1 Cor. 8:6 - An Expanded Sh'ma

Binyawmene said:
Theo 1689 answered the idea that "God" is not a proper noun.
Click to expand...
"o theos" is such a proper noun, as there is only one; but the bible does allow contextual deviations. "O theos" frequently drops the article where grammar allows, and / or to diversify the personal reference to God into a mode of God's action, but underlying referent of "God" never changes in the default doctrinal context.

But beyond the grammar, you have consistently refused to accept the premise of Jn 1:1b, which defines who God is, in the NT, and who the Word is, in the NT. That apostolic diktat in Jn 1:1b can be extended to all the apostles with consumate ease as none are seen to deviate from it, but rather they affirm it.

So to reject the Father as the only "God over all" is to refuse to accept what the bible actually says. And you'd do well to procure some better translators to amend the standard Trinitarian Rom 9:5 & Titus 2:13 translations that so many independent scholars reject.
 
Last edited:
Binyawmene said:
Theo 1689 answered the idea that "God" is not a proper noun.
Click to expand...
"o theos" is such a proper noun, as there is only one; but the bible does allow contextual deviations, reflecting either aberrant usages of theos or translation of the Hebrew Elohim word. "O theos" frequently drops the article where grammar allows, and / or to diversify the personal reference to God into a mode of God's action, but the underlying referent of "God" never changes in the default doctrinal context, which is the "Jesus context." It's notable that Trinitarians reject the usage of God inculcated by Jesus himself, in preferring the allegations of the Jews that Jesus claimed to be God.

But beyond the grammar, you have consistently refused to accept the premise of Jn 1:1b, which defines who God is, in the NT, and who the Word is, in the NT. That apostolic diktat in Jn 1:1b can be extended to all the apostles with consumate ease as none are seen to deviate from it, but rather they affirm it.

So to reject the Father as the only "God over all" is to refuse to accept what the bible actually says. And you'd do well to procure some better translators to amend the standard Trinitarian Rom 9:5 & Titus 2:13 translations that so many independent scholars reject.

Contrast:

John 16:28 "I came from the Father and entered the world; now I am leaving the world and going back to the Father.”

with

John 8:42 "Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I have come here from God. I have not come on my own; God sent me."
 
Last edited:
Theo1689 said:
This particular argument is one that requires a thread of its own.

For context, it must be understood that the most important daily prayer for the Jews has always been the "Sh'ma" from Deut. 6:4-5, in which the Jews proclaim the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as the one true God of Israel:

Deut. 6:4 “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. 5 You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might.​

It is called the "Sh'ma", because that is the first word in the verse, the Hebrew that is translated, "hear". And the three instances of "LORD" in caps are from the name of God, the Tetragrammaton, YHWH, which JW's know as "Jehovah". But the Jews had a tradition to avoid transgressing the commandment not to take the Lord's name in vain, they simply never said His name, and so would avoid that sin. Whether you agree or disagree with that tradition, that's what happened in history. And so when the Scripture was read out loud, Jews would say "adonai" ("Lord") in place of the name, which resulted in the LXX translation of "kurios" ("Lord"), as well as the small caps "LORD" in many translations today.

Why is the relevant? Paul was a Hebrew of Hebrews, a Pharisee, of the tribe of Benjamin. He undoubtedly recited the Sh'ma daily. It was the Sh'ma that identified the God of Israel as both "Lord" and "God". The term "Lord", when used of Jesus Christ, is a far stronger witness to Christ's deity than many Christians even realize.

So the Old Testament understanding of God was simply that, "Elohim", or "adonai". With the coming of Jesus, the Trinity was revealed to Christendom. And so we have two persons, who each identify as the one true God of Israel. They are not two gods, but one God (for only one God exists). But the Son is not the Father, and the Father is not the Son.

So when Paul was writing to the Corinthians, and having to explain why it's okay to eat meat sacrificed to Artemis (1 Cor. 8), by explaining that false gods are idols, who are "nothing in this world", only one god exists ("There is no God but one"), that hearkens back to his Jewish upbringing, and the daily prayer of monotheism, which proclaims the God of Israel as both God and Lord. But now that Jesus has been revealed, what then?

Paul now gives us an expansion of the Sh'ma, to include both the Father and the Son:

1 Cor. 8:6 yet for us there is one God:​
the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, ​
and one Lord, ​
Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.​

In the Sh'ma, God is both "God" and "Lord".
In Paul's version, He has both "God" and "Lord".
And he identifies the Father as "God" (without denying His Lordship).
And he identifies Jesus as "Lord" (without denying His godhead/deity).

This is not a denial of Christ's deity.
Nowhere does Paul say, "Jesus is not God". Nor would he.
Both Jesus and the Father are (the one) God.
Both Jesus and the Father are (the one) Lord.

But instead of us every time Paul uses the term, "God", or "Lord", we have to guess which person he means, or he has to explicitly identify which, Paul simply creates a convention. When Paul is referring to the Father, he generally refers to him as "God". When Paul is referring to Jesus, he generally refers to him as "Lord". But neither title denies the other.

My interlocuter asks a good question, "Who did Paul consider Jesus Christ to be?" And that is an excellent question, which answer is not friendly to JW's. Here is what Paul wrote about Jesus in his epistles:

Rom. 9:5 ... the Christ, who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen.​
Phil. 2:5 ... Christ Jesus, 6 who, though he was in the form of God, ...​
Col. 2:9 For in [Christ] the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily,​
2Th. 1:12 ... the grace of our God and Lord, Jesus Christ.​
Titus 2:13 ... the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ,​

And this is just the testimony of Paul, and doesn't include the testimonies of Isaiah, John, Thomas, Luke, Peter, the author of Hebrews, or Jesus Himself. Not to mention the apostolic fathers and ECF's which followed.
Click to expand...
LORD does not belong at Deut--YHVH or YHWH belongs-- nearly 6800 spots in OT where men who had no right removed Gods name and replaced it with titles. Replaced it by satans will to mislead. Thus the mislead ones see LORD and think its Jesus, but LORD does not belong there in all those spots. Seems you have done a lot of studying you should know my words are fact. Every bible scholar on earth knows its fact. If you don't know, look it up-the tetragramoton. 2 Thess 2:3( Catholicism) removed Gods name by satans will, he owns that religion and all her branches.
 
Theo1689 said:
This particular argument is one that requires a thread of its own.

For context, it must be understood that the most important daily prayer for the Jews has always been the "Sh'ma" from Deut. 6:4-5, in which the Jews proclaim the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as the one true God of Israel:

Deut. 6:4 “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. 5 You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might.​

It is called the "Sh'ma", because that is the first word in the verse, the Hebrew that is translated, "hear". And the three instances of "LORD" in caps are from the name of God, the Tetragrammaton, YHWH, which JW's know as "Jehovah". But the Jews had a tradition to avoid transgressing the commandment not to take the Lord's name in vain, they simply never said His name, and so would avoid that sin. Whether you agree or disagree with that tradition, that's what happened in history. And so when the Scripture was read out loud, Jews would say "adonai" ("Lord") in place of the name, which resulted in the LXX translation of "kurios" ("Lord"), as well as the small caps "LORD" in many translations today.

Why is the relevant? Paul was a Hebrew of Hebrews, a Pharisee, of the tribe of Benjamin. He undoubtedly recited the Sh'ma daily. It was the Sh'ma that identified the God of Israel as both "Lord" and "God". The term "Lord", when used of Jesus Christ, is a far stronger witness to Christ's deity than many Christians even realize.

So the Old Testament understanding of God was simply that, "Elohim", or "adonai". With the coming of Jesus, the Trinity was revealed to Christendom. And so we have two persons, who each identify as the one true God of Israel. They are not two gods, but one God (for only one God exists). But the Son is not the Father, and the Father is not the Son.

So when Paul was writing to the Corinthians, and having to explain why it's okay to eat meat sacrificed to Artemis (1 Cor. 8), by explaining that false gods are idols, who are "nothing in this world", only one god exists ("There is no God but one"), that hearkens back to his Jewish upbringing, and the daily prayer of monotheism, which proclaims the God of Israel as both God and Lord. But now that Jesus has been revealed, what then?

Paul now gives us an expansion of the Sh'ma, to include both the Father and the Son:

1 Cor. 8:6 yet for us there is one God:​
the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, ​
and one Lord, ​
Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.​

In the Sh'ma, God is both "God" and "Lord".
In Paul's version, He has both "God" and "Lord".
And he identifies the Father as "God" (without denying His Lordship).
And he identifies Jesus as "Lord" (without denying His godhead/deity).

This is not a denial of Christ's deity.
Nowhere does Paul say, "Jesus is not God". Nor would he.
Both Jesus and the Father are (the one) God.
Both Jesus and the Father are (the one) Lord.

But instead of us every time Paul uses the term, "God", or "Lord", we have to guess which person he means, or he has to explicitly identify which, Paul simply creates a convention. When Paul is referring to the Father, he generally refers to him as "God". When Paul is referring to Jesus, he generally refers to him as "Lord". But neither title denies the other.

My interlocuter asks a good question, "Who did Paul consider Jesus Christ to be?" And that is an excellent question, which answer is not friendly to JW's. Here is what Paul wrote about Jesus in his epistles:

Rom. 9:5 ... the Christ, who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen.​
Phil. 2:5 ... Christ Jesus, 6 who, though he was in the form of God, ...​
Col. 2:9 For in [Christ] the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily,​
2Th. 1:12 ... the grace of our God and Lord, Jesus Christ.​
Titus 2:13 ... the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ,​

And this is just the testimony of Paul, and doesn't include the testimonies of Isaiah, John, Thomas, Luke, Peter, the author of Hebrews, or Jesus Himself. Not to mention the apostolic fathers and ECF's which followed.
Click to expand...
Those final scriptures = catholicism errors to fit false council teaching of God being a trinity. Israel NEVER served a trinity God when serving the true living God. Not even when Jesus was on earth being taught by them.
 
keiw said:
Those final scriptures = catholicism errors
Click to expand...

I'm not catholic.
Please lose the worthless straw-man.

keiw said:
to fit false council teaching of God being a trinity.
Click to expand...

It's not a "false council teaching".
It's a "true BIBLICAL teaching".

keiw said:
Israel NEVER served a trinity God when serving the true living God.
Click to expand...

They never accepted Jesus as their Messiah, either.
Israel doesn't determine truth.
I'm not sure of your point?
 
Theo1689 said:
I'm not catholic.
Please lose the worthless straw-man.



It's not a "false council teaching".
It's a "true BIBLICAL teaching".



They never accepted Jesus as their Messiah, either.
Israel doesn't determine truth.
I'm not sure of your point?
Click to expand...
Israel served the true God=The Abrahamic God= a single being God=YHVH(Jehovah)--0 doubt in all creation.
No trinity was served prior to the addition of the holy spirit as apart of a 3 headed God at the council of Constantinople in 381 ce.
 
keiw said:
Israel served the true God=The Abrahamic God= a single being
Click to expand...

Who cares?
Israel also rejected Jesus as Lord and Saviour, and rejected the New Testament.
Are you going to follow their lead, and reject Jesus and reject the Bible?
You seem to be "picking and choosing", and making excuses for denying what the Bible teaches.

God's truth is determined by SCRIPTURE, not by "Israel".

keiw said:
God=YHVH(Jehovah)--0 doubt in all creation.
No trinity was served prior to the addition of the holy spirit
Click to expand...

That's because God hadn't yet revealed Himself in that way.
But now that He has, it's a sin to reject God in Trinity.

keiw said:
as apart of a 3 headed God at the council of Constantinople in 381 ce.
Click to expand...

It appears that you're going out of your way to be disrespectful and insulting. And those are most definitely NOT fruits of the Spirit of God.

First of all, the Trinity does NOT teach "a 3 headed God", not the least reason being that neither the Father nor the Spirit have physical bodies, so they don't have "heads".

Secondly, please quote where Constantinople teaches "a 3 headed God". I'm hoping that you are familiar with the Ten Commandments, and I'm hoping that you are aware that one of the commandments is "you shall not bear false witness".
 
Theo1689 said:
Who cares?
Israel also rejected Jesus as Lord and Saviour, and rejected the New Testament.
Are you going to follow their lead, and reject Jesus and reject the Bible?
You seem to be "picking and choosing", and making excuses for denying what the Bible teaches.

God's truth is determined by SCRIPTURE, not by "Israel".



That's because God hadn't yet revealed Himself in that way.
But now that He has, it's a sin to reject God in Trinity.



It appears that you're going out of your way to be disrespectful and insulting. And those are most definitely NOT fruits of the Spirit of God.

First of all, the Trinity does NOT teach "a 3 headed God", not the least reason being that neither the Father nor the Spirit have physical bodies, so they don't have "heads".

Secondly, please quote where Constantinople teaches "a 3 headed God". I'm hoping that you are familiar with the Ten Commandments, and I'm hoping that you are aware that one of the commandments is "you shall not bear false witness".
Click to expand...
You know what i meant God as a trinity, it does not exist. There is 0 equality between the 3. God revealed himself to Israel over and over.
 
keiw said:
You know what i meant God as a trinity, it does not exist. There is 0 equality between the 3. God revealed himself to Israel over and over.
Click to expand...

Oh, of course I knew what you meant.
I've had to put up with mockers for decades now.

And unfortunately for you, God ALSO knows what you meant.
And that is the exact OPPOSITE of "good news" for you.
 
Theo1689 said:
Oh, of course I knew what you meant.
I've had to put up with mockers for decades now.

And unfortunately for you, God ALSO knows what you meant.
And that is the exact OPPOSITE of "good news" for you.
Click to expand...
Jesus didn't know he was God-John 20:17, Rev 3:12--His REAL teachers perse didn't either-2Cor 1:3, Eph, 1:3,17, Col 1:3--1Pet 1:3--The twisting of things by Catholicism( 2 Thess 2:3) 2Cor 11:12-15) has mislead billions. Satan beat 99% living today centuries ago.
 
Theo1689 said:
This particular argument is one that requires a thread of its own.

For context, it must be understood that the most important daily prayer for the Jews has always been the "Sh'ma" from Deut. 6:4-5, in which the Jews proclaim the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as the one true God of Israel:

Deut. 6:4 “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. 5 You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might.​

It is called the "Sh'ma", because that is the first word in the verse, the Hebrew that is translated, "hear". And the three instances of "LORD" in caps are from the name of God, the Tetragrammaton, YHWH, which JW's know as "Jehovah". But the Jews had a tradition to avoid transgressing the commandment not to take the Lord's name in vain, they simply never said His name, and so would avoid that sin. Whether you agree or disagree with that tradition, that's what happened in history. And so when the Scripture was read out loud, Jews would say "adonai" ("Lord") in place of the name, which resulted in the LXX translation of "kurios" ("Lord"), as well as the small caps "LORD" in many translations today.

Why is the relevant? Paul was a Hebrew of Hebrews, a Pharisee, of the tribe of Benjamin. He undoubtedly recited the Sh'ma daily. It was the Sh'ma that identified the God of Israel as both "Lord" and "God". The term "Lord", when used of Jesus Christ, is a far stronger witness to Christ's deity than many Christians even realize.

So the Old Testament understanding of God was simply that, "Elohim", or "adonai". With the coming of Jesus, the Trinity was revealed to Christendom. And so we have two persons, who each identify as the one true God of Israel. They are not two gods, but one God (for only one God exists). But the Son is not the Father, and the Father is not the Son.

So when Paul was writing to the Corinthians, and having to explain why it's okay to eat meat sacrificed to Artemis (1 Cor. 8), by explaining that false gods are idols, who are "nothing in this world", only one god exists ("There is no God but one"), that hearkens back to his Jewish upbringing, and the daily prayer of monotheism, which proclaims the God of Israel as both God and Lord. But now that Jesus has been revealed, what then?

Paul now gives us an expansion of the Sh'ma, to include both the Father and the Son:

1 Cor. 8:6 yet for us there is one God:​
the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, ​
and one Lord, ​
Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.​

In the Sh'ma, God is both "God" and "Lord".
In Paul's version, He has both "God" and "Lord".
And he identifies the Father as "God" (without denying His Lordship).
And he identifies Jesus as "Lord" (without denying His godhead/deity).

This is not a denial of Christ's deity.
Nowhere does Paul say, "Jesus is not God". Nor would he.
Both Jesus and the Father are (the one) God.
Both Jesus and the Father are (the one) Lord.

But instead of us every time Paul uses the term, "God", or "Lord", we have to guess which person he means, or he has to explicitly identify which, Paul simply creates a convention. When Paul is referring to the Father, he generally refers to him as "God". When Paul is referring to Jesus, he generally refers to him as "Lord". But neither title denies the other.

My interlocuter asks a good question, "Who did Paul consider Jesus Christ to be?" And that is an excellent question, which answer is not friendly to JW's. Here is what Paul wrote about Jesus in his epistles:

Rom. 9:5 ... the Christ, who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen.​
Phil. 2:5 ... Christ Jesus, 6 who, though he was in the form of God, ...​
Col. 2:9 For in [Christ] the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily,​
2Th. 1:12 ... the grace of our God and Lord, Jesus Christ.​
Titus 2:13 ... the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ,​

And this is just the testimony of Paul, and doesn't include the testimonies of Isaiah, John, Thomas, Luke, Peter, the author of Hebrews, or Jesus Himself. Not to mention the apostolic fathers and ECF's which followed.
Click to expand...

1 Corinthians 8:6 refers to Jesus as Kyrios of the people of God.
1 Kings 1 refers to David as Kyrios of the people of God.

In the days of King David, Israel has one God, Yahweh, and one Lord/Kyrios, King David.
One God, Yahweh, and one Lord, King David.


Now what? Ignore inconvenient facts like you always do in exchange of appealing to your own confusion?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top