Expert: Dean Gade - 10/30/2010

Question
QUESTION: Dear Mr. Gade

Holy greetings to you, and I am trusting that everything is well with you. I write concerning those two words in my subject box. There seems to be a clash of beliefs, especially with the first word, for while some claim that the plurality of Elohim lies in attributes others say it infers a trinity of persons in the Godhead. The similar situation exist with echad, where one is expressly declared by some to mean an absolute modalistic one while others disagree to the contrary by stating thhat it means a composite one and not a unitary one. What is your position on these two words? Thanks in anticipation of your reply. The Lord bless you.

David

ANSWER: David,

My position is that our God is one God; the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

There is no human logic nor earthly example of how this can be, but this ONE who is THREE is what our God has revealed to us.  He tells us from Genesis to Revelation that we are to live by faith in Him and we have no other clear source of knowledge about Him to beleive in other than His Word

On these matters I rest in the following passages and others like it:

Ps 130:    
O Lord, my heart is not lifted up,
my eyes are not raised too high;
I do not occupy myself with things
too great and too marvelous for me.
2 But I have calmed and quieted my soul,
like a child quieted at its mother's breast;
like a child that is quieted is my soul.
3 O Israel, hope in the Lord
from this time forth and for evermore.
RSV

Deut 29:29
29 The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may follow all the words of this law.
NIV

The "Shema" was not only written in Deut.6:4 but also quoted by Jesus Himeself in Mk.12:29 where the original Greek translation of what Jesus said was: "eis estin" for the Hebrew "echad".  And those two words are the very common ones for the primary numeral and "is".
The "him" of "Elohim" is the common ending of nouns to indicate that it is a plural in the Hebrew.

There are abundant passages of Scripture to tell us that Jesus is God, the Alpha and the Omega, the Aleph and the Tav, Who sent the Holy Spirit of God to be with us now.

It has always been the case that we Christian theologians get into arguements about interpreting the Bible whenever we think we know enough that we can turn to the "majesterial use of reason" instead of the "ministerial use of reason".
We are not going to prove or disprove what we call (as a theological construct) "the Trinity" to either those who do believe...or those who do not believe that God is ONE, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

May the peace of God from His love be with you.

---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------

QUESTION: Dear Mr. Gade

Thanks for our clear answer on this matter, but I have seen reason for a follow-up. I have not studied any originial language, but i can't help but to make observations in religios teaching. Now, you mentioned that the 'him' in elohim, is plural. Now, what is the nature of this plurality. Can one reasonably assume that this plurality lies in persons and not attributes of the same elohim? Why I had to ask this question, is because, the trinitarian position does not deny that Jesus is elohim, yet, Jesus is one one person.
Also, in light of Eph 4 vs 4-6, what it the greek word/words for 'one' and what is/are the true numerical definition/s of it/them? Thanks again as I await your reply.

David

ANSWER: David,

First, I must apologize for mistakenly putting and "h" on the ending. It is only the "im" that is necessary to make Hebrew words plural.

As to the nature of the plurality of Elohim, it is not evident in the ending alone.  The interpretation would depend on the context around the word and the interpretation of the translator. The  interpretation of the plural here (by those who have interpreted it) includes such things as the "royal plural";   as when royal kings spoke of themselves as "we" even though they were speaking only of themselves as the ruler and last word over many under their rule.

But the "im" is just a very common ending as when, in our language, we add an "s" to make a word into a plural.

When Jesus spoke of Himself as God it was most often a hidden code and the code was the name Yahweh and not Elohim.  What He did was to begin a sentence with "I, I am.....the good shepherd, the light of the world, the bread.."  etc.   This (ego eimi)was being redundant but it reflects to the name, Jehovah: "I am who I am".  Many of the religious rulers knew what He was saying and thus accused Him of making Himself "equal with God".

This may sound a little far out but Jesus meant to speak to some so only they could hear...or not hear:

Matt 13:10-14
10 The disciples came to him and asked, "Why do you speak to the people in parables ?"
11 He replied, "The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. 12 Whoever has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. 13 This is why I speak to them in parables :
"Though seeing, they do not see;
though hearing, they do not hear or understand.
14 In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah:............
NIV

Matt 11:25-26
25 At that time Jesus said, "I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. 26 Yes, Father, for this was your good pleasure.
NIV

Matt 21:45-46
45 When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard Jesus' parables, they knew he was talking about them. 46 They looked for a way to arrest him, but they were afraid of the crowd because the people held that he was a prophet.
NIV

On the other hand, I believe this is why in many cases the Lord uses very simple and common language to speak to us.  But you asked about Eph. 4:    here we do have two different Greek words used for "one".
The common word "heis/hen" is like our number "one" and does speak of unity in this case.  However, Paul also uses "mia" when he writes of our "one hope" and our "one faith". "Mia" does mean "one" but also is used as "first".
I never noticed that before now and I do not yet know why God gave Paul this word instead of the others in this parapraph. "Mia" is not uncommon either and is used in Matt. 5:18-19 letter of the Law,  Matt.19:5-6 marriage, et ali.

This is some of the real fun of studying God's Word.  If you have a "Strong's Exhaustive Concordance" (or "Youngs") it will show you all the passages which use "mia" and "hein" and you may be able to discern WHY they are used in the places where they are.
I can tell that you would enjoy such types of word studies.

God bless you.

---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------

QUESTION: Thanks again for such a profound answer. The study of the word is really interesting. Now, to the OT. I have heard that elohim can be applied to an individual idol god eg Dagon. How do you explain the 'im' in elohim in such a context? Where the majestic plurality is concerned as with a King who speaks in the plural by saying 'we'. How are we sure that the plurality of elohim in Isa 44:6 is not a plurality of majesty exclusively and not plurality of persons? The then known world in the NT times was under gentile rulership, which explains why the NT was written in greek. Otherwise it would have been written in Hebrew. What would be the meaning of elohim in 1Tim 3:36 if it was written in Hebrew? Thanks again for your prompt and timely response. I await your reply. The Lord bless you.

Answer
Looking at Isa. 44:6, I can only say that we may have a bad translation.
If you look at verse 8 the word used for the singular "You are witnesses that there is no GOD besides me"   "elowah" is used.  This is the singular from which Elohim comes. (This is according to "Strongs" lexicon). The translation for v.6 should be "There are no gods besides me".

Isa. 45:6 states the same thing but there it is rightly translated as "besides me there is none besides me" and "none" is seen as plural.  

Why 44:6 has elohim translated as a sigular, I do not know UNLESS, perphaps the original manuscripts have used elowah and not elohim.

As I mentioned last time, some translators HAVE viewed the plural as a royal plural instead a true plural.  Taking the Bible as being inspired by God and looking at the context of the whole Bible when it speaks of God, I have no alternative but to believe that God is One and is the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

You asked about I Tim. 3:36....but I don't have that in my Bible.  Whatever the place may be in the Bible, I can probably answer by saying that I can't know the answer as to what the Hebrew would be since it is not in the Hebrew and I am cautious not to speculate.