• 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!

The Plurality of God, The First and the Last

101G

Well-Known Member
Why was Moses called Elohim. Elohim is plural. So is Moses several people or one person?

Your contention was in your post that Elohim being plural means its plural in numbers. So was Moses more than one person? Plural in numbers.

So I think you understand this question clearly.
Oh PS I forgot your other question, you said, "Your contention was in your post that Elohim being plural means its plural in numbers.".
yes, the number is in Ordinal designation, just as Deuteronomy 6:4 states in the term "ONE", "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:"
ONE: 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
notice definition #2. the number is in Ordinal designation, and not Cardinal designation. big difference.
PICJAG, 101G.
 

101G

Well-Known Member
"Understand" what? And what is the "Old Creation", versus the creation in which we exist? Were you trained as a lawyer, where obfuscation is the manner of doing business?
no, I was not trained as a lawyer.... (smile). the OLD creation is the world we live in NOW, physically, even thou we're in the world but not part of it, for we're NEW CREATURES IN CHRIST JESUS. meaning we're spiritually in the Kingdom of God, if BORN AGAIN. supportive scripture, Colossians 1:13 "Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:" hath is a past tense designation, meaning it has already happen, IF BORN AGAIN. only our bodies are to be given us upon his return. so, are you not seated in Heavemly places in Christ Jesus, spiritually? Listen, Romans 8:5 "For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit." Romans 8:6 "For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace." Romans 8:7 "Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be." Romans 8:8 "So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God." Romans 8:9 "But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his." Romans 8:10 "And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness." Romans 8:11 "But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you." Romans 8:12 "Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh." Romans 8:13 "For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live." Romans 8:14 "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God." Romans 8:15 "For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father." Romans 8:16 "The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:" Romans 8:17 "And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together." Romans 8:18 "For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us."

PICJAG, 101G.
 

101G

Well-Known Member
Exalted ones can be translation as well.

Exalted ones took rest, God doesn't need rest.

The Lord Elohim as the Lord the God is distinguished later in the text. When exalted ones refers to God, you know it through context and when it refers to exalted ones, you know it by context.

Adam (a) didn't want to be God, he wanted to one of the exalted ones and that is why he ate of the tree by deception of the devil. Although he was an exalted one, there was yet exalted ones exalted above him.

Also a translation of the famous John verse can be:

In the beginning was the word, the word was with his exalted ones, and the word was his exalted ones.

Moses (a) is also the exalted ones metaphorically, since he at that point represents them, and denying him is denying them all. This is why denying his signs is like denying all signs of God that previous Messengers were sent with and that ones will be sent with after.

Same with Jesus say "You shall not tempt your exalted ones", because Jesus (a) is one of them.
Correct, one knows it by context.
thanks brother Link, be blessed.
PICJAG, 101G.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
did I not answer that? moses is not a Plurality, or the ECHAD of himself, nor is he of God, in the Godhead. which require "ANOTHER" of one's-self., lets bring this numerical dofference out clearly. First step, as for calling him god, did you not read the definition? listen,
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

note definition #3 vs definition #2. distinction is made, likewise as with Moses, and the TRUE God. also the (kjv) can also translate this word as angels, judges also. but understand there is no "god" with God, in or outside the Godhead, listen and Learn. Deuteronomy 32:39 "See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand."
so Moses cannot be in the Godhead.... period. but Jesus as the Ordin First and Last is.... listen, John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." see that "WITH" here in the Verse? THIS IS THE "ECHAD" OF GOD AS "FIRST", AND "LAST". with indicate the Plurality of God, here in John 1, as one person in the ECHAD., of EQUAL SHARE listen and Learn the NUMERICAL DIFFEREBCE... Step #2. Isaiah 41:4 "Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he." did you see the "with" there? it sounds like two people, do it not?, just as in John 1:1 the Word was "WITH" God. the answer is NO, it's only ONE person, the same one person, because we have the bible to reveal it unto us, listen and learn, Isaiah 48:12 "Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first, I also am the last." now p[lease tell us is the First is "ALSO" the Last two separate, and distinct person? no, the bible is clear, the First is ... "ALSO" the Last, the same one person, just as in nJohn 1:1c "and the Word was God", yes, with him, but is HIM in the ECHAD of NUMERICAL DIFFERENCE. this is clearly seen in the OT as well as the NT of "ANOTHER", listen and Learn, using the Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words . "ANOTHER", it is the Greek word, G243 Allos. , "Allos expresses a numerical difference and denotes another of the same sort" there is your NUMERICAL DIFFERENCE. just as in the OT of the term Adam/Man as in mankind, the "ANOTHER" of ONE SELF., listen and Learn,
H120 אָדָם 'adam (aw-dawm') n-m.
ruddy i.e. a human being (an individual or the species, mankind, etc.).
[from H119]
KJV: X another, + hypocrite, + common sort, X low, man (mean, of low degree), person.
Root(s): H119

God is not a species with the "s" at the end, but one of a KIND, just as man is a KIND of another, for see how the kjv can translate Adam/Man..... x another"
the OT as well as the NY confirm this ECHAD of God as the "ANOTHER" of himself. so there is no two, or three persons in the Godhead...
is this not Apodictic enough for you? do you not say you believe the bible, well hear it. hope this helps.
PICJAG, 101G.

So bottomline is, when it comes to the God referred to in the plural, as in Elohim, it is plural in numbers, but the same word used to Moses who is a human, its not plural.

Sorry mate. You are polite in your approach and I respect that, but this response, I dont accept because it does not make sense.

A plural like Elohim does not mean 2 or 3. It could mean a 100. Stopping at 3 or 2 is just a post hoc ergo propter hoc. There has been discussion on this phrase Elohim on the plurality, but never to mean its several. Maybe a few.

Nevertheless I do commend your calm and collected response which is rare. Thanks for your response. I shall take leave from this discussion.
 

101G

Well-Known Member
So bottomline is, when it comes to the God referred to in the plural, as in Elohim, it is plural in numbers, but the same word used to Moses who is a human, its not plural.

Sorry mate. You are polite in your approach and I respect that, but this response, I dont accept because it does not make sense.

A plural like Elohim does not mean 2 or 3. It could mean a 100. Stopping at 3 or 2 is just a post hoc ergo propter hoc. There has been discussion on this phrase Elohim on the plurality, but never to mean its several. Maybe a few.

Nevertheless I do commend your calm and collected response which is rare. Thanks for your response. I shall take leave from this discussion.
first thanks for the reply, second, did you not read post #41? as to the numbers Difference?
and did I not explained this matter of Moses as "god" in post #40? and not "God?".
in your assumption, you said, " Sorry mate. You are polite in your approach and I respect that, but this response, I dont accept because it does not make sense". it makes FAITH. for we walk by Faith and not by sight/Senses. .
but, and that's with one t... (smile), ... BUT, even to reach you, what about "Diversified Oneness", God in a ECHAD or The Plurality of one PERSON, as the First and Last you don't understand, let try that approach. one question at a time please... ok.
PICJAG, 101G.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
first thanks for the reply, second, did you not read post #41? as to the numbers Difference?

I did. It didnt address anything. It is a made up apologetic attempt to try and impose the Christian athanasian creed upon the Hebrew scripture. Its not based on any good linguistics.

Cheers.
 

101G

Well-Known Member
I did. It didnt address anything. It is a made up apologetic attempt to try and impose the Christian athanasian creed upon the Hebrew scripture. Its not based on any good linguistics.

Cheers.
No such thing, it's bible, back-up by definition for clear understanding...
no worries mate.
PICJAG, 101G.
 

101G

Well-Known Member
..then there is nothing to discuss in that case.
Why try to make sense of something, if you'd rather stick to "faith"..
..don't you mean tradition? :)

are you in the flesh or the Spirit? Romans 8:5 "For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit." Romans 8:6 "For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace." Romans 8:7 "Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be." Romans 8:8 "So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God." Romans 8:9 "But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you.
Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his."
sorry about that.
PICJAG, 101G.
 

101G

Well-Known Member
No its not.
listen as I said, the The Plurality of God is in the ECHAD as Ordinal Numbers. scripture, Deuteronomy 6:4 "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:"
one here is, 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
definition #2. tells us the ECHAD is in NUMBERS, but Ordinal Numbers of First and Last in "TIME", "PLACE", "RANK" , and "ORDER"... follow so far? this is the Plurality of God in Ordinal numbers designation, First/Father, and Last/Son... follow? now this Plurality is of ONE PERSON, lets see it. follow... Isaiah 41:4 "Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he." the LORD, all caps, is the First.... follow so far, so who is the Last that he, the LORD, is "WITH?" let the bible speak. Isaiah 48:12 "Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first, I also am the last." BINGO, there's is that Plurality of God as ONE PERSON, the First is "ALSO" the Last. just as John 1:1b states the Word was "WITH" God and John 1:1c says, "and the Word was God"... same one person only in Ordinal designation, hello.
is that Apodictic enough for you?
be blessed.....
PICJAG, 101G.
 

muhammad_isa

Well-Known Member
..this is the Plurality of God in Ordinal numbers designation, First/Father, and Last/Son... follow?
No .. it's rather like "reading the tea leaves" .. you see what you want to see.

..being "the first and the last" is simply another way of conveying being eternal.
i.e. there can be nothing before or after
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
First, thanks for the reply, second, the speaker is God? well who do you think "GOD" is? ..... yes, the Lord Jesus. you do not understand the ECHAD, or the "Diversity" of God in the ECHAD. so, let's prove this out since we're in Revelations. scripture, Revelation 1:1 "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:" ok, who sent "his" angel to John? let the angel tell us who sent him. Revelation 22:6 "And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done." ok URAVIP2ME, "WHO SENT HIS ANGEL?". now according to the angel, it was the Lord God of, of, of, the holy prophets. now a many of scholars have said this, "it is the LORD of the OT, God", as in Revelation 1:1 who sent his angel, and some, the JW have printed in their own bibles, (NWT) "JEHOVAH", as the one who sent his angel. 101G disagree all of them. I will not beat around the bush; I will answer the question.... NO, let the Bible God's own words answer for us... we all do trust God... RIGHT. Good so let's see, by the bible, (God), who was it that sent "HIS" angel to John. scripture, same chapter a few verses down, Revelation 22:16 "I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star."
Uh O ...... Uh O, yes, it is JESUS, yes, the Lord God of the holy prophets that sent his, his, his, angel. yes, JESUS who is "God" of the OT as well as the NT. now you have a BIG problem, because you now have to go back to Revelation 1:1 and re-think who God is there in verse 1.
do you understand now why I posted this topic, God the H430 אֱלֹהִים 'elohiym, the First and the last?

so, in Revelation 1:1 and elsewhere it's only "ONE" person, and he is in Diversity, or the ECHAD of being the "EQUAL SHARE of himself in Flesh but Glorified in Spirit.
thanks for the post and be blessed. hope it has opened your eyes to the truth, or at least take a -re-look.
PICJAG, 101G.

God is the God of Revelation 1. It is God who gave the Revelation unto 'him' (<- aka Jesus ) .
So, God gave the Revelation or the Revealing to His Son Jesus according to Revelation 1:1.
John bears both the Word of God - Revelation 1:2 - ' and ' the testimony of Jesus Christ.
Thus, John introduces showing Revelation by Jesus which God gave to Jesus......
( By God giving the Revelation to Jesus: that would be a contradiction to trinatarians)
It was the resurrected Jesus who received the message from his God.
Jesus was entrusted with conveying Revelation to John and through John to the servant congregations.
The resurrected heavenly Jesus who still thinks he has a God over him according to Revelation 3:12
Resurrected Jesus who is still shown as being subject to his Father.
 
Last edited:

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
.............being "the first and the last" is simply another way of conveying being eternal. i.e. there can be nothing before or after

I find Revelation 1:17 'about being first' corresponds to Revelation 1:5; Colossians 1:18; Acts of the Apostles 26:23.
ALL saying Jesus being ' first ' from the dead.
As far as ' last ' also connects Jesus to Revelation 2:8 who was dead Jesus but came to life again.
This fits in with Jesus being the first to be resurrected to immortal heavenly spirit life ' and ' the last person to be resurrected personally by his God - Colossians 1:18; Acts of the Apostles 3:15; Acts of the Apostles 2:32.
So, in those verses about Jesus being the 'first and the last' is calling attention to Jesus unique resurrection.
Unique because God resurrected dead Jesus, but now Jesus lives forever - Revelation 1:18 - thus conveying now being eternal. And Jesus was given the Resurrection Power.
Thus, No one before Jesus or after Jesus had or has the resurrection that Jesus had performed by his God.
 

101G

Well-Known Member
No .. it's rather like "reading the tea leaves" .. you see what you want to see.

..being "the first and the last" is simply another way of conveying being eternal.
i.e. there can be nothing before or after
first thanks for the reply, second, ERROR, God is already "ETERNAL"... (smile), so, first and Last shows his Plurality in TIME, PLACE, RANK, and ORDER.
if you cannot follow the word of TRUTH, maybe this is not for you.
PICJAG, 101G.
 

101G

Well-Known Member
Its absurd. Echad means one. yOU are propagating a multiple Gods or a godhead.

So it's contradicting. .
First thanks for the reply, second ERROR, Echad is a Plurality of "ONE". on the other hand, a "Yachid" is a single "ONE", so please get your definitions correct.
PICJAG, 101G.
 

101G

Well-Known Member
God is the God of Revelation 1. It is God who gave the Revelation unto 'him' (<- aka Jesus ) .
So, God gave the Revelation or the Revealing to His Son Jesus according to Revelation 1:1.
John bears both the Word of God - Revelation 1:2 - ' and ' the testimony of Jesus Christ.
Thus, John introduces showing Revelation by Jesus which God gave to Jesus......
( By God giving the Revelation to Jesus: that would be a contradiction to trinatarians)
It was the resurrected Jesus who received the message from his God.
Jesus was entrusted with conveying Revelation to John and through John to the servant congregations.
The resurrected heavenly Jesus who still thinks he has a God over him according to Revelation 3:12
Resurrected Jesus who is still shown as being subject to his Father.
READ post #30 again. as well as Post #26.
PICJAG, 101G.
 
Top