John 1:1 - Jesus is the Father or he's not the one true God?

Kermos · Sep 10, 2022

Rich R said:
I think this is about the 6th time you've sent this message. I don't mind, but I thought you might want to know.

JunChosen · Sep 11, 2022

Wrangler said:
expound on it? It’s so simple even a Trinitarian can understand it. The Shama states God is one not three in one, that YHWH alone is God.

I challenge you to exegete the above, because you are in error.

Wrangler said:
Jesus says he has a God and his God is the only true God. Why does this not matter to you?

It does matter to me! It's just that you have no understanding of John 20:17 as well as Deuteronomy 6:4. Prove me wrong. Exegete these two Scriptures?

To God Be The Glory

Wrangler · Sep 11, 2022

JunChosen said:
I challenge you to exegete the above, because you are in error.

It does matter to me! It's just that you have no understanding of John 20:17 as well as Deuteronomy 6:4. Prove me wrong. Exegete these two Scriptures?

To God Be The Glory

LOL Scripture speaks for itself. Deut 6:4 directly says God is 1, not 3-in-1. John 20:17 directly records Jesus saying he has a God. There is no need for me to prove anything to you. Scripture cannot be more directly communicating Jesus’ God is the only God.

APAK · Sep 11, 2022

Yes I agree @Wrangler
(John 20:17) Jesus said to her: Don’t keep touching me; for I am not right now going to ascend to the Father; but go to my brothers and say to them: I ascend to my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God. (NEV)

Jesus said his Father was the God of all people. It was therefore impossible that Jesus could ever be the one true God because God was also his Father. And as Trinitarians would also believe, one eternal person cannot be the father of another eternal person. One has to be mortal -FIRST and then only immortal thence forth.

JunChosen · Sep 12, 2022

Wrangler said:
LOL Scripture speaks for itself. Deut 6:4 directly says God is 1, not 3-in-1. John 20:17 directly records Jesus saying he has a God. There is no need for me to prove anything to you. Scripture cannot be more directly communicating Jesus’ God is the only God.

Indeed, Scripture speaks for itself, but only for those in the know! (Mark 4:34).

There is a technical term for the Hebrew phrase "one alone" or "one only" or "only one" and that is the word "yachid." The Hebrew word used in Deuteronomy 6:4 for "one" was the Hebrew word "echad" which is NEVER used for "one alone" or "one only."

Note that the word "God" in Genesis 1:1 is the same Hebrew word "Elohim" found in Deuteronomy 6 which is a plural number?

Rendering, therefore Deuteronomy 6, "Hear, O Israel: The LORD (YHVH/JEHOVAH) our God (Elohim) is one (echad) LORD (JEHOVAH).

Now, John 20:17 can only be understood if one is in the Spirit of God (1 Cor. 12:3).

Did you and your cohorts even think that when Jesus said, "I ascend unto my Father and my God," He was speaking as a man? Oh, didn't you know when Jesus walked on the earth He was both God and man? Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha I'm laughing with my Father God!!! Proverbs 1:26 and John 8:24.

Do you and your cohorts even understand the meaning/reason why the Lord Jesus told Mary not to touch Him as He has not yet ascended to His Father? Peculiar language, isn't it?

O, so much for man's wisdom. Father thank you that YOU hid these things from them.

To God Be The Glory

tigger 2 · Sep 12, 2022

Yachid
A few trinitarians insist that not only does echad mean “plural oneness,” but that, if singleness were intended by the Bible writer, the Hebrew word yachid (dyxy) would have been used at Deut. 6:4.

Here is how it was presented to me by one trinitarian:

“The word for ‘one’ in this great declaration [Deut. 6:4] is not Yachid which is an absolute oneness but rather echad which means ‘united one.’ Had the Holy Spirit desired to state absolute mathematical oneness in this all-important declaration, He could have easily used the word yachid, couldn’t He?”

We have already seen the absolute falsity of the “echad-means-’plural-oneness’” idea. But what about yachid? Did the Bible writers really use it whenever they meant “absolute mathematical oneness”? We have already seen that they really used echad for “absolute mathematical oneness,” and a good concordance will show they did this consistently—many hundreds of times!

Yachid, on the other hand, is only used about 12 times in the entire Bible and then only in a narrow, specific sense.

The Old Testament language authority, Gesenius, tells us that yachid is used in three very specialized ways: (1) “only” but primarily in the sense of “only begotten”! - Gen. 22:2, 12, 16; Jer. 6:26; and Zech. 12:10. (2) “solitary” but with the connotation of “forsaken” or “wretched” ! - Ps. 25:16; 68:6. (3) As yachidah (feminine form) meaning “only one” as something most dear and used “poet[ically] for ‘life’ - Ps. 22:20; 35:17.” - p. 345 b.

We find yachid is never used to describe God anywhere in the entire Bible! But it is used to describe Isaac in his prefigured representation of the Messiah (and ‘only-begotten’): Gen. 22:2, 12, 16. It is also used at Judges 11:34 for an only-begotten child. The ancient Greek Septuagint translates yachid at Judges 11:34 as monogenes (“only-begotten”): the same NT Greek word repeatedly used to describe Christ (even in his pre-human heavenly existence - 1 John 4:9). Monogenes, however, like the Hebrew yachid, is never used to describe the only true God, Jehovah (who is the Father alone).

So, if Jehovah were to describe himself as “forsaken” or “wretched,” or were speaking poetically about his “dear life,” or were describing himself as the “only-begotten son” (which he never does anywhere in the Bible!), then he might have used yachid.

But since he was describing his “mathematical oneness” at Deut. 6:4, he properly used echad!

tigger 2 · Sep 12, 2022

Echad (‘Plural’ Oneness?)
Here is what I have found written about echad by authorities on Biblical Hebrew:

The only definition given for echad in the trinitarian New American Standard Exhaustive Concordance is: “a prim[ary] card[inal] number; one”. We find no “plural oneness” there!

The highly respected Biblical Hebrew authority, Gesenius, says that echad is “a numeral having the power of an adjective, one.” He then lists the various meanings of echad as:

“(1) The same,”

“(2) first,”

“(3) some one,”

“(4) it acts the part of an indefinite article,”

“(5) one only of its kind,”

“(6) when repeated [echad ... echad] ‘one ... another’,”

“(7) [K echad] AS one man.” [The initial consonant of this word, “K,” actually means “as” or “like,” so in this special form the meaning is close to that of a plural oneness. But this is not the form used at Deut. 6:4 !! ]

Gesenius also lists a plural form of the word (achadim,) which means “joined in one, united.” This, too, is not the form used at Deut. 6:4 which context shows, instead, to have meaning #5 above. - See Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament, #259, Baker Book House. Surely, if God (or Jehovah) were really a union of persons, a united one, this form which truly means “united one” would have been used to describe “Him” repeatedly in the Holy Scriptures. But it and all other words with similar meanings were never used for God (or Jehovah)!

By using a good Bible Concordance (such as Strong’s or Young’s) we can find all the uses of echad in the Bible. Unfortunately (due to space limitations), Young’s and Strong’s both list the rare plural form (achadim,) and the “AS one” (Kechad) along with the common singular form (echad) without distinguishing among them.

Nevertheless, since both the plural form and the kechad form are used quite rarely (see Ezek. 37:17 and 2 Chronicles 5:13 for examples), we can see that the overwhelming majority of the uses of echad listed in these concordances (over 500) obviously have the meaning of singleness just as we normally use the word “one” today.

If you should find a scripture listed as using echad in your concordance that definitely has the meaning “plural oneness” or “together,” or “as one,” you should check it out in an interlinear Hebrew-English Bible. If the word in question is really the echad form of the word (as at Deut. 6:4), then it will end with the Hebrew letter “d” in the Hebrew portion of your interlinear. If, however, it is really the plural form of the word (achadim), then it will end in the Hebrew letter “m”. And if the word is really Kechad (“AS one”), it will begin with the Hebrew letter “k”. Remember, though, that Hebrew reads from right to left (so the LAST letter of a Hebrew word is really the letter at the extreme LEFT.)

Using your concordance along with an interlinear Hebrew-English Bible in this manner, I don’t believe you will ever find echad (as used at Deut. 6:4) literally meaning “plural oneness”!

Further emphasizing the impropriety of this “plural oneness” interpretation of echad are the many trinitarian renderings of Deut. 6:4. In the dozens of different trinitarian Bible translations that I have examined none of them have rendered Deut. 6:4 (or Mark 12:29) in such a way as to show anything even faintly resembling a “plural oneness”!!

Even the highly trinitarian The Living Bible, which, being a paraphrase Bible, is able to (and frequently does) take great liberties with the literal Greek and Hebrew meanings in order to make better trinitarian interpretations, renders Deut. 6:4 as “Jehovah is our God, Jehovah alone.” Notice that there’s not even a hint of a “plural oneness” Jehovah!

The equally trinitarian (and nearly as “freely” translated as The Living Bible) Good News Bible (GNB) renders it: “The LORD - and the LORD alone - is our God.” - Compare the equally “free-handed” (and trinitarian) The Amplified Bible.

And even among the more literal trinitarian translations of Deut 6:4 we find:

“The LORD is our God, the LORD alone.” - New Revised Standard Version.

“The LORD is our God, the LORD alone!” - New American Bible.

“The LORD is our God, the LORD alone.” - The Holy Bible in the Language of Today, Beck (Lutheran).

“Yahweh our God is the one, the only Yahweh.” - New Jerusalem Bible.

“Yahweh is our God, - Yahweh alone.” - The Emphasized Bible, Rotherham.

“The LORD is our God, the LORD alone.” - An American Translation (Smith-Goodspeed).

“The Eternal, the Eternal alone, is our God.” - A New Transation, Moffatt .

The trinitarian ASV (also the RSV) gives 4 different possible renderings of Deut. 6:4. One of them is identical with The Living Bible, and none of them includes an understanding of a “plural oneness” God!

The paraphrased The Living Bible also renders Mark 12:29 (where Jesus quotes Deut. 6:4 and an excellent spot for him to reveal a “trinity” God --- or even just a “plural oneness” God) as: “The Lord our God is the one and only God.” Notice the further explanation of the intended meaning of this scripture at Mark 12:32, 34. “’... you have spoken a true word in saying that there is only one God and no other...’ Realizing this man’s understanding, Jesus said to him, ‘You are not far from the Kingdom of God.’”

Why doesn’t this highly interpretive trinitarian paraphrase Bible (or any other Bible for that matter) bring out a “plural oneness” meaning at these scriptures (Deut. 6:4; Mark 12:29) if that can be a proper interpretation for echad?

Surely, if the trinitarian scholars who made this Bible had thought there was even the slightest justification for an echad = “plural oneness” interpretation, they would have rendered it that way: “Jehovah is a composite unity;” or “Jehovah is the United One;” or “Jehovah is a plural oneness;” etc.

Instead they have clearly shown that God (who inspired it), Moses (who wrote it under inspiration), and even Jesus himself (who taught that it was part of the most important commandment of all - Mark 12:28-29, LB; GNB; etc.) intended this scripture to show God as a single person only!

Similarly, the three annotated trinitarian study Bibles I own would certainly explain any intended “multiple-oneness” meaning for echad at Deut. 6:4 (if there were any possibility of such an interpretation). But the extremely trinitarian New American Bible, St. Joseph ed., gives no hint of such an understanding of echad in its footnote for Deut. 6:4 (or anywhere else). And the trinitarian The New Oxford Annotated Bible, 1977 ed., likewise gives no hint of such an understanding in its footnote for Deut. 6:4 (or anywhere else). And that trinitarian favorite: The NIV Study Bible, 1985, also gives no hint of such a meaning for echad in its footnote for Deut. 6:4 (or anywhere else). The only possible reason for all these trinitarian study Bibles ignoring this “proof” is that it simply is not true!

Wrangler · Sep 12, 2022

JunChosen said:
Did you and your cohorts even think that when Jesus said, "I ascend unto my Father and my God," He was speaking as a man?

Jesus is a man who has a God. Jesus’ God is the only God.

Wrangler · Sep 12, 2022

JunChosen said:
Note that the word "God" in Genesis 1:1 is the same Hebrew word "Elohim" found in Deuteronomy 6 which is a plural number?

You do know that plural does not only mean 3, right?

JunChosen said:
Indeed, Scripture speaks for itself, but only for those in the know! (Mark 4:34).

Gnosticism on display. And your scripture verse does not support Gnosticism.

JunChosen said:
There is a technical term for the Hebrew phrase "one alone" or "one only" or "only one" and that is the word "yachid."

One is a technical term? Pul-ease.

APAK · Sep 12, 2022

@tigger 2 and to add another one of my commentaries of the same subject regarding 'echad.'

--------------------------
Many believe that “… LORD is one.” in the ‘Shema’ is really a compound unity, especially voiced by Trinitarians. There is no basis for it.

They argue that ‘echad’ modifies the collective noun and thus implies a plurality. The collective noun that echad refers to in a verse is what is a unit or group, not the word echad.

The Hebrew word ‘echad’ is a simple word for one as in one unit, the primary cardinal number one.

In Isaiah 51:2, Abraham is called one person, ‘echad.’ He is not more than one person. He is one person.

There is no evidence in any OT commentary by Hebrew scholars or Jews or in any dictionary or lexicon that ‘echad’ can possibly mean a so-called ‘compound unity.’

Echad is used 952 times in the OT. It is translated as ‘one’ 687 times. Sometimes echad means ‘first,’ ‘only’ or ‘alone,’ and some other words.

Here are just a few examples of how the transliterated Hebrew term ‘echad’ is used in the OT:

- Gen 1:5 used for the ‘first’ Day

- Gen 11:1 used for ‘one’ language before Babel

- Gen 21:15 used for the child under ‘one’ of the bushes

- Gen 27:38 used for ‘one’ blessing

- Gen 41:5 used for ‘one’ stalk

- Exodus 9:6 used for ‘one’ cow died

- Exodus 12:49 used for ‘one’ law

- 1 Kings 4:19 “….. and he was the ‘only’ officer which was in the land’

- Isaiah 51:2 ‘for I called him ‘alone,’ and blessed him, and increased him’

As they say, ‘Context is king.’ The context of how a word is used in scripture is more valuable and true than any new fabricated definition of that word. When scribes of the Hebrew scriptures distinguished something as ‘one,’ or the ‘first’ as opposed to ‘two’ or more, they ALWAYS used the word echad.

In fact this so-called ‘compound unity’ for echad is a modern corrupted meaning invented by Trinitarians to insert their pagan Triune god in place of the one YHWH, into the heart of the central sacred verse for Israel; the national faith in One Living and Personal God. Twice every day they read Keriath Shema; (i.e. ‘hear, O Israel’.) in the evening and in morning, as it is said, in Deuteronomy 6:7 and you must teach them diligently to your children and talk of them when you sit in your house and when you walk by the way, when you lie down and when you rise up. (NEV)

In truth, Deuteronomy 6:4 is the strongest scripture against any form of Trinity. God is one alone and not a 3-in-1 person Triune god or some other type of plurality of gods or god.

In Mark 12:29-30 Christ would not be promoting a Trinity doctrine that we should love a Triune god, when he quoted the Shema and the First Commandment.

(Mar 12:29) Jesus answered: The first is, Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one.

(Mar 12:30) And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength. (NEV)

(1Co 8:6) yet to us there is only one God, the Father, of whom are all things and we are everything to Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, for the sake of whom are all things, and we exist for His sake. (NEV)

Wrangler · Sep 12, 2022

APAK said:
Many believe that “… LORD is one.” in the ‘Shema’ is really a compound unity, especially voiced by Trinitarians. There is no basis for it.

They argue that ‘echad’ modifies the collective noun and thus implies a plurality. The collective noun that echad refers to in a verse is what is a unit or group, not the word echad.

I no longer tolerate such transparent rationalizations, substituting “oneness” for alone being one. It’s ridiculous on its face in any language.

And it is insulting to the ancient Hebrew monotheists who reject the trinity to this day, implying they don’t understand their own sacred texts.

PinSeeker · Sep 13, 2022

Wrangler said:
You do know that plural does not only mean 3, right?

But a pluralistic entity is not itself plural but singular. Such is the Godhead.

Wrangler said:
Gnosticism on display.

Not the case at all. And actually quite the reverse, as that label is properly applied to Jehovah's Witnesses and other like-minded folks. The Watchtower organization was formed in the early 1830s. There were many good things that have come out of the Enlightenment, but the effects of it on Biblical understanding among many has been disastrous in many ways.

Grace and peace to you.

Wrangler · Sep 13, 2022

PinSeeker said:
But a pluralistic entity is not itself plural but singular. Such is the Godhead.

What does it tell you that there is no 'godhead' in Scripture (although I admit bad trinitarian English translations insert the flawed word, such as those translations with 'James' in the title)?

God is referred to using singular pronouns 20,000 times in Scripture.

RLT63 · Sep 13, 2022

Wrangler said:
What does it tell you that there is no 'godhead' in Scripture (although I admit bad trinitarian English translations insert the flawed word, such as those translations with 'James' in the title)?

God is referred to using singular pronouns 20,000 times in Scripture.

Young's Literal Translation
Psa 8:5

And causest him to lack a little of Godhead, And with honour and majesty compassest him.
Act 17:29

'Being, therefore, offspring of God, we ought not to think the Godhead to be like to gold, or silver, or stone, graving of art and device of man;
Rom 1:20

for the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world, by the things made being understood, are plainly seen, both His eternal power and Godhead -- to their being inexcusable;
Col 2:9

because in him doth tabernacle all the fulness of the Godhead bodily,

The WEB Bible
Act 17:29

Being then the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like to gold, or silver, or stone graven by art and man's device.
Rom 1:20

For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Col 2:9

For in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.

ASV
Act 17:29

Being then the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and device of man.
Col 2:9

for in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily,

Wrangler · Sep 13, 2022

RLT63 said:
Young's Literal Translation
Psa 8:5

And causest him to lack a little of Godhead, And with honour and majesty compassest him.
Act 17:29

I'm not sure what your point is. 'Godhead' is not in Scripture - unless you refer to bad trinitarian English translations. Just because you found a bad translation that does not have 'James' in the title does not change the fact.

Others have delved into the original language of Scripture to show this. If you want to be deceived, you don't have eyes to see or ears to hear.

NOG
Ps 8:5 You have made him a little lower than yourself.
You have crowned him with glory and honor
Acts 17:29 So if we are God’s children, we shouldn’t think that the divine being is like an image made from gold, silver, or stone, an image that is the product of human imagination and skill.

Michiah-Imla · Sep 13, 2022

Wrangler said:
I'm not sure what your point is. 'Godhead' is not in Scripture - unless you refer to bad trinitarian English translations. Just because you found a bad translation that does not have 'James' in the title does not change the fact.

Others have delved into the original language of Scripture to show this. If you want to be deceived, you don't have eyes to see or ears to hear.

NOG
Ps 8:5 You have made him a little lower than yourself.
You have crowned him with glory and honor
Acts 17:29 So if we are God’s children, we shouldn’t think that the divine being is like an image made from gold, silver, or stone, an image that is the product of human imagination and skill.

“Godhead” doesn’t help promote the trinity either.

Just saying.

Don’t tread on my King James Bible! :Broadly:

Wrangler · Sep 13, 2022

Michiah-Imla said:
“Godhead” doesn’t help promote the trinity either.

Just saying.[/QUOTE]

Well, the stepping stone is to establish the false narrative that God is somehow plural in nature.

I am Yahweh, and there is no other. There is no other Elohim besides me.
Isaiah 45:5 (NOG)

Michiah-Imla said:
Don’t tread on my King James Bible!

Ha! Withersoever thou goest, I wilst tread on thee's KJV.

Michiah-Imla · Sep 13, 2022

Wrangler said:
Ha! Withersoever thou goest, I wilst tread on thee's KJV.

Thou doest not wisely… :pfite:

Wrangler · Sep 13, 2022

Wrangler said:
I am Yahweh, and there is no other. There is no other Elohim besides me.
Isaiah 45:5 (NOG)

Oh and by the way, when Isaiah said these words, he was not claiming to be the one and only God.

PinSeeker · Sep 13, 2022

I'll just point this out:

The prophet Isaiah, in Isaiah 40, prophesies of John the Baptist in verse three of that chapter:

"A voice cries: 'In the wilderness prepare the way of the LORD (Jehovah, NWT); make straight in the desert a highway for our God."

And in the apostle John's gospel, we see that John the Baptist is the fulfillment of this prophecy. Of John the Baptist, the apostle says:

"There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. He came as a witness, to bear witness about the Light, that all might believe through him. He was not the Light, but came to bear witness about the light" (John 1:6-8).

And then the apostle John relates the testimony of John the Baptist:

"...when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, 'Who are you?' He confessed, and did not deny, but confessed, 'I am not the Christ.' And they asked him, 'What then? Are you Elijah?' He said, 'I am not.' 'Are you the Prophet?' And he answered, 'No.' So they said to him, 'Who are you? We need to give an answer to those who sent us. What do you say about yourself?' He said, 'I am the voice of one crying out in the wilderness, "Make straight the way of the Lord," as the prophet Isaiah said.' (Now they had been sent from the Pharisees.) They asked him, 'Then why are you baptizing, if you are neither the Christ, nor Elijah, nor the Prophet?' John answered them, 'I baptize with water, but among you stands One you do not know, even He Who comes after me, the strap of Whose sandal I am not worthy to untie.'" (John 1:19-27)

Some will continue to deny Christ and Who He is. So be it.

Grace and peace to all.

John 1:1 - Jesus is the Father or he's not the one true God?

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads