Jesus and Paul would not contradict a truth,
I told you--Hebrew scholars say--I am that I am in the ot = error--I will be what I will be is correct. They know their language better that trinities do.
They( trinities) know its error as well. Yet teach the opposite..
The same with Elohim--Hebrew scholars say--NEVER plural when used for the true living God-- the trinities know this is fact as well--yet continue to teach error.
To which Hebrew scholars are you referring?
What is the significance, in understanding the text, of I AM or I will be?
"The same with Elohim--Hebrew scholars say--NEVER plural when used for the true living God-- the trinities know this is fact as well--yet continue to teach error."
Elohim is a plural noun. It is always a plural noun. The suffix
im speaks to plurality - always.
If you want to be taken seriously you need to express your propositions with some semblance of acumen and honesty.
This is an example of what "Hebrew Scholars" actually teach instead of your unsubstantiated false accusation.
Mark D. Futato, Robert L. Maclellan Professor of Old Testament and Academic Dean at Reformed Theological Seminary in Orlando. Dr. Futato received his Ph.D. and M.A. in Semitic Languages from the Catholic University of America. He specializes in Hebrew language and is author of the book Beginning Biblical Hebrew (Eisenbrauns, 2003).
Let's take a look at the meaning of YHWH Elohim.
First, YHWH is a proper noun, the personal name of Israel's deity. Second, Elohim is a common noun, used to refer to deity.
Elohim is actually a plural noun (indicated by the /im/ as in cherubim and seraphim). Sometimes the referent is plural. At other times the referent is singular. Like most words in English, Elohim can mean several things. Sometimes Elohim refers to plural "gods," as in "You shall have no other gods before me" (Deuteronomy 5:7). At other times it refers to the singular "God," as in "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" (Genesis 1:1). It is clear in this latter example that even though the form of the word Elohim is plural, the referent is singular, because the verb with which Elohim is used ("created") is singular in Hebrew.
So, why the plural form if the referent is singular? The best answer is that this is an "honorific plural," that is to say, a plural used to show honor to a singular referent. Such an honorific plural is used for humans in texts like 1Kings 1:43, where we read, "our lord King David." The Hebrew word translated "lord" in this case is plural, even though it refers to the singular David. This honorific plural is also used of God elsewhere in texts like Psalm 8:1, where we read, "O LORD, our Lord…." In this text "LORD" (small caps) translates YHWH, while "Lord" translates a common noun for "master," which is in this text plural in form though referring to the singular YHWH. So Psalm 8:1 could be translated "O YHWH, our Master…."
So, YWHW is the true God's personal name, and Elohim by itself is simply the Hebrew common noun used to refer to the true God in an honorific way. Now, what about the combination YHWH Elohim?
First, YHWH Elohim cannot mean "Lord of Gods." This is the case for a fundamental grammatical reason. In Hebrew there is a special grammatical relationship between two nouns called the construct state. The construct state is the Hebrew way of expressing all the relationships that English expresses with the simple word "of." So in Hebrew when one noun, for example, "king," is in construction with a second noun, for example, "Israel," we could translate this phrase, "king of Israel." The problem with YHWH Elohim is that Hebrew grammar does not permit a proper noun to be put in construction with a common noun, so YHWH Elohim cannot mean "YHWH/Lord of Gods." In addition, when Elohim refers to the true God, it is singular and so translated "God" and not "Gods."
Second, the relationship between YHWH and Elohim in the combination YHWH Elohim is one of apposition, that is to say the second noun is placed immediately after the first noun to provide some sort of further definition or explanation. The significance of this can be seen in Genesis 1 and Genesis 2. In Genesis 1 only Elohim is used to refer to deity. This is no doubt because of the universal perspective of this creation story. In Genesis 2, on the other hand, deity is referred to as YHWH Elohim. These two accounts converge to affirm that YHWH (the God of Israel) and not any other ancient Near Eastern deity is Elohim (the universal God).
So then, YHWH Elohim does not mean "Lord of Gods...the one of many," but means that YHWH, the personal God who rules over Israel, is at one and the same time the universal God who rules over all.
The Trinity versions, as you call them do not teach error as you accuse.
Exodus 3:14 RSV God said to Moses, “I am who I am.”[a] And he said, “Say this to the people of Israel, ‘I am has sent me to you.’”
Footnotes:
a. Exodus 3:14 Or I am what I am or I will be what I will be
Exodus 3:14New American Bible (Revised Edition) (NABRE)
Exodus 3:14 NABRE God replied to Moses: I am who I am.[a] Then he added: This is what you will tell the Israelites: I AM has sent me to you.
Footnotes:
a. Exodus 3:14 I am who I am: Moses asks in v. 13 for the name of the One speaking to him, but God responds with a wordplay which preserves the utterly mysterious character of the divine being even as it appears to suggest something of the inner meaning of God’s name: ‘ehyeh “I am” or “I will be(come)” for “Yhwh,” the personal name of the God of Israel. While the phrase “I am who I am” resists unraveling, it nevertheless suggests an etymological linking between the name “Yhwh” and an earlier form of the Hebrew verbal root h-y-h “to be.” On that basis many have interpreted the name “Yhwh” as a third-person form of the verb meaning “He causes to be, creates,” itself perhaps a shortened form of a longer liturgical name such as “(God who) creates (the heavenly armies).” Note in this connection the invocation of Israel’s God as “Lord (Yhwh) of Hosts” (e.g., 1 Sm 17:45). In any case, out of reverence for God’s proper name, the term Adonai, “my Lord,” was later used as a substitute. The word Lord (in small capital letters) indicates that the Hebrew text has the sacred name (Yhwh), the tetragrammaton. The word “Jehovah” arose from a false reading of this name as it is written in the current Hebrew text. The Septuagint has egō eimi ho ōn, “I am the One who is” (ōn being the participle of the verb “to be”). This can be taken as an assertion of God’s aseity or self-existence, and has been understood as such by the Church, since the time of the Fathers, as a true expression of God’s being, even though it is not precisely the meaning of the Hebrew.
Is it because of a lack of scholarly depth that you will not engage with the Psalm 102:25-27 and Hebrews 1:10-12 comparison in any exegetical fashion?
