Can a person not believe in the God of Abraham and be a Christian?

[Muffled]

You would be wrong. They are quite different. The only thing they really have in common is the belief that Jesus is God.

I believe you can try to explain the difference.

 

[Muffled]

Why can't you have it both ways?

One is under the law. Do not eat is a command of the Law.

Jesus statement is under grace He fulfilled the Law nailing it to the tree in His sacrifice. So, the law was taken out of the way.
The old Testament is all about the Law of God.
The New Testament is all about the Grace of God.

Enjoy,

Do I have to explain how it is impossible for something to be and not be at the same time? Of course on a wavering path once could follow the law one day and live by grace the next or partially fulfill the law while ignoring other parts.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I believe that is not my definition of trinitarianism and the one you listed is idolatry and false.

What's your definition?

Here's the Wiki version, which is basically in line with what I said:

The Christian doctrine of the Trinity (Latin: Trinitas, lit. 'triad', from Latin: trinus 'threefold')[1] is the central doctrine concerning the nature of God in most Christian churches, which defines one God existing in three, coeternal, consubstantial divine persons:[2][3] God the Father, God the Son (Jesus Christ) and God the Holy Spirit, three distinct persons (hypostases) sharing one essence/substance/nature (homoousion).[4]

Trinity - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I believe you can try to explain the difference.

In Modalism, the Father Son and HS are all the same ONE PERSON. The three names simply refer to different modes of that person. It's no different than me being a teacher, a wife, and a mother. Or from H2O having three forms: ice, water, and steam. According to Modalists:
Father: The mode in which God is seen as the creator and sustainer of the universe.
Son: The mode in which God is manifested in Jesus , who embodies God's will and purpose in a human form.
Holy Spirit: The mode in which God interacts with believers and the world, often associated with guidance, comfort, and empowerment.

In Trinitarianism, there are THREE DISTINCT PERSONS. They all share the same single essence, the same substance.

Thus, a Modalist will say, "Jesus is God the Father," a Trinitarian will say, "Jesus is not God the father."

If you still have questions, here is a good Christian website that compares and contrasts the two theologies.

What is the difference between the Trinity theory and Modalism?

In Modalism, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are mere "modes" of how the one God interacts with creation. Like an actor on a stage, God could appear sometimes as the Father, other

christianity.stackexchange.com

 

[IndigoChild5559]

1) Your message carries many theological implications and requires more expertise than I can offer, as my background is in traffic management and administration, not in language studies.

2) The birth of my daughter has taught me many lessons. Her mother comes from a different ethnicity, and at first, I would ask her to send me a "hi" on WhatsApp when she got home. In my culture, this means that upon arriving, she would send a message like: "Hi, I just got home, I'm safe, how are you?" However, she responded rather bluntly with just "hi," because in her culture, that's how things are—only what was asked for, nothing more.

3) I'll post the translation of a verse, and then I'll see a rabbi's commentary on it.

εκ του ουρανου | from the heaven ακουστη εγενετο | was heard became η φωνη αυτου | the voice of him παιδευσαι σε | to instruct you και επι της γης | and upon the earth εδειξεν σοι | showed to you το πυρ αυτου το μεγα | his great fire και τα ρηματα αυτου | and his words ηκουσας εκ μεσου του πυρος | you heard from the midst of the fire. דברים (Devarim) Deuteronomy 4:36.

מִן־הַשָּׁמַ֛יִם הִשְׁמִֽיעֲךָ֥ אֶת־קֹלֹ֖ו לְיַסְּרֶ֑ךָּ וְעַל־הָאָ֗רֶץ הֶרְאֲךָ֙ אֶת־אִשֹּׁ֣ו הַגְּדֹולָ֔ה וּדְבָרָ֥יו שָׁמַ֖עְתָּ מִתֹּ֥וךְ הָאֵֽשׁ׃
דברים (Devarim) Deuteronomy 4:36. (35)

מִן־הַשָּׁמַ֛יִם – "From heaven" הִשְׁמִֽיעֲךָ֥ – "He made you hear" אֶת־קֹלֹ֖ו – "His voice" לְיַסְּרֶ֑ךָּ – "to discipline you" וְעַל־הָאָ֗רֶץ – "and on earth" הֶרְאֲךָ֙ – "He showed you" אֶת־אִשֹּׁ֣ו – "His fire" הַגְּדֹולָ֔ה – "the great" וּדְבָרָ֥יו – "and His words" שָׁמַ֖עְתָּ – "you heard" מִתֹּ֥וךְ הָאֵֽשׁ׃ – "from the midst of the fire." דברים (Devarim) Deuteronomy 4:36. (35)

TRANSLATION OF RASHI
35 has been shown to you. This term should be understood just as the Targum translates it: It has been shown to you.

"106. The verb הֶרְאֲךָ֙ is not conjugated in the causative hifil mode [‘you have shown’], but in the reflexive hitpa'el mode [‘it has been shown to you’]. If it were a causative verb, the Targum would have translated it as 'you have shown,' instead of 'it has been shown to you,' which is a reflexive Aramaic verb (Gur Arye ×, Mizraji). However, it is not really a hitpa'el verb, but a verb conjugated in the hofal mode, which has a passive meaning, sometimes similar to the reflexive. The pronunciation also indicates that it is a hofal verb, since even for Sephardim, the pronunciation is not har'eta, but hor'eta."


In the context of Deuteronomy 4:36, the Hebrew verb הֶרְאֲךָ (her'ekha) is indeed a complex form and can be translated in various ways depending on the grammatical conjugation.

As noted in the Rashi commentary referenced, this verb is not in the hifil (causative) form, where it would mean "you have shown." Instead, it is in the hofal form, which is passive, meaning "it has been shown to you" or "you were made to see." This passive form indicates that the action of revealing or manifesting was done by another party (in this case, God) to the recipient (Israel).

Thus, translating הֶרְאֲךָ as "manifested" would be accurate, as it conveys the idea that God actively revealed or made visible something significant (His fire and words). The verb implies that the people were made to perceive this revelation, but they were not the ones doing the showing.

To summarize:
- הֶרְאֲךָ in hofal means "it has been shown" or "it has been manifested."
- The use of "manifested" in translation captures the passive nature of the verb well, as the people were the recipients of God's manifestation rather than the agents.

However, I recognize, as I mentioned my daughter's example, that RASCHI does not use the word "manifest"

First, I want to say how very impressed I was at the quality of your reply. You really put in a lot of effort to provide a strong argument. I seldom get posts this good.

Despite that, I remain unconvinced. "It has been shown to you" or "you were made to see" just don't mean the same thing as "manifest." Similar? Sure. But different enough that I think it would be inappropriate to translate the verse using the word manifest.

I think we may have to simply agree to disagree on this. I have no problem with that.