Are Christians under the Law of Moses?

The popularity of the "Jewish Roots" movement brings up an important question: Are Christians under the Law of Moses?

The answer is clearly NO. However, this does not mean that we are under no law. We are under the law of Christ:

to those who are without law, as without law, though not being without the law of God but under the law of Christ 1 Cor 9:21

Bear one another's burdens, and thereby fulfill the law of Christ. Gal 6:2

You see, this is the mistake that the Gentile Church makes, to say that we are no longer under the law. The correct statement is that we are no longer under the law OF MOSES. As Messiah, Jesus completed the law of Moses (Matt 5:17) and changed the priesthood from Levitical to Melchizidekian and where there is a change of priethood there must be a change of law (Heb 7:12).

Paul showed that one may voluntarily put himself back under the law of Moses in Acts 21. Nothing wrong with this as "the Law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good" Rom 7:12. However, the law of Moses is optional today--we are under the law of Christ.

Eternal Security

Eph 1:13 says: In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation-- having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise. The word for "sealed" is σφραγίζω (sphragizo) which "signifies ownership and the full security carried by the backing (full authority) of the owner. "Sealing" in the ancient world served as a "legal signature" which guaranteed the promise (contents) of what was sealed." (Helps Word Studies).

By the sealing ministry of God the Holy Spirit, God has guaranteed our eternal secrity. Furthermore both the Father and the Son participate in the guarantee in John 10:28-29. In this passage it says we shall "never ever" perish. In the Greek this is οὐ μὴ ἀπόλωνται (ou me apolontai). οὐ (ou) and μὴ (me) are two different words for "not" meaning "never ever" and ἀπόλωνται (apolontai) is from ἀπόλλυμι (apolummi) which is the exact same word used in John 3:16: For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish (ἀπόλλυμι (apolummi), but have eternal life.

There is punishment for turning away from God once saved, but this does NOT include loss of salavtion. This is also made clear in the parables and metaphors of scripture. In the parable of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11-32) the wayward son never ceased being the Father's son. Once a son, always a son. Also, as believers, we are said to be "born again" (John 3:3). It is impossible to be "unborn." Being born signifies a one-time event that cannot be undone.

The Pre-trib Rapture in Daniel 9

 

The period of time known as the Tribulation is the last week of Israel's seventy weeks or 490 years (Dan 9:24). Dan 9:26-27 states that the 69th week ended when Jesus was "cut off" i.e., crucified,  and the 70th week begins when the covenant is signed with Anitchrist. The period where we are now is an intercalation between the 69th and 70th week belonging to the Church not Israel. The 70th week belongs to Israel not the Church. Thus the Church is raptured before the 70th week begins.

Flexibility in Preaching the Gospel

I received the following request on youtube:

Would you, as a gesture of friendship and in the interest of a discussion in good faith, edit your profile so that it does not reflect your aggressiveness towards Allah, the Quraan and the Muslims? Thank you. 

My profile reads as follows:

 I believe strongly that Islam is modern day Nazism--where Der Führer has been replaced by Allah. My approach to combat this false religion of Islam is to show that it is logically impossible.

We must show Muslims, that when the Bible and the Quran are compared via unemotional and honest academic examination, the Quran, which adduces the Bible as evidence of its validity (Surah 10:94), cannot stand. Thus, the only intellectually honest reaction to the Quran is to reject it, and Islam with it as the Bible calls them accursed:

"But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!" Gal 1:8-9

My response is that I will pray about it since my goal on the internet is to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ and to excercise my spiritual gift of teaching (Eph 4:11). If the above statement prevents this goal, then it should be changed per 1 Corinthians 9:

 19For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a slave to all, so that I may win more. 20To the Jews I became as a Jew, so that I might win Jews; to those who are under the Law, as under the Law though not being myself under the Law, so that I might win those who are under the Law; 21to those who are without law, as without law, though not being without the law of God but under the law of Christ, so that I might win those who are without law. 22To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak; I have become all things to all men, so that I may by all means save some. 23I do all things for the sake of the gospel, so that I may become a fellow partaker of it. 1 Cor 9:19-23

Bible Believers should NEVER be Unitarian Hypermonotheists!!!

Bible Believers should NEVER be Unitarian Hypermonotheists. The error of this false doctrine is demonstrable in a myriad of ways from the Bible. However, one strong indirect proof is that the Quran directly affirms Unitarian Hypermonotheism. The Quran dogmatically states:

Say not "Trinity" : desist: it will be better for you: for Allah is one Allah: (Surah 4:171).

Thus if you deny the Trinity, you are worshipping the Muslim God Allah.

ישוע הוא יהוה Jesus IS Yahweh

The following verses, taken together, prove that Jesus IS Yahweh:

A. These will wage war against the LAMB, and the LAMB will overcome them, because HE IS LORD OF LORDS AND KING OF KINGS Rev 17:14

B. The next day he saw JESUS coming to him and said, "Behold, the LAMB of God who takes away the sin of the world! John 1:29

C. For the LORD YOUR GOD (יהוה אלהיכם Yahweh Eloheichem) is the GOD OF GODS and the LORD OF LORDS Deut 10:17

This is a simple application of the transitive property of mathematics which states:

if A=B, and B=C, then A=C

Since , the Lamb is the Lord of Lords, and Jesus is the Lamb, then Jesus is the Lord of Lords and also everything else in the three verses: King of Kings, God of Gods and...

the Lord God (יהוה אלהים Yahweh Elohim)

Does 1 Chronicles 16:30 teach a Flat Earth?

Evolutionists claim that 1 Chronicles 16:30 teaches that the earth is flat. Let's drill down and the verse and see what it says:

חילו מלפניו כל־הארץ אף־תכון תבל בל־תמוט

Tremble before Him, all the earth; Indeed, the world (תבל - tebel: a poetic word meaning the inhabited world) is firmly established, it will not be moved (shaken, overthrown). 1 Chronicles 16:30

The conxtext (1 Chron 16:8-36), shows that this is a psalm of thanksgiving thanking God for all his provisions, one of which is a world in which we can live that is stable, it cannot be moved, shaken, or overthrown. God has established a fixed order (cf Jer 31:35-36), He is fully in control.

This verse certainly says nothing about the earth being flat. Silly Evolutionists.

Summary of the Pre-Tribulation Rapture Position

Theology is just a filing cabinet with which to organize the Biblical Data. Any theological position that does not fit the Biblical Data must either be revised or discarded. The Pre-Tribulational Rapture position is the only one that fits the Biblical Data. Here is the essence of how it coordinates the Biblical data:

Seventy weeks have been decreed for your people (the Jews) and your holy city (Jerusalem), to finish the transgression, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy place Dan 9:24

Sixty nine of these weeks have passed (7 + 62):

So you are to know and discern that from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince (Jesus Christ) there will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; Dan 9:25

Thus one week still remains. This "week" is a seven year period belonging to the JEWS (your people--Dan 9:24). The interventing period (the Church Age) between the 69th and 70th week is a GENTILE period in the "Times of the Gentiles":

and they will fall by the edge of the sword, and will be led captive into all the nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled under foot by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled. Luke 21:24

The Gentile Church Age ends abruptly with the Rapture and then Daniel's 70th Jewish week occurs. You can see this timetable clearly reflected in the book of Revelation. The Greek word for Church (ἐκκλησία - ekklesia) is mentioned numerous times in the first three chapters of Revelation. Then, suddenly, at the very end of chapter three, the Church (ἐκκλησία - ekklesia) is not mentioned again until the very end of Revelation, Chapter 22 verse 16.

This is because the Church is gone, raptured. Chapters 2 and 3 of Revelation describe the "Seven Churches." Seven is the Biblical number of completion--these two chapters summarize the entire Church Age which ends at Rev 3:22--it is completed--the number seven:

He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches Rev 3:22

Rev 4:1 then reads:

After this I looked, and there before me was a door standing open in heaven. And the voice I had first heard speaking to me like a trumpet said, “Come up here...

This is directly parallel to 1 Thess 4:16

For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God,

The "voice" of both verses is the same voice. The "shout" in 1 Thess 4:16 is "Come up here" in Rev 4:1--the "like a trumpet " in Rev 4:1 is the "trumpet of God" of 1 Thess 4:16. This is the Rapture of the Church.

The Church does not return to the Earthly scene until Rev 19:14:

And the armies which are in heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean, were following Him on white horses

The Church is part of these armies.

Rev 22:16 is the summary statement to the Church:

I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star."

Thus Jesus is commanding us in the Church Age to take a very very close look at the Book of Revelation, and when we do, we see that the Church is raptured prior to the start of the Tribulation, and  does not go through the horrible judgements described in Chapter 4 and following.

Question on the Etymology of Nehushtan

He removed the high places and broke down the sacred pillars and cut down the Asherah. He also broke in pieces the bronze serpent that Moses had made, for until those days the sons of Israel burned incense to it; and it was called Nehushtan. 2 Kings 18:4

Question: Is NEHUSHTAN in 2 Kings 18:4 above derived from two root words NAKHASH and SATAN?

Interesting theory. In 2 Kings 18:4 it says that the children of Israel were calling the נחש הנחשת (nachash haNechoshet) or bronze serpent נחשתן (nechustan). I would posit that this name change may have come about from first starting to call it נחשת-תן (nechoshet-tan) תן (tan) being another word for serpent, thus still "bronze serpent" but with a different word for serpent. Over time, נחשת-תן (nechoshet-tan) contracted to נחשתן (nechushtan).

However, since they were worshipping it (burning incense = worship), certainly HaSatan (השטן) Satan was involved but given the fact that HaSatan (השטן) has tav instead of tet for the T sound, and, more importantly, that it has sin for the S sound and not Shin, it probably is not related to נחשתן (nechustan).

Holocaust Denial and Denial of the Crucifixion, Death, and Resurrection of Jesus Christ

There are people who deny the Holocaust. They do so based on presuppositions. Their presuppositions are more important to them than the evidence. Those who deny the crucifixion, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ are doing exactly the same thing. They allow anti-supernaturalist or other presuppositions to prevent them from accepting the evidence of the crucifixion, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ--including the fact that He predicted it all in advance. The evidence for this fact is just as strong as the evidence for the Holocaust. The only difference is that the Holocaust is a recent event so there are living witnesses while the crucifixion, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ are events of antiquity. However, both facts are equally supported by eyewitness accounts.

For example, Peter while addressing a large crowd in Jerusalem said:

22“Men of Israel, listen to these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a man attested to you by God with miracles and wonders and signs which God performed through Him in your midst, just as you yourselves know— 23this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death. 24“But God raised Him up again, putting an end to the agony of death, since it was impossible for Him to be held in its power. Acts 2:22-24

Note that Peter was an eyewitness of these events and was able to state to the crowd "just as you yourselves know" and "you nailed to a cross...and put Him to death." And what was the response of the crowd to what Peter said:

37Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brethren, what shall we do?” Acts 2:37

Luke, who wrote the books of Acts as a sequel to the Gospel of Luke, states his method for writing these books:

1Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us, 2just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word, 3it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus; 4so that you may know the exact truth about the things you have been taught. Luke 1:1-4

Note that Luke recorded "eyewitness" accounts and that he "investigated everything carefully from the beginning."

One of the eyewitness accounts Luke records is that of the men on the road to Emmaus:

18One of them, named Cleopas, answered and said to Him, “Are You the only one visiting Jerusalem and unaware of the things which have happened here in these days?” 19And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, 20and how the chief priests and our rulers delivered Him to the sentence of death, and crucified Him. 21“But we were hoping that it was He who was going to redeem Israel. Indeed, besides all this, it is the third day since these things happened. 22“But also some women among us amazed us. When they were at the tomb early in the morning, 23and did not find His body, they came, saying that they had also seen a vision of angels who said that He was alive. 24“Some of those who were with us went to the tomb and found it just exactly as the women also had said; but Him they did not see.” Luke 24:18-24

Note the Cleopas said: “Are You the only one visiting Jerusalem and unaware of the things which have happened here in these days?” Clearly it was known by all in Jerusalem that Jesus was crucified, died and was resurrected.

Luke further adds that Jesus presented proof of His resurrection for a period of forty days:

1The first account I composed, Theophilus, about all that Jesus began to do and teach, 2until the day when He was taken up to heaven, after He had by the Holy Spirit given orders to the apostles whom He had chosen. 3To these He also presented Himself alive after His suffering, by many convincing proofs, appearing to them over a period of forty days and speaking of the things concerning the kingdom of God. Acts 1:1-3

Thus the crucifixion, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ is a fact of history, supported by eyewitness accounts, just as the Holocaust is.

Did the Witch of Endor really bring up Samuel?

I think there can be no doubt that it was Samuel that appeared to Saul in 1 Sam 28:7-19 and not a demon imitating Samuel. From the description in the passage, it seems that the Witch of Endor was used to seeing demons in disguise when she conjured up departed spirits.

However, on this occasion, she seems to have been shocked and unprepared for what she saw:

When the woman saw Samuel, she cried out with a loud voice; and the woman spoke to Saul, saying, “Why have you deceived me? For you are Saul.” 1 Sam 28:12

She seems to have recognized that this really was Samuel and somehow also at the same time realized that the man in disguise was King Saul--probably from taking a closer look at him based on her surprise at actually having brought up Samuel.

I would say that the Lord simply allowed Samuel to come from Paradise and appear to Saul and pronounce the judgement on Saul in verses 15-19. It seems possible that the departed righteous dead can appear to the living based on these passages:

Luke 16:27-31 Lazarus and the Rich Man:
27“And he said, ‘Then I beg you, father, that you send him (Lazarus) to my father’s house— 28for I have five brothers—in order that he may warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.’ 29“But Abraham said, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them.’ 30“But he said, ‘No, father Abraham, but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent!’ 31“But he said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead.’”

2 Kings 13:21 Elisha's Tomb:
Once while some Israelites were burying a man, suddenly they saw a band of raiders; so they threw the man's body into Elisha's tomb. When the body touched Elisha's bones, the man came to life and stood up on his feet.

Matt 27:52-53 - At Jesus' Resurrection:
52The tombs were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; 53and coming out of the tombs after His resurrection they entered the holy city and appeared to many.

All Israel will be Saved

A user on Youtube named ShalomIsrael60 left these comments on my Channel Page:

PLEASE DO THE JEWISH PEOPLE A FAVOR, YOU ARE NOT JEWISH, YOU ARE

A CHRISTIAN USING JEWISH WORDS AND OUR CUSTOMS, YOU BELIEVE IN JESUS, JEWS DON'T BELIEVE IN JESUS, I DON'T CARE IF YOU THINK YOUR A MESSIANIC JEW, YOUR A CHRISTIAN, YOU ARE NO BETTER THAN THE MUSLIMS THAT WANT TO CONVERT US TO ISLAM, AND YOU WANT TO CONVERT US OVER TO JEWISH, SO AGAIN YOUR BAN IN THE STATE OF ISRAEL AS TROUBLE MAKERS, WE DON'T WELCOME YOU AND WE DON'T WANT YOU, SPREAD THE WORD OF JESUS TO THE MUSLIMS, BUT DON'T POSE AS JEWS, BECAUSE PEOPLE WHO DON'T KNOW WHO YOU ARE THINK YOU ARE JEWISH AND THAT GIVES US A BAD NAME. AND IF YOUR EXCUSE IS THAT YOU COME FROM JEWISH MOM OR GRANDMOTHER AND YOUR STILL JEWISH YOUR NOT, ONCE YOU BELIEVE IN JESUS YOU LOSE YOUR RIGHTS AS A JEW GO READ HISTORY      to which I replied: So sad to see such a negative comment from someone that has "I stand with Israel" as their avatar. I also stand with Israel. All Jews need to read HaBrit HaChadashah (the New Testament) and consider the claims of Yeshsua (Jesus) as Messiah. To let prejudice, propoganda, and misinformation prevent a reading of the greatest book to come from the Jews makes no sense...

There certainly are some Jews, like ShalomIsrael60, who believe that to be Jewish means to reject Jesus. However, in the future they will repent and realize the huge mistake they have made:

I will pour out on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the Spirit of grace and of supplication, so that they will look on Me whom they have pierced; and they will mourn for Him, as one mourns for an only son, and they will weep bitterly over Him like the bitter weeping over a firstborn. Zech 12:10

There are many many Jews who accept Jesus as the Jewish Messiah today--and the Jews corporately will accept Him in the future:

25For I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this mystery—so that you will not be wise in your own estimation—that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in;

26and so all Israel will be saved; just as it is written,
"THE DELIVERER WILL COME FROM ZION,
HE WILL REMOVE UNGODLINESS FROM JACOB."

27"THIS IS MY COVENANT WITH THEM,
WHEN I TAKE AWAY THEIR SINS."
Romans 11:25-27

Israel, Egypt, and Assyria as a Triad?

Click Map to Enlarge

23In that day there will be a highway from Egypt to Assyria, and the Assyrians will come into Egypt and the Egyptians into Assyria, and the Egyptians will worship with the Assyrians.
24In that day Israel will be the third party with Egypt and Assyria, a blessing in the midst of the earth, 25whom the LORD of hosts has blessed, saying, “Blessed is Egypt My people, and Assyria the work of My hands, and Israel My inheritance.” Isaiah 19:23-25

The prophecy concerning Egypt and Assyria in the future is very interesting. I think these nations are mainly being used to represent all Gentile nations in that, at the time Isaiah wrote, Israel was right in the middle of these two super-powers, Assyria to the North and West and Egypt to the South and West. Thus, Assyria, Israel, and Egypt as a triad functioning together in unity is being used as a figure to represent the Millennium when there will be peace among all nations. At the time Isaiah wrote, these three nations hated each other and were constantly at war with each other. In the Millennium, the three will be united with each other and at peace--representing the peace of all the nations in the Millennium, which will be the result of Jesus Christ, ruling them with a rod of iron (Psalm 2, Psalm 110).

Of course, in the Millennium, Islam will be totally and utterly destroyed--it being (in my opinion), the final One World Religion of Antichrist, who will have ruled his kingdom from Babylon--and forced those in the Great Tribulation to convert to Islam. Jesus Christ will utterly destroy the Islamic hordes at Armageddon and Islam will be wiped off the face of the earth prior to the start of His Millennial reign. This will be a huge blessing to Israel and the surrounding nations--who will then all worship the Lord Jesus Christ, who will then not only be known as the Suffering Servant of His First Advent, but also as the Conquering Warrior-King of His Second Advent.

Reply to a KJVOer (King James Version Only)

We can still agree on the doctrines contained in the Bible even if we do not agree on the mechanics of how God provides the Bible to us in the English language.

If you will accept a friendly critique of the KJVO position from the perspective of a polyglot (I speak 11 languages), translations never convey the exact meaning of the original text--you always lose something in translation. Additionally, you bring over the presuppositions of the translator which contaminate the translation.

Thus a translation can only give you the sense of what is being communicated. For analysis of the text, you must go the original language of writing--these are the languages in which inspiriation by the Holy Spirit occured via the hands of the inspired writers.

The KJV is a good translation (with an interesting manuscript theory) but that is all it is--a translation. Many (many) times the KJV translation simply does not communicate in English the thought being communicated in the original languages, either because of archaic language (the English language has changed considerably since 1611) or because of translator error or bias.

This is how I see it, as someone who specializes in this area. However, the important thing is not to let one's Bible version preference get the way of true Christian Unity as Jesus said:

That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. John 17:21.

The Minimalist Gospel

John appears to me to give the most concise presentation of the precise information that must be communicated and believed in order for the recipient to have eternal life.

That is: Something Jesus Christ did is enough to save me.

It is the transference of faith that saves:

From: something I do saves me (my good works must outweigh my bad works, etc..)
To: something Jesus Christ did saves me.

Most importantly, I do not necessarily need to know or understand the "something" of what Jesus Christ did in order to have eternal life.

This is the Minimalist Gospel.

For example, the gospel can simply be presented as: "Look to Jesus Christ, the Lifted Up One and Live"
As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; so that whoever believes in Him will have eternal life. John 3:14-15.

I actually give this presentation here:

Here is an excellent article which gives a more detailed presentation of the Minimalist Gospel--this is a position hated and attacked by many Christians (e.g., "Easy Believism") but I feel very strongly that it is the essence of the Gospel, with all the superfluities stripped away.

http://www.faithalone.org/journal/2000ii/Hodges.htm

Seraphim as Angels?

In Numbers 21:6 Yahweh sent הנחשים השרפים (HaNachasim HaSeraphim) "Burning Serpents" among the people.

In Numbers 21:8 God tells Moses to make a שרף (Seraph) and set it on a pole.

In Numbers 21:9 Moses makes a נחש נחשת (Nechash Nechoshet) "a Bronze Serpent" and sets it on a pole.

Thus, it appears that both נחש (Nechash) "Serpent" or שרף (Seraph) "Burning One" can be used as a synecdoche for these "Burning Serpents."

What is the connection between the use of the שרף (Seraph) in Numbers 21 and elsewhere where it means a Burning (and Flying) Serpent and the use in Isaiah 6:2 and 6:6 where it is used of Angels?

Certainly it simply means that these Angels (who I submit are Cherubim) are "Burning" in the sense of the following verses:

Exodus 3:2: The angel of the LORD appeared to him in a blazing fire from the midst of a bush; and he looked, and behold, the bush was burning with fire, yet the bush was not consumed.

Heb 1:7 (which is a quotation from Psalm 104:4): And of the angels He says, "WHO MAKES HIS ANGELS WINDS, AND HIS MINISTERS A FLAME OF FIRE."

Certainly there is no distinct order of Angels called שרפים (Serpaphim)? These are simply כרובים שרפים (Kerubim Serpahim) "Burning Cherubs."

The obvious connection here is Satan. He is a נחש-כרוב-שרף (nechash-kerub-seraph) a "Burning (flying) Serpent-Angel"...

Are שרפים (Seraphim) really different than כרבים (Cherubim)?

This is an interesting question because the majority view of commentators is that שרפים (Seraphim) and כרבים Cherubim are two different orders of angels.

However, this appears to me to be clearly incorrect. שרף (seraph) in the Hebrew simply means "burning", "a burning one", "a burner".

This is clear from Num 21:6

The LORD sent burning serpents (הנחשים השרפים haNachashim haSeraphim) among the people and they bit the people, so that many people of Israel died.

The "burning" serpent probably called thus because of their fiery red color or because of the burning inflammatory effect of their bite, or both.

and from Num 21:8-9:

Then the LORD said to Moses, "Make a burner (שרף seraph), and set it on a standard; and it shall come about, that everyone who is bitten, when he looks at it, he will live." Num 21:8

And Moses made a bronze serpent (נחש נחשת nachash nachashet) and set it on the standard; and it came about, that if a serpent bit any man, when he looked to the bronze serpent, he lived.

Note that God told Moses to make a Seraph and he made a Nachash--Moses certainly did not think God was asking him to make an angel...

The only use of (שרף seraph) as referring to angels is in Isaiah 6:

Seraphim (שרפים) stood above Him, each having six wings: with two he covered his face, and with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew. Isaiah 6:2

Then one of the seraphim (שרפים) flew to me with a hot coal in his hand, which he had taken from the altar with tongs. Isaiah 6:6

However, these two uses should simply be translated "Burning Ones" or "Burners." They are simply Cherubim, the same as described in Ezekiel chapters 1 and 10.

These Cherubim are "burning" probably in the same sense that the Angel of the Lord was in Exodus 3:2

The angel of the LORD appeared to him in a blazing fire from the midst of a bush; and he looked, and behold, the bush was burning with fire, yet the bush was not consumed.

and in Heb 1:7 (which is a quotation from Psalm 104:4):

And of the angels He says, "WHO MAKES HIS ANGELS WINDS, AND HIS MINISTERS A FLAME OF FIRE."

The connection between a Seraph (burning) Cherub and a Seraph (burning) Serpent is of course Satan, who is both a Cherub ("the annointed covering Cherub" Ezekiel 28:14) and a Serpent ("the Serpent of old who is the Devil and Satan" Rev 12:9) 

πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον (face to face) in 1 Cor 13:12 - What does it mean?

1 Cor 13:12 states:

For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face (πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον prosopon pros prosopon); now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known.

This is a very enigmatic verse, I think possibly one of the verses Peter had in mind when he said of Paul's Epsitles:

"...in which are some things hard to understand..." 2 Peter 3:16

My opinion is that the key to unlocking the passage is to understand what πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον (prosopon pros prosopon) means.

This phrase is a direct translation from the the Hebrew פנים אל־פנים (panim al panim) which occurs in these OT verses:

ויקרא יעקב שם המקום פניאל כי ראיתי אלהים פנים אל פנים ותנצל נפשי
So Jacob named the place Peniel (פניאל face of God), for he said, “I have seen God face to face (פנים אל פנים panim al panim), yet my life has been preserved Gen 32:30

וירא גדעון כי מלאך יהוה הוא ויאמר גדעון אהה אדני יהוה--כי על כן ראיתי מלאך יהוה פנים אל פנים
When Gideon saw that he was the angel of the LORD, he said, "Alas, O Lord GOD! For now I have seen the angel of the LORD face to face (פנים אל פנים panim al panim)." Judges 6:22

Thus πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον means "to see God face to face" i.e., to discern perfectly God's nature, will, and purposes (Thayer's Lexicon).

So how can we "discern perfectly God's nature, will, and purposes"?

The key is in the previous three verses of 1 Cor 13:

9Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away. 9For we know in part and we prophesy in part; 10but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away. 11When I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason like a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things.

This passage means that the temporary spiritual gifts of prophecy, tongues, knowledge, etc. which were only needed to confirm the New Testament revelation (Heb 2:1-4) would be done away when "the perfect" comes. The perfect is the completed canon of scripture, Old Testament and New Testament.

Thus with the completed canon we have the potential to see God πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον (prosopon pros prosopon) פנים אל פנים (panim al panim) or face to face, to know him fully, just as fully as we have been known by Him (and He is omniscient)--because He has made full and complete revelation of Himself through his completed canon of scripture, the Bible.

Additionally, this is the same thought Peter is expressing here:

For by these He has granted to us His precious and magnificent promises, so that by them you may become partakers of the divine nature... (2 Peter 1:4) 

Why Islam must be rejected

Yet another reason to reject Islam:

And on the Day when He will gather them together and that which they worship besides Allah [idols, angels, pious men, saints, 'Iesa (Jesus) - son of Maryam (Mary), etc.]. He will say: "Was it you who misled these My slaves or did they (themselves) stray from the (Right) Path?" Surah 25:17 (Muhsin Khan)

Jesus accepted worship:

Matthew 14:33 “Then those who were in the boat worshiped him (Jesus), saying, “Truly you are the Son of God.”

John 9:38 “Then the man said, ‘Lord Jesus, I believe,’ and he worshiped him.”

Jesus never corrected these people

The three wise men also worshipped Jesus at his birth:

After coming into the house they saw the Child with Mary His mother; and they fell to the ground and worshiped Him. Matt 2:11

This is protrayed as a righteous act.

 

If you carefully study the Bible, OT and NT, you will see that Jesus is God, the Son, the second member of the Trinity, who became flesh, died for our sins, and then ascended back to heaven and is seated on His throne at the right hand of the Father. This is the only possible conclusion. Islam says that Jesus is just a prophet. This is simply incorrect. The Biblical data do not bear this out. This is why Islam must be rejected.

Plural of Intensification in Hebrew

[quote=ooTRAV1Soo;57297579]The Hebrew word "Eloh'im" is the word most often translated to "God" in the English bible. The ending "im" in Hebrew is a masculine majestic pluralization of words, meaning not to say that a word is plural literally in numbers, i.e 2, 3 or more gods, but pluralization to show respect to God.[/quote]

There is no difference in form between plural of number and plural of intensification (this is the more correct term in Hebrew--but same concept that you are stating). It's simply a matter of subjective interpretation to determine whether a plural of number or a plural of intensification is in view.

Let's take an example and then move to אלהים (Elohim).

His grave was assigned with wicked men, Yet He was with a rich man in His death (במתיו bemotav), Because He had done no violence, Nor was there any deceit in His mouth. Isaiah 53:9

In this verse מות (mavet) is plural (construct state) but is translated as singular because "deaths" would not make sense in the context. The plural is being used to intensify the word death.

However, with אלהים (Elohim), you certainly cannot make the assumption that this is plural of intensification. God revealed himself as a singularity that is also a plurality in the Old Testament (see this paper for an excellent presentation of the Doctrine of the Trinity in the Old Testament: The Doctrine of the Trinity in the Old Testament By Nathan Kassulke).

Thus to me, it is much better to take אלהים (Elohim) as a plural of number. Thus, the very beginning of God's self revelation in the Bible: בראשית ברא אלהים (bereshet bara elohim) presents God via a plural noun אלהים (Elohim) used with a singular verb ברא (bara) because God is a Singularity that is also a Plurality.

Linguistic reasons for the Trinity

Gorgoll2 wrote: Thank you, JW. But, wouldn´t speaking about more than one god wouldn´t be polytheism?

From a linguistic standpoint (since this is a language forum) I find that the only way to accurately categorize the Biblical data is via the Doctrine of the Trinity. This is because the data say that God is a plurality but also a singularity.

For example, John 1:1 says that the Word was πρὸς τὸν θεόν (pros ton theon) "with God" i.e., distinct from God but also that θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος (theos en o logos) "the Word was God" i.e., one and the same with God.

Another example is that in John 10:30 Jesus said:

ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν (ego kai ho pater hen esmen)
I and the Father are one

On the surface, this appears to conflict with the Great Shema of the Jews in Deut 6:4:

שמע ישראל יהוה אלהינו יהוה ׀ אחד ׃(shema yisrael Yahweh eloheinu Yahweh echad)

Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD is one

and this apparent contradiction, God being one yet more than one, is why the Jews were outraged at Jesus' statement:

31The Jews picked up stones again to stone Him.
32Jesus answered them, “I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?”
33The Jews answered Him, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God.”

They simply did not understand how the "one" in John 10:30 could be reconciled with the "one" in Deut 6:4. This is because this truth, God as "a singularity that is also a plurality" was a μυστήριον (mysterion - mystery) in the Old Testament--it was there but not understood--until it was fully explained in the New Testament, the clearest statement of which is Matt 28:19:

πορευθέντες οὖν μαθητεύσατε πάντα τὰ ἔθνη, βαπτίζοντες αὐτοὺς εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος,

Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,

This is how I see the Biblical data on the subject coming together from a linguistic standpoint. Of course others with strong linguistic skills in the Greek and Hebrew would (and have) disagree(d) with me but they seem, at least to me, to be engaging in eisegesis rather than exegesis, i.e., they are letting their theology influence their hermaneutic, rather than simply interpreting from the Hebrew and Greek based on linguistic consideration alone.

After all. the very first verse of the Bible starts out representing God linguistically as a "singularity that is also a plurality" via a plural noun with a singular verb:

בראשית ברא אלהים
bereshit bara elohim
In the beginning God created

Elohim is a plural noun
bara is in the singular

La Naturaleza Pecadora

Amerykanka wrote:

No nego lo que la corazon humana puede volverse muy perversa. Hay muchos ejemplos de esto en la Biblia. Solo digo que la alma no es intrinsecamente mala. Cuando Dios estuvo a punto de crear a Adan, dijo, "Hagamos al hombre a Nuestra imagen, conforme a Nuestra semejanza." (Genesis 1:26) Si estamos hechos a la imagen de Dios, no podemos ser intrinsecamente malos, porque Dios es bueno. Dios dijo esto antes de la Caida, pero el pecado de Adan no destruyo esta semejanza, todavia la desfiguro. Vivimos en un estado caido, pero no estamos privados de todo lo bueno.

Dios mismo crea cada alma. Las almas no pueden venir de nuestros padres. Dios no puede y no quiere crear nada que es malo, asi que nuestras almas no son intrinsecamente malas.
*********************************************************************************
El problema con el hombre no es el alma sino la naturaleza pecadora:

Porque así como en Adam todos mueren 1 Corintios 15:22

Porque como por la desobediencia de un hombre los muchos fueron constituídos pecadores Romanos 5:19

Entre los cuales todos nosotros también vivimos en otro tiempo en los deseos de nuestra carne, haciendo la voluntad de la carne y de los pensamientos; y éramos por naturaleza hijos de ira, también como los demás. Efesios 2:3

Y es esta naturaleza pecadora que es heredado de nuestros padres (y no el alma como has correctamente dicho tu).

En este respecto:

Thantophobia wrote:

Los humanos son malos. Si hay algo malo que puede ser hecho, es hecho.
******************************************************************************
Malos como:

..adulterio, fornicación, inmundicia, disolución, idolatría, hechicerías, enemistades, pleitos, celos, iras, contiendas, disensiones, herejías, envidias, homicidios, borracheras, banqueteos, y cosas semejantes á éstas. Gálatas 5:19-21

los malos pensamientos, muertes, adulterios, fornicaciones, hurtos, falsos testimonios, blasfemias. Mateo 15:19

fornicación, inmundicia, molicie, mala concupiscencia, y avaricia, que es idolatría Colosenses 3:5

Por eso, la declaración de Jeremías:

Engañoso es el corazón más que todas las cosas, y perverso; ¿quién lo conocerá?
Jeremías 17:9

Tatoo Marks

JW, this is striking to see indeed. But what does the Hebrew mean? Something with tattoo? Obviously in Hebrew "to tattoo" is meaning also "to destroy, ruin." Were you speaking of this ambiguity?

It's from Leviticus and it is a prohibition against tattoos. Very clever, JW.

________________________________________________________________________

Yes, it is specifically from Leviticus 19:28 which reads: ושרט לנפש לא תתנו בבשרכם וכתבת קעקע לא תתנו בכם אני יהוה

You shall not make any cuts in your body for the dead nor make any tattoo marks on yourselves: I am the LORD.


כתבת (ketobet) is another hapax legomenon in the Hebrew Bible which means: an impression, inscription, mark. The Septuagint translators rendered this as γράμμα meaning letters or writing.

Thus כתבת קעקע (ketobet qaqa) = tatoo marks. There are two reasons for the prohibition:

1. In the ancient world, such tatoo marks were used in the worship of idols with the symbol and/or the name of the idol imprinted on the body.

2. This was considered as a disfigurement of the body, and thus of God's workmanship, since Man was created in the image of God.

I find it generally very useful to drill down on fashions and trends and investigate their origins. Many of them go back to ancient times and often have links to practices with which I do not wish to be associated.קעקע (qaqa) is a hapax legomenon (a word occurring only once) in the Hebrew Bible which means: a mark branded in the skin, incision, imprint, tatoo, mark. The Bilingual Jewish Elders tranlsated this word as στίγμα (stigma) in the Greek of the Septuagint and this word has been taken directly into English "stigma."

Doctrine of the Trinity in the OT - Continuned

Originally posted by islamispeace

This is from Numbers, not Deuteronomy.

Yes, that was a misquoted reference. Thanks for the correction.

 

Originally posted by islamispeace

And as with the above verse, this is just a random verse which has been twisted to say something which it is not saying.

 

Neither reference is alone conclusive, only more bricks in the building of the Doctrine of the Trinity in the Old Tesatment.

 

Originally posted by islamispeace

What is more interesting is that the word used to refer to God in these verses is not "Elohim" but rather "Adonay", which is further proof that "Elohim" has not relation to a trinity, if the trinity concept is even present in those verses and in the OT (which it is not). 

 

No, you are incorrect, it is  יהוה  (Yahweh) in both the Numbers and the Isaiah passages.

Originally posted by Egwpisteuw

The Hebrew Bible also mentions the Spirit of God:

 

ורוח אלהים מרחפת על פני המים

 

and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters Gen 1:2

 

and a Son who will be called אל גבור  (El Gibor = Mighty God) עמנו אל (Immanu El = God with us) Isaiah 9:6 and 7:14 

 

Originally posted by islamispeace

More misquotes.  The verse from Isaiah 9 is again out of context, as the verse also says that the child will be called "Eternal Father" which in no way applies to Jesus as he was never referred to with that title.

  

This is a straw man. In Hebrew the word שמ (Shem) means more than just name or title it means: fame, renown, memorial, repute, an appellation, as a mark or memorial of individuality; by implication honor, authority, character.

 

It's a multifaceted word and it means that the Son would be אביעד (Abi-Ad). Now אב (Ab) not only means Father in a literal sense but also in a figurative sense as the producer or generator. Thus  אביעד (Abi-Ad) is the one who fathered or generated or produced eternity. Of course this is the same God mentioned in Genesis 1:1--but is here a Son.

 

This is what Jesus was saying in John 8:28:

 

εἶπεν αὐτοῖς Ἰησοῦς· ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 8:58

 

Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am." John 8:58

 

Jesus was born after Abraham died yet He existed before Abraham was born. This is because he fathered, produced, generated eternity prior to his incarnation as a Son and Child.

 

Jesus is the Son in Isaiah 9:6

 

(Sorry, the quote system is not working thus I put all my comments in bold)

Doctrine of the Trinity in the OT - Point 5

Let's move on to Point 5 in the Doctrine of the Trinity in the Old Testament:

 

5. Micah 5:2:

 

ואתה בית לחם אפרתה צעיר להיות באלפי יהודה--ממך לי יצא להיות מושל בישראל ומוצאתיו מקדם מימי עולם

 

But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Too little to be among the clans of Judah, From you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, From the days of eternity Micah 5:2

 

The "Me" in this verse is God and the "One" is also God since he is said to be eternal. However they are clearly two different persons, right?

Edited by Egwpisteuw - Yesterday at 4:02pm

God's Word Cannot be Corrupted

Originally posted by islamispeace

Both you and your "800 pound gorilla" are suffering from denial.  Any person with an ounce of reason will see that you are chasing your own tail and making a fool out of yourself.  You know in school when you take an exam and leave a question blank, you get the question wrong!  You have failed to refute the arguments I have raised and instead simply repeat the same tired, old arguments. 

 

This is just more ad hominem abuse and idle words. It's nothing more than a tacit admission that you can't answer my argument which I have reduced to down to an ultra-succint formulation:

 

An inccoruptible God can only produce an incorruptible word.

 

Originally posted by islamispeace

the contradictions in the Bible

 

If the Bible has contradictions then you and I both need to become Atheists becasuse:

 

Jesus says the Bible has no contradictions:

 

ου δυναται λυθηναι η γραφη ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 10:35

 

the Scripture cannot be broken John 10:35

 

and the Quran specifically confirms this statement:

 

He has sent down upon you, [O Muhammad], the Book in truth, confirming what was before it. And He revealed the Torah and the Gospel.

 

The Blood of Christ and the OT Blood Sacrifices

Originally posted by islamispeace

Originally posted by Sign*Reader


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_BoltzThanks but no thanks

This is ad hominem abuse:

 

Ad hominem abuse (also called personal abuse or personal attacks) usually involves insulting or belittling one's opponent in order to invalidate his argument, but can also involve pointing out factual but ostensible character flaws or actions which are irrelevant to the opponent's argument. This tactic is logically fallacious because insults and even true negative facts about the opponent's personal character have nothing to do with the logical merits of the opponent's arguments or assertions.

 

By resorting to such a logically fallacious tactic you are simply making a tacit admission that you cannot answer my argument:

 

All the blood of the innumerable pure innocent animals sacrificed over all those centuries under the OT Levitical system are the type and THE BLOOD of THE LAMB, Jesus Christ, the pure and sinless one, who was crucified and died is the antitype. These two historical facts go hand in glove and are a stunning refutation of Islam. 

The Incorruptibility of God's Word - 2

Originally posted by Sign*Reader

Originally posted by Egwpisteuw

Why would I ever entrust a whimsical, capricious, ne'er-do-well god, whose word he allowed to be corrupted by man, with the salvation of my soul?

The debate is about about you spamming Ibn Hazm... 

What assurance do I have that he will not also allow my soul to be lost and corrupted the same way he allowed his word to be lost and corrupted?

Again you are not addressing the subject...

Sign*Reader, the subject is a theological debate. Ibn Hazm posited the Doctrine of the Corruption of God's Word. This doctrine is the cornerstone of Islamic Apologetics (1).  Without this doctrine, Islam cannot be defended since the Quran, on which it is based, says it agrees with the Bible (Surah 3:3), but clearly, upon examination, does not.

Ibn Hazm did not think through the logical implications of his doctrine. A god who cannot keep his word is a god who cannot be trusted--just as a man who cannot keep his word is a man who cannot be trusted.

I entrust my soul to my Great God and Saviour Jesus Christ, the Mighty God of Isaiah 9:6 who became the God With Us of Isaiah 7:14 and the God Whose Word endures forever in Isaiah 40:8

(1) Let me take you to school on the following error that you made:

Originally posted by Sign*Reader

There are no Muslim apologetics; it is  Christian phenomena, the premise is false!

a·pol·o·get·ics   /əˌpɒləˈdʒɛtɪks/ Show Spelled

the branch of theology concerned with the defense or proof of christianity.

The English word Apologetics is from the Greek απολογία (apologia) meaning a verbal defense, a speech in defense, a reasoned statement or argument. Thus the more correct definition is as follows:

the discipline of defending a position (usually religious) through the systematic use of reason.

The Incorruptibility of God's Word

Originally posted by Sign*Reader

I had been on the fence on this thread_______________ LOL

Welcome to the party Sign*reader. Hop on the bus with Islamispeace and let me take you to school.

 

First in your long epistle you neglected to adress the 800 pound Gorilla in the room (as did Isalmispeace):

 

Originally posted by Egwpisteuw

So now let's hone in. I keep repeating myself because you keep ignoring the 800 pound gorilla in the room:

 

Originally posted by Egwpisteuw

God is incorruptible thus His Word  must also be incorruptible.

 

This is the only valid theological Doctrine of God's Word

 

Why would I ever entrust a whimsical, capricious, ne'er-do-well god, whose word he allowed to be corrupted by man, with the salvation of my soul? What assurance do I have that he will not also allow my soul to be lost and corrupted the same way he allowed his word to be lost and corrupted?

 

No sir. Such a god is not God.

 

The God of the Bible said that His name endures forever:

 

יהוה שמך לעולם

Your name, O LORD, endures forever (Psalm 135:13)

 

and that His Word is even more sure than His name:

 

הגדלת על-כל-שמך אמרתך

you have magnified your word above all your name (Psalm 138:2)

 

Thus the conclusion in Isaiah:

 

יבש חציר נבל ציץ ודבר אלהינו יקום לעולם 

The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever. Isaiah 40:8

 

repeated by Peter:

 

τὸ δὲ ῥῆμα κυρίου μένει εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα

BUT THE WORD OF THE LORD ENDURES FOREVER 1 Peter 1:25

 

Now such a God I can entrust with the salvation of my soul.

 

הללו־יה 

αλληλουια

Hallelujah!

The Trinity in Genesis 1:1

[QUOTE=honeto]God as One is probably the oldest teachings dating back to the Old Testament times[/QUOTE]

The oldest teaching is that God is a singularity that is also a plurality. This is from the very first verse in the Bible:

 

בראשית ברא אלהים

 

In the beginning God created (Gensis 1:1)

 

אלהים Elohim (God) is a plural noun

 

ברא Bara (created) is a singular verb

 

ראשית (reshit) begininng is from ראש (rosh) meaning head, top, height, chief, best.

 

Thus the highest teaching about God is contained in the first three words of the Bible in which He presents Himself as a singularity that is also a plurality.

The Trinity in the Hebrew Bible

Originally posted by islamispeace

I am saying that authoritative sources clearly disagree with you.  The source I used is a Jewish one (not Christian or Muslim) which makes sense since Hebrew is the language of the Jews.

I would advise extreme caution about accepting Jewish secondary sources on Biblical Hebrew interpretation. I qualify this with the statement with the fact that I am a Christian Zionist and love the Jewish people, but Jewish sources many times mix Theological interpretation in with their exegesis. For example, their translation of Genesis 3:15 and Isaiah 7:14 which totally distort the Hebrew of those passages.

 

Originally posted by islamispeace

You obviously ignored the source I quoted which gives a specific example from the Bible of a monarch who uses the plural of majesty, and this monarch was an Israelite!  Are you saying the Bible is wrong?  2 Samuel 16:20 says:

 

"Absalom said to Ahithophel, “Give us your advice. What should we do?”"

 

Absalom was the king of Israel, was he not?  Since the answer is yes, this refutes your claim that "such was not the usual style of monarchs in the ancient East".

 

"The plural form ’elohim is used not only of pagan "gods" (e.g., Ex. 12:12; 18:11; 20:3), but also of an individual pagan "god" (Judg. 11:24; II Kings 1:2ff.) and even of a "goddess" (I Kings 11:5)." [Names of God]

So clearly, the word can be used to refer to a single "individual" as in the case of the god Chemosh (Judges 11:24).  Commenting further on the use of ""Elohim", the Encyclopedia Judaica states:

"The odd fact that Hebrew uses a plural noun to designate the god of Israel has been explained in various ways. Some scholars take it as a plural that expresses an abstract idea (e.g., zekunim, "old age" ne ’urim, "time of youth"), so that ’Elohim would really mean "the Divinity." More likely, however, it came from general Canaanite usage. In the el-Amarna Letters Pharaoh is often addressed as "my gods [īlāni ’ya] the sun-god."" [Ibid.]

As you can see, there is no mention of any possibility of the word being interpreted as referring to a triunity.  This is simply a Christian interpolation, which is just not grounded in fact.

You are avoiding the facts rather than explaining them. I submit again that the God presented in the Hebrew Bible is a singularity that is also a plurality. For example, take Genesis 18:1-2:

Now the LORD appeared to him (Abraham) by the oaks of Mamre, while he was sitting at the tent door in the heat of the day. 2When he lifted up his eyes and looked, behold, three men were standing opposite him

The Lord יהוה (Yahweh) appeared as three men. Again you see the jump between singularity and plurality. This is because God is a singularity that is also a plurality.

The example of water is also not sufficient since no matter what form it is in (solid, liquid or gas), it is still chemically the same (H2O).  How is this similar to the trinity?  Jesus (the "son") was flesh and blood.  The Father and the Holy Spirit are clearly different.  Therefore, the water example as a defense of the trinity is not logical.

God is presented in the Hebrew Bible as a singularity that is also a plurality.

Originally posted by islamispeace


I would also rather discuss the other point I raised as it has everything to do with this topic.  It has major implications on your claim that the trinity even exists in the Hebrew Bible, as if your claim is true, it would show an inconsistency between the two books, and one that I think is impossible to reconcile.

If you want to switch topics go ahead. I summarize this topic, to wit, the Trinity in the Hebrew Bible as follows: 

Originally posted by islamispeace


Clearly, "logic" to you is something entirely different to the rest of us.  Making silly comparisons of the trinity to an egg or water is the epitome of desperation.  How is an egg similar to the trinity?  An egg is something that is created.  The triune God was not created.  Additionally, if you really want to get technical, then you would see that an egg is much more than simply a shell, yolk and albumen (egg white).  Underneath the shell, there are actually two membranes.  There is also the germinal disc which serves as the pathway for sperm during fertilization [Georgia Egg Commission].

What I am giving you is examples from mathematics and nature that show "three yet oneness."  You are taking the analogies of water and the egg too far.  The same water can take on three different forms: liquid, solid, gas (not sure if steam is actually a gas but you get my point) and I can take a hard-boild egg and easily separate it into shell, yoke, and white. The equations 1 + 1 + 1 = 3 and 1 x 1 x 1 = 1 are both mathematically true.

Originally posted by islamispeace


Well, the reason for that is that the OT was written by different people.  The Documentary Hypothesis presents strong evidence that the different usages of the names of God points to different authors.  In fact, two of the anonymous authors have been designated "Jahwist" and "Elohist".  The presupposition that the different usages mean that God must be a trinity is baseless and hence nothing more than a non-sequitur.

Now you are simply copping out. The documentary hypothesis and form criticism certainly do not present anything that can be termed "strong evidence." They are nothing more that academic myths based on nothing but pure speculation.

The antecedent of the "we" in 2 Sam 16:20 ( "us" is not there in the Hebrew) is verse 15:

Then Absalom and all the people, the men of Israel, entered Jerusalem, and Ahithophel with him.

 

Absalom was with his cabinet, his advisors, when he asked Ahithophel the question in verse 20:

 

Give counsel among you what we shall do-This is the first cabinet council on record, although the deference paid to Ahithophel gave him the entire direction of the proceedings. Jamieson Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary 2 Sam 16:20

 

Thus the we in verse 20 refers to Absalom and his cabinet advisors.

Originally posted by islamispeace


Again, you are making completely unsupported statements.  The Encyclopedia Judaica has an interesting entry on the word "Elohim":

You are making my point exactly here.  Zero in on the phrase "The odd fact that Hebrew uses a plural noun to designate the god of Israel." It is indeed a very odd fact. One that cannot be ignored. It is the same with the word for water מימ (mayim) and heaven שמימ (shamayim)  which can be either plural or singular. אלהים (Elohim) is a singularity that is also a plurality.