Echad (One) and the Trinity

[praise_yeshua]

A challenge for all forum participants.....

Often time "modalists" will reference the "Echad" in their particular "oneness" positions. I've been asked multiple times on this forum...

"Do you believe in the Echad". To which, I have replied "no" multiple times.

There is a reason for why I respond this way. The conversation usually ends because both sides of the debate don't know how to respond to me. However, most everyone should already know why. So tell me...Most Trinitarians will often use the "Echad" as defense of the Trinity.


Then, as a Trinitarian, why would I reject the use of "Echad" in the defense of the Trinity?

Since so many of you say you know the "Trinity" (whether for it or against it). Tell me why I would chose not to. I'm a reasoned person. I have reasoned positions on all these subjects. You're not going to find this answer by Googling or asking your "AI" of choice. What I believe comes from study and experience.

Thus, the challenge. Show me what you know.....

 

[FreeInChrist]

A challenge for all forum participants.....

Often time "modalists" will reference the "Echad" in their particular "oneness" positions. I've been asked multiple times on this forum...

"Do you believe in the Echad". To which, I have replied "no" multiple times.

There is a reason for why I respond this way. The conversation usually ends because both sides of the debate don't know how to respond to me. However, most everyone should already know why. So tell me...Most Trinitarians will often use the "Echad" as defense of the Trinity.


Then, as a Trinitarian, why would I reject the use of "Echad" in the defense of the Trinity?

Since so many of you say you know the "Trinity" (whether for it or against it). Tell me why I would chose not to. I'm a reasoned person. I have reasoned positions on all these subjects. You're not going to find this answer by Googling or asking your "AI" of choice. What I believe comes from study and experience.

Thus, the challenge. Show me what you know.....

Boy, how I missed this one I have no idea.

It is amazing how study produces growth in any theological position.

I used to defend the Trinity using echad, and while I still see why that argument is made, I have come to recognize that it is ultimately a weakened one.

Rather than argue against your position here, I find myself affirming it. Book of Deuteronomy 6:4 teaches monotheism. I fully affirm that. The doctrine of the Trinity must fit within that oneness, not attempt to redefine the word “one.”

Appealing to “compound unity” — particularly from Book of Genesis 2:24 — can unintentionally suggest that God is a collection of parts. Classical Trinitarianism rejects that idea. God is not a composite being formed from separate individuals.

So while echad affirms that God is one, it should not be pressed into service as a proof of internal plurality. The Trinity stands or falls on the full scope of biblical revelation, not on a lexical argument about a single Hebrew word.

 

[civic]

A challenge for all forum participants.....

Often time "modalists" will reference the "Echad" in their particular "oneness" positions. I've been asked multiple times on this forum...

"Do you believe in the Echad". To which, I have replied "no" multiple times.

There is a reason for why I respond this way. The conversation usually ends because both sides of the debate don't know how to respond to me. However, most everyone should already know why. So tell me...Most Trinitarians will often use the "Echad" as defense of the Trinity.


Then, as a Trinitarian, why would I reject the use of "Echad" in the defense of the Trinity?

Since so many of you say you know the "Trinity" (whether for it or against it). Tell me why I would chose not to. I'm a reasoned person. I have reasoned positions on all these subjects. You're not going to find this answer by Googling or asking your "AI" of choice. What I believe comes from study and experience.

Thus, the challenge. Show me what you know.....

The problem with the modalist is their view of one fails with so many biblical examples where we see how one can and does refer to unity not a numeric value. Echad is in the Shema. Echad is in the man/woman- husband/wife being one- Echad.

We know there are both man/woman who become one flesh. This shows how we reflect God who is also " one" Echad yet is Father, Son, Holy Spirit. The One body ( church ) of Christ has many members/parts but they are one in unity/purpose.

So many get caught up with God as a math problem. Gods being 3 in 1 in not math. This becomes the stumbling block for all unitarians and modalists alike. The N.T. Shema also affirms the same in 1 Corinthians 8:6 with the One Lord/One God and the many lords/gods of the pagans. The Father/Son there reveals their Oneness together in Creation. This too is also another stumbling block in another way with those same groups. Because of their misunderstanding of "ONE" they fail miserably with the One Lord, One God to the exclusion of the other whether its the Father or the Son. They want to have their cake and eat it too when it comes to the Father alone as God but refuse to give the same meaning to One Lord with the Son at the exclusion of the Father. With true Trinitarianism we see its not either/or scenario , but and and both.

This is the problem with those groups and their presuppositional reading of Scripture. I'm not at all saying Trins don't do that too but when it comes to the Shema the Trins have the biblical answer.

hope this helps !!!

 

[TedT]

I have put my faith in the word echad as being true...

Deut 6.4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is One [echad].

Genesis 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one [echad] flesh.

Echad, can refer to the word one and to a unity, as Gen 2:4 indicates.

We understand that things are defined by their attributes; cats have cat dna attributes, apple trees have different dna attribute than corn, etc.

The FATHER is a Person with the divine attributes of omniscience, omnipotence and omnipresence, etc.

The Son is a Person with the divine attributes of omniscience, omnipotence and omnipresence, etc.

The Holy Spirit is a Person with the divine attributes of omniscience, omnipotence and omnipresence, etc.

The nature of these Divine attributes is such that they form a perfect GODly UNITY so that while there are three divine persons, there is only ONE GOD. That is, the perfection of the unity of divine attributes makes it proper to refer to this unity as ONE GOD, not three gods...even though each of the Three is a Divine being.

 

[civic]

I have put my faith in the word echad as being true...

Deut 6.4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is One [echad].

Genesis 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one [echad] flesh.

Echad, can refer to the word one and to a unity, as Gen 2:4 indicates.

We understand that things are defined by their attributes; cats have cat dna attributes, apple trees have different dna attribute than corn, etc.

The FATHER is a Person with the divine attributes of omniscience, omnipotence and omnipresence, etc.

The Son is a Person with the divine attributes of omniscience, omnipotence and omnipresence, etc.

The Holy Spirit is a Person with the divine attributes of omniscience, omnipotence and omnipresence, etc.

The nature of these Divine attributes is such that they form a perfect GODly UNITY so that while there are three divine persons, there is only ONE GOD. That is, the perfection of the unity of divine attributes makes it proper to refer to this unity as ONE GOD, not three gods...even though each of the Three is a Divine being.

I like everything you stated with the exception of the last sentence each is a Divine Being. I would replace that with Person that way it eliminates the perception of Tritheism.

 

[praise_yeshua]

I have put my faith in the word echad as being true...

Deut 6.4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is One [echad].

Genesis 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one [echad] flesh.

Echad, can refer to the word one and to a unity, as Gen 2:4 indicates.

We understand that things are defined by their attributes; cats have cat dna attributes, apple trees have different dna attribute than corn, etc.

The FATHER is a Person with the divine attributes of omniscience, omnipotence and omnipresence, etc.

The Son is a Person with the divine attributes of omniscience, omnipotence and omnipresence, etc.

The Holy Spirit is a Person with the divine attributes of omniscience, omnipotence and omnipresence, etc.

The nature of these Divine attributes is such that they form a perfect GODly UNITY so that while there are three divine persons, there is only ONE GOD. That is, the perfection of the unity of divine attributes makes it proper to refer to this unity as ONE GOD, not three gods...even though each of the Three is a Divine being.

"Technically" Deut 6:4 is problematic as evidence for what you said. "Echad" or אֶחָד is not without ְהֹוָה.

At best, you have a unity of name that some would reference as "Jehovah". This is common mistake made by oneness and one of the reasons I don't appeal to "Echad" as evidence.

The Greek OT contains a much longer narrative for the verse. Jesus also never mention the sentence from any Hebrew manuscripts when He appealed to the "Good Samaritan" to silence the Pharisees in Luke 10:27.

The parable of the "Good Samaritan" presents the very nature of God toward humanity. People get "wrapped up" in names and miss the reality of Luke 10:27.

What Christ did, speaks for itself. It speaks to the Character of God. Not what someone thinks about the "name" Jehovah.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Boy, how I missed this one I have no idea.

It is amazing how study produces growth in any theological position.

I used to defend the Trinity using echad, and while I still see why that argument is made, I have come to recognize that it is ultimately a weakened one.

Rather than argue against your position here, I find myself affirming it. Book of Deuteronomy 6:4 teaches monotheism. I fully affirm that. The doctrine of the Trinity must fit within that oneness, not attempt to redefine the word “one.”

Appealing to “compound unity” — particularly from Book of Genesis 2:24 — can unintentionally suggest that God is a collection of parts. Classical Trinitarianism rejects that idea. God is not a composite being formed from separate individuals.

So while echad affirms that God is one, it should not be pressed into service as a proof of internal plurality. The Trinity stands or falls on the full scope of biblical revelation, not on a lexical argument about a single Hebrew word.

Sadly, there is a ritualism to Trinitarianism like there are for most any belief. The "Shema Prayer" came out of the ritualism that was demanded by the law of Moses.

What do we do when we are forced to do things we don't want to do? We form "rituals" that force us to comply with our needs. That is what you find in the "Shema Prayer". A ritual of the second temple period where God was abandoned and ritual replaced willingness of heart and mind to serve God. To "want to be there" with God in all things. Such grieves the Spirit of God.

Such ritualism has produced such teachings as the "Shema Prayer" and the "Echad" teaching that are rooted in Monotheism of Judaism. Judaism, as we know it, was the theology of the second temple period. A ritualistic religion that didn't fill the hearts of men with willingness. Just a hallow shell with empty "shells" of service.

 

[praise_yeshua]

The problem with the modalist is their view of one fails with so many biblical examples where we see how one can and does refer to unity not a numeric value. Echad is in the Shema. Echad is in the man/woman- husband/wife being one- Echad.

We know there are both man/woman who become one flesh. This shows how we reflect God who is also " one" Echad yet is Father, Son, Holy Spirit. The One body ( church ) of Christ has many members/parts but they are one in unity/purpose.

So many get caught up with God as a math problem. Gods being 3 in 1 in not math. This becomes the stumbling block for all unitarians and modalists alike. The N.T. Shema also affirms the same in 1 Corinthians 8:6 with the One Lord/One God and the many lords/gods of the pagans. The Father/Son there reveals their Oneness together in Creation. This too is also another stumbling block in another way with those same groups. Because of their misunderstanding of "ONE" they fail miserably with the One Lord, One God to the exclusion of the other whether its the Father or the Son. They want to have their cake and eat it too when it comes to the Father alone as God but refuse to give the same meaning to One Lord with the Son at the exclusion of the Father. With true Trinitarianism we see its not either/or scenario , but and and both.

This is the problem with those groups and their presuppositional reading of Scripture. I'm not at all saying Trins don't do that too but when it comes to the Shema the Trins have the biblical answer.

hope this helps !!!

A willingness of heart and mind. "Swift to hear". This is what Trinitarianism brings to theology.