lifeisgood
New member
Bs"d
SpoilerEchad
The other main argument from the Hebrew used to teach that God is a “plural” entity is that the Hebrew word echad in the shema of Deuteronomy 6:4 means, not a simple “one”, but rather a “compound unity” of one, a “togetherness”. Those who teach this will often also teach than there is a different word for a “simple” one, yachid, so that the absence of this word in Deuteronomy 6:4 is, apparently to them, significant.
First, it should be noted that when one learns the Hebrew numbers, it is echad, not yachid, that is the Hebrew for the number “one”: echad is one, shenayim is two, shalosh is three, arba is four, etc.
Any Hebrew grammar book, whether of Biblical or modern Hebrew, would demonstrate that echad, not yachid, is the everyday Hebrew word for the numeral “one”. And when one looks in the Tanakh itself at the frequency and usage of the two words – echad and yachid – it is very quickly and easily seen that echad, not yachid, is in fact the standard Hebrew word for a simple one.
Echad is used over 900 times in the Hebrew Bible, making it the most frequently used adjective in the Tanakh.
Here are some examples of its usage where the word “one” is translated from echad: “one place” (Gen. 1:9); “one man” (Gen. 42:13); “one law” (Ex. 12:49); “one side” (Ex. 25:12); “one ewe lamb” (Lev. 14:10); “one of his brethren” (Lev. 25:48); “one rod” (Num. 17:3); “one soul” (Num. 31:28); “one of these cities” (Deut. 4:42); “one way” (Deut. 28:7); “one ephah” (1 Sam. 1:24); “one went out into the field” (2 Kings 4:39); “one shepherd” (Ezek. 37:24); “one basket” (Jer. 24:2); “one [thing]” (Ps. 27:4); “Two are better than one” (Ecc. 4:9); “one day or two” (Ezra 10:13).
Sometimes it is simply part of a number, like “eleven” (echad + ‘asar, one plus ten), in , for example Genesis 32:22. Sometimes it is as well translated by an indefinite article (a[n]): “a new cart” (1 Sam. 6:7); “a juniper tree” (1 Kings 19:4,5); “a book” (Jer. 51:60).
Perhaps most importantly, echad clearly has the meaning of single, alone, ONLY one, or JUST one, the ideal of a limit of one (Num. 10:4; Josh. 17:14; Esth. 4:11; Isa. 51:2). In Deuteronomy 17:6, for example, it really isn’t precise English to translate echad merely as “one”. For if the “one” witness referred to is the second of the third witness, then that one witness is enough to convict the hypothetical person of murder. The meaning is that a person must not be put to death of the evidence of only one witness (which is the way the NRSV translates it). Echad means “one” and ONLY one.
Some make the argument that because echad is used in passages such as Gen. 1:5 (evening and morning were “day one [echad]”, or “first day”), Gen. 2:24 (a husband and wife shall be “one” flesh) and Ezek. 37:17 (two sticks are to become “one” stick), echad is therefore meant to be understood as some kind of a compound unity.
To begin with, such examples make up but a very small minority of the uses of echad, the vast majority being of the variety listed previously.
It is improper exegesis to define a word on the basis of a small percentage of its usage.
But even this extreme minority of usage does not mean that echad actually has a different meaning than a simple one in these passages. In Gen. 1:5, “day” is the word that has “parts” to it (i.e., “evening” and “morning” make up the day), not echad. In Gen. 2:24, “flesh” acts as the collective noun (what the man and the woman as comprise together). [12] The key factor in all such passages – a factor missing from Deut. 6:4 – is that two or more “parts” are mentioned, such that the reader can immediately discern that there is some kind of “coming together” of the people or things mentioned, usually for just one purpose or goal. Echad, in fact, must maintain its meaning of “just one” for these expressions to convey their intended sense.
To make our point clear: Deut. 6:4 does not say, “YHVH our God, though three (or two or whatever plural number you like), is one.” There is no hint of “coming together” here. The verse says that YHVH our God is plainly, simply, one.
Once again, scholarship is in agreement. The Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Lexicon, the standard Hebrew lexicon of the Bible used in seminaries, list eight ways echad is used – e.g. meaning “each/every,” or “a certain,” or “only,” etc. – but there is no mention or hint in the entire echad article that echad ever means any kind of compound unity. [13]
And the “echad” article in the Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament also nowhere teaches that echad implies a compound unity. It says that Deuteronomy 6:4 is essentially saying that YHVH is the one and only God for Israel (Vol. I p. 196).
Yachid, on the other hand, is a very rarely used word in the Tanakh, and it is employed in a special sense when it is used. It is found a grand total of 12 times in the entire Tanakh, three of those times in the same passage (Gen. 22:2, referring to Isaac as Abraham’s “only” son), so virtually any argument based on its absence from a Bible text is necessarily weak. Its meaning is restricted to a unique, priceless possession, whether a person or thing (Isaac in Gen. 22:2, 12, 16; one’s soul – lit. “only one” – in Ps. 22:20(21), 35:17); or to solitary, desolate, isolated or lonely people (Ps. 25:16, 68:6(7)). There is a “neediness” seen in all that yachid applies to in the Tanakh. YHWH our God is not dependent on anyone. Based on Biblical usage, therefore, it would be entirely inappropriate to use yachid as an adjective for God for any reason.
Conclusion
In conclusion, neither the word Elohim nor the word echad supports the notion of a plurality in God. The plural form Elohim when used of God does not have to mean a plural entity. In Hebrew, plural forms can be singular in meaning. this is sometimes referred to as a plural of majesty or plural of rank. The very term elohim is used of single, foreign gods and of the Messiah. But YHVH is, in fact, always referred to by grammatically singular forms and used with verbs in the singular (even when the plural form Elohim is the subject). Finally, the Greek Old Testament, sometimes quoted in the New Testament, always translates the term for God – whether the Hebrew word is singular or plural – in the singular Greek form.
Echad, rather than being any kind of support for a plural God, teaches the opposite. It means “one” and “only one.” God is one.
Final Word
It seems clear that the sole reason for these arguments attempting to teach a plural God from the Tanakh is a desire among many Christians and Christian originated Messianics to find Tanakh (irreverently called the Old Testament) substantiation for the concept of the Trinity or some other form of plural God. In other words, they force the square peg of their bias into the round hole of truth. They twist and distort the Hebrew language and the bulk of Scripture to “prove” what is actually not present and that is, indeed, actually proven wrong if the language and passages are properly understood.
But of course, that is no way to proceed in a Bible study.
We must accept the definitions which the words reveal about themselves and how they are used in the Bible text, not what we would like them to mean.
May God help us to accept what the Scripture has to say about who the true God is. “YHVH our God is one single Person” (cp. Paul in Gal. 3:20: “God is only One Person,” Amplified Version).
Referenced Notes from the Study:
[1] Some Christians believe that God consists of the Father and Son only, and that the Holy Spirit is essentially God’s active power, not a third Person.
[2] E.g., Gen. 23:1: Sarah’s “life”
[3] E.g., Gen. 43:31: Joseph’s “face”
[4] This is another word, like Elohim, which is a title denoting someone superior in rank. See “plurality of majesty” discussion below.
[5] The fact that Ps. 45:6(7) is viewed as messianic does not change the point: The Messiah is just one individual and yet is given the title of the plural (in form) Elohim. Some will use this verse, taken out of context, as “proof” that Yeshua Messiah is God because the term elohim (god) is applied to him. However, elohim can also mean rulers, judges, divine ones, angels, gods, god, goddess, godlike one, etc. There is also a legitimate question regarding the verse’s correct translation. The JPS Tanakh renders the verse as:
Psalm 45:7
7 Your divine throne is everlasting; your royal scepter is a scepter of equity.
The Stone Edition of the Tanakh renders it as:
Psalm 45:7
7 Your throne is from God, it is forever and ever, [for] the scepter of fairness is the scepter of your kingdom.
Nevertheless, as with virtually all verses that are incorrectly used as “proof” of Yeshua’s deity, when the context is considered, it is proven that even if elohim is applied to Messiah in verse 6 (7 in JPS and Stone editions), he is still not “God.” The very next verse shows this.
Psalm 45:7
7 Thou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness: therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.
The King James Version, (Cambridge: Cambridge) 1769.
Therefore, since God has anointed the one spoken of in verse 6, the one in verse 6 is obviously NOT God, but is god (little g), godlike, or a ruler, all of which perfectly describe the MAN, Yeshua the Messiah. Common sense dictates the one anointing and one being anointed are not the same entity.
[6] Two rather emphatic examples: 1 Kings 18:39 and 2 Sam. 7:28. The relevant part of the former reads, “YHVH, He is God [Elohim]; YHVH, He is God.” The key portion of the latter reads, very literally, “Lord [adonay] YHVH, You [sing], He, [is] the God [Elohim].”
[7] God is translated from El in the following passages: Gen. 17:1, Ex. 34:6, Josh. 3:10, Isa. 5:16 and Ps. 29:3. From Eloah: Deut. 32:15, Neh. 9:17, Job 4:9 (used more often than Elohim in Job) and Ps. 114:7.
[8] E.g., Dan. 2:28, Ezra 5:2.
[9] Gen. 1:26 says, “Let us make…” where God is perhaps either referring to Himself in the plural (possibly another form of plural of majesty), or is condescending to His heavenly host (i.e., someone besides Elohim, reflecting the normal concept of any first person plural), bringing them into the creative act. “Make,” of course, is plural in its Hebrew form. In the next verse, where Elohim actually performs the action, the verb for “made” is back to its singular form.
[10] The Hebrew word order may be relevant here as well. In Hebrew prose, the usual word order is that the verb precedes the noun. In Gen. 1:1, therefore, before the Hebrew reader even gets to the word Elohim, he or she reads “bara” (“created”), the third person masculine singular form, immediately telling him or her that the acting subject is singular in reality.
[11] See Heb. 1:6 for example, where a version of the LXX of Deut. 32:43 is quoted. The passage is quite different from the Hebrew text we now have and use.
[12] There wouldn’t be much point in saying, “The two shall be two fleshes.” The unity intended is obviously that of purpose and mind. And “one” here still means just one.
[13] Interestingly, there are five instances where echad is used in the plural (echadim):Gen. 27:44, 29:20; Ezek. 37:17; and Dan. 11:20. Echadim is usually translated “few”, but “one” may be the best translation in Gen. 11:1 and Ezek. 37:17 (so that they may become “one” in your hand). In those passages, echadim is used with plural nouns, and perhaps here has the sense of a compound. All the more remarkable, then, that Deut. 6:4 – which has the plural form Elohim – has echad in its singular form. This may be yet another indicator that Deut. 6:4 quite strongly emphasizes the simple oneness of God.
Spoiler
Deut. 6:4 Hear, O Israel: Jehovah our Eloheem[PLURAL] is one[SINGULAR] Jehovah.
You do not believe your own Tanach rejecting your Suffering Servant.
Where is the altar where you offer your lamb to cover your sin?
Who is your high priest that your lamb can be approved for sacrificing?
Where is your Temple where you must go three times a year?
You are a very religious man but very UNsaved exactly as the ones who demanded that Jesus be crucified because He did not fit their idea of God's Savior.
Last edited:
