• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

How does “Hear, O Israel, YAHWEH, our God, is one” prove that YAHWEH is three persons

Soapy

Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
Some strange ideology claims that Moses told the Israelites that Yahweh, the God of their ancestors, is three persons but one God.

Im unable to see how that is expressed in the scriptures (both old and new).

Can someone throw light on this strange matter and show where, how, and why there are three equal almighty beings as the one YAHWEH God?
 

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
You are too obsessed with this. Move on. There is more to the Bible then this.

You've proven your point, but, there's come a point when repeating has opposite effect then reminding. It causes people to become immune to your arguments.
 

paradox

(㇏(•̀ᵥᵥ•́)ノ)
How does “Hear, O Israel, YAHWEH, our God, is one” prove that YAHWEH is three persons
How does "God created everything..." say God is 3 persons?

Which is equally silly question since it says anything about 3 persons.
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Some strange ideology claims that Moses told the Israelites that Yahweh, the God of their ancestors, is three persons but one God.
I'm not aware of anyone who believes that the Trinity doctrine was anything that Moses was aware of, nor that he taught anyone that. He also wasn't aware of "love your enemies", and "turn the other cheek" either. He taught you should kill your enemies and knock their teeth out if they knock out yours. Jesus corrected that in what he taught.

So what's your point? That Moses didn't know later teachings? I don't think anyone would disagree with that! :)
 

dybmh

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש
When I hear this claim, they generally focus on the word echad and refer to Gen 2:24 where man and wife become one flesh. They then look at Deut 6:4 and see the same word echad thinking that it could be a similar concept where multiple beings are unified into one.

Please don't get me wrong, I don't subscribe to this interpretation. I'm just sharing what I've heard.
 

stvdv

Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV
New Some strange ideology claims that Moses told the Israelites that Yahweh, the God of their ancestors, is three persons but one God.

Im unable to see how that is expressed in the scriptures (both old and new).

Can someone throw light on this strange matter and show where, how, and why there are three equal almighty beings as the one YAHWEH God?
For me simple to understand
I don't take everything literally

From Advaita POV also understandble
 

tigger2

Active Member
Echad (‘Plural’ Oneness)

I have seen Deut. 6:4 - “YHWH [Jehovah/Yahweh] our God, YHWH [Jehovah/Yahweh] one [Echad] in Hebrew]” - rendered in several ways. (I prefer "Jehovah [is] our God, Jehovah alone.") Some trinitarians misinterpret this. They often say something like this: “At Deut. 6:4 the word ‘one’ is echad in Biblical Hebrew, which means ‘composite unity’ or ‘plural oneness’.”

First, it certainly wouldn’t be surprising to find that some noted trinitarian authority on Biblical Hebrew had written somewhere that echad means “united or plural oneness.” But I haven’t found one yet!

Here is what I have found written about echad by authorities on Biblical Hebrew:

The only definition given for echad in the trinitarian New American Standard Exhaustive Concordance is: “a prim[ary] card[inal] number; one”. We find no “plural oneness” there!

The highly respected Biblical Hebrew authority, Gesenius, says that echad is “a numeral having the power of an adjective, one.” He then lists the various meanings of echad as:

“(1) The same,”

“(2) first,”

“(3) some one,”

“(4) it acts the part of an indefinite article,”

(5) one only of its kind,”

“(6) when repeated [echad ... echad] ‘one ... another’,”

“(7) [K echad] AS one man.” [The initial consonant of this word, “K” actually means “as” or “like,” so in this special form the meaning is close to that of a plural oneness. But this is not the form used at Deut. 6:4 !! ]

Gesenius also lists a plural form of the word (achadim,) which means “joined in one, united.” This, too, is not the form used at Deut. 6:4 which context shows, instead, to have meaning #5 above. - See Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament, #259, Baker Book House. Surely, if God (or Jehovah) were really a union of persons, a united one, this form which truly means “united one” would have been used to describe “Him” repeatedly in the Holy Scriptures. But it and all other words with similar meanings were never used for God (or Jehovah)!

By using a good Bible Concordance (such as Strong’s or Young’s) we can find all the uses of echad in the Bible. Unfortunately (due to space limitations), Young’s and Strong’s both list the rare plural form (achadim,) and the “AS one” (Kechad) form along with the common singular form (echad) without distinguishing among them.

Nevertheless, since both the plural form and the kechad form are used quite rarely (see Ezek. 37:17 and 2 Chronicles 5:13 for examples), we can see that the overwhelming majority of the uses of echad listed in these concordances (over 500) obviously have the meaning of singleness just as we normally use the word “one” today.

If you should find a scripture listed as using echad in your concordance that definitely has the meaning “plural oneness” or “together,” or “as one,” you should check it out in an interlinear Hebrew-English Bible. If the word in question is really the echad form of the word (as at Deut. 6:4), then it will end with the Hebrew letter “d” in the Hebrew portion of your interlinear. If, however, it is really the plural form of the word (achadim), then it will end in the Hebrew letter “m”. And if the word is really Kechad (“AS one”), it will begin with the Hebrew letter “k” (looks like a backwards "C"). Remember, though, that Hebrew reads from right to left (so the LAST letter of a Hebrew word is really the letter at the extreme LEFT.)

Using your concordance along with an interlinear Hebrew-English Bible in this manner, I don’t believe you will ever find echad (as used at Deut. 6:4) literally meaning “plural oneness”!

Further emphasizing the impropriety of this “plural oneness” interpretation of echad are the many trinitarian renderings of Deut. 6:4. In the dozens of different trinitarian Bible translations that I have examined none of them have rendered Deut. 6:4 (or Mark 12:29) in such a way as to show anything even faintly resembling a “plural oneness”!!

Even the highly trinitarian The Living Bible, which, being a paraphrase Bible, is able to (and frequently does) take great liberties with the literal Greek and Hebrew meanings in order to make better trinitarian interpretations, renders Deut. 6:4 as “Jehovah is our God, Jehovah alone.” Notice that there’s not even a hint of a “plural oneness” Jehovah!

The equally trinitarian (and nearly as “freely” translated as The Living Bible) Good News Bible (GNB) renders it: “The LORD - and the LORD alone - is our God.” - Compare the equally “free-handed” (and trinitarian) The Amplified Bible.

And even among the more literal trinitarian translations of Deut 6:4 we find:

“The LORD is our God, the LORD alone.” - New Revised Standard Version.

“The LORD is our God, the LORD alone!” - New American Bible.

“The LORD is our God, the LORD alone.” - The Holy Bible in the Language of Today, Beck (Lutheran).

“Yahweh our God is the one, the only Yahweh.” - New Jerusalem Bible.

“Yahweh is our God, - Yahweh alone.” - The Emphasized Bible, Rotherham.

“The LORD is our God, the LORD alone.” - An American Translation (Smith-Goodspeed).

“The Eternal, the Eternal alone, is our God.” - A New Transation, Moffatt .

The trinitarian ASV (also the RSV) gives 4 different possible renderings of Deut. 6:4. One of them is identical with The Living Bible, and none of them includes an understanding of a “plural oneness” God!

The paraphrased The Living Bible also renders Mark 12:29 (where Jesus quotes Deut. 6:4 and an excellent spot for him to reveal a “trinity” God --- or even just a “plural oneness” God) as: “The Lord our God is the one and only God.” Notice the further explanation of the intended meaning of this scripture at Mark 12:32, 34. “’... you have spoken a true word in saying that there is only one God and no other...’ Realizing this man’s understanding, Jesus said to him, ‘You are not far from the Kingdom of God.’”

Why doesn’t this highly interpretive trinitarian paraphrase Bible (or any other Bible for that matter) bring out a “plural oneness” meaning at these scriptures (Deut. 6:4; Mark 12:29) if that can be a proper interpretation for echad?

Surely, if the trinitarian scholars who made this Bible had thought there was even the slightest justification for an echad = “plural oneness” interpretation, they would have rendered it that way: “Jehovah is a composite unity;” or “Jehovah is the United One;” or “Jehovah is a plural oneness;” etc.

Instead they have clearly shown that God (who inspired it), Moses (who wrote it under inspiration), and even Jesus himself (who taught that it was part of the most important commandment of all - Mark 12:28-29, LB; GNB; etc.) intended this scripture to show God as a single person only!

Similarly, the three annotated trinitarian study Bibles I own would certainly explain any intended “multiple-oneness” meaning for echad at Deut. 6:4 (if there were any possibility of such an interpretation). But the extremely trinitarian New American Bible, St. Joseph ed., gives no hint of such an understanding of echad in its footnote for Deut. 6:4 (or anywhere else). And the trinitarian The New Oxford Annotated Bible, 1977 ed., likewise gives no hint of such an understanding in its footnote for Deut. 6:4 (or anywhere else). And that trinitarian favorite: The NIV Study Bible, 1985, also gives no hint of such a meaning for echad in its footnote for Deut. 6:4 (or anywhere else). The only possible reason for all these trinitarian study Bibles ignoring this “proof” is that it simply is not true!
 

Soapy

Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
Echad (‘Plural’ Oneness)

I have seen Deut. 6:4 - “YHWH [Jehovah/Yahweh] our God, YHWH [Jehovah/Yahweh] one [Echad] in Hebrew]” - rendered in several ways. (I prefer "Jehovah [is] our God, Jehovah alone.") Some trinitarians misinterpret this. They often say something like this: “At Deut. 6:4 the word ‘one’ is echad in Biblical Hebrew, which means ‘composite unity’ or ‘plural oneness’.”

First, it certainly wouldn’t be surprising to find that some noted trinitarian authority on Biblical Hebrew had written somewhere that echad means “united or plural oneness.” But I haven’t found one yet!

Here is what I have found written about echad by authorities on Biblical Hebrew:

The only definition given for echad in the trinitarian New American Standard Exhaustive Concordance is: “a prim[ary] card[inal] number; one”. We find no “plural oneness” there!

The highly respected Biblical Hebrew authority, Gesenius, says that echad is “a numeral having the power of an adjective, one.” He then lists the various meanings of echad as:

“(1) The same,”

“(2) first,”

“(3) some one,”

“(4) it acts the part of an indefinite article,”

(5) one only of its kind,”

“(6) when repeated [echad ... echad] ‘one ... another’,”

“(7) [K echad] AS one man.” [The initial consonant of this word, “K” actually means “as” or “like,” so in this special form the meaning is close to that of a plural oneness. But this is not the form used at Deut. 6:4 !! ]

Gesenius also lists a plural form of the word (achadim,) which means “joined in one, united.” This, too, is not the form used at Deut. 6:4 which context shows, instead, to have meaning #5 above. - See Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament, #259, Baker Book House. Surely, if God (or Jehovah) were really a union of persons, a united one, this form which truly means “united one” would have been used to describe “Him” repeatedly in the Holy Scriptures. But it and all other words with similar meanings were never used for God (or Jehovah)!

By using a good Bible Concordance (such as Strong’s or Young’s) we can find all the uses of echad in the Bible. Unfortunately (due to space limitations), Young’s and Strong’s both list the rare plural form (achadim,) and the “AS one” (Kechad) form along with the common singular form (echad) without distinguishing among them.

Nevertheless, since both the plural form and the kechad form are used quite rarely (see Ezek. 37:17 and 2 Chronicles 5:13 for examples), we can see that the overwhelming majority of the uses of echad listed in these concordances (over 500) obviously have the meaning of singleness just as we normally use the word “one” today.

If you should find a scripture listed as using echad in your concordance that definitely has the meaning “plural oneness” or “together,” or “as one,” you should check it out in an interlinear Hebrew-English Bible. If the word in question is really the echad form of the word (as at Deut. 6:4), then it will end with the Hebrew letter “d” in the Hebrew portion of your interlinear. If, however, it is really the plural form of the word (achadim), then it will end in the Hebrew letter “m”. And if the word is really Kechad (“AS one”), it will begin with the Hebrew letter “k” (looks like a backwards "C"). Remember, though, that Hebrew reads from right to left (so the LAST letter of a Hebrew word is really the letter at the extreme LEFT.)

Using your concordance along with an interlinear Hebrew-English Bible in this manner, I don’t believe you will ever find echad (as used at Deut. 6:4) literally meaning “plural oneness”!

Further emphasizing the impropriety of this “plural oneness” interpretation of echad are the many trinitarian renderings of Deut. 6:4. In the dozens of different trinitarian Bible translations that I have examined none of them have rendered Deut. 6:4 (or Mark 12:29) in such a way as to show anything even faintly resembling a “plural oneness”!!

Even the highly trinitarian The Living Bible, which, being a paraphrase Bible, is able to (and frequently does) take great liberties with the literal Greek and Hebrew meanings in order to make better trinitarian interpretations, renders Deut. 6:4 as “Jehovah is our God, Jehovah alone.” Notice that there’s not even a hint of a “plural oneness” Jehovah!

The equally trinitarian (and nearly as “freely” translated as The Living Bible) Good News Bible (GNB) renders it: “The LORD - and the LORD alone - is our God.” - Compare the equally “free-handed” (and trinitarian) The Amplified Bible.

And even among the more literal trinitarian translations of Deut 6:4 we find:

“The LORD is our God, the LORD alone.” - New Revised Standard Version.

“The LORD is our God, the LORD alone!” - New American Bible.

“The LORD is our God, the LORD alone.” - The Holy Bible in the Language of Today, Beck (Lutheran).

“Yahweh our God is the one, the only Yahweh.” - New Jerusalem Bible.

“Yahweh is our God, - Yahweh alone.” - The Emphasized Bible, Rotherham.

“The LORD is our God, the LORD alone.” - An American Translation (Smith-Goodspeed).

“The Eternal, the Eternal alone, is our God.” - A New Transation, Moffatt .

The trinitarian ASV (also the RSV) gives 4 different possible renderings of Deut. 6:4. One of them is identical with The Living Bible, and none of them includes an understanding of a “plural oneness” God!

The paraphrased The Living Bible also renders Mark 12:29 (where Jesus quotes Deut. 6:4 and an excellent spot for him to reveal a “trinity” God --- or even just a “plural oneness” God) as: “The Lord our God is the one and only God.” Notice the further explanation of the intended meaning of this scripture at Mark 12:32, 34. “’... you have spoken a true word in saying that there is only one God and no other...’ Realizing this man’s understanding, Jesus said to him, ‘You are not far from the Kingdom of God.’”

Why doesn’t this highly interpretive trinitarian paraphrase Bible (or any other Bible for that matter) bring out a “plural oneness” meaning at these scriptures (Deut. 6:4; Mark 12:29) if that can be a proper interpretation for echad?

Surely, if the trinitarian scholars who made this Bible had thought there was even the slightest justification for an echad = “plural oneness” interpretation, they would have rendered it that way: “Jehovah is a composite unity;” or “Jehovah is the United One;” or “Jehovah is a plural oneness;” etc.

Instead they have clearly shown that God (who inspired it), Moses (who wrote it under inspiration), and even Jesus himself (who taught that it was part of the most important commandment of all - Mark 12:28-29, LB; GNB; etc.) intended this scripture to show God as a single person only!

Similarly, the three annotated trinitarian study Bibles I own would certainly explain any intended “multiple-oneness” meaning for echad at Deut. 6:4 (if there were any possibility of such an interpretation). But the extremely trinitarian New American Bible, St. Joseph ed., gives no hint of such an understanding of echad in its footnote for Deut. 6:4 (or anywhere else). And the trinitarian The New Oxford Annotated Bible, 1977 ed., likewise gives no hint of such an understanding in its footnote for Deut. 6:4 (or anywhere else). And that trinitarian favorite: The NIV Study Bible, 1985, also gives no hint of such a meaning for echad in its footnote for Deut. 6:4 (or anywhere else). The only possible reason for all these trinitarian study Bibles ignoring this “proof” is that it simply is not true!
If there could be a single answer to this question (which there should be) then this, sir, is it.

You left no stone unturned in this matter. Clearly the question has been studied so comprehensively and so in-depth that it is confusing and exasperating that Trinitarians still use their version in debates (presumably for the sake of trini’s who haven’t seen the proof against them!!)

Thank you
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Some strange ideology claims that Moses told the Israelites that Yahweh, the God of their ancestors, is three persons but one God.

Im unable to see how that is expressed in the scriptures (both old and new).

Can someone throw light on this strange matter and show where, how, and why there are three equal almighty beings as the one YAHWEH God?
G-d is One and trinity is a Pauline-Hellenist concept , it has got nothing to do with Moses and or Jesus and their teachings if correctly understood, please. Right?

Regards
 

Truth in love

Well-Known Member
Some strange ideology claims that Moses told the Israelites that Yahweh, the God of their ancestors, is three persons but one God.

Im unable to see how that is expressed in the scriptures (both old and new).

Can someone throw light on this strange matter and show where, how, and why there are three equal almighty beings as the one YAHWEH God?


There is not much in the OT on this. Matthew 5 and John 17 do address this a lot. The oneness is in purpose not physical being. The common pagan beliefs of the day had many gods of various natures and duties. The One God was unified and without internal discord/
 

Eli G

Well-Known Member
I'm not aware of anyone who believes that the Trinity doctrine was anything that Moses was aware of, nor that he taught anyone that. He also wasn't aware of "love your enemies", and "turn the other cheek" either. He taught you should kill your enemies and knock their teeth out if they knock out yours. Jesus corrected that in what he taught.

So what's your point? That Moses didn't know later teachings? I don't think anyone would disagree with that! :)
Do you think that God can tell Moses that he is ONE (Deut. 6:4) , and then a post-apostolic Christian say that God is three and be true, even if God had said just the opposite?

G-d is One and trinity is a Pauline-Hellenist concept (...) Right?

Regards
Paul a Trinitarian? Really?
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Do you think that God can tell Moses that he is ONE (Deut. 6:4) , and then a post-apostolic Christian say that God is three and be true, even if God had said just the opposite?
Do you think that post-apostolic Christians did not know what God told Moses about being One? Maybe that you don't understand what their theology is, is much more likely than that being the case. It would seem so anyway. Unless for some reason, they just couldn't see the obvious like you have? I think it's just a little too convenient that you happen to have the real truth, and they all missed it.
 

Eli G

Well-Known Member
Do you think that post-apostolic Christians did not know what God told Moses about being One? Maybe that you don't understand what their theology is, is much more likely than that being the case. It would seem so anyway. Unless for some reason, they just couldn't see the obvious like you have? I think it's just a little too convenient that you happen to have the real truth, and they all missed it.
So, what is your explanation to the fact that for Jews and original Christians God is One person, only the Father, and for Trinitarians God is three persons?
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
So, what is your explanation to the fact that for Jews and original Christians God is One person, only the Father, and for Trinitarians God is three persons?
Are you saying that early Christians did not believe that Jesus was God? Certainly they believed the Holy Spirit was God, didn't they?

May I ask, what is a "person" to you, in regards to God? A human-type being separate and distinct from other creatures, occupying some separate space with a body of sorts? Exactly what does that mean when someone speaks of God in terms of "person"? Can you explain that? You did just refer to God as "One person", so what does that word person mean to you?
 

Soapy

Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
Are you saying that early Christians did not believe that Jesus was God? Certainly they believed the Holy Spirit was God, didn't they?

May I ask, what is a "person" to you, in regards to God? A human-type being separate and distinct from other creatures, occupying some separate space with a body of sorts? Exactly what does that mean when someone speaks of God in terms of "person"? Can you explain that? You did just refer to God as "One person", so what does that word person mean to you?
Answering:
A Person is a sentient Being, one with self-identification (self awareness), and an open Will.

There are therefore only three types of ‘Person’ in existence: God, Humans, and Angels.
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Answering:
A Person is a sentient Being, one with self-identification (self awareness), and an open Will.
So when scripture speaks of the Son in those terms, and the Holy Spirit in those terms, doesn't this suggest that there is individual "personhood" to these? And with that in mind, can't you see how the Trinity is describing just that as "persons"?

BTW, as a footnote, with the above definition of person as one with self-identification, and an open will, I think we can conclude that a fetus is not yet a person in this sense. A child does not truly become a person until they are able to self identify and exert will. In the womb, those don't seem to apply. Just saying.
 

Eli G

Well-Known Member
Are you saying that early Christians did not believe that Jesus was God? Certainly they believed the Holy Spirit was God, didn't they?

May I ask, what is a "person" to you, in regards to God? A human-type being separate and distinct from other creatures, occupying some separate space with a body of sorts? Exactly what does that mean when someone speaks of God in terms of "person"? Can you explain that? You did just refer to God as "One person", so what does that word person mean to you?
The word GOD appears in NT about 1344 times. Can you tell me how many of those occasions you think it refers to Jesus Christ?
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
The word GOD appears in NT about 1344 times. Can you tell me how many of those occasions you think it refers to Jesus Christ?
I asked you what the word "person" meant in regards to God. Since you used the term. Can you answer that question please?

To repost my question again here for ease of reference:

"May I ask, what is a "person" to you, in regards to God? A human-type being separate and distinct from other creatures, occupying some separate space with a body of sorts? Exactly what does that mean when someone speaks of God in terms of "person"? Can you explain that? You did just refer to God as "One person", so what does that word person mean to you?"​

I was looking forward to your answer in this post, but you skipped it and asked another question instead.
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
A person to me is any individual with his own personality and identity.
Is the Holy Spirit spoken of as a person in the NT, according to your definition of person? Did Jesus speak of the Holy Spirit as a different "personage" from the Father?
 
Top