Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
archangel_josh

'Elohim' does not mean 'God'

Recommended Posts

archangel_josh

Hello all,

Some of you may know that the word 'Elohim' appears in the original Jewish Bible many times. This word has been translated into the word 'God'. This is where we get our concept of the monotheistic 'God'.

However, we all know that 'Elohim' is a plural word. It therefore, cannot be translated into the singular 'God', because the singular of 'Elohim' is 'Eloha'.

For those people who still believe in God and debate the word 'Elohim', they will tell you that 'Elohim' is the family of God. It means God, Jesus, the angels etc.

This is wrong.

Look at Genesis 1:26 "Elohim said 'Let us make man in our image after our likeness'".

Now, if the family of God (God, the angels, Jesus) are all saying: "Let US make man in OUR image after OUR likeness" then this denote that God, Jesus and the angels all created human beings.

Ah, but then we're told that only God is the creator. He created the angels and Jesus and humankind. So the angels and Jesus can't have created mankind, which throws this arguement out the window.

The true meaning of 'Elohim', which is an ancient Hebrew word, is 'Those who came from the sky'. Its meaning has been lost due to this huge mistranslation.

In fact, the Bible is the first athiestic book, because nowhere does it refer to 'God'. It only talks about 'those who came from the sky'.

Another point I'd like to make is that where the name 'Yahweh' is meant to be (the name of the 'God' of Israel) most Bibles have 'The Lord' which is a singular word. This means that this single person, Yahweh, is metaphorically called 'the lord'. This means that this individual is the one in charge. He's the boss. He is known as 'God' to the Jews.

So then, why doesn't the Bible say: "In the beginning Yahweh created....."?

Because Yahweh didn't create. He was in charge of the creation, but he didn't create it all. It was Elohim. It was those who came from the sky who created life on Earth.

Responses?

-Josh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
bleach

Three persons make up God: Father is God, Son is God (Jesus), and the Holy Spirit is God. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are coexistent and coeternal. I'm not going to debate anything though as I see foolishness in man trying to refute it much less fully comprehend it.

Edited by bleach

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rosewin
However, we all know that 'Elohim' is a plural word. It therefore, cannot be translated into the singular 'God', because the singular of 'Elohim' is 'Eloha'.

...

The true meaning of 'Elohim', which is an ancient Hebrew word, is 'Those who came from the sky'. Its meaning has been lost due to this huge mistranslation.

To the first part that is not true. It is a plural word with a singular meaning. Hebrew does not have the same rules as English.

Elohim has plural morphological form in Hebrew, but it is used with singular verbs and adjectives in the Hebrew text when the particular meaning of the God of Israel (a singular deity) is traditionally understood. Thus the very first words of the Bible are bresh** bara elohim, where bara ברא is a verb inflected as third person singular masculine perfect. If Elohim were an ordinary plural word, then the plural verb form bar'u בראו would have been used in this sentence instead. Such plural grammatical forms are in fact found in cases where Elohim has semantically plural reference (not referring to the God of Israel). There are a few other words in Hebrew that have a plural ending, but refer to a single entity and take singular verbs and adjectives, for example בעלים (be'alim, owner) in Exodus 21:29 and elsewhere.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elohim#Hebrew_grammar

To the second part of the part I quoted what Hebrew sources do you have that claim Elohim means those who came from the sky? As far as I know those who speak Hebrew says it means God and is a plural with with a singular meaning to denote God. No translations should say Yahweh created either because that word for God was not even used until God revealed that name to Moses at the burning bush.

I also do not believe in the trinity because it is nowhere to be found in the Bible.

Three persons make up God: Father is God, Son is God (Jesus), and the Holy Spirit is God. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are coexistent and coeternal.

This is not found in the Bible.

Edited by Clovis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
greggK

It is the nature of God. Elohiym is the Nature of God. We were created in the image of God, AFTER God's Likeness. After everything that moves, flies, swims, crawls, eats grass, etc. was created, it was "Let US make man in OUR image after OUR likeness." Haven't we created our own wings, created our own fins, essentially 'become' God? Haven't we done exactly what the serpent said we would do? And haven't we proven what the bible says when Jehovah said to Noah after the flood and He smelled the sweet savour from the barbecue that 'man's thoughts are evil continually?' Man was created and the nature around us supports us. Male and female were created first by 'the' Elohiym. It was Jehovah (the Self-Existent), which is the name that Moses gave, that 'formed' male and female out of the dust of the ground and breathed the same breath of life as is in all other living creatures.

That is a logical assumption, though. If you take logic out of it does it make any sense?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bleach
I also do not believe in the trinity because it is nowhere to be found in the Bible.

This is not found in the Bible.

The word trinity is not found in the bible. But do you believe all three exist? According to the bible they do as they can be found mentioned. Which part are you disagreeing with?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rosewin
Deuteronomy 6:4 "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one.

Colossians 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

No I believe in the One True God whose name is Jesus. There are too many scriptures that show this. Such as the one where Jesus is the God who guided the Israelites in Exodus and Jesus is the creator and Jesus is the Alpha and Omega. I believe God is Jesus and the Holy Spirit but it is all One God and not three persons in one or any other configuration of the trinity. But I do not think God cares if we see Him as One or as a trinity. I just attempt to have a view that is biblically pure without any additives.

"Let US make man in OUR image after OUR likeness."

This is a very bad English translation. It should not say 'US'. It should be translated as singular for that is how the Hebrew views it.

Edited by Clovis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bleach
No I believe in the One True God whose name is Jesus. There are too many scriptures that show this. Such as the one where Jesus is the God who guided the Israelites in Exodus and Jesus is the creator and Jesus is the Alpha and Omega. I believe God is Jesus and the Holy Spirit but it is all One God and not three persons in one or any other configuration of the trinity. But I do not think God cares if we see Him as One or as a trinity. I just attempt to have a view that is biblically pure without any additives.

This is a very bad English translation. It should not say 'US'. It should be translated as singular for that is how the Hebrew views it.

I think you misunderstood what I was saying. Do I believe there are three Gods? No. Do I believe there is one God? Yes.

I'm NOT saying Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are PARTS of God. They are all complete and all God. I think your views are the same as mine on this matter or am I missing something? I agree that its not important we know how it works nor could we wrap our minds around it probably.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
greggK
"Let US make man in OUR image after OUR likeness."

This is a very bad English translation. It should not say 'US'. It should be translated as singular for that is how the Hebrew views it.

******************************

You cannot deny the fact that it has said that for perhaps hundreds of years. And it does not take mass media long to change the entire picture. The Gutenburg Bible was the first printed, I think. The Hebrews, the descendants of Eber, have all but disappeared.

H430

אלהים

'ĕlôhîym

el-o-heem'

Plural of H433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative: - angels, X exceeding, God (gods) (-dess, -ly), X (very) great, judges, X mighty.

H433

אלהּ אלוהּ

'ĕlôahh 'ĕlôahh

el-o'-ah, el-o'-ah

(The second form is rare); probably prolonged (emphatically) from H410; a deity or the deity: - God, god. See H430.

H410

אל

'êl

ale

Shortened from H352; strength; as adjective mighty; especially the Almighty (but used also of any deity): - God (god), X goodly, X great, idol, might (-y one), power, strong. Compare names in “-el.”

H352

איל

'ayil

ah'-yil

From the same as H193; properly strength; hence anything strong; specifically a chief (politically); also a ram (from his strength); a pilaster (as a strong support); an oak or other strong tree: - mighty (man), lintel, oak, post, ram, tree.

H193

אוּל

'ûl

ool

From an unused root meaning to twist, that is, (by implication) be strong; the body (as being rolled together) also powerful: - mighty, strength.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rosewin

I understand what you said and our views are not the same. You believe in three persons who make up one God but do not believe in three gods. That is a pretty standard view of the trinity though other's have different formulas. I believe just in One God and One God alone. There are no three persons in my view. God can work in different modes in my view so it is closer modalism.

linked-image

The above graphic is how many view the trinity.

linked-image

This is how I view God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rosewin
You cannot deny the fact that it has said that for perhaps hundreds of years. And it does not take mass media long to change the entire picture. The Gutenburg Bible was the first printed, I think. The Hebrews, the descendants of Eber, have all but disappeared.

If it has been translated wrong in English for hundreds of years then that is still bad translation. As used in Genesis 1:1 the world 'elohim' is a plural intensive with a singular meaning. The Hebrews understand it to be a singular meaning and so should we.

But will explains it better and here is an excerpt of his post where he does.

This has been confused among Christins for a long time. One can belive in the 'Trinity' if they want to. However, this passage is not about that. The word for "God" in this passage is "אלהים"; Elohim.(and all of the begining of Genesis, until the Gn 2.4, when the creation of mankind passage begins[more to this later if interested])

This word, whose root is the same as "Allah", is the most common word used for "God". It is, however, plural. This does not mean that it is not refering to one God. Though one could argue it. The word is used a few times in Scripture for "gods", "judges", and "mighty ones". However, in the most often used case, this is a plural word, with a singular meaning. This is very common in Hebrew. "מים"; mayim "Water", for instance is a plural word, yet with a singular meaning. "שׁמים"; shamayim-heaven, or heavans, is plural. But usually just means "sky".

The confusion for some, comes with that fact that one must pluralize any following adjectives, pronouns, etc. which correspond to this word in the plural form, though it be singular. Such as the word "life" (חיים-hayim) in Hebrew. A plural word. Good, and adjective "טוב" tov. So "a good life" is rendered "חיים טובים"-hayim tovim. If you didn't understand Hebrew grammar, but just read it literally with an English understanding, it would look like "lives goods" or "good lives". But they would be incorrect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
greggK

Nobody can say 'There are no birds' because they're in the sky every day, you see them.

You can draw pictures all day long of birds because you see them.

Everybody agrees what a bird looks like because you see them every day.

But what cannot be agreed upon is what God is.

Nobody can draw a picture and say 'This is what God is' because that may be what God isn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rosewin

Going by the Hebrew alone the word 'elohim' has a singular meaning even if it has a plural intensive. If you want to believe in a different nature of God that is your definite right but it should not be based on the word elohim as used in Genesis 1:1.

Edited by Clovis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
bleach
I understand what you said and our views are not the same. You believe in three persons who make up one God but do not believe in three gods. That is a pretty standard view of the trinity though other's have different formulas. I believe just in One God and One God alone. There are no three persons in my view. God can work in different modes in my view so it is closer modalism.

linked-image

The above graphic is how many view the trinity.

linked-image

This is how I view God.

I see now. If you don't mind how would you explain this?

John 14:28

28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.

-Would He call Himself greater than Himself? Jesus calls Him Father. He is going unto the Father.-

Matthew 27:46

46 About the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice, "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?"—which means, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

-Is He speaking to Himself?-

Maybe I'm just not understanding your view clearly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rosewin

Well for the John 14 scripture let us take a look at more of the chapter.

John 14:26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.

Remember that God has revealed Himself to mankind using different names. To moses He was 'I AM' and also Yahweh. These are His revelations to whoever He chose to reveal Himself too but once He does it is for all to know the names He chooses to go by. In the above scripture we see that the Spirit will be sent by the Father in Jesus' name. So the Spirit is Jesus in my view. God is also Spirit are there are many verses that attest to this. A simple search of all the scriptures with Spirit then searching those for God will show many cases where God is Spirit. Is the Holy Spirit different from that Spirit?

John 14:6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. 7 If you had known me, you would have known my Father also. From now on you do know him and have seen him."

Here it says no one goes to the Father except through Jesus but then He turns around and says if you know Jesus you then know the Father and if you see Jesus you see the Father. It is equating them as One and the same.

John 14:8 Philip said to him, "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us." 9 Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'?

Right after saying that Philip still did not get it and was like OK lulz now show me God then, pull Him out your hat like a bunny at a magic show, OK so maybe Philip was not saying all that but he was thinking along similar lines. Jesus replied with 'do you not recognize me Phillip?' to paraphrase. Jesus even gets snippy at the end there and is like bobbing His head going nuh uh 'Show us the Father?'. The sarcasm is practically dripping off the page.

John 14:10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in me does his works. 11 Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, or else believe on account of the works themselves.

Again Jesus is saying the Father and Him are in each other. While Jesus was on Earth the Father dwelt in Him because it was simply God Himself choosing to come down in the flesh. This goes back to in the beginning was the Word and the Word was God and the Word was made flesh etc...

John 14:12 "Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I am going to the Father. 13 Whatever you ask in my name, this I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14 If you ask me anything in my name, I will do it.

God here again reveals Himself by the name of Jesus. He is Jesus, He is Yahweh, He is the One.

Here is a very long post I made about the Oneness of God. Take a peek if you want. But as I said God does not care how we view Him as long as we love Him and allow Him to dwell in us. This trinity vs oneness has nothing to do with the main message of Salvation.

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum...t&p=2259016

Edited by Clovis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bleach

Thank you Clovis, I understand a little more why you believe as you do and I can respect it.

However, I can't say I've changed my mind about the trinity concept.

Matthew

16 As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and lighting on him. 17 And a voice from heaven said, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased."

Here I see three persons acting at the same time (Note: "at that moment"). Jesus rising from the water, Holy Spirit descending and lighting Him, and God from Heaven says, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased".

Anyway, I think this is fitting:

Isaiah 55

8 "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways," declares the LORD.

9 "As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GrymKryst

First of all all those who debate this are just trying to justify their own false  beliefs Abraham built an alter to a bull god hence the reason for the four horns and why would he follow a god that asked him to sacrifice his son if he didn't believe it and Moses got mad cause they built a calf and not a full grown bull and also god provided a RAM not a lamb to Abraham they all worshiped "pagan" gods just like the majority of any country believes in the belief of the god they were raised in and El means bull study your history and Hebrew and don't read the lies and what you want to believe Moses version of history was written after the fact and Incorporated stories and beliefs from other cultures and religions just like any other politician today or president/leader who wants control over the population and lastly if human sacrifice is so horrible than why do you follow on that celebrates it ie father asking for his sons death 

 

Edited by GrymKryst

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jodie.Lynne
26 minutes ago, GrymKryst said:

First of all all those who debate this are just trying to justify their own false  beliefs Abraham built an alter to a bull god hence the reason for the four horns and why would he follow a god that asked him to sacrifice his son if he didn't believe it and Moses got mad cause they built a calf and not a full grown bull and also god provided a RAM not a lamb to Abraham they all worshiped "pagan" gods just like the majority of any country believes in the belief of the god they were raised in and El means bull study your history and Hebrew and don't read the lies and what you want to believe Moses version of history was written after the fact and Incorporated stories and beliefs from other cultures and religions just like any other politician today or president/leader who wants control over the population and lastly if human sacrifice is so horrible than why do you follow on that celebrates it ie father asking for his sons death 

 

Apparently, you disbelieve in the existence of punctuation.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not A Rockstar
4 minutes ago, Jodie.Lynne said:

Apparently, you disbelieve in the existence of punctuation.

but he does believe in the resurrection....

… at least (of ten year old topics) :D 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jor-el
On ‎16‎-‎05‎-‎2008 at 1:26 PM, Rosewin said:

If it has been translated wrong in English for hundreds of years then that is still bad translation. As used in Genesis 1:1 the world 'elohim' is a plural intensive with a singular meaning. The Hebrews understand it to be a singular meaning and so should we.

But will explains it better and here is an excerpt of his post where he does.

 

It hasn't been translated wrong, that is why the equivalent word used in the translation is singular.

Just like the word "sheep".

That said though, there are some places in the Bible where the term is used in the plural... :)

אֱלֹהִים נִצָּב בַּעֲדַת־אֵל בְּקֶֶרב אֱלֹהִים יִשְׁפֹּט׃

God stands in the divine council; in the midst of the gods he passes judgment.

Edited by Jor-el

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XenoFish

10 years a dead thread. This is necromancy.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jmccr8
5 hours ago, XenoFish said:

10 years a dead thread. This is necromancy.

jmccr8

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps

Interesting the OP says:  "The true meaning of 'Elohim', which is an ancient Hebrew word, is 'Those who came from the sky'.

The Sumerians of the oldest known civilization have the term "Anunnaki" with the exact same meaning, "Those who came down from the sky". Also, the Jews say Adam was the first man. The Sumerians say that Adamu was the first genetically modified man.

Why is this significant...? The Jews cribbed Genesis from the Sumerians, so it seems. Also, the House of Judah is divided into two parcels, Judea and Samaria. I don't know if there is a connection with Samaria and Sumeria but we do know that the Sumerians had to flee with the rising tides. Quite possibly they ended up  all over the Levant.

And it looks like they brought their religion with them.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk

anim_cube.gif.23f7d74375668b2c503e110d51ea70d7.gif

I like to use this simple gif to represent how I view the Trinity.  I agree that Elohim is a plural form with a singular meaning, i.e. the cube.  Why would that be?  But as you can see, the shadow of the cube can have three forms.  We humans cannot see the cube as it emanates from a different realm, but we can see its shadow and how it interacts with this world.  The first shadow, that of a square would be Yahweh.  Rotating 1/4 turn on either axis gives a rectangle which is Jesus.  Rotating it again another 1/4 on the other axis gives a hexagon or the Holy Spirit.  So is this three entities or three representations of the same entity?  Hence, this is why there is a plural word with singular meaning.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Gremlin

Im not a christian, but I've always thought of it this way...

Think of a cup on the sea-shore....

The ocean is massive, too big to visualise. 

The water is the spirit.

Christ is the cup that the spirit fills.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
odas
On 11/12/2018 at 11:46 PM, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

Interesting the OP says:  "The true meaning of 'Elohim', which is an ancient Hebrew word, is 'Those who came from the sky'.

The Sumerians of the oldest known civilization have the term "Anunnaki" with the exact same meaning, "Those who came down from the sky". Also, the Jews say Adam was the first man. The Sumerians say that Adamu was the first genetically modified man.

Why is this significant...? The Jews cribbed Genesis from the Sumerians, so it seems. Also, the House of Judah is divided into two parcels, Judea and Samaria. I don't know if there is a connection with Samaria and Sumeria but we do know that the Sumerians had to flee with the rising tides. Quite possibly they ended up  all over the Levant.

And it looks like they brought their religion with them.

 

 

The more we find out about the Sumerians the more obvious it gets that the OT is a copycat of something much older. The Hebrews only adjusted the story for their purposes, then christians for their, muslims for their and so on and on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.