in the expression `elohim hayyim, “the living God.” In the vast majority of cases, however, the plural form is treated as if it were a noun in the singular. The odd fact that Hebrew uses a plural noun to designate the sole God of Israel has been explained in various ways. It is not to be understood as a remnant of the polytheism of Abraham's ancestors, or hardly as a “plural of majesty” — if there is such a thing in Hebrew. SOURCE: Encyclopedia Judaica 7:679So let me quote the last part again….
The odd fact that Hebrew uses a plural noun to designate the sole God of Israel has been explained in various ways. It is not to be understood as a remnant of the polytheism of Abraham's ancestors, or hardly as a “plural of majesty” — if there is such a thing in Hebrew. SOURCE: Encyclopedia Judaica 7:679
This contradicts you and your definition of “Plural Majesty”.
I would think you would go with the Jewish understanding of the word “Elohyim”.
It seems you have the bias here.
Quote Did you miss the other sentence, or is that YOUR bias? “In the vast majority of cases, however, the plural form is treated as if it were a noun in the singular“
Did you miss the first part of my post or is that your bias?
“Not so. How does “In our image” and “after our likeness” become “In his own image” “in the image of God” ?
Do you believe man was made in the image of other created beings and not God alone?
The Holy Spirit (Gen 1:1,2) and Yeshua (Jn 1:1-3) who is the image of the invisible God (Col 1:15-17) was present and took part in the creation of all things”.
You never answered the question.
Do you believe man was made in the image of other created beings and not God alone?
So, the point is the word “Elohyim” can be and is used sometimes in a plural sence.
Which supports the concept that God is plural Yet one. Or the scriptures both the Hebrew and the GT contradict.
Just as man speaks about an atom as one, yet we know the atom is not singular in its structure.
The atom is the building block of all of creation.
Name me one thing that is not plural in the universe.
Quote So then you still have to answer the “Let us make” “in Our Image” after “Our likeness”, With the “So God” created man in “His own Image” in the “Image of God”, question.
Who were they? For apparently the text says there is more than one yet we see there is only one.
Kinda looks like “pluratity of Oneness” to me.
The building blocks of creation reveals this concept and in fact reveals the Glory of God.
Quote He spoke to others, He created. If I am giving a speech and say “let us begin” but I'm the only one talking, what does this mean? I am giving the speech, no one us. So in Gen 1:27 you have G-d in in the singular creating. Making a speach and creating something is not the same thing.
If you say let us make this house then I would assume you are not doing it alone.
Besides that, is the “us” also the “Our image” and “Our Likeness”?
Quote From http://www.aish.com/torahpo….766.asp
===================================
Hashem is referred to as Elohim in the plural, as a sign of respect (in English this is called “the Royal We”). Just as “Adonoi,” another name for Hashem, literally means “my Lords” in the plural. But whenever Hashem is called Elohim, in the Torah, the verb is always in the singular. As in the oft repeated phrase “Va'y'daber Elohim…” – “And God spoke…” – the verb “spoke” is in the singular. But in our verse the people used the plural “they will go,” indicating that they desired many gods. This is the basis for Rashi's interpretation.
===================================But here is another interesting turn from http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/premo.html
===================================
Early Hebrew religion was polytheistic; the curious plural form of the name of God, Elohim rather than El, leads them to believe that the original Hebrew religion involved several gods. This plural form, however, can be explained as a “royal” plural. Several other aspects of the account of Hebrew religion in Genesis also imply a polytheistic faith.Early Hebrew religion eventually became anthropomorphic, that is, god or the gods took human forms; in later Hebrew religion, Yahweh becomes a figure that transcends the human and material worlds. Individual tribes probably worshiped different gods; there is no evidence in Genesis that anything like a national God existed in the time of the patriarchs.
===================================These sources are at odds with the “Encyclopedia Judaica”. I will go with the latter.
Quote So if you agree with this th
en agree that the the trinity is indeed polytheistic if you wish to view 'elohim' in this manner. Of course most know that the trinity is polytheistic in any case but some do try to fool themselves.Obviously you dont understand the Trinitarian view.
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 29 2007,09:33) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Dec. 29 2007,09:26) Hi WJ,
So if it looks like some sort of trinity it must be so?
Sorry but greek logic carries little weight here compared with scripture.
The Word of God does not anywhere teach a trinity and that is where truth is taught.
NHSo I take it by this statement you dont believe that Jesus and the Holy Spirit was present in Gen 1:26,27!
Hi WJ,
Does it say three gods were there?
God is one. Wake up.Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 29 2007,01:01) Quote Did you miss the other sentence, or is that YOUR bias? “In the vast majority of cases, however, the plural form is treated as if it were a noun in the singular“
Did you miss the first part of my post or is that your bias?
No, but it seems you ignore the alternatives in your quote that don't agree with your viewpoint AND the fact that modern CHRISTIAN scholars do not agree with you. Only refer to CHRISTIAN scholars when they agree with your polytheistic viewpoint?
Quote “Not so. How does “In our image” and “after our likeness” become “In his own image” “in the image of God” ? Do you believe man was made in the image of other created beings and not God alone?
Well, let's see: angels appeared as men more often than not, and G-d is all spirit…go figure.
Quote The Holy Spirit (Gen 1:1,2) and Yeshua (Jn 1:1-3) who is the image of the invisible God (Col 1:15-17) was present and took part in the creation of all things”. Jesus was not present for anything since he, along with several other men, were false human messiahs who ended up dead on a cross.
Quote You never answered the question. Do you believe man was made in the image of other created beings and not God alone?
See above. Are you all spirit?
Quote So, the point is the word “Elohyim” can be and is used sometimes in a plural sence. Which supports the concept that God is plural Yet one. Or the scriptures both the Hebrew and the GT contradict.
No, plural is plural, singular is singular. Oh, and yes the Tanakh and GT contradict, thanks for pointing that out.
Quote Just as man speaks about an atom as one, yet we know the atom is not singular in its structure. Yes, it is.
Quote The atom is the building block of all of creation. And how does that make it not singular?
Quote Name me one thing that is not plural in the universe. The database is not big enough. Your idea of plural is way off: you are thinking of a different word such as 'composite' or similar.
Quote Quote So then you still have to answer the “Let us make” “in Our Image” after “Our likeness”, With the “So God” created man in “His own Image” in the “Image of God”, question.
Who were they? For apparently the text says there is more than one yet we see there is only one.
Apparently you have a biased view of the verses that cannot see anything but 3-in-1.
Quote Kinda looks like “pluratity of Oneness” to me. The building blocks of creation reveals this concept and in fact reveals the Glory of God.
Anyone have a shovel? WJ is really scraping the bottom now.
Quote Quote He spoke to others, He created. If I am giving a speech and say “let us begin” but I'm the only one talking, what does this mean? I am giving the speech, no one us. So in Gen 1:27 you have G-d in in the singular creating. Making a speach and creating something is not the same thing.
If you say let us make this house then I would assume you are not doing it alone.
Besides that, is the “us” also the “Our image” and “Our Likeness”?
What if a father tells his 3 year old son “let us make a tree house”, do you think the son will help other than in a fun way?
Quote Quote From http://www.aish.com/torahpo….766.asp
===================================
Hashem is referred to as Elohim in the plural, as a sign of respect (in English this is called “the Royal We”). Just as “Adonoi,” another name for Hashem, literally means “my Lords” in the plural. But whenever Hashem is called Elohim, in the Torah, the verb is always in the singular. As in the oft repeated phrase “Va'y'daber Elohim…” – “And God spoke…” – the verb “spoke” is in the singular. But in our verse the people used the plural “they will go,” indicating that they desired many gods. This is the basis for Rashi's interpretation.
===================================But here is another interesting turn from http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/premo.html
===================================
Early Hebrew religion was polytheistic; the curious plural form of the name of God, Elohim rather than El, leads them to believe that the original Hebrew religion involved several gods. This plural form, however, can be explained as a “royal” plural. Several other aspects of the account of Hebrew religion in Genesis also imply a polytheistic faith.Early Hebrew religion eventually became anthropomorphic, that is
, god or the gods took human forms; in later Hebrew religion, Yahweh becomes a figure that transcends the human and material worlds. Individual tribes probably worshiped different gods; there is no evidence in Genesis that anything like a national God existed in the time of the patriarchs.
===================================These sources are at odds with the “Encyclopedia Judaica”. I will go with the latter.
As in, “I found one sentence I can agree with and twist for my own use so I will ignore all others”.
Quote Quote So if you agree with this then agree that the the trinity is indeed polytheistic if you wish to view 'elohim' in this manner. Of course most know that the trinity is polytheistic in any case but some do try to fool themselves. Obviously you dont understand the Trinitarian view.
Oh, I understand it, I just think it is humorous and ridiculous. Three gods is monotheistic?
Ephesians 4:4 There is one God, one Jesus Christ, one Spirit(the Fathers Spirit, cause that is the only Spirit) one baptizm, and Father of all who is above all and in us all. Period.
Peace and Love Mrs.
Quote (IM4Truth @ Dec. 30 2007,04:16) Ephesians 4:4 There is one God, one Jesus Christ, one Spirit(the Fathers Spirit, cause that is the only Spirit) one baptizm, and Father of all who is above all and in us all. Period. Peace and Love Mrs.
Hey that's three!Someone explained the trinity to me this way.
The Father BY HIMSELF is NOT God!
The Son BY HIMSELF is NOT God.
The Holy Spirit “BY HIMSELF” IS NOT GOD.ALL THREE MAKE GOD!
So according to this before the Son and Spirit there was NO GOD!
That's what was explained to me. But now WJ and IS and Oxy and others have a different perspective, I think?
Quote (kenrch @ Dec. 30 2007,05:06) Quote (IM4Truth @ Dec. 30 2007,04:16) Ephesians 4:4 There is one God, one Jesus Christ, one Spirit(the Fathers Spirit, cause that is the only Spirit) one baptizm, and Father of all who is above all and in us all. Period. Peace and Love Mrs.
Hey that's three!Someone explained the trinity to me this way.
The Father BY HIMSELF is NOT God!
The Son BY HIMSELF is NOT God.
The Holy Spirit “BY HIMSELF” IS NOT GOD.ALL THREE MAKE GOD!
So according to this before the Son and Spirit there was NO GOD!
That's what was explained to me. But now WJ and IS and Oxy and others have a different perspective, I think?
He are you talking about my smiles or what?Peace and Love Mrs.
Hi Nick
Quote The only reality for you, you say, is what you can see and understand.
Wars are evidence that what everyone can see and understand is far from universal.
Wars are not caused by ideology or understanding of reality, they are fights over different kinds of resources. Ideology is used to justify wars. Religious ideologies are the most prominent amongst them.Quote So, whether you like it or not, you are egocentric as we do not share your view of truth
I do not claim absolute truth and a special place in the universe. You seem to.Quote You have known the bible well but have never heard the voice of God
there and now have lost respect for both God and His works and words?
I can understand someone never reading the bible and not respecting it.
But coming to prefer the offerings of mere men is a little hard to take.
A little hard for you to take? Oh, I’m very sorry for the offense. Still, as the universe revolves around you, and not humans of other ‘faiths’, I can understand the surprise.Reading the bible objectively is the fastest way to come to the realisation that the chief character is fictional and a violent brute. I never had respect for mythology but that does not mean it is uninteresting to find out why people are slaves to it.
Stuart
Hi Stu,
You will have to live with your view of God and His revelation in the bible.
It is wiser to see those revelations as strong evidence of an amazing God
Who has a major plan that goes beyond the small view we have of anything
and to follow His advice and fear Him and seek to satify His simple demands.You must be born again.
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 06 2008,09:06) Hi Stu,
You will have to live with your view of God and His revelation in the bible.
It is wiser to see those revelations as strong evidence of an amazing God
Who has a major plan that goes beyond the small view we have of anything
and to follow His advice and fear Him and seek to satify His simple demands.You must be born again.
Boy Oh Boy I go for that one, you know Nick this website is getting so negative with all these diffrent believes. When I came here I came to share with others, but how can one do that when they and we constantley disagree.Peace and Love Mrs.
Hiu Im4,
This site is a portal on the world and the variety of views that are out there.
Rather like Paul's visit to Athens in Acts 17.
He did not stay long.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
