Is God Three?

[freelight]

One Spirit.......

One Spirit.......

Hasty.

Nah, pertinent points.

God is ever echad, never revealed in the Bible as anything more or less. Slice and dice Deity as you wish,....'God' can assume many different forms, hence goes by many different names. If you prefer to personify God in any number of personalities, you may do so....many different gods and goddesses abound

A '3-in-1' or '1-in-3' model can apply within a monist perspective quite well, since a panentheistic view comprises the metaphysics just fine.

Beyond the technicalities, that one loves and worships the One God is sufficient.

That worship may be channeled unto and/or thru a personification of God to original source, which is the spirit-essence of the Creator (and all creation). All spirit offsprings of God have a connection to God in spirit, so worship always originates and is generated there.

 

[CherubRam]

The word used is sar.

It is a noun.

It does not mean "minister."

It means:

prince, ruler, leader, chief, chieftain, official, captain

chieftain, leader

vassal, noble, official (under king)

captain, general, commander (military)

chief, head, overseer (of other official classes)

heads, princes (of religious office)

elders (of representative leaders of people)

merchant-princes (of rank and dignity)

patron-angel

Ruler of rulers (of God)

warden

It is used 421 times.

This study is done from the N.I.V Exhaustive Concordance.

The two words of this study are, (PRINCE-S) and LEAD-ER-S-ING).

The Hebrew word (NASIY). Ref # 5954 is used 39 times for the word (PRINCE-S).
And the Hebrew word (SAR). Ref # 8569 is used 51 times for the word (PRINCE-S).

As you can see NASIY and SAR are very different words.

The word SAR is used a total of 421 times; 78 times as officials, 110 times as commander-s and 32 times as officer-s. And 40 times as Lead-er-s-ing.

The correct translation for Daniel 12:1 is “leader.” And the correct translation for Isaiah 9:6 is "leading."

The other alternate Hebrew words for PRINCE are these.
5592. NAGIYD (PRINCE) 3 times. / 5618. NADIYB (PRINCE-S) 6 times. / 5687. NAZIYR (PRINCE-S) 3 times. / 5817. NASIYK (PRINCE-S). 3 times.

You should take notice that they all began with the letters " N A ".

In Daniel 11:22 the word PRINCE is #5592 NAGIYD.

In our different bible, interpretations are often given in place of translations.
It's something to think about.

Prince Minister Leader Sar

Brown-Driver-Briggs makes a very good argument for the word "sar" meaning royalty, in Assyrian. (King) However, using another language to translate a word can be both helpful, and misleading. What they did not take into consideration is the fact that royalty also acted as ministers. (As in, ministering in peace.) Or (Minister of the faith.) The Hebrew word "Sar" is best translated as "Minister." The Hebrew word "Sar" should never be given a translation as having to do with royalty.


Brown-Driver-Briggs
שַׂר420 noun masculine chieftain, chief, ruler, official, captain, prince (Late Hebrew especially of angels; Assyrian šarru, king)

 

[freelight]

Is. 9:6 - superimposing........

Is. 9:6 - superimposing........

Because God likes hiding things, so that man can dig and find them out.

Well, yes...prospecting is good, if panning in the right stream

'God' in the OT, is clearly taught as being 'one' in the Shema. Jesus affirmed the Shema.

We might also note that Is. 9:6 is not quoted in the NT as a proof-text about Jesus being 'God', and it holds quite well with its traditional Unitarian translation without a trinitarian spin job done on it. Nothing wrong with creative Christology, but just saying. The original orthodox Jewish interpretation ought be considered first, then additional interpretations can be explored. It certainly doesnt necessarily support the Trinity in anyway, while on the topic.

 

[oatmeal]

Yeah, kind of 'stuck in Judaism' aren't they? Galatians 3:1 :doh: Don't be surprised most cults are steeped in Judaism-messed-up.

Yes especially those who believe that trinitarian nonsense

 

[freelight]

Yes especially those who believe that trinitarian nonsense

Well,......trinitarians are adamant on maintaining some sense of classical monotheism by maintaining "one essence"! - so, they can divide 'God' up into any number - hey, its all good...."one essence" anyways,...which is just as compatible in a pure 'monist' sense, except the dogmatic clinging to make 'God' into a 'personality' or a company of divine 'persons'. Hey,....have your cake and eat it too

 

[oatmeal]

Well,......trinitarians are adamant on maintaining some sense of classical monotheism by maintaining "one essence"! - so, they can divide 'God' up into any number - hey, its all good...."one essence" anyways,...which is just as compatible in a pure 'monist' sense, except the dogmatic clinging to make 'God' into a 'personality' or a company of divine 'persons'. Hey,....have your cake and eat it too

Well, God is one, but as you pointed out in a previous post:

"'God' can assume many different forms, hence goes by many different names."

I have read that God refers to himself using about 250 different names and titles and attributes

Even with that many different ways to describe God, God is only one

 

[oatmeal]

we have the luxury of living at the back end of 2000+ years of growth and dominance over other traditions superstitions beliefs by Christianity...itself a not a uniform body...names matter in this war for supremacy not only for the world but your salvation...there are many believed creators out their all with their own followers and systems of belief

is the new kid on the mars hill block ya dig?

a jealous One Who went to great length to preserve His rep among the nations...at one point stopped from destroying His own people because they misrepresenting His Name...

sure...name have meaning and cultural context...Jesus isn’t even Joshua out of Latin out of greek from Hebrew...I have spoke to Christians about Jesus who are quite surprised He is NOT a)white blue eyed blonde b) black curly headed c) gentile eating sunday Ham dinners

Forgetting He was a Jew makes it easier to forget much of what He did and believed and taught we are to do...

covenants are legal contracts pet names are cute but He asked we not carry His name for naught. If just for accuracy it is fascinating the development from Jehovah to Yah. And as I have said before if we respect politicians and sports hero’s with at least an attempt at accuracy of their name why not for, you know HIM... king Carlos is radically different than King Charles...Juan or Jan

Maybe it’s not that important to you...but it comes in at number 3 of His top ten list...

instructed to a group who already knew the Name culture history expectation...and didn’t need them listed formally name once a year but actually needed to understand them as intimate personal relationship building aids...hence YHWH to daddy...ok not that far...lol see?

choose Ye this day Whom ye will serve...I gave you some of my reasons...

especially when it comes to names Saul to Paul...KJV confusing Joshua with Jesus...

When Saul/Paul was knocked off his horse and asked “who are you?” it is a most important detail that he heard the answer in Hebrew/Aramaic you can bet he didn’t hear the English “Jesus”...


“Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.“

Read the multicultural context by which even that verse was penned...

Well, how nice.

God did have Moses refer to him as per the KJV, "I am that I am"

Or more accurately, "I will be what I will be"

Or are you looking for a more common name?

How about Bob or Tom or Ralph?

 

[JudgeRightly]

Well, God is one, but as you pointed out in a previous post:

"'God' can assume many different forms, hence goes by many different names."

I have read that God refers to himself using about 250 different names and titles and attributes

Even with that many different ways to describe God, God is only one

None of this contradicts the concept of a Trinity.

 

[freelight]

One Original Spirit....................

One Original Spirit....................

Well, God is one, but as you pointed out in a previous post:

"'God' can assume many different forms, hence goes by many different names."

I have read that God refers to himself using about 250 different names and titles and attributes

Even with that many different ways to describe God, God is only one

Indeed.

As you know I'm refering directly to the subject within a judeo-christian context, while always holding a universal, all-inclusive, universal theology, as including the concepts and ideals of 'Deity' from all religious traditions and cultures.

The Hindu concept of 'Brahman' fits just as well here, but has a broader nuance and inclusion of Deity-forms and personalities,...it just so happens that there still is one eternal, infinite essence of pure Deity from which all substances and forms are derived (which is also the source of all personality and personalities), so this one original divine spirit-mind-essence is the 'Creator' (the guiding, directing intelligence in all creation). - all offspring souls naturally have a co-creative place in the cosmos as well,....in as much as we function like God, made in his image and likeness.

There is no more debate here over whether 'God' is '3' from the Jewish scriptures, neither is such taught expressly in the NT apart from a presupposed and superimposed interpretational context read within the canon, then later expounded and defined by councils in the creeds.

Unitarian vs. Trinitarian debate has gone on since the Trinity was formulated and dogmatized, so nothing new under the sun, and all the while....absolute reality is all that is absolute. All else is 'relative', and subject to variation, difference and conditioning

'God is spirit, and they who worship the Spirit, must do so spiritually and according to reality....naturally speaking'.

 

[clefty]

Well, how nice.

so kind of you...thanks for reading

God did have Moses refer to him as per the KJV, "I am that I am”

Or more accurately, "I will be what I will be"

yup...AahYah...translaters trying their best...but still confused Joshua with Jesus...

Or are you looking for a more common name?

How about Bob or Tom or Ralph?

naw...cuz see? He really ain’t that common...

Need a name that reflects His context and purpose, history, culture, people, language, intent, mission...oh and His Father’s Name...and all that is His...

But thanks for offering...

 

[oatmeal]

so kind of you...thanks for reading

yup...AahYah...translaters trying their best...but still confused Joshua with Jesus...

naw...cuz see? He really ain’t that common...

Need a name that reflects His context and purpose, history, culture, people, language, intent, mission...oh and His Father’s Name...and all that is His...

But thanks for offering...

God uses many names, titles and attributes because is not one dimensional or ten dimensional.

Without God creating there would be no dimensions.

Why is it that Joshua and Jesus are the same name meaning the same thing and that threeeologians do not demand that Joshua be God?

 

[clefty]

God uses many names, titles and attributes because is not one dimensional or ten dimensional.

Without God creating there would be no dimensions.

Why is it that Joshua and Jesus are the same name meaning the same thing and that threeeologians do not demand that Joshua be God?

Lol...threeology...nice

Because there is a an agenda to distract and distort from the True...for us to take a counterfeit name...

His Own use of various titles and descriptions takes nothing away from what His True Name is...just like which man you call daddy does not because he agrees...except your bank won’t cash a check signed “daddy”

Again Paul knocked off his horse heard a proper name in Hebrew/Aramaic...not a title or nick name

 

[JudgeRightly]

Well, yes...prospecting is good, if panning in the right stream

'God' in the OT, is clearly taught as being 'one' in the Shema. Jesus affirmed the Shema.

And yet, even in the Shema, the word used for "one" implies a plurality in the one-ness. A unity of multiple. Still one LORD, but a plurality in Him.

See Strong's H259.

We might also note that Is. 9:6 is not quoted in the NT as a proof-text about Jesus being 'God', and it holds quite well with its traditional Unitarian translation without a trinitarian spin job done on it. Nothing wrong with creative Christology, but just saying. The original orthodox Jewish interpretation ought be considered first, then additional interpretations can be explored. It certainly doesnt necessarily support the Trinity in anyway, while on the topic.

The Trinity concept fits with the orthodox Jewish interpretation. That's what you people don't seem to get. The trinity doctrine doesn't say that there is more than one God. It affirms that God is one God. But it doesn't stop in the Old Testament, it continues in the New, where we see that there are in fact three Persons shown in Scripture,

 

[JudgeRightly]

Yes especially those who believe that trinitarian nonsense

I'm going to ask you to cease your libel.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Well,......trinitarians are adamant on maintaining some sense of classical monotheism by maintaining "one essence"! - so, they can divide 'God' up into any number - hey, its all good...."one essence" anyways,...which is just as compatible in a pure 'monist' sense, except the dogmatic clinging to make 'God' into a 'personality' or a company of divine 'persons'. Hey,....have your cake and eat it too

Are you saying we just arbitrarily came up with the number three?

Are you saying we just arbitrarily came up with the concept that God is three "Persons"?

Because you would be incorrect.

And no, we don't "divide God up." We simply recognize what scripture actually teaches.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Well, God is one, but as you pointed out in a previous post:

"'God' can assume many different forms, hence goes by many different names."

I have read that God refers to himself using about 250 different names and titles and attributes

Even with that many different ways to describe God, God is only one

None of this is incompatible with the Trinity doctrine.

 

[clefty]

Are you saying we just arbitrarily came up with the number three?

Are you saying we just arbitrarily came up with the concept that God is three "Persons"?

Because you would be incorrect.

And no, we don't "divide God up." We simply recognize what scripture actually teaches.

Do you have a proper name for that third person please?

 

[JudgeRightly]

Do you have a proper name for that third person please?

How about "The Holy Spirit"?

Next question please.

 

[marhig]

The trinity, as an official doctrine, began to be developed in 325 A.D. at the Council of Nicaea and was completed in 381 at the Council of Constantinople. Both of these official events were convened and presided over by Roman Emperors. So by 381 A.D. it was officially decreed that God was three persons who were equally the one God.

“[The Trinity Doctrine] is not ... directly and immediately the word of God.” - (p. 304) “The formulation ‘One God in three persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian Dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers [those very first Christians who had known and been taught by the Apostles and their disciples for over 100 years], there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.” - New Catholic Encyclopedia, p. 299, v. 14, 1967.


Now it is obvious that Scripture uses the word 'one' numerous times to describe God. And it is equally obvious that every dream or vision of God shows a single person as God (sometimes the Messiah is shone approaching or standing by the one person depicted as God (Acts 7:55 and Dan. 7:9, 13, 14 are good examples).

So, how many times in Scripture is God described using the word 'three'?

And how many times is he shown in scripture as three persons? or one person with three faces?

Excellent post and the truth, there's no such thing as a trinity. God is one and he's the father.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Excellent post and the truth, there's no such thing as a trinity. God is one and he's the father.

You say there is no such thing as the Trinity.

Here is the proof of it.