View Single Post
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 09-26-2008, 01:36 PM
Traveler Traveler is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,315
Thanks: 246
Thanked 1,335 Times in 785 Posts
Laughs: 6
Laughs at 137 Times in 55 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yekcidmij View Post
I think that the bible speaks of 2 kinds of what the old testament calls "elohim" (gods). Both uses can be seen in Psalm 82. First, the very word "elohim" is not a proper name, but is a generic title that usually refers more to a plane of existence. There are a few instances when it is used to talk about human judges (Ex 21:6; 22:8-9), and I think it's used to denote the function as an elohim rather than being, in the present tense, an elohim. The elohim are in heaven, men are on earth. I think this has carried over to our language today to what we call "angels" and "demons". Angels and demons are elohim (and yes I have verses).

Then there is a unique use of the of the title elohim when it refers to Israel's God. He is THE Elohim, Ha'elohim. He is utterly unique from everything else and is incomparable to anything else. He is the One and only Creator of everything, including all other elohim. Nothing is, was, or will be like Him. YHWH (Jehovah) is Elohim and no ther elohim is YHWH.

Deut 6:4:
Shema Yisrael,.. YHWH.........Eloheinu,. YHWH....... Ehud.
Hear O, Israel, Jehovah [is] our God, Jehovah [is] One.


Quote:
Failure to engage this fact is a great flaw of traditional Trinitarian Christians.

Until now.
I am not sure how you have engaged the great flaw of traditional Trinitarian Christians. In every case you have used "one" to reference G-d from Biblical scripture the reference is the ancient Hebrew "Ehad" - yet you are using it as though it was "Yhead". The singularity of "ehad" excludes the differentiation of both a Father and a Son. Ehad implies a unity as a man and woman becoming "one" in marriage. A single individual would have been yhead.

The Traveler
Reply With Quote