Genesis 1:1 and John 1:1 the Singularity of God's Plurality

[101G]

Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." and John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

The Hebrew term "God" here is a plurality of ONE PERSON
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
Compare: H5945, H7706, H8199, H4397

the KEY to clearly understand God's plurality as a (single) ONE PERSON is in the plural form of H433. as the definition above suggest. Please note
H430 אֱלֹהִים 'elohiym (el-o-heem') n-m. or אֱלֹהֵי 'elohiy (el-o-hee') [alternate plural] is what in QUESTION.

so, who is H433 in order to understand H430 אֱלֹהִים 'elohiym (el-o-heem') as (a Plurality)?

H433 אֱלוֹהַּ 'elowahh (el-o'-ah) n-m.
אֱלֹהַּ 'eloahh (el-o'-ah) [shortened (rarely)]
1. one with supreme strength and ability.
2. the Supreme Being, God the Creator, Yahweh by name.
3. a supreme entity, a god-like creature (that is, one of God's supreme creations, or one of man's inventions).
[probably prolonged (emphat.) from H410]
KJV: God, god.
Root(s): H410

again, who is H433? the ONE TRUE GOD, correct. but keep in mind that H430 אֱלֹהִים 'elohiym (el-o-heem') is ..... "of" .... not separate and distinct .... "from" H433, but is "OF", H433. THIS IS THE ERROR MEN HAS MADE THROUGH TIME. they got the "of" WRONG. for the term "of" means, "expressing the relationship between a part and a whole". HOLD THAT THOUGHT, " a part and a whole". NT, Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:" the term "FORM" here, G3444 μορφή morphe (mor-fee'), means NATURE OF, OF, OF, God. and this NATURE is "Equal ... WITH" .... God. so, according here to Philippians 2:6 the million dollar question is, "HOW IS THIS NATURE EQUAL WITH GOD?". remember, "of" means, "expressing the relationship between a part and a whole". well the root of Form, G3444 μορφή morphe (mor-fee'), is G3313 μέρος meros (me'-ros)

G3313 μέρος meros (me'-ros) n.
1. a portion (i.e. an amount allotted, a part of something).
2. a part.

we need not go any further a "Portion" ... or as definition #2 states "Part?". notice definition #1, see the "of" there, a part of something? just as in Genesis 1:1 where H433 אֱלוֹהַּ 'elowahh (el-o'-ah) is "of" H433? well now we have our answer to God's plurality. because the PORTION of Something as in definition #1 states in G3313 μέρος meros (me'-ros) n is a "EQUAL SHARE of ONE'S OWNSELF". because the term portion here is synonyms with SHARE when us as a NOUN, in "A part of a whole" is SHARE". remember, the term "of" means, "expressing the relationship between a part and a whole". and here in Philippians 2:6, as well as in John 1:1 and from the start, Genesis 1:1 God is the EQUAL SHARE of himself in Flesh. this is why he has the Rank "Lord" while shared equally in flesh. and the title "Son". so, the PORTION of God in FLESH, is the EQUAL SHARE "OF" HIMSELF IN FLESH. CAN WE BACK THIS UP BY SCRIPTURE? YES, John 3:34 "For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him." THIS TERM measure, IT MEANS,
G3358 μέτρον metron (me'-tron) n.
1. a measure (“metre”).
2. (by implication) a limited portion (degree).
{literally or figuratively}
[an apparently primary word]
KJV: measure

portion? yes, without limits. meaning EQUAL.... "WITH" read John 3:34 again.

Conclusion, men made the mistake in understanding the term "OF". as in Son "of" God.... the Son "of" man, ect...... according to Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words the term "of", translates the genitive case of nouns, with various shades of meaning. Of these the subjective and objective are mentioned here, which need careful distinction. is not the Christ the "OBJECTIVE" ....... of, of, of, God here on earth to do his will? Isaiah 63:5 "And I looked, and there was none to help; and I wondered that there was none to uphold: therefore mine own arm brought salvation unto me; and my fury, it upheld me." his "OWN ARM" in flesh as a man.... brought salvation unto himself? yes. his own ARM is him in flesh doing his WILL on earth.

only a two-letter word in its misunderstanding has caused so much devastation.

next time we should clearly understand this "EQUAL SHARE" in the term "WITH" as in Philippians 2:6b "to be equal with God:" and John 1:1b "and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
understanding the term "WITH" will shed more understanding on the ONE PERSON GOD, "JESUS".

 

[101G]

GINOLJC, to all.

"The Singularity of God's Plurality"
(The With, as One Person)​

John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
here, the Word was "WITH" God. sound like two separate and distinct persons? the Word one person, and God a separate and distinct person. or what about Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:" again, The Christ, a separate person from God? let the bible tell us if the Word in John 1:1 and the Christ in Philippians 2:6 is a separate person from God.

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." here we have the Lord, a single person states he's the First. and this single person is "WITH" the Last another single person, who is separate and distinct? one more, 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." NOTICE the and in both verses, the First and the Last. just as in John 17:3 "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and, and, and, and, Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." and again, the First and, and, and, ... With the Last, the same as in John 17. in both scriptures, are these two separate and distinct persons? let the bible answer this. Isaiah 48:12 "Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first, I also am the last." WHAT! the First is ..... "ALSO" ..... the Last? yes, the same one person. because the term "ALSO" means, in addition; too, BINGO, in addition to being the same one person as first and, and, and, Last, the term "ALSO" is similar, or synonyms to .... "EQUALLY", just as Philippians 2:6 clearly states. so, the person in John 1:1 who is the Word, is the same one person who is God. and that same person in John 1:1 the Word/God is the same one person who is called God in Genesis 1:1 ...... who is the Spirit.... yes, the Holy Spirit. the three-person Godhead is being dismantle by scripture. not by 101G but God himself.

so, 101G ask, if there is any objection to this post, please make them so we may discuss them according to scripture.

next time, UNDERSTANDING the term H259 ECHAD "ONE" in God's Plurality as the Singularity of his OWN-SELF..... ONE PERSON.

101G.

 

[Dizerner]

Notice here that Jesus distinguishes the Father's will as not his own:

nevertheless not My will, but Yours, be done." (Lk. 22:42 NKJ)

He directly called the Father's will "not my will," thus this alone disproves God being one person with three roles.

We know that will is distinctive and definition of person.

 

[101G]

Notice here that Jesus distinguishes the Father's will as not his own:

nevertheless not My will, but Yours, be done." (Lk. 22:42 NKJ)

He directly called the Father's will "not my will," thus this alone disproves God being one person with three roles.

We know that will is distinctive and definition of person.

First thanks for the reply. second, ERROR, his will in being G2758 κενόω kenoo (ke-no-ō') read Philippians 2:7. and in that state he learns. and as the ARM of God he do the will of "HIS" OWN-Spirit. see Isaiah 63:5.

101G.

 

[Dizerner]

Error indeed.

 

[101G]

Error indeed.

(smile), cannot understand what the scriptures are saying?

101G.

 

[101G]

@Dizerner,
Listen, the ARM of God in flesh. Isaiah 53:1 "Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed?" Isaiah 53:2 "For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him." Isaiah 53:3 "He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not." Isaiah 53:4 "Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted." Isaiah 53:5 "But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed." Isaiah 53:6 "All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all." Isaiah 53:7 "He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth." Isaiah 53:8 "He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken." Isaiah 53:9 "And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth."

do you believe that the Christ is the ARM of God? yes or No.

101G.

 

[Dizerner]

Yes, of course.

But that does not logically entail Christ being the person of the Father, who has a separate will.

 

[civic]

Yes, of course.

But that does not logically entail Christ being the person of the Father, who has a separate will.

welcome to the world of oneness where Singular and Plural pronouns mean whatever they want them to mean much like we see with unitarians.

 

[101G]

Yes, of course.

But that does not logically entail Christ being the person of the Father, who has a separate will.

yes it do, listen, Philippians 2:5 "Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:" Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:" if you're equal are you not of the same mind?

101G

 

[Dizerner]

yes it do, listen, Philippians 2:5 "Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:" Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:" if you're equal are you not of the same mind?

101G

Husband and wife are equals without being the same person.

 

[101G]

welcome to the world of oneness where Singular and Plural pronouns mean whatever they want them to mean much like we see with unitarians.

no, welcome to Diversified Oneness where God is the ECHAD, or as the Greek say the G243 Allos of himself in flesh. now Civic, is this one person or two. 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."

so Civic, who is the ROOT of David, and who is the Offspring of David.... your answer please.

101G.

 

[101G]

Husband and wife are equals without being the same person.

is she the Head of her husband? as said to Civic, is the Root and the Offspring in Rev 22:16 two separate persons? yes or No.

101G.

 

[101G]

@Dizerner, and @civic.
101G suggest you both take a crash course on the Root as the source” or “origin” of here, David? and the source or origin of something refers to as "Father" and the bible is full of this example.

looking to hear from both of you.

101G

 

[Dizerner]

is she the Head of her husband? as said to Civic, is the Root and the Offspring in Rev 22:16 two separate persons? yes or No.

Root and Offspring of David is Christ's unique title.

Notice this verse, where Christ is forever subject to the Father as Head:

Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all. (1 Cor. 15:28 NKJ)

It is logically impossible a person to submit to his own self, as he would be the same person.

 

[101G]

Root and Offspring of David is Christ's unique title.

Notice this verse, where Christ is forever subject to the Father as Head:

Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all. (1 Cor. 15:28 NKJ)

It is logically impossible a person to submit to his own self, as he would be the same person.

(smile) another ERROR on your part, Listen and Learn

“The subjection of Christ within God”​

1 Corinthians 15:27 "For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith, all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. 28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all".

SUBJECT: G5293 ὑποτάσσω hupotasso (hoop-ot-as'-so) v. According to Noah Webster's 1828 Dictionary of American English. the Greek word here, G5293 ὑποτάσσω hupotasso, this word is used as a verb, and not a noun. (that will alert one quickly). as a verb one can quickly see, or understand what subject means here in context.
a. put within, b. will. lets look at both and understand this revelation. according to the second definition of subject in the Noah Webster's 1828 Dictionary as a verb, it means 2. To put under or within the power of. (there is our revelation, “within” within the power of). lets back this up with our second understanding. G5293 ὑποτάσσω hupotasso (hoop-ot-as'-so) as a verb which means 1. to subordinate
2. (reflexively) to obey
[from G5259 and G5021]
KJV: be under obedience (obedient), put under, subdue unto, (be, make) subject (to, unto), be (put) in subjection (to, under), submit self unto.

please notice, the KJV can translate subject, G5293 ὑποτάσσω hupotasso, as be under obedience, which bring us to our second understanding. lets see this in scripture, Matthew 26:42 " He went away again the second time, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me, except I drink it, thy will be done”. now here is the revelation. the Lord Jesus is God “OWN” arm. scripture, Isaiah 63:5 " And I looked, and there was none to help; and I wondered that there was none to uphold: therefore mine own arm brought salvation unto me; and my fury, it upheld me”. so being his “OWN” arm it is through, or “within” the agency of the Lord Jesus Christ that his, (GOD), OWN “will” is done, hence the obedience. this is proven out in the definition of G5293 ὑποτάσσω hupotasso itself. the definition also states from G5259 and G5021, lets see what G5259 ὑπό hupo
(hoop-oh') states,
1.under
2. (with the genitive case) of place (beneath), or with verbs (the agency or means, through)
3. (with the accusative case) of place (whither (underneath) or where (below) or time (when (at)) In the comparative, it retains the same general applications, especially of inferior position or condition, and specially, covertly or moderately.
[a primary preposition]
KJV: among, by, from, in, of, under, with

examine definition #2 above carefully, it said, when used as a verb. there is our conformation, the agency or means,“through”. and “through” is synonyms with “WITHIN”. so when G5259 is use in VERB form, meaning with a verb as in “BE” subject as here in 1 Corinthians 15:27-28 then it is understood to be used as the “agency or means, through”. other words Isaiah 63:5 is totally correct and on point when God said, " And I looked, and there was none to help; and I wondered that there was none to uphold: therefore mine own arm brought salvation unto me; and my fury, it upheld me”. the power is in, or within God “own” arm, which the Lord is, “God’s own arm. that’s all that is needed, the Holy Spirit, (the Revelator) and an old English dictionary like the Noah Webster's 1828 Dictionary.

brother Dizerner, you have not been taught this great revelation? guess not, but now you know. now back to 101G original question, is the ROOT and the OFFSPRING the same one person...... (smile). now you been schooled on 1 Corinthians 15:27-28, please don't make the same mistake ..... ok.
now your answer on Rev. 22:16

@civic if you need help in understanding of 1 Corinthians 15:27-28 in the Lord Jesus being .... Subject, just remember when used with a verb, as here, "BE", it changes the meaning...... Oh my this is too easy.

101G.

101G

 

[101G]

@Dizerner, and @civic
in that definition above ... "be Subject", notice that second definition.
a. put within, b. will. lets look at both and understand this revelation. according to the second definition of subject in the Noah Webster's 1828 Dictionary as a verb, it means 2. To put under or within the power of. (there is our revelation, “within” within the power of). lets back this up with our second understanding. G5293 ὑποτάσσω hupotasso (hoop-ot-as'-so) as a verb which means 1. to subordinate
2. (reflexively) to obey.

OBEY, yes, as the ARM of God in Flesh, just read 2 Chronicles 32:8 "With him is an arm of flesh; but with us is the LORD our God to help us, and to fight our battles. And the people rested themselves upon the words of Hezekiah king of Judah." ARM OF FLESH? yes, understand what this verse is saying. as 101G posted in another topic, the ARM of GOD in flesh is his own POWER/God's ARMY of ONE, in flesh on earth do do do his will. .... MY GOD THIS IS TOO EASY.

as any ARMY/an ARM of Flesh, do not it's own WIIL, but must be AUTHORIZED, and that AUTHORIZATION came at his BAPTISM, or his Anointing b y John the Baptist who was SENT from God, and not Just sent .... "by" .... God, but sent ....... "FROM" .... God. just read. John 1:6 "There was a man sent from God, whose name was John." see, this is also one of the reason why 101G know for sure that the Lord Jesus and John the Baptist are the two witness in the end times.

 

[civic]

@Dizerner, and @civic.
101G suggest you both take a crash course on the Root as the source” or “origin” of here, David? and the source or origin of something refers to as "Father" and the bible is full of this example.

looking to hear from both of you.

101G

diversion since it has nothing to do with the Father and Son being the same person.

 

[Dizerner]

brother Dizerner, you have not been taught this great revelation? guess not, but now you know. now back to 101G original question, is the ROOT and the OFFSPRING the same one person...... (smile). now you been schooled on 1 Corinthians 15:27-28, please don't make the same mistake ..... ok.
now your answer on Rev. 22:16

Scripture describes God as three persons not one.

I encourage you to seek a revelation of this.

 

[101G]

diversion since it has nothing to do with the Father and Son being the same person.

101G did not bring up 1 Corinthians 15, but put it to rest. now thank you for staying on the Father and the Son, since you cannot address Revelation 22:16 concerning the ROOT /Father, and Offspring/Son, let see these titles more clearly then. Revelation 4:11 "Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created." for thou... "O Lord". here the definite article is used and identify the CREATOR. well is this not the Son who sits on the throne as CREATOR of all things? 101G say it's the Son. but, but, but, and that's with one t, but is it not the "LORD" all caps who is the CREATOR of all things? your answer please.

101G.