Not the point which is obviously that echad can refer to a unity.
If God is a Trinity, should He be referred to as “He/Him” or “They/Them”?
- Thread starter Runningman
- Start date
Missed post #11, eh?
Runningman
Active Member
My apologies, I did miss post #11. You did explicitly say God is a they and I see you voted as well. Thank you! I'm curious why you think God is a they since no one referred to Him as such anywhere in the Bible. I think that's significant and represents how people viewed God and how many still do now.
Believe
Active Member
God is one being in three co-equal, co-eternal persons: the Father, the Son (Jesus Christ), and the Holy Spirit. It signifies that while there is only one God, God exists as three distinct divine persons within the one Godhead.
Not “He/Him” or “They/Them”
Be respectful and use their Names. Not them guys.
It resonates in my soul as the truth... I used to refer to YHWH as THEM in my writings to emphasise my faith in a divine Lord but it short circuited topics too often so I stayed with accepted use.
I think that many doctrines are of the hidden variety in which the meaning must be inferred from interpretation and context and received by the work of the Holy Spirit.
You know what I mean because this is the way some of our favourite doctrines were not taught but were hidden for centuries including the Deity of the Messiah:
- the teaching that the OT was NOT the end of all scripture, (as per Deuteronomy 4:2 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish [ought] from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.) but would include the NT writings and the new revelation hinted at in Rev 10:8-11.
- that God would incarnate as a man,
- that the Messiah would be an intermediary for prayer,
- any hint of Adamic sin before the NT.
- including his and our pre-earth existence
- and also including the words for doctrine that we use that are not in scripture: Trinity, omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, incarnation, rapture
So, scriptural doctrine without having a precise scriptural reference is a time honoured procedure, and depends upon rightly dividing the word of truth aka the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
amazing grace
Active Member
If it wasn't a point then why did you reference it?
Just to show you that a husband and wife become one through intimacy . . .
Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? Never! Or do you not know that he who is joined to a prostitute becomes one body with her? For, as it is written, “The two will become one flesh.” [1 Cor. 6:15,16]
I can't seem to find a Concordance or Lexicon which defines echad as a unity.
Last edited:
Runningman
Active Member
Thanks for defining the way you see the trinity. So God is the being and He is omnipresently in the persons. That would make God Unitarian, but what you're describing is modalism, i.e., the persons aren't God, but rather the God in them is God.
umm, you're kidding, right?
You got the point wrong... I did not get the meaning of the reference wrong.
I know, sad for you...
amazing grace
Active Member
Accusations are pointless when you just accuse and not explain how or where I got the reference wrong.
Well, if you know of one you should reference it.
Runningman
Active Member
So no one in the Bible is on record coming out and confirming the several tings about what you believe regarding the trinity one way or another, but based on what you read it seems to be what is accurate from your perspective. What if the prophets already thought ahead and just gave it to us straight in their writings? No hidden doctrines, just the straightforward truth about God. Do you think that's possible?
When Paul went up to the third heaven he told us he learned things he was not supposed to talk about, 2 Corinthians 12:2-4 ... The things he heard were inexpressible, things that man is not permitted to tell. inexpressible could mean ineffable but the next phrase telling us that he was not allowed to tell them defines inexpressible. Iow, there would have been no need to forbid him from telling them if they were too untellable anyway.
I do tend to think that more of the bible should be taken at face value but is corrupted because of prior commitment to bad doctrine. I understand Rom 1 to say that everyone knows the truth but because they love sin more than the truth, sinners deny the truth they know for indulgence, sigh.
Runningman
Active Member
I also agree that it's better to take the Bible at face value. It's a very wordy book and contains a lot of nuanced language which makes it easy for people who want to manipulate it to do so. However, we can begin with some absolutely certain things that put up guardrails to guide us in the way we should understand the general context. There are statements in the Bible that shouldn't be contradicted. I think those help make it clear what the truth is.
Runningman
Active Member
Interesting that not many of the usual trinitarians on this entire board have dared to vote in the poll. Who would think that such an easy question would give them cold feet.
Alter2Ego
Active Member
Just about everything that you claim in your above post regarding Jesus Christ happen to be false.
There are no scriptures in the Bible to support the Trinitarian claim that Jesus is omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent and that he is in a trinity with Jehovah the Father. To the contrary, scripture makes it clear that Jesus DOES NOT have the same knowledge as Jehovah the Father and that Jesus DOES NOT have the same power as Jehovah the Father. In fact, I'm wondering if you even understand the meaning of the words you used in paragraph 1 of your above post. Below are the definitions for those reading this thread.
omniscient
1: having infinite awareness, understanding, and insight2: possessed of universal or complete knowledge
Definition of OMNISCIENT
having infinite awareness, understanding, and insight; possessed of universal or complete knowledge… See the full definition
www.merriam-webster.com
omnipotent
having unlimited power and able to do anything:
omnipotent
1. having unlimited power and able to do anything: 2. having unlimited power…
omnipresent
Something that is omnipresent is present everywhere or seems to be always present.
Believe
Active Member
Some people like having a secondhand Jesus, but like Paul what I want more than anything else is to know Christ, to become like Him. I imagine Paul was not a guy with a lot of “margins” in his schedule. Anyone who describes his life as a “drink being poured out” is probably a busy man. Paul had a lot of things to do. Yet the thing he made central to his life—the pursuit that defined all other pursuits—was his straining toward the goal of knowing Jesus. It was Paul’s one thing.
David. Mary, of Mary and Martha. Paul. They could have defined their lives by many things—David by his position or fame or influence; Mary by her responsibilities or duties; Paul by the churches he planted or the letters he penned. Each had many roles that they played. Yet each of them understood that only one role was sacred and irreplaceable. It is the one thing desired, the one thing needed, the one thing to be done. It is knowing Jesus.
Jesus is my King, do you know Him?
David. Mary, of Mary and Martha. Paul. They could have defined their lives by many things—David by his position or fame or influence; Mary by her responsibilities or duties; Paul by the churches he planted or the letters he penned. Each had many roles that they played. Yet each of them understood that only one role was sacred and irreplaceable. It is the one thing desired, the one thing needed, the one thing to be done. It is knowing Jesus.
Jesus is my King, do you know Him?
Runningman, the word "God" have two Strong number one is #H430, in Hebrew "אלהים 'ĕlôhı̂ym," Bible lexicon defined it as - plural.
Hence, by the mention of "God" it means not single, just like when it refer to "rulers or judges" it means two or more being referred.
The singular use of "God" have Strong#H433, in Hebrew "אלהּ / אלוהּ 'ĕlôahh" in English still as - God.
Job 1:6 R1Now there was a dayH3117 when the N1 R2sonsH1121 of GodH430 cameH935 to presentH3320 themselves beforeH5921 the LORDH3068, and N2SatanH7854 alsoH1571 cameH935 amongH8432 them.
H430
אלהים 'ĕlôhı̂ym
BDB Definition:
1) (plural)
1a) rulers, judges
Job 3:4 “May that dayH3117 be darknessH2822; May GodH433 aboveH4605 not careH1875 for it, NorH408 lightH5105 shineH3313 on it.
H433
אלהּ / אלוהּ 'ĕlôahh
BDB Definition:
1) God
Runningman
Active Member
Elohim isn't referring to numerical plurality, which is why God is always referred to as a singular He, Him, His, You, and I throughout the Bible. God is one person which is why no one ever refers to God as a they or them. Also, humans are called elohim as well many times in the Bible. You misunderstand what elohim means.
Did I not presented it to you through Bible verses Runningman? Yes, it also refer to plural judges or rulers.
See also below from online AI.
Elohim (אֱלֹהִים) is the plural form of Eloah (אֱלוֹהַּ), both stemming from the root El (אל), meaning "god" or "mighty one," with Eloah being singular and Elohim being a collective plural used for both the God of Israel.
Runningman
Active Member
When referring to God Almighty, elohim is always about one person without exception.
Right off the bat, Genesis doesn't give the reader any excuses for misunderstanding it.
Notice how a man and a woman together are a them, but God is not a them even if they are "one flesh." God is one person, a His, Him, He. The writers knew what they were talking about.
Genesis 1
27So God created man in His own image;
in the image of God He created him;
male and female He created them.
Last edited:
Similar threads
