Tanach is the Jewish Bible Or Jewish Canon. It is not Old Covenant or Old Teatament. In fact the Greek translations like Septuagint[LXX],Version of Auuilla,Version of Theodotion,Version Of Symmachus etc. Were never called as Old Covenant or Old Testament. It was fairly late that post Iesous Cannon was established and after it was compiled it still took a long period to Tanach or its Greek versions as OLD COVENANT OR OLD TESTAMENT.It may be interesting to note that even Syriac [Aramaic ] Verson was not known as Old or New Testament or Covenant. The Hebrew word for Covenant is Brit [tirB] No where in Hebrew Tanach it is called OLD Covenant Or Old Testament.In is very interesting to note down that even in the books of New Testament ,the word Old Testament or Old Covenant is mensioned for HEBRAIC TANACH.
Even Iesous Himself never called the books of Hebraic Tanach as OLD COVENANT or OLD TESTAMENT.That is why a number of people in Christianity are compelled to think that the post esous Scriptures and Ante Iesous SCRIPTURES ARE TWO BOOKS and not a single book of two parts namely OC or OT and NC or NT. So if the word Bible may be used for each of them them then there are two Bibles .If the word Bible is confined to Tanach and Its Translations then there tre two Holy Books in Christianity, namely Bible and NT.[ If Iesous The ultimate Founder Of Christianity did not call Hebraic Books Of Hebraic Cannon as old Testament or Old Covenant then it is to say some thing which even Iesous did not say in his entire ministery.Not only Iesous but non of his disciples ever call tis Non Biblical Term s of OT or OC. So it is cincorrect to use this term even according to New Testamental standard.] Words of timeless GOD never grow old and are perpetually not old. Other wise the New Testament may be termed as TWO THOUSAND YEARS OLD TESTAMENT, or some 1700 years old but still new testament. Athanasian Christianity believes that the belief of Athanasian Trinity is found in Hebraic Bible. It is constantly attempted to prove Athanasian Trinity from the text of Tanach and Lxx. A n example is Isaiah 9 where the word FATHER is used to apply on Iesous who is not father even from the standard of Athanasian Christianity. An other example is of the Proper Noun Ammanuel, which was not a noun of Iesous.There is no rule that the literal meanking of a proper noun may be used to apply aProper Noun On a Person.Yet it is do so. Genesis is also used to shew that God is a trinity.
There are three most misused verses in Genesis which are constantly being misused by A thenasianism in an attempt to prove the Dogma Of Trinity Of God. These verse do not prove trinity. It is discussed in some detain since Athanasianism rejects all the Jewish Commentaries in a single stroke. In this section there will be a critical study of The book [ tiSarB ] Read from right to left/
AND THE GOD SAID , << LET US MAKE MAN IN OUR IMAGE>>[ Genesis -26] The Hebraic TEXT in PURE LATIN ALPHABETS and Letters is as follow:
ו יאמד אלהיס נעשה אדס בצלס כרסות נו
vN tvmD C vN mlsS C mdA hs’N mihvlA rmaI V <<........ARROW OF DIRECTION.................<< WARNING. DO NOT TRY TO READ THE HOLY TEXT FROM LEFT TO RIGHT. OTHER WISE IT WILL BE A DISGRACE TO THE HOLY TEXT. [Hebrew Text in PURE Latin Alphabets written from right to left, with out vewels. I is used for J or Y,Vis used for U and W,C is used for K .The first letter of each word is a Capital Letter and rest of the letters of each word are in Small letters. Letter A for Aleph,V for Vau, ‘ for Ain sS for Sde etc. ] ATTENTION. Any error is writing Hebraic Text in Pure Latin Alphabets is purely accidental. For more accuracy one is advised to consult a Tanach in Hebrew. This is the most problematic verse Of Genesis Of Torah [ PETENTIUCH ] of Jewish Tanch and Christian OLD COVENENT [OC/ OT]. Athenisian Christians try to provr the Dogma Of Trinity Of Triune God From this verse. But this verse does not prove this Dogma in the least sense . There are some obvious mistakes in its translations in different languages. They are discussed in several priliminaries. FIRST PRE MILINARY The following are the most obvious mistakes in a number of translations. A] The word said is an incorrect translation. It should be Ordered or Commanded.Since the Hebrew word IAMR
יאמדmeans Command or Order.
Why this is translated as SAID instead of ORDERED or COMMANDED is very obvious. GOD CAN NOT BE COMMANDED AND THIS EXPLODES arguments in favour of Dogma Of Trinity. B] The word MAN is once again most fatal mistake in the alleged translations. The Hebrew Text contains the word ADAM , and not the Word MAN
בשד. Why Athanasian Christianity has rejected the Proper Noun
ADAM in these translations and subtituted the Common Noun MAN in place of It. The answer is once again quite simple.[1] Adam is an Individual Human Person , and is not a Human Trinity. If God is a Divine Trinity then Adam Must be a Human Trinity. Thus to hide this problem the The Proper Knoun Adam is changed by a Common Noun MAN. C] ‘ INOUR IMAGE’ is once again an incorrect translation. First the Hebrew word S-L-M means SHADOW OR PROJECTION. It does not mean IMAGE. To translate SHADOW as IMAGE is just to force Genesis to be in Harmony with
the ATHANASIAN COMMENTARIES OF YOHONNON OF NT/NC. So once more one must neglect this and take the original meaning OF SHADOW. Also the preposition IN is an incorrect TRANSLATION. The most appropriate translation is FROM and Not In. This means ADAM WAS MADE FROM SHADOW OF GOD, ADAM WAS NOT MADE IN THE IMAGE OF GOD/G-D./ As the word Shadow explodes trinitical interpretations of this verse of Genesis Of Torah Of Tanach, ATHANASIAN CHRISTIANS TRIED TO TRANSLATE IT BY THE WORD image, and instead of using the word FROM as the most appropriate Preposition in the translation deliberately used the preposition IN. D] One of the worst translations is the translation # IN OUR LIKENESS#. The Hebrew word is DUMUS which means FIGURE,SHAPE, FORM etc. The word Cu preceeds it. So the word become Cu-Dumus. It means LIKE OUR FIGURE or Like Our Shape, Or Like Our Form , Or In likeness of [Our] Figure etc.. NOW THE TRANSATION BECOMES AS FOLLOW: AND GOD COMMANDED, LET US MAKE ADAM FROM OUR SHADOW ,LIKE OUR FIGURE/FORM.
Second premilinary. THERE ARE MORE PROBLEMS IN THE hEBREW – Non Bebrew translations. They maybe discussed below. A] The problem of self imperative sentences. In a large number of languages an IMPERATIVE SENTENCE or an Imperative Verb is used for the second Person and not for the first person and the third person. But in Hebrew an imperative sentence may be for the first or third persons as well. This generates a problem in translation and makes translations misguiding. The Hebrew word N-‘-S-H
נעשהIt is a self imperative VERB in the Hebraic sentence. That is a Peson orders Hnself.A
thing which is not found in most of the languages. So they are forced to translate as Les Us [In the case of First Person Imperative sentence] or LET HIM OR LET THEM [In the case of third person imperative sentences]. But hese attempts make ambiguities which are used by ATHANASIANISM. In order to convey the actual meaning one may take some liberty from interliner translations. A more accurate translation in regard to sense of the Original Hebraic Text is as follow. AND THE GOD COMMANDED [ HIMSELF] MAKE ADAM FROM OUR SHADOW LIKE [ OUR] FIGURE/FORM. N-‘-S-H is a self commanding verb in plural. But As GOD CAN NOT BE COMMANDED IT IS JUST A METAPHOR and not a word
in real meaning of the word. [ This is perhaps the best way to convey the Idea of a Self IMPERATIVE SENTENCE, YET IT IS NOT AN INTERLINER TRANSLATION.] A more accurate literal meaning may be conveyed by the following translation. AND THE GODS COMMANDED [ THEMSELVES] MAKE ADAM FROM OUR SHADOW LIKE [ OUR] FIGURE/FORM, But although the word Alohem literally means GODS [] PLURAL[], IT IT MEANS A SINGLE GOD AS A PLURAL IN FORM OF WORD AND SINGULAR IN MEANING KNOWN AS PLURAL OF MAJESTY MAJESTY, OR A MAJESTIC SINGULAR. SIMILARLY THE WORD NA’S H IS A PLURAL OF MAJESTY . THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS THAT THE FORMER WORD IS A NOUN AND THE LATTER WORD IS A VERB.
Even from the trinitical point of view Logos is God and God can not be commanded by First or third Hypostases. Even the Trinitical Being cannot command any one of the Hypostases residing in its Ousia [SUBSTANCE/GODHEAD]. So even upon the standard of Trinitical Dogmas it is use of a word not in the real meaning but in the virtual / unreal meaning. But if some one insists that TRIUNE GOD ORDERS ALL THOSE HYPOSTASES WHICH RESIDE IN THE OUISA OF THE TRIUNE GOD even then he must have to accept that as Each Supreme Hypostasis Is God , None of them can be commanded neither by the Trinitical God or Triune God Or God the Trinity Nor by any one of the CO-HYPOSTASES dwelling jointly in the Ousia of the Triune God Or Trinity. So he must have to confess that this WORD is in a Virtual meaning , instead of the real meaning of the word. If virtual then not real and thus the dispute is just upon the two virtual meanings of a given word, and if so then at least neither of them can be certain , and if none of then are certain then no argument can be made from uncertain alternatives. Now translate the original sense as God Ordered themselves or God Order Himself, each meaning is just a virtual meaning.
THIRD PREMILINARY THE WORD ELOHEM AND ITS MEANING
The Hebraic word Elohem
אלהיס
[ mihvlA] [ Read the Holy words from right to left] is a
plural of words Elah [hlA]or Eloah [hvlA]. The Word Eloah
אלוהor Elah אלהmeans God or god or deity.
Consequently the plural of them means Gods or gods or deities. Thus the words Eloah or Elah means God or god, amd the word Elohem means Gods or gods. In the real and literal meaning the word ELOHEM can not be used for the Supreme Being o f Tanakh and the Supreme Being of O.C. Since both believe in just One God and not in more then one Gods. And the word ELOHEM does not mean God or god but GODS or gods in its literal meaning.
From Jewish point of view GOD is UnoUnity or Mono Unity , that is only One Hypostatic Person In Godhead. The same is tue from the point of view of Unitarian Christianity and Arian ChristianitFrom Trinitical point of view there is Only One God Who is a Triune God and a Trinity. Therefore this God cannot be called GODS or gods . The plurality of Hypostases in the Divine Ousia [Substance]Of Supreme Being does not allow the words Gods and gods for the Supreme Being./ One even can not say ‘’ Divine hypostases are Gods/ gods ‘’, according to the Dogma Of Trinity Of God. So the word Elohem
אלהיסcan not be used for the Supreme Being or the Hypostases in the Ousia Of The Supreme
Being [Godhead], and additionally not for the collection of them if the word Elohem means Gods or gods. If the word Elohem
אלהיסdoes not mean Gods or gods, then it means God or god [Plural Of Majesty and Singular in
meaning].In this case it does not imply any plurality of Hypostases in the Ousia Of the Supreme Being. Since it only means God or god [That is the form of the word is plural yet its meaning is singular.Unfortunately there is no analogue in English. It may be understood just by a supposed example. Suppose that the word BOOKS which is the plural of the word Book is used for a Single Majestic Book.Now the word BOOK does not mean its Real meaning , the plural Of the word Book, but it means book, plural in form and singular in MEANING.]. The words God and god does not imply plurality of Hypostases in the given singular form. The entire discussion in the support of the Dogma Of Trinity is based on scriptural verses and not on the singular form of the word God or god. So if the word Elohem means God or god it does not imply any plurality of Divine Hypostatic Persons in the Divine Ousia [Godhead] Of the Supreme Being [God]. Thus the word Elohem has just the following possibilities. A] The word Elohem means God or god. This is the real and primary meaning of the word.[Plural] B]The word Elohem means Gods or gods. This is the secondary meaning of the word.[Singular] C] It means neither of these two meanings[ i.e neither plural nor singular] . In the first sense it is not useable to God Of Hebraic Scriptures. In the second sense it doesnot imply any plurality of Hypostases in the Divine Ousia [namely Godhead[ If it still implies some sort of plurality of Hypostases and Hypostatic Plurality in the Divine Ousia then it is neither in the first meaning nor in the second meaning. Assuming that the first is the regular meaning and second is the irregular meaning then the third is the unique meaning which is neither regular nor irregular but only one of its kind. Word singular in meaning yet implying plurality of Supreme Hypostases in the Ousia Of Its Grammatical and literal Subject i.e The Supreme Being. How ever such type of word was not known before the foundation of Athanasian Christianity. Now we render some more possible translation of the verse . AND GODS COMMANDED [THEMSELVES] ,<< MAKE ADAM FROM [OUR] SHADOW IN LIKENESS OF OUR FIGURE/FORM/] This meaning is incorrect even according to Dogma of Trinity since the Words Gods and gods are not allowed to use for the Supreme Being or for the Hypostases dwelling inside the Ousia Of The Supreme Being. So replacing the word Gods
by the word Elohem does not make the meaning correct if the word Elohem is used in the meaning of the word ‘Gods’ or ‘gods’. If the word Elohem is used in the meaning of the word ‘God’ or ‘god’ then the word is not in the plural meaning and it does not imply plurality and multiplicity of Supreme Hypostases in the Ousia Of The Supreme Being.All the Hebraic Lexitonists, Grammarians and Scripturists never thought of implication of plurality of hypostasis in the Ousia Of God while using this word for God . This is a sufficient proof that to claim that it still imply plurality of hypostases inside the Divine Ousia even when it is not used as a Plural is a latter openion . One may reject the latter opinion and prefer the former opinion . SIXTH PRIMILINARY THE HEBRAIC WORD IAMAR is usually translated is SAID instead of commanded. It amy be translated on the demand of context as said. But its actual meaning is Commanded. It may be the case that more number of places may be translated as SAID,yet thre must be a demand of context to translate it as such. It does not depend upon the majority or minority of cases but it depend upon the context. If there are more number of cases where the word is demanded to mean SAID by the context, and less number of cases where there is no such demand by the context , then it may be translated as SAID on the demands not because because of the greater number of demands. I f there is no such demand from the context then it must be translated as COMMANDED OR COMMAND, SINCE A SHIFT IN MEANING FROM REAL TO VERTUAL DOES NOT DEPEND UPON THE MAJORITY OF CASES BUT UPON THE DEMANDS, AND THE INDICATIONS OF CONTEXTS, ANS SOME TIME EXTERNAL INDICATIONS AS WELL. The principle and rule of demands and indications are independent of majority or minority. This is the key point which must be kept in mind. So it is incorrect to argue that a greater number of cases demand that it must be translated as SAID, then this means that every thing has become TOPSYTERVY , .This is incorrect. The rule is that is thre is only one place where there is no demand and thousand of places where there are demands, even then the PRINCIPLE is immutable . SEVENTH PREMILINARY If one delete all the prepositions and try to translate with out prepositions one may get a more pure meaning. And Ordered Elohem [Himself] Make Adam Like
Our Shadow, Like Our figure.
The Hebraic word Dumus may be translates as Form but it can be easily confused with the Theological term Form which is Nothing But the Ousia Of Divine Supreme Being in theological Discussions about Supreme Being. Hebraic Text are confined to the meanings of Hebrew Language whether Real or Virtual. 8th Preliminary. They word Elohem does not prove the Dogma Of Trinity, and does not imply any type of Plurality. One of the simplest proof is as follow. This proof is directly followed from the word Elohem. If the Dogma Of Trinity is true then each and every Hypostasis dwelling in the Divine Ousia [Namely Godhead] Is God , say Logos is God. Now the question is.
Is Logos Elohem.? If Logos is NOT then Logos is not GOD. This contradicts the Dogma Of Trinity. If Logos is, the Logos is Itself A Trinity and a Triune God. This is against the Dogma Of Trinity To believe that Some Hypostases [atleast one] in Triune God are Trinities.Thus the dogma of Trinity it self implies that the word Elohem can not be used as a plural word implying plurality of Hypostases in Divine Ousia or in any one of the Hypostasis. That is PERHAPS ONE OF THE REASONS ,that a number of protestants also agree that the word ELOHEM is just a Plural of Majesty. CONCLUSION The word Elohem is used as a singular and if it is used as a singular it loses any type of plurality. To claim that it still implies a sort of plurality say the plurality of Supreme Hypostases in the Divine Ousia Of the Divine Being is a latter invention. No Hebraic scholar from the day Hebraic Genesis was written to the advent of Athanasian Christianity ever consider this type of strange plural-singular amalgam.
Even if God is a Trinity and not a unoUnity or MonoUnity , the
word Elohen when used as a singular loses any implication to the plurality of Hypostases in the Ousia Of Supreme Being, and if used as a Plural Implies Plurality of Divine Beings ,not just Plurality Of Hypostases. Even if there are thousans of Hypostases In Divine Ousia it can not be used in its Plural meaningsince in this case it means nothing but Gods or gods ,and these words I.E Gods and gods can not be used for The Supreme Being even if there are thousands of mutually distinct and incommunicable Divine hypostases in the Divine Ousia Of Divine Being. Thus this verse does not proves trinity in the least meaning. Objection1. Use of plural of Majesty is an irregular case of Hebrew language. It is incorrect to prefer an irregular case when it is possible to take a word regular case. Answer . A] It is incorrect to reject a case just because it is irregular , since irregulars also exist. How ever the uses of some irregulars are regulars for certain grammatical things. Elohem has been a regular case for a God Of Judaism since ages. No one ever claimed to be irregular for GOD. It is very strange to claim that all he Hebraic Prophets and all the authors of Hebraic Scriptures used this irregular word with out knowing that it implies plurality of Hypostases in the Ousia Of Elohem. If they had the slightest doubt they would have never used this word for the GOD OF JUDAISM since they did not believed in the hypostatic plurality in the Ousia Of Elohem Of Judaism â&#x20AC;Ś B] If this is an Irregular case then the Christological use of A SINGULAR IMPLYING THE PLURALITY IN THE OUSIA IS THE UNIQUE CASE OR A PLURAL ONLY IMPLYING THE HYPOSTATIC PLURALITY IN THE OUSIA Is the Unique case of Hebrew language. It is then neither regular nor irregular but purely unique . And if so then even an irregular case is far more preferable then the alleged this case . C] It is strange to see that if it is a real plural and not a plural of Majesty then it does not mean GODS . IF ELOHEM DOES NOT MEANS gods TRHEN IT IS NOT A PLUTRAL AT ALL, irrespective of the alleged implication of Hyposatatic Plurality in the Ousia Of the Subject of the word ELOHEM.
OBJECTION 2 There is a plurality in singularity and if so then the plural form of a word is useable. Answer. If so then one can use the word GODS for this plurality but The Dogma Of Trinity Does not allow to do so even for this case. Are we to assume that there are a number of GODS in regared to the alleged plurality and only one GOD in regard to singularity.One is not allowed to claim that there are more then one GOD in regard to hypostatic plurality and only one GOD in regard to Osiaic Singularity. If not then then the word ELOHEM does not make any exception. Since it either means GOD if it is a Plural Of Majesty, and it means GODS if it means A real Plural. One Elohem means One God since the word Elohem means God or godif it is singular in meaning [Plural Of Majesty]. One Elohem means One Gods, if it is a Real Plura’ [Plural Of Number ] But this meaning is incorrect even if the Dogma Of Trinity is correct.If Dogma Of Trinity Does not allow the use Of the plural Of God or god for the Trinitical Plurality Of Hypostases, the same is true for the WORD ELOHEM if it means GODS. If this does not mean Gods or gods then it only means God or god with out any Implication to the stated above Plurality.[2] aaa
FOOT NOTES; [1] THERE FORE THE TRANSLATRIONS AND THE GOD SAID , << LET US MAKE ADAM IN OUR IMAGE>>
IS A BETTER TRANSLATION THAN ,, AND THE GOD SAID , << LET US MAKE MAN IN OUR IMAGE>> .It must be noted than the noun ADM Must be taken as a proper noun unless and otherwise it becomes imperative to take it as a common noun in its literal meaning.To translate is as as Man is incorrect unless and other wise three is some impossibilities [atleast one]in the text. [2]The root of the word Elohem is Elah,[
אלוה
] and ELOAH is a derivative of Elah. The word
ELOHEM [ELOAHEM] is a plural of the word Eloah. This word is used in Hebraic Tanach for Angels ,Kings, Judges, Chiefs and even false Gods./gods. In Exodus,it is used for Moshe [Moses]. This is sufficient to that the word when used as a singular implies only one person as in the case of Moses [hsM].This word does not imply any sort of plurality if it is used as a singular.If the author of Genesis ever comes to know what arguments are made from his simple texs which he has authored he would be the most surprised person in the entire history of authors of religious scriptures. Notes@ Pure Latin Alphabets are: ABCDEFGHILMNOPQRSTVX All the other Alphabets are Latin Extended Alphabets with subdivisions.
Hemi Latin Alphabets are: KUY, K and Y were geneally used to write Greek word with KAPPA or Upsilon.
Non Latin Alphabets are: JW Special Non Latin Alphabet Z Note. It is very likely that the famous space research centre NASA is the Aericanized form of Hebraic N’s-h
נעשהstated above. That is the words are so selected that there abbreviation becomes Amaricanized form of Genesic N-‘S-H נעשה
END OF PART ONE. PART TWO: And the LORD GOD Said, ‘’ the man has become one of us , ...
The Hebraic TEXT in PURE LATIN ALPHABETS and Letters is as follow:
ו יאמד יהוה אלהים הו ארמ היה כאחר םםנו
[ Gen-22]
...vnmM dhaC hiH mdA H mihlA HVHI rmI V <<........ARROW OF DIRECTION.................<< WARNING. DO NOT TRY TO READ THE HOLY TEXT FROM LEFT TO RIGHT. OTHER WISE IT WILL BE A DISGRACE TO THE HOLY TEXT. [Hebrew Text in PURE Latin Alphabets written from right to left, with out vewels. I is used for J or Y,Vis used for U and W,C is used for K .The first letter of each word is a Capital Letter and rest of the letters of each word are in Small letters. Letter A for Aleph,V for Vau, ‘ for Ain sS for Sde etc. ] ATTENTION. Any error is writing Hebraic Text AND IN in Pure Latin Alphabets is purely accidental. For more accuracy one is advised to consult a Tanach in Hebrew.
This is another verse which is used for proving the Dogma Of Trinity. But once again this verse neither does prove Trinity nor can prove DOGMA OF Trinity. FIRST PREMILINARY The word said is once again a mistranslation. It should be Ordered or Commanded.
‘And Lord GOD Commanded’ is a better rather correct translation of Hebraic words. Similarly the word in Hebrew Text is
הו ארמ
Hv ADAM [mdA vH] and not man [rsB]. God knows why the noun ADAN is changed by the word Man and what
are the motives behind this manupolation. We do suggest a number of reasons but a detail discussion is beyond the
בשדit would be correct to translate it by ארםand this is a Proper Noun . It must be adopted in
scope of present topic.He ADAM do emphasise ADAM.If GOD Hd used the word the word MAN, but,God Has Used the word ADAM translation as ADAM
.
The word בשדis used in Genesis eg Gen-6-3.It may be noted that the word ASAM may only be translated as man WHEN taking it as Adam contradicteth Hebraic Tanach. Only in this condition one can argue that the word ADAM is used as a Petaphorical Symbol Of Mankind. Once again it is independent of majority or minority of cases. Please Keep it in mind once for all times that if the condition is present in a greater number of cases and the very same condition is absent in less number of cases, this does not changes the principle or rule..
Second PRIMILINARY: The Hebraic word MIMMANU is translated as One Of Us. This is the Grammatical First Person Translation. It should be translated as a Grammatical Third Person Translation. Eg Like One Of Them Or One Among them, Or Unparrallel among them etc.There are atleast 27 places in Hebraic Bible where this word is translated as a Third Person translation instead of First Person translation.In such places it is not allowed to translate it is the first person translation. One or two places are such that there is a possibility of both types of translation. But neither of them are certain. Even the Most probable is certainly Not Certain. In matter of believes a certain translation is required not an uncertain translation. So this verse can neither prove trinity nor this prove trinity on the basis of choice of translations. since even the most probable translation is not certain,and necessary condition to prove a Dogma whether the Dogma OF UNITARIANITY [Mono-Unity/UNI-UNITY] or Trinity] is certainiity which is not fulfiied and not satisfied.
THIRD PREMILINARY: The word
םםנו
MIMMANU is a compound word formed by the combination of two words a]Mn
ריels are omited] If vovels are inserted then the word may be read as is Min and Hu respectively. Mn
מנand Hv הו
If joined they become MINHU [MNH].
[מנהוHnM]
[[FROM RIGHT TO LFT]
A NUN nun was added to join them. It became Min-nahu [vhnnM] [[FROM RIGHT TO LFT]
מננהו
[Mnnhv].
[ מנnM]. B]H. [Vow
Ha or h was changed by n so it become MIN-NA-NU
מנננו
[Mnnnv].
[nvnnM] [[FROM RIGHT TO LFT]
First two Nuns were then changed by mem with a DAGISH. So it changed into MIMMANU
םםנו
[Mmnv].
[nvnM] [[FROM RIGHT TO LFT]
From the very origin it is a Grammatical Third Person Pronoun. So the better and more accurate translation is as follow> I] And the LORD GOD Said, ‘’ HE ADAM has become one of THEM , to know good and [Evil].
Ii[And the LORD GOD Commanded, ‘’Now [behold] Adam has become one among them , to know good and [Evil]. III]AND IHVH GOD COMMANDED ‘ HE ADAM BECAME ONE OF THEM............’ IV] AND IHVH GOD [ GOD IHVH] COMMANDED ,’ HE ADAM BECAME [DID BECOME ] UNIQUE AMONG THEM......’ FOR THOSE WHO LIKE TO RECIEVE MORE HEBRAIC MEANING THE FOLLOWING LESS ENGLISH TRANSLATION ARE PRESENTED. V] AND IHVH GOD [ GOD IHVH] COMMANDED ,’ HE ADAM BECAME DID BE ONE OUT OF THOSE/ ONE OUT OF THAT............... The word Behold is not present in HEBRAIC SENTENCE OF GENESIS. Yet one is supposed to suppose it in sense while reading the text, or to add it in mind while reading the text. How ever if some one does not it is equally correct sinse it is optional, cont a compulsion.. It may be noted that there are several plases in Tanach where this word
םםנו
is used as third person pronoun.
FORTH PRIMILINARY The Hebrew word Cahud[dhC]
כאחרmay be translated as Unique, One with out Parrall,with out a partner, unparralle
only one [among them ] , With Out A Compeer.etc. So a still better translation is as follow;
Lord Lord God Commanded [Some one].’Now behold Adam is become with out a compeer among them by having the Knowledge of Good and Bad [Evil]. Onkelos explains it as IAHIDI.
[ idihaI] יחירי
Fifth Premilinary. If God is talking and conversing in a company of angels, supermundales, spiritual and heavenly beings, cherubs, etc God can say One Of Us. To claim that God can not include himself among heavenly Suppositums is like the claim that God can not incarnate in Iesous to live among people. God cansome how manifest among angles, and other heavenly rational suppostums with or with out assuming their natures if He can incarnate in human beings by assuming human nature to live among human beings. So there may be some created and made persons and hypostases not in Divine Ousia but out of Divine Ousia.Thus this cannot prove any type of plurality in Divine Ousia. To Claim that God cannot include Himself among Heavenly Rational Suppositums sayAngelic Beings, Supermundales,Spiritual Beings,Spirits, cherubs etc.a claim like <<God Cannot Assume Human Nature >>.S uch a claim that God Cannot Assume Angelic Nature but can Assume human nature is like the claim that God Cannot Assume Femail human Nature but Can Only Assume Male human Nature. Obviously only a dogmatic mind can accept such strange claims. But a Rational mind cannot accept such claims. What form of Christology is this that if it is claimed << God Can incarnate to become a human and Can live among them for Thirty Three years [APPROXIMATELY] but can not Menisfest to become an angel or a Supermundale by Assuming their Natures just for speaking some sentences. Obviously such a Christology is unacceptable and CANNOT BE ACCEPTED. Thus if it can be believed that God Can Incarnate and become a man by Assuming a Human Nature and Can live among Humans for 33 years then such believers cannotr deny That God Can also Menifest and become an Angle by assuming Angelic Nature and Can live in trheir Companyfor some time atleast at the time of speaking these words and sentences.
End OF Part Two.
Part Three Let Us Go Down...........[Genesis-11-7]
הבה נדרה ונבלה שם שפתם אשד לא ישמעו איש שפת דעהו vhR ptS siA v’msI aL dsA mtpS mS hlbN V hrdN bhH
<<........ARROW OF DIRECTION.................<< WARNING. DO NOT TRY TO READ THE HOLY TEXT FROM LEFT TO RIGHT. OTHER WISE IT WILL BE A DISGRACE TO THE HOLY TEXT. [Hebrew Text in PURE Latin Alphabets written from right to left, with out vowels. I is used for J or Y,Vis used for U and W,C is used for K .The first letter of each word is a Capital Letter and rest of the letters of each word are in Small letters. Letter A for Aleph,V for Vau, â&#x20AC;&#x2DC; for Ain sS for Sde etc. ] ATTENTION. Any error is writing Hebraic Text in Hebraic or in Pure Latin Alphabets is purely accidental. For more accuracy one is advised to consult a Tanach in Hebrew.
This verse is also used to prove Trinity from the Test Of Genesis Of Petentuch Of Holy Tanach .It is argued that it is beyond angelic power the change the minds of people, in a very short period of timeso that they are compelled to change their languages , and two forget their mother tongues instantly, all with out noticing what has happen to them. Thus the only suggestion is that God spoke to all Hypostases inside His Ousia. First Premilinary. Hebrew wordHabaa is derived from Hebrew word Yihib.This means to Give, to put, to place, to depart. It is some times used as an Auxilry verb in order to shew motivation or it is used to motivate for an act which is to be done. It does not imply plurality of Hypostases in Divine Ousia Of Supreme Being. It may be the case that God shew his Motivation by using this word and plural form is just a Plural Of Majesty. So it only means Let Me Go or Let me Give Or Let me Depart etc Second Pemilinary. If the word Haba conveys the sense of a Self Imperative Verb , then it must be known thatno one can commoand God to do an Act. A self command is not a real command in particular not a command for God. Thus this implies that the sentence cannot be taken literally but figuratively or metaphorically.If even such places of Jewish Tanach cannot be taken in Vertual sense then this means that there is no Versr intire Bible which can be taken not Literally i.e figuratively or metaphorically. Athanasians become Literalist when they see literal approach supporst the Dogma Of Trinity and Figuratists and Metaphorists if they find figurative or metaphorical approach suppors their DOGMA. THIRD PREMILINARY.
This interpretation does not matches with the Dogma which is suppposed to be proved from this verse. A very strange case indeed. There are only two possible cases if the Dogma Of Tinity is Assumed To Be True. EITHER The TRIUNE GOD or GOD THE TRINITY is commanding all the Hypostases Existing in the Divine Ousia Of The Triune Trinity or Any One Of The Hypostasis living in the Divine Ousia Of TRIUNE GOD is commanding to the rest of neighbour Hypostases dwelling in the same Ousia. Dogma Of Trinity asserts that these Hypostases can talk and can converse with each other and listen to each other if they will so. But as each Hypostasis in the Divine Ousia Is God then no one can order or command God. In both cases this verse can not be translated literally. Thus this is not in real sense or meaning , but in vertual sense or meaning.So in either case whether there is a Trinity or Uni-Unity the words of the verse are not in the primery meaning. If the word of the verse are not in their real meanings then the verse cannot be used to disprove or to prove the Dogma Of Trinity. Forth Premilinary. It may be the case that God in the company of Angels and Super mundales wanted to come down . That is he wanted to come down with them and not with out them . If it ias argued that it is outb of Angelic and Supermundalic Powers to change human minds and to delete their former languagess from their memories and to write new languages in the memory of their minds and brains, it can ot disprove this rendering of the verse. Since it is one of the weak objections of polymics. 1] If God Is So Omnipotent then G-d Can Give Powers To Angels etc. to do so. 2] If this Omnipotent God Does not have Omnipotence to to Grant this sort of power to Angels and Supermundales, even then there are certain solutions to this problem not necessarilyb the trinitical one. 1] It is evident from Hebraic Tanach renamed as Hebraic Bible and Grrek Septuagint renamed as Old Covenant that Miracles are the WORKS and ACTS of GOD EVEN IF THEY ARE SHOWN BY humaqn beings. So the act of changing the language was actually the Act of GOD but was shown by Angels accomanying GOD during his comming mensioned above. The word let us does shew and only shew the Miracles performed by Angels and Supermundales who accompanied GOD during the Descension Of GOD AND HEAVENLY BEINGS on the planet earth.. 2] This is some what theological interpretation of the verse. In ATHANASIAN Christology it is said that the Human Nature Of Christ is not a Person.This Human Nature is almost like a HUMAN PERSON yet it lacks some thing so that it fails to be a Person. Now Athanasian Christologists have debated since long what is the actual difference between a Human Person and the Human Natrure Of Christ which falls short of being a person. Ifnot a human person then this Human Nature stated above is NOT a HUMAN BEING. IUt is still undecided what is the actual difference between these two, and Athanasian Theologists anf Christologists are still disputing . Yet one thing is certain if the Hypostatic Union ceases then the Human Nature Of Christ will immediately upgrade to a human person consequently to a human being.
BUT IF the Hypostatic Union is some how RESTORED the immediate consequence is that the Upgraded human person shall immediately revert to the Original Human Nature. Thus we can say that the angels , Supermundales were United with God to form Hypostatic Unions and in this process these Heavenly Persons and Suppositums were reverted to Angelic and Supermundalic Natures. Now the plurality is just in regard to non divine natures and unity is with respect to Divine Natures. But after the Divine mission of changing the languages of humans the Hypostatic Union ceased . A ll the Natures were restored to their respective Personalities and persons, and SUPPOSITUMNESSES. Thus what so ever done by angles is just like the Miracles appearently shewn by the human nature of Iesous , even if the Human Natre did not have the power to show any Miracle. This is one of those places where Christology can be used against The Dogma Of Trinity. OBJECTION. HYPOSTTIC UNION REQUIRES A HYPOSTASIS AND UNITARIANITY DISBELIEVES IN HYPOSTASIS. ANSWER. The difference between Unitarianity and Trinity is that Unitarianity believes in only One Hypostasis in Godhead while Trinity believes in more that one hypostses in Godhead. Although Unitarian sects like Bible Students, YAHVAH Wtnesses etc do not mention the exact relation between Godhead and Hypostasis but it appears that the only difference between them is on the number of Hypostases in GODHEAD.Since they reject the plurality of Hypostatic Persons in Divine Ousia [Godhead] but this does not mean that they reject he singularity Of Hypostses and Hypostatic Persons in the GODHEAD. Rationally if an Unitarian sect what so ever it may be have the following options. 1] Either It believe that there is only one Hypostasis in Divine Ousia or it believe that God is a Hypostasis with out any Ousia, or it believe that OUSIA is in Hypostasis. If It is believed that Ousia is in the Hypostasis , then or Hypostasis is in the Ousia then such a Hypostatic Union is possible. It is incorrect to claim that if there are more then Hypostases in the Divine Ousia then any one of the Hypostasis can form a hypostatic union anf if there is only one hypostasis then this hypostasis can not form a hypostatic union. Such a claim is irrational and self reasoned. If it is believed that God is a HYPOSTASIS WITH OUT AN OUSIA then such a claim may not be accepted. But even then the ability of a Hypostasis to form a Hypostatic union doee not depend on the existence or non existence of Ousia.How ever I personally Opine thatr there can be NO HYPOSTASIS IF THERE IS NO OUSIA. in the case if there is ONLY ONE HYPOSTASIS in the DIVINE OUSIA [Renamed as Godhead for convinence] Then the Ousia is not Distinct From the Only Hypostsis which is in it or in which it is or both, and Ousia is Highly communicable to the Only Hypostasis.
But
Ousia is not the Hypostasis since it is so communicable to the Only Hypiostasis that it does not exist apart from the Hypopstasis even if it is Per se subsistent. Any how Trinity can not be proved. This interpretation nullify the arguments in supoprt of trinity. Even the minutest possibility of this interpretation breaks all the arguments from this verse in support of trinity ones for all.
Notes.There are a number of places in Genesis where the Hebrew text says God Commanded, and it is translated as GOD SAID. tHE FAMOUS VERSE . And THE GOD SAID LET THERE BE LIGHT MAY ALSO BE TRANSLATED AS
אור
ו יאמד אלהים יהי אוד ו יהי־
rvA ihI V rvA ihI mihlA rmaI V WARNING. DO NOT TRY TO READ THE HOLY TEXT FROM LEFT TO RIGHT. OTHER WISE IT WILL BE A DISGRACE TO THE HOLY TEXT.
AND THE GOD COMMANDED ,' LET THERE BE LIGHT';. Or
more simply and more correctly
And God Commanded. Be [ O’] Light, AND LIGHT BECAME. The sense of the sentence may be manifested in English as follow. And God commanded, ‘ EXIST [O] LIGHT’ AND LIGHT EXISTED. The word O in translation does not exit in HEBRAIC TEXT. One must omit it if he wants to be more Hebraic. That is why they are written in squire brackets. Omitting them gives translations like these given below: And God commanded, ‘ EXIST , LIGHT’ AND LIGHT EXISTED OR And God commanded, ‘ BE , LIGHT’ AND LIGHT DID BE OR And God commanded, ‘ BE , LIGHT’ AND LIGHT BECAME.
One may see that such a constant distortion of Hebraic senses and meanings can not be unintentionally. There must be some motive and some mission behind it. Even if it can be translated as said instead of commanded, even then it is never informed that an other translation is possible. The translation Let There be light is according to Trinitical Approach, that is GOD is saying to some one that he may let the light to become [or to exist.]But there is no ‘Let there be’ but Be , Avery direct command , with out the letting of any
one else, ruling out any possibility of saying to any hypothetical Hypostasis in the Ousia Of the Sayer.’ A similar game is played in Yohanon when no translator informs in general that the Greek word LOGOS may also be translated as Reason. Since to translate as In the bigening was the Reason, and Reason Was With the God, AND The Reason was [the] God , DOES SHAKES THE OLD CONCEPT conceived in minds by translations like In the Begging was the word.
END OF PART THREE
Part four. AND EARTH WAS WITOUT FORM AND VOID< AND DARKNESS WAS UPON THE FACE OF DEEP [WATER] . AND SPIRIT OF GOD WAS MOVING/ BLOWING TO AND FRO. [GENESIS -1-2] This verse is deliberately translated incorrect in order to shew that the Mentioned Spirit is the Third Hypostasis in the Ousia of Triune GOD of Trinity.] THE HEBRAIC TEXT IN HEBREW AND PURE LATIN ALPHABETS AND LETTERS IS AS FOLLOW.. ............................................
ד הךצ חיתה תהר רבהך ו השך על־ פנני תהוס ו דוח אלהיס סדחפת על־ פני ה סיס
Mim H inP lA tphrM mihlA hVR V mvhT inP lA xshH V vhB V vhS htiH ssrA.H V
<<........ARROW OF DIRECTION.................<< WARNING. DO NOT TRY TO READ THE HOLY TEXT FROM LEFT TO RIGHT. OTHER WISE IT WILL BE A DISGRACE TO THE HOLY TEXT. [Hebrew Text in PURE Latin Alphabets written from right to left, with out vowels. I is used for J or Y,Vis used for U and W,C is used for K .The first letter of each word is a Capital Letter and rest of the letters of each word are in Small letters. Letter A for Aleph,V for Vau, ‘ for Ain sS/ss for Sde etc. ] ATTENTION. Any error is writing Hebraic Text in Pure Latin Alphabets is purely accidental. For more accuracy one is advised to consult a Tanach in Hebrew.
THE ACTUAL TRANSLATION.
AND THE EARTH [ARS] WAS NOT INHABITENT AND EMPTY ,AND DARKNESS WAS UPON THE FACE OF WATER. AND RUH OF GOD WAS A HETCHER ON THE FACE OF WATER[S]<1> A]
B] One may see the word by word comparesion of the most mistranslated part of the verse. See that to translate Spirit Of God Or Wind Or Air Of God was moving to and fro is an in correct translation for all times and eternities.. What so ever it was -= it was sitting like a bird on the face of water not moving at all.[whether it be spirit or wind or air]
Mim H inP lA tphrM mihlA hvR V WARNING. DO NOT TRY TO READ THE HOLY TEXT FROM LEFT TO RIGHT. OTHER WISE IT WILL BE A DISGRACE TO THE HOLY TEXT
V = And V Ruhh[Ruh]= wind, air,spirit.ghost,soul Alhim=God mihlA
hvR דוח
אלהיס
Mrhhpt=To Sit on somelike like a bird sits on its eggs to get them hatch tphrM
סדחפת
Al= on,upon lA Pni= face inP H=the H.
Mim= water Mim
סיס
The construction Ruhh Alhim implies Ruh Of Alohim./Alhim.
Thus the meaning is as follow. Thus the meaning is as follow. << the Ruh דוחOf GOD was sitting on the face of water[ Like a bird which sits on eggs to get them hatch] סדחפת
.
Or more accurately the meaning is as follow. << the Ruh Of GOD was sitter סדחפתon the face of water>> [ Like a bird which sits on eggs to get them HATCHED/INCUBATION] Since there is no continuous tense in Hebrew Neither Past continuous nor Present Continous. [It may not be reminded that Future continuous is beyond all Hebraic thoughts,since it is the most obvious fact of Hebrew language.] and the only possibilities are indefinite tense [sit, sat] or active particibles [not present participles like sitting, but sitter, or one that sits, or one that does sit.It may however be noted that Past Participles are in close approximation to Passive Participles] The Hebraic word Ruh is deliberately kept conserved in the translation since the point is to shew the static nature of Ruh, and not the Dynamic nature of It irrespective of the proper alternative of it.
FIRST PRIMILINARY
HOSHIX
[ חשךXSH] means Darrkess . This means that there was no light but there was water etc. The may
contemplate that there was no light and the Earth was inhabitant. No biological living thing was on Earth. No thing could be seen since there was no light to see. Every thing was in darkness. But there was earth in its actual form. No thing shews that there was no form of Earth. Such a translation is misleading. This also shews that there was liquid water [not ice]. Second preliminary The verse does not say that earth was formless and void. In does say it was INHABITANT and EMPTY. Once again one may sense some trinitical conspiracy behind this sort of translation. This is to induce the concept of Philosophical Form and Voidness [CHOAS] in Genesis which can be used for supporting the DOGMA of Trinity Of GOD. Third preliminary. The word TUHUM [mvhT] means Water . May be translates as deposits of water.But this is less verbal and Water is relatively and comparatively a better translation . FORTH PRIMILINARY The word RUH is translated as Spirit. But it may be translated as AIR or Wind. A spirit is neither solid nor liquid nor gas. Even Human Spirits [ghosts] are neither solid nor liquid nor gas. But the wind or air does shew gaseous form of matter. When compare to Water the liquid form , it is suggested that it is air or wind and not the spirit of or souls or ghost. So This Air of GOD, OR WIND OF GOD only means that Air5 or wind what so ever it might be was not a Suppostum in general and a rational Suppositum in particular and certainly Not a Hypostasis residing in the Ouasia Of Triune God with neighbouring Hypostases. But we shall see that air is more correct translation then wind since Wind is blowing air in a particular direction, and it moves from one place to another place in a particular direction. But this air was not moving at all. There for it is AIR and just air even if one may translate it as Wind [BLOWING/MOVING AIR IN A PATRTICULAR DIRECTION.] FIFTH PRIMILINARY
The Hebrew word MARAPHAT means hatching. It is the position of a [female] Bird sitting on her eggs to hatch them. A bird some times even swells her body to cover her eggs. So Hatcher bird is the true representative of Ruh hence it is some what condensed air with some pressure on water since a bird does press her eggs by her own weight. This is the static Ruh of Hebraic Genesis and the Ruh of translations is dynamic since it blows or moves to and fro. This is deliberately done just to reject the concept of a Created Ruh [AIR]. The concept of Hypostatic Spirit moving to and fro on the face of wather may correspond to the movement of Hypostatic Spirit or Ghost when it incarnated in a dove by assuming the nature of the bird dove. But Ruh is air which has some pressure on the face or surface of Water[s].But this air is pressing water and this air is reffered to God. This means that God was the creator of this Ruh. The reference of the RUH to God is of creative nature and not of hypostatic nature. SIXTH PRIMILINARY. The word face may be taken as SURFANCE like SUFACE of water instead of face of water but if the Hebraic words are concern Face Of Water is preferred over Surface of water even if the word surface is more easy to conceive in minds for a student of Chemistry or Physics yet Laxitonically FACE IS THE CORRECT TRANSLATION. Seventh Preliminary
A more close translation close in meaning is as follow,.
AND THE EARTH [ARS] WAS NOT -HABITENT AND EMPTY ,AND DARKNESS WAS UPON THE FACE OF WATER. AND RUH OF GOD WAS SITTING LIKE A BIRD WHICH HATCHES [HER EGGS] ON THE FACE [SURFACE]OF WATER[S] Or more Hebraically as: AND THE EARTH [ARS] WAS NOT IN-HABITENT AND EMPTY ,AND DARKNESS WAS UPON THE FACE OF WATER. AND RUH OF GOD SAT LIKE A BIRD WHICH HATCHES [HER EGGS] ON THE FACE [SURFACE] OF WATER[S]. IT MAY BE NOTED THAT THERE IS NO GRAMMATICAL CONTINOUS TENSE OR VERB IN HEBREW. THERE FORE THE BEST ENGLISH ALTERNATIVE IS THE INDEFINITE TENSE AND MEANING. WHETHER IT BE PAST OR PRESENT OR FUTURE.It may be noted that GOD never required a continuous tense to Express His Sentences. Seventh Preliminary.
A moving Spirit is more close to trinitical Spirit rather than a not moving spirit , that is why the dynamic translation is made rejecting the original Hebraic word. Athanasianism believes that Spirit is a Divine Hypostatic Suppoitum . Unitarianisms are divided over the issue of the spirit. Some believe that it is a created Suppositum, some believe that it is a NON SUPPOSITUMIC FORCE, and some believe that is some thing created which is some time Suppositumized by God and Other times is reverted to Non Suppositumic state as according to Will Of God. Question is that if this is a Hypostasis living in the Divine Ousia Of Sureme Being then it cannot drift away from the Ousia, hence it can not be on the waters with out assuming a non eternal nature. But a HYPOSASIS CAN ASSUME ONLY a human nature, that is why if the spirit is a Hypostasis then it must have assumed some human nature before moving to and fro other wise with out assuming any nature it cannot come on earth since it can not be drifted from Ousia leaving behind neighbouring hypostases and to land on earth to move to and fro. CONCLUSION. THE SPIRIT OF GOD WAS NOT MOVING TO OR FRO AND NOT BLOWING BUT SITTING AND HATCHING DEPOSITS OF WATHER. THIS SPIRIT WAS NEITHER A CREATED SUPPOSTUM NOR A HYPOSTATIC SUPPOSITUM BUT A WIND. [A NON SUPPOSITUMIC THING] As it is clear that in trinitical Christology No Hypostasis inDivine Ousia Of Triune God has power to assume the nature OF AIR OR WIND OR WATHER, AND HAS ONLY POWER TO BECOME MALE HUMAN BEING By assuming [MALE] human nature, AND PERHAPS [MALE] DOVES AS WELL By assuming [MALE] Dove Nature .IT IS TRIED TO SKIP THE CONSEQUENCES WHICH DOES NOT CONCORDM WITH TRINITY AND RELATED TRNITICAL DOGMAS, THEY HAVE MISTRANSLATED THE STATIC RUH OF HEBRAIC TEXTY IN FEVOR OF DYNAMIC RUH OF TRANSLATIONS. ONCE AGAIN KEEP IN MIND ONCE FOR ALL TIMES THAT THE HEBRAIC WORD סדחפ does not mean To Move To And Fro.
.................................................................................... <1> iT MAY BE TRANSLATED AS PLURAL OR SINGULAR DEPENDING UPON THE CONTEXT.
, .<2> The words SPIRIT and GHOST were once used in almost same sense. But now a Spirit may be Good or Bad or Neutral. But a ghost is always bad except in the case the word Holy is before it, Such a distinction has made a problem .Since it may not be objectionable to a number of persons to call Holy Spirit As Spirit Of God, But It may be objectionable to many of them to call HOLY GHOST as Ghost Of God. It is very interesting to note once for all that even then Holy Ghost and Holy Spirit are two English terms used for the one and the same Trinitical Hypostasis as according to English believers of Dogma Of Trinity. This is the reason that the incorrect translation And Spirit Of God Was Moving To And Fro is never translated as And Ghost Of God Was Moving To And Fro. But fortunately the word ghost when refers to the founder of Christianity Yeshua or Isu still convey a good meaning. One still find about Yeshua /Iesus that He gave up the Ghost, instead of he gave up the Spirit. But once again the reason to keep this word is to save believers in the Trinitical Dogma from believing that Issus gave up the Ruh Of Elohem OR The Pnuma Of Theos mensioned in their translation of Genesis. Some Unitarian sects of Chhristianity believes that this Spirit is a Divine Energy of Force while some think it is a Created (Spiritual) Person or a Created Spirit that is a Person or a Created Hypostasis. .