1

The Oneness / Trinity Conversation

Deut 6:4 "Listen, hear and obey Yisra’el, is our God; is one."

Sh'ma Yisra'el Yahuah Eloheinu Yahuah egad.

Gerrie C Coetzee

Seeing that this statement, made here as well as in other places, is the only direct and distinct statement about this

particular topic in Scripture, I thought it fitting that it should be my point of departure, foundation and accepted truth

and not what Theology or anything else has taught me.

First a few thoughts to steer us in the right direction:

1. If we already have a pre-conceived doctrine about this, it becomes impossible to discover truth. Any one who

truly seek truth, will test and investigate all possibilities to discover truth.

2. Today there are more people than ever that claim they believe in the first 5 books of the Bible (Torah) as the

start of truth and that they form the foundation. Does Torah teach that God is a Trinity?

3. Is there a Trinity teaching in the Tanakh?

4. If a certain teaching is in the Bible, why would people add verses and words to proof that teaching?

5. Do the Messianic prophecies show the Anointed One as man or God? Did Yeshua then fullfilled these

prophecies?

6. Could God have a God?

7. Is our definition of the word "God", correct as "something to be worshipped?"

8. Did Yeshua declare Himself to be God at any time?

9. If Yeshua is God and is sitting on the right hand of God, how many gods are there?

10. Why do people expect the Anointed One to be God as well? Where does it imply or teach that He must be God?

11. The command to Fathers to come out of false teachings is still valid.

We will look at all these things and more.

Pronounciation and meaning: (Whenever you see the Name in this writing):

- doesn't matter how you think the nekkudot (Tetragrammaton) must be pronounced – it can not be translated as "I

Am". That would be (ehyeh).

The Tetragrammaton consists of the Name (cp. Ps. 68:5), together with the present incomplete participle of the verb

that is, (hoveh). When combines with , the kamatz nikkud (/a/) is subject to ("the law ,(hayah) ָהיָה

of hatafering"), which is called "propretonic reduction" by English /Hebrew linguists; so the kamatz nikkud becomes a

shva nikkud (/e/), which causes the pronounciation to be "Yeh-" rather than "Yah-". See that the one 'waw' falls away

which makes the definitive "w" pronounciation into a "oe" easier. A possible pronounciation is therefor Ye –hu - ah and

the meaning freely as "Yah is [the] existing One" or "Yah is [He] who is."

History of the Trinity, Yeshua is God, teaching.

The debate in theological circles about the trinity and the divinity of Yeshua only started in the fourth century.

Therefor it was not an issue before then! There were no Trinity teaching in the first church and that is a well

documented fact.

In 322 aY, Constantine, Ceasar of Rome called a council together to decide on the divinity of Yeshua, because it was

tearing his kingdom in two – thus not to find truth – and forced a decision in 325 aY. He forced compromise through a

Greek word – homoousia – which means to be of the same substance. Eusebius of Nicomedia presented the initial

proclamation that presented Yeshua as the Son of God, which was rejected and a changed resolution was signed.

Biblical truth was replaced with pagan believes to work so called unity. Those who did not sign it were either banned or

killed. Athanasius, who was a man of tyranny and violence, who took the position as bishop of Alexandria and killed

people who differed from him, took the opportunity to enforce his teaching which was received from Plato. He had this

extreme and unscriptural idea about Yeshua and defended it with "it is above human comprehension." Many argued

with him but he established it more and more in the Roman Empire. (Christianity Through the Centuries, pp. 142-

143)

2

It is through many violence, fear and political powers that the Trinity doctrine became acceptable and orthodox. Plato's

teaching: "The Platonists believed in an Unknown Father, a Word (Logos) and a world soul." Archana Srinivasan,

Famous Greek Personalities, p. 30.

The Roman Church acknowledges: ". . . one should not speak of Trinitarianism in the New Testament without serious

qualification . . . when one does speak of an unqualified Trinitarianism, one has moved from the period of Christian

origins to, say, the last quadrant of the 4th century. It was only then that what might be called the definitive Trinitarian

dogma “one God in three Persons” became thoroughly assimilated into Christian life and thought." New Catholic

Encyclopedia, 1967 ed., Vol. XIV, p. 295.

Jesuit scholar Edmund Fortman states:

The Old Testament . . . tells us nothing explicitly or by necessary implication of a Triune God who is Father, Son and

Holy Spirit. . . . There is no evidence that any sacred writer even suspected the existence of a [Trinity] within the

Godhead. . . . Even to see in [the Old Testament] suggestions or foreshadowings or ‘veiled signs’ of the trinity of

persons, is to go beyond the words and intent of the sacred writers.

. . . The New Testament writers . . . give us no formal or formulated doctrine of the Trinity . . . Nowhere do we find any

Trinitarian doctrine of the three distinct subjects of divine life and activity in the same Godhead.

By bringing the Trinity teaching into the church, satan shifted the emphasis to the Son and the work of the Holy Spirit

and removed and forgot the Father. Now the church also moved away from its original form = obedient to Father's laws

and standards with Yeshua as Model, Master and acknowledged Anointed One with His origin in Yisra'el.

Please read: "When Jesus Became God: The Struggle to Define Christianity During the Last Days of Rome."

I quote what Academics and Researchers say about the so called Trinity:

Scholars: Zero Evidence in New Testament for the Trinity

Being that it took 350 years after the Messiah to solidify the Trinity, the simple question is, why so long? If the Trinity

is found and supported in the Bible, why did it require many centuries and numerous church schisms, arguments,

debates, and even violence to legitimize and propagate this doctrine? Why wasn’t it authenticated from the very

beginning, in the book of Acts, avoiding endless questions and wrangling over it? Where is the New Testament

teaching of a triune being?

The fact is the word "Trinity" is not found anywhere in the Bible. Even the concept is missing. Clearly it was contrived

in the imaginations of man. An exhaustive review of Scripture and history reveals the simple fact that the Trinity

teaching was unknown to the early New Testament assembly, as supported by numerous authorities:

• "Because the Trinity is such an important part of later Christian doctrine, it is striking that the term does not appear in

the New Testament. Likewise, the developed concept of three coequal partners in the Godhead found in later creedal

formulations cannot be clearly detected within the confines of the canon" (Oxford Companion to the Bible, 1993, p.

782).

• "The Bible does not teach the doctrine of the Trinity. Neither the word ‘trinity’ itself nor such language as ‘one-in-

three,’ ‘three-in-one,’ one ‘essence’ (or ‘substance’), and three ‘persons,’ is biblical language. The language of the

doctrine is the language of the ancient church taken from classical Greek philosophy" (Christian Doctrine, Shirley

Guthrie, Jr., 1994, pp. 76-77). It’s important to observe here that the author attributes the notion of the Trinity not to

Scripture, but to influence from Greek philosophy.

• "This is not itself a Biblical term, but was a term coined by Tertullian to refer to this whole concept under one word"

(Classic Bible Dictionary, Jay P. Green, p. 483). Tertullian was a Christian author and apologist who lived from 160 CE

to 225 CE. Before Tertullian the word trinity did not exist in Christian writing.

• "Many doctrines are accepted by evangelicals as being clearly taught in the Scripture for which there are no proof

texts. The doctrine of the Trinity furnishes the best example of this. It is fair to say that the Bible does not clearly teach

the doctrine of the Trinity" (Basic Theology, Professor Charles Ryrie, 1999, p. 89).

• "It is indeed true that the name ‘Trinity’ is nowhere to be found in the Holy Scriptures, but has been conceived and

invented by man" (The Sermons of Martin Luther, John Lenker, Vol. 3, 1988, p. 406). Even though Martin Luther was

an avid supporter of the Trinity, he correctly recognized that the doctrine was derived from man and not from the Bible.

3

• "The term ‘Trinity’ is not a biblical term…In point of fact, the doctrine of the Trinity is a purely revealed

doctrine…As the doctrine of the Trinity is indiscoverable by reason, so it is incapable of proof from reason"

(International Standard Bible Encyclopedia , vol. 5, p. 3012, "Trinity").

• "It is admitted by all who thoughtfully deal with this subject that the Scripture revelation here leads us into the

presence of a deep mystery; and that all human attempts at expression are of necessity imperfect" (New Unger’s Bible

Dictionary, 1988, p. 1308, "Trinity"). Should we rest our entire faith on a belief that is a "deep mystery?"

• "Respecting the manner in which the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit make one God, the Scripture teaches

nothing, since the subject is of such a nature as not to admit of its being explained to us" (Cyclopedia of Biblical,

Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, p. 553, "Trinity").

• "Precisely what that doctrine is, or rather precisely how it is to be explained, Trinitarians are not agreed among

themselves" (A Dictionary of Religious Knowledge, 1885, "Trinitarians"). Disagreements abounded through the

centuries even among those who advocate this doctrine. Should not a belief so critical and indispensable be not only

plainly and clearly taught in the Scriptures, but at least be understood and agreed upon by its very proponents?

• "The formal doctrine of the Trinity as it was defined by the great church councils of the fourth and fifth centuries is

not to be found in the NT" (The Harper Collins Bible Dictionary, 1996, "Trinity").

• "The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies… The council of Nicea in

325 stated the crucial formula for that doctrine in its confession that the ‘Son is of the same substance…as the Father,’

even though it said very little about the Holy Spirit…By the end of the 4th century…the doctrine of the Trinity took

substantially the form it has maintained ever since" (Encyclopaedia Britannica, "Trinity").

• "…primitive Christianity did not have an explicit doctrine of the Trinity such as was subsequently elaborated in the

creeds of the early church" (New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Vol. 2, 1976, p. 84, "God").

• "The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian

life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century… Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been

nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective" (New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. 14).

Both secular historians and Bible scholars readily admit that the doctrine of the Trinity was not official church teaching

until the council of Nicea. This is startling! Neither the Apostles nor the early apostolic fathers had a concept of a triune

relationship among the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. It is freely admitted that the doctrine was not established until 400

years after the Savior’s resurrection. If the doctrine of the Trinity is not biblical, how did it originate?

The Word as our only foundation and standard

We declare easily that the Word of God is our standard. Please consider the following.

You grew up alone on an island. One day an aeroplane fly over and drop a Bible correctly translated.

If you now study this, it truly is your only standard – no other input. Now the question: Which feasts will you

keep? Will you celebrate Yeshua's birthday since there is no such command? Which day will you set apart as

God's day with His standards? What will you eat and not eat? Who will you worship as God?

Scripture appended as "proof"

Before we consider Scriptural and Academic proof, just a sobering thought:

1 Yog 5:7 and 8 is the only text in the Bible remotely being able to justify a trinity doctrine. No "original" manuscript

before the year 600 after Yeshua contains this text – not the Greek and definitely not the Aramaic as original. If it is an

original and valid teaching, why did the fathers think it necessary to write the verses into the Bible to proof their

viewpoint?

Take a minute to think about it.

Here are the changed verses from the King James Version:

1John 5:6 This is he that came by water and blood, [even] Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And

it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.

1John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are

one.

1John 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.

4

Let us now look at the original translation:

1Yog 5:6 This is He who came by water and blood, Yeshua, the Anointed One; not by water alone, but by water and

blood

1Yog 5:7 and it is the Spirit that testifies, because the Spirit is truth.

1John 5:8 There are three that testify: the Spirit, the water and the blood and the three are in unity.

Note the following on 1John 5:7: "During the controversy of the 4th cent. over the doctrine of the Trinity the

text was expanded - first in Spain ca. 380, and then taken in the Vulg. - by the insertion: ‘There are three that

bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit: and these three are one.’ A few late Greek

manuscripts contain the addition. Hence it is passed into the KJV. But all modern critical editions and

translations of the NT, including RSV, omit the interpolation, as it has no warrant in the best and most ancient

manuscripts nor in the early church fathers" (The Interpreter’s One-Volume Commentary on the Bible, note

on 1John 5:4-12).

Proof 1: - Scripture:

Meaning of the word that is used in referring to the Anointed One.

Ps 110:1 A Psalm of David -- Jehovah said unto my Lord, Sit at My right hand, until I place Your enemies as Your

footstool. [VW]

This verse was used to refer to the Mashiag by the Pharisees and by Yeshua himself. It tells us that the relationship

between God and Yeshua is that of Deity and non-Deity. The Mashiag is called adoni (my lord) and in every one of its

195 occurrences adoni (my lord) means a superior (lord, boss) who is not God. Adonai (with a long vowel) on the other

hand refers exclusively to the One God in all of its 449 occurrences. Adonai is the title of Deity and adoni never

designates Deity. This must be distinguished from Adonai with a short vowel meaning "our master."

If the Mashiag was called Adonai (with a long vowel) this would introduce “two Gods” into the Bible and would be

polytheism. Ps 110:1 should guard us all against supposing that there are two who are God. In fact the Mashiag is the

supreme human being and agent (qnoma) of the One God. Ps 110:1 is the Bible’s master text for defining the Son of

God in relation to the One God, his Father.

Why is it that a number of commentaries misstate the facts about Ps 110:1? They assert that the word for the Mashiag

in Ps 110:1 is adonai. It is not. These commentaries seem to obscure a classic text defining God in relation to His Son.

The Hebrew text assigns to the Mashiag the title adoni which invariably distinguishes the one addressed from the Deity.

The Mashiag is the supreme human lord. He is not the Lord God (I Tim. 2:5; I Cor. 8:4-6; Mark 12:28-).

Why is the Mashiag called adoni (my lord) and never adonai (my Lord God)?

Dictionary:

Adonai is referring to God but Adoni to human superiors.

Adoni — ref. to men: my lord, my master [Ps. 110:1]

Adonai — ref. to God…Lord (Brown, Driver, Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament, under adon

[= lord]).

“The form ADONI (‘my lord’), a royal title (I Sam. 29:8), is to be carefully distinguished from the divine title

ADONAI (‘my Lord’) used of Yahweh.” “ADONAI — the special plural form [the divine title] distinguishes it from

adonai [with short vowel] = my lords” (International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, “Lord,” p. 157).

5

“Lord in the OT is used to translate ADONAI when applied to the Divine Being. The [Hebrew] word…has a suffix

[with special pointing] presumably for the sake of distinction…between divine and human appellative” (Hastings

Dictionary of the Bible, “Lord,” Vol. 3, p. 137).

“Hebrew Adonai exclusively denotes the God of Israel. It is attested about 450 times in the OT…Adoni [is] addressed

to human beings (Gen. 44:7, Num. 32:25, II Kings 2:19 [etc.]). We have to assume that the word adonai received its

special form to distinguish it from the secular use of adon [i.e., adoni]. The reason why God is addressed as adonai,

[with long vowel] instead of the normal adon, adoni or adonai [with short vowel] may have been to distinguish from other gods and from human lords” (Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible, p. 531).

Proof 2 Scripture is very direct and specific about this point of oneness in question:

Deut 4:35 It is shown to you so that you might know that is God; there is none beside Him.

Deut 6:4 "Listen, hear and obey, Yisra’el, is our God; is one."

1 Sh' 2:2 There is none as set apart as ; truly, there is none but You and there is no Rock like our God.

2 Sh' 7:22 Because of this, -God, you are great, because there is no-one like You and there is no other God

beside You, according to all we heard with our ears.

Yes 44:6 This is what , the King of Yisra’el and Redeemer, -Tzva’ot says: ‘I am the first and the last and besides

Me there is no other God’.

Yes 45:5-6 I am and there is none beside Me; except for Me, there is no other God; I will gird you, although you

did not know Me 6 so that people may know from the coming up of the sun to the going down of the same, that apart

from Me, there is no other God; I am and there is none other;

Yes 46: 9 Remember the things that were of old, because I am God and there is no other; I am God and there is no

one else like Me;

Psa 18:31 for who is God except and who is as mighty as our God?

Mar 12:29 Yeshua answers him: "The first of all commandments is: Listen, hear and obey, Yisra’el, is our God;

is one."

:32 The teacher of the law said to Him: “Excellent, Teacher, You have truthfully stated that God is one and

that there is no other beside Him

1 Cor 8:4 therefore, concerning the food offered to idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world and that there is

no other God but One, 5 for although there are those that are called “gods”, whether in heaven or on earth, just

as there are many gods and many lords, 6 to us there is one God: God the Father, from whom everything

comes and in whom we are; One Master- Yeshua, The Anointed One, for everything is by Him and we

also are in His hands.

For Judaism the proof of God’s existence is incomplete if it does not absolutely confirm His Oneness. Although Jewish

philosophers understood oneness differently, they never diverged from the fixed belief of God’s oneness. During the

middle ages, philosophers began to see God’s oneness as a corporate oneness. This is explained by the understanding

of the meaning of the word “egad “. Let us look at a few dictionaries for the explanation.

6

Proof 3- Dictionary study:

Brown-Driver-Briggs' Hebrew Definitions - early 1900's

- Original:

- Transliteration: 'echad

- Phonetic: ekh-awd'

- Definition:

1. one (number)

a. one (number)

b. each, every

c. a certain

d. an (indefinite article)

e. only, once, once for all

f. one...another, the one...the other, one after another, one by one

g. first

Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Greek and Hebrew Dictionaries - 2008 by Jonathan Mickelson

H259 'echad (ekh-awd') adj.

1. (properly) united, i.e. one

2. (as an ordinal) first

This might be an example thereof, depending on a person's understanding of the meaning of the word ‘united’.

This is a modern dictionary – moving away from the accepted and only meaning of old = ONE.

Let us have a look at a few older dictionaries:

Heb and Eng Lexicon of the OT incl. Biblical Chaldean. 1849

A Lexicon, Hebrew, Chaldean and English - Samuel Lee D.D. - 1840 = has the same explanation

Genius’s Hebrew and Chaldean Lexicon to the OT Scriptures - 1810 translated 1824 = has the same explanation

for the following word.

Seeing that the plural form of the word "egad" exists, it makes sense to me

that this word would have been used to refer to a combined oneness. BUT it

is not used when referring to God.

The same word is found in Bagster's Analytical Hebrew and Chaldean Lexicon.

I would like to wrap up this section of our word study with a quote from the “Etymological Dictionary of Biblical

Hebrew; Based on the commentaries of Samson Raphael Hirsch":

In this dictionary, considered by most Hebrew scholars to be the best Hebrew – English dictionary, there is

no concept of a corporate oneness or combination. The derivitive of the meaning 'more than one' from this

word must come from some other, later sources.

7

- being one 1: be one; be alone 2: unit; one out of many 3: several identical items

It makes sense to me that the dictionaries adapted the meaning of the word to accommodate this teaching of a corporate

oneness. Today's meaning of the word does not reflect the original meaning but instead the gradual adaptation of the

word to give answers to questions.

For the true meaning – in the old dictionaries – we find only one meaning – an absolute ONE.

Apologist Greg G.Stafford states:

"The idea that the one God of the Bible is multi-personal arose hundreds of years after the contents of the Bible

were completed" (IBID <http://www.forananswer.org/Bibliography.htm>, p. 129).

Proof 4 - Yagid: We must add that most arguments state that the word “egad" is used and not "yagid" which would without any doubt be

presented as the singular ‘one’. THAT IS DONE BY THE ASSUMPTION THAT THE WORD "EGAD" IS IN PLURAL

FORM, WHICH WE ALREADY HAVE SEEN TO BE INACCURATE. This is regularly used as "proof" to show that

there is more than one. The word “yagid” originates from the word “yagad” which means "combined". I believe that

this specific singular form is not used because at the places "egad" is used it refers to God performing different roles

and not that He is composed of different persons (entities). He is our Father and Redeemer and Provider and Healer etc.

H3173 - Original: - Transliteration: Yachiyd

- Phonetic: yaw-kheed'

- Definition: adj

1. only, only one, solitary, one

a. only, unique, one

b. solitary

c. (TWOT) only begotten son subst

2. one

- Origin: from H3161

H3161 - Original: - Transliteration: Yachad

- Phonetic: yaw-khad'

- Definition:

1. to join, unite, be joined, be united

a. (Qal) to be united

b. (Piel) to unite

- Origin: a primitive root

Proof 5 - Elohim – plurality: The next argument deals with the "plural form" of God which is used in Genesis, even from creation.

I would like to mention that it is only the Masoretic Hebrew text that uses this plural form "elohim" for God.

Gen 1:26 – Then God said: “Let us make man in Our image, just like us and let them rule over the fish of the see, the

birds of the sky, the livestock and over the whole earth and over all the animals that move upon the earth.”

The Complete Word Study Old Testament further states, "Elohim; this masc. noun is pl. in form but it has

both sing. and pl. uses. In a pl. sense it refers to rulers or judges with divine connections (Ex. 21:6); pagan

gods (Ex. 18:11; Ps. 88:8); and probably angels (Ps. 8:5; 97:7)…In the sing. sense it is used of a god or a

goddess (1 Sam. 5:7; 2 Kgs. 18:34); a man in a position like a god (Ex. 7:1); God (Deut. 7:9; Ezra 1:3; Is.

45:18 and many other passages," Lexical Aids, 430.

"The name Elohim is unique to Hebraic thinking: it occurs only in Hebrew and in no other ancient Semitic

language. The masculine plural ending does not mean “gods” when referring to the true God of Israel,

since the name is mainly used with singular verb forms and with adjectives and pronouns in the

singular (e.g., see Gen. 1:26). "

Against popular belief I do not believe that the word “elohim” necessarily depicts a plural form, but rather an absolute

form of majesty and power. Please attentively re-read the quotation above. With this in mind and the fact that singular

nouns and adjectives are used in combination with the word “elohim”, I propose that it can not be proven without any

doubt that “elohim” refers to a plurality in all places it is used. My thoughts on this is strengthened by the fact that

the Aramaic Tanakh only uses the singular "eloha" when referring to God.

8

Proof 6 – Trinity: origin, other faiths and Christianity:

Author Marie Sinclair writes, "It is generally, although erroneously, supposed that the doctrine of the Trinity is of

Christian origin. Nearly every nation of antiquity possessed a similar doctrine" (Old Truths in a New Light, 1876, p.

382). The belief in a triune deity is also very ancient, and can be traced back to ancient Babylon. "Will anyone after this

say that the Roman Catholic Church must still be called Christian, because it holds the doctrine of the Trinity? So did

the pagan Babylonians, so did the Egyptians, so do the Hindus at this hour, in the very sense in which Rome does" (The

Two Babylons, by Alexander Hislop).

A question few ever stop to ask is why the Trinity, a belief held firmly by most of Christianity, is totally lacking in the

teachings of the Bible? The historian Will Durant offers this revealing explanation, "Christianity did not destroy

paganism; it adopted it…The Greek language, having reigned for centuries over philosophy, became the vehicle of

Christian literature and ritual; The Greek mysteries passed down into the impressive mystery of the Mass. Other pagan

cultures contributed to the syncretist result. From Egypt came the ideas of a divine Trinity" (The Story of Civilization,

vol. III).

The trinity concept of the Living Creator God of the Bible is not unique to Christianity and the trinity principle of

gods can be found in most if not all religions.

"Triads of gods appear very early, at the primitive level. The archaic triads in the religions of antiquity and of

the East are too numerous to be mentioned here. Arrangement in triads is an archetype in the history of

religion, which in all probability formed the basis of the Christian Trinity." C. G. Jung. A Psychological

Approach to the Dogma of the Trinity

A triple deity (sometimes referred to as threefold, tripled, triplicate, tripartite, triune, triadic, or as a trinity) is a deity

associated with the number three. Such deities are common throughout world mythology; the number three has a long

history of mythical associations. Carl Jung considered the arrangement of deities into triplets an archetype in the history

of religion.Triads\Triple deity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.htm

Hislop’s statements are supported in the Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, "Although the notion of a divine triad

or Trinity is characteristic of the Christian religion, it is by no means peculiar to it. In Indian religion we meet with the

trinitarian group of Brahma, Siva, and Vishnu; and in Egyptian religion with the trinitarian group of Osiris, Isis, and

Horus, constituting a divine family, like the Father, Mother and Son in mediaeval Christian pictures" (Trinity, p. 458).

In Hindu mythology, Trisiras and Dattatreya are explicitly

tricephalous deities, but other instances of three-headedness are

also found in Hindu iconography, for example in depictions of

the goddess Durga.

The smaller Gallehus horn has a three-headed figure, holding an

axe in its right hand and a rope tethered to the leg of a horned

animal in the left.

In Slavic mythology, the god Triglav, (literally meaning "three-

heads") is a three-headed man, sometimes depicted with three

goat heads. He is depicted as representation of three major Slavic

gods that vary from one Slavic tribe to another that serve as the

representatives of the Slavic realms. Triglav is usually described

as a fusion of these gods.

The hound Cerberus in Greek mythology is often depicted with three heads.

Geryon has been depicted as three-headed on the Herculean Sarcophagus of Genzano currently held at the

British Museum. Triads\Triple deity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.htm

According to the Larousse Encyclopedia of Mythology, Sumer, an ancient civilization first settled around 4500 BCE

to 4000 BCE in southern Mesopotamia (modern Iraq), contained a similar belief, "The universe was divided into three

regions each of which become the domain of a god. Anu’s share was the sky. The earth was given to Enlil. Ea became

the ruler of the waters. Together they constituted the triad of the Great Gods" (1994, pg. 54-55).

9

Historical polytheism

Perhaps even more important is the influence of Greek philosophy. According to Aristotle, "All things are three, and

thrice is all: and let us use this number in the worship of our gods; for, as the Pythagoreans say, everything and all things

are bound by threes, for the end, the middle and the beginning have this number in everything, and they compose the

number of the Trinity" (Author Weigall, Paganism in Our Christianity, p. 197-198).

The Classical Greek Olympic triad of Zeus (king of the gods), Athena (goddess of war and intellect) and Apollo

(god of the sun, culture and music)

The Delian chief triad of Leto (mother), Artemis (daughter) and Apollo (son) and second Delian triad of

Athena, Zeus and Hera

The Olympian demiurgic triad in platonic philosophy, made up of Zeus (considered the Zeus [king of the gods]

of the Heavens), Poseidon (Zeus of the seas) and Pluto (mythology)/Hades (Zeus of the underworld), all

considered in the end to be a monad and the same Zeus, and the Titanic demiurgic triad of Helios (sun when in

the sky), Apollo (sun seen in our world) and Dionysus (god of mysteries, "sun" of the underworld) (as can be

seen on Plato's Phaed on the myth Dionysus and the Titans)

In ancient Egypt there were many triads:

o Osiris (husband), Isis (wife), and Horus (son),

o the Theban triad of Amun, Mut and Khonsu

o the Memphite triad of Ptah, Sekhmet and Nefertem

o the Elephantine triad of Khnum (god of the source of the Nile river), Satet (the personification of the

floods of the Nile river), and Anuket (the Goddess of the Nile river).

o the sungod Ra, whose form in the morning was Kheper, at noon Re-Horakhty and in the evening Atum,

and many others.

The Hellenistic Egypt triad of Isis, Alexandrian Serapis and Harpocrates (a Hellenized version of the already

referred Isis-Osiris-Horus triad), though in the early Ptolemaic period Serapis, Isis and Apollo (who was

sometimes identified with Horus) were preferred

The Roman Capitoline Triad of Jupiter (father), Juno (wife), and Minerva (daughter)

The Roman pleibian triad of Ceres, Liber Pater and Libera (or its Greek counterpart with Demeter, Dionysos

and Kore)

The Julian triads of the early Roman Principate:

o Venus Genetrix, Divus Iulius, and Clementia Caesaris

o Divus Iulius, Divi filius and Genius Augusti

o Eastern variants of the Julian triad, e.g. in Asia Minor: Dea Roma, Divus Iulius and Genius Augusti (or

Divi filius)

Eastern religions Ayyavazhi Trinity

Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva (Trimurti) in Puranic Hinduism

Lord Dattatreya

Fu Lu Shou in Taoism

Mitra, Indra, and Varuna in early vedic Hinduism

Saha Realm Trinity in Mahayana Buddhism (Shakyamuni, Avalokitesvara and Ksitigarbha)

Shakti, Lakshmi, and Saraswati (Tridevi) in Puranic Hinduism

Three Pure Ones in Taoism

10

Christianity

The Trinity, comprising the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

Let us look at Christianity

I will not even go to the real Trinity inside esoteric Catholicism – Father, Mother and Son.

Theologians interpret "the trinity" as one God in three persons, which I believe is unacceptable and a complete defiance

for Godly oneness. I personally still have to find a reference to the trinity that does not refer to or imply three

separate gods. The following quotation is a typical statement about Yeshua:

"In any orthodox statement of the doctrine of the Trinity, the Second Person is described as possessing all the attributes

of the godhead, being distinguished as the Second Person in contrast to the First or Third Person of the Trinity and as

the eternal Son in contrast to the Father or the Holy Spirit. In such utterances as Hebrews 13:8 it is made clear that these

attributes are the eternal possession of Christ continuing even in His incarnate state. Even before His incarnation,

however, Christ had certain properties and ministries which distinguished Him from God the Father and God the Son."

Part II: The Person of the Incarnate Christ--John F. Walvoord

I see at least two entities in this statement – not a God that is One. It sounds like idolatry.

Here is another explanation:

"The propositions involved in the doctrine are these: (1.) That God is one, and that there is but one God (Deu 6:4; 1Ki

8:60; Isa 44:6; Mar 12:29, Mar 12:32; Joh 10:30). (2.) That the Father is a distinct divine Person (hypostasis,

subsistentia, persona, suppositum intellectuale), distinct from the Son and the Holy Spirit. (3.) That Jesus Christ was

truly God, and yet was a Person distinct from the Father and the Holy Spirit. (4.) That the Holy Spirit is also a distinct

divine Person."

Individual persons (gods) still sound like more than one and thus idolatry to me.

Deut 6:4 Listen, hear and do, Yisra’el, is our God; is One.

1 Kon 8:60 that all the peoples of the earth may know that is God; there is no other. Yes 44:6 Thus says , the King of Israel, and His Redeemer of Hosts; I am the first, and I am the

last; and besides Me there is no God. Mar 12:29 Yeshua answered him: “The first of all the commands are: Listen, hear and do, Yisra’el, is

our God; is One.

Mar 12:32 So the scribe said to Him, "Well said, Teacher. You have spoken the truth, for there is one God,

and there is no other besides Him."

Models people use for the Trinity

The egg

"An egg consists of 3 parts, but is one."Let us understand! Are the yellow, the white and the shell the same? Is

only one of them an egg? Sorry they are three distinct materials!

Water

Water is in a steam, liquid and ice form but is the same. Let us understand! It can only be steam or water or

ice at any given time – never all 3 at the same time.– Sorry but that is 3!

Proof 7 – The Name:

The following argument consists of 2 parts and I am going to use a well known scripture

Matt 28:18 And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, All authority is given to Me in Heaven and on earth.

:19 Go therefore and instruct all the nations, immersing them into the name of the Father and of the

Son and of the Holy Spirit,

:20 teaching them to observe all things whatever I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you

always, even to the end of the age. Amen.

11

The Argument: "The Father, Son and Spirit is mentioned together in one verse and is a proof of the trinity."

Answer: That makes Avraham, Yitz'gak and Ya'akov a trinity too!!!

The Argument: At other places it is only mentioned to baptize in the Name of Yeshua, but here it is commanded to

baptize in all three Names!!

Answer: Some answer that this verse was not in the original, but I have this verse in a copy of the oldest document –

The Kabouris – in Aramaic. The problem is with the understanding of what it says.

1. The word ם .In the Name" is in the singular" ּבשֵׁ

2. The Hebrew word for "Name" means "Character and Authority."

3. The good news according to Mattityahu is written with emphasis on the Kingdom, from and to the Jews

- who naturally have an understanding of the oneness of God.

4. The full meaning of the word baptism is "to saturate / fill up." Like when you dip (Baptise) your rusks in

the coffee or a sponge in the water.

5. Together with verse 18 and 20 it is clear that it is a command to discipleship which in the light of

1 Yog 2:6 gives us the context = "to be like Yeshua." :6 he who claims to stay in Him, for him it is

neccassary to live as He lived.

6. It starts and happens at the baptism with water which is the symbol of death for the person and resurrection

in the Character and Authority of the Father who showed it to us through Yeshua as Model in the power of the

Spirit which is the presence of the Father with us. There is no refference to a tri-une God here.

Proof 8 - The Spirit of God:

Let me use this opportunity to discuss the aspect of the Spirit.

Yog 4:24 "God is Spirit and it is fitting that those who worship Him do so in Spirit and in truth.”

Notice that it does not say God has a spirit. He is Spirit. The Spirit is what God is – His Spirit is who He is.

Psalm 51:1-11 and Yeshayahu 63:1-11 shows that the Set Apart Spirit (Holy Spirit) and Spirit of God are the same

Spirit.

The Spirit is His working and action in a person.

Before we continue with the proof, let us have a look at a few different verses and concepts.

1. Yeshua as Model / Representative

Yog 14:6 Yeshua answered him: “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life; no one comes to my Father, except through

Me. 7 If you had known Me, you also would have known my Father. From now on you have known Him and you

have seen Him.”

Here we have a few explanations:

1. The way to our Father is through Yeshua.

2. By knowing Yeshua, we get to know the Father.

3. No one can see the Father – so how could they see Him? I believe that this scenario is the same as in the first book of

Genesis. Adam was created in His image = to represent His Being and Character – to be like Him.

In the same way they could see the Father by looking at the One who was like the Father in every way; thus we

have, by Example, the chance to again be created in the image of Father and live by it.

2. Do the following verses hint that there might be other ‘gods’?: Ps 95:3 for is a great God and a great King above all gods.

Ps 97:9 for You, , are highly exalted above the whole earth; You are highly exalted above all gods.

Ps 135:5 I know that is great and that our Master is above all gods.

Ps 136:2 Praise the God of gods with open hands, for His loving goodness endures forever.

On the surface it seems that way -

Let us also read a statement made by Sha'ul :

12

1 Cor 8:4 therefore, concerning food sacrificed to idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world and that there is no

other God, besides One, 5 for although there may be so called ‘’gods,” if it be in heaven or on earth, just as there are

many “gods” and many “masters” , 6 for us there is only One: God-the-Father, from Whom everything is and us in Him;

One Master, Yeshua, The Anointed One, for everything is through Him and we also are in His hand. 7 Not all have this

knowledge. Furthermore, some that are aware of the idol, eat it as an idol sacrifice and their conscience, which is weak,

is polluted,

The topic of Sha’ul’s teaching is a little bit different, but his statement makes the above mentioned question clear.

There are no other gods except one, but there are those who acknowledge the “gods” and that is why the gods are

mentioned so that people can understand what is said. There is only one God.

Proof 9 - Yeshua is the Son of God. This is confirmed throughout scripture.

Prov 30:4 Tell me: Who has gone up to heaven and come down? Who has gathered the wind in His fists? Who has

bound the waters in a cloth? Who has determined the boundaries of the earth? What is His Name (Character and

Authority) and what is the Name (Character and Authority) of His Son, if you know?

Mat 14:33 And those who were in the boat, came and fell before Him saying: “Truly, You are the Son of God!”

Mat 17:5 While he was still speaking, behold, a brightly lit cloud covered them and a voice spoke from the cloud

saying: “This is my Son whom I love and with whom I am very satisfied. Listen to Him!”

Mat 26:63 Yeshua remained silent and the high priest said to Him: “I demand an oath from You, by the living God, that

You tell us if you are the Anointed One, the Son of God?”

64 Yeshua answered him: “You have said it, and I say to you: ‘From now on you will see the Son of man seated at the

right hand of Power and you will also see Him come on the clouds of heaven’.”

Yog 1:49 Natan’el answered and said to Him: “Teacher, You are the Son of God, You are the King of Yisra’el!”

Yog 11:27 She answered Him: “Yes, my Master, I believe that You are the Anointed One, the Son of God, who has

came into the world.”

Rom 1:2 that which He promised from the beginning through the prophets in the Holy (set apart) Scriptures, 3 regarding

His Son, Who was born according to flesh from the seed of the house of David 4 and revealed with power through the

Holy (Set Apart) Spirit by the resurrection from the dead as the Son of God: Yeshua, The Anointed One, our Master.

Heb 1:2 and in these last days He spoke to us through His Son, Whom He appointed Heir of everything. Through Him

He created the universe,

1 Yog 4:13 In this we know that we remain in Him and He in us: that He has given us His Spirit 14 and we have seen

and are witnesses that the Father has sent His Son as Saviour to the world. 15 Whoever confesses that Yeshua is the Son

of God; in him God abides and he in God.

1 Yog 5:10 Whoever continues to believe in the Son of God, has this witness in himself. He who does not believe has

made God a liar because he does not believe the testimony that God has given of His Son.

One thing is clear and that is that we must believe that Yeshua is the Son of God. This is then taken as a statement

"Yeshua is God" which it never says. As we have seen, it is a part of the promise in the Tanakh and that the Anointed

One (HaMashiag) is the Son of God. It is necessary for salvation to believe (trust) in the Anointed One’s work of

redemption, Kingship and that He is the Son of God. Son of Godgiven pure seed , the same as Adam was pure when

created.

13

Proof 10 - Yeshua is the ”Mediator”

Heb 8:6 but now Yeshua, the Anointed One, has received a better ministry, just as the covenant is better, of which He

was made Mediator, with better promises than what were given,

Heb 9:15 And for this reason He is the Mediator of a new covenant, for in His death He was Salvation for those who

transgressed against the first covenant so that we may receive the promise, those who are called to an eternal

heritage,

Heb 12:24 and to Yeshua, the Mediator of a new covenant and the sprinkling of blood that speaks clearer than that of

Hevel.

There must be an individual who acts as mediator between, and represents, both parties. Neither God nor sinful man

could act as mediator to restore the relationship with man. This individual must be both man without sin (representing

man) and man filled with the fullness of God (representing God).

From our church backgrounds we all learned that Yeshua and the “Holy Spirit” are God in the trinity concept,

but Yeshua is not the Father – to me this creates 3 gods and thus idolatry. This scenario can not work identify

the true God.

Proof 11 - The Pre-existence of Yeshua:

Speaking of Yeshua as the Son of God had a much different connotation and meaning in the first century than it had

ever since the Council of Nicea (325 AD). It meant just that - Son of God - and has never meant "God." Talk of His pre-

existence ought, in all cases, to be understood, on the analogy of the pre-existence of the Torah, to indicate the eternal

divine purpose being achieved through Him, rather than pre-existence of a personal / physical kind.

I do not find any proof in Scripture that a personal / physical pre-existence is taught. In Jewish (Semitic) thought

there is no such thing. "When the Jew wished to designate something as predestined, he spoke of it as already ‘existing’

in heaven." [Thus "pre-existence" statements in the NT really have to do with fore-ordination and predestination. It was

the Greeks who misunderstood Jewish ways of thinking and turned Jesus into a cosmic figure who entered the earth

from outer space. But is such a Jesus a human being? Is he the true Messiah of Yisra'el?]

I decided to borrow the following on this topic since it is complete in itself without any of my own adding:

The Nature of Pre-existence in the Hebraic Mind and the "Logos"

I wish to point out 2 basic facts that are ESSENTIAL to a proper understanding of Scripture, particularly the gospel of John. Indeed, they are essential to properly understand the entire New Testament! The almost universal failure to acknowledge these 2 facts can be traced to the general and intentional anti-Hebraic approach Christian leaders take in their study of the New Testament and to the ignorance of Hebraic things among sincere Christians. It is likely at least one of these 2 facts will be something you did not realize; however, I am convinced many of the leaders of Christianity DO realize it but purposely conceal it because of the damage it would cause to their Trinitarian teachings as well as many other orthodox dogmas of Christianity. These 2 facts are presented below followed by discussion of each. I am going to merely touch the fringes of the subjects. Entire books could and have been written on these 2 subjects alone. FAR more detailed discussion can be found in numerous publications among which is the outstanding book, The Doctrine of the Trinity - Christianity's Self-Inflicted Wound, by Sir Anthony Buzzard and Charles Hunting. Now to the 2 basic facts.

1. The Hebraic understanding of "pre-existence" DOES NOT necessarily imply a LITERAL, PHYSICAL pre-existence.

2. The term logos has other renderings that are FAR more logical and understandable than the common mystical and VERY BIASED rendering of "Word".

14

PRE-EXISTENCE IN THE HEBRAIC MIND

I wish I could convey the enormous importance of this topic. The need to understand scripture from the context in which it was written is underscored by this issue. Please pause and truly consider as you read how crucial it is for us to understand what was written from the context of those that wrote it. Furthermore, please recognize the irrefutable fact that ALL the authors were Jews that thought, lived, and wrote entirely within a Hebraic framework. As you continue reading this remember it is critical to interpret Scripture in the proper context and that task is just as relevant to the pre-existence issue as it is to anything else.

The pre-existence topic is especially applicable to the gospel of John; however, it finds application throughout the entire New Testament. There is no better example of the tragic breakdown in communicating Hebraic writings to the Westernized world than has occurred with the concept of "pre-existence". The typical understanding of John's writings is the result of a failure (I believe premeditated misrepresentation) to properly describe the Hebraic concept of this crucial issue. The common Christianized concept of the pre-existence of Messiah, in particular, has been divorced from the purely Hebraic mind set of the New Testament authors. Two of the many catastrophic outcomes of abandoning this Judaic context are the Trinity and the belief that Yeshua is God. I distinguish them as 2 separate outcomes because in fact they are, and many reject the Trinity yet still cling to the belief that Yeshua is "God" because of confusion over the question of pre-existence. At the very least the gospel of John has been grossly misinterpreted because of the failure to apply the proper context to it's interpretation.

I need only reference a single Hebraic source to clarify the issue. The clarity of the reference leaves no misunderstanding and removes the veil of deceit so long used by the church to conceal truth. Below is a quote from Everyman's Talmud - The Major Teachings of the Rabbinic Sages, by Abraham Cohen. Everyman's Talmud is an excellent little book (if you call almost 400 pages little) that summarizes many of Judaism's primary teachings - a book every sincere student of Scripture should have on their bookshelf. It should be realized this is the GENERAL, STANDARD HEBRAIC understanding of this issue. The following quote is on page 347 and is taken from the section which discusses the Messiah in the chapter on the Hereafter.

The belief was general that the sending of the Messiah was part of the Creator's plan at the inception of the Universe. "Seven things were created before the world was created: Torah, repentance, the Garden of Eden (i.e. Paradise), Gehinnom, the Throne of Glory, the Temple, and the name of the Messiah" (Pes. 54a). In a later work there is the observation: "From the beginning of the creation of the world king Messiah was born, for he entered the mind (of God) before even the world was created" (Pesikta Rab. 152b)

So, here we see how the "pre-existence" of Messiah (christ) was understood by the Hebraic mind. Remember that ALL THE BIBLE'S WRITERS WERE HEBRAIC! Messiah was "born" in the MIND (thought, motive, plan) of YHVH (God) before creation but did NOT literally exist! The concept of a PHYSICAL literal pre-existence is arrived at by most Christians only because they have unknowingly (or knowingly) abandoned the Hebraic concept.

I must press this issue. It's importance is unequaled. It must be noted how the pre-existence of the Messiah is defined in terms of his (Messiah's) existence in the MIND of G-d since before Creation. There is absolutely no literal pre-existence assumed at all!

You see, the Hebraic mind is so overwhelmed and awed by the magnificence, power, splendor, and infinite nature of YHVH that it assumes to "exist" whatever is in YHVH's mind long before His "thought" actually physically manifests itself. The certainty of YHVH's plan (thought) makes it as though the "thought" had already happened. YHVH's intent or thought or motive or plan is so certain that it is said to "exist" despite its absence in the physical world! Obviously, since the "intent" or "plan" or "motive" of YHVH has always included the coming Messiah, the Hebraic mind assumes him (Messiah) to have "existed" (in the Mind of YHVH) since before creation! However, this "pre-existence" was NOT considered literal or physical!

15

This concept is witnessed from the New Testament. In Paul's epistle to the Messianic community in Rome we find the following:

Romans 4:17 (NASB) 17 (as it is written, "A father of many nations have I made you" ) in the sight of Him whom he believed, even God, who gives life to the dead and calls into being that which does not exist.

The phrase, "calls into being that which does not exist." has as its literal rendering, shown in the center column reference of the NASB, "calls the things which do not exist as existing". The New King James Version renders this phrase as, "calls those things which do not exist as though they did." These

phrases present PRECISELY the same idea as the Hebraic concept just discussed. And no wonder, since Paul was a "Hebrew of Hebrews."

So, in his epistle Paul provides STRONG evidence that supports the traditional Hebraic meaning of Pre-existence in his description of YHVH as a "God who ... calls those things which do not exist as though they did." Therefore, for those that wish proof from the New Testament, you now have it! Better yet, it comes from the very epistle and the very apostle Traditional Christianity most exalts! For those of you that prefer the King James Version, it is even more clearly stated as:

Romans 4:17 (KJV) 17 (As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were.

For additional contributions to the New Testament evidence I present regarding the fact that pre-existence is not literal, consider the following verses:

1 Peter 1:19-20 NKJV 19 but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot. 20 He indeed was foreordained (foreknown, destined) before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you

Revelation 13:8 (KJV) 8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

If we apply the logic of those promoting a literal pre-existence of Messiah to this verse we would have to conclude that Messiah was slain upon the execution stake long before Creation! Obviously, the Lamb (Yahshua Messiah) was not slain until long after "the foundation of the world". Trinitarians and others promoting the anti-messiah of the Beast hate this verse because of the damage it causes to their incorrect preexistence doctrine. So, we see hear just one more verse from the New Testament that buttresses my argument that pre-existence in the Hebraic, SCRIPTURAL context is NOT a literal pre-existence. Instead it is to be understood as the state of existence in the mind, thought, plan, or motive of God. God's divine plan included the Lamb (Messiah) before the foundation of the world; however, that Lamb did NOT literally exist until it/he was manifested at his appointed time!

Note also that the context from which Revelation 13:8 was taken discusses the Beast and how he will deceive virtually the entire world. It is this very Beast that is promoting the anti-messiah (replacement Messiah), "other gods", and rebellion against YHVH's eternal instructions (Torah or Law)! Sadly, most "that dwell upon the earth" DO worship that Beast - traditional Christianity!

Finally, Hebraic tradition has the understanding that ALL souls are pre-existent and await the time when they will be placed within mortal beings. With this in mind, ALL of us could be said to be "pre-existent", which would of course include the MAN, Yahshua. However, even within this belief, the LITERAL, PHYSICAL pre-existence is not present and Yahshua's "pre-existence" would not be unique. The notion is that every soul

16

that will ever live was created in the beginning and, upon their appointed time, enters into the physical body. It is more of a "spiritual" form of pre-existence.

I will be more specific in the application of this FUNDAMENTAL BIBLICAL CONCEPT in those verses where it needs to be remembered; however, its use should be obvious in the gospel of John. I will most assuredly show due diligence in applying this Hebraic truth as it is encountered.

LOGOS AND THE PRE-EXISTENCE ISSUE

Interestingly, the term logos dovetails perfectly with the previous sure Biblically Hebraic fact. Why do I say this? Well, if the translators had not been so biased in passages such as the famous ones of John 1 where they render the term as "Word", it would be obvious; however, since they were I will explain. The translators even expanded upon their bias in John 1 by rendering the term "Word" with a capital "W" - a totally unsubstantiated and blatant show of bias!

Let's look at the possible Greek meanings of the term logos. The New Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of

the Bible defines among the various meanings the following:

1. Motive

2. mental faculty

3. Reasoning

4. Intent 5. Thought 6. Divine Expression

What is really illuminating is the fact that, according to the Strong's Concordance I referenced, a Greek philosopher named Heraclitus first used the term logos around 600 B.C. to designate the divine reason or plan which coordinates a changing universe. Thus, we have a historic precedent which shows the proper understanding of logos is as the "Divine Plan, thought, or motive" of the Almighty Creator. Furthermore, when this corrected rendering is applied to John 1:1-3 the term logos can be shown to not be

referring specifically to Messiah (much less some mysterious "Word-man") but, instead, refers to the Divine Plan from (or through) which YHVH created all things and which included Messiah as the crowning achievement! As a side note, the use of the personal pronouns "he" and "him" are NOT concrete and early versions of Scripture - Tyndale's original translation for example - used the term "it". The article entitled, "What does John 1:3-4 REALLY Say?" discusses this in more detail.

John 1:1-3 In the beginning was the Divine plan/motive/thought, and the Divine plan/motive/thought was with God, and the Divine plan/motive/thought was God. The same (Plan) was in the beginning with God.

All things were made by it and without it was not any thing made that was made.

This makes perfect sense! In the beginning YHVH had a Divine Plan. This Divine Plan was, of course, with YHVH since it was His master plan conceived in His Divine Mind. The only information mankind has available to understand God is His Torah (instructions) - His Divine Plan. Through study of that Plan one can grasp aspects of God. There is nothing else available with which the characteristics of YHVH God can be understood. Therefore, His Divine Plan - being the very manifestation of YHVH's Divine thought and Mind - is YHVH! Yahshua the Messiah, as the perfect servant and emissary of God, revealed the character of God more than any other man; however, everything he did and preached was accomplished within the sphere of God's Plan. Thus, the Plan of God is still the only way we have of understanding God. Of course, since YHVH (God) is Spirit, the use of terms such as "mind" are anthropomorphic so that we can grasp basic concepts.

17

Anthropomorphism: attribution of human characteristics or to nonhumans: the attribution of a human form, human characteristics, or human behavior to nonhuman things such as deities in mythology and animals in children's stories.

The concept that the Torah or Mind (thought, Plan) of YHVH is inseparable from YHVH is a long standing, traditional Hebraic understanding of the Creator! It is comparable to you and your mind (mental faculty, reasoning) being inseparable. It can be said that you ARE your mind; thus, you ARE your "logos" (thought, mind). (It does seem, however, that Traditional Christian and counterfeit Messianic leaders may have somehow become separated from their mental faculties - or "lost their minds".) So, just as a human can be said to be his/her mind, YHVH can anthropomorphicly be said to be His mind (logos). Later verses could be correctly construed to interject the sublime and ultimate ingredient of His Plan, which is Messiah. However, this "Plan" or intent for a future Messiah was only in the Mind of YHVH and did not physically and literally get "begotten" until Yahshua the Messiah physically appeared upon earth 2000 years ago.

There is no argument that "word" is one possible rendering; however, why would the translators choose the most nebulous possible rendering of the term logos in areas such as John 1? The rendering of "word" is completely illogical in the first chapter of John unless one is already predisposed to belief in the Trinity and intentionally biases the translation to support a "mysterious" inner meaning. The historic precedent mentioned earlier and the more clear rendering of Divine "plan" or "motive" or "thought" or "intent" makes far more sense and removes all mystery! So what we have in crucial verses of the New Testament is an intentionally ambiguous and biased translation done in such a way so as to hide the far clearer translation of the Greek word logos!

Additional support for the opinion that "intent" or "motive" or "thought" is the better rendering of logos in John 1 is its clear agreement with the standard Hebraic understanding of the pre-existence of the Messiah which we covered earlier! JOHN WAS A HEBREW - A JEW - A MAN WITH A JUDAIC/HEBRAIC MIND THAT THOUGHT AND WROTE FROM A THOROUGHLY HEBRAIC MINDSET! In order to believe the common rendering of logos as "word" is correct or that the common notion of the literal pre-existence of Messiah is correct one must TOTALLY EJECT from the basic Hebraic foundation of ALL the writings of the Scriptures! Unfortunately, since Christianity was originally invented in the 4th century to do that very thing we now have a typical orthodox Christian understanding of extremely critical passages that is completely wrong and violates basic Hebraic concepts! Without doubt, Messiah WAS in the mind of YHVH before Creation and this "thought" or "intention" was "manifested in the flesh" much later when the "Plan" for Messiah materialized. So, the logos was, indeed, "manifested in the flesh"; however, when properly translated what we see is that "the plan/intent was manifested in the flesh."

So, in summary, the doctrine of the Trinity and the deity of Messiah rides largely upon a grossly incorrect understanding of "pre-existence" and an intentionally ambiguous and "mysterious" translation of the Greek term logos. The facts I've presented are clear regardless of your acceptance of them. At the very least they render as completely impotent and inconclusive the often and fiercely promoted "traditional" understanding of many "proof" passages used by Trinitarians as they attempt to promote one of the many false doctrines of the Beast and great Harlot and her daughters.

Source: Bruce Barham

18

Proof 12 – Manifestation of God or The Intermediatary of God:

Manifestation of God can be briefly described as the physical revelation of God, making Him known or

revealing Him in some form on earth. An aspect (Qnoma) of the invisible through which He shows Himself.

Revelation through messengers (Angels)

One of the various ways in which God has been manifested, or revealed, in the Tanakh (OT) is through His messengers

(angels).

One such angel spoke to Hagar when she fled from the face of Sarah

Genesis 16:7-14: 7 The angel of YHWH found her by a fountain of water in the wilderness, by the

fountain on the way to Shur. 8 He said, "Hagar, Sarai's handmaid, where did you come from? Where

are you going?" She said, "I am fleeing from the face of my mistress Sarai." 9 The angel of YHWH

said to her, "Return to your mistress, and submit yourself under her hands." 10 The angel of YHWH

said to her, "I will greatly multiply your seed, that they will not be numbered for multitude." 11 The

angel of YHWH said to her, "Behold, you are with child, and will bear a son. You shall call his name

Ishmael, because YHWH has heard your affliction. 12 He will be like a wild donkey among men. His

hand will be against every man, and every man’s hand against him. He will live apposed to all of his

brothers." 13 She called the name of YHWH who spoke to her, "You are Elohim who sees," for she

said, "Have I even stayed alive after seeing him?" 14 Therefore the well was called Beer-lahai-roi.

Behold, it is between Kadesh and Bered.

The angel spoke as if he were God Himself referring to a promise only God could perform. The words of Hagar (vs 13)

show she thought of the angel as God. The angel is referred to in the text as “” and by Hagar as “God”. As a

representative of God, the angel was called by His Name (“”vs 13 ) and spoke the words of God to Hagar, not

his own words. This is a principle used throughout the whole of Scripture. Doesn't Genesis 16:13 clearly state that it

was who spoke to Hagar? Don't 16:7, 9, 10 and 11 clearly state that the person Hagar saw and spoke with was the

angel of ? Didn't Hagar understand that she had dealt with the Mighty One? Concerning this Angel of , doesn’t

Scripture record that ’s Name is in Him?

A Messanger before you in the wilderness:

In their wilderness wanderings the children of Yisra'el had a powerful guide and protector: “Behold, I send an Angel

before thee, to keep thee in the way ... Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your

transgressions: for My Name is in him ... thou shalt indeed obey his voice, and do all that I speak” (Exodus 23:20–22).

There are two things to note about this angel: the children of Yisra'el were not to provoke his voice, but this was also

God Himself speaking—“I speak”. In verse 21 we are told that the Name of God was in the angel, again signifying that

he represented the one God. God delegated power and authority to the angel to withhold the forgiveness of sins

according to the righteousness of God.

Exo 23:20,21 Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I

have prepared. Beware of Him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for

My Name is in Him.

In the Torah, and in the rest of the Tanach God's intermediary is often called the Angel of . The Angel in 's

mission is to make all facets of known to mankind. The Angel of was an exact image or His manifested

Presence (Glory) of since no-one may see Him. The authority of the Angel was given by the power of 's name.

19

Bil'am and Balak

In the story of Balak we can see how the authority of HaShem's name makes the Angel of worthy of worship.

Num 22:31 states "the LORD opened the eyes of Balaam, and he saw the angel of the LORD standing in the way,

and his sword drawn in his hand: and he bowed down his head, and fell flat on his face."

When the Angel appeared, Balaam was overcome with the feeling that he needed to worship the Angel. Balaam was

witnessing the power and the authority that had given the Angel. Therefore, Balaam bowed and fell on his face.

Balaam reacted this way because the Angel of carried the name of as Exo 23:21 states; "Beware of him, and

obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for My Name is in him". The Angel

of was given 's name in order to act in God's stead. Therefore, the Angel of is entitled to the same

respect that receives.

Angels who appeared to Abraham in Genesis 18 : (IAV)

Gen 18:1-3 “1 And appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day; 2

And he lift up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood by him: and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from

the tent door, and bowed himself toward the ground, 3 And said, My , if now I have found favour in thy sight, pass

not away, I pray thee, from thy servant:

Here Avraham recognized the presence of the Almighty God in the messenger / man.

God’s Appointed Representative - Yeshua

Applying this all to Yeshua makes more sense than any other scenario.

Yeshua was the extention of the presence of God here with us and as representative had the full authority of God. He

became "God with us." All the quotes above, about what the angels did is also applicable to Yeshua.

It was not Yeshua who appeard in the Tanakh, but the specific messengers God used for the purpose.

Did God die on the cross? God is one.

I think this is quite clear now.

Proof 13 - Let us look at more Scripture

from which we can learn and see something:

Mat 3:3 This is the man of which the prophet Yesha’yahu spoke when he said: “The voice of one who calls: ‘Prepare

the way for in the wilderness and make straight His paths!’” Yes 40:3; Mal 3:1

Before who does Yoganan go in this section? , Yeshua or both? is given from both this verse and the verse in the Tanakh where the prophesy was written.

Yeshua is the One discussed in this context - vs. 11, the One whose path he comes to prepare.

Vs. 2 – Here again we have the two-folded purpose: Salvation and Kingdom. He came to prepare the way for the

Saviour and for the Restorer of the Kingdom.

Luk. 2:10 The messenger says to them: “Do not be afraid, because notice, I proclaim unto you great joy which will be

for the whole universe, 11 because today the Saviour, who is The Master, The Anointed One, is born for you in the city

of David.

Yogannan prepared the way for Father to save and redeem in and through Yeshua.

Was Yeshua completely human? Yes.

Did Yeshua pour out His life / being (nefesh) on the cross? Yes.

Did Yeshua truly suffer, bled and agonize as human being? Yes.

Did Yeshua need His Father to rise Him from the dead? Yes.

Is Mashiyag (The Anointed One) a human title / office for the sake of and His people? Yes.

Did Yeshua admit that His life / being (nefesh) was distressed unto death – which means that He is mortal? Yes.

Did Yeshua speak to Himself when He prayed to ? No.

Did Yeshua say that there are two ‘wills’ – His and that of His Father and that His is secondary to that of His Father?

Yes.

20

- PLEASE STAY WITH ME. – All will fit into the puzzle -

Are Yeshua and His Father One? Yes. Of mind, of Character of will. Like we also ought to be through Yeshua.

Was the Anointed One there since the beginning of time? Yes. As planned will of God – not as being.

Is Yeshua correct when He declares: "Before Avraham was, I was."? Yes. As plan of God.

Is it true that there cannot be more than one separate Godly being – then it is idolatry? Yes.

Let us start with the solution:

Yeshua thus have human and Godly characteristics, but He is not a type of “God-man” like Hercules of the Greeks.

Hercules, or any other mythological ‘god-man’ is an integrated god-man through DNA. If it really could have existed –

as it is only a myth - it could not have had normal DNA and would have been inseparable god and human. In the

heathen mind – no problem. In the Hebrew mind – a rejectable thought! , in His nature must be ONE and only

ONE.

The following step in our understanding comes from the Tanakh:

1. Yes 11:1-2 Then a Shoot Mat 2:23

will sprout from the stump of Yishai and a Branch from his roots will bear fruit. 2

The Spirit of will rest upon Him, the Spirit of wisdom Luk 2:52

and understanding, the Spirit of counselling and

power, the Spirit of knowledge and the respectful fear of .Luk 2:40

It is clear that the "nefesh" being / life and the Spirit "ruagh" of are separate in Yeshua. Therefore He can say: "Not

My will, but Your will." In the good message of Yoganan He openly denies that His humanity was lifted up and

changed in . Yeshua never claims that His "nefesh" is , but precisely that He is human and can die. This makes

sense, because:

cannot die

cannot sacrifice Himself for the sins of humankind. (He cannot die.)

can not be mediator between God and man..

Is it not more logical that it is a perfect, Torah (instructions) obeying man who pays the price in our place and

that is looking at our unity with His Son and sees His Son’s impartial uprightness instead of our weakness?

That is why "he who has the Son, has the Father" and "no one comes to the Father, but by Me."

's Spirit can have different character attributes, but only one nature.

-Yes 11:2 The Spirit of will be upon Him, the Spirit of Wisdom Luk 2:52 and understanding, the

Spirit of council and power, the Spirit of knowlwdge and the respcful fear of the . Rev 4:5

-Open 1:4 Yoganan, to the seven congregations in Asia: undeserved favour to you and peace, health,

prosperity and complacincy from Him who is and who is to come,Eks 3:14 of the seven Spirits before His

throne. Yes 11:2

All these are actually only the Spirit of that is set apart.

The Spirit of God is in ALL its characteristics in Yeshua as is clear in: Col 1 and 2, Phil 2:6-11 and

Heb 1:1-5.

I believe that Father does not put forth some sinister or incomprehensible concept, but that it is logical and acceptable.

We are going to create a scenario in which we would try to answer all the questions. (You should please converse with

us in order to touch on all the unanswered concepts and verses.) Stay with us till the end to grasp the whole picture

together with all the information up to now and decide then.

2. Z’kharyah 12:10:

is speaking from chapter 12.

says: "ET ASHER DAKARU" – it means "they pierced Me."

Key point: Since can not literally be pierced or killed – a fact – it is a metaphoric reference to the

Spirit of which is in the flesh of the Son and that it is that flesh that is pierced.

...cry for Him (the Son) like the bitter wailing for an uniqually first born (YACHID)."

21

The following is borrowed from "The Refiner's Fire" and Andrew Gabriel Roth in the Aramaic-English New

Testament:

Christianity as a whole has built its entire theology around the very much misunderstood writings of Paul, which seem

more important to them than the very words Yeshua our Messiah spoke - the Messiah who knew He was "an arm" of

Yahweh (Isaiah 53:1); not someone who came to usurp His Father's Godhood and start a new religion. See for yourself

that Messiah PRAYED to the Father (not to Himself) because, as His "arm" He was an extension of Yahweh, a human

with a Divine Qnoma (Nature) who came to fulfill His Father's Plans to have His Son die as our Final SIN

Sacrifice....So, let's discuss John 17 scripture by scripture.

Borrowed from the Aramaic English New Testament - John 17

John 17: 1. Y'shua spoke these things and he lifted up his eyes to Heaven and said

My Father the hour has come. Glorify your Son so that your Son might glorify you. 2. Just as you have given him

authority over all flesh that whomever You have given him, he will give to him life that is eternal. 3. Now this is life

that is eternal, that they might know You, that You are the Elohim of Truth, and he alone whom You have sent, the

Mashiyach Y'shua.

Life eternal is what? "That they might know YOU!"....Yeshua never came to replace Yahweh! He came as "an arm" of

Yahweh, and to do everything His father told Him:

Luke 4: 43 "But he (Yeshua/Jesus) said, "I must preach the good news of the Kingdom of God to the other towns also,

because that is why I was sent."

Luke 8: 1. And it happened after these things that Y'shua was going around in the cities and in the villages and was

preaching and declaring the Kingdom of Elohim.

Acts 28: 23 "From morning till evening the Apostle Paul explained and declared the Kingdom of God and tried to

convince people about Yeshua from the Law of Moses and from the Prophets."

Acts 24: 14. But this indeed I (Paul) acknowledge, that in that same doctrine of which they speak, I do serve the Elohim

of my fathers, believing all the things written in Torah and in the prophets.

4. I have glorified You on earth. The work that You have given to me to do I have finished it. 5. And now glorify me my

Father with You in that glory that I had with You from before the world was. 6. I have made Your Name known to the

sons of those men whom You had given to me from the world. They were Yours and You have given them to me, and

they have kept Your Word. 7. Now they have known that everything that you have given to me I have given to them and

they received them. 8. And they know that I have truly proceeded from your presence, and they believe that You have

sent me.

Please re-read that entire passage beginning in verse 4. Did Yeshua in any way suggest that He came to proclaim

Himself as someone who was empowered to change Yahweh's rules? NO! He says, "You have sent me!"

9. And I plead for them. It is not for the world I plead; rather, for those whom you have given to me because they are

Yours. 10. And everything that is mine is Yours, and Yours is mine and I am glorified by them. 11. Henceforth, I will

not be in the world, and these are in the world. And I am coming to Your presence. Kadosh[1] Father, keep them by

your Name[2] , that which you have given to me, that they may be one as We are. 12. I was with them while I was in the

world. I have kept them in your Name[3]; those whom you have given to me, I have kept. And not a man of them is lost

except for the son of perdition, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled.

22

13. And now I come to Your presence, and these things I speak in the world that my joy may be full in them. 14. I have

given to them Your Word and the world hates them because they are not of the world as I am not of the world. 15. It is

not that I plead You take them from the world, but that You might keep evil from them. 16. For they are not from the

world, as I am not from the world.

17. Father sanctify them by your Truth, for Your Word is Truth. 18. As you have sent me into the world, I also have sent

them into the world. 19. And I fear for their sakes. I sanctify myself so that they may also be sanctified by Truth. 20.

And it is not only for the sake of these I plead, but also for the sake of those who will believe in me by their word.

21. That all of them may be One; as You my Father are in me and I in You, that they also may be One in Us, that the

world may believe that You have sent me. 22. And the glory that You have given to me I have given to them that they

may be One as we are One. 23. I in them and You in me, that they may be perfected into One and that the world may

know that You have sent me, and that You have loved them as also You have loved me.

24. Father, those whom You have given to me, I desire that where I am they might also be with me that they might see

my glory that You have given to me because You have loved me from before the foundations of the world. 25. My Just

Father, the world has not known You, but I have known You. And these that You know You have sent me. 26. And I

have made Your Name known to them. And I will confess it so that the love with which You have loved me might be in

them, and I might be in them.

All of the above passages show Yeshua exhibiting respectful and reverent deference to the Father. This does not mean

He was a "lesser god"; it means He was serving as Yahweh's "arm". The arm is not the brain; it does what the brain tells

it to do, and yet it is inseparable from the brain.

By insisting that grace and mercy somehow replaced the need for obedience (We don't have to do anything but

"believe in Jesus!") Christianity has totally skewed who God is and who His Son is....

Roth up to here

The Yeshua-Scenario

When Father wanted to use a people as example to the nations of how He desires to be served, there were none serving

Him in order for Him to use them and He chose a man (Avraham) through whom He brought His people into being to

serve as example to the nations – of how to worship / adore the True Creator-God and to live according to His

Creation purpose and serve Him. From out of this people He would then send a Man as example to portray the aspects

of the standards (instructions) perfectly, to live accordingly and then as Man, who lived sinless and perfectly

according to the creation purposes of Father, again restore the Kingdom in order for others to live accordingly.

Yoganan the Baptist prepared the way for this unity: Mat 3:3 - “The voice of one calling: ‘Prepare the way of in

the wilderness and straighten His paths!’” Luk 1:16,17 "and he will cause many of the children of Yisra’el to turn

back to , their God 17 and he will go before Him in the spirit and power of Eliyahu, the prophet, to turn back the

intellect, will and emotion of the fathers to the children and those who are not convinced, to the knowledge of the

Righteous One, to prepare a people who are perfect for .” and Miryam was informed of the same two-fold

purpose and roll: Luk 1:30 "The messenger says to her: “Do not be afraid, Miryam, because you have found

undeserved grace with God, 31 see, you will become pregnant and will give birth to a Son and the Name which you

must give Him is Yeshua. 32 He will be mighty and be called the Son of Ha’Elyon (the Almighty) and -God will

give to Him the throne of His father David 33 and He will rule over the house of Ya’akov unto eternity and to His

Kingdom there will be no end."

The same word is confirmed by Zakharyah: Luk 1:76 You, son, will be called a prophet of Ha’Elyon (the Almighty,

because you will go before the Presence of to prepare His way’ 77 in order for Him to give the knowledge of life

to His people in the forgiveness of their sins, 78 through the underserved grace of our God wherein the Manifestation

from heaven will visit us, 79 to shine on those who sits in darkness and in the shadow of death in order for Him to

conduct our feet on the way of peace.”

23

Father therefore put a perfect human seed (Yeshua was not some kind of strange being with half the chromosomes etc. –

He was completely human, who needed two human seeds) in Miryam and He was born as human being. Just like Adam,

He had an advantage, but the same choices as any other human being to be made. Satan had free power (because to him

the authority on earth was given temporarily), to mislead / seduce Him like with any other person (like Adam who made

the wrong choice) and to let Him sin in order for God’s plan with Him, like with any one of us, to fail. He first had to

show Himself worthy and sinless before His command could be executed perfectly – to take as perfect human being

(thus without sin and without disobedience to the law) the punishment for sin, as brought into the world by the first

Adam (was it not Eve (Havah)? – Adam had the authority to correct and stop it, but he did not and accepted it) upon

Himself as sacrifice, as the law prescribes, (there is no other way in which atonement for sin can be made) and then, as

God restore the Kingdom (only God can present His Kingdom again to the human race) by showing and teaching it to

the human beings through the life of Yeshua and through that to incorporate the human being by giving the Power of

His Spirit to each and every one who wants to walk the path with Him and who wants to enter into His Kingdom, with

His terms. The human being will then, when Yeshua comes back to fully takes occupation of the Kingdom, again live in

the Kingdom on a new earth as Father planned it since the origin.

He thus had to overcome sin, and through that, death, as human being, because without sin there is no punishment

through death. Death is the punishment of sin Rom 6:23. We know He did this, because He overcame death and

destroyed the punishment, because He did not stay in the grave / death.

All of it is confirmed in Acts 2:22 Men of Yisra’el, listen to this message! Yeshua, from Natzeret, the Man who

appeared to you from God with mighty deeds, signs and miracles, which God, as you yourselves know, did amongst

you by His hand;

24 but raised by God and destroyed the chains of Sh’ol as it was not possible to keep Him jailed in Sh’ol,

36 Let the whole house of Yisra’el therefore truly know that God made that Yeshua, Whom you have crucified, the

Master and The Anointed One.” Here it is answered – His two-fold purpose can be fulfilled.

He also had to present the victorious life of the Kingdom; therefore the Spirit came in fullness to live in Him with His

baptism, after He showed Himself trustworthy and sinless at the age of 30 – the age at which a man may start to speak

and lead in public. He had no sin and therefore did not need the baptism, but still did it as part of the example, His first

step in the initiation as High priest and as entrance to the Kingdom life. Now the fullness of God came to live in Him on

earth (Yeshua became saturated with the Character and Authority of God) – His humanity was not taken away, but God

came to live in the human being, Yeshua, which gave Him the right to declare as God: "“ אנא אנא – I am, was, will

be who I am, was, will be." As Human being He still lived and walked sinless and asked His power from the Father,

who now lived in Him and as God He did the work / miracles of the Kingdom and prepared man for the Kingdom

through Yeshua as Model. He thus had the right and power to forgive sins and to allow a tree to die and to control

nature. As human being He spoke to His Father and asked strength in the time of need which He HAD TO go through as

human being to overcome the burden of sin and death for you and me. He could never have died naturally as

punishment for sin, because He had no sin, but laid down His life unto Father as perfect life which is breaking the power

of death as punishment because He had no sin.

On the cross He could not die as God, but there He died as man, because God can not die. This He had to do as

complete human being; therefore He reached the victory as human being and sits at the right-hand of the Father as first

glorified human being, King and will judge, because He was the proof that man can live sinless.

This scenario fulfills every standard of the law and every scenario in the life of Yeshua. He is the Saviour and Restorer

of the Kingdom of God.

Is Yeshua your Saviour from the condemnation of sin, because He also was the sin offering in your place – you who

accepted the sacrifice – AND does He rule in you through His Spirit as King and have you become part of His Kingdom

through obedience?

"Listen, hear and do, Yisra’el, is our God; is one."

Sh'ma Yisra'el Yahuah Eloheinu Yahuah egad.

This was compiled by using many quotes and pieces from Andrew Gabriel Roth and many others.