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

[rosends]

and also you said,


I would like to call your attention to the part of your reply above, "Echad in Hebrew is "one" but also in an undivided sense when it applies to God". Good so let's see it in the three verses I gave before.

Scripture #1. 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." one person "With" himself in a EQUAL SHARE of himself.

Scripture #2. Isaiah 44:6 "Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God." again one person in the ECHAD of designated TIME.

NOW HERE IS THE REVELATION OF THE "ECHAD" AS ONE IN UNIFICATION.AS "ONE",.

Scripture #3. 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 is the unity of ONE. remember my definition of 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 #1 & [a numeral from H258]
ok, let's see what H258 means,
H258 אָחַד 'achad (aw-chad') v.
1. to unify.
2. (figuratively) collect (one's thoughts).
[perhaps a primitive root]
KJV: go one way or other.

and Isaiah 48:12 shows that unity in First and Last.

101G.

again, take note: you wrote "Good so let's see it in the three verses I gave before."

BUT IT ISN'T IN THE 3 VERSES YOU GAVE.
the three verses show that God is the first and last in that there is no other besides him. He is a unity. Not a thing subdivided into parts. The first is the same as the last -- identity, not portions. This is why God's being echad, one, shows a singular and undivided unity -- because the first and last means the ONLY.

 

[101G]

Thanks for the reply,

BUT IT ISN'T IN THE 3 VERSES YOU GAVE.
the three verses show that God is the first and last in that there is no other besides him. He is a unity. Not a thing subdivided into parts. The first is the same as the last -- identity, not portions. This is why God's being echad, one, shows a singular and undivided unity -- because the first and last means the ONLY.

scripture, Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:"
being in the Form is present tense. "Spirit", and Form is his, the Lord Jesus nature. for the term "Form" is the Greek word, G3444 μορφή morphe (mor-fee') n.
1. form.
2. (intrinsically) fundamental nature.
[perhaps from the base of G3313 (through the idea of adjustment of parts)]
KJV: form
Root(s): G3313

definition #2. gives us the answer to the Lord Jesus NATURE, but the Million-dollar question is what kind of NATURE he has in the ECHAD. the answer is found in the root of the definition of G3444 μορφή morphe as the definition states, [perhaps from the base of G3313 (through the idea of adjustment of parts)] and that root word is
G3313 μέρος meros (me'-ros) n.
1. a portion (i.e. an amount allotted, a part of something).
What is another word for or is synonyms with "portion?" answer "SHARE", BINGO, there is our ECHAD answer. the Lord Jesus is the EQUAL SHARE of himself as God, in Flesh bone and blood. this is the LAST in TIME, PLACE, ORDER, or RANK.

the ECHAD is Clearly answered in the EQUAL Share of one-self in flesh which was to Come, the LAST ,,ADAM.


101G

 

[rosends]

Thanks for the reply,

scripture, Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:"
being in the Form is present tense. "Spirit", and Form is his, the Lord Jesus nature. for the term "Form" is the Greek word, G3444 μορφή morphe (mor-fee') n.
1. form.
2. (intrinsically) fundamental nature.
[perhaps from the base of G3313 (through the idea of adjustment of parts)]
KJV: form
Root(s): G3313

definition #2. gives us the answer to the Lord Jesus NATURE, but the Million-dollar question is what kind of NATURE he has in the ECHAD. the answer is found in the root of the definition of G3444 μορφή morphe as the definition states, [perhaps from the base of G3313 (through the idea of adjustment of parts)] and that root word is
G3313 μέρος meros (me'-ros) n.
1. a portion (i.e. an amount allotted, a part of something).
What is another word for or is synonyms with "portion?" answer "SHARE", BINGO, there is our ECHAD answer. the Lord Jesus is the EQUAL SHARE of himself as God, in Flesh bone and blood. this is the LAST in TIME, PLACE, ORDER, or RANK.

the ECHAD is Clearly answered in the EQUAL Share of one-self in flesh which was to Come, the LAST ,,ADAM.


101G

Ah, so phillipians and Greek. Neither is much use. I'll stick with Hebrew and the Tanach.

 

[101G]

Ah, so phillipians and Greek. Neither is much use. I'll stick with Hebrew and the Tanach.

no, that's an excuse. it's the same, your Tanach. Zechariah 13:7 "Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man that is my fellow, saith the LORD of hosts: smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones."

here Fellow is your Hebrew Word,
H5997 עָמִית `amiyth (aw-meeth') n-m.
1. companionship.
2. (hence, concretely) a comrade or kindred man.
[from a primitive root meaning to associate]
KJV: another, fellow, neighbour.

the Lord Jesus fulfils this scripture in . Matt 26:31; Mark 14:27. but the KJV can translate the word as "ANOTHER" which shows the ECHAD again. for the term ANOTHER in Greek is G243 Allos. and Allos expresses a numerical difference and denotes another of the same sort. Bingo a numerical difference is the Ordinal First and Ordinal Last.
also the definition #2. (hence, concretely) a comrade or kindred man. this clearly support Phil 2:6 in God Equal share of himself in Flesh. supportive scripture, 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."

here "Offspring" is
G1085 γένος genos (ǰe'-nos) n.
kin.
{abstract or concrete, literal or figurative, individual or collective}
[from G1096]
KJV: born, country(-man), diversity, generation, kind(-red), nation, offspring, stock
Root(s): G1096

BINGO, the Lord Jesus is God Share equally in Flesh as the "KINsman Redeemer", just as your Hebrew word H5997 עָמִית `amiyth (aw-meeth') describe.

so your Tanach CONFIRMS WHAT THE GREEK SAYS.

101G

 

[rosends]

no, that's an excuse. it's the same, your Tanach. Zechariah 13:7 "Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man that is my fellow, saith the LORD of hosts: smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones."

here Fellow is your Hebrew Word,
H5997 עָמִית `amiyth (aw-meeth') n-m.
1. companionship.
2. (hence, concretely) a comrade or kindred man.
[from a primitive root meaning to associate]
KJV: another, fellow, neighbour.

the Lord Jesus fulfils this scripture in . Matt 26:31; Mark 14:27. but the KJV can translate the word as "ANOTHER" which shows the ECHAD again. for the term ANOTHER in Greek is G243 Allos. and Allos expresses a numerical difference and denotes another of the same sort. Bingo a numerical difference is the Ordinal First and Ordinal Last.
also the definition #2. (hence, concretely) a comrade or kindred man. this clearly support Phil 2:6 in God Equal share of himself in Flesh. supportive scripture, 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."

here "Offspring" is
G1085 γένος genos (ǰe'-nos) n.
kin.
{abstract or concrete, literal or figurative, individual or collective}
[from G1096]
KJV: born, country(-man), diversity, generation, kind(-red), nation, offspring, stock
Root(s): G1096

BINGO, the Lord Jesus is God Share equally in Flesh as the "KINsman Redeemer", just as your Hebrew word H5997 עָמִית `amiyth (aw-meeth') describe.

so your Tanach CONFIRMS WHAT THE GREEK SAYS.

101G

You couldn't possibly have that more backwards. The tanach text is being translated into other languages and you are trying to draw conclusions from the translations. You then find what you need to find. The Greek translations and the agenda driven interpretations create a conclusion to echo the material in the tanach and then you claim that the tanach intended it in the way you use it. The cart is put before the horse. Foolishness.

And it ignores the actual tanach text in deference to the translation.

 

[101G]

You couldn't possibly have that more backwards. The tanach text is being translated into other languages and you are trying to draw conclusions from the translations. You then find what you need to find. The Greek translations and the agenda driven interpretations create a conclusion to echo the material in the tanach and then you claim that the tanach intended it in the way you use it. The cart is put before the horse. Foolishness.

And it ignores the actual tanach text in deference to the translation.

thanks, but another excuse, because the tanach itself is not the original language.
so, no thanks to the translation of the tanach.

101G

 

[Muffled]

Numbers 23:19 God is not a man...nor a son of man.
1 Samuel 15:29 for he is not a man
Hosea 11:9 I am God and not a man
Job 9:32 For he is not a man

I believe this is true. God is not a man but He is in the man Jesus and that gives Jesus the identity of God.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I believe this is true. God is not a man but He is in the man Jesus and that gives Jesus the identity of God.

I'm not sure what you mean. Your remark appears to contradict itself at face value. Are you trying to say that Jesus had like some sort of human husk that God filled? If that's true, I'll let your fellow Christians take you on for your unconventional theology. As a Jew, it is a distinction without significance.

 

[Joshua Pryce]

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?

God refers to Himself as We in genesis creation. Let Us make man in Our image. This implies that all 3 members are more than 1. That all of them are men and that all of them, look like human beings. God didnt say my image but Our. The Father is seen as the form of a man in Ezekiels vision. We all know Jesus as a man. The Holy Spirit is referred to as He in the gospels and by the disciples writings. The father, Son and Holy Spirit display divine attributes throughout the text. The Holy Spirit is most elusive, but is the most acknowledged and "felt".

 

[IndigoChild5559]

God refers to Himself as We in genesis creation. .

The traditional understanding of of "Let us make man in our image" is that God is talking to the heavenly court, the angels etc.

 

[101G]

The traditional understanding of of "Let us make man in our image" is that God is talking to the heavenly court, the angels etc.

that's nonsense, no angel, a creature itself helped God create mankind.
no, the plurality here in Genesis 1:6 was to come, meaning God is a ECHAD of himself in a plurality of First and Last. this is prophetic language God is using, speaking of himself to come in flesh, his own IMAGE.

God is the first prophet in the bible...... . what you say!

101G.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

that's nonsense, no angel, a creature itself helped God create mankind.
no, the plurality here in Genesis 1:6 was to come, meaning God is a ECHAD of himself in a plurality of First and Last. this is prophetic language God is using, speaking of himself to come in flesh, his own IMAGE.

God is the first prophet in the bible...... . what you say!

101G.

What can I tell you? Even Christians traditionally interpreted the verse as being that God was speaking to the angels. This idea that it is referring to the Trinity is a modern one.

 

[101G]

Christians traditionally interpreted the verse

did you not read? 2 Peter 1:20 "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation."

101G.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

did you not read? 2 Peter 1:20 "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation."

101G.

Hogwash. When we read we interpret. The Bible is no exception. You have a different interpretation than the traditional one is all.

 

[Muffled]

Numbers 23:19 God is not a man...nor a son of man.
1 Samuel 15:29 for he is not a man
Hosea 11:9 I am God and not a man
Job 9:32 For he is not a man

I believe that is the case. God is not Jesus. Jesus is God.

 

[Muffled]

I'm not sure what you mean. Your remark appears to contradict itself at face value. Are you trying to say that Jesus had like some sort of human husk that God filled? If that's true, I'll let your fellow Christians take you on for your unconventional theology. As a Jew, it is a distinction without significance.

I believe we all have a human husk that we fill and God placed His Spirit in Jesus.. Not all of it of course because He inhabits the whole universe but God is one so it makes no difference. God is there as the one speaking and doing the miracles.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I believe that is the case. God is not Jesus. Jesus is God.

Not if Jesus is a man he's not.