Deuteronomy 32:39 saying "there is no god with me" means that we are supposed to have a relationship with God and not have idols. The context of that verse is not about the Trinity.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
How can a Jew reject Jesus as the Messiah?
- Thread starter ayin
- Start date
-
- Tags
- jesusisyhwh
Deuteronomy 32:39 saying "there is no god with me" means that we are supposed to have a relationship with God and not have idols. The context of that verse is not about the Trinity.
dybmh
ויהי מבדיל בין מים למים
If the relationship is compatible with the OT, it would need to skip over any plurality in favor of "there is no God with me". This is what's meant by Deuteronomy 6:4. 6:4 ends with the word "one." That's the goal: To know that God is one. It's a deep concept.
"There is no God with me" means that we should make God a part of our life and not have other gods before Him. God isn't looking for perfect people, but people who are going to seek Him and strive.
dybmh
ויהי מבדיל בין מים למים
I agree that "There is no God with me" = "not have other gods before Him", if Him is God, not Jesus.
Trying to understand the Trinity is like an ant understanding the internet.
dybmh
ויהי מבדיל בין מים למים
"There is no God with me" is easy to understand. Even the Hebrew is easy.
Deuteronomy 4:35 Interlinear: Thou, thou hast been shewn it, to know that Jehovah He is God; there is none else besides Him.
Just because something is easy to understand doesn't mean it's true.
For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. Isaiah 55:8
rosends
Well-Known Member
So you are saying that God's thoughts aren't YOUR thoughts? And your ways aren't God's ways?
Great, thanks.
God is beyond human understanding. Can an animal understand physics?
dybmh
ויהי מבדיל בין מים למים
If the words are in the OT "there is no God with me" and they are easy to understand, then it's foolish to discuss God as a Trinity in the OT.
Isaiah 55:8 is irrelevant.
Here's your original claim:
This is false ^^.
What else would you like to discuss?
"There is no God with me" is about there is only one true God who is holy and just and loving. There is no god of this or god of that.
I'm saying that we can't deny that the Trinity is in the Old Testament just because we can't fully understand it. I can't fully understand why God sent the Messiah to die for every single person, because people can't love like God can.
Tzephanyahu
Member
Haha, no my friend I was just joking with you. Of course I believe they exist!
Fascinating works.
I highly recommend you check out 2 Esdras though. Not just for the allusions of Messiah but also because of the detail of how Scripture came to be after the Yahudah's return from Babylon - including the formation of an early canon.
As I understand it, Susanna may have been deliberately left out due to the controversial depiction of the leaders in the book. It didn't paint them a great light at all, and so may have been "edited" out along with other books that didn't harmonise with the Pharisaic standpoint. This is a slippery slope. Removing a second book will be twice as easy as removing the first. Unfortunately, this is still happening today.
One could assume that, but should they?
Which do you think is wiser? Assessing a book for yourself, using your acute powers of analysis, or assuming someone else has done so adequately before? If we assume real infallible geniuses have gone before us, then what new ground can we ever hope to break? With that assumption, over time wouldn't we slowly and consistently become reductive in our own opinions and experiences?
It's another one worth checking out. Even if it's as approached as a fiction novel.
rosends
Well-Known Member
So you can't affirm the trinity because you don't understand it, and can't deny unity because you don't understand it. As a matter of fact, you can't do much of anything related to God and religion because, as you say, you can't understand it. If you wish to be consistent, you need to stop commenting because you don't understand anything.
I understand the concept of unity I just don't think it's in the Bible because the term echad is also used about a husband and wife.
dybmh
ויהי מבדיל בין מים למים
"Father+Son+Spirit" contradicts "There is no God with me"
rosends
Well-Known Member
Sorry, but according to Isaiah 55, you don't. Thanks for trying.
dybmh
ויהי מבדיל בין מים למים
Then why doesn't the OT describe God as Gods plural? And when it does, it's talking about idol worship?
Examples:
1 Kings 18:24
Jeremiah 2:28
Daniel 3:18
The OT denounces Gods and divine plurality.