Is the OT polytheistic?

[sthack99]

sthack



I don't believe that's the common take on this, if I have the source passage right. The passage refers, according to common Christian theology, to man made in God's image. (I'm not claiming with the powers.) It referred to Adam.

That all makes sense, until you take into consideration that he made man (Adam) in "our" image, not "his" image. Who makes up "our"? Whenever I ask Christians, they say "our" represents the Trinity.

[ALIHAYMEG]

Something else.....I know Christians say that when God says "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness", he's referring to the Trinity. But how can that be? Since Jesus hadn't been born yet, the Trinity didn't exist (or would have just been a duo).

The only verse in the entire text of the Bible that plainly states the doctrine of the "Trinity" doesn't appear in any fragment or scroll before 1522AD. It is known in textual circles as the "Comma Johanneum". The rest of the 2 verses is original while the Comma was added obviously to support the doctrine of the Trinity.

(with the Comma in bold print):
5:7 "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 5:8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one."

[sthack99]

The only verse in the entire text of the Bible that plainly states the doctrine of the "Trinity" doesn't appear in any fragment or scroll before 1522AD. It is known in textual circles as the "Comma Johanneum". The rest of the 2 verses is original while the Comma was added obviously to support the doctrine of the Trinity.

(with the Comma in bold print):
5:7 "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 5:8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one."

So basically what you're telling me is, when someone says ""our" means the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost", they really don't know what they are talking about...

[ALIHAYMEG]

So basically what you're telling me is, when someone says ""our" means the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost", they really don't know what they are talking about...

They are victims of indoctrination just like the rest of us. We all have some institution that we cling to with religious fervor.

[sthack99]

They are victims of indoctrination just like the rest of us. We all have some institution that we cling to with religious fervor.

I'm sure glad I never caught this "fervor".

[Jack]

I'm not sure how Jesus got into this debate. The OP references the Old Testament, not the new. The concept of the trinity is strictly New Testament. There's no evidence in the Old Testament to suggest that "our" or "gods" refers to a triune godhead. The only question I see is what other gods could the writers of the books of the Old Testament been thinking of when they used those terms.

[lsbskins1]

I'm not sure how Jesus got into this debate. The OP references the Old Testament, not the new. The concept of the trinity is strictly New Testament. There's no evidence in the Old Testament to suggest that "our" or "gods" refers to a triune godhead. The only question I see is what other gods could the writers of the books of the Old Testament been thinking of when they used those terms.

Oh, just the Gods that the early Jews took for granted as existing. The idea was to worship "their" God and not someone else's God. It is plain from the text. It is also plain from the fact that they had so many different names for God. See, they liked to kind of "merge" him with the Gods of locals they occupied over time.

Shaddai, El, El Shaddai, El Elyon (which translates as "God Most High" and begs the question..higher than other Gods?) Adonai, Yahweh, Jehovah.

See, El is the name a Canaanite God, often represented by a Bull (Golden Calf anyone) but is the root of Biblical names that reference the Jewish god (Samuel, meaning "called of God", etc)

Shaddai is what Abraham was supposed to know as God's name, but the El got attached latter. Lovely merge, ain't it?

The Jewish people did NOT originally believe in a single God, they believed their God was the biggest, baddest God and only later did the monotheism come along. Believers can try to deny it all they wish, the truth is the truth.

[tishe]

My apologies- i am new here i have to learn what people here are about.

No worries, you will learn quick. My advise, learn "what people here are about" plus the rules of debating!! (tough crowd, but a win, win, situation!)

[Questatement]

Not really Q.

How do christians get away with praying to crosses and crucified jesus, kissing rings and cups of wine and wafers of whatever the hell that tasteless crap is that sticks to the roof of your mouth at communion? Why can't they just use real bread??

Anyway, you get the idea. Christianity is chock full of "idols". What gives?

To each their own.

Personally, I don't have any such things surrounding my 'worship.' I remember Jesus' sacrifice in an offical way by saying a few words or opening a (usually short) discussion about every other time I eat bread or drink wine.

I know, I'm a failure 50% of the time.

[Questatement]

If it were someone other than God himself saying that line, I would agree with you (like in Genesis 31:30, it's obvious Laban is refering to idols). But by God saying "other gods", he is putting himself in the god category. If the "other gods" aren't the same as him, why didn't he just simply say "gods" without the word "other"? Or say "fake gods"? Or use a completely different word altogether? And that still doesn't answer my question about jealousy.

Again, if God is speaking to a group that believes that he is just one God among many, referring to himself in association with these idols as 'gods,' would make perfect linguistic sense. Idolatry is one of the most common themes in the OT and the clarification that God makes between him and them can not be misunderstood by a rational mind.

As far as jealousy goes, it's off topic on this thread but basically, love is legitimately/justly jealous of that which threatens its application. There is also the petty, selfish type but God is not guilty of this to my knowledge.

Here's another verse:

Genesis 3:5
For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

Again, here we see gods plural. And what's great about this one is, during Adam & Eve's era, there were no idols or leaders to be mistaken as gods. So, who was God talking about? If he was the only god, he would have said "and ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil."

'elohiym can be translated in many different ways depending on the context. The only one that fits the Genesis verse, since other gods don't have personhood, hence a mind to 'know,' is that God is referring to himself which is the most common English translation.

"Like God' in this specific area of understanding.

[Questatement]

Something else.....I know Christians say that when God says "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness", he's referring to the Trinity. But how can that be? Since Jesus hadn't been born yet, the Trinity didn't exist (or would have just been a duo).

Jesus was only born in time as a man. He existed from eternity past just as the other two persons who constitute the 'god-head,' collectively known as God, or the one true God, just as anything with a triune nature can be referred to individually as a whole or in the plural for the individual parts which make it up.

[Questatement]

Shaddai, El, El Shaddai, El Elyon... Adonai, Yahweh, Jehovah... See, El is... Shaddai is...

The Jewish people did NOT originally believe in a single God, they believed their God was the biggest, baddest God and only later did the monotheism come along. Believers can try to deny it all they wish, the truth is the truth.

You seem pretty sure on your perspective of the word usage in the OT but how do you get around the many references that there is only one 'true' God who hears, sees, speaks, acts. etc. (e.g. lives and possesses personhood) and the rest are just the works of man's hands?

I mean, can't we take just about any large body of writing and obfuscate a clear, overall, consistent message by picking apart individual words with the intent of showing a 'contradiction?'