Why Elohim if God is Absolutely One?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ben_Masada
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ben:

This is a long thread and I tried to see if I missed this point that I felt would have been brought up, and it likely has,…but I missed it. Genesis 1:26 “Then God said, let us make men in our image”. How exactly did the chosen people interpret or understand this?

I myself heard the best explanation from St. Patrick and the 3 leaf clover example. But the question is to you.

Some people like to run their mouth. As Gottle of Greer remarked, your next advertisement is not appropriate, but then I see this is not the only web site that you express your and only your opinions.

But to the point, I don’t know how I would have explained this statement if this Jew, Jesus Christ, didn’t come along and educate me today versus if I lived in 700 BC, or maybe 33 AD? You and I have the benefit of 2000 years along with communication capability that is nearly world wide. How does one explain this passage, (and there are others as well referring to a plural deity, but one in being), how does one explain this today? I know I as the chief priest before Christ would have no idea!

Enjoy in a different understanding! 🙂
 
No Alan, that’s not what I mean. A so-called Atheist Jew, which I don’t believe there is one, has not confessed religious loyalty to another faith. Therefore, he or she remains Jewish.

Then you are talking about cultural Judaism not religious Judaism, and while I don’t have statistics to prove there have been atheist Jews nor can you defifintively prove there aren’t

**Really! If that’s how you understand, let us read the introduction to the text. To begin with that’s a Letter to the church in Galatia. (Gal. 1:2)
Then, Paul was disappointed that so many among the Galatians were deserting him and going over to the other gospel, which was the gospel of the Apostles he would refer to. (Gal. 1:6)

It is logical to assume that if they were Jewish they would have already been circumcised. Since they were being persuaded by the Judaizers it is logical to assume that they were not Jewish already.

**The difference being he persuaded them he did not brainwash them. How could a Jew (Paul) whom you say like Jesus would never speak of a man God unless he was convinced by supernatural means convince so many.Also regarding Jesus there are several possibilities besides the one you propose, i.e. Jesus was either mad or evil or if He was in fact God become man He would not deny Himself & would not be bound by Jewish or pagan theology indeed several times he exhibits disdain for the letter of the law.
And Paul had to have presented pretty persuasive evidence to convert so many in the diasporic communities. Finally you say that it is not important what one believes as long as one does the right thing. Then what is your motivation for arguing so strongly against traditional Christian belief if you truly believe it doesn’t matter what one believes?
 
alan1941 said:
Then you are talking about cultural Judaism not religious Judaism, and while I don’t have statistics to prove there have been atheist Jews nor can you defifintively prove there aren’t
Click to expand...
Ahem!.. Alan, I think Judaism is the religion. As for a Jew to be a Jew because his mother is a Jewess, I think you should call it Judeity. Not Judaism.
(Would any Jewish person reading this correct me if I am wrong?)
 
alan1941 said:
No Alan, that’s not what I mean. A so-called Atheist Jew, which I don’t believe there is one, has not confessed religious loyalty to another faith. Therefore, he or she remains Jewish.

Then you are talking about cultural Judaism not religious Judaism, and while I don’t have statistics to prove there have been atheist Jews nor can you defifintively prove there aren’t

**Really! If that’s how you understand, let us read the introduction to the text. To begin with that’s a Letter to the church in Galatia. (Gal. 1:2)
Then, Paul was disappointed that so many among the Galatians were deserting him and going over to the other gospel, which was the gospel of the Apostles he would refer to. (Gal. 1:6)

It is logical to assume that if they were Jewish they would have already been circumcised. Since they were being persuaded by the Judaizers it is logical to assume that they were not Jewish already.

**The difference being he persuaded them he did not brainwash them. How could a Jew (Paul) whom you say like Jesus would never speak of a man God unless he was convinced by supernatural means convince so many.Also regarding Jesus there are several possibilities besides the one you propose, i.e. Jesus was either mad or evil or if He was in fact God become man He would not deny Himself & would not be bound by Jewish or pagan theology indeed several times he exhibits disdain for the letter of the law.
And Paul had to have presented pretty persuasive evidence to convert so many in the diasporic communities. Finally you say that it is not important what one believes as long as one does the right thing. Then what is your motivation for arguing so strongly against traditional Christian belief if you truly believe it doesn’t matter what one believes?
Should God study the latest Judaic theology before He’d do anything? He is bound by His own Words. In itself, it’s quite enough, if God truly is God, and we certainly believe He is…
Click to expand...
 
Alan, I was writing in addition to the quote from you, not in reply to it. I intended it for Ben.
Just in case you’d be wondering about the quote from YOU appearing there…
 
Hi
I know some few words Elohim if God is Absolutely One.

Christians in general misunderstand the word Elohim when using it as an evidence for plurality in God. Trinity, that is. As time can be considered chronologically, and also psychologically, a word can also be looked at grammatically in terms of plurality of itself or psychologically as the plural related to it. I’ll explain it in more simpler words.

I am happy to see this forum .
keep posting to us daily .

thank you .

nuimos.

GOD IS ONE
 
Lapell said:
Ahem!.. Alan, I think Judaism is the religion. As for a Jew to be a Jew because his mother is a Jewess, I think you should call it Judeity. Not Judaism.
(Would any Jewish person reading this correct me if I am wrong?)
Click to expand...
Thank you for the correction but a cultural Jew is still a Jew
 
Ben_Masada said:
Christians in general misunderstand the word Elohim when using it as an evidence for plurality in God. Trinity, that is. As time can be considered chronologically, and also psychologically, a word can also be looked at grammatically in terms of plurality of itself or psychologically as the plural related to it. I’ll explain in more simpler words.

The word Elohim does mean plural but not of itself. I mean, of the subject, but of the object it points to. For example, Elohim barah et hashamaim…" If Elohim, the subject was a word meant to be itself in the plural, the verb would by necessity have to follow the plural as in “baru,” (created).

Let’s take Abraham as an example to illustrate the case. Afterwards we will return to
Elohim. We all know that originally, Abraham’s name was Abram, and the name change was effected by occasion of the Covenant between himself and God, when the reason for the change was that Abraham would be the father of a host of nations. (Gen. 17:4,5) So, does the word Abraham mean plural? Yes, but not of the subject (Abraham) who continued to be one person. However, Abraham meant plural
but of the object or “many nations.”

Now, back to Elohim, there was a time in the very beginning, when the Hebrews considered God to be a local God: The God of the Hebrews, in opposite to the gods of the other nations. When they came to the enlightenment or understanding that God was absolutely One, and that He was the God of the whole Earth, the God of all the nations, they also came to understand that the plurality of Elohim was related to the object (the nations) and not of the subject, or Himself, Who remained absolutely One.

Grammatically, the singular for God is El, and the plural Elim, and not Elohim. Therefore, there is no plurality in Elohim per se but in what He relates to. The conclusion is that God is absolutely One and not a Trinity or Duality. Besides, God is also incorporeal, and there can be no plurality in incorporeality.

Ben: :confused:
Click to expand...
Most knowledgeable Trinitarians no longer place much weight on the plural form of elohim as a proof that God is more than one person. It can be proven quite easily that this is not the case because Moses is called elohim in Exodus 7:1 and in Ps 45:6-7 the Hebrew King (most consider this to be Solomon) is called elohim.

I am not a Trinitarian, I am one of Jehovah’s Witnesses, but I have spent much time studying the doctrine and debating those who do believe the doctrine.

שָׁלוֹם

Dan
 
Lapell said:
Except that you still oppose Paul VS the Apostles. Paul did not say:*“the other Gospel” but “another Gospel”, and the Gospel he proclaimed was the same as the one proclaimed by the Apostles. So, I am afraid that you HAVE assumed things. Are you sure you are really interested in the Truth? Then why don’t you pray the True Truth to show you the Way to It whereever it leasds you to and to give you first what it takes to accept It as It truly IS? Have you already done that? Given what you have been saying here and elsewhere, I have serious doubts. Sorry.
Click to expand...
**Lapel, for heaven’s sake, what is the difference between
the other gospel, and another gospel? It means that the gospel of Paul was different from the gospel of the Apostles. **
 
Lapell said:
It was through prophet Nathan, after King David had told the prophet: “Look! I am living in a palace made from cedar, and the Lord God is living in a tent!” (When David wanted to build a temple more worthy of his God whom he cherished)
Click to expand...
I think you should visit the dictionary for the meaning of Covenant.
 
Wildkit said:
Ben:

This is a long thread and I tried to see if I missed this point that I felt would have been brought up, and it likely has,…but I missed it. Genesis 1:26 “Then God said, let us make men in our image”. How exactly did the chosen people interpret or understand this?

I myself heard the best explanation from St. Patrick and the 3 leaf clover example. But the question is to you.

Some people like to run their mouth. As Gottle of Greer remarked, your next advertisement is not appropriate, but then I see this is not the only web site that you express your and only your opinions.

But to the point, I don’t know how I would have explained this statement if this Jew, Jesus Christ, didn’t come along and educate me today versus if I lived in 700 BC, or maybe 33 AD? You and I have the benefit of 2000 years along with communication capability that is nearly world wide. How does one explain this passage, (and there are others as well referring to a plural deity, but one in being), how does one explain this today? I know I as the chief priest before Christ would have no idea!

Enjoy in a different understanding! 🙂
Click to expand...
What makes you think the Chief Priests of before Jesus
had no idea about the absolutely unity of God? As I can see, you still need a lot to know about what being Jewish is all about. I would recomend you the book “The Guid for the Perplexed” by Moses Maimonides. You would have no doubt afterwards.
 
alan1941 said:
No Alan, that’s not what I mean. A so-called Atheist Jew, which I don’t believe there is one, has not confessed religious loyalty to another faith. Therefore, he or she remains Jewish.

Then you are talking about cultural Judaism not religious Judaism, and while I don’t have statistics to prove there have been atheist Jews nor can you defifintively prove there aren’t.

A Jew is a Jew, cultural or religiously.

**Really! If that’s how you understand, let us read the introduction to the text. To begin with that’s a Letter to the church in Galatia. (Gal. 1:2)
Then, Paul was disappointed that so many among the Galatians were deserting him and going over to the other gospel, which was the gospel of the Apostles he would refer to. (Gal. 1:6)

It is logical to assume that if they were Jewish they would have already been circumcised. Since they were being persuaded by the Judaizers it is logical to assume that they were not Jewish already.

All the converts of the Nazarenes were circumcised and they would become Jewish for all purposes.**

The difference being he persuaded them he did not brainwash them. How could a Jew (Paul) whom you say like Jesus would never speak of a man God unless he was convinced by supernatural means convince so many

How could Muslims strap bombs around their waist and explode themselves for the sake of Islam? There is no difference.

.Also regarding Jesus there are several possibilities besides the one you propose, i.e. Jesus was either mad or evil or if He was in fact God become man.

Jesus was neither mad nor evil. Mad and evil were and are those who claim that he was what he was not.

He would not deny Himself & would not be bound by Jewish or pagan theology indeed several times he exhibits disdain for the letter of the law.

You better don’t show me where in the NT Jesus exhibited disdain for the letter of the Law, because you will be digging one more contradiction against Matthew 5:18,19. Check it out!

And Paul had to have presented pretty persuasive evidence to convert so many in the diasporic communities.

So many! What do you mean? Paul was unable to raise a church with Gentiles from scratch. His custom was to overturn the Nazarene synagogues into Christian churches. 98 percent of his missionary activities were among the Jews. Since the synagogues of Damascus and until his last station in Rome, he never left the Jews in peace. Can you show me in the NT, especially in the book of Acts where did he ever decide to go to the Gentiles? I am curious to know.

Finally you say that it is not important what one believes as long as one does the right thing. Then what is your motivation for arguing so strongly against traditional Christian belief if you truly believe it doesn’t matter what one believes?

Good question! And it requires a good answer. Here is my motivation. Jesus was Jewish, wasn’t he? Yes, he was. So, my motivation is to defend the image of Judaism from being distorted by Christians before the world, every time they use a Jew to teach the world that Greek Mythology is possible in Judaism. Isn’t it a good motivation to hang around? Drop the Jewishness of Jesus and I am out.
Click to expand...
 
nuimos said:
Hi
I know some few words Elohim if God is Absolutely One.

Christians in general misunderstand the word Elohim when using it as an evidence for plurality in God. Trinity, that is. As time can be considered chronologically, and also psychologically, a word can also be looked at grammatically in terms of plurality of itself or psychologically as the plural related to it. I’ll explain it in more simpler words.

I am happy to see this forum .
keep posting to us daily .

thank you .

nuimos.

GOD IS ONE
Click to expand...
Wow! That’s an welcome voice! Does it mean I have an ally here? Sometimes I think I am like John the Immerser, a small voice in the wilderness.
 
Dan_Parker said:
Most knowledgeable Trinitarians no longer place much weight on the plural form of elohim as a proof that God is more than one person. It can be proven quite easily that this is not the case because Moses is called elohim in Exodus 7:1 and in Ps 45:6-7 the Hebrew King (most consider this to be Solomon) is called elohim.

I am not a Trinitarian, I am one of Jehovah’s Witnesses, but I have spent much time studying the doctrine and debating those who do believe the doctrine.

שָׁלוֹם

Dan
Click to expand...
I am aware of the use of Elohim to indicate plurality in people, but in God the “im” of Elohim indicates no plurality. Ephraim as the Ten Tribes could have indicated plurality but not in the individual son of Jacob. This is just an example that “im” in Hebrew is not an absolute rule of plurality.
 
Ben_Masada said:
**Lapel, for heaven’s sake, what is the difference between
the other gospel, and another gospel? It means that the gospel of Paul was different from the gospel of the Apostles. **
Click to expand...
Here I adamantly say to you: No, Ben, for heaven’s sake! You must know what a heresy is. There were many “gospels” written in the beginnings of the Church. Not all of them ended up making the canon of the New Testament! Most of them were declared plainly false doctrine, others were considered not fit to help the faithful advance in their faith and on God’s paths.Those were what Paul was refering to, not the Gospel preached by the Apostles!
 
Lapell said:
Here I adamantly say to you: No, Ben, for heaven’s sake! You must know what a heresy is. There were many “gospels” written in the beginnings of the Church. Not all of them ended up making the canon of the New Testament! Most of them were declared plainly false doctrine, others were considered not fit to help the faithful advance in their faith and on God’s paths.Those were what Paul was refering to, not the Gospel preached by the Apostles!
Click to expand...
The “gospel according to Mary Magdalene”, for instance, is one such false gospel. Same with the “gospel according to Judas” which inspired the rock opera Jesus Christ Superstar… False teaching is rampant, Ben. False testimony on TV also (not just in the news) despite God condemning such thing. They see no immediate punishment, so they all take a chance for the glory of a moment which compared to eternity is very tiny. There WILL be a Last Judgment, Ben. That you don’t see doesn’t mean there won’t be any. I haven’t seen the Land of Israel in person, but I am certain of its existence, and you are living there, don’t you! It does exist. My not seeing it doesn’t change a thing, does it?!
 
Lapell said:
The “gospel according to Mary Magdalene”, for instance, is one such false gospel. Same with the “gospel according to Judas” which inspired the rock opera Jesus Christ Superstar… False teaching is rampant, Ben. False testimony on TV also (not just in the news) despite God condemning such thing. They see no immediate punishment, so they all take a chance for the glory of a moment which compared to eternity is very tiny. There WILL be a Last Judgment, Ben. That you don’t see doesn’t mean there won’t be any. I haven’t seen the Land of Israel in person, but I am certain of its existence, and you are living there, don’t you! It does exist. My not seeing it doesn’t change a thing, does it?!
Click to expand...
How come you believe God exists, Ben? Have you ever seen Him? And yet, you proclaim with your people that He does exist, and you proclaim the Torah (and the rest of the TaNaKH) because you are convinced it’s the Truth, don’t you?
 
Ben_Masada said:
I think you should visit the dictionary for the meaning of Covenant.
Click to expand...
Oh, I know what it is. It’s not just a contract. It’s an oath normally sworn by two parties. Like Abraham with Abimelekh, for instance. But in Covenants involving God, did you notice that with Abraham for instance, the Shekhinah passed between the quarters of meat, but Abraham did not? God had made His promise official through an oath, swearing on Himself that He would accomplish what He said. At Mount Sinai, the Kahal (assembly) of God swore that they would do everything His Torah asks them to, and God swore that He would look after His People provided they are faithful to Him and to His Torah.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top