Is God One or is He Three?

[Rhema]

My Church? It's not my Church it's the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ who is its head! You might want to talk to the "head" of the Church and see what he says.

Been there, done that. (Still do.) But you don't seem to be listening. So yeah, your church.

Rhema

 

[Rhema]

I can't find any faults with the New World Translation and find it to be excellent and accurate.

And you're not listening either. Please, compare your NWT with your own Kingdom Interlinear, and the inaccuracies will stand out like a sore thumb.

so I speak from experience.

Don't fool yourself. You have no experience in translation or linguistics. Again, get a copy of your own Kingdom Interlinear, and then when you're witnessing, use that instead.

Rhema

 

[Rhema]

NO

I never claimed I was not once.

Thank you kindly. I had thought you were expressing a Sabellian view.

Rhema
Just wanted to be sure.

 

[Rhema]

If God did not want his name to be uttered, why did he go to the trouble of having the Tetragrammaton (which represents his name in Hebrew) written in the Bible hundreds of times?

But you already stipulated that there is no "J" in Hebrew, and the switch to a hard "J" in English from a "Y" or "I"sound is pretty recent.

The first English language books to make a clear distinction in writing between ⟨i⟩ and ⟨j⟩ were the King James Bible 1st Revision Cambridge 1629 and an English grammar book published in 1633. J - Wikipedia​

So technically the NWT should be writing Iehova, or Yahova.

What you and other Jewish people of today won't admit is that the disobedience of the ancient Israelites is what caused the correct pronunciation of the Divine name to be lost to history.

Well, I'm not Jewish.

The name that nobody knows the correct pronunciation of due to the negligence and outright disobedience of the ancient Israelites?

And I'm pretty sure I know how to pronounce the Divine Name.

Rhema

 

[Rhema]

John 20:28 is what Thomas said one single time. He didn't go around teaching that to other people. And you are ignoring the context at John 20:31 where the Bible reiterates that Jesus is the son of God. So obviously Thomas didn't have the final word and he was simply wrong.

I was going to let this pass, but it's a good example of what I called a Linguistic Artifact.

ο κυριος μου και ο θεος μου = the Lord of me and the God of me.

It is not written to say the Lord and the God of me. If it was, the first μου would have been omitted. Furthermore, the conjunction "kai" at this point would indicate two separate phrases and a verbal expression of astonishment directed toward two separate objects, the first being directed to Jesus, and the second to the Father.

Thomas wasn't wrong.
Rhema

 

[Rhema]

The Bible in many places calls Jesus God, but you will never see it because you are not a believer. You can not see what you do not believe, even if it is right in front of your eyes. Jesus spoke of people like you........

But the Bible doesn't teach the Trinity. And you will never see it because you've been indoctrinated in the Trinitarin cult. You can not see what you do not believe, even if it is right in front of your eyes. Jesus spoke of people like you........

"But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you shut up the kingdom of heaven against men; for you neither go in yourselves, nor do you allow those who are entering to go in. (Matthew 23:13 NKJV)​

Rhema

 

[First and the Last]

Curtis:

That's what you and all Trinitarians are claiming when you insist that Jesus, who scripture says was BEGOTTEN aka CREATED, is also God.

Alter2Ego

Many monotheists have pointed out that both trinitarianism and binitarianism weaken the strict monotheism taught by the Bible. They insist that the Godhead cannot be divided into persons and that God is absolutely one. These believers in strict monotheism fall into two classes. One class asserts that there is only one God, but does so by denying, in one way or another, the full deity of Jesus Christ. This view was represented in early church history by the dynamic Monarchianism, such as Paul of Samosata, and by the Arians, led by Arius. These groups relegated Jesus to the position of a created god, subordinate god, junior god, or demigod.

The second class of true monotheists believes in one God, but further believes that the fullness of the Godhead is manifested in Jesus Christ. They believe that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are manifestations, modes, offices, or relationships that the one God has displayed to humans. Church historians have used the terms modalism and modalistic monarchianism to describe this view as held by such early church leaders as Noetus, Praxeas, and Sabellius. Today, those who believe in both the indivisible oneness of God and the full deity of Jesus Christ frequently use the term “Oneness” to describe their belief. They also use the terms “One God” and “Jesus Name” as adjectives to label themselves, while opponents sometimes use the misleading or derogatory designations “Jesus Only” and “New Issue.” (The label “Jesus Only” is misleading because to trinitarians it implies a denial of the Father and the Holy Spirit. However, Oneness believers do not deny the Father and Spirit, but rather see Father and Spirit as different roles of the one God who is the Spirit of Jesus.) Unlike Modalism and Monarchianism, Oneness Pentecostals teach that God is able to manifest Himself in all three “modes” simultaneously, such as at Jesus’ baptism in Luke 3:22.

 

[First and the Last]

But Alter2Ego,

The word "begotten," though, does not mean "created." It just means born.

Jesus was μονογενής - the only Son of God who was born in the normal human way - an actual human, not a phantasm or hologram. Whoever told you that begotten means created did you a great disservice.

Rhema
I provide you with a link to the Liddell Scott Lexicon:

Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, μονο-γενής

John 3:16 calls Jesus the only begotten Son of God. However, many people use the phrase “eternal Son.” Is this latter phrase correct? No. The Bible never uses it, and it expresses a concept contradicted by Scripture. The word begotten is a form of the verb beget, which means “to procreate, to father, to sire.” Thus begotten indicates a definite point in time—the point at which conception takes place. By definition, the begetter (father) always must come before the begotten (offspring). There must be a time when the begetter exists and the begotten is not yet in existence, and there must be a point in time when the act of begetting occurs. Otherwise, the word begotten has no meaning. So, the very words begotten and Son each contradict the word eternal as applied to the Son of God. “Son of God” refers to the humanity of Jesus, which clearly is not eternal but was born in Bethlehem.

However, the Self-Expressive Eternal Word, which refers to the deity of Jesus, is indeed eternal and uncreated. John 1:1-14 explains that "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." This passage reveals that the Word existed from the very beginning and was God Himself. Verse 14 states, "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us," indicating that the eternal Word took on human form. Hebrews 10:5 further supports this by saying, "Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me." This body, prepared for the Word, highlights the incarnation—the eternal Word entering time and space to manifest in human form as Jesus Christ. Therefore, while the humanity of Jesus had a beginning, the divine Word that became flesh is eternal.

 

[Christ4Ever]

No need to be nasty, Curtis. But that's not what I said. So let me be clear.

I do not believe in the Trinity.

And from what I can tell, @Christ4Ever doesn't either, given his assertion that there is a Hierarchy in the Godhead - a view that contradicts the aspect of co-equal - a stipulation of the Trinity by definition,... (although I haven't yet read a post where he clarifies his position).

Rhema
PS: Neither did Sir Isaac Newton (believe in the Trinity).

lol - you don't believe in the Trinity and yet will tell one who does what it is about and that they don't? lol

Thank-you for the laugh. However, please don't speak for me.

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
Nick
\o/
<><

 

[Curtis]

You can not see what you do not believe, even if it is right in front of your eyes. Jesus spoke of people like you........

You sound like a little kid who says “Same to you but more of it”

 

[B-A-C]

many people use the phrase “eternal Son.” Is this latter phrase correct? No. The Bible never uses it, and it expresses a concept contradicted by Scripture. The word begotten is a form of the verb beget, which means “to procreate, to father, to sire.”

I know many people who believe it, including myself. But I don't know anyone who actually says that phrase in that way. Still begotton means "only" not "procreate"

μονογενής
monogenēs
mon-og-en-ace
From G3441 and G1096; only born, that is, sole: - only (begotten, child).
Total KJV occurrences: 9

μονογενής = monogeneous

mono = one.
genes is the word we get "genes" from. DNA of the parent.

Monogenēs - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Monogenes: “Only Begotten” or “One of a Kind”? | Christian Library

www.christianstudylibrary.org

Search Microsoft Translator - Translate from Greek to English

Quickly translate words and phrases between English and over 100 languages.

www.bing.com

 

[Curtis]

Isa 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

The "eternal Son" would be given by the method of a "child that was born."

 

[Curtis]

A preacher who does not believe in the "trinity" is like a preacher who does not believe in God.

 

[Curtis]

Does the Bible teach the Trinity?

“Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.” What do the plural verb (“let us”) and the plural pronoun (“our”) mean?

Genesis 3:22 (“Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil”), Genesis 11:7(“Come, let us go down and there confuse their language”),

Isaiah 6:8 (“Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?”).

Psalm 45:6–7, the psalmist says, Your throne, O God, is forever and ever. . . . You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness. Therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your companions.


To the person called “God,” the author says that “God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness” (v. 7). So two separate persons are called “God”(Heb. ’Elōhîm). In the New Testament, the author of Hebrews quotes this passage and applies it to Christ: “Your throne, O God,is forever and ever” (Heb. 1:8). Similarly, in Psalm 110:1, David says, “The LORD says to my Lord: ‘Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.’ ” Jesus rightly understands that David is referring to two separate persons as “Lord” (Matt.22:41–46), but who is David’s “Lord” if not God himself? And who could be saying to God, “Sit at my right hand” except someone else who is also fully God?


The New Testament teaching on the Trinity seems clear that David was aware of a plurality of persons in one God. Jesus, of course, understood this, but when he asked the Pharisees for an explanation of this passage, “no one was able to answer him a word, nor from that day did anyone dare to ask him any more questions”

Isaiah 63:10 says that God’s people“rebelled and grieved his Holy Spirit,” suggesting both that theHoly Spirit is distinct from God himself (it is “his Holy Spirit”),

In Hosea 1:7, the Lord says of the house of Judah, “I will save them by the LORD their God,” again suggesting that more than one person can be called “Lord” (Heb.Yahweh) and “God” (’Elōhîm).

Isaiah 48:16 “Now the Lord GOD has sent me and his Spirit,” if spoken by Jesus the Son of God, refersto all three persons of the Trinity.

When Jesus was baptized, “the heavens were opened to him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming to rest on him; and behold, a voice from heaven said,‘This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased’ ” (Matt.3:16–17). Here at one moment, we have three members of the Trinity performing three distinct activities. God the Father is speaking from heaven, God the Son is being baptized and is then spoken to from heaven by God the Father, and God the Holy Spirit is descending from heaven to rest upon and empower Jesus for his ministry.


At the end of Jesus’ earthly ministry, he tells the disciples that they should go “and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matt. 28:19). The very names “Father” and “Son,” drawn as they are from the family, the most familiar of human institutions, indicate very strongly the distinct personhood of both the Father and the Son. When the “HolySpirit”


1 Corinthians 12:4–6: “Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who empowers them all in everyone.”


Similarly, the last verse of 2Corinthians is Trinitarian in its expression: “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the HolySpirit be with you all” (2 Cor. 13:14). We see the three persons mentioned separately in Ephesians 4:4–6 as well: “There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call—one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.”


All three persons of the Trinity are mentioned together in the opening sentence of 1 Peter: “According to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in the sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and for sprinkling with his blood” (1 Peter 1:2). And in Jude 20–21, we read: “But you, beloved, building yourselves up in your most holy faith and praying in the Holy Spirit, keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ that leads to eternal life.”


John 1:1–2 tells us: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God.” The fact that the Word (who is seen to be Christ in vv. 9–18) is “with” God shows distinction from God the Father. In John 17:24, Jesus speaks to God the Father about “my glory that you have given me because you loved me before the foundation of the world,” thus showing the distinction of persons, sharing of glory, and a relationship of love between the Father and the Son before the world was created. We are told that Jesus continues as our High Priest and Advocate before God the Father: “If anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous” (1 John 2:1). Christ is the one who “is able to save to the utmost those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them” (Heb. 7:25). Yet in order to intercede for us before God the Father, it is necessary that Christ be a person distinct from the Father.


Jesus said, “But the Helper, theHoly Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you”(John 14:26). The Holy Spirit also prays or “intercedes” for us(Rom. 8:27), indicating a distinction between the Holy Spirit and God the Father to whom the intercession is made.

Jesus said, “It is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you” (John 16:7). Some have questioned whether the Holy Spirit is indeed a distinct person rather than just the “power” or “force” of God at work in the world. But the New Testament evidence is quite clear and strong.6 First are the several verses mentioned earlier where the Holy Spirit is put in a coordinated relationship with the Father and the Son (Matt. 28:19; 1Cor. 12:4–6; 2 Cor. 13:14; Eph. 4:4–6; 1 Peter 1:2): since the father and Son are both persons, the coordinate expression strongly intimates that the Holy Spirit is a person also.

Other personal activities are attributed to the Holy Spirit, such as teaching (John 14:26), bearing witness(John 15:26; Rom. 8:16), interceding or praying on behalf of others(Rom. 8:26–27), searching the depths of God (1 Cor. 2:10), knowing the thoughts of God (1 Cor. 2:11), willing to distribute some gifts to some and other gifts to others (1 Cor. 12:11), forbidding or not allowing certain activities (Acts 16:6–7), speaking (Acts 8:29;13:2; and many times in both Old and New Testaments),


Finally, if the Holy Spirit is understood simply to be the power of God rather than a distinct person, then a number of passages would simply not make sense, because in them the Holy Spirit and his power or the power of God are both mentioned. For example, Luke 4:14, “Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit to Galilee,” would have to mean, “Jesus returned in the power of the power of God to Galilee.” In Acts10:38, “God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power,” would mean, “God anointed Jesus with the power of God and with power”


the fact that all three persons are distinct, the abundant testimony of Scripture is that each person is fully God as well. First, God the Father is clearly God. This is evident from the first verse of the Bible, where God created the heaven and the earth. It is evident through the Old and New Testaments, where God the Father is clearly viewed as sovereign Lord over all and where Jesus prays to his Father in heaven.


In “The Person of Christ,” we can see several explicit passages at this point. John 1:1–4 clearly affirms the full deity of Christ: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made. In him was life, and the life was the light of men.


Here Christ is referred to as “the Word,” and John says both that he was “with God” and that he“was God.” The Greek text echoes the opening words of Genesis 1:1(“In the beginning”) and reminds us that John is talking about something that was true before the world was made. God the Son was always fully God.


John 20:28 in its context is also strong proof for the deity of Christ. Thomas had doubted the reports of the other disciples that they had seen Jesus raised from the dead, and he said he would not believe unless he could see the nail prints in Jesus’ hands and place his hand in his wounded side (John20:25). Then Jesus appeared to the disciples when Thomas was with them. He said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and see my hands, and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe” (John 20:27). In response to this, we read, “Thomas answered him, ‘My Lord and my God!’ ” (John 20:28). Here Thomas calls Jesus “my God.” The narrative shows that both John in writing his gospel and Jesus himself approve of what Thomas has said and encourage everyone who hears about Thomas to believe the same things that Thomas did. Jesus immediately responds to Thomas, “Have believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed” (John 20:29). As far as John is concerned, this is the dramatic high point of the gospel, for he immediately tells the reader—in the very next verse—that this was the reason he wrote it:


Other passages speaking of Jesus as fully divine include Hebrews 1:3, where the author says that Christ is the “exact imprint” (Gk. charaktēr, “exact duplicate”) of the nature or being (Gk. hypostasis) of God—meaning that God the Son exactly duplicates the being or nature of God the Father in every way: whatever attributes or power God the Father has, God the Son has them as well. The author goes on to refer to the Son as “God” inverse 8 (“But of the Son he says, ‘Your throne, O God, is forever and ever’ ”), and he attributes the creation of the heavens toChrist when he says of him, “You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning, and the heavens are the work of your hands”(Heb. 1:10, quoting Ps. 102:25). Titus 2:13 refers to “our great God and Savior Jesus Christ,” and 2 Peter 1:1 speaks of “the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ.”13 Romans 9:5, speaking of the Jewish people, says, “To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the christ, who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen.”14 In the Old Testament, Isaiah 9:6 predicts, For to us a child is born, to us, a son is given, and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called “Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God.”


the prophecy of the coming of the Messiah in Isaiah 40:3, “In the wilderness prepare the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our God,” quoted by John the Baptist in preparation for the coming of Christ in Matthew 3:3.


the Holy Spirit is also fully God. Once we understand God the Father and God the Son to be fully God, then the Trinitarian expressions in verses like Matthew 28:19(“baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit”) assume significance for the doctrine of the HolySpirit because they show that the Holy Spirit is classified on an equal level with the Father and the Son. This can be seen if we recognize how unthinkable it would have been for Jesus to say something like, “baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the archangel Michael”—this would give to a created being a status entirely inappropriate even to an archangel. Believers throughout all ages can only be baptized into the name (and thus into a taking on of the character) of God himself.


In Acts 5:3–4, Peter asks Ananias,“Why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit . . .?You have not lied to man but to God.” According to Peter’s words,to lie to the Holy Spirit is to lie to God. Paul says in 1 Corinthians 3:16, “Do you not know that you are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in you?” God’s temple is the place where God himself dwells, which Paul explains by the fact that “God’s Spirit” dwells in it, thus apparently equating God’s Spirit with God himself. David asks in Psalm 139:7–8, “Where shall I go from your Spirit? Or where shall I flee from your presence? If I ascend to heaven, you are there!” This passage attributes the divine characteristic of omnipresence to the Holy Spirit, something that is not true of any of God’s creatures. It seems that David is equating God’s Spirit with God’s presence. To go from God’s Spirit is to go from his presence, but if there is nowhere that David can flee from God’s Spirit, then he knows that wherever he goes he will have to say, “You are there.” Paul attributes the divine characteristic of omniscience to the Holy Spirit in 1 Corinthians 2:10–11: “For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God. For who knows a person’s thoughts except the spirit of that person, which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God [Gk. literally ‘the things of God’] except the Spirit of God.”

God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again’ ” (John 3:5–7). But the work of giving new spiritual life to people when they become Christians is something that only God can do (cf. 1 John 3:9, “born of God”). This passage therefore gives another indication that the Holy Spirit is fully God.

 

[First and the Last]

Does the Bible teach the Trinity?

“Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.” What do the plural verb (“let us”) and the plural pronoun (“our”) mean?

Isaiah 44:24, God speaks of Himself as the sole creator: "I am the Lord, who makes all things, who stretches out the heavens all alone, who spreads abroad the earth by Myself." The consistent testimony of Old and New Testament Scripture is that God alone is the creator, further reinforcing the understanding that Genesis 1:26 does not introduce a plurality of persons. We must also reconcile the plural pronouns in Genesis 1:26 with the singular pronoun in the very next verse, Genesis 1:27, which says, "So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them." This shift from plural to singular pronouns emphasizes the unified action of a single God.

James Barr - An Old Testament scholar, Barr discusses the use of plural forms in the Hebrew Bible and their implications:

"The plural form 'us' in Genesis 1:26 has been interpreted by some scholars as a plural of majesty, a common form in ancient Near Eastern languages where a singular ruler speaks in a plural form to denote greatness and majesty."
(James Barr, The Semantics of Biblical Language, Oxford University Press, 1961, p. 41)

E. W. Bullinger - A biblical scholar known for his detailed works on biblical linguistics:

"The use of the plural pronoun 'us' in Genesis 1:26 can be understood as a plural of deliberation or majesty. This is a stylistic form used in royal contexts, where a king might use the plural to refer to his singular person, emphasizing his grandeur and authority."
(E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, Baker Book House, 1968, p. 56)

Nahum M. Sarna - A renowned scholar of Jewish studies, Sarna explains the plural language in Genesis:

"The employment of the first person plural 'Let us make' is a majestic plural from the standpoint of Hebrew idiom and implies no polytheistic or trinitarian concept. It is a linguistic means to emphasize the sovereignty and majesty of the creator."
(Nahum M. Sarna, Genesis: The JPS Torah Commentary, Jewish Publication Society, 1989, p. 12)

Gordon Wenham - A biblical scholar specializing in the Old Testament:

"In the ancient Near East, it was customary for monarchs to use the plural when speaking of themselves. This 'plural of majesty' was a linguistic way to convey the speaker's greatness and power. The plural pronouns in Genesis 1:26 likely serve a similar function."
(Gordon Wenham, Word Biblical Commentary: Genesis 1-15, Word Books, 1987, p. 27)

John H. Walton - A prominent scholar of Old Testament studies:

"The plural 'us' in Genesis 1:26 is best understood as a plural of deliberation, reflecting an internal divine dialogue. This form does not suggest a plurality of divine beings but rather the comprehensive and majestic nature of God's creative work."
(John H. Walton, The NIV Application Commentary: Genesis, Zondervan, 2001, p. 114)

 

[Charlie24]

Isaiah 44:24, God speaks of Himself as the sole creator: "I am the Lord, who makes all things, who stretches out the heavens all alone, who spreads abroad the earth by Myself." The consistent testimony of Old and New Testament Scripture is that God alone is the creator, further reinforcing the understanding that Genesis 1:26 does not introduce a plurality of persons. We must also reconcile the plural pronouns in Genesis 1:26 with the singular pronoun in the very next verse, Genesis 1:27, which says, "So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them." This shift from plural to singular pronouns emphasizes the unified action of a single God.

James Barr - An Old Testament scholar, Barr discusses the use of plural forms in the Hebrew Bible and their implications:

E. W. Bullinger - A biblical scholar known for his detailed works on biblical linguistics:

Nahum M. Sarna - A renowned scholar of Jewish studies, Sarna explains the plural language in Genesis:

Gordon Wenham - A biblical scholar specializing in the Old Testament:

John H. Walton - A prominent scholar of Old Testament studies:

A 2020 survey said that 72% of Christians believe in the Trinity.

Another survey placed it at 79%.

" It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks."

 

[Christ4Ever]

Isaiah 44:24, God speaks of Himself as the sole creator: "I am the Lord, who makes all things, who stretches out the heavens all alone, who spreads abroad the earth by Myself." The consistent testimony of Old and New Testament Scripture is that God alone is the creator, further reinforcing the understanding that Genesis 1:26 does not introduce a plurality of persons. We must also reconcile the plural pronouns in Genesis 1:26 with the singular pronoun in the very next verse, Genesis 1:27, which says, "So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them." This shift from plural to singular pronouns emphasizes the unified action of a single God.

James Barr - An Old Testament scholar, Barr discusses the use of plural forms in the Hebrew Bible and their implications:

E. W. Bullinger - A biblical scholar known for his detailed works on biblical linguistics:

Nahum M. Sarna - A renowned scholar of Jewish studies, Sarna explains the plural language in Genesis:

Gordon Wenham - A biblical scholar specializing in the Old Testament:

John H. Walton - A prominent scholar of Old Testament studies:

You realize that this is not a universal position, right?
Other scholars believe otherwise.
The same happens with "elohim" which usually occurs in plural form, for which they will say it does not have a plurality of functionality. lol

Quoting a position of thought from men which has two sides as your basis of belief/argument, against what is actually written in Scripture, is nothing new, which is people are going to side with what they believe to be true and seek those who support their position. Just adding my two cents...

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
Nick
\o/
<><

 

[First and the Last]

I was just simply stating another side of the coin not taking position either way. Not saying it disproves the possibility of the Trinity. There is just so much textural criticism behind it, it can't really be used to prove it either. Because the very next verse (v.27) says how we are made in the singular.

 

[First and the Last]

A 2020 survey said that 72% of Christians believe in the Trinity.

Another survey placed it at 79%.

" It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks."

Just because you think you are following the majority does that make you automatically correct. If you choose to go with the majority logic:

Matthew 7:13, "....for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:"

Majority is not always good in all cases.

 

[Christ4Ever]

I was just simply stating another side of the coin not taking position either way. Not saying it disproves the possibility of the Trinity. There is just so much textural criticism behind it, it can't really be used to prove it either. Because the very next verse (v.27) says how we are made in the singular.

To many it does of course, 3 persons in 1, and 1 person in 3.
Perfect symmetry to many.
With the Love of Christ Jesus.
Nick
\o/
<><