An interesting look at the trinity “Hear, O Yisra’ĕl: יהוה our Elohim, יהוה is one!” Debarim (Deuteronomy) 6:4. The Father is יהוה (YAHUAH,) our Creator. The Son, יהושע (Yahushua), is יהוה. Ruach haQodesh (the Wind that is Set Apart or the Set-apart Spirit) is יהוה. Seasoned Scripture students may easily find many verses to support these assertions. What they may not find are Scriptures that state there are three Elohims in One. Rather, Scriptures show that literally, יהוהis One. The form of יהוה’s expressions to us have varied. He was a Man who appeared to Abraham with two messengers. He was a Burning Bush, a Pillar of Fire and Cloud, the Rock that followed Yisra’ĕl in the wilderness, a Voice, and many others in Scripture. However, He was One. He did not change to express Himself to us He never changes. He used whatever means He chose, and He was able to do more than one thing at a time. He could be born of a virgin, live a life, die for us, and continue to fill the Universe. He could descend as a dove, and continue to fill the Universe. יהוה chose to express Himself to us as Father, Son, and Spirit not only to accomplish tasks, but also to reveal aspects of His Nature. Advanced students of Scripture may wish to compare what was revealed about the personalities of the Father, Son, and Spirit. There was only one. Most doctrines about the Trinity have roots in both Scripture and pagan religions. Many pagans worshiped a trinity of deities, often with a father, mother, and son (among many more.) As the Church drifted farther from Scripture, pagan customs were included to unify the Roman Empire and to attract converts. The Roman Catholic Church admitted to this practice in print.Theologians used flawed analysis of Scripture as they attempted to apply Grecian logic to Hebrew concepts. Hebrew concepts expressed in common Greek were less precise than Greek philosophy expressed in scholarly Greek. Only through Ruach haQodesh may anyone understand Scripture. A man named Callistus, later Pope Callixtus I from 217 to 222, was a proponent of "modalistic monarchism." He was murdered and dropped in a well. That doctrine was similar to the one briefly presented above. "History of the Christian Church," by Phil Schaff, Vol. 2, Ch. 12,§151, 3rd Revision, 1890, and "The Catholic Encylopedia." Regrettably, so many are promulgating the damnable fraud of a “replacement” theology. The powerful movement afoot called Replacement Theology which states that the church is Israel and the promises given to Israel were primarily for the church. ►Nowhere in the scriptures is it suggested that the name Israel is a “spiritual” name. Its actual meaning may be interpreted in two ways. ►One reads the “sar” root as “prince” or “administrator”, and therefore interprets the name Israel as a “prince of Elohim” or a “minister of Elohim”. ►Another reads it as the verb “yissar” which means “he will struggle”. This reading fits much better with the circumstance for which the name was given, which was Yakov wrestling all night with the Angel of Elohim. ►Thus the name Israel reflects Yakov’s willingness and determination to struggle with Elohim to receive His blessing. Of course this has nothing to do with genetics or any change to them, but Israel is the ancestor of a distinct people who are characterized by their struggles to conform with YHVH’s Torah instructions. The subsequent history that is responsible for this family of people who are his descendants becoming known as “ YEHUDI [Jews”] is another story. ►The name Yehudah (i.e., Jew) has an even greater “spiritual” meaning than Israel, but it also does not constrain itself to any genetic heritage. ►It is rather the heritage of a people, a culture, a civilization. While this civilization has been able to absorb additional people, [ BY MARRIAGE, AND OR CONVERTING TO THE WAYS OF THE AUTHENTIC HEBREWS] regardless of their genetic origin, and incorporate them into the people who are genetically related to the original Avraham, Yitzhak, Yakov/Yisrael, and their genetic descendants who became the people of Yisrael, there is no “spiritual” change that diminishes the importance of that peoplehood. However, when Shaul [paul] was trying to describe a legitimate position for non-Jews to participate in the covenant of Israel in their response to Rav Yeshuah, he did invoke a spiritual and linguistic metaphor, in that the Hebrew idiom describing someone as a “son” allowed a meaning of demonstrating the characteristics of the named “parent” as an example or archetype. Hence, “sons of Avraham” are those who exemplify Avraham’s trust in Elohim. ► Note that the passage in Galatians 3 does not continue the metaphor to describe these “sons of Avraham” also as sons of Yitzhak and Yakov/Israel. ►They do not become Israel and they do not replace the physical sons of Israel. When they are grafted into the domesticated Hebraic tree with its Hebraic Root in Rav Shaul’s metaphor of Rom.11, there also exist domesticated branches that have been broken off but can be grafted back in even more easily and naturally than the wild branches. ►When we see Israel in the scriptures, it really means Israel and not some supposedly-spiritual alternative. Some folks just cannot envision how Elohim can possibly continue to deal with the people of Israel, to whom His “gifts and calling are irrevocable”, when some of those people seem inimical to Rav Yeshuah, Torah, and his ways. ►But Elohim’s promises are eternal, and He will do as He promised. When all has been accomplished, perhaps those who cannot now understand it will do so then, and perhaps the mistaken writer below will be among them. But the attempt to reinterpret Rom.11:26 with some other “Israel” is quite false. Israel is none other than the Hebraic people, and “all Israel” includes more than merely the Hebraic remnant who follow Rav Yeshuah. ►Non-Jews who follow Rav Yeshuah do not become Israel merely because they can be accounted “sons of Avraham”. There is a justification hidden in Gal.4 for some of them to convert to Hebrewism, but in general, throughout his letter, Shaul discouraged them from doing so (because efforts by others to coerce them to do so had been seriously misleading and misplaced). Shaul’s instructions to the Galatians are reflected in Acts 15, where the halakhic decision of the Jerusalem Council was to allow the non-Jews a lenient freedom not to keep the entire Torah, but to learn from Jews as Torah is taught in synagogues each Shabbat. ►The only rules laid upon them were those common to “sons of Noa’h”, and Shaul had already described their spiritual legitimacy as “sons of Avraham” whose faith predated the detailed instructions of Torah that were later became incumbent upon Jews. Even while Shaul was discouraging the Galatians from allowing themselves to become circumcised needlessly, he re-iterated the requirement for Jews and circumcised proselytes to keep the entire Torah (Gal.5:3). ►The fact that the scriptures delineate promises made to the Hebrew people, that are not also made to all of humanity, is a matter in which all those who trust YHVH should rejoice and not take resentment. Remember Rav Yeshuah’s parable of the laborers who protested that some who worked for less time were nonetheless given the same wage, and the boss who replied that if he chose to pay in that way, it was not for them to challenge his choice. ►Rom.11:26 reflects YHVH’s choice to favor Israel, meaning the Hebrew people, even as His “new covenant” described in Jer.31 was made only with the Hebrew people (described in their then 2 political entities of Israel and Judah). Grafting in non-Jews who participate in trust rather than by deserving it is also His mercy and His favor, and it is not appropriate for such grafted-in branches to boast against the domestic ones. SHALOM AND GREETINGS TO ALL: SHAUVO-TOV {HAVE A GOOD WEEK}: BY MICHAEL TAYLOR 53@ DATE: NOVEMBER 24, 2011
Posted on: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 01:04:52 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015