Isaiah 53 and Human Sin

[101G]

I quoted it. Maybe YOU should read it a first time.

I did, and "provide" can be used. because it is for a future event, which one prepare for, meaning to provide for it. and this LOOK or see open a door, oh How Great the Lord God ... JESUS is in the OT. God LOOKED, or SEEN, (FORE-KNEW), that he will "PROVIDE", ... HIMSELF, not PROVIDE ... "FOR" himself, but provide "HIMSELF" as the sacrificial LAMB, (the ARM of God, Isaiah chapter 53). notice Lamb ... "OF", "OF", "OF", "OF", God which is God, in the ECHAD, a Plurality of his own self as H430 אֱלֹהִים 'elohiym (el-o-heem') clearly states, in Flesh bone and BLOOD. thanks rosends for opening that door on Provide, LOOK, or SEE, this just add to what I have already said before. God "provided" a Lamb, his OWN ARM as Isaiah clearly states in chapter 53, per Isaiah 63:5 .

rosends, if you would have never brought that up I might would have just ignored it. but now this is more ammunition to prove that the Lord Jesus is the plurality of God in Flesh and bone. thanks old buddy........ (smile). see how God used you to allow 101G to see this connecting revelation that the Lord Jesus is the ECHAD of God in a Plurality of FIRST, and LAST, meaning in Ordinal designations.

Ordinal First, title, Father, "LORD", CREATOR, and MAKER of all things, per Isaiah 44:24. Ordinal Last, title, "Lord", Son, REDEEMER, and SAVIOUR, of all that he created, and Made before...... yes, the plurality of God in the ECHAD, Oh this is too easy.

I got to give it to you and especially stack exchange in bringing the Lotd Jesus out in the OT.

101G.

 

[101G]

"Why have you forsaken me???" is NOT accepting the will of God. What you have brought does not change this simple fact.

ERROR, he came to do his WILL, which by the way is his's own will. see, understand, "ME" is not God's the Father the Ordinal Fill WILL, (Smile) Oh my.
now, did the Father, the Ordinal First, forsake him, presently on the cross, or permanently, if it was his will, yes or No? .... (smile).... your answer please. and that will put an end to that nonsense.

101G..

 

[rosends]

dose it not identifies "God?" 3. (specifically, in the plural, especially with the article) the Supreme God (i.e. the all supreme).

so my question still stands.

101G.

No, it identifies God as 1 (as shown through the verb). So your ERROR still stands.

 

[rosends]

I did, and "provide" can be used. because it is for a future event, which one prepare for, meaning to provide for it. and this LOOK or see open a door, oh How Great the Lord God ... JESUS is in the OT. God LOOKED, or SEEN, (FORE-KNEW), that he will "PROVIDE", ... HIMSELF, not PROVIDE ... "FOR" himself, but provide "HIMSELF" as the sacrificial LAMB, (the ARM of God, Isaiah chapter 53). notice Lamb ... "OF", "OF", "OF", "OF", God which is God, in the ECHAD, a Plurality of his own self as H430 אֱלֹהִים 'elohiym (el-o-heem') clearly states, in Flesh bone and BLOOD. thanks rosends for opening that door on Provide, LOOK, or SEE, this just add to what I have already said before. God "provided" a Lamb, his OWN ARM as Isaiah clearly states in chapter 53, per Isaiah 63:5 .

rosends, if you would have never brought that up I might would have just ignored it. but now this is more ammunition to prove that the Lord Jesus is the plurality of God in Flesh and bone. thanks old buddy........ (smile). see how God used you to allow 101G to see this connecting revelation that the Lord Jesus is the ECHAD of God in a Plurality of FIRST, and LAST, meaning in Ordinal designations.

Ordinal First, title, Father, "LORD", CREATOR, and MAKER of all things, per Isaiah 44:24. Ordinal Last, title, "Lord", Son, REDEEMER, and SAVIOUR, of all that he created, and Made before...... yes, the plurality of God in the ECHAD, Oh this is too easy.

I got to give it to you and especially stack exchange in bringing the Lotd Jesus out in the OT.

101G.

"can be used"? Sure, so can "tomato." I showed you the answer that pointed out that it was wrong. You don't want to read that part. You like the part that says you "can" if you want because it is an interpretation you like. Good luck with that.

 

[101G]

No, it identifies God as 1 (as shown through the verb). So your ERROR still stands.

U always ERROR, God is a ECHAD of ONE which is a plurality, not a Yachid which means single.

so you're reproved..... try again.

101G.

 

[101G]

"can be used"? Sure, so can "tomato." I showed you the answer that pointed out that it was wrong. You don't want to read that part. You like the part that says you "can" if you want because it is an interpretation you like. Good luck with that.

you showed your ERROR in the Hebrew Language... LOL, LOL, LOL. now, let's see if you ERROR again, Deuteronomy 6:4 "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:"

is the term "ONE" here an ECHAD, yes or No?

ECHAD means a single entity but made up of more than one part.

Yachid which means single, no parts.

101G.

 

[rosends]

U always ERROR, God is a ECHAD of ONE which is a plurality, not a Yachid which means single.

so you're reproved..... try again.

101G.

no, as has been explained to you many times, echad is "one". Since you don't know Hebrew, this is lost on you. Yachid means "unique" or "only" or "alone." Same root, different word. According to you, Jacob is a "plurality" of a man.

 

[101G]

no, as has been explained to you many times, echad is "one". Since you don't know Hebrew, this is lost on you. Yachid means "unique" or "only" or "alone." Same root, different word. According to you, Jacob is a "plurality" of a man.

so, is ONE a ECHAD in Deuteronomy 6:4 or a Yachid, your answer please.

101G

 

[rosends]

so, is ONE a ECHAD in Deuteronomy 6:4 or a Yachid, your answer please.

101G

One in 6:4 is one. The Hebrew word for one is echad.

Ps 25:16 uses Yachid

פְּנֵה־אֵלַ֥י וְחׇנֵּ֑נִי כִּֽי־יָחִ֖יד וְעָנִ֣י אָֽנִי׃
Turn to me, have mercy on me,
for I am alone and afflicted.

 

[101G]

One in 6:4 is one. The Hebrew word for one is echad.

Echad, correct, and do not an ECHAD consist of two or more parts? and is not two or more a plurality, yes or no?

101G.

 

[rosends]

Echad, correct, and do not an ECHAD consist of two or more parts? and is not two or more a plurality, yes or no?

101G.

No, echad means one. Does "one" consist of two or more parts, making "one" a plurality" yes or no?

And remember, "one" day has 24 hours. and "one" person has many atoms. So is "one" a plurality? Yes or no?

 

[101G]

No, echad means one. Does "one" consist of two or more parts, making "one" a plurality" yes or no?

And remember, "one" day has 24 hours. and "one" person has many atoms. So is "one" a plurality? Yes or no?

ERROR, listen to the definition, Echad is the Hebrew word for one, but more precisely it means a single entity but made up of more than one part. There is another Hebrew word from the same root – Yachid which means single. The meaning of Echad (more than one part) is a confirmation of the Hebrew word Elohim which is translated as God.

this was taken from Kehila News The meaning of the word Echad - One » Kehila News Israel.

101G.

 

[rosends]

ERROR, listen to the definition, Echad is the Hebrew word for one, but more precisely it means a single entity but made up of more than one part. There is another Hebrew word from the same root – Yachid which means single. The meaning of Echad (more than one part) is a confirmation of the Hebrew word Elohim which is translated as God.

this was taken from Kehila News The meaning of the word Echad - One » Kehila News Israel.

101G.

So you can't answer my question. And you support your position by quoting a Christian website? That's hilarious.

Echad article

 

[101G]

So you can't answer my question. And you support your position by quoting a Christian website? That's hilarious.

Echad article

I did and let younsite you chose tell you also, this is from your site, "The Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament has the following information on the word echad:
This word occurs 960 times [there exists a discrepancy on the number of occurrences between authors] as a noun, adjective, or adverb, as a cardinal or ordinal number, often used in a distributive sense. It is closely identified with yahad "to be united" and with ro'sh "first, head,"

and "UNITED" means, made one, combined, or joined together, Which means more than ONE PART is used to make the ONE. now you're reprove there

so, ECHAD, according to your web site means more than "one" as a single as in Yachid. see how easy it is to disprove you.

but your web site said something that confirms what I have been saying all along. " as a cardinal or ordinal number," BINGO, ordinal Number, according to Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Dictionaries of the Greek and Hebrew Testaments, ONE in Deu. 6:4 is
H259 אֶחָד 'echad (ech-awd') adj.
1. (properly) united, i.e. one.
2. (as an ordinal) first.
[a numeral from H258]
KJV: a, alike, alone, altogether, and, any(-thing), apiece, a certain, (dai-)ly, each (one), + eleven, every, few, first, + highway, a man, once, one, only, other, some, together.
Root(s): H258

definition #2 says it all and ORDINAL

God is an Otrdinal First, and Last, which is Jersus

again, thanks old buddy your web site prove valable to me.

and i will prove that God is a Plurality in a ECHAD of First and Last, which the Lord Jesus is.

101G.

 

[rosends]

I did and let younsite you chose tell you also, this is from your site, "The Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament has the following information on the word echad:
This word occurs 960 times [there exists a discrepancy on the number of occurrences between authors] as a noun, adjective, or adverb, as a cardinal or ordinal number, often used in a distributive sense. It is closely identified with yahad "to be united" and with ro'sh "first, head,"

and "UNITED" means, made one, combined, or joined together, Which means more than ONE PART is used to make the ONE. now you're reprove there

so, ECHAD, according to your web site means more than "one" as a single as in Yachid. see how easy it is to disprove you.

but your web site said something that confirms what I have been saying all along. " as a cardinal or ordinal number," BINGO, ordinal Number, according to Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Dictionaries of the Greek and Hebrew Testaments, ONE in Deu. 6:4 is
H259 אֶחָד 'echad (ech-awd') adj.
1. (properly) united, i.e. one.
2. (as an ordinal) first.
[a numeral from H258]
KJV: a, alike, alone, altogether, and, any(-thing), apiece, a certain, (dai-)ly, each (one), + eleven, every, few, first, + highway, a man, once, one, only, other, some, together.
Root(s): H258

definition #2 says it all and ORDINAL

God is an Otrdinal First, and Last, which is Jersus

again, thanks old buddy your web site prove valable to me.

and i will prove that God is a Plurality in a ECHAD of First and Last, which the Lord Jesus is.

101G.

you seem to have some trouble reading: " It is closely identified with yahad "to be united""

notice how "closely related" is not the same as "same"? In English, "only" is closely related to "one" but they are different words.

All the connections that you then invent equating two words that are related but not the same are therefore wrong.

Then you go back to your errors about echad as an ordinal. As I mentioned in that other boondoggle of a thread, it IS an ordinal number in very specific cases and sentence structures. (Yom echad la'omer -- the first day of the omer). The description of God, though, is not of that structure.

All of your misquotes, inventions and outright errors don't become right when you repeat them or put them in colors.

 

[101G]

you seem to have some trouble reading: " It is closely identified with yahad "to be united""

LOL, LOL, LOL, close is no cigar.
Now, according to Deuteronomy 6:4 "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:" one here is the ECHAD of God in a plurality. the definition according to Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Dictionaries of the Greek and Hebrew Testaments, ONE here is
H259 אֶחָד 'echad (ech-awd') adj.
1. (properly) united, i.e. one.
2. (as an ordinal) first.
[a numeral from H258]
KJV: a, alike, alone, altogether, and, any(-thing), apiece, a certain, (dai-)ly, each (one), + eleven, every, few, first, + highway, a man, once, one, only, other, some, together.
Root(s): H258

many IGNORTANLY accept definition #1. but they ERROR in the term "UNITED", or as some say "Compound unity". a compound shows two or more coming together as well as UNITED, which means joined together.

well God is not separate, nor Divided, meaning in a compound, or in a unity.

so, what is the correct answer? "Ordinal" as the definition #2 states. and as rosends web site also states. LISTEN again,

The Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament has the following information on the word echad:
This word occurs 960 times [there exists a discrepancy on the number of occurrences between authors] as a noun, adjective, or adverb, as a cardinal or ordinal number, often used in a distributive sense. It is closely identified with yahad "to be united" and with ro'sh "first, head,"

101G agrees with the Ordinal definition, for the "HEAD" which indicate "First", just as the (AHLB), Ancient Hebrew Lexicon of the Bible states.
scripture, Isaiah 41:4 "Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he."

so, the "FIRST" is the Father, as the head indicates. but also notice, the "FIRST" is WITH the Last. This is the ECHAD of Deuteronomy 6:4.for he said .... "I AM he" and I is "ONE" person.

now follow 101G rosends. Isaiah 48:12 "Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first, I also am the last." the term also means in addition to. this is the ECHAD as said of Deuteronomy 6:4, but it's one in the SAME "ONE" person.

since unity, and a compound unity is out then, as your web site said and 101G dictionary definition states, this ECHAD of God is in Ordinal Designations. well how do you know this 101G? because of the term "Beginning" here in Isaiah 41:4 and the BEGINNING in Genesis 1:1

first here in Isaiah 41:4,
Beginning: H7218 רֹאשׁ ro'sh (roshe) n-m.
the head (as most easily shaken), whether literal or figurative (in many applications, of place, time, rank, itc.).
[from an unused root apparently meaning to shake]
KJV: band, beginning, captain, chapiter, chief(-est place, man, things), company, end, X every (man), excellent, first, forefront, (be-)head, height, (on) high(-est part, (priest)), X lead, X poor, principal, ruler, sum, top.

now, "Beginning" in Genesis 1:1
H7225 רֵאשִׁית re'shiyth (ray-sheeth') n-f.
1. the first, in place, time, order or rank.
2. (specifically) a firstfruit.
[from the same as H7218]
KJV: beginning, chief(-est), first(-fruits, part, time), principal thing.

now go back and look at the definition in
Isaiah 41:4,
Beginning: H7218 רֹאשׁ ro'sh (roshe) n-m. the head (as most easily shaken), whether literal or figurative (in many applications, of place, time, rank, itc.).
Root(s): H7218

conclusion: God is a "ECHAD" of Ordinal First, (Father), head, and Ordinal Last, (Son) in the designation of "PLACE", "TIME", "ORDER", " or "RANK".

and the "Lord" is God, who is the Son, the LAST, the Ordinal Last. scripture, Psalms 110:1 "A Psalm of David. The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool." WE ALREADY KNOW THAT THE "LORD" ALL CAP IS THE "FIRST". is not the "Lord" Jesus the Last who is God also? yes, God, Psalms 110:5 "The Lord at thy right hand shall strike through kings in the day of his wrath."
"Lord" here is the same "Lord" in verse 1. now watch the definition of "Lord" in verse 5,
H136 אֲדֹנָי 'Adonay (ad-o-noy') n-m.
1. (meaning) Lord (used as a proper name of God only).
2. (person) Adonai, The Lord God of Israel (which is actually “Yahweh God of Israel” - see Exodus 5:1 and 120 other occurrences).
[am emphatic form of H113]
KJV: (my) Lord.
Root(s): H113

definition #2. says it all. the Lord is the God of ISRAEL as well as the "LORD", because the LORD and the Lord is the CHAD of God the same "ONE" person

and Jesus is the "Lord" in flesh. meaning he is the Last, for God in flesh is "Lord", for Lord, with the cap "L" means MASTER, divine as the definition in Psalms 110:1 states. now as MASTER, the divine one, scripture, John 13:13 "Ye call me Master and Lord: and ye say well; for so I am. " and "MASTER" is human or Divine, as "Lord" here in 110:1 states. there it is.

JESUS is God almighty as "FIRST" and "LAST", not three separate persons no, but one person..... "SHARED" in flesh, hence "LORD" OT, Spirit, title Father. "Lord", NT, Flesh, title Son.

this is too easy not to understand. it answer all the questions in the bible old and new. especially to my friend, dybmh. yes, your forsook question. it is answered.

101G.

 

[rosends]

LOL, LOL, LOL, close is no cigar.
Now, according to Deuteronomy 6:4 "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:"

look at you, starting with a mistake. How unexpected. The verse doesn't say "one LORD".

one here is the ECHAD of God in a plurality.

you have yet to answer the question I asked about the nature of the word "one." Then you assert something about "plurality" because it supports your theology. It isn't supported by the text, though. The rest of your rambling repetition makes the same mistakes (I like how you say that people who accept the first definition are ignorant...that's hilarious).

many IGNORTANLY accept definition #1. but they ERROR in the term "UNITED", or as some say "Compound unity". a compound shows two or more coming together as well as UNITED, which means joined together.

well God is not separate, nor Divided, meaning in a compound, or in a unity.

You still don't understand when and how echad is ordinal (and how that doesn't apply in this case) and you still don't get that the phrase "I am the first" doesn't use the word "echad." So instead you keep jumping around, combining words in English and claiming that that makes any difference to the Hebrew. A word that is connected in idea with another word becomes, in your fantasy, idetical with that word. It is like a parade of ignorance and you are in the front, marching to the beat of a non-existent drummer. You just keep on making mistakes and not reading or dealing with the myriad pieces of information which prove you wrong. You just throw in some colors, some lols and some "ERROR" statements and then repeat the same mistakes.

 

[101G]

@rosends,
only one thing 101G can say about, for, or to u.... right now. thanks for the web site. for with that information, 101G can now comfortably challenge more Jews now from the Jewish prospective. Using their own language.

understand, I just LOVE your single narrow-minded view of the Hebrew language. which is easily defeated instead of a diverse Jewish language mind........ .... (smile). when one has a NARROW mind defeat is eminent.

so, you have no creditability with the Hebrew language as I'm concerned.

101G

 

[rosends]

@rosends,
only one thing 101G can say about, for, or to u.... right now. thanks for the web site. for with that information, 101G can now comfortably challenge more Jews now from the Jewish prospective. Using their own language.

understand, I just LOVE your single narrow-minded view of the Hebrew language. which is easily defeated instead of a diverse Jewish language mind........ .... (smile). when one has a NARROW mind defeat is eminent.

so, you have no creditability with the Hebrew language as I'm concerned.

101G

And I have to thank you because you have made it abundantly clear and obvious to any and every one that you don't read, are driven by a singular and flawed approach, and have serious intellectual limitations when it comes to Hebrew and English. You barely know English and your Hebrew understanding is non-existent so your entire enterprise lacks all reliability and credibility and now everyone knows it. Good work and thanks for the laughs.

 

[101G]

to all my Jewish friends, and alike.
The ECHAD of God, a better prospective. instead of "one" being Joined, united, or merged into one in order to be a "ONE" ECHAD. consider this. what if "ONE" was ...... SHARED ..... equally as the ANOTHER of ONE's OWN-SELF. not a division, nor a separation, but the EQUAL SHARE of one's owns self.

think about it, if two join or come together, then the two are already separate in order to make "ONE". meaning the two already esisted before becoming "ONE". if so then one would have two separate Gods already in existence..... think about it. for if the two already existed to JOINED or unite, then you have two Gods already, else you have two equally half that is God ..... already. and that want fly.

so my Hebrew and Jewish friends you just might want to re-think your position on God as a ECHAD. remember Isaiah 48:12 "Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first, I also am the last."

101G.