El-o-Hym = El-o-Human = All-Human = No ego

[RevTestament]

2 is plural. Not just 3+

The Hebrew nouns for water and sky also have a plural structure. Are there 3 skies?

I thought Hebrews believed there were three heavens?
How would you respond to the assertion that Elohim refers to the house of Elohim. So YHWH is telling us that I am YHWH your family/house?...

 

[chair]

I thought Hebrews believed there were three heavens?
How would you respond to the assertion that Elohim refers to the house of Elohim. So YHWH is telling us that I am YHWH your family/house?...

You'll have to be more specific. I don't know where you get these ideas from. 3 heavens?

Maybe some verses would help. Or sources that say whet you are referring to.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again beameup,

The Angel of YHVH is none other than the pre-incarnate Jesus (Yeshua). That is just one of his many titles.

My understanding of this is that the Angel is a Messenger of Yahweh, and he came to deliver a message concerning the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt. As such the Angel cannot be Yahweh himself, nor can he be a third part of a Trinitarian “Elohim”. The Scriptures are clear that man cannot look upon God and live, therefore the Angel must be a lesser creature.

BTW, the "im" ending on a Hebrew word means plural (3 or more). Elohim is plural. You have been led down the wrong "path".

Elohim is a plural form of eloh. Therefore God is a plural - always has been, always will be

I will let you and chair resolve this on a Hebrew language level, but I consider that what chair has stated appears to be correct. How do you read Exodus 3:6 where Moses was afraid to look upon Elohim? Were all three revealed to Moses at the bush, or was there one Angel representing Yahweh, called here Elohim.

Note that whenever asked his NAME, he declines to give it (in the O.T.).

But Moses did ask God’s Name and was given an answer. And when the Name was given it was singular, not plural. It was given as “I am”, or as I prefer as per Tyndale and RV and RSV margins “I will be”. Why not “We are”, “We are what we are”?
Exodus 3:12-14 (Tyndale): 12 And he sayde: I wilbe with the. And this shalbe a token vnto the that I haue sent the: after that thou hast broughte the people out of Egipte, ye shall serue God vppon this mountayne. 13 Than sayde Moses vnto God: when I come vnto the childern of Israell and saye vnto them, the God of youre fathers hath sent me vnto you, ad they saye vnto me, what ys his name, what answere shall I geuethem? 14 Then sayde God vnto Moses: I wilbe what I wilbe: ad he sayde, this shalt thou saye vnto the children of Israel: I wilbe dyd send me to you.
Are you suggesting that God the Father’s Name is Yahweh, but the supposed pre-incarnate Jesus did not share this Name? BTW, as a Biblical Unitarian, unlike JWs and Trinitarians, I do not believe that Jesus pre-existed. Jesus is the name of the child born to Mary.

Another example of Elohim used in the sense of representation is when Moses is called Elohim to Pharaoh:
Exodus 3:1 (KJV): 1 And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god (Hebrew Elohim) to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet. 2 Thou shalt speak all that I command thee: and Aaron thy brother shall speak unto Pharaoh, that he send the children of Israel out of his land.

Also Genesis 17 has similar language to Exodus 3, where an Angel represents Yahweh and speaks on His behalf. When the Angel finishes speaking with Abraham, it states the following:
Genesis 17:21-22 (KJV): 21 But my covenant will I establish with Isaac, which Sarah shall bear unto thee at this set time in the next year. 22 And he left off talking with him, and God went up from Abraham.
Now it says that Elohim went up from Abraham. Only one being went up from Abraham, the Angel, but again the word Elohim is used because the Angel represented God.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[beameup]

I thought Hebrews believed there were three heavens?
How would you respond to the assertion that Elohim refers to the house of Elohim. So YHWH is telling us that I am YHWH your family/house?...

May I suggest that you ask someone who has a knowledge of the Original Pictographic Hebrew and the "Worldview" of ancient Hebrews.
Hint: You won't find that with Chair (secular Jew) or Trevor (Unitarian).

 

[chair]

May I suggest that you ask someone who has a knowledge of the Original Pictographic Hebrew and the "Worldview" of ancient Hebrews.
Hint: You won't find that with Chair (secular Jew) or Trevor (Unitarian).

1. I am not a "secular Jew".
2. Learn some Hebrew:

The word for "bull" is "PAR". פר
The plural is "PARIM" פרים
numbers:
"one" is "ECHAD" אחד
"two" is "SHNAIM" שניים
"three" is "SHLOSHA" שלושה

there are differences in numbers between male and female objects.

so we have :
PAR ECHAD- one bull פר אחד
SHNEI PARIM- two bulls שני פרים
SHLOSHA PARIM- three bulls שלושה פרים

the plural for bulls is PARIM. It can mean any number more than one.

Your Pictograms are not relevant (even if they were accurate). This is the way the language is spoken as well as written. Which letters are used is not relevant.

 

[chair]

Greetings again beameup, My understanding of this is that the Angel is a Messenger of Yahweh...
Kind regards
Trevor

The Trinitarian view has a major difficulty in the Old Testament. It is stated quite clearly that God is one. It doesn't state anywhere that God is a trinity. So if a Trinitarian wants to find the Trinity in the Old Testament, he has to look for hints or obscure points.

There are alternate explanations for these unclear verses. Even if there weren't- it doesn't make a clearly wrong suggestion (Trinity) correct.

It is important to note that in the Bible a messenger can speak in his sender's voice. That is, he can speak in the first person, as if he was a recording of what the sender said.

 

[beameup]

This is the way the language is spoken as well as written. Which letters are used is not relevant.

The dual form doesn’t exist in English, and in the modern Hebrew it exists only in very specific nouns.

The source of this form is in the biblical Hebrew where each noun had singular, dual and plural form.
https://www.duolingo.com/comment/74...Hebrew-Nouns-Adjectives-Dual-and-Plural-Forms

I'll stick with the Hebrew that Moses wrote in and spoke in as the final authority... thank G_d for the Dead Sea Scrolls.

BTW, the SUBJECT is Elohim

 

[beameup]

It is important to note that in the Bible a messenger can speak in his sender's voice. That is, he can speak in the first person, as if he was a recording of what the sender said.

Yea, here is an example:
Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name [YHVH] is in him. But if thou shalt indeed obey his voice, and do all that I speak; then I will be an enemy unto thine enemies, and an adversary unto thine adversaries. - Exodus 23:20-22

Compare with this:
And the LORD [YHVH] descended in the cloud, and stood with him there, and proclaimed the name of the LORD [YHVH]. And the LORD [YHVH] passed by before him, and proclaimed, The LORD, The LORD God [YHVH-YHVH 'el], merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation. And Moses made haste, and bowed his head toward the earth, and worshipped. - Exodus 34:5-8

 

[chair]

I'll stick with the Hebrew that Moses wrote in and spoke in as the final authority... thank G_d for the Dead Sea Scrolls.

BTW, the SUBJECT is Elohim

What alphabet are the Dead Sea Scrolls written in , oh wise one? When were they written?

 

[beameup]

What alphabet are the Dead Sea Scrolls written in , oh wise one? When were they written?

A mixture. There remains some yet undiscovered caches.
Original Hebrew Alephbet was derived from Phoenician, rabbi.

PS: Elad needs to excavate up there south of the south-east corner of the Haram al Sherif.

 

[chair]

A mixture. There remains some yet undiscovered caches.
Original Hebrew Alephbet was derived from Phoenician, rabbi.

PS: Elad needs to excavate up there south of the south-east corner of the Haram al Sherif.

Well, at least you know something. Moses would not be able to read many of the Dead Sea scrolls.

In any case, the grammar is part of the language. It is not script dependent.

 

[beameup]

Well, at least you know something. Moses would not be able to read many of the Dead Sea scrolls.

In any case, the grammar is part of the language. It is not script dependent.

Yes, Moses would have no doubt had difficulty with the Paleo-Hebrew , but we don't know the extent of Moses education in Egypt.
Hebrew was originally written with a pictographic script similar to Egyptian Hieroglyphs. The Ancient Hebrew language is a concrete oriented language meaning that the meaning of Hebrew words are rooted in something that can be sensed by the five senses such as a tree which can be seen, sweet which can be tasted and noise which can be heard. Abstract concepts such as "praise" have no foundation in the concrete and are a product of ancient Greek philosophy. The much later Babylonian script was based on Aramaic script. To fully understand the original Hebrew, it must be seen through the perspective of the Ancient Hebrews who wrote it, not from Aramaic or Greek perspectives.

 

[chair]

Yes, Moses would have no doubt had difficulty with the Paleo-Hebrew , but we don't know the extent of Moses education in Egypt.
Hebrew was originally written with a pictographic script similar to Egyptian Hieroglyphs. The Ancient Hebrew language is a concrete oriented language meaning that the meaning of Hebrew words are rooted in something that can be sensed by the five senses such as a tree which can be seen, sweet which can be tasted and noise which can be heard. Abstract concepts such as "praise" have no foundation in the concrete and are a product of ancient Greek philosophy. The much later Babylonian script was based on Aramaic script. To fully understand the original Hebrew, it must be seen through the perspective of the Ancient Hebrews who wrote it, not from Aramaic or Greek perspectives.

You are quoting from a text written by a self-proclaimed expert. You should reference his work when quoting him.

There are abstract concepts in the Bible. Many of which date from late periods which may have has Greek influence, but some likely predate that. "Praise" does appear in the Old Testament, mostly in Psalms (when those were written is an interesting question). The idea of "beauty" appears already in Genesis. Not likely under Greek influence.

Again- the script is not relevant. It is a way of recording language. It is not the language itself.

You may want to study some other sources about Biblical Hebrew.

 

[daqq]

The Ancient Hebrew language is a concrete oriented language meaning that the meaning of Hebrew words are rooted in something that can be sensed by the five senses such as a tree which can be seen, sweet which can be tasted and noise which can be heard. Abstract concepts such as "praise" have no foundation in the concrete and are a product of ancient Greek philosophy.

Hmmm, so according to you "im" means three? :chuckle:
And Judah does not mean "praise" but rather something more like "noise"? :chuckle:

 

[beameup]

You are quoting from a text written by a self-proclaimed expert. You should reference his work when quoting him.

There are abstract concepts in the Bible. Many of which date from late periods which may have has Greek influence, but some likely predate that. "Praise" does appear in the Old Testament, mostly in Psalms (when those were written is an interesting question). The idea of "beauty" appears already in Genesis. Not likely under Greek influence.

Again- the script is not relevant. It is a way of recording language. It is not the language itself.

You may want to study some other sources about Biblical Hebrew.

The gist of what I posted I already knew, long ago, from study... and by watching certain YouTube videos. You would do well to study a bit yourself.

Is it hard to understand "symbolism" as opposed to "alphabet"?
From my classes covering anthropology and linguistics this is a no-brainer.
The Hebrew worldview was an Oriental one and not a westernized logic-based "Greek" one.
I believe you have lost all contact with the original culture in this modern age.
Hebrew is but a "shell" of its former self; all the richness and earthiness is missing.

However, a "refreshing" and "restoration" of the land to pastoral/agricultural richness,
by Messiah, will refresh and restore Hebrew language and culture.

 

[chair]

The gist of what I posted I already knew, long ago, from study... and by watching certain YouTube videos. You would do well to study a bit yourself.

Is it hard to understand "symbolism" as opposed to "alphabet"?
From my classes covering anthropology and linguistics this is a no-brainer.
The Hebrew worldview was an Oriental one and not a westernized logic-based "Greek" one.
I believe you have lost all contact with the original culture in this modern age.
Hebrew is but a "shell" of its former self; all the richness and earthiness is missing.

However, a "refreshing" and "restoration" of the land to pastoral/agricultural richness,
by Messiah, will refresh and restore Hebrew language and culture.

You can believe whatever you want. The form of the letters was certainly originally symbolic, but, once they became letters in an alphabet, they became a way of recording a language. Semitic languages existed long before they could be written. That is a real "no-brainer".

I agree the the original Hebrew world was not the Western (i.e. Greek) one. That is not a secret. But it doesn't change the plan facts of the language. What a plural means. The use of terms like "beautiful" (in genesis!) to describe a man or woman.

You are insisting on things that are completely wrong. Saying I don't understand doesn't change what the facts are.

We are speaking of Biblical Hebrew, of which you know very little. And you are knocking the 'shell' of modern Hebrew- only showing that you know even less about it.

Go learn Hebrew. Instead of watching pseudo scientific youtube videos. I know this is the "post truth" age- but that is a bad thing. There are facts and truths in the world.

 

[daqq]

Greetings again beameup,

I noticed that you did not respond to my comment above, and I am not sure if you agreed or disagreed. Also you did not agree with my comments on Psalm 8:5 where the Angels are called Elohim, directly summarising and commenting on Genesis 1:26-27. Both of these give an understanding of the OT meaning of the word Elohim, and would give a better understanding of Elohim as it is used in Genesis 1:1, 26-27.

I thought it expedient to post an explanation of Elohim as applied to the Judges in Israel, as the concept is similar to Elohim when applied to the Angels. In both instances I believe Elohim represents Yahweh, the One God, the Father working in and through his agents, either the Angels or Judges.

Many Trinitarians use John 10:30 in support of their beliefs. There is a need to look carefully at what Jesus actually says in v30, and also his explanation and response to the Jews.
John 10:30-36 (KJV): 30 I and my Father are one. 31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him. 32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me? 33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. 34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? 35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; 36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

In response to the false accusation by the Jews, Jesus also answers by speaking concerning the OT usage of the word “God”, “gods”, that is the Hebrew word “Elohim”, quoting Psalm 82:6, the Psalm that you introduced. Jesus speaks concerning the fact that in the OT the judges were called God or gods. It is interesting to note that the translators had difficulty with the relevant verses where the Judges acted in the role of God (Hebrew Elohim):
Exodus 21:6 (KJV): 6 Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever.
Exodus 21:6 (ASV): then his master shall bring him unto God, and shall bring him to the door, or unto the door-post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him for ever.

Exodus 22:8-9 (KJV): 8 If the thief be not found, then the master of the house shall be brought unto the judges, to see whether he have put his hand unto his neighbour’s goods. 9 For all manner of trespass, whether it be for ox, for donkey, for sheep, for raiment, or for any manner of lost thing, which another challengeth to be his, the cause of both parties shall come before the judges; and whom the judges shall condemn, he shall pay double unto his neighbour.
Exodus 22:8-9 (ASV): 8 If the thief be not found, then the master of the house shall come near unto God, to see whether he have not put his hand unto his neighbor’s goods. 9 For every matter of trespass, whether it be for ox, for donkey, for sheep, for raiment, or for any manner of lost thing, whereof one saith, This is it, the cause of both parties shall come before God; he whom God shall condemn shall pay double unto his neighbor.

The role and responsibility of the judges is indicated in the following:
Deuteronomy 1:17 (KJV): Ye shall not respect persons in judgment; but ye shall hear the small as well as the great; ye shall not be afraid of the face of man; for the judgment is God’s: and the cause that is too hard for you, bring it unto me, and I will hear it.
2 Chronicles 19:6 (KJV): And said to the judges, Take heed what ye do: for ye judge not for man, but for the LORD, who is with you in the judgment.
So the judges were called God or gods because they were united in administering the work or judgements of God. Here Elohim does not represent two or three in the plural of Elohim, as there were 70 Judges who were called Elohim, either individually or collectively.

Jesus was claiming a similar though superior role as The Son of God, by calling and claiming God as His Father. He represented God and also could be called Elohim individually. A careful consideration of verses 30 and 36 show that Jesus is not claiming to be God, but the Son of God.
John 10:30-36 (KJV): 30 I and my Father are one. 36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?
He was united with His Father in character and works.

Kind regards
Trevor

Hi Trevor, the definite article makes a difference in some of the passages you have quoted, (I noticed in another post you also quoted from the burning bush passage where it may also make a difference in the meaning of the text). Proper nouns or personal names are already emphatic and therefore do not tolerate an article. Elohim is sometimes used in this manner also, (but one must be careful because this is not always the case when you see the article in conjunction with the word Elohim). I will take your quote from Exodus 22:8-9 KJV and, while leaving everything else the same, I will substitute how I believe the text should read where it comes to Elohim with and without the article, (just my little ole opinion). When it has the article it should probably be understood as "Judges", as most render it, (but could also mean "Angels" in a supernal sense, and so on), but the final occurrence, the second occurrence in v.9, does not have an article, and look how it changes the meaning of the overall statement, (it implies as you and others have said, that is, that the Elohim-Judges speak and act on behalf of Elohim).

Exodus 22:8-9
8 If the thief be not found, then the master of the house shall be brought unto ha-Elohim, [the Elohim-Judges] to see whether he have put his hand unto his neighbour’s goods.
9 For all manner of trespass, whether it be for ox, for donkey, for sheep, for raiment, or for any manner of lost thing, which another challengeth to be his, the cause of both parties shall come before ha-Elohim; [the Elohim-Judges] and whom Elohim [Elohim without article] shall condemn, he shall pay double unto his neighbour.

So the people go to the Judges; and what do the Judges do? They consult Elohim, (by way of prayer and His Word), and the ultimate Judge is therefore Elohim because the Elohim-Judges do His bidding according to His Word, (so long as they are upright Judges).

 

[daqq]

Hi Trevor, the definite article makes a difference in some of the passages you have quoted, (I noticed in another post you also quoted from the burning bush passage where it may also make a difference in the meaning of the text). Proper nouns or personal names are already emphatic and therefore do not tolerate an article. Elohim is sometimes used in this manner also, (but one must be careful because this is not always the case when you see the article in conjunction with the word Elohim). I will take your quote from Exodus 22:8-9 KJV and, while leaving everything else the same, I will substitute how I believe the text should read where it comes to Elohim with and without the article, (just my little ole opinion). When it has the article it should probably be understood as "Judges", as most render it, (but could also mean "Angels" in a supernal sense, and so on), but the final occurrence, the second occurrence in v.9, does not have an article, and look how it changes the meaning of the overall statement, (it implies as you and others have said, that is, that the Elohim-Judges speak and act on behalf of Elohim).

Exodus 22:8-9
8 If the thief be not found, then the master of the house shall be brought unto ha-Elohim, [the Elohim-Judges] to see whether he have put his hand unto his neighbour’s goods.
9 For all manner of trespass, whether it be for ox, for donkey, for sheep, for raiment, or for any manner of lost thing, which another challengeth to be his, the cause of both parties shall come before ha-Elohim; [the Elohim-Judges] and whom Elohim [Elohim without article] shall condemn, he shall pay double unto his neighbour.

So the people go to the Judges; and what do the Judges do? They consult Elohim, (by way of prayer and His Word), and the ultimate Judge is therefore Elohim because the Elohim-Judges do His bidding according to His Word, (so long as they are upright Judges).

By the way, Trevor, Exodus 22:8-9 is very likely one of the passages of scripture where the Psalmist, (Asaph), gets the teaching from, concerning the statement which is made in Psalm 82:6, because the Elohim-Judges had received the Torah-Word of Elohim, just as the Master says in John 10:35, (those to whom the Word of Elohim had come). I do not know if you already made that point or not but it is pretty obvious because the Elohim-Judges would have and did consult the Torah in all judgments. In this very passage above, (and the other similar passage you quoted from the previous chapter), is where they are called elohim.

 

[beameup]

Go learn Hebrew. Instead of watching pseudo scientific youtube videos. I know this is the "post truth" age- but that is a bad thing. There are facts and truths in the world.

I'll stick with the consensus of the experts. Apparently you are unaware of the tremendous amount of tools available to the computer user nowadays.
You do know the creator of the (original) Hebrew culture and language... don't you?

The earth was formless and void,
and darkness was over the surface of the deep,
and the Ruwach Elohim was hovering over the
surface of the mayim. - note the plurals

 

[chair]

I'll stick with the consensus of the experts. Apparently you are unaware of the tremendous amount of tools available to the computer user nowadays.
You do know the creator of the (original) Hebrew culture and language... don't you?

The earth was formless and void,
and darkness was over the surface of the deep,
and the Ruwach Elohim was hovering over the
surface of the mayim. - note the plurals

If you have some consensus of experts- let's have their names, and some sources.

As far as I can tell, you are not following any consensus of experts. You are following one non-expert. Two, if you count yourself.

You can stand on your head , eat five camels, find some "expert" and tell me that I am ignorant. The Hebrew plural will still not mean "three or more". I've given you counter examples- and you have ignored them. Any school child who knows Hebrew will tell you that. And it is true in Biblical Hebrew as well.

It is a ridiculous attempt to force the Trinity on a text that doesn't have the trinity in it.

I hope you haven't fallen for the "Hebrew word for one actually mean many" bit as well. Another piece of total nonsense.