Judaism and Christian Trinitarianism

[IndigoChild5559]

It is the purpose of this post to explain the two Jewish approaches to Christian Trinitarianism.

Judaism usually doesnt deal with Christianity to be real honest. I know it may be strange to some Chrisitans, but Jews just dont get together and talk about Jesus. Yet there, in the deep background, is our legendary confict over who Jesus is, and what is the nature of God.

Jews as you know, teach a very, very pure form of monotheism -- there is only one God, and he has no form (nor will he ever, since this is his nature). We are forbidden by the Torah to make idols of anything in the heavens above or earth below -- God is not any of those things, no matter how spsectacular they are

Christians, on the other hand, have a very complicated doctrine called the Trinity, in which they emphatically state they believe in only one God, one essense, but this one God is made up of three distinct persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. To further complicate things, one of those three, the Son, is not only fully God, but also fully man. They are grouped in the monotheistic camp, but obviously it is a very muddied monotheism. It can turn you head inside out trying to understand Trinitarianism, as Christians will admit.

Judaism has had its problems with Christianity, given our long perecution by the church for starters. But we do have deal with Jesus on some level because the christian religion is all around us, even today.


The first approach is to simply write it off completely as avodah zarah, or idolatry. Why? Because first Christianity fudges on the mono of monotheism. The Torah clearly states, "Hear O Israel, the LORD is God, the LORD is ONE." But the harder part is this idea that God became a man. It's just nonsense to Jews. Three times in the Tanakh (OT) it is written that God is not a man. Three times. Must be important, dont you think? Essentially, Christians have taken something from creation and said, "that person is God." This despite that Deuteronomy 5:7 (5:8 in christian bibles) says loudly, "Thou shalt not make unto thee a graven image, even any manner of likeness, of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth." They still see God in the image of Christ and that is idolatry.

There is a second approach to Trinitarianism, where it is seen as "shi-tuf." Shi-tuf means association. In the case of Christianity, the man (Jesus) is associated with God, to the degree that the two are confused in their minds. A christian will say that they pray to the father through Jesus. Thats useful wording. Imagine a room with a glass ceiling, and on the glass is etched the name of Jesus. The christian in the room looks up to heaven to pray, and between him and God is this name of Jesus. They cannot see Jesus without seeing God, and cannot see God without seeing Jesus. In this school of thought, Christians are actually praying to the same God as Jews, but are just mixed up about it due to this association. (Just a note to the side -- it is this concept which makes it possible for Jews to do business with Christians, which they could not do if it were a simple case of avodah zarah, but that is a post for another time.)

There is another instance of shi-tuf in history that is worth mentioning. In Egypt, there was a Pharoah that overhauled the entire country so that it was monotheistic. Only one God, Aten, the sun god, could be worshiped. Aten was the simple disk of the sun, with no human characteristics. All other gods were forbidden to the people of Egypt. Once again, the idea is that Egypt was actually worshiping the one true God, but was mixed up about it becuse of this association of God with the sun. I hope this illustration better helps you all understand what it means to say that Trinitarianism is shi-tuf.

Jews are not allowed to practice shi-tuf. For a Jew to worhsip jesus or aten, it would be considered still to be avodah zarah. But in this view, non-Jews do have the freedom to make this sort of error. Its not the ideal, but its workable.

I know this is new to a lot of people. I'll look for your questions.

 

[Brickjectivity]

It is the purpose of this post to explain the two Jewish approaches to Christian Trinitarianism.

Also don't forget Harel13's recent thread: Is the Christian God the same as the Jewish God?

Judaism usually doesnt deal with Christianity to be real honest. I know it may be strange to some Chrisitans, but Jews just dont get together and talk about Jesus. Yet there, in the deep background, is our legendary confict over who Jesus is, and what is the nature of God.

Jews are I think compelled to make determinations about whether it is idolatry and to review this from time to time. The lawyers get together and discuss it so as to apply the wisdom of the sages and determine best course for Jews in the near future. I don't know how often, but they do this. I think I can understand he necessity: emergency preparedness, but that seems like an internal process and not something you'd want to bring out as an accusation. Maybe I have misunderstood what its for.

Jews as you know, teach a very, very pure form of monotheism -- there is only one God, and he has no form (nor will he ever, since this is his nature). We are forbidden by the Torah to make idols of anything in the heavens above or earth below -- God is not any of those things, no matter how spsectacular they are

Do they? Its pure?

Christians, on the other hand, have a very complicated doctrine called the Trinity, in which they emphatically state they believe in only one God, one essense, but this one God is made up of three distinct persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. To further complicate things, one of those three, the Son, is not only fully God, but also fully man. They are grouped in the monotheistic camp, but obviously it is a very muddied monotheism. It can turn you head inside out trying to understand Trinitarianism, as Christians will admit.

It is complicated, obscure and arcane to many; however to say that Judaism is relatively pure on this basis seems a little weird, because you Jews occasionally get little gods among yourselves. Once in a while you get a highly esteemed scholar who gets treated like he's closer to God than everyone else. What about the famous sages? That's not ****uf, but Christianity is?

Jews are not allowed to practice shi-tuf. For a Jew to worhsip jesus or aten, it would be considered still to be avodah zarah. But in this view, non-Jews do have the freedom to make this sort of error. Its not the ideal, but its workable.

I appreciate skill and dedication, but Judaism still fails where it counts. The young are still foolish, despite reading Proverbs and learning the Torah and whatever else. You don't have the standing to declare Christianity as ****uf. I think you're just fence building around it, just in case its ****uf.

 

[exchemist]

It is the purpose of this post to explain the two Jewish approaches to Christian Trinitarianism.

Judaism usually doesnt deal with Christianity to be real honest. I know it may be strange to some Chrisitans, but Jews just dont get together and talk about Jesus. Yet there, in the deep background, is our legendary confict over who Jesus is, and what is the nature of God.

Jews as you know, teach a very, very pure form of monotheism -- there is only one God, and he has no form (nor will he ever, since this is his nature). We are forbidden by the Torah to make idols of anything in the heavens above or earth below -- God is not any of those things, no matter how spsectacular they are

Christians, on the other hand, have a very complicated doctrine called the Trinity, in which they emphatically state they believe in only one God, one essense, but this one God is made up of three distinct persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. To further complicate things, one of those three, the Son, is not only fully God, but also fully man. They are grouped in the monotheistic camp, but obviously it is a very muddied monotheism. It can turn you head inside out trying to understand Trinitarianism, as Christians will admit.

Judaism has had its problems with Christianity, given our long perecution by the church for starters. But we do have deal with Jesus on some level because the christian religion is all around us, even today.


The first approach is to simply write it off completely as avodah zarah, or idolatry. Why? Because first Christianity fudges on the mono of monotheism. The Torah clearly states, "Hear O Israel, the LORD is God, the LORD is ONE." But the harder part is this idea that God became a man. It's just nonsense to Jews. Three times in the Tanakh (OT) it is written that God is not a man. Three times. Must be important, dont you think? Essentially, Christians have taken something from creation and said, "that person is God." This despite that Deuteronomy 5:7 (5:8 in christian bibles) says loudly, "Thou shalt not make unto thee a graven image, even any manner of likeness, of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth." They still see God in the image of Christ and that is idolatry.

There is a second approach to Trinitarianism, where it is seen as "shi-tuf." Shi-tuf means association. In the case of Christianity, the man (Jesus) is associated with God, to the degree that the two are confused in their minds. A christian will say that they pray to the father through Jesus. Thats useful wording. Imagine a room with a glass ceiling, and on the glass is etched the name of Jesus. The christian in the room looks up to heaven to pray, and between him and God is this name of Jesus. They cannot see Jesus without seeing God, and cannot see God without seeing Jesus. In this school of thought, Christians are actually praying to the same God as Jews, but are just mixed up about it due to this association. (Just a note to the side -- it is this concept which makes it possible for Jews to do business with Christians, which they could not do if it were a simple case of avodah zarah, but that is a post for another time.)

There is another instance of shi-tuf in history that is worth mentioning. In Egypt, there was a Pharoah that overhauled the entire country so that it was monotheistic. Only one God, Aten, the sun god, could be worshiped. Aten was the simple disk of the sun, with no human characteristics. All other gods were forbidden to the people of Egypt. Once again, the idea is that Egypt was actually worshiping the one true God, but was mixed up about it becuse of this association of God with the sun. I hope this illustration better helps you all understand what it means to say that Trinitarianism is shi-tuf.

Jews are not allowed to practice shi-tuf. For a Jew to worhsip jesus or aten, it would be considered still to be avodah zarah. But in this view, non-Jews do have the freedom to make this sort of error. Its not the ideal, but its workable.

I know this is new to a lot of people. I'll look for your questions.

The Trinity, it seems to me, is really about three different aspects or manifestations of God:
- the father: creator, rule maker, judge,
- the son: physical messenger to humanity who actually became a human being to do it,
- the spirit: medium of spiritual influence.

I suspect it is the second of these ideas that is contrary to Judaism: The Word became flesh and dwelt among us.

 

[rosends]

The way I learned it, the label of sheetuf is not because of a trinitarian concern but because of the idea that a "Satan" character can challenge God and (according to some) be the creative source behind evil. Some discussion here.

 

[Onoma]

Jews as you know, teach a very, very pure form of monotheism -- there is only one God

I'm curious as to why the book of Daniel uses אלה for " gods " and other books use it for " God " ?

Dan 2:11 " And it is a rare thing that the king requireth, and there is none other that can shew it before the king, except the gods, whose dwelling is not with flesh "

Ezr 4:24 " Then ceased the work of the house of God which is at Jerusalem. So it ceased unto the second year of the reign of Darius king of Persia "

I'm not familiar with the intricacies of written Hebrew, but have always wondered about this in light of the claim of monotheism

 

[rosends]

I'm curious as to why the book of Daniel uses אלה for " gods " and other books use it for " God " ?

Dan 2:11 " And it is a rare thing that the king requireth, and there is none other that can shew it before the king, except the gods, whose dwelling is not with flesh "

Ezr 4:24 " Then ceased the work of the house of God which is at Jerusalem. So it ceased unto the second year of the reign of Darius king of Persia "

I'm not familiar with the intricacies of written Hebrew, but have always wondered about this in light of the claim of monotheism

Daniel 2:11 reads
וּמִלְּתָ֨א דִֽי־מַלְכָּ֤ה שָׁאֵל֙ יַקִּירָ֔ה וְאָחֳרָן֙ לָ֣א אִיתַ֔י דִּ֥י יְחַוִּנַּ֖הּ קֳדָ֣ם מַלְכָּ֑א לָהֵ֣ן אֱלָהִ֔ין דִּ֚י מְדָ֣רְה֔וֹן עִם־בִּשְׂרָ֖א לָ֥א אִיתֽוֹהִי׃

The thing asked by the king is difficult; there is no one who can tell it to the king except the gods whose abode is not among mortals.”

The word for "gods" is elahin which is based in that same aleph-lamed-hey structure as the word that is used to refer to the monotheistic ideal Jewish God, to judges and to other gods (as in the ten commandments, "elohim acherim" - other gods). The final nun is because this verse is in Aramaic and not Hebrew.

 

[pearl]

Yet there, in the deep background, is our legendary confict over who Jesus is, and what is the nature of God.

And rather ironically, we Christians cannot answer the question of who Jesus is in separation from Jewish heritage. "When at the passah meal I lift the cup and break the unleavened bread, I am doing what he did, and I know that I am much closer to him than many Christians who celebrate the Eucharist in complete separation from its Jewish origins." (excerpts from quote by Schalom Ben-Chorin)

There is another instance of shi-tuf in history that is worth mentioning. In Egypt, there was a Pharoah that overhauled the entire country so that it was monotheistic. Only one God, Aten, the sun god, could be worshiped. Aten was the simple disk of the sun, with no human characteristics. All other gods were forbidden to the people of Egypt. Once again, the idea is that Egypt was actually worshiping the one true God, but was mixed up about it becuse of this association of God with the sun. I hope this illustration better helps you all understand what it means to say that Trinitarianism is shi-tuf.

In all of pagan literature there is a single instance in which the writer apparently confesses and praises a single God of the universe. It is in the Hymn to the Aten, written in the 14th century B.C. by the Egyptian Pharaoh Akhenaten. He was somewhat of a religious revolutionary. By some stroke of grace or genius, he broke away from the polytheism of his fathers and insisted on the existence of a single deity. In the Hymn to the Aten, he describes the Aten as "lord of heaven and lord of earth," and the one "who gives breath to sustain all that he has made." The whole tone of the work is praise to a single god who created all that exists and rules over it with power and care. As a piece of religious writing, it is remarkable in its originality; the closest the ancient heathen world ever came to an understanding of the one God. It has even been compared to Psalm 104.

Jews are not allowed to practice shi-tuf. For a Jew to worhsip jesus or aten, it would be considered still to be avodah zarah. But in this view, non-Jews do have the freedom to make this sort of error. Its not the ideal, but its workable.

Once again there is need to clarify worship is to the God of Israel, and finds the promises to Israel that the world will know the One God fulfilled in Jesus.

Jews are not allowed to practice shi-tuf. For a Jew to worhsip jesus or aten, it would be considered still to be avodah zarah. But in this view, non-Jews do have the freedom to make this sort of error. Its not the ideal, but its workable.

I think the doctrine of the Trinity is best understood by those who through the centuries have insisted there is no contradiction to "Hear O Israel, the LORD is God, the LORD is ONE.", that the Trinity is a unity.

 

[Onoma]

I'm curious as to why the book of Daniel uses אלה for " gods " and other books use it for " God " ?

Dan 2:11 " And it is a rare thing that the king requireth, and there is none other that can shew it before the king, except the gods, whose dwelling is not with flesh "

Ezr 4:24 " Then ceased the work of the house of God which is at Jerusalem. So it ceased unto the second year of the reign of Darius king of Persia "

I'm not familiar with the intricacies of written Hebrew, but have always wondered about this in light of the claim of monotheism

Just to clarify, I'm under the assumption that monotheism is the worship of one " God " , but doesn't exclude the belief in the existence of other " gods " , because belief in the existence of something =/= worship of that thing

I'm also assuming that 2:11 refers to the common beliefs of the day, that " tutelary deities " ( AKA " gods " ) revealed this knowledge

 

[1213]

...Jews as you know, teach a very, very pure form of monotheism -- there is only one God, and he has no form (nor will he ever, since this is his nature). We are forbidden by the Torah to make idols of anything in the heavens above or earth below -- God is not any of those things, no matter how spsectacular they are

Christians, on the other hand, have a very complicated doctrine called the Trinity,....

Sad thing about this is, Bible has no Trinity, yet it is taught. Even Paul says in the Bible:

For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,
1 Timothy 2:5

And Jesus says:

This is eternal life, that they should know you, the only true God, and him whom you sent, Jesus Christ.
John 17:3

I don’t know why “Christians” don’t really believe Jesus and Paul.

But, it is also interesting that Judaism is monotheism, when according to the Bible, there has been many gods.

God presides in the great assembly. He judges among the gods.
Psalms 82:1

I said, "You are gods, All of you are sons of the Most High. Nevertheless you shall die like men, And fall like one of the rulers."
Psalms 82:6-7

Now it happened on the day when the sons of God came to present themselves before Yahweh, that Satan also came among them.
Job 1:6

It happened, when men began to multiply on the surface of the ground, and daughters were born to them, that God's sons saw that men's daughters were beautiful, and they took for themselves wives of all that they chose.
Genesis 6:1-2

The idea of many gods is in the OT, but in there it is understood correctly and should be understood similarly in the case of Jesus.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

The idea of many gods is in the OT, but in there it is understood correctly and should be understood similarly in the case of Jesus.

I must have missed those verses. Where in the Torah do we deify a human?

 

[Brickjectivity]

I don’t know why “Christians” don’t really believe Jesus and Paul.

They annoy us with their calls for perfection, humility and work, work, work. You totes like everything Jesus and Paul say? Really? You're telling us that you always believe them on every point. You can maintain this position in an extended conversation?

Sad thing about this is, Bible has no Trinity, yet it is taught. Even Paul says in the Bible:

He says ""Those who think they know something do not yet know as they ought to know." (I Cor 8:2) He's not talking about you though. You know everything just as you ought.

I must have missed those verses. Where in the Torah do we deify a human?

What about in the story of Exodus when Moses is like a god to the pharoah and Aaron acts as Moses (the god's) prophet? Maybe its another translation problem. How about the time that Joshua orders the sun to stop, so it just sits up there until he gives the go ahead? These seem a little borderline...just a tiny bit. What about the miraculous powers of Elijah? Nobody would have messed with that guy, because he was super powered. He didn't even die but flew up into the sky like he was not of Adam's race.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

What about in the story of Exodus when Moses is like a god to the pharoah and Aaron acts as Moses (the god's) prophet? Maybe its another translation problem.

Perhaps your problem; certainly not mine. The text reads: "See, I have set you as a god to Pharaoh, and Aaron your brother will be your prophet. You it is who will speak all that I charge you and Aaron your brother will speak to Pharaoh, and he will send off the Israelites from his land." There is no Mosaic divinity here.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Also don't forget Harel13's recent thread: Is the Christian God the same as the Jewish God?

Jews are I think compelled to make determinations about whether it is idolatry and to review this from time to time. The lawyers get together and discuss it so as to apply the wisdom of the sages and determine best course for Jews in the near future. I don't know how often, but they do this. I think I can understand he necessity: emergency preparedness, but that seems like an internal process and not something you'd want to bring out as an accusation. Maybe I have misunderstood what its for.


Do they? Its pure?

It is complicated, obscure and arcane to many; however to say that Judaism is relatively pure on this basis seems a little weird, because you Jews occasionally get little gods among yourselves. Once in a while you get a highly esteemed scholar who gets treated like he's closer to God than everyone else. What about the famous sages? That's not ****uf, but Christianity is?


I appreciate skill and dedication, but Judaism still fails where it counts. The young are still foolish, despite reading Proverbs and learning the Torah and whatever else. You don't have the standing to declare Christianity as ****uf. I think you're just fence building around it, just in case its ****uf.

Note: you might want to use a hyhen in the word shi-tuf, or a asterisk or something to replace one of the letter, because there is a naughty english word embedded in it that gets censored, and all we see is ****uf, which is unreadable.


Yes, Jewish monotheism is pure monotheism, and no we don't have "little gods." No one claims the sages are God the way that Christianity declares Jesus is God. No Jew thinks Maimonides is God. No Jew thinks Rashi is God. There is nothing in Judaism like this at all. In fact I'm really surprised that yu would even suggest such a thing.

And I'm not advancing my own idea here. The concept of Christianity as sh*tuf goes back to the times of the sages. It parces out the delicate question of whether Jews can do business with Christians, since by law we were not allowed to do business with pagans for so many days before and so many days after their holy days. Christians have always considered Sunday a holy day (this was much stricter in the past). You X out a few days before to a few days after, and what days are there left in the week to do business?

 

[Brickjectivity]

Note: you might want to use a hyhen in the word shi-tuf, or a asterisk or something to replace one of the letter, because there is a naughty english word embedded in it that gets censored, and all we see is ****uf, which is unreadable.

I liked how rosends handled it with 'Sheetuf'.

Yes, Jewish monotheism is pure monotheism, and no we don't have "little gods." No one claims the sages are God the way that Christianity declares Jesus is God. No Jew thinks Maimonides is God. No Jew thinks Rashi is God. There is nothing in Judaism like this at all. In fact I'm really surprised that yu would even suggest such a thing.

What about tzaddiks? They are an innovation that has appeared as a result of the Ba'al Shem Tov -- long after Christianity. I don't know much about these, but they seem elevated. They are starting to sound a little like Christian saints with powers after death. I wonder if the Roman Catholics have noticed? They are a little bit superhuman-sounding.

And I'm not advancing my own idea here. The concept of Christianity as sh*tuf goes back to the times of the sages. It parces out the delicate question of whether Jews can do business with Christians, since by law we were not allowed to do business with pagans for so many days before and so many days after their holy days. Christians have always considered Sunday a holy day (this was much stricter in the past). You X out a few days before to a few days after, and what days are there left in the week to do business?

Since I replied to your post I have learned (from a different poster) that the decision about sheetuf in xtianity came as a result of teachings about Satan as a being capable of opposing God. I can understand that. Trinity doesn't seem to me as obvious.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

The Trinity, it seems to me, is really about three different aspects or manifestations of God:
- the father: creator, rule maker, judge,
- the son: physical messenger to humanity who actually became a human being to do it,
- the spirit: medium of spiritual influence.

I suspect it is the second of these ideas that is contrary to Judaism: The Word became flesh and dwelt among us.

What you are describing is modalism, not trinitarianism.

 

[exchemist]

What you are describing is modalism, not trinitarianism.

Yes, you are right. I had never heard of modalism, but having looked it up, that's exactly what I was describing. Thanks for this.

I must say it seems to me a quite sensible way of thinking about the Trinity. This issue of whether to label these aspects/functions of God as distinct "persons" or not strikes me as a bit arcane and unimportant, to be honest. I can't see what difference it makes - though clearly the early church got its knickers in a serious twist over far more pedantic issues than this one

What I need is @metis at this point, to explain to me why the difference is crucial and why a modalist way of thinking about God is an appalling, eyeball-rolling heresy!

 

[IndigoChild5559]

What about tzaddiks? They are an innovation that has appeared as a result of the Ba'al Shem Tov -- long after Christianity. I don't know much about these, but they seem elevated. They are starting to sound a little like Christian saints with powers after death. I wonder if the Roman Catholics have noticed? They are a little bit superhuman-sounding.

Superhuman, but not God.

Be well.

 

[rosends]

What about tzaddiks? They are an innovation that has appeared as a result of the Ba'al Shem Tov -- long after Christianity. I don't know much about these, but they seem elevated. They are starting to sound a little like Christian saints with powers after death. I wonder if the Roman Catholics have noticed? They are a little bit superhuman-sounding.

The idea of a tzaddik is not new. The second mishna in the first chapter of the Ethics of the Fathers references Shimon haTzaddik, Simon the righteous who was among the last of the men of the great assembly which dates back a long time. The talmud in Tractate Sukkah, 45b talks about the righteous of the world including the 36 Tzadikim (in Aramaic it reads לא פחות עלמא מתלתין ושיתא צדיקי דמקבלי אפי שכינה בכל יום, in the world, there re never fewer than 36 righteous people who face the divine presence every day).

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Yes, you are right. I had never heard of modalism, but having looked it up, that's exactly what I was describing. Thanks for this.

I must say it seems to me a quite sensible way of thinking about the Trinity. This issue of whether to label these aspects/functions of God as distinct "persons" or not strikes me as a bit arcane and unimportant, to be honest. I can't see what difference it makes - though clearly the early church got its knickers in a serious twist over far more pedantic issues than this one

What I need is @metis at this point, to explain to me why the difference is crucial and why a modalist way of thinking about God is an appalling, eyeball-rolling heresy!

@Vouthon would probably be a better person to ask, no offense to Metis.

I can try, too. Modalism is probably a no-no because it denies that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are distinct Persons, and not merely just aspects of God.

 

[exchemist]

@Vouthon would probably be a better person to ask, no offense to Metis.

I can try, too. Modalism is probably a no-no because it denies that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are distinct Persons, and not merely just aspects of God.

Yes, I'm sure @Vouthon would have it all at his fingertips.

But this raises the question of what one can mean by "person", in such a context. Given that we are speaking of a supernatural being, able to permeate creation, rather than a physical individual localised in space ad time, what is a "person"? If one defines person in terms of distinct roles, modes of action and ways of interacting with humanity, what other attributes would one expect such a non-corporeal "person" to have, I wonder?