Quote:
Originally Posted by Traveler
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
|
I was using Deut 6:4 in terms of the context it occurs in. It refers to the uniqueness of Israel's God and that He is the sole object of their worship. It is not an analysis of the inner being, contrary to what PassionForHisWord says. It has nothing to do with unity either. Neither of those are the appropriate context of Deuteronomy. It has to do with uniquness and devotion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PassionForHisWord
The Shema actually screams the doctrine of the trinity.
|
I happen to affirm the Nicene Creed, but I'm afraid it's not entailed in Deut 6:4.
Quote:
|
As I think many of us know, the word "Elohim" denotes three or more figures.
|
Not always. It can be used to refer to 1 figurel, such as Gen 1:27, or it can be used to refer to an unspecified many figures, such as Psalm 82.
Quote:
|
And the word used for "one" in the passage is "echad", which describes a compound unity among 2 or more figures (the same word is used when the Bible describes marriage as becoming one flesh in Genesis 2:24).
|
Gen 1:27 and Psalm 82:1 use 'elohim' in the sense of 1 figure since the helping verbs and pronouns denote 1 figure.
Quote:
|
So what the Shema is saying about YHWH is that He is three or more figures united as one Being.
|
Not really.