• 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!

101G

Well-Known Member
I certainly do not believe in a trinity. But elohim refers also to a plurality. Not a trinity either.
Correct. God is the EQUAL Share of himself in flesh. supportive scripture. . Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:"

being is present tense, and the "FORM" of God is his NATUTRE.question? is there two Spirits? no, but the EQUAL SHARE of the one same Spirit in NATURE, and not in "Persons". for the root word of "Form"/Nature is
G3313 μέρος meros (me'-ros) n.
1. a portion (i.e. an amount allotted, a part of something).

and another Word for portion or that is synonyms with portion is "SHARE". there is the PLURALITY of ONE in the ECHAD, in TIME, PLACE, ORDER. or RANK. God is the EQUAL SHARE, not a division, but the EQUAL "SHARE" of himself in Flesh.

which answers the Psalms 110:1 question. the LORD, and the Lord there is the SAME one "PERSON", in the ECHAD of First and Last. Spirit, the LORD, First, the Ordinal First, Father, who came or manifested in Flesh in the EQUAL SHARE of the ECHAD, as Lord, the Last, the Ordinal Last, Son.

same one Person, EQUALLY "SHARED" in the ECHAD of First, and Last in TIME, PLACE, ORDER, or RANK.

that's the PLURALITY of God, not in persons, but "SHARED" in Nature.

hope this help.

101G
 

101G

Well-Known Member
Jesus is not a lord of anything. He might be the first and last of failed messiahs during his lifetime
how did he failed?
He is ONE (cardinal) of a long list of false or failed messianic claimants. He might even be (according to the linked list) the FIRST of that list.
again, how is he false?
And you still haven't explained wha a "plurality of one" even means.
see post #341 above

101G
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
how did he failed?
He lacked the personal lineage. He lacked the necessary temperment and behavior. He did not accomplish the required things. He was not anointed. He is dead.
again, how is he false?
In that in his failures he is not the true messiah. That makes him false.
see post #341 above

101G
yeah, I tried to decipher it but it makes no sense to me. You are stringing together weird assertions and not making any sense.
 

wellwisher

Well-Known Member
So my question is: why does "God" refer to himself in plural? (Let us create...)

I did some research, and the Trinity isn't even mentioned in the Bible (at least not as "Trinity", there are hints of it). Why would a "God" that claims to be only God refer to what looks like others like him (as if he was one of many; "our likeness")?

*I'm an atheist (just in case)

Genesis 1-26; 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.

The plural has to do with the Angels, who were already in the image of God, before man appears. God and Heaven is a timeless abstract, The Angels were there with God before time and the universe.

Image of God is often confused to mean the superficial facade of God; what you see in the mirror. It really has more in common with the computer term; disk image. It is more of a copy of a bootable operating system. God and the Angels had will and choice. This was given to the humans; disk image, who then start civilization and alter the earth; 6000 years ago.

I can make a disk image of the operating system on a new computer. I can then load this copy, into my old computer, on a different partition of the hard drive. It is still the old computer; same human body, but now the computer behaves in new ways, due to the update on the disk image.

The other partition is still there, with the old operating system, so I can switch back and forth, between natural instinct and will and choice; trees of life and knowledge, respectively. Evolution is about the computer, while Creation is about an installation of a new disk image onto that hard drive about 6000 years ago. What then happens is humans begin to advance very rapidly, through civilization, which first needed this software update, before it could occur.

Science can show signs of civilization occurred for several thousand years before the first stable ones appear and linger. The older start-ups would abort. These had bugs in the disk image. Finally a good copy appears and it was off to the races.

My guess is this was connected to the invention of written language. In the beginning; final update, was the word and the word was God. God was the first written word, just as the Bible was the first book printed on a modern printing press. These change everything.

Invention comes from the unconscious mind, as an intuition or hunch, with the conscious mind seeking to translate the hunch and materialize it into reality. What will be invented, at first, is not yet on the earth; material form, but only in the ethereal; data streams, places of the unconscious mind. What written language did was allow away for thought to become fixed outside people; in a book. This was needed so the ego could appear, which had will and choice.

Speaking is more spontaneous. Writing requires you think more deliberately and then read and rewrite until what you wish to say is clear. Speaking can come up with good ideas without writing, but it may not be able to recreate what it was spontaneously said. Writing solidifies thoughts and from this the ego can became more solid instead of intermittent; loss of soul.

Disk image is a type of writing process, that can make a copy of something, so it can be mobile and duplicated at will, as many times as needed. Once writing appears, civilization did not have to depend on spontaneous invention, but it could visit the books and duplicate a test proven plan; image. This is aspect of the disk image was felt to have come from God; Holy Books. The Bible for example, makes the faithful assume the from of this disk image.
 
Last edited:

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
correct, is not the LORD the First and "ALSO" the Last, see Isaiah 48:12.

now think, by listening, Isaiah 43:10 "Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me."

what did that just tell us? Gos who is First is also the same one who is Last. and is not JESUS the First and the Last? meaning Jesus is the LORD/First/Father, and JESUS is the Lord/Last/Son.

101G.
Sorry, but absolutely no translator says that the Echad in the Shema means first. Nor does it make sense.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Sure, he was inspired by the story of Abraham and the miraculous defeat of the Kings immediately prior to Malchi-tzedek blessing ... Abraham. Abraham was able to defeat his enemies, King David sees this as above and beyond his own means. That's why he's praying for assistance.
This has nothing to do with the translation and why the term Lord is substituted in so many
So your concern about the trinity is that the Chabad (Judaica Press) translation somehow invokes this? The text is rendered as "Of David a psalm. The word of the Lord to my master; "Wait for My right hand, until I make your enemies a footstool at your feet.""

This may not lead to any conclusions you are looking for, and it certainly is only one possible reading of the verse, but it is a very popular one, based on the commentary (and sources/explanation) written down over 1000 years ago. What insight into the Hebrew words do you have that leads from the Hebrew to a translation that you think is more accurate?
You have misunderstood the context of my point there. No, I do not think or believe that God is a multiple of persons. To be more explicit, the Bible does not imply that God is a trinity.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Genesis 1-26; 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.

The plural has to do with the Angels, who were already in the image of God, before man appears. God and Heaven is a timeless abstract, The Angels were there with God before time and the universe.

Image of God is often confused to mean the superficial facade of God; what you see in the mirror. It really has more in common with the computer term; disk image. It is more of a copy of a bootable operating system. God and the Angels had will and choice. This was given to the humans; disk image, who then start civilization and alter the earth; 6000 years ago.

I can make a disk image of the operating system on a new computer. I can then load this copy, into my old computer, on a different partition of the hard drive. It is still the old computer; same human body, but now the computer behaves in new ways, due to the update on the disk image.

The other partition is still there, with the old operating system, so I can switch back and forth, between natural instinct and will and choice; trees of life and knowledge, respectively. Evolution is about the computer, while Creation is about an installation of a new disk image onto that hard drive about 6000 years ago. What then happens is humans begin to advance very rapidly, through civilization, which first needed this software update, before it could occur.

Science can show signs of civilization occurred for several thousand years before the first stable ones appear and linger. The older start-ups would abort. These had bugs in the disk image. Finally a good copy appears and it was off to the races.

My guess is this was connected to the invention of written language. In the beginning; final update, was the word and the word was God. God was the first written word, just as the Bible was the first book printed on a modern printing press. These change everything.

Invention comes from the unconscious mind, as an intuition or hunch, with the conscious mind seeking to translate the hunch and materialize it into reality. What will be invented, at first, is not yet on the earth; material form, but only in the ethereal; data streams, places of the unconscious mind. What written language did was allow away for thought to become fixed outside people; in a book. This was needed so the ego could appear, which had will and choice.

Speaking is more spontaneous. Writing requires you think more deliberately and then read and rewrite until what you wish to say is clear. Speaking can come up with good ideas without writing, but it may not be able to recreate what it was spontaneously said. Writing solidifies thoughts and from this the ego can became more solid instead of intermittent; loss of soul.

Disk image is a type of writing process, that can make a copy of something, so it can be mobile and duplicated at will, as many times as needed. Once writing appears, civilization did not have to depend on spontaneous invention, but it could visit the books and duplicate a test proven plan; image. This is aspect of the disk image was felt to have come from God; Holy Books. The Bible for example, make.s the faithful assume the from of this disk image.
When God said, "Let US make man in our image.." He was not speaking to Himself, He was speaking to someone with Him in heaven. Not 2 other persons.
 

101G

Well-Known Member
He lacked the personal lineage. He lacked the necessary temperment and behavior. He did not accomplish the required things. He was not anointed. He is dead.
personal lineage? was he not according to the flesh, David's son?
temperament and behavior? well then how did he suppose to act?
He did not accomplish the required things? like what?
He was not anointed. He is dead/ A. he was anointed with the Spirit, and B. he rose. And resurrected, and live forever.
In that in his failures he is not the true messiah. That makes him false.
post scripture that makes him false.
yeah, I tried to decipher it but it makes no sense to me. You are stringing together weird assertions and not making any sense.
no decipher needed, just follow the scriptures. "but it makes no sense to me." personal; opinion don't count. ignorance is no excuse of the Law, likewise with the scriptures.

101G
 

101G

Well-Known Member
Sorry, but absolutely no translator says that the Echad in the Shema means first. Nor does it make sense.
The bible does. are you going to believe God or translators?
now you said no translator say the ECHAD means First.
according to the Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Dictionaries of the Greek and Hebrew Testaments they have is as Ordinal First
H259 אֶחָד 'echad (ech-awd') adj.
1. (properly) united, i.e. one.
2. (as an ordinal) first.
[a numeral from H258]
KJV: a, alike, alone, altogether, and, any(-thing), apiece, a certain, (dai-)ly, each (one), + eleven, every, few, first, + highway, a man, once, one, only, other, some, together.
Root(s): H258

and this "First" of God is clearly seen in Genesis 1:1.

191G
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
personal lineage? was he not according to the flesh, David's son?
Not if he was God's "son." You can't have it both ways. Are you willing to deny any divine lineage on the father's side? In that case, he was a guy from Joseph's line and then we can focus on his other failures.
temperament and behavior? well then how did he suppose to act?
Like a righteous Jew not breaking commandments...which he did.
He did not accomplish the required things? like what?
build the 3rd temple, gather all the Jews from around the world in israel, end war and sickness, make it that everyone in the world recognizes God.

A. he was anointed with the Spirit, and B. he rose. And resurrected, and live forever.
No such thing as a king being anointed with "spirit." Inventing it so that you can use a word is duplicitous. And "resurrected"? No, he wasn't. And if he was, he then disappeared before accomplishing anything more.
post scripture that makes him false.
I could copy and paste from anywebsite that lists lies/mistakes Jesus made. But I will just stick with what I said -- " in his failures he is not the true messiah. That makes him false." Since, as i showed, he did not fulfill the obligations and expectations of a true messiah, he must therefore be a false one.
no decipher needed, just follow the scriptures. "but it makes no sense to me." personal; opinion don't count. ignorance is no excuse of the Law, likewise with the scriptures.

101G
Ignorance of the scriptures rests on you as you didn't even know what the required things are (all scripturally based).. And inventing a phrase like "plurality of one" makes no sense. That isn't opinion. That is an accurate assessment of a self-contradictory figure of speech that you have done nothing to explain other than introduce other fanciful phrases that defy explanation.
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
The bible does. are you going to believe God or translators?
now you said no translator say the ECHAD means First.
according to the Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Dictionaries of the Greek and Hebrew Testaments they have is as Ordinal First
H259 אֶחָד 'echad (ech-awd') adj.
1. (properly) united, i.e. one.
2. (as an ordinal) first.
[a numeral from H258]
KJV: a, alike, alone, altogether, and, any(-thing), apiece, a certain, (dai-)ly, each (one), + eleven, every, few, first, + highway, a man, once, one, only, other, some, together.
Root(s): H258

and this "First" of God is clearly seen in Genesis 1:1.

191G
Actually he said that " no translator says that the Echad in the Shema means first."

So denying this by pointing to the possibility in another place the word "echad" might be ordinal is dishonest. And in Gen 1:1 the word echad is not used. In fact, the only word indicating rank in that verse is based in the r-a-sh root which is the one used in rishon, first. Not "echad".
 

101G

Well-Known Member
Not if he was God's "son." You can't have it both ways. Are you willing to deny any divine lineage on the father's side? In that case, he was a guy from Joseph's line and then we can focus on his other failures.
God son according to the Spirit, I asked was he not David son according to the flesh., yes or no before u answer read 2 John 1:7. now also, if he was God son why u don't believe him?
, he was a guy from Joseph's line
post scripture to your claim, book chapter and verse please.
Like a righteous Jew not breaking commandments...which he did.
but everyone else broke the commandments.
build the 3rd temple, gather all the Jews from around the world in israel, end war and sickness, make it that everyone in the world recognizes God.
ERROR. no third temple, for all the people will be gathered in him, not the Land Israel. and as for who is a Jew, Romans 2:29 "But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God."
No such thing as a king being anointed with "spirit." Inventing it so that you can use a word is duplicitous. And "resurrected"? No, he wasn't. And if he was, he then disappeared before accomplishing anything more.
David and Saul? let's aee.1 Samuel 16:13 "Then Samuel took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the midst of his brethren: and the Spirit of the LORD came upon David from that day forward. So Samuel rose up, and went to Ramah." 1 Samuel 16:14 "But the Spirit of the LORD departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the LORD troubled him."

now, KING JESUS, Luke 4:17 "And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written," Luke 4:18 "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised," Luke 4:19 "To preach the acceptable year of the Lord." Luke 4:20 "And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him." Luke 4:21 "And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears."
I could copy and paste from anywebsite that lists lies/mistakes Jesus made. But I will just stick with what I said -- " in his failures he is not the true messiah. That makes him false." Since, as i showed, he did not fulfill the obligations and expectations of a true messiah, he must therefore be a false one.
well, copy and paste a few. and he did complete his mission.
Ignorance of the scriptures rests on you as you didn't even know what the required things are (all scripturally based).. And inventing a phrase like "plurality of one" makes no sense. That isn't opinion. That is an accurate assessment of a self-contradictory figure of speech that you have done nothing to explain other than introduce other fanciful phrases that defy explanation.
Personal opinion? want work with me. scripture only. a plurality of one is bible based. and it's right under your nose in Genesis 1:1.

understand something all these religions of the World is come to an END, yes including Judaism. we are to be "Holy" in him,

101G
 

101G

Well-Known Member
So denying this by pointing to the possibility in another place the word "echad" might be ordinal is dishonest.
Not in the Godhead,
And in Gen 1:1 the word echad is not used.
How IGNORANT are you of the Scriptures. LISTEN and learn. Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." see the term "beginning", it's the Hebrew word,
H7225 רֵאשִׁית re'shiyth (ray-sheeth') n-f.
1. the first, in place, time, order or rank.
2. (specifically) a firstfruit.

[from the same as H7218]
KJV: beginning, chief(-est), first(-fruits, part, time), principal thing.
Root(s): H7218

notice definition #1 the "FIRST", why First? because H430 אֱלֹהִים 'elohiym (el-o-heem') n-m. here in Genesis 1:1 is the [plural of H433 אֱלוֹהַּ 'elowahh (el-o'-ah) n-m. let's see the difference.

H430 אֱלֹהִים 'elohiym (el-o-heem') n-m.
אֱלֹהֵי 'elohiy (el-o-hee') [alternate plural]
1. (literally) supreme ones.
2. (hence, in the ordinary sense) gods.
3. (specifically, in the plural, especially with the article) the Supreme God (i.e. the all supreme).
4. (sometimes) supreme, used as a superlative.
5. (occasionally, by way of deference) supreme magistrates, the highest magistrates of the land.
6. (also) the supreme angels (entities of unspecified type).
[plural of H433]
KJV: angels, X exceeding, God (gods)(-dess, -ly), X (very) great, judges, X mighty.
Root(s): H433
Compare: H5945, H7706, H8199, H4397

see it? the [plural of H433]

H433 אֱלוֹהַּ 'elowahh (el-o'-ah) n-m.
אֱלֹהַּ 'eloahh (el-o'-ah) [shortened (rarely)]
1. one with supreme strength and ability.
2. the Supreme Being, God the Creator, Yahweh by name.
3. a supreme entity, a god-like creature (that is, one of God's supreme creations, or one of man's inventions).
[probably prolonged (emphat.) from H410]
KJV: God, god.
Root(s): H410

u better start reading tour bible with the Holy Spirit ........... (smile). :eek: YIKES!

101G.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Correct. God is the EQUAL Share of himself in flesh. supportive scripture. . Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:"

being is present tense, and the "FORM" of God is his NATUTRE.question? is there two Spirits? no, but the EQUAL SHARE of the one same Spirit in NATURE, and not in "Persons". for the root word of "Form"/Nature is
G3313 μέρος meros (me'-ros) n.
1. a portion (i.e. an amount allotted, a part of something).

and another Word for portion or that is synonyms with portion is "SHARE". there is the PLURALITY of ONE in the ECHAD, in TIME, PLACE, ORDER. or RANK. God is the EQUAL SHARE, not a division, but the EQUAL "SHARE" of himself in Flesh.

which answers the Psalms 110:1 question. the LORD, and the Lord there is the SAME one "PERSON", in the ECHAD of First and Last. Spirit, the LORD, First, the Ordinal First, Father, who came or manifested in Flesh in the EQUAL SHARE of the ECHAD, as Lord, the Last, the Ordinal Last, Son.

same one Person, EQUALLY "SHARED" in the ECHAD of First, and Last in TIME, PLACE, ORDER, or RANK.

that's the PLURALITY of God, not in persons, but "SHARED" in Nature.

hope this help.

101G
Jesus did not say he was equal to the Father. John 14:28, "You heard that I said to you, ‘I am going away and I am coming back to you.’ If you loved me, you would rejoice that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I am."
 

101G

Well-Known Member
Jesus did not say he was equal to the Father. John 14:28, "You heard that I said to you, ‘I am going away and I am coming back to you.’ If you loved me, you would rejoice that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I am."
first thanks for the reply, second a misunderstanding on your and many others part. is that GREATER in quality, or quantity. while in a G2758 κενόω kenoo (ke-no-ō') state in natural flesh.

I will make this as short as I can.

This verse in question have been taken out of context for way to long, and grossly misunderstood. as the word say, in all thy getting get understanding. the word, "GREATER", here in this verse is not the word GREAT, but, "GREATER", it's an Adjective, as used here, and not an Adverb, this is very important. the word GREATER is the Greek word G3187 meizon (meid'-zone) adj.
1. larger (specially, in age)
{literally or figuratively}
[irregular comparative of G3173]
KJV: elder, greater(-est), more Root(s): G3173

Dictionary.com as an Adjective, (of a city) considered with the inclusion of the outer suburbs: Greater London. here, the definitions is indicating quantity, (MORE), instead of quality, (SUPERIOR).
quantity: "an exact or specified amount or measure". look at these capitalize words above real good and let's get an understanding.
What did Jesus mean, "The Father is Greater than I", (The Father is Greater than I)
Greater: G3187 meizon (meid'-zone), quality, or quantity. in the book of Romans 12:3 it states, "For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith". this verse gives us the understanding of quantity, and quality. every man is the same, (quality), no man is superior to another, so there's no rank. also, as with MALES and FEMALES in the kingdom of GOD. the same Spirit is in every man/female. and every man/female is given the same amount or the same quantity of Faith. so likewise, as the same Spirit that manifest in that fleshly body, the nature of the Spirit did not change in quality, only the quantity is limited to that one body, other words his Omni attributes was limited. let’s look at this in John the 14th. chapter. here, the Lord Jesus is speaking of the work of salvation. as the Spirit was in Christ, (the flesh), the man, he was limited, by that fleshly body with BLOOD. the Lord Jesus didn't go into all the world while he was here on earth in flesh and blood. he was limited in his work of salvation, because of that body he was in. but to see this clearly, watch the WORKS and how it is used. John 14:12 "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father". see that word "greater" here in verse 12. it is the same word, "greater", Jesus uses in verse 28. wait a minute, is Jesus saying that men who believe is GREATER than him in power, (quality), as we been led to assume what greater means? NO. so what is the Lord Jesus really saying, as I have said, GREATER, have several meaning, depending on how you used it, in context or out of context, but let the bible explain itself. with that said, now we are seeing the real use of the word, in context meaning, greater as in quantity, and not in quality. greater used as an adjective, it means, "more" as in more believers to do the SAME quality of work, because it is the Lord who do the work. so now the work he is doing will be a greater number, as in them/us doing the same quality of work he was doing as an individual. more, or greater in quantity, not in quality, because he said, John 14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works, (there it is), than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father". so we who believe will do the SAME works, but now we have millions of Jesus doing the same quality of works, so greater here means more.

and because he goes to his "Father"/His own diversified Spirit, now he is glorified in the Spirit, and is poured out unto all believers. and now Glorified in the Father/Spirit, now he can be in all believers doing the work, whereas in a fleshly body in a G2758 κενόω kenoo (ke-no-ō') state he could not.

Hope that help, this is the short answer.

101G
 

101G

Well-Known Member
Genesis 1-26; 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.

The plural has to do with the Angels, who were already in the image of God, before man appears. God and Heaven is a timeless abstract, The Angels were there with God before time and the universe.
this is incorrect, God was alone when he Made all things.

101G
 
Top