English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Moses is also referred to as Elohim in Exodus 7:1. Does this mean that there were three of him?

Dagon is also referred to as Elohim in ISam5:7. Does this mean that Dagon was a trinity?

Nehemiah 9:18 uses the term Elohim to describe the molten calf that was made by the Jews when they left Egypt. How many calves did they have? Were there three, or were there three persons in the calf?

There are many other verses that use the term Elohim to refer to a singular person or idol, with no hint of plurality to it.

Why is it that when the same term is used for God, that it suddenly means that there are three of them?

2007-12-29 13:22:10 · 7 answers · asked by Southern Apostolic 6 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

7 answers

there is NO TRINITY
Never was...never will be

Elohim def=GOD

NO PLURELS

JUST GOD

2007-12-29 13:30:04 · answer #1 · answered by hghostinme 6 · 4 0

’Elo·him′ means, not “persons,” but “gods.” So those who argue that this word implies a Trinity make themselves polytheists, worshipers of more than one God. Why? Because it would mean that there were three gods in the Trinity. But nearly all Trinity supporters reject the view that the Trinity is made up of three separate gods.

The Bible also uses the words ’elo·him′ and ’elo·heh′ when referring to a number of false idol gods. (Exodus 12:12; 20:23) But at other times it may refer to just a single false god, as when the Philistines referred to “Dagon their god [’elo·heh′].” (Judges 16:23, 24) Baal is called “a god [’elo·him′].” (1 Kings 18:27) In addition, the term is used for humans. (Psalm 82:1, 6) Moses was told that he was to serve as “God” [’elo·him′] to Aaron and to Pharaoh.—Exodus 4:16; 7:1.

Obviously, using the titles ’elo·him′ and ’elo·heh′ for false gods, and even humans, did not imply that each was a plurality of gods; neither does applying ’elo·him′ or ’elo·heh′ to Jehovah mean that he is more than one person, especially when we consider the testimony of the rest of the Bible on this subject.

2008-01-04 10:00:10 · answer #2 · answered by Just So 6 · 2 0

While I am not a Christian, I agree that the non-Trinitarian view of God seems more sensible. You might want to look at the non-Trinitarian versions of Christianity.

I would suggest looking into these Christian churches which are all non-Trinitarian: Jehovah's Witnesses, Christadelphians, Bible Students, American Unitarian Conference, Arian Catholic Church, Oneness (or Apostolic) Pentecostal, UU (Unitarian Universalist) Christian Fellowship, etc. Swedenborgianism (look up Swedenborg on Wikipedia) was also non-Trinitarian. I also believe the churches that sprang from Herbert Armstrong and retained his teachings are also non-Trinitarian (or unitarian - small "u").

While it is true that LDS Mormons do not believe in the Trinity, they have a doctrine of Godhead and eternal progression which is more polytheistic than monotheistic.

2008-01-04 10:00:10 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I just did a search on Elohim. The translation that seemed to make the most sense was also the weirdest I could find. It says that Elohim means "those who came from the sky."
Read it at this sight:

2008-01-04 10:00:10 · answer #4 · answered by Porch 4 · 0 0

There isn't a trinity. Never mentioned in the Bible, not even once! It was made up at the council of Nicea. Google it. Very confusing document.

2008-01-04 10:00:10 · answer #5 · answered by LDS Mom 6 · 3 1

"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one." (1 John 5:7)

2008-01-04 10:00:10 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

There is no trinity. You are right, they are wrong.

2008-01-04 10:00:10 · answer #7 · answered by paula r 7 · 4 1

fedest.com, questions and answers