Jump to content


Pseudo-Onkelos's Content

There have been 4 items by Pseudo-Onkelos (Search limited from 25-April 23)


Sort by                Order  

#437807 Edward Fudge & The Fire That Consumes

Posted by Pseudo-Onkelos on 01 March 2012 - 07:03 PM in Theology

This should be interesting to listen to. Thanks, Evangelion. :)



#436896 Malachi 2:10

Posted by Pseudo-Onkelos on 30 December 2011 - 10:53 AM in Cherith

I'd like to be encouraging about your project, and I hope it's very successful. As far as looking up, and commenting on, every use of the word "one" in scripture, I think it's good to remember that the Hebrews were ordinary humans, and "one" was an ordinary word to them. If you imagine what it would be like to look up every occurrence of "one" in Moby Dick, say, or War and Peace, I think you would conclude that it was a huge effort likely to bear only a very little fruit.

On your question, I know that Malachi never heard of the "Holy Trinity," had no conception of the Holy Spirit as a person, and had never in his life heard of "God the Son." So he couldn't possibly be arguing for or against any of those ideas. Just like the verse says, Malachi was saying, "We all have the same God, so we should all be true to each other and our religion."


Perhaps. I just want to be able to find where "one" is modified, and so far from what I've examined, when "one" is modified, the examples make this quite clear, using plural pronouns or giving an idea of plurality, as with "a cluster of grapes". One cluster is made up of many parts, and "grapes" is plural. So far I've not seen this when used with reference to God.

I know Malachi couldn't be arguing for or against the Trinity, but this is a problem for me because I don't think trinitarians mind ambiguity.

Hi Pseudo-Onkelos, it sounds like you're doing a great job. Personally I do not think Trinitarians can get anything useful out of Malachi 2:10 and I doubt they would attempt the line of argument you have suggested.

:)


Thanks. I just want to have all the bases covered.



#436811 Malachi 2:10

Posted by Pseudo-Onkelos on 28 December 2011 - 09:26 AM in Cherith

Greetings, fellow Christians. I am currently working on what I feel will be a magnum opus, called Is the Trinity in the Tanakh? I have been seeking out all the verses that use the Hebrew word 'echad, each being briefly commented. It is not enough to present so-called "proof texts", but to explain them. The one I have in mind is Malachi 2:10. From the NJPS:

Have we not all one Father? Did not one God create us? Why do we break faith with one another, profaning the covenant of our ancestors? (Mal. 2:10)

As you can see, my main focus is on the Hebrew word 'echad. In the Hebrew, it says 'av 'echad, "one father", and 'el 'echad, "one god". Without causing equivocation, one must accept that 'el 'echad does not have any compound unity in mind, otherwise it must be so for 'av 'echad. Trinitarians are unwilling to say that there is more than one father because that would stand against the doctrine of the Trinity.

However, I feel that trinitarians will attempt to explain away the issue. I feel they will say that this is clearly referring to God the Father, and that because 'el is being used instead of 'elohiym, there is no problem at all. (I'm thinking like a trinitarian, which is why I thought of this explanation.) I decided to present this to see some explanations for why the trinitarian view is faulty here.

My opinion on this is that it's just an assumption on the trinitarian's part, but they may be fine with that because as long as something is seemingly ambiguous, some won't take an issue with it. I thought that this trinitarian argument wouldn't work because Malachi didn't have the first person of the Trinity in mind, nor did his audience, so it wasn't as if he was saying, "Well, didn't the Father, as opposed to the Son and Spirit, create us?"

Any thoughts would be much appreciated.



#436571 Is a Jealous God a good God?

Posted by Pseudo-Onkelos on 12 December 2011 - 11:06 AM in Apologetics

I don't have much to add, but I thought I'd present my input. Words change, and this is no different for the word "jealous". It is often associated with, or used synonymously for, "envy". This is true even in the Tanakh/Old Testament. The Hebrew word קַנָּא (qana') is used for God, while קָנָא (qana') is used for both God and man. (The difference is that the latter uses qamats twice. :D ) Yes, it can mean more than just jealous. It is also translated envy and zealous. It should be noted, unless I missed it somewhere, that when God is jealous, He is never jealous of, but jealous for. I will quote from the ESV.

"Therefore thus says the Lord GOD: Now I will restore the fortunes of Jacob and have mercy on the whole house of Israel, and I will be jealous for my holy name." (Ezek. 39:25)

"Then the LORD became jealous for his land and had pity on his people." (Joel 2:18)

"So the angel who talked with me said to me, 'Cry out, Thus says the LORD of hosts: I am exceedingly jealous for Jerusalem and for Zion." (Zechariah 1:14)

"Thus says the LORD of hosts: I am jealous for Zion with great jealousy, and I am jealous for her with great wrath." (Zechariah 8:2)