The Jewish Trinity

M rial 0 uto The Jewish Trinity Matenal com direlbs autcrars Matenal com direlbs autorars The Jewish Trinity Wh...

Author: Yoel Natan

235 downloads 2656 Views 53MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!

Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

M

rial 0

uto

The Jewish Trinity

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Matenal com direlbs autorars

The Jewish Trinity When Rabbis Believed in the Father, Son and Holy Spirit

By Yoel Natan

cP Aventine Press LLC

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Look for other books by Yael Natan coming soon! Web site: www.yoel.info

Copyright © Octo ber, 200 3 by Yoel Natan Ediuon 1,0.1

Without limit ing the rights unde r copyr ight rese rve d above. no pan of this publication may be reprod uced. store d in or introd uced into a retr ieva l sys tem , or transmitted, in any form o r by any means (electron ic. mec hanical. photocopyin g. recordin g. or otherwise ). without the pr ior wr itte n permiss ion o f both the copyright owne r and the pub lisher of thi s book. Pu blished by Avent ine Press, LLC 2208 Cabo Bah ia Chula Vista, CA 9 19 14. USA www.a veminepre ss.com ISB N: 1-59330- H)(I-6 Printed in the United Stales of A merica ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Table of Contents

Foreword

1

Glossa

3

a nd Abbreviations

Syno psis of The Jewish Trinity

9

Chap ter 01 : The Syntax War Between Trinitaria ns 15

and U n it a ria n s

Chap ter 02: Proto-Sinaitic Trinitarianism

67

Cha pter 03: The Presences of Elyon

79

Chap ter 04: The Shema

l1 3

Chap ter 05: The Trini ty in Dani el 01-05

127

Chapter 06: The Prophet Behind the Prophets

141

Chap ter 07: Various OT Presentations of the Trinitv

159

Chapter 08: The NT Use of aT Yahveh Texts

163

Cha ter 09: The "1 AM" Stateme nts

199

Chap ter 10: The Song of Moses (Deu 32)

213

Appen d ix A: MT Plurals Referring to Yahveh

249

Ap pend ix B: OT Texts That Sugges t or Speak of the Deity of the Mess iah ~cndix

265

C: Trinita rian Proofs

269

Appendix D: A Sampling of the NT Use of OT Yahveh Texts

323

En d notes

34 1

Ind ex .."

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

,.. ,., 357

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Matenal com direlbs autorars

Foreword T , ..dit;u lI

~ "Y ~

tl' i>L

MlO ~C ~

a ud the Ic st o f the OT ", l ite I" sc kll" " ' ,illte d a t tile

ex istence of the Trin ity. Th is book. ho weve r, shows that the NT writers knew that Mose s and the other OT writer s wrote strik ingly and o ften abo ut the Trinity and about the de ity' of C hrist. T he or and NT write rs both wrote abo ut Ihe Trinity and the g lory and grace of the Me ssia h so that their readers co uld he saved. The aim of this book is 10 d isperse Ihe smog o f those who wo uld ob fusca te the witnes s o f the Ot' and NT to the Tnnuy and to the dei ty of Ch r ist. so that the O'I' and NT will continue to save as many ax poxvible through the ir witness to the trut h. Th is boo k ought to accomplish this aim, God willing. beca use eve n if someone werc to arbitrarily reject the majority o f the Trinitarian proofs men tioned in this book, the mino rity of O'F and NT proo fs that remained wou ld still to tal mo re than the number of proofs kno w n before the publica tion of this book . By Goo 's grace. many readers of this book will co nclude thar: • Many of the c ults and wor ld reli gio ns frn m which people need to esc ape are based on the mistak en idea tha t Moses was unitaria n rather than Trinitarian, and • If Mo ses. Yesh/lu. and all the OT and NT writers were through and throug h Trinitarian, the n the read e r shou ld fo rsake all an ti-Tr ini tarian religions. c ults, and churches, as well as thei r leade rs, te ache rs, theologians and philosopher s, and quickly join a Trinitarian church.

'reel Natan Ma}' 2003

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Matenal com direlbs autorars

Glossary and Abbreviations N o ll' .

Wl " lh d lld

d hloH; v i dt il" ' ~

<,;;ill be lo oke d u p 0 11 Web

~ i Lc~ ~ ..,,;h d ~ .

Britannica.com H'. l nfoplease .com H' and Gu ruNet .n mr " . Intern et searc h e ngines such as Goo gle.co ni' v are also helpful. Mo st of the Bible te xts and reference works listed below ca n be fo und in sc hol arly Bible soft ware prod ucts such as HibldVorks T " or Logos T" . Some hook s, such as the KOrl1 l1 . can be found in the public dom a in on the Web. T

Transliterated Aramaic: Translation and Int erpretation Ila yah : Most High. Strong's Concordance has 'iltav with a pron unciation of i/-Iah'·ee.

/lyonin : Most High. Strong 's Concordance has

'1'1.\'111'1;11

with a pronuncia tion of

e1-\'IJIlI." ,

Translitera ted Greek : Translation and Interpretation egw eim i: " I am" or " I AM " no 14'/1 : " who is" o r "WHO IS" kunos: " lord" or "Lord"

Translit erated Heb rew: Translation a nd Interpretation Note 1: Capitalization co nvention: There is no ca pitalization in Hebrew. T his makes it a matter of interpretation whether the English translations and translitcratio ns read, for instance, "lord" o r "Lord" tadon o r Adon ), "god" or "God" teiohim or tJ ohim). "face" or " Face" tpan im or PUllim ). or spirit or Spirit (ruill'h or Rual'lI). The lac k of capitalization. or any co nventio n. for differentiating the Hebre w for "god" from "God" telohim from E/ohim ) can he co nfusing. Per instance, it has led to two translations of Exo 22:2K: "Do not re vile the gods" (KJV, LXE), and "Do not blasphe me God " (NIV, RSV. YL I). Not e 2: Ita lici zatio n con vention : Boo k titles and words that have no t yet beco me a part of the English language belo w are italic ized. MT, LXX, DSS, TR and s imilar works are not italic ized since. though they seem to I'll ' titles, they are used as proper nouns to denote families of manusc ripts. Note 3: Many of the follo wing no uns are discussed in the collective plurals chapter, adon : " master" Adon : "Lord." Capitalized when used to refer to Yahveh, adonai: " my maste rts)." adonai, like adonim, is a plural form of

l I J OII I'f' .

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

4

Yael Natan

adonai is a plural of delegation. a type of co llective noun, when used to refer to a s ing le master who has dele gated authority to anothe r master or slave dri ver. A donai: " my Lo rdt s)." Adenai is c ap italized whe n used to refer to Ytlhl'ell. AdO/wi is a plural o f delegation. a type of co llective noun , whe n used to refer to a s ingle me mber of the Trinity. but a q ua ntitat ive plural or a plu ral collec tive noun whe n used 10 refer to two or the three persons of the Trinity. adonee : " my master" A do llee: " my Mas ter." Ca pitalized when used to refer to the Son o r Spiri t. No instances of Adoncc happe n to refer to the Fath er. A ta 1l-hu: " You-he" are pa ired pro noun s. ecn aa . "o ne:' or " united one" whe n referring 10 a group. echadim: " united ones" o r " a fe w." ehyeh asher ehyeh: "I AM who I AM" el: "god" El: "God:' Capitalized when refer ring to Yahveh, The Hebrew root means "mighty one : ' The plural is elohim. El S hadda i: "God of Mig hty Ones:' Shadd(/i is a " masc uline plural" accord ing to the Westmi nster Morphology a nd Lemma Data base (WTM ), Rele ase 3,5, Westmin ster T heo logica l Scrninary.Hjtjl. elah im : "god(s ): ' "etohi m" is a plura l of delegalion , a type o f collect ive nou n, when re ferring to a single false god among his cohorts, "e lo him" is a plural collec tive no un or a quantitative plural when referring 10 angels or human judges. Elo h im : "(Iodt s}." "Elohim" is c apitalized when used 10 refer to Yahl'eh . " E/o llim" is a plural of delegation , a type of collective nou n, when used to refer to a single member of the Trinuy. " tJolr im" is a quantitative plural or a plural collective no un when used to refer to two or three persons o f the Trinity. Elyon : "ElyrJl! " literally means " high," hUI is commonly imerpreted 10 mean "Most High" or "Highesl." haElohim : " [All) the God s" khayyim : Adjective meaning, "li ving." m alek : " messenger:' ofte n interpreted to mean "angel." Malek Yah veh : " Angel of Yahveh." Capitalized whe n used to refer to the Son. panim : "facers)," "pcrso nrs)," or " prese nee(s)." "panim" is a Hebrew dua l Iorm that ca n he singular or plural, depending on the co ntext. Panim : "Face ts)." " Pe rso n(s )" or "Pre se ncer sr" (o f Yu/ll'e"l. Pan im is capitalized whe n used 10 re fe r 10 the Son or Sp irit (E xo 33 :14- 15 ). Panim is a plural of delegation, a type of co llective no un, when used to refe r to a s ing le member of the Trinity. Pan im is a quan titative plural or a plural collective noun when used 10 refer to two or three persons of the Trinity. ru aeh : "spirit," " mind," or "w ind" Ruach : "Spim." Ruach is capitalized when used to refer 10 the Spirit. S hek inah, Tile: The Son or Sp irit who are the Pamm. In rabb inic theolo gy, however, the Shekm ah is a vis ible, imperson al manifestati on of the di vine presence . Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

5

Shema, The: SIU'Ina mean s, "Hear!" in Hebrew. T he Shema refers to Moses' stateme nt. "Hear. 0 Israel : Y ahveh [the Father] land] our Elohim [the So n), Yahveh [the Spirit] [are ) a united one [echadl" ( Deu 06:04). yachid: "sole : ' "a lo ne," " unique" Yahveh : " vahveh" is the per sonal na me of th e Heb rew God. rah veh is co mmo nly tran slated as " LORD" in English Bib les, and as Kurios, mean ing. " Lord," in the G reek LXX (the Se ptuagint). Yeshua: "Jesus" in English, or tesous in Koine Greek . Yes lrua is the Aramaic derivatio n of the Hebrew name Joshua. Aramaic and other languages were spoken in Palestine in Ye,~ h lla' s day. Bihle Book Name Ahbreviations Conventions All Bible book name abbreviations are three-lettered . This citation method has advantages o ver other abbreviatio n systems . T he thrr..re-let ter abbreviations arc the same as the first three letters of the English Bible book name, except in a few cases: • J udges (Jdg j a nd Phil e mo n (Phm) arc diffe rentiated f ro m J ude (J ud ) and Philippians (Phi), and • Song of Solomon is abbreviated "S ol" 10 avoid con fusion with the word "So n" For the most part, all three-lettered book name abbreviatio ns sort just as their corresponding book names would in searc h e ngines and indexes. T he e xceptions are Jud ges (1dg) and Jude (1ud). Jude, howe ver, is only one chapter in leng th, so this is not a major concern. Old Testament I. Gen: Genesis: 2. Exc: Exodus; 3. Lev: Le viticus; 4. Num: Numbers; 5. Deu: Deuteronomy; 6. Jcsr Joshua: 7. Jdg: Judges; 8. Rut: Ruth; 9. 15a: 1 Samuel; 10, 2Sa: 2 Samuel: 11. IKi: 1 Kings; 12. 2Ki: 2 Kings; 13. leh: 1 Chronicles; 14. 2eh: 2 Chronicles; 15. Ear: Ezra; 16. Nch: Nehem iah; 17. Est: Esther; l R. Job: Job: 19. Psa: Psalm; 20. Pro: Proverbs; 2 1. Eel': Ecclesiastes; 22. Sol: Song of Solomon ; 23. Isa: Isaiah; 24. Jer: Jeremiah ; 25. Lam: Larnemation s: 26. Eze: Ezekiel; 27. Dan : Darnel; 28. Hos : Hosea; 21). Joe: Joe l: 30. Amo: Amos; 3 1. Oba: Obadiah; 32. Jon: Jonah; 33. Mtc: Micah ; 34. Nah: Nahum: 35. lIab: Hab akkuk; 36. Zep: Zephaniah; 3 7 . lI a ~ : Haggai ; 38, Zec : Zechariah; 39. ~lal : Malachi . Ne w Testament

40. Mat : Matt he w; 41. Mar: Mark: 42. Luk: Luke: 43. Joh: John: 44. Act: Acts: 45. Rom : Rom ans; 46. I Co : 1 Cor inthians; 47. 2eo: 2 Corin thians; 48.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

6

Yael Na ta n

Gal: Galatians; 49. Eph: Ephes ians; 50. Phi: Philippians; 51. Col: Co lossians: 52. lTh: 1 Thessa lonians: 53. 2Th: 2 Thessalonian s: 54. lTi: I Timothy; 55. 2Ti: 2 Timothy: 56. Tit: Titus; 57. Phm: Philemon; SR. Heb: Hebrews; 59. Jam: James; 60 . IPe: I Pete r; 61. 2Pc: 2 Pete r; 62. Ijn: I Jo hn; 63. 2Jo: 2 John: 64. 3Jo: 3 Jo hn; 65 . Jud: Jude; 66. Rev: Revelat ion.

Citation Convention for the Bible and Koran All the chapter and verse Bible c itations arc two-digit, for e xa mple. Mat 0 1: 01. exce pt fo r Psalms. which has three-d igit c hapter refere nces. Lead ing zeroes are used when necessary. for e xample. Psa 00 1:01. This method of c itatio n me ans that the chapter and verse c itations sort nume rically in search e ng ines and indexes. All the chapter and verse c itations for the Koran are three-digit [Koran 009:(05 ). "Sura(h)" is Arabic and re fers to the 114 chapte rs of the Kora n.

Other Books, References and Abbreviations 11\1a: First Macca bees (lnrertesrame ntal apoc ryphal book] 2~la : Seco nd Macca bees (lnrcrtcsturncntal apocryphal book) a.k.a.: A bbreviation for "abo kno wn as" BlJB: Brown, Driver; Bri,;,;.\ : Hebrew-A ramaic and English texicon of the or BHS: Bibtia Hehraica Stung ortensia (an annotated MT rece nsion) DSS : T he Dead Sea Scrolls and fragme nts fo und in the twen tie th ce ntury at Qu mran and its environs near the Dead Sea . Most of the scrolls that survived were stored in day jan; in ca ves. Hadith: A repo rt o f the sayings o r actions of Muh ammad or his co mpanio ns, toge ther with the tradit ion o f its chain o f tra nsmissio n {isnad j. T he plural is Hadith or Hadiths. ISBE : lntemannnat Standard Bible Encyclopedia, 19 34 (Public Domain) Jdt: Judith (Intertestamental apoc ry phal book) KJV: King Ja mes Version of the Bible (English) Koran : Th e s ac red tex t of Islam , c ons ide red by M us li ms to co ntai n the re ve lations of Allah 10 M uham mad . Koran is a lso spelled Qu r 'all. Quran and Alcorcm , LXE: The English Tran slation of The SepWlIKint Ve n ;oll of the OM Tes tament (LXE), by Sir Lance lot C. L. Brenton. 1844, 1851, published by Sa muel Begsrer and Son s, London. LXX: T he Septuagint is a second and third ce ntury B.C. G reek translation of the OT a nd so me apocryphal boo ks. 1\IT: The Masoret ic Te xt (OT He bre w and Ara ma ic) is a rec en s ion. A de fi nitio n o f a recensio n is: A critical revision of a te xt incorporating the eleme nts deemed most plausible from varying sources.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

7

The MT recension was compiled from vario us Hebrew manuscripts by Talmudic acade mies in Babyloni a and Pa lesti ne du ring the 6th to 10t h cen turies AD. The name of the te xt comes from Ta lmu dic academy of the Masore tes. meaning. "Traditionalists." that flouri shed in Tiberias o n the Sea of Galilee between the 7th ami 9th ce nturies AD. The oldest surviving MT recensio n manu script is the "Cairo Prophets" (895 AD), which was prod uced by Moses ben Asher in 'l'iberias. Galilee. The second oldest MT recen sio n manuscript is the Lenin grad Codex of the Latter Prophets (916 AI)). which has Babylonian vowel pointing. T his book so me times uses the ter m MT as an inc lusive te rm for the MT recensio n and the family of manu scripts that served as the bas is fo r the MT recens ion. This fa mily of manusc ripts no longer exists except fo r scrolls found a mong the Dead Sea Scro lls. NIV: New international Ver.l'itJII , 19&4 (US English Bible) NT : New Testament (the origin al was written in Kaine G reek) D'T: Old Testament (Jewish Tanakh) (the original is in Hebrew, but parts are in Aramaic). RSV: Revised Standa rd Ven 'iml (1952 ) (English Bible) Sir: Wisdom of S ir uch (a n Intertestam en ta l apocryphal book, u.k .a., Ecclesiastic us) Sanna: The way of life prescribed as no rmative in Islam, based bo th on t he teachin gs and practices of Muhammad , and on exegesis of the Koran, TR: Textus Receptus. from the Latin mean ing, " Received Te xt," This is t he Greek text of the New Testame nt that was standard in printed editio ns from the 16th to the end of the 19th century. TWOT: The Theological Wordbook of IIII' OT Yl.T: The EnXIi.\'h Young \ Literal Transiution of the Holy Bible 18621 181171 189&(YL 1) by J N. Young WEB : The WorM English Bible is o ne of the public dom ain versions of the OT and NT in modern Eng lish that is downloadab le from ebible.org. The WER NT consistently follows the Greek Majority Text, but provides footnot es noting any significant variant readings listed in these Greek NT recensions: Textus Recep tus (TR), Nestle- Aland (NA) , and United Bibl e Societv (UBS).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Matenal com direlbs autorars

Synopsis of the Jewish Trinity A oe; u~t i llc ~ .. iJ

Ll,.. t

C lll i ~ t\,I U e;) i~

la tent ill tl,,: OT. d lld p..tc lIL ill th e NT. '

Christian s have app lied Augustine's analysis to oth er d istin ctively Christian doctr ine s. Fo r instan ce. co nvent io nal wisdom says tha t wh ile the d oc tri ne of the Trinity was implic it in the OT. it is exp lic it in the NT.1 s This book shows that if on e reads the or without wear ing unitarian blinder s. the or is as e xplici t abo ut the Trinit y as the NT. The reade r of this book will co me to know the OT as ancient Trinitarian Yahvists knew the OT -a book replete with Trinitaria n proof's ,

Synopsis of Cha pter 01: The Syntax War Between Trinitarian s and Unitarians Th is chapter deals with the main d ifference between the ancien! read ing and the modem reading of the O'I; The ancients read the several thousand plurals that refer to }(Ih ~'eh as collective nouns with different nuance s. Collective no uns that refer to }(,hre!l are pote nt Trinitarian proofs, espec ially co nsidering the sheer number o f instances. During Inrertestame nta l times. unitar ian reade rs argued thaI all plurals referring to Yo hreh were maje stic plurals. The majestic plural propon ents said that plurals referri ng to Yahl'eh indicate majesty, but do not hin t at the e xistence of persons ca lled Yalll'ell. T his c hapter shows that the majestic plural usage is a n incorrect rea din g o f thousand s of plurals referr ing to vahven. and that the se plurals, in fact, consuu ne Trinitarian proo fs.

Synopsis of Chapter 02: Proto-Slnaluc Trinitarianism At Mount Sina i, the So n revealed that h is name was Yahveh. Previously, o nly the Fath er was known as Yah vch, So Gene sis contai ns both the Proto-Gospel (Ge n 0 3: 15) and Pro to-Sinairic Trinitarianism. In Ge nesis. the Fa ther was kno wn as Yahveh and the Most High ( /:'/yon) . the Son was known bo th as God of Mighty On es (EI Shaddai) a nd as the Ma lek }(111I'eh. and the Spirit was know n as the Spirit (RIUK h). The Trinity was know n as hatilohim, literally. "[All] the Gods." This analysis of Gene sis is co nfirmed by ex amining the Genesis na rrat ive. as well as other sect io ns of the OT that refer back to Gene sis. T he Trinitarian interp retatio n of Gene sis debu nks the J ED P theor y. Also, the theories that say the Masek Ya lll'en was a mere creature. or was imperso na l. are refuted.

Synopsis of C ha pter 03: The Presences of Elyon T his c hapte r di sc usses the Presen ce s of Etvon. Im por tant passages incl ude how the Israeli te s saw the " Living G ods" tkhuvvim E/on;m) (De u 0 5:26) d uring Matenal com direlbs autcrars

10

Yael Natan

the giving of the law. Moses said that at the giving of the law. "[ AllJ the Gods" (haElohim) stood on three mountains: This is the blessing that Moses the man of [Ali i the Gods [IIlIEfoh im] pronounced on the Israe lite s before his death. Yah vrh [the Father] came from Sinai. and Ithe Sonl dawn ed over them from Sc tr: he [the Spirit] shone forth from Mount Paran. He [the Father] came with myriads of holy noes from the so uth. from his [the "ather 's) mountain slopes (Deu 33:01-02) . La ter, the Father sent his Presence s, the Son and Sp irit, to Canaan. The Father said: 'My Presences (plural noun). they will go [plural verb] with you, and I will g ive you rest. ' Then Moses said to him, ' Your Presences [plural noun I, if they do not go [plural verb] with us. do not send us up from here' (Exo 33:14-15). T he Pre sence s' o the r appearances in the OT are al so discussed.

Synopsis of C hapte r

()~:

The Shema

The Shema is a simple Tr initarian form ula: Hear. 0 Israel : rah veh [the Fathe r] lan d ] o ur Elohim [the Son], Yahveh [the S piritllarc] 11 united o ne k d wdl (Dc u 06:04). The correct interpretation and import of the Shl'lna ca n he inferred from OT Sht'nw- Iike statements (Hos 11:06; I'-Cc 14:0lJ). Ye.l,hail's short vers io n of the Shem« is, " 1 and the Father are one" (Joh 10:30). When ever Ye,~ hlla d iscussed the Snema, he a lwa ys mentions two or three o f the divine persons of the Trinity, fo r instance: • After quoting the Shema (M at 22:36-40 ), veshua said that David was inspired by the Spirit when David sa id that the Fathe r and So n we re his Lord (Psa 110: 01. OS: Mat 22 :43-45; Mar 12:36-37: Luk 20:42, 44 ),and • After speaking a Shema·like statement, "I and the Fat her are one" (Joh 10:30), Ye.I'hail said that the jud ges to who m the word of God ca me were called "gods" (Psa Ol'l2:06: Joh 10:35 ). YeS/lUG adde d: What about the o ne whom the Father set apa l1 as his very own and sent into the world? (psa 0&2:0& ; Joh 10: 36a). Yeshua here alluded to Yahveh the Fat her 's state ment to the Son in the same Psalm : Rise up, 0 God [the Son] and judge the eart h, for all the nations are your [the Son' s] inheritance (Psa 082:08: Joh 1O: 36a)!

Synopsis of C ha pter 05: The Trinity in Daniel 01·05 Da niel infonned Ncb uchadnczzur that the go lde n head of his d rcnmscapc stat ue re pre se nted Ne buch adn e zxar's kingd om, the Bab ylon ian Empire, T he statue's other body parts represen t succeed ing ki ngdom s down to the e nd of time as we kno w it.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

11

The gold head showed that 11 disti ng uishing characteristic of Ncbuchadnczzar's kingdom was wea lth. The other body parts were made of inferior me tals and clay to show that the distingu ishing characteristics of subseq uent kingdoms would not be wealth. Th e gold head also reve aled that a d isti ngui shing c ha racteristic of Neb uchad nezz ats kingdom was ho mogene ity. Hi s was a un if ied kin gdom. The Modo-Pe rsian that followed was bifurcated as shown in the arms unite d to the torso. Alexander's kingdom bifurcated into the Sclcucid and Ptolemaic dynasties, as was shown hy the bronze thig hs. Rome was divided into the Western Latin-speaking and Eastern G reek-speaking parts, as was shown by the two iron calves. T he Rom an Empire dissolved leaving nations of iron to exis t in the midst of nations of d ay. In the end the Son wou ld establish a kingdom not built o n the fou ndations of the old kingdom s represe nted in the statue. The Son's kingdom would last fo rever. Ncbuchadnczznr saw the Son in Da n 03:25, and Daniel saw the Son in the Dan 07 So n of Man vision. T here is a relati onship between the statue of Nebuch adnezzars dream (Dan 02) and the golden statue that Neb uchad nezzar built (Dan 03 ). Nebuchadnezzar'v landscape statue of Dan 03 was like the drcamscapc statue of Dan 02, but was golde n from head to toe (Da n 03). Ncb ucha d nczzur's stat ue represented Ncb ucha d nczzurs prayer to his gods. Nebuchadnezz ar wanted his gods to veto Y(/h ~'eh 's plan to cut Nebuchadnezzars gol den kingdom off at the neck -hen ce, the gold frnm head to toe. Nebuchad nezzur wanted the Babylonian Empire to be the sole empire until the end of the world, and not ju st until the Medo -Persian Empire was formed. Danie l inst r uc ted Nebuc ha dnezza r about vahveh, the " Most High ," just as Jo se ph had instructed Egy ptia n roy a lty (Gen 45: 08; Psa 105 : 17-22 ). Ncbuchadnczz ur used OT Trinitarian rcr rninology that Moses, Josh ua. ami others had used. Neb uchadnezzar's Trinitarian speec h is recorded in Dan 02 -03. By Dan 04, it seems Nebuchadnezzar ma tured into a full-fledged Trinitarian, as his letter to his subjects shows (Dan 04).

Synopsis of Chapter 06: The Prophet Behind the Prophets The OT prophetic books should be read as the words of the prcmcur natc So n rather than as the word s of the prophets. The few phrases and sections that are ob vious words of the prophets shou ld he considered mere inspired interjectio ns. That the OT prophetic books can. for the most part. be understood as the wo rds of the Son impl ies Trinitarianism. In OT prophetic boo ks, first pe rson speech (for example . " I: ' "me," " my") sho uld gene rally be read as the words of the So n. Q uotations are most often the words of the Father as q uoted b)! the Son. Third person speec h (for exa mple. "he ,' "h im," "his") referring to Yaln'eh generally is the Son speak ing abou t the Fathe r or the Spirit. Matenal com direlbs autcrars

12

Yael Na ta n Synopsis of Chapter 07: Various OT Presentations of the Trinity

Ezekiel, Jo nah and Zecha riah g ive interest ing pre se ntat ions o f th e T rin ity. Jo nah di sti ngui shed between Yahveh t he father and the Presences of Yahveh, who are the So n and Spirit. Jonah' s Trinita rian lan gu age includes me nt ion of "[All] the Gods" (htlEloh im) and " Yf/hreh Elohim." In Eze kiel and Zec hariah. both the Spirit and Son take on vari ous roles, call each othe r Yahveh, and refer to the Father and quote the Father.

Synopsis of Chapter 08: The NT Use of OT Yahveh Texts Th e fir st part of this cha pter concerns NT q uotation s and allus ions to O'T Yl/hl'eh texts. Man y exam ples are give n in the append ix that com plements this chapter. Th e list o f NT a llus ions and q uotat ions to O'T Yahveh text is meant to be representative rather th an ex haus tive. The second part of th is chap ter concerns whether reshua pr imarily spo ke Gree k or Ara maic. T his has some bearing on whet her Yeshua ident ified h imself as: • Yahveh the Son hy his applying O'T Yahveh tex ts to himsel f, • Th e d ivine Son of Ma n described in the Dan 07 vision (as is d iscu ssed in the Song of Mo ses c hap ter), • The -t AM" (as is disc ussed in the " I AM" and the Song of Moses chapt ers), and • The subjec t o f the Shema along wi th the Father a nd the Spirit (as is di scu ssed in the Silemil c hapter). The evidence will show that Yes/ilia spoke both Ara ma ic and Gree k. Gal ilee , where YO'hua grew, was hom e to many ge ntiles who tended to spea k Gree k. W hile Aramaic was mo re prevalent in Judea , inscri ptions an d literary evidence show that Greek was common the re , too. G iven Yeshua 's lang uage ab ilities, it is implaus ible that he inadve rtently gave the impression that he was, for instance, the "I AM." His audie nces were ast ute enoug h to kno w what Yeshua was say ing, and they eve n tried to sto ne Yes/ilia mo re tha n o nce for blasphemy. Not once d id Yl'shua say he was m isundcrstood . T he NT writ ers kne w both Arama ic and Gree k, and the)' were fam iliar with the O'T He bre w. Th is me ans tha t th e NT wr ite rs conscio us ly ap plied O'I " I A M" sta tements and Yahveh texts to YeS/ilia. G iven the ir language abi lities. they faithfu lly recorde d Yeshua 's stateme nts, ami no meaning was inadve rten tly added or lost during tra nslatio n or tra nscription.

Synopsis of Chapter 09: The "I Alit-I" Statements Ya/weh the Son was the d ivine spea ker of Exo 03 - 06, as was d iscussed in the cha pter on Proto-S ina itic Trinitarian ism. Yahl'eh the Son said in Hebrew: I AM who I A M [Hebrew: "ehveh asher ellyell"1. Th is is wha t yo u are to say to the Israeli tes: ' I AM fellyell1 has sent me to you' (Exo 0 3:14 ). The Greek LXX version reads: Matenal com direlbs autcrars

13

The Jewi sh Trinity

I AM [Greek: eRII' dmi ) WHO IS [ho II'n). ..WH O IS [ho wn].. .(LXX Exo 0 3; 14). No te thai the Hebre w wo rd etryeh mentioned three times in Exo 03;14 is translated as "(',IIw eimi" and wn." T his c hapte r disc usses the occ urrences where Yeshua and thc NT writers applied "e,tiw eimi" and "ho wn" to Ycshua . In this way. the NT writers show that Yes/lifo is Yuhl'ell the So n- the divine spea ker in Exo 03.

'"'/0

Synopsis of Chapter 10: The Song of Moses (Deu 32) The So ng of Mo.'iCS shows God's stra tegy for sav ing Jews and gentiles. The Father's slrategy is to try to save errant Israel by every means possible. lastly by se nding his Son. The So n is far superio r to Moses. After being rejected by the Je wish leaders. the Son turns to save the gen tiles. This has the effect of making Israel jealous enoug h to come back into the Trinity's fold. O ne sect ion in th is chapter presents a So n of Man theo logy where the Dan 07 So n of Man is linked to the Proto-Gospel (Gen 03; 15). The cha pter ends with a discussion on how the Son is far superior to Moses in that the Son is: • The '" AM," • The Son of Man (Dan 07), and • God the So n. Synopsts of Appendix A: J\.fT Plurals Referring to Yahveh This ap pendix disc usses plurals referrin g to Yahn,h tha t are fo und In 3K chapters of IK MT books. The se arc plural verbs. adjectives and noun s other than the comm on plural noun Elohim (literally, "Gods"). All plurals referring to Yahveh sho uld be considered Trinit arian proo fs. Synopsts of Appendix B: OT Texts That Suggest or Speak of the Deity of the Messiah This appendi~ lists the texts. provides a short summary statement of each text, and directs the reader to where there is further discussion of eac h text. Synopsis of Appendix C: Trinitarian Proofs Thi s appendix first summarizes fo ur categories of Trinitarian proo fs. Fo ur categorie.s of Trinitarian proofs are : I, Many passages thai are prima facie evidence for the doctrin e of Trinity co ntain MT o r LXX plurals referring to Yahveh, Examples include the " us" in Gen 0 1: 26: 03:22: II :07 and lsa 06:0K. More examples are found in the M Y plurals appendix.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

14

Yael Na ta n

2. OT Yahrch texts applied to ind ividual pe rsons o f the Tr inity in the OT and NT arc prima facie evidence for the do ct rine o f Trinity. The se arc di scu ssed in the "I AM" and Song of Moses chapters. as well as in the NT use of OT Yah veh texts c hapter and its co mplementary ap pendi x thai goes by the same name. J. Texis that suggest o r speak to the de ity of the Messiah shou ld be cons idered indire ct proofs o f the Trinity. T hese proo fs are su mmarized in a table in a separate append ix, and 4. Gen eral Trinitari an proofs are listed with an e xplanation in this Trinitarian proofs ap pendi x. Synopsis of Appendix D: A Sampling oflhe NT US(' nfOT Yahveh Texts A list o f OT Yahveh text-, quo ted or al luded 10 in the NT is pro vided with an ex planation of their s ignificance . The pa~~ age~ are grouped according to the person or persons of (he Trinity to w hom the OT Yanl'en (e xt is applied.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Chapter 1 The Syntax War Between Trinitarians and Unita rians

The or Battleground T he task of a uansl ator a nd interpreter is 10 e xpress the sutho rs intended meaning in another language . Th e qu andary is thaI the intended meaning of the or a uthors is in d ispute. We re the or a uthors unitarian as is supposed by the rabb inic unitaria ns. Prote stant Unitarians , Jehovah 's Witne sse s, O nene ss Pe ntecostal s and othe rs'! Did the aut ho rs of the or j ust hint o f the Trinity as main stream Ch ristian sc holars co ntend"? O r were the authors of the or full-fledged Trin itarian s? O ne m ight as k. " Just ho w d id such diverge nt vie ws o f the OT de velop?" T his is surprising ly simp le to explain. Many layme n will be surprised to know that, with ju st a few e xce pt ions. thousand s o f O'T He brew plural s re ferring to Yalll,,'h a re translated a s singulars. Th ese plurals are tran slated as singulars because rabb inic an d Christ ian sc holars are tau ght that all plurals referring to Ya hveh are maje stic pl ura ls. The majestic plura l sy ntax is counter intuitive in thaI the plural for m supposed ly doe s not ind icate an y so rt of plurality in the god head . A majestic plural. as the name indi cate s. supposed ly speaks o nly of ¥llhl'eh's majesty. Mo st C hrist ian sc ho lars grudg ing ly accept the e xiste nce of majest ic plurals. Th ey quickl y point o ut. ho we ver. that maje stic plurals accommoda te the doctrine of the Trini ty. and e ven hint that Yahl'eh is the Trin ity. Christian scholars bolster these asse rtions by referring to the OT and NT Trinitarian proofs. By contrast , thi s boo k contend s that the OT wr iters would find the majesti c pl ural rationa lization to he a fore ign co ncept. Like wi se. the OT pro phets wo uld assert that the unitarian misi r ne rpr eta no n of t he OT was adopted first d urin g Intertestamemel tunes. They wou ld assert th at the real reason why people do not believe in the Trinity is the y do not want to listen to Moses (Joh 05:47 ; Luk 16 :3 1). A casual read ing of the NT reve als that Yeshua and the NT w riters wou ld not agree with the assertio n th at the OT merel y hint s at the Trinity. T he NT w riters speak of the Fathe r. Son and Spirit w itho ut an introd uct ion . without apo logy, and without any sense of no ve lty. Th e NT writers knew the Trinity to he read ily apparent in the OT. That many Jew s read ily became Christians sho ws that the y too Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Yael Natan

16

had a Trinitarian o utlook on the OT. The apostles sa id that the NT merely made the word s o f the prophet s abo ut the de ity o f the Me ssiah mo re certain (2Pc 01 : 16, 19). So to summar ize. thi s c hapte r de als with a princip le di ffere nce bet ween the ancien! read ing and the modern reading of the OT. The ancients read the seve ral tho usand pl ural no un s referring to Ya hve h as co llec tive no uns wi th differ e nt

nuances. These collective nouns are potent Trinitarian proofs. especiall y cons ide ring how often they occ ur in the OT. Mode rns. howe ver, read thes e sam e plural nouns as majestic plurals. Supposed maje stic plurals indic ate majesty, but in no way hint that there arc person s ca lled ranven.

Hebrew Couec nve Noun s Be fore t he di sc ussion of Hebrew co llec tive nou ns heg ins in ea rne st. it is wort hw hile to note that Hebre w is like other lan guages in that it has its ow n d istinctive sy ntax. For insta nce. an American English speaker migh t think it odd that in Hebrew: • Coll ectiv e noun s. wheth er s ingular or plural . can lake plural verb s and pred icates. and • Plura l collect ive nou ns can refer to a single gro up. and can take s ingular verbs and modifiers. Hebrew collective noun us.age is not entirel y di fferent from that o f other languages . A case in point is that British Eng lish uses collective nou ns muc h like a ncie nt Hebrew. bu t A merica n Engli sh docs less so . The Am ah-a n Her itage Dictionarv of the Eng lish ulIlglw ge states: In Amer ican usage. a co llec tive nou n ta kes a s ingular verb when it refers to the co llectio n cons idered as a whole. as in Tilt' fwnily was united on this question. The enemy is s ui/lg for peace. It take s a plu ral verb when it refers to the members of the group considered as individua ls. as in My f am il), are alW(/.I'.I' fi ghting among themse lves. The enemy were showing ul' in groups of th ree o r fo ur to fil m in their wea"OIIS. In British usage. ho we ver. co llective nouns are more oft en treat ed as plura ls: The government have 1I0t announce d a nell' policy. The tea m a re pl(lyillK ill the test matches next week. A co llective noun should no t be treated as both singular and plural in the same co nstruction: thus The family is de termined 10 p re.I'.\' its (not the ir) claim ... •

Singular Collective Nouns with Plural Predicates The famo us Hebraist. H. W. F. Gesenius (1 7R6-1842 AD) wrote thai Hebre w s ing ular coll ec tive nou ns " read ily" have plural predic ate s.' He re arc a fe w examples: • Joseph sa id. "T he whole eart h [singular] came [plural verb]" (Gen 41:57). so persons are indicated by the s ingular "earth,"

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

17

The Jewish Trinity

• " Each man IHebrew singular is cn'''1threw down [plural verb) his staff" (Exo 07:12). • " Each man [singular ct'sh] gat her [plural impe rative] as much as he needs" (Bxo 16:l(i), • "So man (sin gular CCJh ] lies dow n [s ingu lar verb] and rises [s ing ular verb] not aga in: till the hea vens are no more they will not aw ake [plural verb). or be roused Iplural verb) o ut o f thei r sleep" (Job 14:12), • "Surely ma n [singular cnh ] walks abou t [sing ular verb] as a shadow ! Surely. for nothing they strive [plural verb] : man acc umulates [singular verb] and doe s not know [sing ular verb]" (Psa 0 39:06 (Bl/S 0 39:07)). • "They o pen [plura l verb] their mo uth [singular noun]" (Jnh 16: Ill), and • "The ev il man [singu lar cesh )" (Pro 0 2:1 2) is the subject o f the plural ve rbs " leaves," "ex ults" and "are devious" (Pro 02: 13- 15).

Plural Collecttvc Nouns with

Si ll~ u la r

Predicates

Hebrew co llec tive nou ns tha t refer to a gro up may be plural, ye t can take s ing ular pred icates . Here are some ex amples: • " Luminaries" takes a singular ve rb (vter be " ) in Gen 0 1:14a. but plural verbs in GenO I: 14b-16, • "Nations and a gro up o f nations" take a sing ular verb (Gcn 35: I I). • "Childre n" takes a sing ular verb (Exo 10 :24), • " People" takes sing ular ve rbs (E xo 20 :18: Jo s 24: 16 , 2 1), but ca n also take plural verbs (Jc s 24: 16. 2 1, 24), • "A nima ls" takes a singular verb (Job 12:07 ), and • " Wo rthless ido ls" take s the singular verb " pass away" (Isa 02: 18).

The Hebrew Plural Collective Noun Hlohim. lite rallJ "Gods" The Athanasian Creed speaks ag ainst the here sy of Trirheism. and warn s aga inst speaking o f the Tr inity as "Gods" or "Lords." T he Athnnasian Creed was written in the wester n churc h in the sixth ce ntury by an un kno wn author who may have had no famil iarity with the Bible in the origina l langua ges." The Athanasian Creed co ncerns doctrine, and sho uld not necessar ily be interpre ted as an exegetical ga g rule. Exegetes can disc uss the fact that the literal translations of plural form s referring 10 Yahveh are plural. What to make of that fact. and how to express it doctrina lly, is where the Athanasian C reed becomes helpfu l. The Hebrew plural co llective no un Elo him/elohim (lite rally, "Gods" o r "gods") occ urs 2,600 times in 2,247 MT verse s. Most instances refe r to Yohveh, but d ohim is also used to refer to angels (Psa 008:005 [BHS 008:006]), judges (Exo 2 1:06: 22: 08 -09 (BHS 22:07·08); los 24:0 1), rulers (Psa 082:01 , 06), as well as fal se gods and idols . The a ncient Hebrews co nsidered Elo him 10 be a plural co llec tive nou n. or a nuanced co llective no un, denoting the persons of the Trinity. Elohim was no t used to re fe r to Yahreh in any polythei stic se nse. Like other Hebrew plura l collecti ve Matenal com direlbs autcrars

18

Yae l Na tan

no uns. Elohim/elohim co uld ta ke sing ula r o r pl ural ve rbs a nd mo difie rs. Fo r e xample . E/ohimlelohim co ukl ta kc: • S ingu lar mod ifiers. for exam ple, " The ir gods Id ohim) will be [p lural ve rb] a snare [singular noun I" (Exo 23 :33; Jdg 0 2:03), • Si ngular verbs , fo r instance, "The God /gods IE lohim/eiohim] who a nswe rs [s ing u lar ve rb ] hy fir e -he is Elol!im " ( I Ki IR:24 ). No te tha t e it her the ha ttaaltm (" the Baals" ) ( I Ki l X: JK). who are 8(.w{ an d Ashcrah ( IKi 18: 19), or " the Word" (the Son ) (I Ki 18 :01 , 3 1) and the Sp irit (I Ki 18 : 12). are the co llccuvc subjec t of the cond itional sente nce (I Ki 18 :24 ), • P lural verbs and modifiers such as: o "... gods [c!olrim] are near [plura l modi fier ].. .' (De u 04:07). o ... ..make us gods Id ohim! who will go [plural verb ) before us ..." (Exo 32: 01 ,23), o ... ..gods [d ohim ) ne ither see.. . hear.. .ear... smell. .. .. (plural verbs ] (Deu 04: 28 ), and o The plu ral verbs and modi fier referring to Yah" ch (Ge n 20: 13: 35:07 ; Exo 32: 04, 08; Jo s 24: 19 and the like) thai are me ntioned in the MT plura ls appendix. Sometimes Hebrew speakers used s ing ular and plural verbs with Elohim in the same convers ation. This tend s to pro ve that Etohim was inde ed con side red a co llective noun. Por instance , Sennachenb 's o ffice rs asked in He bre w (2K i 1R:2R): Ho w can yo ur Flohim [God s) deliver [singular verb] you o ut of m ine hand (2C h 32 : 14)? .. How m uch le ss sha ll yo ur Elohim [pl ural no un] del iver (plural ve rn ] )'O U out of my hand (2C h 32: I S)! T he chro n icler wrote , "Se unacher tb's offi ce rs spo ke further ag a ins t Yah veh Hlohim" (2Ch 32: 16). Other passage s w ith singular and plural ver bs refe rring to Elohim can be fo und in the MT plura ls append ix. Plural co llective nouns used with singular verbs sugges t that then: are the plu ral mem bers of " a united" (ed1at£) group. So the plural Elohim (literally. "Gods") used w ith a singu lar verb is meant to emphas ize that then: an: three perso ns of the Trinity. Like wise. the plural form "gods" (e1ohim) is used with sing ular verbs to refer to a false god and his goddess eon sort or progeny. Other plural coll ective nouns that an: s im ilar to Etohim an: hllt.:lohim (" (A ll J the Gods" ), Adontli (" my Lord s" ) and adonai ("my masters" ). T hese word s an: d iscussed in depth later in this chapter. A form s im ilar to the collectiv e noun Etotsim is the p lura l co llect ive no un Mitsrayim. M it.l m yim can be tran slated as a sing ular co llec tive noun " Egy pt" (Gen 13:10 ; 15: 18), or as a plural collect ive noun " Egy ptians," according to contextua l clues. For ex ample : • In Exo 14:25 Mitsravim is used w ith two singular verbs (" he sa id" and "let me ge t away" ), but bot h times M il.l-ray im shou ld be translated in the plura l as " T he Egy ptians sa id , ' Let us ge t away," . and • In Exo 14:1 8 a plural verb is used with Mitsrayim; so Mo ses must have meant the plural Mitsravim to be translated in the plura l as " the Egyptian s will know," rather th an in the singular as " Egypt wi ll know ." Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

19

So the plural form Mitsrayim can bc tra nslated as a singu lar collective noun, "Egypt," or as a plural co llective noun, " Eg)'ptians." T his suggests that the p lura l form Elohim sho uld, depend ing on the context. be tre ated as a sing ular collecti ve nou n (God ), or as a p lural cotlecuve no un re ferr ing to the persons o f l'c!hw-I,. For example. Yahl'eh is a " God IE/ohi",! o f God s IE/ohi", !, and Lord IAdonail of Lo rds [AdO/llIi]" (com pare l os 22:22; Psa 050:01; Isa 26: 13; Dan 0 2:47; 11;36; m 06 :15; Rev 17:14; 19:1 6) . Etohim , a plura l to rm, can be trans lated as "God" o r " Gods." Th e plural form Adonai can he translated as " Lord" o r " Lords." In the above-listed pass.age s. the first Elohim and Adonai o f eac h phrase shou ld be tra nslated as a sing ular collecti ve nou n. w hile the second Eloh im and Adona; of eac h ph rase shou ld be con side red a pl ural collective no un: "God of God s" and " Lord of Lo rds." The sing ular co llective no un emphas izes YalH'eh 's unity, while the plura l co ltccnve no un emphas izes that the re are persons called Yahveh, Tha t one phrase ha s both singu lar and plura l collective nouns referr ing to Yahl'e!l indicates that Yllhrt'h is the Trinity: o ne God. yet three person s. Th e " God of Gods and Lord of Lord s" passages are similar to the Shema in that they are Trinitar ian express ions. The Shemo is men tioned late r in th is c hapter, and in the chapte r o n the Sncma .

Weaknesses of th e Majestic Plur al Hypothesis Grammar issues c an rest for a moment as other issues with broad imp lications are here d isc ussed. A bird's eye v iew of the deb ate reve als that there are so me obv ious weak nesses in the majestic plu ral hypothe sis.

Exceptions Become the R" le Rath er Tha ll Lsest "Proving fin the sense of "Testing "j the R ute .. A we akness o f the maj est ic plural hy pothes is is th at the proo fs co ns ist of except io na l examples where pl ural no u ns see m ing ly refer to s ing le perso ns or objec ts. In the majestic p lural schem a. the lesso ns dr awn from e xcept ional examp les de termin e the tr an sl at ion and in te rp re tati o n of tho usan ds of wo rds. Rather than letti ng "the exceptions pro ve [in othe r words, "test"] the rule"-as th e proverb says,' majestic plura l proponcn ts say, "Tbc e xcept ions are thc ru le ." The re are at least two pitfall s involved when us ing e xce pt ions to e xp lain the majority o f insta nces. Firs\, exce ptions hy de fin ition are always fe w, and th us are easie r to misconstrue. The misinterpretation is then used to d isto rt the meaning of man) words. Second, even if exce ptional data were inte rpreted co rrectly, the connection between the exceptions and thc mass of da ta that thc exceptions supposed ly ex plain may be ten uo us. What this mcans is th at eve n if a few exce ptions arc prove n to be majes tic p lura ls, this doe s not necessarily me an there are thou sands o f majestic plurals in the OT. Matenal com direlbs autcrars

20

Yael Natan

Analogous s ituations where erroneo us e xtrapolations could be drawn from sca nt data include: • If o ne dete rmi ned what Eng lish gra mmar rules are by anal yzing the e xce ptional for ms " its" and "u's." o ne would mistake co ntractio ns for possessives. and abbre viation s for possessives. "Its" looks plural, but is really a possessive prono un, and "u'svlooks like a possessive prono un. but is really the abbreviated fo rm of "it is." • A planet might be mistaken for a star, or vice versa , but this does not mean all luminaries are planets, and • A Tom Clancy fiction novel might be mistaken for history. but this doe s not mean that Tom Clanc y is a historian rather than a novelist. Stat istically speaking, it is unwise to suppose that thousands of OT majestic plurals exist based on the ana lysis of a few examples. Per haps the majestic plural rationalization e xists merely because no one has bothered to offe r viab le alte rnativ e explanatio ns. I use the word "viable" because theol ogical liberals have offered altcmativc explanations. Liberal s commonly believe that the majestic plura l rationali zatio n was unknown in the patr iarchal and Mosaic periods. Man y liberals believ e that the Hebrew plurals refe rring to Yahl'e11 act ua lly are vestiges of mcnolatry (hcnothcismj. binitarianism, or pol ythe ism." Mon ol atr) is the belief tha t the re art: many gods worth y of wor ship, but th at eac h person o ught to choose o ne god to worsh ip and ig no re the o t he rs. Binitananism is the worship of two divine persons who arc worshipped as one god. Of course. these theories are flawed in that they do not satisfactor ily e xplain all the data. The ev idence calls out for a Trinitarian ex planatio n, but the call has falle n o n deaf cars until now. Som eone migh t ask , "Wh y must anyon e t hin k up e xplanatio ns for pl ural forms?" The answer is that there is no surviving ancie nt Hebrew grammar book that states how the He brew Scripture should be translated. So a Hebrew grammar must be based on the study of the language itself. This is problcm anc al becau se languages tend to becom e regular and less complicated o ver time. Inscriptions and archaic word form s may be the only evidence that certain words. usages, cases and conjuga tions e ve r exi sted. Unfortunately. there are fe w undis puted sa mples of e xtra- Biblica l, anci ent Hebrew. These are mainly found on walls and porshard s. Unlike some ancie nt Innguages, ancient Hebrew seems to have been written almost ent irely on perishable materials. Whole libraries went up in smoke or disintegrated to d ust in a process that began already in OT times (2K i 22:08). There are only a fe w samples of e xtra-Biblical, OT-era Hebre w. Thi s mean s that OT Hebrew grumrnurs and lexi co ns canno t be cross checked and verified aga inst no n- Biblica l so urces from the same per iod. By contrast, the NT Greek gra mmars and lexicon s can be c rossc hecked again st Nf-era, extra-Bib lical G reek so urces to ex pose built-in bias .

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

21

Certain ways to read the OT cun be tau g ht thro ug h Hebre w gram mars and lexicons. The dange r o f Hebre w gram mars douhling as de facto do ctrinal honks is that any reading besides the "official" rendering is co nsidered a gramm ar mistake. T he reader who is non chalant ab out the po wer o f gra m mars 10 c hange pe rccprio n and influence doctrine sho uld consider how some gra mmar issues arc not just ac ade mic issues. Indeed. ove r the cen turies, a stude nt who wished to read Trinitarian texts as they we re inten dcd to be read ran the risk o f being ch arged with false doct rine or blasphemy. The se charges e ntailed various consequences de pending nn the ce ntury and cultura l se tting. Exa mples could be multiplied abo ut how far dog ma and rules c an remo ve the pious interpretatio n o f a text from its literal read ing, but here are two examples that may give pa use. One exa mple is from Judai sm and other fro m Islam: • In He bre w grammars it was ta ug ht that in orde r to av o id t he c ha rge o f blas phemy, it was best to read o ut loud "Lord" (Adonai ), or another wo rd, instead o f saying the name Yo/well. Th e gra mmar books referred to "what is read" as qcre, and "w hat is writte n" as kethih . Just how effective this qerekelllih syste m was is shown by the facr that after awh ile. the ex act pro nunciatio n o f the name rahveh became a matter for debate. Th is is the case eve n tho ugh Ya/weh occ urs about 6,828 time s in 5,790 OT verses, and • In early Islamic times, in o rder 10 show the sup pose d su periority o f Islam , Musli ms devised the d ogma that the Koran wa s both ete rna l, and the very words of Allah." So, to trans form Mu hammad 's discou rse into wo rds that Allah cornrn anded Muhammad tn repeat , com pilers inserted the imperative for m "say" 350 times into the Koran ic text. '" 11 Many scholars, unlike most Muslims. se nse the man}' ab surdi ties that the "sa}'!" inte rpolat ions create." The qere-kethib and "Say!" rules affec ted h und reds or thousands of pass ages, an d thus cha nged ho w an entire book was read. Si milar ly, the majest ic plural rule affec ted the inter pretatio n o f thousands o f passages with the result that many read the Trinitari an Bible as thoug h it taught unitarianism. The majestic plural rule is nnt hing hut a veil (2Co 03: 13- 16; 2Co 04:03 ). So it behooves the reade r to suspect any qere inter pretative translat ion that is unitarian when the kethih literal reading of the text is Tri nitarian. f-or instance , the many plu ral and d ual form s that arc translated as majest ic pl ural s oug ht to be trans lated as co llec tive plurals. Exa mp les incl ude Elohim (God) and Panim (meaning, "facets)." or "presence," or "Prese nce s"]. The I\-Iajestic Plural Rationalization Has Not Been Seriously C r os s Examined Due to a Sanitized History Another weak ness of the majestic plural rati onali zatio n is that this gram matical construction has not been ser io usly analyzed in the past. The maje stic plural usage has been acce pted uncri tically based on its long rabbimcaltraditiou. Howe ve r, the majestic pl ural trad itio n may not he very ancie nt.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

22

Yael Na ta n

T he success of the early Trinitaria n c hurch among Je ws suggests tha t the Inle rte s ta me nlal Je ws int e rpre te d OT maj e stic plu ral s as be ing Tr in itarian. Cu ltures, however, are notorio us for presenting idealized, san itized pictures of the past. Cullural me mory selectively preserves che ris hed idea s while suppressing and forgett ing d isse nt. As the saying goes, "The victors write h istory." II is a mailer of histo ry that unitarians managed to ostracize Trinnanans fro m Je wish soc iety. Th e Jewish Trinitarian uad iuon was deem ed hereti ca l and was forgotten. Records nOI deemed ca nonica l were burned or allowed 10 di sin tegrate into ob livion , unless. of course , Ihey we re fortunate e nough to be left in pots in caves. The idea that classical J udaism had unan imous agree ment o n unitarianism and the majestic plura l syntax may soon fall o n hard limes . Other cherished ide as abo ut classical J udais m have been discarded in the twe ntieth ce ntury d ue to archeology finds, namely, t hat: • The lang uage o f Palestine was wholly A ramaic and Hebrew. Th is issue will be discussed in the chapte r on Ihe NT Use of OT Yahl'eh TeXiS, and • Cla ssic alJudai sm was untainted by astrology and human figural art. Jewish traditio n had prese nted cl assical Judaism as be ing untainted by astrology an d human figura l art. So me rab bis wrote that astrology applied 10 gent iles. hut not to JeWS. 'l As trology. ho we ve r, ap pears in Jew ish apocaly ptic writings." and as trology eve n made a n inc ursion into the Herodian temple i tself! ' ~ I. Les ter Ness wro te: [F lav ius] Jo sep hus [37 A D-?] " and Philo [Judaeus (c. 20 BC--c. AD 40)] 1'".1.10 not hesita te to ide ntify the twelve signs wuh the twelve loave s of [show] bread offered eac h d ay in the temple o r the seven pla nets wit h the seve n branches o f the me norah." T he Arc h o f T it us in Ro me that co mme mo rates the 70 AD co nques t o f Je rusalem co nfirms Jose phus and Philo's assertion that the te mple meno rah had astral connotations. Erwin Goode nough wrote: From these indepe nde nt sources. then . we have ev idence that Je ws actually made their te mple c ultus, made Judaism itself, into an astral relig ion.'"

Figure t.

What remains of the Jerusalem

temple menorah rt'lid on the Arch of Titus,

DO DO Matenal com direlbs autcrars

23

The Jewi sh Trinity

Addi tio nal examples of as t ral art inf iltration could be ci ted to s how that ast ro log y made major in roads in to J ud a ism from the Ma cc a be a n thro ug h the Byzantine pe riod . Be rnard Go ldm an notes tha t in the Macca bean period "the star o f the Maccabees" was place d over the temple facade.'?' Popular M uccabca n and Herodian coins loo k suspic iously li ke a c resce nt and Venus orb co uplet on a po le or f inia l. The coi n purpo rted to port ray a do uble co rnucopia wit h a po me g ra na te o rb on a stem between the horns o f ple n ty. Ya'u kov Mcsh o rer wrote : It is log ic a l to ass ume that the symbo l fi lte red into J uda is m as a n o bj ect re la te d to fe rti li ty, and th e n acq ui red addi tio na l Je wi s h con no-

tenons."

FiAure 2. Popular xta ccabean a nd Herudlun coin.

Classical J uda ism abso rbed astrolog ica l art and concepts , and this ca used friction wit h the C hristian c hurch. Ste phen's speech re fe rs to the astra l worship of the fore fathers. the implic atio n being that the NT Jewish leaders whom Stephen addressed had erred in the same way (Act 07:43 ). It was not the as trology so much as the cree ping homegrow n heresy called unitarianism that did the most to squeeze OT T rinitarianism entirely OUI of Judaism. Astrology in the tem ple, of co urse, was one o f the factors that led to the rejectio n of Trinitarianism, to the destr uction of the temple, and to the further dispersal of the Jews. Th e Maj esti c Plural Has Been Accepted Uncr-ltlcally on an A d Hom inem Basis T he re are other re ason s the majestic p lu ra l has no t und e rg o ne se rio us cros s -exa mination. Man y ho ld to the ad hominem assum pt ion t ha t uni taria ns are especial ly q ua lifi ed to read He bre w. This is no t rig ht since Ye shu{/, the a po st les, an d many early Trinitaria ns were fl uen t in Hebre w a nd A ram a ic.

M

rial 0

uto

24

Yael Na tan

Th e NT shows that Yeshua , the a po stles and early Ch ristian s considered the OT to be thoroughl y Trinitari an. Since the NT was not as ye t written. the y s urel y did not de rive the ir Trini tarian beliefs fro m the NT. T he NT shows that the peo ple were not be holden to every official do gma (Mat 01: 29; Mar 01 :22). So the maj estic plural ration ali zation ma y ha ve ca used f ric tion bet wee n the people and the religiou s authoritie s. What e ver the case. the fact that so man y lnte rtestarne ntal Je ws held Trinitaria n beliefs suggests the y did not belie ve the or was awash in majestic plurals refer ring to YlIIIl' eh as tho ugh he were a single majestic perso n. Desp ite convent ional wisdo m, unitarians arc not es pecially q ualified to rule o n OT Hebrew, FiNt of all , the Bible is not hk e o ther doc ume nts that are doctrinall y neutral , so the translatio n and interpre tation is not purel y acade mic. Human s, being what the y are, find it a ll too ea sy to give in to sectarian bias. Co ntrary to what so me might believe, no one spea ks Biblical Hebre w. The fir st language of grammarians like Gese nius and other Ashke nazi Jews of Ce ntral and Eastern Europ e was Yiddish. Yiddish is a blend of medieval Ge rman, S la vic, Old Fre nch, Old Italian , Ara maic and He brew. Sephardic Je ws, who lived in the Iberian Pe ninsula. wrote mainly in Arabic. Fo r instan ce, Moses be n Ma imo n, a.k .a. Ma imoni des ( 1135- 1204 AD), wrote in Arabic , but did incorpo rate so me non-Biblical Hebrew. S. D. Goitein wrote abo ut the Arabic influence on medie val Hebre w: The Jews too k their full share in this g reat Middle-Eastern mercantile c ivilizatio n, in partic ular from the te nth to the thirteenth centuries, and it was at that time and in that part of the wo rld that Judaism itsel f received its final shape. T here, under Arab-Muslim influe nce. Jewi sh t hought a nd philosophy and eve n Je wish law and religious prac tice were sys tematized a nd fin a lly fo rmula ted . Even the He br ew la ng ua ge de ve lo pe d its grammar and voca bulary on the model of the Arab language . T he re vival of He bre w in o ur own times would be entirely unthink able witho ut the se rvices rendered to it by Arabic in va rious ways a thousand years ago. Arabic itsel f beca me a Jewish la ngua ge and. unli ke Latin in Europe, was e mployed by Jews for all secular and religio us purposes, with the so le e xception of the synagogue se rvice ." The He brew that Je ws spea k toda y is Modern Hebrew. T he syntax of Modern Hebrew is qui te remo ved from that of the OT. In fac t. the Hebre w lang uage is usually divided into fo ur developme ntal stages: Biblical. Mishnaie (also ca lled "Rabbinic "]. Medie val and Modern Hebrew. T he syntax of Modern Hebre w is Mish uuic, a nd M ishna ic has different rules fro m Biblical sy ntax!)' Th e vocabu lar y of Mode rn He bre w also is ve ry' differe nt rrom Biblica l He brew. Elieze r Ben-Yehuda ( 1858- 1922 AD), the fat her of Mode rn He brew, s pe a rhe aded t he re vi val of He bre w as a li ving, s po ke n la ngu age . Be nYehuda began with the 7 ,704 Hebrew words of the Tora h, but proceeded to

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

25

The Jewi sh Trinity

co !n an d borrow other words. Mod e rn Heb re w acq uired 100.000 words by 19 78 A D.~~ By so me est imates . in 2000 AD Heb re w had 120.0nO words. Spea kers of non- Hebre w lang uages pe rhaps could tak e a fresh appr oach to Biblica l Hebrew. Modern Hebre w speakers. howe ver. are burdened by more tha n two millennia's wo rth of linguistic baggage. So it may be e asier to reach a level of objectivity co ncern ing He brew when one has no preconceived notions, and no habits that need to be unlcarned . All these facts take n together suggest that di sagreement s about majestic plurals may be dr iven by sect ar ian bias rath er tha n a lack of relevant OT data. T here is no hint that Yesh ,w and the apos tles or any early Christians deferred to the establishment for aut horitati ve gramma tical rulings (Mat 0 7:29; Mar 0 1:22). Likewise, C hristians should learn fro m the da ta rathe r than accept ad hominem argurnc nration. even if the authorities sco ff (Jo h 0 7:49). OT Data Inconsistent With the Existence of the :\Iajestic Plural Syntax Josh ua and me tsraetues In a speec h aga inst poly theism, Joshua referred to Yahreh as the " hoI) [plura l adjective] Go ds [E/ohi/lll" (Jos 24: 19). Unless Joshua was teac hing Trinita rianism, it wo uld have bee n counterproduc tive to refer to God usin g a plura l in a speec h ag ains t polythei sm. So the ph rase "h oly' [plural adjec tive I Gods IE/ohim]" is a plural co llective noun rath er tha n a majestic plural.

l ehoiakim ll,I' Al/OII Yi:,h ,'('h sa id that when Jehoiakim d ied, no one would lament his dea th as tho ugh he were a bro the r, nor wou ld any one say: Alas, [what a ] master [tIJon] ! Alas, [what] majesty! (Jer 22: 18). The Hebrew translated "m aster" is the singular form adon. If the re we re such a thi ng as a n OT majestic pl ural. one wou ld think that the pl ura l fnrm adonai wn uld ha ve bee n used before the phrase. "Alas. [w hat] majes ty." If the plura l at/ollai meant " majestic master" j ust by itself. the n the sec ond phrase "A las. lw hatl majesty!" wo uld have been red undant. The Majestic Plural Construction is at Odds with the Shema Trini tarianism is based on the Biblical version of the Shenw that read s Etahim (Go ds ) is "a united o ne" (echad). Unitaria nism. ho we ve r, c urrent ly is based o n an a ltered vers ion of the Shema introd uced by Maimon ide s. Maimomdes ch anged the Shcma from Elohim (God s) is "a united one " (('eheld) to Elohim (Gods) is "a unique one " (yae"i(/) . T ho ugh the OT neve r used vachid to refer to Yahvrh ; Maimonides" altered vachid vers ion o f the Shema has beco me a pivotal article of the modern Jewish fai th.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

26

Yae l Na tan The Majestic Plural Concept is at Odds with Unitaria nism

The maje stic pl ural conce pt sugge sts that the quality o f majesty is so me how related to the co nce pt o f plurality. This assoc iat ion betwee n majesty and plurality see m's artificia l and con trived. For the sake of argument. however, it is worth while to thin k the associ ation is hypot het icall y valid. For instance. if the association betwee n pluralit y and majesty were valid. the pe rso ns of the Trinity wou ld necessarily' be more majesti c than the lo ne div mc f igurc to uted by maje stic pl ural propone nts. The Majestic Plural is at Odds with the OT Use of the Plural for God If the OT taught unitar ianism. one would expect that the s ingular Hebrew for ms for God. £ / (Ge n 14: 18) and Elo( w)uh (D eu 32: 15. 17; Hab 0 3:0 3) wo uld have bee n used thro ugho ut thc OT. Furthcrmo re, the singular for m El wo uld have bee n use ful to counter the pre va iling poly theistic notions. Ove rall, the O T looks ve ry Trinitar ian. T he singular for ms £ / a nd £ /o(w}uh are used mainly in poet ic sec tions . As WHS noted above , there are 2.600 occ urrences of the plural for m Eiohim in 2,247 OT verses. The sing ular form D , howe ver, occ urs 2 19 times in 2 12 verses, wh ile the singular for m Elo( w)uh occ urs 58 times in 57 ve rses. The prevale nce of the plural Elohim suggcs ts that the plural form Elohim wou ld have been used in poe try. too. e xce pt that the forms EI and Elo(w)uh were eas ier to work with given the constraints o f Heb rew poet ry.

The Form HoElollim is Not C ons iste nt With the Existence of the Majesti c Plural Syntax The Hcb rew de fin ite article no (the) prefix implie s "all the ... ," but doc s not explic itly stale "all the ..... Massey g ives the ex ample that havam [hu + yam ] litera lly mea ns " the peop le:' but "all the peop le" is implied." Th e definite art icle " the" (ha) prefixed to Elohim (haElohim) suggests the Trinity: " [AlII the Gods." So when t he arncle I", is prefixed 10 Flohim (or do/rim). thl: form should be taken to mean: • " [All) the Gods" whe n referring 10 the Trini ty. • " [Ali i the gods" when referring to false gods (Exo 18: II ; Jdg 10: 14; 2Ch 0 2:04; Jer 11 :1 2), and • " [AlII the judge s" whe n referring to humans (Exo 2 1:06: 22:08- 09 (BIIS 22:0708); Jos 24:0 1). The reade r o f mod ern translat ions, o f co urse, will not find ha F.lohim tra nslated as a plural co llective no un whe n referri ng to Yahveh , e xce pt in ISa 04 :08 (as is no ted in the MT plur als appe ndi x ). Lik e tho usan d s o f o ther pl ura ls th at refer to YCl hw h. tran slato rs co nside r the fo rm hClElohilll to be a maje stic pl ural. Accordingly. when refe rring to rahveh; /w EIt/him is translated in the s ing ular as Matenal com direlbs

autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

27

"God " (Gcn 05:22, 24; 06:02, 04, 09 , I I; 17:1S; 20 :0 6, 17; 22:03, 09; 27:28: 31: I I; 35:07 , etc.) Onl y when the translators figured, wrongly or rightly, that haetohim referred to false gods was hoctohim translated in the plura l as "gods" (Exo llU I; Deu 10:17; Jdg 10:14: ISa 04:08 : 2Ch 0 2:04: Psa 136:02; Jer II :12). It goes without sayillg that translating a plural form as a singular sometim es and as a plural other times is inconsisten t. This treatment of haEJohim is also inconsistent with the translat ion of o ther plurals prefixed by the defi nite article. Exa mples incl ude: " ... the Baets [huHau lim ] and the Asherahw IhuA.I"herrl l J" (NI V Jdg tl3:07) , If Ya hreh were a s ingular perso n, it is c urio us that God is culled IIlIElo him (" [Ali I the Gods") , H aE lo h im occurs 366 timex ill 337 OT verses, and nearl y a lways refers to Yahwh (Gcn 05:22, 24: 06 :02, 04 , 09, I I, etc .. but not in Exo 2 1: 06; 22:0&,09). However, when "a ll" [Hebre w is cowl] is explicitly prefixed to "the god s" (co wl elohimr. the phrase refers to: • Angels (Psa 097:07, 09), o r • Pagan gods (fnr instance, Gen 35:04; Exu 12:12; 1&:1 1; 2 Ki 1&:35; ICh 16:2526: 2Ch 02:05 (BHS 2Ch 02:04); 32:14; Psu 09 5:03 : 096:04-05; 135:05; Isa 36: 20; Zep 02: 11). At least three inc idents show that the form haElohim (" [All] the Gods") refers to persons ca lled Yahvr h ; and so implicitly spea ks of the Trinity: • In Dcu 33 :0 1 Moses is called " the man of [AlII the God s," and the n in the nex t verse Yllh ~Th was said to have appeared on three mountains during the gi ving of the law [Exo 20). Deu 33:01-0 2 is d iscussed in the chapter nn the Presences of Elvon, • In a sec tion where rahveh is twice ca lled "[ AII] the Gods" (Jos 22:34: 24:( 1), the Transjordan tribes called upon Yahveh to be the Mosaic minimum of two concurring witnesses , saying: God of Gods, Yah l'ell [the Fathe r]! God of God s, ranvcn [the So n]! He know s (Jos 22:2 2), and • S imilarly, Elijah ca lled Yohvch '"[All] the God s" (1 Ki I R:2 1, 24, 37). Later, the people twice said: Yehvch , he is [Al ii the God s: Yuh w'h , he is [AlII the Gods (I Ki 18:39 ). The ex tensive use o f the form haElohim suggests that "[All] the Gods" implic itly speaks of rhe Trin ity: • The se people saw or talked to haE/ollim: Enoch (Gen 05:22, 24), Noah (Gc n 06:(9), Ahraham (Cen 17:1 &; 20: 17; 22:03, 09 ), Abimelech (Cen 20:06), Jacob (Gen 27:2&; 35:(17: 4& :15), Moses (E xo 03:06, I I. 12, 13; 19:0 3), the Israelites (Exo 18: 12; 19 :17; 20:20, 2 1; 24: I I ), Buleam {Num 22: 10; 23:27) and G ideon (Jdg 06: 36, 39), • Moses is called "the man ofl AllI the Gods" (Dcu 33:0 1: Jos 14:06 ; 2Ch 30:16: Ezr 0 3:02; Psa 090:0 I), Moses is called the "servant of [AII] lhe Cods " ( Ie h 06:34 : 2Ch 24:09 : Neh 10:29 (BHS 10:30); Dan 09: I I), and Moses received the "Law of [All] the Gods (Exo 18:16; Neh 08:08 ; 10:291 BHS 1O:301l on the "Mount of [All] the Gods" (Exo 03:01 : 04 :27: IR:05; 24;13; I Ki 19:08; 2Ki 04:2"j), Matenal com direlbs autcrars

28

Yael Na tan

• The Ark o f t he Cove nant was later called the " Ark of [Alii the Go ds" 35 times in 3 1 verses (Jdg 20:27 ; 1Sa 04 :04, 13. 18. 19, 2 1, 22; 05:0 I, 02. 10 (twice); 14: 18 (twice ); 2Sa 06 :0 2, 0 3, 04. 0 6, 07. 12 (twice); 15: 24 (twice), 25. 29; lCh 13: 0 5. 06, 07. 12, 14 ; 15:02, 15 ,24 ; 16:01 , 06 ; and 2C h OI:(4), and • T he ark res ided in the " Ho use of IA lIl the Gods," The " House of IAllI the Gods" is mentioned 55 time s in 54 verses (l dg IlL 'll ; ICh 06 :33; 09 : 11, 13.26. 27 ; 22:0 2; 23:28; 25:06; 26:20; 28: 12, 2 1; 29:07; 2Ch 03 :03 ; 04: 11 ,1 9;05:01. 14; 07 :05 ; 15:18 ; 22:12 ; 23:03, OlJ; 24:07 , 13,27; 25:24; 28:24 (tw ice) , 3 1: 13, 2 1; 33:07; 35:08; 36:18. 19; Ezr 0 1:04; 0 2:68; 0 3:08, 09; 06:22; 08 :36; 10:0 1. 06, 0 9; Neh 06 : 10; 08: 16; 11 :11, 16, 22; 12:40 ; 13:0 7,09, II ; Bee 04 :17; and Dan 0 1:02 ). The AffinitJ Between Hebrew Plurals That Refer to Yahveh Massey w rote : The only way to exp lici tly excl ude the implicit 'all ' from ' the people ' is to mark it with a q ualifica tion. e.g. . 'so me of the peop le ,' 71 So in the ca se of haElohim. the on ly way to re mo ve the implicit "all" is to usc a qu alifi er like "some ," No qualif ier is eve r used when hatilohim refer s to the Trinity, Besides. a "some" q ualifie r wo uld still refer to more than one perso n, not just a singular majest ic person, So w hen I/(/ £Io llim refers to Yalll'ell. the plural Iorm sugges ts that there a re pe rsons who are called Yah",'h both indi viduall ) and co llec tively, Far fro m us in g qu al if iers to exc lude the implic it "a ll" und erst a ndin g of halilohim (" [Ali i the God s" ), ha Elohim is used in conj unct ion with other MT elem ents that refer to the perso ns of rahveh , Of co urse. the plural fo rm Etahim (lite rall y. "Go ds") occurs so oft e n that its proximi ty to ot her Trin itarian proofs is stat ist ically insig nificant. Howe ver, there are othe r Trinitarian proofs be sides Elohim scattered througho ut the OT. For e xample, the affinity between h(lElohim ("[A ll] the God s" ) and these ot her Trinitarian proofs is statistically significant. To ap prec iate the sta tistical s ig nifica nce of ha Eloh im 's p ro xim it y to O T Trinitari an proo fs, note that the re are only 336 ve rses with an instance o r two of ha lilohim out of 23,2 13 verse s in the Heb rew OT, Furthermore. the distri bution of haElollim throu ghou t the OT is no t e ven. Mo st instan ces of IIII E/ohim (9 1.5 percent or 335 instances of 366 total instance s) occ ur in just twe lve OT books." Also , most instances o f IwElohim (80.6 perce nt or 2lJ5 mstances of 366 total instances) are c lustered in just 83 ch apters." So ch a nce wou ld only acco unt for a few instan ce s o f p ro ximity be twee n IwElohim and Trinita rian proofs. Furth ermore. the fact that hablohim is cluste red see ms significa nt- as thou gh these cha pters were mean t to teach the Trinity, Th e affinity between IIaElohim and plurals referring to Yallvd , is dem onstrated in the fo llowin g table :

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

29

The Affinity Between Elements (Besides the Common Plural Form Elohim) That Indicate Yahven is Plural Persons T he ele ments conce rned are: • " rAIII the Gods" (haEIohim) occurs 366 time s in 33 7 OT verses. ha E/a him is d iscussed above, • "You-he" tatah-hu ] paired pronouns occ ur nine times in n ine OT vers es . Atah-hu is di scussed later in the chapter, • "Yahveh Elohim" (Yahveh Gods) occur 37 times in 35 O'I' verses . ·' Y(.IJII'I:1i Elohim" is di sc ussed later in the cha pter. and • MT plural verbs and modifiers rererrin~ to Y(.Ihveh occ ur once o r more in 38 MT Ch apters. MT plura ls referring to Yahveh a rc d isc ussed in Co llect ive Plurals chapter and in the MT plurals app e ndix. Groupings of Trinitarian cle men ts (beside s the co mmon plura l for m Elollim ) arc found at: • The Creation Account: o Yahveh Etohim: Gen 02:04h- -03 :23 o MT Plural s: Ge n 01:26; 03 :22; and I.XX Gen 02:18; I.XX Cen 03:05b • Gen 20 and Neh 9: c hllElohim : Ge n 20:06, 17: Neh 09:07 o Ata n-hu: Neh 09 :06a, 07 o MTPl urals: Ge n 20:13; LX X Neh 09: IR

•

•

•

•

•

•

Cen 35: o hllElohim: Gen 35:07 o MT Plural: Gen 35:0 7 Deu 04 and Jer 2..1: c hllElohim : Deu 04 :35, 39: Jer 23:23 o MT Plurals: Dc u 04:07 ; Jer 23:36 jos 22, 24: o halilohim: Jos 22:34 ; 24:0 1 o MTPlural: Jos 24:19 (Sa 04 : o ho EJohim: ISa 04 :04 , 08 (twice). 13. 17, 18, 19, 2 1, 22; 05:01, 02, 10 (twice), II o MT Plurals: lSa 04: 07-08 2Sa 07: o halilohim: 2Sa 07:02 , 2R o A teh -hu: 2Sa 0 7:28 o Yohveh Elohim : 2Sa 07 :25 o MT Plural: 2Sa 0 7:23 2Ki 19: o hoEloh im: 2Ki 19:1 5 c A II/Ii- /m : 2Ki 19:15 o Yohw' h Elohim : 2Ki 19:19 Matenal com direlbs

autcrars

Yael N ata n

30 •

IChl 7 and2Sa07; c Jw E/oll im: ICh 17:0 2. 2 1, 26 o A la h· h,,: l Ch 17:26 o fa/w ell Elohim: t Ch 17:16- 17 o MT Plural: 2S a 07 :23 • t ell 28:

o hIlE/ohilll: ICf 28: 12. 2 1 o Yohveh Eloh im: lCf 28:20 •

•

•

•

•

• •

•

•

•

l ehO! : o IwE/ohim : 2eh 0 1:03-04 o Yahveh Elohim: 2e h 0 I :09 2eh 07; o hllE/ohim: 2e h 07:05 o Yahveh Etohim: 2eh 06:4 1-42 2eh 19: o Iw E/oll im: 2eh 19:03 o A/ali-hit: 2e h 20:06 2eh 32: o halilohim; 2eh 32: 16, 3 1 o MTPl umls: 2Ch32 :14. 15 Isa 37: o J",[lohim: lsa 37: 16 o A ltl h·h,,: Isa 37 : 16

Isa 41: o MTPl urals: lsa41:04.21 -23. 26 Dan 04 : o MTPlura]s: DaI104:08.09, 17. 18, 25, 26, 3 1, 32; 05: 11 , 20, 21 ; 07:18, 22, 25b, 26 . 27 Jon 04 : o Iw E/oll im: Jon 04 :07 o Yahve h Elohi m: Jun 04:06

Ecc 12: o halilohim; Ecc 12:07 , 13-14 o MT Plural: Ecc 12:01 H os 11-12: o MT Plurals : Hos 11:02, 12 (8HS 12:0 1);Hos 12:04 (8 11S 12:( 5 )

Th e Pai red Words vah veh Blohlm Yah veh HIt/him are the Father ( Ya lll'eh) and the So n (H{t/him ). Yahveh Etah im are the " us" mentioned severa l ti me s in Genesis (GCIl 0 1:26. 0 3:22 ; 11:07 and LXX Gen rJ2 : IR). Yahreh f it/him are men tioned twen ty times in Ge n rJZ -rJl The nou ns Yahveh F.lohim are d iscussed in the MT plurals append ix, as are all the plural elem ents mentioned in the " Affinity" table, above. Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

31

The Paired Pronouns "You-he" (Atah-hu) The paired pronou ns atah-hu ("you-he") occ ur nine times in the MT (2Sa 07: 28; 2Ki 19:15; ICh 17:26; 2Ch 20:06; Neh 09 :06a, 07; Psa 044:05a ; Isa 37:16; Jer 14:22). Five times all.lh·/Ill is assoc iated with the form haE/ohim ([A ll] the Gods). This sugges ts atah-hu refers to the persons called Yahveh. He re arc literal translations of all nine occurrences of paired pronouns "you-he": • Y(,h",'h, y ou -he [are] [All] the Gods [JwElohim ) (2Sa 07:28), • Yahl'eh, Gods [E/ohim] of Israel who dwell [betwee n] the che rubim . yo u-he [are] [Alii the Gods [huElohim ) (2Ki 19 :15), • Now Yuhl'eh, you- he [are] [Ali i the Gods [haElohim] (tCh 17:26) , • Yahveh Gods [EJoMm] of o ur fat hers. [are] yo u- he not Gods It'Jo him ] in heaven'! (2Ch 20:06), • You -he [are ) Yohvch alone... you -he [are] fuhl'eh . [All I the Gods [hllEJohim] (Neh 09:06-{l7), • You-he [are] my king, 0 Gods [E/ohim] (Psa 044:(4). • Yahvch of hosts, Gods IEJohim ] of Israel who d well [between] the che rubi m, you-he [arc] [Alii the God s [haElohim l (!sa 37: 16), and • [Are I not you-he. Ya /w eh, our Gods [Elohenu I? (Je r 14:22). The Presences of Elyon chapter discusses ho w the Father dwc lt in heave n, while the Son and Spirit as Prese nces of Yohveh d wel t first in the tabernacle and the n t he temple. T he "you" of the pained "yo u-he' pronou ns rna) have been mean t as a collective prono un referring to the Presences in the temple. T he mem bers of the Trinity were ofte n addressed wuh singular collective noun s. The "he" of the paired "you-be" pronouns may have been mea nt as a singular pronoun refe rring to the Father in heaven. "You" natura lly refers to a person or persons who are ncar- such as the Presences in the te mple. "He" naturally refe rs to a person more distant such as the Father in heaven. "You" is a singular collective noun referring to the Son and Spirit.

The Lack of Evidence for the Majestic Plural Syntax in Any Language Since Biblical He brew is a Semit ic lang uage, one wou ld expect to find copious examples of majes tic plurals in other contemporary Se mitic languages. T ho ugh large ancient Near East Iibruries have been unearthed, o nly a few dubious exam ples have been offered as proof t hai othe r Se mitic languages used majestic plurals. Instead , what one finds is, as the Encyclopaedia Britannica stales: So me rulers speak of their own dynastic dei ty. A king who owes his position to the Assyrian emperor refers to the latter and the dynastic deity equally as ' my master.,_v, Notice the king and god arc referred to by the s ingular "my master," not by a majest ic plural "my masters."

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

32

Yael Na tan Case Studies on Supposed Majestic Plurals Supp osed Arab ic M aj e,I'Iit." I' hirals

Majest ic plural proponents say that the Koran co ntains many majestic plum b. Muhammad has Allah say ing, "we ," " us" and "our" often, Many plural pronouns that are best unde rstood as refe rring to angels are instead inter preted as referring to Allah.'! Th e Kora n. howe ver, is nOI of any great a nnquity, btl! is merely medie val-era Iitcrururc written betwee n 6 10 and 6 32 AD. Furthermo re, pre- Islamic doc ume nts yie ld sca nt ev ide nce for the ex iste nce of majesti c pl ural s in Arabia. James Hastings wrote: C urio usly eno ugh, the two oldest doc umen ts which mention he r [the goddess M m taf ]. 11 Nabataea n and a La tin inscr iption , use the plural form Ma na wtl/ (spell Mal1l11't// in Latin), ju st as the plural M1II1tI.I't/ is used for Mt/lliya rmeaning, "do om to death" or "destruction"]," and It may be added that the di vine name tval , which occurs once in an ancient verse, is possibly a plural of majest y fo rmed from D .'-' Latin had no majestic plural rarionalizauon . so the abo ve Lat in tra nsliterations cited by Hast ings may have reflec ted a plural in e ither Aramaic or Arabic. T he se few pre -Islamic pl ural s could be explained without resorting 10 the majest ic plural rationalizat ion. Later in th is cha pte r. for e xample. the plurals referring to Ba al and Astnora h are explained without referring to the majestic plural rationalizat ion. T hese Arabian doc ume nts we re pro bably based o n Arabic langu age so urces. The Arabic langu age was first writte n down with a crude alphabet a few ce nturies before the Islamic er a. It would seem, the refore, that no ne of the ex amples fro m Arab ia are o f great antiquity. Thus, it cannot be pro ven that the majestic plural concep t was fo und in Arabia be fo re Je wish influe nces infiltrated the pen insu la. If the pre -I sla mic writers meant the se plu rals to be unde rstood as maje st ic pl urals , they probably wer e ju st copying Je wish custo m. There is, ho wever. no do ubt that Ko ran ic maje stic plurals re flect Jewish teach ing. Ibn Warraq w rote about the Jewish influen ce: Cook pctuts out the si milarity of certain Muslim beliefs and practices to those of the Sa maritans .. .He also points OUI that the fundamental idea o f Muham mad develo ped of the reli gion o f Abraham was already presen t in the Jewish apocryphal work (dated to circa 140-100 BC ) ca lled the Book of Ju bilees and may well have influenced the forma tion of Islamic ideas.. .. Sozornc nus [a fifth ce ntury AD historian I goes on to describe how certain Ara b tri bes that learn ed of the ir Ishmaehte o rigins from Jews adopted Jewish observances [c ircumcision. abs tai ning from canng pork, ctc.} '' J. Wansbrough wrote about the Jewish inl1 uenee on the Ko ral/ ' S development: Quranic all usio n presuppose s familiarity with the narrativ e material o f Judaeo -Christian scripture, w hich was not so much reformulated as merel y referred to.. ..Take n together. the q uantity of reference. the mecha nically re pe t it io us e m ploy me nt of rhe to rical conve nt ion, and the st ride ntly po lemica l style. all sugges t a stro ngly sec tarian atmosphere in which a Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

33

corpus of familiar scripture was being pressed into the service of as yet unramiIiar doc trine ." The Kora n repeatedly notes how c ritics acc used Muhammad of having no new stories (Koran 006:025; 008:03 1; 0 16:024; 023:083; 02 5:005; 027:068; 0 46:01 7; 068:0 15; 083:0 1J ). The detractors sa id the o ld info rmatio n was pieced togethe r with the he lp o f others (Koran 016: I03; 044:0 14). Koran 025:004-005 reads: Those who di sbelie ve say : Thi s is no thin g bu t a lie t hat he [Muhammad ] has forged, and other peop le have helped him at it; so indeed the y ha ve done inju stice and (uttered) a fa lsehood. And they [critics] say: The sto ries of the ancients-he [Muhammad] has go t them written, and the se are read out to him morn ing and evening. One heckle r vexed the apostle by saying: Muhammad is only an ea r. If anyone te lls him a thing he believes it.-'" The Koran ev e n rec o rd s t ha t a non - indigen o us Ara bic spe aker he lped Muham mad formulate Islam: We [Alla h ] know indeed tha t the y s ay, is a man tha t teach e s him [Muhammad]. ' The to ng ue o f him [Muhamm ad's tuto r) they [the Mekkans] wicked ly poin t to is o utlandish. while this [the Ko mnJ is Arabic , pure and clear ( Koran 0 16: I03; compare 026: 1( 5). The language and cultural identity of Muhammad's tutor is suggested else where in the Koran, Allah to ld Muhammad to go to the Peo ple of the Boo k, mea ning the Jews. to verify that the KOf(1I1 was co nsistent with Heb rew sc ripture (Koran 010: 0(4). Muhammad's biographer, Ibn lshuq. men tion s there be ing ma ny rabbi s at Medina. Med ina is Arabic mea ning, 'T he City [of the Prophet Muhammad]." Several rabbis converted to Islam. including Muk hayriq" and Husayn ibn Salta m." One of the most learned rabbi s in the area lived at Medina. Ibn lxhaq wrote: 'A bdull ah b. Suriya the one-eyed who was the most learned man of his time in the Hijaz in Torah studies ... J" History records that the Jews in Arabia d id not spea k pure Ara bic, at leas t to ex press their religion. S. D. Goitein wrote that e ven d uring medieval times, the Jews around the Mediterranea n did not use Arabic d uring synagog ue services. " In Ambia up to M uhammad 's time . the Je ws had a spec ialized vocabulary that was unfam iliar to the Arabs. The diffe re nce het wee n the J udea -Arabic dia lec t and Arabic was much less than the d iffere nce betwee n German and Yiddish. Gordo n Newby wrote: Muhammad 's aman uensis, Zayd b. Thabir. is said to have learned alyohudivvah in seventeen d ays in order to be able to understand what the Jews were writing. an indication that the diffe rence betwee n Arabic and atyah udiyyah we re mutters of vocabulary and sc ript; they were no t differen t languages." So in the Koran Muhammad con trasted the Judeo-Arab ic d ialect with Arab ic. Thi s e xplains why Muhammad had to e mphasize that the Kora n was written in "pure" Arabic nathe r than just saying the Kora n was written in Ara bic ( Koran 12:

-u

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

34

Yael Na ta n

002 ; 0 13:037; 0 16: 103; 0 20: 11 3; 0 26: 195; 039:028; 04 1:00 3; 04 2:007; 043:003; 0 46:0 12). M uham mad arg ued that the different dialec t proved that his mater ia l was nOI ju st a rehash of ra bbinic materia l. but was o riginal re ve lat ion. Histor y also points 10 the Jews being Muhammad 's source of inspiration. as Gord on Ne wby wrote: The c irc ulat ion of non -Is lam ic materi als for usc as the basis for Qur 'an co m me ntary was p resent dur ing Muhammad 's lifeti me a nd saw a conside rable increase in the two gene ratio ns after his dea th. The Co mpani on. Abu Hurayruh, althu ugh illiterate, had extensive knowle dge of the Torah. a s did ' Ali, Sa lma n al-Farivi. and, of co urse. the 'Ocea n of Tafsir.' Ibn ' A bba s. who is ofle n c alled the 'hih r (l1·'ummll,' or ' Rabbi o f the [Mus lim] Co mmunity,' on accou nt of his extensive knowledge o f Ju deo-C hrjstum as well as M uslim Scripture and co mme ntary acqu ired in Arab ia. Muhammad, Abu Bakr, and 'U mar are repo rted to have made several trips to the Bet M id rash [vHo use of S tudy"] in Med in a, and Muhammad 's aman uensis, Zayd b. Thabit, who was so ce ntral in matte rs Q ur' anie, is repo ned to have go ne so far as to learn a!-Yllhudiy."a" [JudeoArabic ] in a Bet Mid rash at Muhammad 's behest in ord er to read Je wish ma ter ial,' : So it see ms that the unly plausible e xplanat ion, give n all the data , is: • Muhamm ad 's tuto r me ntioned in Kora n 0 16:103 was a Jew ish Arab , and • Muha mmad learned the majestic plural rationalizat ion from the Jews. Logic also suggests that Muhamm ad lea rned the majestic plural rationalization from the Jewish sources rather than Arabie sources. If Allah was eve r made to say "we" or "our" or " us" in pre -Islamic lime s, the Mekkans surely wo uld have meant the plural pron ouns to refer to Allah and his goddess d aughte rs Allar. Mana! and U :.;:a ( Kortlll 0 53:0 19 -020 ). In fact, the K ora n may record the Mekkan objec tion 10 Muham mad 's mer ging A/hlh and his dau ghters into one god by interpre ting phu nls as maje stic plurals: So they [Me k kun cri tics] won de r t hat a Warn e r [M uham mad ] ha s come to them from amo ng the mselves! and the unbelievers say, 'This is a sorce rer telling lies ! Has he made the gods into a single Allah? Truly this is a strange thing!' And the leader among them goes aw ay (imputiently), (saying), ' Walk ye away. and remain co ns tant to yo ur gods! T his is most sure ly a thing sought after ' ( Komll 0 38:004-IXI6). It see ms e vide nt that the so urce o f maje stic plurals in the Koran trace s bac k partly to rabb inic pse udo-scholarsh ip and pa rtly to OT Trinitarian ism. Muhamm ad purpose ly made Allah speak oft en like Yallreh occa sionally spo ke - using plural pronouns like " we" and " us" (Ge n 0 1:26; 0 3:22: 11 :0 7; Isa 06 :0R). So it wou ld see m that majest ic plurals both in the Koran and in ex tr a-biblical Je wish literatu re are an unwitting or 11 grudging imitation o f OT Trinitarian ism.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

35

Supposed M' lj l'I1ic Ptura!s in First Man'flbl't's

So me maje st ic plural pro ponents sa)' that Ihe OT apocry phal boo k o f Fi rst Maccabe e s co nta ins majestic plural s. Of course. this is Interrestamemalliterature, so il probabl y refl ects newfangled rab binic teaching on the majestic plural. Intert eslamental t imes. of course. were more than a thousand years after Moses pe nned the Pent ateu ch (Exo 34:27; D eu 3 1:19). Grammar rules are introduced and arc dis carded all the lime. A thousand years is mo re than e nough time for the majestic plural inno vation 10 be conceptualized, be introduced. and beco me koshe r gr amma r. Th en maje stic plura l propone nts mo nopohzed Jew ish scholars hi p by fo reing out traditional Tri nitari an scholars. In First Macca bee s various kings wrote messages using the pronouns "we" and " us" ( I Ma 10: 19-20.26-28,53-54.56.70-72; 11:31 , 33-35). The " we" and the " us" of the lener s refer not to a single king, but 10 IWO petty kings, or the king and his co urt. For instance: Demetrius sen t Jo nathan a letter in peacea ble words to honor him ; fo r he sa id, 'Let us [Demetrius and his co urt] act firs t to make peace with him (Jonat han] before he mak es peace with Alexande r again st us. for [ot herwise ] he will rem em be r all the wrongs whic h we did to him a nd 10 his bro ther s and his nation ' ( I Ma 10:03-05), So he said, 'S hall we [Alexander and his cou rt] find another such man? Come now, we will ma ke him ou r friend and ally.' And he wrote a letter and sent it to him... in the fo llo wing wonk ' King Alexander to his brother Jo nathan, greeting. We [Alex ander and his court] have heard about ) 'OU, that you are a mig hty warrior and worthy to be ou r friend' (I Ma 10: 16-19 ), and When Deme trius heard of these things he was grieve d and said. ' Whal is this that we I Deme trius and his co urt] have done '! Alexander has gotte n ahead of us in forming a frie ndship wit h the Jews 10 stre ngthe n himsel f ' (lMa 10:22-23 ). It see ms incon cei vable that the above state ments would be the kmg's self-deli berat ive thou ghts. II would be unnatu ra l for a king 10 think 10 himself us ing majestic plural pro nouns such " us" and "we." Hexides , a k ing us ing majesuc pl ural s puhlid y wo uld surely ha ve ca used en dless con fusion. When the king used a plural prono un. eve ryone wou ld wonder whe the r the king was referri ng just to his majestic self. Perha ps he mea nt h imself and his co urt, or qu een. or all ies, or what not. Th at kings ever uscd majestic plurals so unds as fic titio us as Hans Ch ris tian Ande rsen 's ta le "T he Em pe ror 's New Clot hes" (I R37 AD).

Supposed Majestic Plurals in the ArHicryplral and PwudcpiXTaplral Books Man y pse udepigr ap hal book s and apocry pha l boo ks lik e Fi rsl Macc ab ee s surv ive on ly in Greek o r Coptic ve rsions. Many suc h books may have bee n written o rigi nally in G reek. Since there is no majestic plural construction in Gree k grammar, one can assume the re are no majestic plurals in any apocry phal and pse udep igrap hal hoo k that or iginally was wnuen in Greek . Matenal com direlbs autcrars

36

Yael Na ta n

Supposed M uj e.I'f;c Plural.I' ill the Septuagint (LXXj T here is no maje stic plural construc tio n in G ree k gra m mar. So no o ne ca n automatically assume the re are no majestic plurals in the Septuag int. the G ree k Tranvluno n of rhe He bre w OT. Someone migh t ask: Did the LXX translators recognize many Hebrew no uns 10 be majest ic plurals, and then tran sla te them as s ingulars'! It is possible tha t the LXX translators mistook He bre w plurals to be maje stic plurals. II see ms mo re plausible that the LXX translat ors understood ma ny Hebrew pl urals were plural collective nOIl IlS. T he G reek may have used sing ular co llective nouns more freque ntly than plural co llec tive nou ns , so Hebre w plura l collective nouns we re translated as singu lar co llect ive nou ns. T he situat io n is ana lo go us to a Br it ish Eng lis h boo k be ing tra ns late d into A merica n English. The plura l co llective nouns wo uld he changed to s ingular co llective nouns to con form 10 the sensibilities of Amer ican English reader s." Supposed Maj estic Plurals ill Ezra Majest ic plura l propo nent s offer an exa mple fro m the Aram aic book o f Ezra: The letter yo u sen t us has bee n read and trans lated in my presence " (Ezr 04 : l 8). King Anaxerxes" use of a sing ular prono un (my') wo uld he inconsiste nt with his ha ving used a majestic plural (us) e arlier in the verse. Anaxer xes ' leiter me ntions a translator and a reader bein g in his pre sence , and that the letter was writte n out of loyalty 10 "th e palace" and king (Ezr 04 :14). So A rtaxerxes ' use o f " us" is best interpreted as the king spea king for him self and his court. or pe rhaps the trans lator. the reader and himself. King Artnxc rxcs' response must have been trans lated from the k ing 's Per sian lan gu age. a n lu do- Euro pean lang uage s imila r to Vedic Sa nskrit ( Ezr 04 : 18 )..... S urely. the king a nd trans lato r d id not use majestic plurals since. apparently. neither the Ara maic nor Indo-Euro pean langu ages had a majestic plural usage. Nkodenltfs ' S"PfX1.1'ed Maj estic Plural Nicode mus came stealthily to Ye.l lw l! at night and sa id, "Rabbi. we kno w... .. (J oh 0 3:02). Some ha ve s upposed that s inee Nicodem us was a Pha risee and a " ruler o f the Je ws" (Joh 0 3:( 1), he was e ntitled to use majest ic plurals when refe rring to himse lf. That Nicode mus wa s refe rring to hi mself and his co lleagues see ms appare nt when Ye.lhlw add ressed Nicodemus a nd sa id, "yo u peop le" (Joh 0 3: 11 ). Supposed Maj estic Plurais in the Apastte Paul '.1' Writings Paul said " us" and "we" ofte n in Co loss ians. in First and Second Thessalon ians, and in other ep istles. S ince G ree k has no majestic plura l sy ntax , it is unlikely that Paul wou ld write using majest ic plurals. Historic ally. Paul's plural prono uns have been unde rsto od 10 refe r to himse lf and his coworke rt s j, f rie nd (s) o r co ngregation(s). Malenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

37

Suppo.l'ed M aj en k Plural Usage in viaonan Engtond

Alexa ndrma Victoria , Queen of England from IR37- 1901 AD, reportedly said, "We are not amused." T his has been offered as support for the majestic plural rationalization. Every o ne in co urt, howeve r, su rely unders tood the queen 10 be speaking for herself and the royal fa mily, or herself and the court. If Q ueen Victoria really had used a majestic plural, there ought to be tho usands of o the r examples of majest ic plurals in the English royal archives. Apparently, none arc to be found since only this one exa mple has been offered. Because this isolated example is of late da te, it says nothing abou t whe ther the majestic plural can be traced back to antiquity in any language. The example proves, if anyth ing, that English royalty had read a rabbini c grammar book abo ut majest ic plurals. In rea lity, ho we ve r. this example proves absol utely nothing abou t the majestic plural since it represen ts a typical use of the plural prono un "we." Sup/H).\'ed M aj en k Plural Referring 10 Kemosh

T he Ammo nites had not integr ated into Israe lite society as had o ther e thnic gro ups like the Ken ites (Jdg 05:24; ISa 15:06) and the Hitt ites (I Sa 26:06; 2Sa I I: I I ). The lack of integ ratio n was due to Ammonite reliance on sorcery and their false god, Kemosh (Dcu 23:03- 06). T he segregation a lso was a result of the Ammonit es and Moabues, the desce ndants of Lot, living o n buffer stale "reservations" (Gc n 19:38: Dcu 02:09- 11. 19-21) . T he)' shared th is status with the Edomite s, the descendants of Esa u (Deu 02:04-06; Jos 24:04). T he marginalized Ammonites wa ited three ce nturies until the Israelites were weak, and then they de manded land back that WlIS not theirs in the first place. The Ammonite rationale was not that they we re the majority occ upants or " the powers that be" over the disputed land (Jdg 11 :26: Ro m 13:0 I ). Instead, a corrupted oral history, or a misreading of Israelite history, informed the Ammonites that the Israelites had take n the ir land (Jdg I I:13). Neve rtheless. the Am monites wanted to undo three hundred years of history (Jdg 11:26). The Israelites operated o n the manifest destiny principle that Y(lJm :h had give n certain lands to the Israelites and ce rtain lands to the gentiles (Dell 02:05-24; Act 17:26), Jephth ah no ted that YaJ"":,,, himself had driven out the pre vious occ upants. and that Yahvch had given Israel thrce hund red years of uncontested occ upancy in the contested land (Jdg 11:23). Jephthah set the record straight by pointing out that Israel had take n the contested land from the Amorites ( Num 21 :21-24; Jdg II : 19-23). not from the Ammon ites (Deu 02: 19-21, 37). So in rea lity. the Ammonites were attempting a naked land grab of territory that belonged first to the Amori tes and then to the Israelites. Jephthah argued that if the Ammonites had bee n given an opportunity, they wou ld have confiscated land given to the m by "your clohim [literally. "gods"), Kemesh: (Jdg 11 :24). Je ph rhah's argu me nt was not so hypot het ical, fo r the Ammonites had driven out tribes to take their land (Dcu 0 2:19-23). Mo reo ve r. the Ammo nites were about to do so again by dislodg ing Israe l.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

38

Yael Natan

The s ituat io n be twee n t he Ammo nites and I sr ael oc c urred because t he Ammonite s relied on the ir sanitized and corrupted oral history, This h istory left them fee ling both self-rig hteous and wronged. Their history was as e ffective as a myth since it pro vided the pretext for group actio n and co hes io n. The Am monites could selectivel y misrea d Israel's written history to make land claims and construct moral superiority arguments. Jephtha h, how e ver, could not "fi ght fin: w ith fire" by reading the Ammon ite 's d isin fected histo ry. Jephthah co uld onl y co unter with the correct reading of Israelit e history. The correct reading probably sounded like only so much pro paganda to the Ammonites OJg 11:2 ~). So why did Je phthah ca ll K/'/Il (!.I'h "f'loh im," literally, "god s"? Using a maje stic pl ural to honor an e nemy's god does not motivate on e 's troops, nor does it make for effective psycholog ical warfare. Furthermore , it wo uld be incon s iste nt fo r Jephthah first to ho nor Kcmosh b)' using a majest ic plural (Jdg I I:24 ), and the n be little the Ammonite king, sayin g: Are you better tha n Balak son of Zippor. king of Moa b"? Did he ev er q uarrel with Israel or fight with them? (Jdg 11:25). Archaeol ogy see ms to pro vide an an swe r for wh y I ep ht hah ca lled Kemosh plura l "gods." Centurie s afte r the Je phrhah inc ide nt in Judges , Mes ha had the Moabite Stone made to bOlISI abou t his rebellion aga inst Israel. Me sha happens 10 be menuon ed in the Bible (2Ki rJ3:(4). Though Jep hthuh fo ug ht an Am monite king , and Mesh a was Moabire. both kings referred 10 the same god(s) Kemosh, Th e Ammon ites and Moabi tes and their gods arc mentioned togethe r in the OT ofte n. for instance, in Deu 23:03 -tl4. The A mmonites and Moabites were related (Gen 19:37-38). Their god s Molech and Kemosh are noted for having territorial ambit ions (Jer 49:01 -0 3). William Fox well Albright wrote: As a male, Athturt was kno w n a s Athta r and co rres po nde d 10 the Moabite god Kemosh , as well as the Am mon ite god Milco m, o r Molech ( I Ki 11:33)." Mcsha the n built a tem ple to Kemosh and Ashlar that showc ased the Moabitc Stone. The 34-line inscription c hise led aro und 850 BC is ca lled the Mesha inscnpnon." T he sto ne was redisco ver ed in 1868 AD. The stele (a lso spel led "s tela" ) boa sted of Mcsha's dastard ly deeds and mundane ads. In lines 14-18 of the inscr iption. Mesha calls his gods hy the co mpound name Astnar-Kemosh: .. .Now Kemosh said to me , 'Go se ize Nebo fro m Israel.' So I wen t at night and fo ugh t against it fro m the break of dawn until noon. I seized it and killed everyo ne of [irl-c-seve n thous and native men, fore ign men . nat ive wome n, forjeig n] women. and conc ubines- for I dev oted it to Ashtar-Kemosh. I took fro m there rh] e ves ]se ls of ruh veh and dra gged the m before Krmosh , Now the king o f Israel had built.. ." Another Moahite stone. the Balun Ste le , shows a king flan ked hy two fig ures. Archa eo lo gis ts sus pect that the fi gures are Kemosn wi th a sun d isk , and the goddes s A.\h/llr with a crescent moon." The Mesne inscription men tio ns K emosh

Malenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

39

ofte n (lines 0 3. OS, 09, 13, 14, IS, 19.33), but there is one me ntion o f AshtarKemosh (see quote abo ve). The mentio n of Astnar-Kcmosn on the Moabite Sto ne and the figure s on the Balua Ste le suggest that Kemosh was an mclusive ter m meaning Ashtar-Kemosh, That Kcmosh is a collective no un ex plains why Jcp hthah spo ke of Kcmosh using a sing ular ver b "causes to possess" with the pluralvgod s" (c1ohim) : That which Kemos h your gods causes you to possess-will yo u nol possess it'! (Jdg I I :24) . Tho ugh the Moa bite lan guage was closely related to He bre w,'" no Moa bite stde spo rts a majestic plural. Apparently. the Moebites d id not assimilate the majestic pl ural rationa lization from the Israe lites . though there is ev idence tha t Moabite s an d Israeli tes intc rrmnglcd : • The Moa bites were desce ndants of Lot (Gen 19:37). Lot undou bted ly kne w and spo ke Ihe same Hebrew that his uncle Abraham spoke (Gcn 12:0 5; 14:12), • The Jewish Tr ansjo rda n tr ibes mingled with the Moabites. Mcsha's inscription e ven ment ions a sanc tuary of Yahveh at Nebo at the edge o f Moabue terr itory (see lines 14 a nd 18 quoted above ), • A man of Judean desce nt wa s once a Moabite king (l Ch 04 : 22 ) .-~ ' • The book of Ruth reveals that the tribes west of the Jordan River als o m ixed with the Moabites. a nd • T he Moa bite god Kemosn was wors hipped in Jeru sale m fo r Iwo centuries betwee n the reigns o f Sol omon and Josiah ( I Ki I I :07.33; 2Ki 23: 13). T his data suggests that the maje stic plura l usage was unkno wn in ancient ti mes, an d was devised o nly in lnte rtestame ntal times.

The Supposed Majestic Plural Baalim (Lords) I n many ancient Near East language s, the word baahm (lo rds) was a near sy nony m fo r elohim (gods). If elohim we re used as a majestic pl ural. o ne wou ld ex pect that healim and other etohim synonyms would have been used as maje stic plurals, too. Howe ver. ancient Near Eas t libraries re veals that haalim re ferred to persons or things rather than to single. majestic persons. A study of the B iblica l data also sho ws that haalim always re fers to persons or things. Here is a study o f how the wor d boat was used in the OT, When refe rring to the god Ba(/I, the He brew word baal is made definite by: • Prefixing the definite art icle "t he" (ha ) as in ha8aal (the 8001) ami ha800lim ("t he Haal.\"), • Putting haal in a Heb re w construct make s heal 11 possessive (" H(wl's ," or "of Baar). o r • Pre fixing a prepo sition to boat suc h as "by" (beth) (Jer 02:0 8; 12;16: 23:13) or the pre posi tion " to" tlamadtn (Jdg 0 2:13; 06:3 1: IKi 16:32; 19: 18). Ot herwise. the He brew for m baal is used as: • A title meaning. "masters" or " husba nds" (Gcn 20:03), • A personal name ( IC h 05:05; 08: 30; 09 :36), or as • A syllahle in com pound: Matenal com direlbs autcrars

40

Yael Na ta n

o Place names (Exo 14:02), and o Personal names (Gcn 36:J~-39). The acco unt of E lijah on Mount Ca nnel shows that the word haBlIalim ("'the Hlwh'" refers ( 0 both HIllIl and Ashtorah , Elija h uses the singu lar leon hl/Baal (IK i 18: 19.21 ,22.25 ,26, 40) and the plural hatsoatim (I Ki \lUH) inte rch angeably in the account of Elijah a nd the Prophets of Baat. Elijah reve aled who the hattaatim were by say ing: .. . bri ng the fo ur hu nd red and fi tly prophe ts of Blilil an d the four hundred prophets of Astuorati (1 Ki 18: 19). So Elijah used the plural fo rm flllHal/lim (vthe 8(/(/1.\") as a pl ural collective noun referring to the god Baul and h is god dess consort Ashtoratr. In the acco unt of the Prophets of 8 /10/, both the singular form !w Raat and the pl ural haHlll/lim likely were co llective nouns referring to Baal and Ashtoroh, It is easy to understand ho w in patriarchal soc ieties the singular term haR(wl carne to be an inclu sive. co llective noun referr ing to the god Baal and his goddess consort. Many gods were assu med to have goddess consorts. thou gh the names of the goddesses may have never been invo ked in literature. The names o f the goddesses were often the fem inine form o f a god 's name. for examp le, Batl!"s goddess consort in Byblos was Baalat of Byblos." Similarly. Alla h's goddess consort or daughte r. de pending nn the locu tion and period. was Al/m [ Koran 053 :( 19). Somet imes the goddess consort was a goddess wi th all entirely d iffer ent name than the god. but their spheres of infl uence we re related. For ex am ple, Baurs goddess consort Asmorah has a name with no etymological connection to Baal, but Baat-Shamash was " Lord of Heave n" a nd Ashtorah happened to be the "Q ueen of Hea ven" (Jer 07: 18: 44: 17, 19). Baars symbol so metimes was the sun. As!llOrah's astral association was Venus. The sun and Ven us o ften rise and set together. T hat Raul and A\/rwmh's spheres of infl uence are related help to acco unt for their being know n as Ill/Baalim (I Ki 18: 18). Ca lling Baal and Asntorah Baalim is similar to calling a husband and wife by the plural " the Joncscs." The word IwBaalim als o was used as a co llect ive no un referring to a pantheon. Hosea , ev idently spea king of a pantheon, said the hu baalim have a " their name [singular]" (Hos 02 :17). That haBaalim (vthc Baal.{·) became synony mo us with "pantheon" is because the gnd Buul wa s a ruin god , amo ng oth er things. In t he parched environme nt of the ancie nt Near East. his rain and fert ility roles mea nt Bact was the de [acto top god in most C anaanite pantheons . So thc term habaatim was used as a collective plural to refer to many gods (Jdg 0 2:1 1; 03 :07: 08:33; 10:06. 10; ISa 07:04; 12: 10: IKi 18:1 8; 2Ch 17:0 3; 24:07; 28: 0 2: 33:03 ; 34:04 ; Jer 02:23; 0 9:14; II :13; Hos 02: 13). Ce rtain verses provide esped ally stro ng evidence that haBaalim referred to seve ral deities (Jdg 02: 11 -12: 03:07; 08:33; 10:(6). Tbe fll/ :vdolJlledia Britwlllic(I slates that there were many Hoo ts: It is clear that severa l different deities arc referred to by the form Baa/·X r''Lord of X"). Hudad is probably represented by !Ju{/i-Shilmt'll (t'Lord of the Heavens"). F.l appeared under the title BU{"-Hulllm(JIl :'~ Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

41

Suppo.l'ed Maj en k P/urals Ref errinf( to Goaaess Consorts Asheroh (hilA.I'hert/h) was the Canaanite gnddess of fo rtune and happi ness. Asherah is only referred 10 as 11 perso nal goddess a fe w times (lKi 18:19; 2Ki 23: 0 4, ( 7). Most translations only ha ve the plural form of Ash;'rah's name once in the phrase: "the Boats and the Asturans" (N fV Jdg 03:07, but RSV transliterates the plural as A.l hl'mth) . Otherwise, "groves" or "Asherah poles" is the standard translation of the Hebre w plural forms lIaAsherorh (Jdg 03:07; 2Ch 19:03; 33:03) and haA.~hl.'filII (2Ki 23:14: 2Ch 14;02; 17:06; 24:18; 3 1:0 1. 19; 34:07; Isa 27:09: Bzc 27:06). T his leaves o nly o ne plural form of Asherah in the whole OT that might be classified as a plura l of majesty - "the A.I'hemhs" in Jdg 03:07. T here are a few al te rnative ex ptananons for the plural fo rm "Asherahs" or " Ashcrorh" in Jdg 03:07, oth er than that Asheratxs is a majestic plural. Perhaps the plural fon n !UlA,I'hl.'mth should be trans lated as "groves" ( KJ V. LXE Jdg 03 : 07) or "sh rines" ( YLT Jdg 03:07). If "the Baals' are understood to mean the male population of the pantheon, than "the A~hemhs" may stand for the goddesses of the pantheon. T he plura l A.I'hem!l.l' may also stand for Baal's three goddess co nsorts who, according to certain Ugaritic myths. were jea lous riva ls: A.I'hrorah , Astarte, and A na /h . The jea lous, love- hate rcla nons hip of Baal and Asntorah was the explanation provided for the cold and hot seaso ns ex perie nced eac h year in many Mcdircrraucan regions.

Israel's Neigh bors Kn ew No Majestic Plural Sl nta x The following examples show that in Palestine collective no uns, but no t majestic plurals , were used to refer to gods and even to Yahveh, Abraham and rhe Three Men Three heave nly men came to visit Abra ham. These me n d id no t pose as Israelites s ince Israel did not ex ist at the time. Abraham must have assumed at first that they were Arnrneans. perhaps from Hara n, Abraham addressed the three men ax "01) Lord s" (AdO/wi). The plura l form Adona ; literally means "my Lords," but modern translations read " Lord." Thai "they answered Abraham" (Ge n 18:05) shows that the Father was Lord, the So n was Lord. and the Sp irit was Lord, as the Athanasian C reed teaches. Abraha m said, " If now I have found favor in your [singular) sighr..." (Gen 18:03). T hat Abraham used a singular "sight" shows that Abraham meant "Lords" as a plural collective no un. If the three visito rs had unde rstood AdO/wi ax a majestic plural, then they wou ld have understood Abraham to say "m ajestic lo rd [singu lar )" rathe r th an "lords [plural]." If the three men were familiar with majestic plurals, they wou ld have thoug ht that Abraham had addressed only o ne majestic lo rd of the three. Thai all three visitors replied (Gen 18:05) shows that the three visitors thought Abraham had addressed them co llectively as a group of lo rds. T his shows that the Matenal com direlbs autcrars

42

Yael Natan

majest ic plura l was nol known in the Near East (palestine or Me sopo tam ia). Since the three visitors we re from hea ven. evide ntl y the majestic plural was unkno wn eve n in hea ven during Abraham 's da y.

LOI and the Two Mt'n S imilar 10 the situat ion with Abraham and the three visitors (Oen I ll), Lo t addres sed the two visitors as "my Lords" (AdO/w i ). They both ans we red (Ge n 19: 02 ). If the two visitors we re familiar with the majest ic plural. they wou ld have tho ught Lot addre ssed only one majes tic lord, but not both. That the Son and Spirit an swered Lot suggests that the two visitors knew of no majestic plural syntax (G en 19:02).

Ahraham and Ahimelech tire Fhitistinc Ru ler The Philistines called Dagon clohim (gods) OJg 16:23-24; IS a 05:07 ). T he Philistines also used sin gu lar verbs with the plura l form elohim (ld g 16:23-24 ). The plural elohim used with a s ing ular verb indicates that when the Philistines refer red to Dago n as "gods," they used etotnm as a pl ural co llect ive no un. The Phil istines co uld have used the plural collect ive no un clohim to refer to both Dagon and h is goddess consents)." T he plural fo rm d ohim may have bee n used to ind icate that Dago n was a pluri form god. Dago n may ha ve been plurifm m meaning tha t Dagon had a: • Dual nature. s ince Dagon was supposed ly part fish an d pan man, or an • Androgyno us nature. Dagon wo uld have been like Astarte , who o rig inally was thought to be androgy nous." Abraham told Abirnelech: God s (£ {oll illl ], they c aused [plural verb] me to wander. .. (Ge n 20:13). Abime jech must have understoo d Abraham to he using a plural co llec tive noun with a plural verb to speak of perso ns comprising one god. If Abimelec h had not bee n fam iliar with plural collective noun s, the n Abimelech would have as sumed Abraham was using quantitative plum Is. If Abimclcch only knew of quantitative pl urals, than Abimelech wo uld have understood Abraha m to be speaking as a polythe ist-as thou gh Abraham had se veral gods. Abraha m co uld speak to Abim e1cch using plurals no uns and verbs referring to the person s o f Yoh vch, O ther pagan s, ho we ve r, wou ld have under stood such talk to be polythe istic. The difference between Ab ime lech a nd othe r pagans is that " (All] the God s [ht/£/ohilll )"' (the Tri nity) had appeared to Ab imelech (Ge n 20 :0 6). Beca use Abimc1ech had seen the three persons know n as vahveh, Abime1cch knew that Abraham was speak ing as a Trini tarian rather than as a poly theist. Later in the acco unt, Abraham prayed to " [All ] the Gods [hat.;/ohim)" (the Trinity ) to heal Abimcl cch (Gc n 20: 17). T he Phil ist ine s ca me to know the Tr inity frnm an c ie nt Yahvis ts who we re Abraham's co ntemporar ie s , Yahv ist s suc h a s Melchized ek (G e n 14: 18-20). Yahvists subseq uently ke pt the Philistines informed of Yahven-: Ynhvists such as

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

43

Jaco b (Gen 26:28), Salaa m (N um 22 -24) and the Israeli te s duri ng the Exod us ( Exo 13: 17; Num 14:14: Deu 32:31 : Jos tl,'Hll). Du ring the time of the Judges, the Philistines see m to have known that YlIhreh was the Tri ni ty. The Philisune s used sing ular verbs to refer to Dagon (1dg 16: 23), but some times spoke of Yahl'eh using plural nou ns and plura l ve rbs. T he Philist ines said: God s [plural noun] have co me [singular verb ].. .who can de liver us fro m the hand [singular noun] of the mighty [pluraludjccrivc ] God s [pluralnoun]? T hey [plu ral pro noun] ale the same [plural pronoun) Gods [plural no un] who struck [plural ver b) the Egyptians with all kinds of plagues (I Sa 04:07-(8). Jacob and His Familr Since Laban of Haran was considered an Aramea n (Gen 28:05: 3 1:20 : 3 1:24), and Jacob was conside red a "wander ing Ara mea n" (Dc u 26:05), one co uld say that Jacob 's fam ily was as much Ar umcan as Israe lite (Gc n 32:28: 35:10). Th e langua ge of Arumeans was Aramaic or a sister lang uage, As wa s disc ussed before. the Ara maic langu age apparen tly d id not use majestic plural s. Jacob told h i.s fam ily to bury all their foreig n gods (Gen 35:02). It is interesting that just afte r Jaco b and h is clan made a cle an break with po lythei sm. the na rrator used a plural noun and verb to refer 10 Y ahveh: "Gods [E/ohiml. they had re vealed [plural verb ] himself to him" (Gc n 35:07 ). If the narrator were not Trinitarian. it wou ld ha ve made better se nse to use singu lars in this si tuation. Sennacherlh :1' Offkia/.I' Se nnachenh's o fficers as ked in Hebrew (2 Ki 18:28): Ho w can your Elohim [God s) de liver [singular verb] you o ut of mine hand (2C h 32: 14)? . .Ho w m uch le ss sha ll your Elohim [pl ural no un] del iver [plural verb] )'O U out of my hand (2C h 32: 15)! T he Ch ro niele r wrote, "Se nnac he rih's office rs spoke fu rt her against Yohvch Eloh im" (2C h 32:1 6). The Chro nicler also wrote : T hey spoke about the E/ohim of Je rusalem as they did abou tthe £/ohim of the othe r peoples of the wo rld (2C h 32: 19), The offi cer s referred to Yo/we" using the pl ural fo rm £ /o h;m with both singular an d plura l verbs. S ince the ot he r nations d id not use a majestic plural syn tax. and since the officers spo ke o f Yahreh as the)' did o f oth er gods, Scnnachcnb's officials must not have used majestic plurals to refe r to Yahvch, Anot her ind ication that majestic plurals were not used is that the o ffice r was waging psycho logica l warfare. He wo uld want to d iminish the glory of ranven (2C h 32: 15), All thi s suggests that Se nnac henb's officers knew o f no majestic pl ural synta x, but they d id know there were persons called Ya hl'e h - the Tr inity.

Dodd's Psalm Da vid co mplained about fo reign rulers. and prayed that G od wou ld judge the earth so the nation s wo uld say: Matenal com direlbs autcrars

44

Yael N ata n

Most assuredly. God s [plural noun], they j udge [plural part iciple] the e arth (Psa 05&: I I ). Surely. the ge ntiles did not usc majestic plurals. so Dav id 's phra se wou ld so und a wfully polytheistic nil ge ntile lips. T he plural s suggest that David ho ped the gent iles wou ld one da y come to know the Trinity (,1I1/1lI.I'H'.

Indeclin able Nouns as Ccllecuve Nouns As wa s mentioned at the start of thi s chapte r, Hebre w speak er s so metimes paired s ingular collective nou ns with plural predicates. On e ex ample is that the seemingly s ingular form Yohvch is so metimes paired with plura l verbs. plural mod if iers. and plural no uns such as E/o him (God s ). Ap paren tly. }{,h l'eh is an indecl inable noun. Ind ecli nable no uns arc no t all tha t unc o m mon , pe rhaps in any langu age. Engli sh has indecli nabl e no uns (so metimes ca lled "in varian t no uns" ) wher e the singular and plural form s are iden tical. The pluralized for m of any of these nou ns see ms forced and unnatural, for instance, " proge nies:' Examples incl ude: aircraft, appa ratus, biso n, darkness. dee r, fi sh, gro use, hardware. hiatus. home work . informat ion. lo gistics, migh t, offspring. progen y, prospectus. scissors. series. sheep. silverware, software, species, status. thunder and woo l. Hebrew also has indeclinable no uns such as owph ("bird" or " birds"). Fo r exa mple, in lob 12:0 7, owph shou ld be translated " birds" rather than " bird," s ince in the preceding parallel co ns truc tion in lob 12:0 7, the noun "animals" is pl ural. yet take s a s ingular verb. He brew sing ulars may he used to denote singular persons or things, or a co llection of persons or things, e ven when there is a perfec tly valid plural fonn that co uld ha ve been e mployed. For instance: • adam (an mcan Adam (Gc n 05 :(1 ), both Adam and Eve together (Gc n 01: 2628), a man. or humanit y, • eyr; ca n mean a tree , grov e or forest. or a Slick or sticks (E ze 37: 17 is di scussed later in thc chapte r). Note that the plural eytsim is a lso used , • bahemah can mean an ox or ca ule (Gen 0 1:24 ), • di mah ca n mea n a tea r or tea rs (P sa 006:07; 042: (4). The plura l form of dimah is fo und once in the OT (La m 02: I l]. • ROy ( an mean a ge ntile or a nation (Gen 18: 18). T hc pl ural fo rm Roy im is also used, • yond (an mean a hand or hands (G cn 19: [0 , 16). The Hebrew singular " hand" (Psa 0 3 1:05 ; BIIS Psa 03 1:06) is translated into the Greek as " hands" (LXX Psa 03 1:06 ; Luk 23:46), and • zerah can mean a seed or seeds (compare Gal 0 3: 16). The co nte xt and the subject-ve rb agree me nt indic ate wheth er indeclin able nou ns are to be understood as sing ulars or as co llect ive nouns. Som et imes s ing ular nou ns are used, see mingly to emphasize that person s or thing s are a co llect ive entity. For instance : Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

45

• The peo ple [sing ular noun] journeyed [plura l ver b] from Hazero th (Num 12: 16), • T he Amale k ite [in ot her words, " the Arna le kues"] and Ca naa nite lin o ther words, "the Canaanites "] that lived on that mountain came [sing ular ver b] down (Num 14:45), and • Lcr l sractlsingular noun] rejoice [sing ular verb] in his Make rs [plural noun) , let the peo ple (plural noun] o f Zion be glad [plural verb] in their King (Psa 149:02). Case Studies on Hebrew Collective Nouns Ya/weh as an Indeclinable Cotteaive NO/III

Most OT translat ions never mention the He bre w word Yaln'eh, thou gh so me mention the pse udon ym Jeh o vah. To ind ica te tha t Yahl'eh is the undc rlying Hebr ew word, translators ca pitalize the entire word as " LORD" or as "GOD:' Yah veh occurs 6,R2R times in 5,790 OT verses. Tho ugh Ylih yeh occ urs so o ften, Yahl'eh is not declined o nce." eve n when paired with pl ural verbs and modifie rs (as is noted in the MT plurals appen dix }. YlIllI'eh is not declined eve n when used as a possessive Hebrew "co nstruct." In English translations, ho weve r, the possessive YiIIIl'eh is tra nslated as LORD's . That Yahreh is an indeclinable noun is made conspicuo us by: • The shee r number of occ urrences of the Name, Yahveh, in the OT,

,"d • The fact thai Hebrew is an inflected lang uage, Ho w did Yohvch beco me an indeclinable noun? Eve knew the Farber hy the Name, vonven (Ge n 04 :0 1). Peo ple spoke or heard Ihe Name, Yahveh, in 52 Genesis verses.> Th at Moses knew of the Name, Yahveh. is ev ide nced by the fact that the sho rtened form of Yahveh (Ya) is embedded in the nantes o f persons born before the events of Exo 03 and 06, for instance : • Jochebed (me aning, "Yahveh is glory") was the mother of Moses, Aaron and Miriam (Exo 06:20; Num 26:59), and • Joshua (mea ning, "Yalil'ch saves") was born be fo re the Exodus fro m Egy pt (Nurn 32: 11- 12), and was a leader as early as Exo 17:09 . The Name, Yahveh, was likel y deri ved fro m a form (Qa{ imperfec t, I st perso n singular) of the verb " I am" tha t was c urrent at the Creation (Gcn 0 2:04b; 04 :26 ). The Name, Yahveh, ossified while the conjugation for " I am" grad ually changed. This is not unlike how ma ny archaic forms co me into existence. A certain fo rm ossifies while the rest of the co njugation o r decle nsion mor phs aro und it, or the form fos silizes whi le the rest of the conj ugation or de cle nsio n becomes exunct. Language students k now that entire lan guage s ff ux ove r time. Heavily used conj ugations like the '" am" conj ugation often acqu ire so many irregular to nus that se para te conjugation tab les are necessitated. The breakdown of irregular co njugations sometimes de fies explanation. so rote memorization is necessitated. The abo ve was a gene ral ex planat ion of the Name, Yahreh. however, here is a mo re det ailed analys is. At the burning bush, the Son told Moses thai his name Malenal com direlbs

autcrars

46

Yael Natan

was Yahveh (Exo 03: 15-16. 18).11 The Son pointed OUi that the Nam e. Yohveh, had been derived fro m ehyeh, Ehyeh is the Qaf impe rfec t first per son form o f the verb "1 am: ' The BHS He brew of Exo 03: 14 has the form ehyeh three times: God said 10 Moses, 'I AM k hye hl who I AM [ehyeh l.' And he said , 'Say this to the people of Israel, 'I AM Iehreh l has se nt me to you" (Exo 0 3: 14). The grammatical and etymological specifics on the form Yah veh are disputed. but the meaning, '"I AM ," is what is mo st important. In NT times, for instance , the Son po inted OUi to Septuagint (LXX) readers thai he was the "1 AM" (" C811' eillli'). Thi s is the same Greek phrase used to translate the Hebrew for " I AM " phr ase s in LX X Exo 03: 14 and elsew here. The fonn Yah ~'f'h is not a form in any conjugat ion table, and there is no con se nsus on the exact etymology of Yah l'eh. These facts give the author license to propose an e xplanation . In the Ga rden o f Eden , the Fathe r said his name was " I AM: ' This existential-sounding name was told Adam and Eve [Gen ()4; 0 1,26). Reve aling th is name was appropriate since Adam and Eve surely were thinking cosmological and existential tho ughts. In the proto-Hebrew that Adam and Eve spoke, the Qui imperfect of the verb "I am" likely was vahveh , There was the da nger thai Adam a nd Eve might think the Name, vahven. was just a homon ym of the "I am" verb form vahveh , So the Fathe r likely indicated this name actually mea nt, " I AM," Moses met the Son at Mount Sinai many centuries after the Creation. Moses kne w thm the Father's name was Yah veh; but did nOI know the Mu lek Yah ~'eh' s name. The Son said his name was Yahl'eh , too. The So n referred to the Hebrew ve rb form rhyeh ("I am") to e xplain the name Yi,h l'eh's meaning of "I AM ," Of course, the fo rms ehveh and Yu /n'eh no longer were ide ntical beca use the ancient proto- Hebre w fo rm yahveh had softe ned to e!lyeh in He brew. The proc ess of so fte ning hard words occurred with grea ter freq ue ncy before the ad vent of dictionaries. Dictionaries have the affect of standa rdizing spelling and pronuncia tion. For instance, the harder sound ing "annoy" and softer so und ing "ennui' a re derived from the same French word. The reason for the d ifferen t pronunciation is thai "annoy" was borrow ed in the 1275 AD from Old French, while "e nnui" was borro wed in 1732 AD from Middl e French. Thi s example of a word softening occurred before dictiona ries became ubiq uitous in Europe . Etymological studies shnw that soft leiters go silent, es pec ially soft letters that begin words. Deep, harsh gutturals have all but d isappeared from most langua ges, and hard phon emes le nd to softe n. This wo uld explain why in Mose s' day the Name , Yahveh, no lo nger matched the Qaf imperfect ti na person of the verb "I am" (ehyeh ). Apparently, the initial soft sound ing " y" of Yahveh had dropped, and the hard "v" sound had changed to the so ft vy" sound. leaving the form ehveh , Fac tors that led to the ossification of the Name, Yah veh, incl ude; • Respect for the d ivine name, and • There was no need fo r a plural form of YlIhl'eh from the time o f Eve until the time of Moses. Onl y on Mount Sinai did Moses find o ut that the Son as well as the Father was named Yahw h. Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

47

Thi s book 's chapte r on Proro-Stnalnc Trinitarianism e xplains that the patriarchs kne w only the father as vah veh, Of course, the post-Smauic narra tor of Gene sis knew that the Father, So n and Spirit were all named Ya hl'eh, but the patriarchs did not kno w the Spiril as rahveh, The patriarc hs kne w the Son only as EI Shaddoi and as the M alek Yallwh (the Angel of Yah l'eh). After meetin g Yahveh on Mount Sinai. Moses co ntinued to use the form Yah veh as an indecli nabl e no un. Moses did not upda te the Name , Yo h l'eh. to chych s ince Moses knew that the unde rlying meaning was what was really important. Moreove r, the ancie nt Name, tchveh, surely was dear In many Near East Yahvists. Moses did not also contrive a plura l for Yohveh, Moses knew that Yahveh cou ld be unde rstood as a singular or as a collective noun. thereby obv iating the r eed for a plural. Furthermore. 10 say that there were three Yahvehwrnighrlead to polytheistic notions about Yuh veh, but God is one (De u 06:04). Us ing the conte xt as a guide, Hebre w speakers used other indec linable no uns without co nfusion, for instance, OWl'h ("bird" or " birds"). He brew speakers cou ld differe ntiate when Yah l'eh was used as a s ingular to refer to o ne perso n. or as a collective noun to refer to the Trinity. That is, of course . as long as the re were no ingra ined. preconceived no tions to obfuscate matters, The fact that Yah l'eh is an indeclinable noun has never been the real problem. From ln tertestamenra l times to the present. however. the failure or refusal to recognize that Yahveh is an indeclinable noun has led man)' dow n the rocky road from Trinitarian ism to unitarianism. Many e xegetes have failed to see that vah veh can be used as a singular or as a co llective noun e ven though vahveh is associated with: • Singular as well as plural verbs. pronoun s and modifiers (as is noted in the MT plurals appendix), • The plural fo rm ha Eloh im , meaning. "[ All] the Gods.'?" HaElohim , of course, was discussed previously in this chapter. and • Most of the 2,600 instances of the plural form Efohim (literally, "Gods"] fo und in 2,247 verses. Translators always treat Yah veh and Elohim as singulars, hut ne ve r as co llective nouns referring to Yah reh. T he upshot of this practice is that reade rs of translations mista ke nly assu me that thousands of occurrences of YuJII'eh and God are prima f acie ev idence that God is a single person. Most translation reade rs would be surprised to learn that plural form s for God such as Elohim vastly outnumb er sing ular forms suc h as El and Elo(w)ah . That trans lations ne ver treat YU /II' eh and Elohim as collective noun s is es pecia lly insidious whe n coupled with Mairnomdes ' non -bihhcal vach id vers ion of the Shema . The yochi d versio n says 't(lh l'eh is "a unique o ne" while the Biblica l edllld version says Yohveh is "a united one," While the majestic plural may have been introd uced to combat polyrhcisnc notions pre valent during Intertestamental times, Maimo nides ' non- biblical vochid ver sion of the Sh cma was introd uced to combat Trini ta rianis m. Ma imo nides (11 3&-1 204) lived in southern Spa in d uring the Islamic occ upatio n where no polytheism existed. Thu s. Maimonides" Shell/a , along the majestic plural usage and Matenal com direlbs autcrars

48

Yael Natan

other arguments , are taught 10 ensure that stude nts read the Trinitarian Bible as tho ugh it were a unit arian book. T he Bi ble in the o riginal langu age s co ntains overw he lming evidence of th e Trinity. and tranvlationv wo uld too if the He bre w and Ara maic pl ural collective nou ns, plural verbs and plural mod ifie rs we re tran slated as plu ral s. Th is wou ld con stitu te ov er whelm ing ev iden ce that Yah vch is the Tr inity. Ho we ver . du e to the policy of tra nslating nearly all plurals referring 10 Yohvch as sing ulars. man y Trinitari an proofs are lost in tr anslation. Trinitarians are left ta lking abo ut ho w the OT "h ints" o f the Trinity. This, of co urse. undcrwhclms oppon ents and skeptics . A s translatio ns now read: • Provin g monothei sm to be bibl ica l is an overly e asy. downh ill bailie again st wou ld-be pol ytheists, but • Pro ving Trini tari ani sm 10 be b iblical is an un nece ssarily hard, upb ill battle against wou ld-be uni tarian s.

Echad Gi rd Echadim Used as Co lleclil'e Noun s St ud ying the use of /'dwd(im) (vuni ted one (s)" ) is info rm ati ve for the study of other co llective nouns such rah voh , t ;/ and Elohim. Furt hermore . the words Yahl'eh. £ /oh ill/ and echad all happen to be fou nd in the Shema (D cu 06 :04): Hear. 0 Israel : Yohveh [the r ather] [and] our E/ohilll [the Son]. Yah l'cn [the Spirit] [are ] a uni ted o ne k d ra(J] lDeu 06:04). Yahveh; Elohim and edwd's use as collec tive nou ns indicates that the Sh ema speaks o f Yahl'eh as be ing person s who are " a unite d on e" (ech o(/). For instance , the narrator of Judges uses echod as a collec tive noun to refer to per sons: All the men o f Israel were gathe red [singular verb ] to the city as one [et'hdd ] man [singular noun ], com pan ions (Jdg 20 : II ).'" Note tha t pl ural "companions" are called " o ne (r('hadJ ma n." and a singular verb is used . T here are many more passages whe re echad is used similarly. for instanc e: • Eve ning and mo rning were one da y (Gcn 0 1:0 5), • Man and woman becom e one fle sh (Oen 02 :24 ; Ma l 02: 15; co mpare ICo 06: 16). • Asse mblies. soldiers and nations were con sidered one (Gen 11 :0 6 ; Num 14: 15 ; Jns 0 9:tl2; Itl:42; Jdg 06 : 16 ; zorn. OR, 11; 2S a 02 :25 ; 07:23: 19 : 14: Ezr tl2:64: 03 :0 1; Neh 0 8:01), • Two gro ups plan ning to intermarry wo uld have bee n one peop le (Gen 34: 16 ). • Th e two dreams that the pharaoh dreamt (G en 4 1:32) had one interpret atio n (Ge n 41 :25-26), • The people answered with o ne vo ice (Exo 24:03 ), • C urtain s we re strung together so the tabe rnacle became one (Exo 26 :06 . II ; 36 : 131, • A q uan tity of gra pes wa s cons idered one clu ster tho ugh the cluster wa s so large that two men had to carry it on a pole (N um 13:23 ). and • Trum peters and s inge rs made o ne vo ice (2Ch 05: 13). Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

49

Two OT ve rses have the singular form cchad and the plural form echadim in the same verse. Th e narrator, Moses, wrote : T he who le earth had o ne (ed uu/] lan guage of a few k chadim ) d ialect s [lueralty, "words" ) (Gen II :01), The plural form echadim ( an mea n "one" (E ze 37 :17), bu t cchadi m likel y sho uld be tra nslated as "a few " w he n modifying plural nou ns." For exa mple. echadim paired with the plural word "d ays" should be translated as "a few days" (Ge n 27:44; 29:20; Dan I I : 20) . ~ 1 The plural form cchadim ("'united o nes") is meant 10 em phasize -s-even more tha n the sing ular torm echnd r- e united one"). that a who le is co mprised of paris. In ot her wo rds. seve ral da ys eq uals a few kdradim) days, a few (('c1wdim ) d ialect s comprise a langu age . and the like. T he author labe ls this usc of the plural a plural of dtstrt buuon -,.a type of pl ural co llective noun. A plural of di stributio n is meant to sho w that a whole is di st ributed over pa rts. The othe r instance o f echad and erh aaim being used in the same verse oc curs when roh veh told Ezekiel: Join them one to the othe r, so that to you the stick will be one , and they will beco me a uni ted one in you r hand (E/.e 37:1 7). Ezc 37: 17 di ffere ntiate s three use s o f cchad ("a uni ted one " ) and echadim (vunited one s"): Join them [two stic ks I one [echad (sing ular noun j] to the othe r [cchad (sing ular noun )]. so that 10 you the stick Ieyl; (co llect ive noun )] will he one [edwd (coll ecti ve noun)], and they will become a united o ne In 'had im (plural of distribu tion l] in yo ur hand (Eze 37:17). Here is a more detai led look at t he three uses of cctioa and echadim found in Ezc 37: 17; I. Ezekiel used echad as a reg ular singular for m to refer to the indi vid ual sticks befo re they we re assem bled. Ezek iel called the part s "one" (cch ad) and the "other" (echad), 2. Ezek ie l used the singular form cchad (" a united nne") as a co llect ive nou n to under sco re the aspect of union. Similarly, anothe r pro phet. Zecharia h. ca lled h is shep herd's staff "Un ion" kdrad) to emphasize the union of brot he rhood be tween J udah and Israel (Zec 11 :07, 14). Zechariah then bro ke the stick into two to stress how there once had been a unio n (Zec I I: 14), and 3. Ezekiel used the pl ural echadim (" unitcd ones") to (all atten tio n to ho w the stic k was assem bled from co mponent parts ca lled: • "The m" and "they," as we ll as • "One (c('had) a nd the other (ech ad) ." So in Eze 37; 17 echadim is a plural of d istri bution-a ty pe o f plura l collec tive noun . In Eze 37:17. rchad is paired with the sing ular for m e.l'l: meaning , "stic k": Jo in the m o ne [e('ha d (singular nounj ] to the o the r [et'had (sing ular nou nj], so thai 10 yo u the stick Iey/ ;;: (co llect ive nou n)! will be one lee/wd (co llective no unI]. Malenal com direlbs autcrars

50

Yael Na tan

Not e that two uni ted st icks we re conside red on e (I;'("hl.l d) st ick (Eze 37: 17). The singular form eyt: (Gcn 02:17 ) is used o ften as a collective noun meaning, "s ticks" and " trees" (Ge n 0 I: II ). thou gh the plural for m eyl,I';1II (trees ) is used ofte n elsew here (Le v 01 :07). Evt; in Ezc 37:17 and Yahl'eh in the Shema (Dell 06 :04 ) arc co m parable in that

they are both paired with the word erhad. rahvch; as we have seen. can be a collective no un just as "yf::. is com monly used as a colle ctive nou n. So just as Exe 37: 17 says th m sticks (eyl:) are a united one (edllld) . the Shem« co uld vel)' well indic atc that fa /well arc perso ns who arc a united one (edwd ). t :ehlld im is No la Plum l of tntensitv So me majestic plural propo nen ts might venture thai edwdim is a plural of inte nsity, a var iation on the so-called majestic plura l rationaliza tion. T hey wo uld say a plural o f inten sity is like a majestic plura l in that the plural form fa ils to ind icate an y so rt of plurality. The plural suppose d ly gives a s uperlat ive me aning to the s ing ular- like " h ighes t" rath er than just "h igh." Majestic plural proponen ts thi nk that the e xiste nce o f the plural of inte nsity te nds to prove the ex istence o f the plural of majest y, since born usages are similar. Mo reo ve r, prov ing that both grarnmutical con struction s ex ist wo uld buttre ss the unitarian interp retation o f the OT. If echudim (literally, "ones" ) were tra nslated a.s a plural o f intensity, the superlative meaning wou ld be " very one" or "abso lute o ne" o r "alone." If. ho we ver. cchadim is a type o f pl ural collec tive noun, than cchadim wo uld mean "a few." Not ice that the d iffe rent defi nitions the plural of intensity and the co llective noun produce are near ly antonyms: "absolutely one" vers us -a fe w," We ' ve alread y see n that echadim is usually trans lated "a few" (Ge n 11:0 I; 27: 44 ; 29:20; Da n I I:20 ). Moreo ve r. the "alone" l)Yll,'hill ) interpre tation o f the Shcma is not he lped by an "alone" translatio n of echadim. T he rea son is that the Shema has the sing ular fo rm ech ad and not the plural for m ech adim. So it would see m that echadim is a pl ural collective noun ("united one") rather than a plural o f inten sity (uniquely one ). The re are other exa mples of the supposed plural of inten sity. For instance. it is said that the s ingular for m olam means "old," so the plural fo nn o!amim in Ecc 0 I: 10 must mean "ancien t." Th is definition might be correct. however. the pro pone nts for the plural of inten sity arri ved at the co rrect defini tio n th rough the wrong methodology. After all, a broken cl ock is still acc urate twice eac h d ay! The English equivale nt o f what the Heb rew author had in mind by the plural otamim perhaps was not so much "o ldest" or "ancient," but rat her "o ld, old, old. " The plural form otamim, therefore. stood for multi ple uses o f the s ing ular otam. Th is is similar to how: • The plural ectmdim (vunited o nes" ) stoo d for two uses o f the sing ular in Eze 37: 17: echad (o ne) and echad (the other ). ££'ha
Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

51

Eloh im (" G od ~" ) may he a plural standing for "God, God , God" (t.:l, 1::1, El )three persons who arc one God. or in other words. the Trin ity. Perh aps consjderanou of Hebrew dual form s would he instructive. Whet her dual forms are translated as singulars or plurals is depen dent on the context. Either way, dual forms are not translated as plurals of intensity. However. eve n whe n dual form s a rc translated as sing ulars, therc is so me sense of plurality: • "Heave m sj ' (.\hu I/Il/yim) refe rs to the severa l "sphe res ." T he clouds were kno wn to he closer s ince they covered the moon. Occultatio n and the varying swiftness of the heave nly bod ies suggested that certa in regions we re fa rther than others, • "Pacer's]" (/Hmim ) may refer to ho w the face has bilateral sy mme try: two ears, two eyes, two nostrils. and so forth, and • "Water(s )" ( may i m ) may refer to ho w many dewdrops form a droplet, ho w many drops fonn a unit of water, and how a unit of water can form rivu lets (Ge n 0 2:10). Majestic plural propone nts offer more exa mples in thei r attempt to prove plurals of intensity' e xist. These examples, ho we ver, indicate plurality rathe r than intensity. The plural fonn may be used to indicate repeated behavior. o r abstractness. Abstract ideas are plural in the sense thai they are abstracted from the study of many e xamples or lessons. and then the abstract idea is in tum applied to many situations or dimensions. Here are some exa mples supposed to be plurals of inten sity that perhaps are better interpreted in a plural sense: • "Wisdoms" docs not necessarily mean "great wisdo m," but merely that a person is wise about a number of subjects (Psa 049 :04 ), • "Dark nesses" does not necessarily mean "great darkness," but rather "da rk places" (KJV, YLT Lam 03 :06). Ano ther inte rpretation is that a deep shadow is usua lly comprised of both a partial (penumbra) and full (umbra) shadow, • "Co mpass ions" does not necessarily mean one has "great co mpass io n," but merel y indicates many acts of co mpass ion (Lam 03:22), • "H arlotries" docs not necessarily mean "g reat harlot ries," but mcrely that many acts of fo rnication is tantamoun t to harlot ry ( Hos 0 1:02), • "Btnemesses' does not necessarily mean "great bittern ess," but mere ly indicates thaI there are multiple bitter situanon s (Hos 12:14 (BHS 12:1 5). and • "Blood s" docs no t mea n " very blood y: ' but merel y indica tes multiple stab wounds (Exo 22:02 -03; Hos 04 :02). •

Summa rv Findings 0 11 Edwdim Moses showed that things called echad ("a united one"] could he comprised of echodim ("united one s"), for example: • O ne (et'hl./tl) language could be co mprised of "a few" (ed w dim ) dia lects (Ge n I l :OI ), and • O ne (et 'hl./t/im) period of time is "a few" days (Gen 27:44; 29:20; see also Dan 11 :20 ).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

52

Yael Natan

The writer of Jud ges wrote that people can be co nsidered in a singular or plural se nse - bo th echad ("a united one" ) and "compan ions" (Jdg 20: 11). Ezekiel referred 10 an unassem bled part (a st ick) as echad (o ne). Ezek iel showed thai the asse mbled parts (two sticks put e nd 10 end) co uld be referred to both as ech od C'a united one") and echadim t''untrcd ones"). T hat Mo ses and Ezek iel used bo th the singular (crill/d ) and plural (eduulim) as co llec tive noun s to describe the same things is no wonder, Echad comes from a Hebrew root that means "10 uni fy" or " 10 co llect together." So ech ad was used to e mphasi ze unity. while echadim highlighted the ind ividual part s o f the collect ion. The Hebrew use of singular and plural co llective nouns is similar to the co llecnve noun usage in many language s. A singular co llect ive noun and pred icate em phas ize the co llec tion as a who le, while a plural co llective no un and plu ra l pred icate emphasize (he compo nents o f the co llection. The n, of CO UThl:, the re is t he hybrid version when: a singular co llective no un is paired with a plural predica te, or a plura l co llective noun is paired with a singular predic ate. Zec hariah called his shepherd's staff " Union" (ec had) to indicate the brothe rhoo d be tween J ud ah and Isr ae l (Zec 11:07, 14). T he echod surely d id no t emphas ize any assembly of Zechariah's Slick s ince the Slic k was still in one piece until Zechar iah broke it in two (Zcc 11 : 14). Beca use echad and ectmdim can both ser ve as collective nouns. the echad that ends the SJU'ma co uld be a co llect ive no un. We ' ve a lread y see n that Yahreh can be a co llective nou n. and Elohirn, o f co urse, is a plural form . So grammatica lly speaking, the Sne ma is decidedly Trinitarian: He ar, 0 Israel: Yohveh [the Father] [and ) our Elohim [the Son], Yah l·eh [the Spirit] [are] a united one Iet.·had ] (Deu 06:04 ).

The Plural of Distribution In Languages Other Than Hebrew The Ararneans appare ntly used plura l co llective nouns as plurals o f distri bution just as the Hebrews d id. In Dan 05:25 the handwriting o n the wall included the Aramaic plural word parsin (d ivided ). When Daniel spoke of the writing on the wall, howe ver, he used the s ingular fo rm o f parsin (pines) (Dan 05: 2&). T his see ms to ind ica te that Da niel co ns ide red Belsha zzar's kin gdo m to be a whole com posed of parts. Two reaso ns for this might he : • The Babylonia n kingdom was already split adm inistrative ly. Belshazzar was the coregent who ruled from Babylon . while the corege nt Nabo nidus ruled from the north Arabian oasis c ity of Tcrna, and • T hat very night Be lshazzar 's kingdom was abou t to be div ided between the Medes and Persians (Dan 05:2&). yet the di vided kingdom was ruled by one top leader (Dan 05:30).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

53

Repetition of Elohim as t he S ubject of a Singular Verb Indicates Elohim is

Persons Somet imes Elo},im is repeated as the subject o f a singular verb. Sometimes a fe w d iffe rent names for God , suc h as Yah l'eh , Hohisn. ha Elohim and Snoddai. a re given as the co llective subject o f a s ingular verb. Jacob provides conte nt fo r the study of see mingly redundant subjec ts. Jaco b used multiple name s for God as Ihe subject of the same singula r verb on at least five occa sions (Gcn 28:20- 22,3 1:42, 32:0 9, 41\ : 15-16 ; 49:24 -25 ). T he narrator of Gene sis wrote: He [Jacob] .. .said . '[A ll] the Go ds (lIlIElo h im ) .. .[A lI] th e Gods (haEloh im) .. .the Malek.. .bless [singular ve rb] the lads [two of Joseph's sons ]' (Gen 48: 15-16). Here Jacob used Iwo instances of " [All] the God s" (haElohim) and the M aId as subjec ts o f the same singular verb " to bless." T his shows that Jacob knew Ihe Malek 10 be o ne of "[All) the Gods" (haElohim) . Other wise, if Jaco b had net co ns ide red the Ma lek to he God , Jaco b wo uld have used a plural verb to say that both God and an ange l, " .. .they bless."?' That t he Maid Yah""h is one of J",Elohi m (" [All] the Gods") is verified by t he fac t that Jaco b els ewhere used a plu ral ver b with ha Elohim (" [AlIl lhe God s" ). Jaco b sa id. "Gods [Eloh im]. they had reve aled [plural verb] himself to him" at Bethel in Ge n 28 (Gcn 35:0 7). Note that Jacob spoke of God as " they" (Gen 35: 07 ) right after the Father spoke of the So n in the third person: Then God [the Father) said to Jacob. "Go up til Bethel a nd settle there , and build an altar the re to God [the So n]. who appeared to yo u when yo u were Ileem g from your brother Esau (Ge n 35:01). The Ma lek of I Ali i the Gods (ilaEloh im ) (Ge n 3 1: II ) said that he was God (E/) who appeared to Jaco b at Bethe l (Ge n 3 1: 13). So Gen 3 1: 11, 13 show that the Ma lek Yahwh was one of the Elohim who appeared at Bethel in Gen 28 (Gcn 35: 07 ). That the Ma jek me ntioned in Ge n 4 R: 16 is o ne o f [All] the God s (ha fillhim) can also be ascertained from Moses ' word s: ... and with the best gifts of the earth and its fullness, and the favor o f him [the Malek Yah!'ehJ who dwe lt in the b urning bush [Exo 03:02J . Let all these rest on the head of Joseph [Jose ph's sons' de scendant s), o n the brow of the prince among his brothers (Dcu 33: 16). In Deu 33: 16 Moses co nnected Jacob's blessing and the burning hush accounts where the Ma jek is mentioned eac h time: • Jacob 's bless ing as ked that God and the Malek bless Ephraim and Manasseh's descendants (Gen 4 K: 15-16 ), and • The Malek Yo/we }, was at the burning bush (E xo 0 3:02: Act 0 7:30 . 35). Note that the narrator of Exodu s places the Ma lek Ya hl'eh (Exo 0 3:02) right in the same b ush as God and Yahveh (Bxo 0 3:04) . mcaning that the M alek Yahveh was Yah veh the Son.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

54

Yael Na tan

The re is plenty o f proof that the Malek Y ahveh was one of 111.1E/ohim ("[All] the Gods" ) me ntioned in the account of the burning bush (EI\o 03:0 1. 06, 11 . 12, 13 ). The Mu /eli. Yahveh (Exo 0 3:0 2) said: " am the Hohin! of yo ur father-s-the Etahim of Abraham. the t'/ohim o f Isaac and the Elohim of Jaco b: At this, Mose s hid his face. because he was a fraid to look at '[ All] the God s' (ha Ell/him) ( Exo 03 :(6). That the Maid rahveh was o ne o f IwElohim (" [AliI the God s" ) ca n also be infe rred from ho w. in connection with the burning bush acco unt. the Malek Yahveh is ca lled: • Yahveh (Exo 03 :0 4. 07, 15, 16, 18 (twicej). and • God (E xo 0 3:0 4. 0 5. 06 (five times) , II , 12 (twice ), 13 (twice ), 14, 15 (fi ve times), 16 (twice) , J g (twlccu. Ano ther passa ge similar to Gen 48: 15 - 16 is Gen 3 1:4 2 whe re Ja co b used a s ing ular verb with the collective subjec ts: God , God , and the r ea r o f Isaac. The parallel struc ture betwee n Ge n 48:15-16 (11t1 Eloh im . halitohim, Malek ) and Gen 3 1:42 (£/ohim , E/oh im. Fear) sugges ts that "tbc Fear" is the Malek . That Jacob co nside red the Ma /ek to be God (Ge n 31:42) and o ne of "[ All] the Gods" (h(lt '/ollim) (Ge n 48: 15- 16) is consistent with how e lsew here: • The Malek Yahl'eh re fe rred to h imself as £ Iohilll (Ge n 3 1: II , 13; Exo 0 3:02, 061. and • The Maid Yohveh was called E!o /rim o ften (Cen 16; 21 - 22; 3 1-32; Exo 0 3; 14; 23; Num 22 - 24; Jdg 0 2; Jdg 06; 13; I Ki 19; 2Ki 19; and Zec 02 - 0 3). The Plural of Dcleganon-,,a Plural Couccuvc Noun Variant T he proofs usu all y o ffe red for the maje stic plural co nstructio n arc OT text s where a creature is ca lled clohim (gods ) and adonai (m asters ). Maje stic plural proponents cre me a false dilemma by say ing that the speaker must have used the plura l to indicate the person is majestic. They say. "Surely the plural form cannot me an a s ingle person is plur al pe rso ns!" Passage s referring to a single pe rson using a plural are offe red as proof that pl urals referring to Yahw,h are mere maj esti c plurals. The case for majest ic plurals unravel s. howe ver. whe n other grarnmaric al poss ibilities arc e xplored. The plural in que stion may ha ve bee n intended as a quant itati ve plural, a plural co llec tive nou n. a plura l o f de legation. a plural of d istrib ution. or anot her type of plural. The plural of de legatio n by itself ex plai ns mo st o f the ex amples offe red as majest ic pl ural proofs. For instance. a se rvant wo uld normally refer to his master using the s ing ula r «donee, mea ning, " my mas ter." Some times. ho we ve r. the se rvant would refer to his master using the pl ural m lOl rai. meaning. " my masters." The se rvant used the plural form to ac kno wledge that a master had de legated manage na l re spn nsibifities to : • Another master. • A slave driver. or eve n to • The servant himself. Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

55

So plurals were somet imes mea nt to ackno wledge the multi tie r co mmand structure.

Discussion of Majestic Plural Proof Texts The study of majestic plural proo f texts shows that supposed majestic plurals are really plurals of deleg ation. o r another construction that expresses plura lity. M osrers

( I.\"

Adonai"-'

T he Genesis narrator said that Abraham was masters (adO/Ill;) to his servant Ehe zer (Gen 24:09- 10). Laban a lso said that Abraham was masters (odmlll;) to Eliezer (Ge n 24:5 1). Plurals of delegation arc applied to Abraham because he had delegated authority to his servant Eliezer (Gen 24:02). Abraham also had delegated a uthor ity to Isaac , whom Eliczer considered his mas ter (adonee) (Gen 24:65). Eliezer referred to Isaac using the sing ular (/(/0111'1' ("my master" ) rather than using a plural of delegatinn ((/(Iono;). Th is was likely because Isaac had not yet delegated authority to any person who m Eliezer recogn ized as an eq ual or superior. Pouphar is ca lled (ldO/ra; (masters ) (Gen 3l,l:02 , 03, 07, 08,1 6. 19.20) because Potiphar had deleg ated much authority to Joseph (Gen 39:04-06, 08-09, I I). Joseph 's warden is called adO/III; (masters) (Gen 39:20; 40 :07 ) because he had delegated authority to Joseph (Gcn 39:21-23). Joseph was called Egypt's adO/III; (masters) (Gen 42:30. 33). and Jose ph was adonai {masters) tn his servan ts (Gen 44:08). Josep h was called adona; because Pharao h had delega ted authority to Joseph (Ge n 4 1:40 . 44, 55; 44:08. 18; 45 :08). Those who were not Joseph's servants seemed to not have used plurals of delcganon referring to Jose ph. For instance , Jacob and Joseph 's brothers referred to Joseph as "dOlI (maste r) (Gen 45:08-09) and as "donee (my master) (Gen 44;16, 18 (twice), 19) . Ano ther example is the Egyptian populace calling Jose ph adonee (my master) (Gen 47: 18 (twice), 25). Joseph was ca lled adonce for the same reaso n that Eliezer referred to Isaac as adonee (Gen 24 :65). Isaac was adonee to Eliezer since Isaac had not delegated a uthority to anyone that Ehe zer recognized as an equa l or superior. Jose ph was odonce because Joseph had not delegated a uthor ity to any subordinate that Jacob, Joseph 's brothers, o r the Egyptian populace recognized as their superior. Thur tbc Egyp tians populace dealt direct ly with Joseph rathe r than his delegate can be inferred from: • The detail of Joseph 's cnmmiss ioning (Gen 4 1:40-45). • From the Egyptians' stateme nt: You have saved o ur lives. May we find favor in the eyes of my lord (adonee) [Joseph]. Our land and we will be in bondage 10 Pharaoh (Ge n 47:1 9.25). In Mosaic Law , a master was simply an adonee ( mas ter) (Exo 2 1:05 ). If, howe ve r, a servant had decl ined his chance to be a freeman in order to serve a master for life. then the master ((Ido/leel became masters ((Idolla;) (b.n 2 1:(6). Matenal com direlbs autcrars

56

Yael Na tan

Th e sw itch fm m adona to aclOlwi occurred becau se the master del egated authority. The servant may have become a manager or supe rvisor. or eve n an inheritor (Gcn 15 :0 2) and adopted son-in- law (Ge n 29 : 1&: 3 1:3 1; Exo 2 1:04-05). An altern ativ e ex planatio n of the use of the plural (adonai) take s into account the ce re mony that made the servant into a servant fo r life . T he ceremon y invo lved pie rc ing the servant 's ear with an a wl before the elders [Exo 2 1:(6). So the adonai (m asters) may ind icate that the se rvant was now beho lden 10 the elders and his mas ter who together were called "masters" «(/(1011(/;). Da vid was called adonai ( I Ki 01 : 11 , 4 3) bCl:i.\USC he had delegated kingship to Solom on on o ath. The agreed upon delegation of kin gship we nt into effec t w hen David ruled with Solomon . Thi s co- rege ncy began at the lime Adonija h failed to usurp the thro ne and la sted until the timc of Da vid 's dea th (l Ki 01 : 13, 30; 0 2:0 1; ICh 22 : 17 ). Job sa id : C aptive s a lso enjoy their ease [in Sheol where the souls of the damned await Judgment Day ); they no lon ger hea r the slave dri ver 's sho ut. The small and the great are the re . a nd th e slave is fr eed from h is ma sters [adona ; I" (Joh 03 : 18-19 ). He re " masters" is plural because the se rvant's master had de legated autho rity to a s lave dr iver. So the slave had two masters (ado na;): the master and the sla ve driver. I sa ia h prop he si ed tha t an A ssyrian ki ng wo u ld rul e E gyp t ( Isa 20 :04 ). Else where, th is kin g is called " a crue l [sing ular ] adonim [masters ] and a fie rce [si ngu lar] kin g [singu lar]" (Isa 19 :0 4). The " k ing " was Esarhaddo n w ho co nquered Egypt in 670 Be. "Masters" (m/onim ) is a plura l of delegation thai refers to the king and his commande rs. Thi s is con sistent w ith how an Assy rian king once boas ted , "Are not my commanders all kings?" (1 Ki 20 :24 : lsa 10:08). Isa iah called a donke y' s ow ner " maste rs" ( Isa 0 1:03). O ne might wonder, " Why wo uld a donke y's o wner necessarily be majestic ?" M aje stic plural propo nents provide no overriding reason Wh y the plural form "masters" must be translated as a sing ular, especially con siderin g how : • The w it thai Ye.l h ,w rode into Jerusalem had "owne rs" (Lu k 19: 33), and • Eliczcr had two maste rs , Ab raha m ( ado na i) (Ge n 15 :0 2) and Isaac (adoll e!') (O en 24 : 12, 65). The Trinitarian interpretatio n of Isa 0 I:0 3 is revealed whe n one co ns ide rs how: • Elsewhere Yahveh sa id the y (meaning the Trin ity) are " maste rs" (Al/ollim ) (Ma l 01 :06), and that • Isa 0 I:0 3 is a parallel construction . The para llel co nstructio n sho ws tha i there are two ellipse s in the trai n of thou ght. Isa 0 I:03 should be unde rstood as: The 0 )1, know s its owner [qantlh (masculine sing ular»), t he donkey its ma sters' manger, but Israel does not kno w . .. [. .. its owner, in other words, God [Exo 06:07 ; 19 :05-06)), my people do not perce ive . .. [. .. its ma sters, in other words, the Trinity {Mal U1:06) ] (Isa 0 I:03). Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

57

MOSt'S lind Aaron as £ Iohim Yah veh sa id to Moses, "Behold . I have made yo u god ~ [d ohim] to pharaoh .. ... (Exo 0 7:0I a ). T he plural form etohim is a plural of de legation that denotes how Mose s del egated authority to Aaro n. Pharaoh obviouxly knew that Aaron was speaking on behalf of Moses. A plural o f delegatio n is a collec tive noun variant, so o ne cou ld say thai pharaoh knew Moses and Aaron co llectivel y as "gods." The delegat ion of authority from Moses to Aaron can be seen when the whole verse is considered: Behold, I have made yo u gods [elohim] to pharao h, and you r brother Aaron will be your [Mose s'] prophet (Exo 0 7:0Ib). God had delegated au thority to Moses ( Exo 0 3: 10; 04:12), and then from Moses to Aaro n saying: He [Aaron] will speak to the people for you [Moses]. and it will be as ifh e [Aaron I were yo ur [Mose s"] mo uth, and 11S if )' OU [Moses ] were like [/amed h preposition] God to him [Aaron] (E xc 04: 16).

Ang els and Judg es as Etohim As was ju st disc ussed, Moses and Aa ro n we re ca lled "god s" (dohim) . Angels a lso we re called "gods" (e1ohiln) (Psa 097:07). J udges were also called: • "gods" (dohim ) (Psa 082:01 ,06), and • " [a ll] the gods" (haefoh im) (Exo 2 1:0 6; 22:08-0 9 (BHS 22:07 -08) ; Jos 24:0 1). Hum ans and angels were o nly ca lled etotnm co llec tive ly. The re is no oc c urre nce in the 0 '1' of a mere angel nr human working alone heing ca lled "god" ( eI ) or "gods" (e/oh im) . Thus, elohim sho uld be conside red a plural co llective noun when referring to mere angels or human s. God had delegated autho rity fro m himself to angels and human s to rule and to judge. This delegation explains the plural since the plural recogn izes that two or mo re perso ns are, by definition. involved in any delegatio n of authority. God's de legation of author ity also e xplains why the judges or ange ls were ca lled "gods" (elohim ). They were God's dele gates who represented God . The uotacn Calfas Eloh im Some say that thc golde n calf tha t Aaron made (Exo 32:20. 24 : De u 09 :21) was called "gods" (d ohim ). so this elohim must be a majestic plural. One might wonde r. " Why would a c111f image be so majcsuc?" Why the plural form etohim was used in co nnection with a lone calf is d iscussed under Exo 32 in the Trinitarian proofs appendi x.

Sam uel a,\ D o /rim Saul asked a spiritist what she saw: The wo man a nswered Saul, ' I see elohim [gods ] coming up [plural pa rticiple] ou t of the earth' (I Sa 28:13). Maje st ic plura l propone nts arg ue that bec ause the ne croma ncer refe rred to Sam uel as clohim (gods). etohim must de note maje sty rather than plura lity. Matenal com direlbs autcrars

58

Yael Na ta n

Majestic plural pro pc nenrs. however, have nor accou nted for all the partici pants at the sp iri tist 's dwe lling. whether real o r im pe rso na ted . T he plu ra l participle "corning up" me an s thai the spi ritis t saw IWO sp ir its who m she ca lled etohim (gods). The Septuagint translators reta ined the plural partici ple : ." see gods. the y arc co ming up. .." (LXX 153 28: I J). T he plural partsciple in ISa 28:13. mention ed above , is perhaps why the KJV and RSV ( hose to use the p hrase "by the famil ia r spir it" in ISa 2IH17-08. T he Hebr ew word translated "familiar sp irit" is owh. " Having a famili ar spmt" is a dctinition g iven for (lll'b in the Thayer/BDB le xicon and the nVOT,"" Owb is mentioned five times in the spir itist of Endor account ( ISa 28:03, 07 (twice), OR, 09 ).'" When Sa ul heard the spiritist say that she saw etohim. Sa ul asked what "he :' meaning Samuel. looked like, After all, Saul had requested that tbc spiritisl bring up Samuel ([Sa 2R:II ). Th e spiritisl used singulars 10 sa)' thai an old man rose fro m the ea rth ( ISa 28:14 ), II wo uld see m the plural s in ISa 2R: 13 referred to both Samue l and Ihe fam iliar spirit. while the singu lars in ISa 28: 14 refer to Samuel on ly, So the spiritist cal led Samuel a nd the fa miliar sp irit "god s" ( ISa 28 :13 ), but d id 1101 refer to Sam uel a lone as "gods." So Ihe "god s" (elollim ) ( ISa 28 : 13) is a plu ral co llective noun referri ng 10 Samuel and the fam iliar spiril. Th is is sim ilar to how the angels and judges were only calle d elohim (god s) couecuvety. but no t individ ually, T his fact wa s mentioned above in this sec tion. Two DemOlIS ax Etatnm W he the r the d emons were rea l or impersonated by the s pirinst is inconsequent ial to our study of gra mmar. Whether real or not , the spiritis t would have used the sa me gram mar e ither way so as ne t to give herself a way, II is wel l known that spiritists impersonate de mo ns, for instance. Sam uel Zwemer w rote: The ex pectant moth er, in fear of the qurina [an "e viltwin" spirit] visits the sheikha (le arned woma n) three mo nths before the birth o f the child. and does whateve r she indicates as a re medy. These sheikhas exercise g reat mnuen ce over the wo men. and batte n on their superstinous beliefs, o flen impe rso nat ing the qarina and frightening the igno rant.... The case can be made that Sam uel's s pirit was ne t presen t at the spiritist of Endo r"s dwe lling. This wo uld mea n that two demons were cu lled etohim, o r at least IWO impersonated dem ons. The demo ns were called elohim bec ause demons liked to pose as pagan gods (clohim). T his is what Mo ses sa id on the subject: T hey sacrificed 10 dem on s, w hic h are not God - god s (efohim) the y had nOI known. gods (e/ohim ) that recentl y appeared, gods (e/ohim ) your fathe rs did not fear (Deu 32: 17; sec also Psa 106: 37). Saul sa id, " Please d ivine by the fam iliar spirit" (I Sa 2R:OR ). so o ne sp irit was a demo n for sure. The other entity likely was a second demon posin g as Samuel. Everythin g the dem on told Saul see med to ha ve been pari of a ca lcu lated plan to

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

59

extingu ish Sau l's hope and destroy Saul spiritually and physic ally. This would lead one to conclude that a demon had indeed posed as Samuel, The demon perhaps had 11 plan of attac k since there was forewarnin g of Sa ul's visit 10 the spiritist of Ende r (ISa 28:(7). Saul's occ ult experience began with the cla irvoyant saying that Sam uel came up out of the ground rather than from heaven (I Sa 28: 13. 15). T his was calculated to destroy any hope thai Saul may have had abou t the afterlife. Now the best that Saul could ho pe for wou ld be to d well in nether regions with Samuel. T hat Samuel's spirit came out of the gro und sugges ts a demon was pnsing as Samuel. Sa muel's body but not spirit wou ld be residing underground awaiting j udg me nt (D eu 32:22: Jo b 03:1 8-1 1); Psa 0(1):1 7 ; 016 :10 ; 055:1 5; 086:13). Sam uel's spirit would instea d be residing in heave n with Enoch, and later with Elijah (2Ki 0 2: II ; Luk 08:55; 16:26; 20:37-38; 24:05; Rev 07 :09). If the real Sam uel had talked to Sau l the day before Sau l was abou t to die, Sam uel would have given Saul an uplifting law and gospel sermon. Samue l wou ld have presen ted the way of salvation throug h faith in the promised Messiah (Gen 03: 15; 49: 10-11; Num 24:17). The demon posing a.s Samuel. however, o nly spoke of law and wrath. In this way, the demon presen ted a mere caricature of Sa muel and, indirectly, of Yahl'eh. Sam uel's impostor gruffly asked Saul, "Why have you disturbed me by bringing me up'!" (I Sa 28: 15). T he true Sa muel, who grieved for Saul until Sa muel 's dying day (lSa 15:35), wo uld not have been so gruff. The o nly reason Samuel did not minister to Saul mo re when Samuel was alive was Samuel feared for his life. as did David ( ISa 0 2:34 ; 16:02; 19:15; Psa 059:0 I). Sa muel's satanic impostor s a id that rah veh had tu rned away from Sa ul beca use Sau l had no t destroyed t he Amalck ites (lSa 28: 16-18). Sa ul, ho we ve r, was the prodi ga l son who had turned away from Yohv rh, Yahveh had no t t urned away from Sa ul (I S a 15: 11). That Yahveh had not harde ne d S a ul in his s in is evident from how, afte r Sau l admi tte d tha t he had s inned , S amuel we nt to wo rsh ip Yahl'cn with Sau l li Sa 15:31). Sa muel's demonic imposto r said that Yahveh had become Saul's e nemy ( ISa 28 :16). It is true that the spec ial measure of t he Spirit had left Saul and rested on David (I Sa 16:1 3-1 4). It is also true that Yo/weh allo wed a "spirit of sadness " ( YLn or an "evil spirit" (N/ V, LXE, KJV) to torment Sau l (lSa 16:1 4.23; 18:10; 19:0IJ). Ho we ve r, the last spirit ment ioned as possessing Sau l was the "S pirit of God" ( ISa 19:23-24). Inte restingly. Saul prophes ied ( ISa 10:11- 13: 18;10; 19:2 1, 23-24; 28;15) eve n whi le being tormented (I Sa 18: 10). So if the "evil spirit" was more than just a bad mood, it may have been a "lying spirit" utteri ng false prophes ies (I Ki 22:22-23; 2Ch 18:2 1-22). If the spirit that afflic ted Sa ul was a de mon. the n Da vid 's songs and har p play ing were a form of exorc ism (1Sa 16:23; 18:10; 19:(9 ). David was a prophet (Act 0 2;30 ) who spoke by the S pirit ( ISa 16:13; Act 04:25). David sang inspired

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

60

Yael Natan

psa lms that had the power 10 dri ve out e vil spirits. The de mon. ho wever, wo uld return after each e xorcism becau se Sa ul did not repent (L uk II :24-26). Tha i Samu el grieved for Saul until Samuel 's dyin g da y suggests that Ytlhl't'h did not e nd Sau l's time of grace before Saul d ied (I Sa 15:35; He b 09: 27). The only reason Samuel did not preach to Saul was Sam uel feared for his life (ISa 16: 02 ). So ev ide ntly the evi l spirit was sent not 10 harden Sa ul's heart ( Ro m 09: 18 ). Rat her. itseernx, the spirit was se nt to de stroy Saul's sinful nature so his so ul might be saved (lCo05:04-05). It seems unl ikely that the name Saul wo uld have remained a popular name among the Jews if God had hardened Saul's heart ( ISa 06:06; Act 07:58). A demo n. howe ver. wanted Saul 10 think that Ya lll'eh was his pennanent e nemy. Then the prodigal SOil would never think of returning home (Luk 15:24. 32; ColO I:2 1-22 ). G ive n Israel 's military sit uat ion a nd Saul 's lo ss of heart (lSa 2R:04-0 5) , the prophecy that Samu e l's impostor gave was a pro phecy any prescient demon cou ld proffer ( ISa 28; 19). Th e demo n knew that self-fulfilli ng proph ecies have the best chance of s uccess, so the dem on grap hically pred ica ted tha t Saul and his so ns wo uld be in hell the next day. Th e fear the prophecy instilled in Sau l (I Sa 28; 1520) became a co ntributing facto r in Saul's battlefield defeat ( ISa 3 1:02-(6). The prophecy the demon gave abo ut Sa ul and his sons being with Sa muel the next day probab ly co ntributed to Saul's c hoice to commit suic ide ( IS a 3 1:04-(5). T he sense o f fata lism the prop hec y introd uced mean t that Sau l d id not e xplo re any op tio ns 10 avoid death. Op tions could have included tactic al retreat, mustering additi onal force s agains t the Philistines ( ISa 11:0 7), pa ying tribute, or abdicating in favor of Jonathan or Dav id. The fal se prophecy thai Saul and his sons wou ld be with Samuel undergro und (ISa 28:19) likely helped Sa ul resign to his fate a nd co mmit suicide (Job 03: 1719 ). After a ll, co uld Saul hope for anything better in the after life than to be where Samuel was? A good law and gos pel sermon. however, wo uld ha ve produced d iffere nt results in Saul. The rea l Samuel would ha ve told Saul o f God's grace and the gift of paradise {Lu k 23:43), while at the same time warning of hell fo r rejec ting God's graci ous offers. The fatal error that caused Saul's de mise was his attendance at a "synagog ue o f Satan" (Rev 02:09; 0 3:tl9). Saul heard a se rrnone ne from a demon (2Co I I; 14). Sau l was beat up spirit ually an d emotionally by the demon posing as Sam uel. Saul's ex perience is so mewhat analogous 10 how a dem o n beat up the seve n sons ofSce va (Ac I 17: 14-16). Per haps God allowed this demon to further destroy Saul's sinful natu re so his so ul migh t be saved (ICh 10:13- 14; ICo 05:04-05). Scr ipture, however, does not hold out much hope thai Sau l e ver repented and went to heave n ( IC h 10: 13- 14). So the case has here been made that two de mons were ca lled etoh im, and that the real Sa mue l wa s never culled etahim. So demons are called elohim co llective ly, just as earlier we learned thm humans and ange ls were o nly called elohim collec tively and not indi vid ua lly. Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

61

A Grave as "Grare I " T he prophe tess Huldah referred to King Josia h's "graves " (2 Ki 22:20 : 2Ch 34:28) . Luter, howe ver, Josia h was buried in a si ngula r "grave" (2 Ki 23 :30). Majestic plura l proponents be lieve the plura l indicates a royal grave as o pposed to a com mon grave. If there were an occasion to refer In a grave using a majestic plural , it wou ld have been when Abraham. the " prince of God ," was offered any of the Hittit es' "choicest graves" (Gen 23:06). Notice that "grave" is in the singular as would be expected. T he Hittites said: You are a mighty prince a mong us. Bury yo ur dead in the choicest [singular I of our graves. None of us will refuse you his grave [sing ular] for burying your dead (Gen 23:06). Here is a n a lte rna tive inte rpretatio n of Jo siah 's plu ral "g ra ves." Huldah began the prophecy by saying Josiah wo uld be gathered to his "fathers." So the plural " graves" may refer to a grave complex such as a mausoleum, family plot, or catacomb where his "fathers" are buried . So the mention of "graves" may be si milar to ho w English speakers ofte n use the plura l "cataco mbs" evert when referring to a single catacomb. Anoth er inte rpretation of the plural "graves" is that the prop hetess Huldah kne w Josiah would first be laid in one tomb, and then in a nother. Joseph, for e xample. was placed in o ne tomb and then anothe r (Gcn 50:24-25; Exo 13:19: Jos 24:32) . The re was another way that bodies came to be laid in two to mbs. Betwee n 20 Be and 70 AD'" a Je wish practice involved hurying a person in a ca ve or a tomh. Then after the soft tissues had turn ed to d ust, the bones were collected and put in an ossuary in a family tomb. The person whose body was so handled could be said to have "graves." The most likel y interpre tatio n of "graves," howe ver, can be found in Ezekiel. In Eze kiel 's "Dirge fo r Egypt" (Ezc 32: 17-32), Ezekiel intersperses the singular word "grave" ( ql' ber ) (Eze 32:23, 24) with the plural "graves" (Eze 32:22, 23. 25, 26). In the same c hapter, Ezekie l mentions the singular "S heol" (Etc 32:2 1, 271. T he NIV most ofte n translates "Sheol" as "grave." Once, ho we ver. the N IV translates Sheol as "realm of death" (Deu 32 :22). Twice the NfV tran slates Sbeo! as "death" in the phrase "gates of death" (Job 17:16: Isa 38:10). So it seems that the plural "graves" refers to first the physical grave, and then secondly to the metaphysic al place ca lled Shcol. Based o n the informatio n from Ezekiel. one can say the prophecy about Josiah going to his "graves" in peace (2Ki 22:20 ; 2Ch 34:28) dea ls with more than JU SI temporal death. The prophecy must also mean that Josiah would find peace with God in the afterlife. Huldah's prophecy mean t Jo siah cou ld look fo rward to a bodily resurre ction ju st as Job had (Job 19:27). Huklah's prophecy assured Josiah of heaven ju st as the thief on the cross was assured of heaven (Luk 23:43). Josiah was buried in his own singular grave (2Ki 23:30 ). Perhaps Josiah 's body was left undisturbed until the body turned to tally to dust. Surely. Josiah's grave was not desecrated along with the graves of the o ther kings who had worshipped Matenal com direlbs autcrars

62

Yael Na ta n

false gods (Jer 08 :01-02). Perhaps Josiah's grave lasted as long as David's grave (Act U2:29). Sennacherib

CI.\

"King,\ "

Hezckiah's men sa id. "Why shou ld the kings of Assyria come and find plenty of water?" (2Ch 32:04 ). Majestic plural proponems say that "kings" is a majestic plural that refers to Sennacherib. since other OCl:UITl:nCl:S of "king" are singular in the same chapter (2C h 32:0 I. 07) . Majestic plural proponents say that early translato rs must have thought "kings" was a majestic plural, since the LXX, Syriac, and Arab ic translatio ns of 2Co 32:04 have "king" rather than "kings:' One explana tion of the plural "k ings" is tha t the Assyrians boasted about thei r armies being so large that each co mmander was like a king (lsa 10:08). Interestingly. in the NT the Corinthians were eo proud that Paul said they thou ght of the mselves as hl:ing kings (I Co 04 :08 ). Th e early Musli ms had sim ilar thoug hts: We were kings of men befo re Muhammad. And when Islam came we had the superiority." So the "kings" in 2Ch 32:04 may he a plural collective noun referr ing to the Assyrian king and his commanders . The tircydopal'(lia Rrltannica provides information that supports the idea that there were in fact mo re than one Assyrian king: Some rulers speak of their own dynastic deity. A king who owes his position to the Assyria n emperor refers to the latte r and the dynast ic deity equally as 'my master:.... If the Assyrian king is co nsidered an "e mperor:' then his regional admin istrators could be considered "kings." After all. by definitio n lin emperor is 11 king of kings. The com manders of the Assy rian armies may have a lready been regio nal kings, or soon wo uld be, After each successful campa ign. the new ly conquered land likel y was div ided into fiefdoms for commanders to rule. T he si ngu lar instances of "king " may refer to the Assyrian emperor. or the singular "king" may be a co llective noun referring to the king and his king-like com manders. Translat ions such as the LXX, Sy riac and Arabic translate "kings" in the singu lar. T he trans lators likel y thoug ht it more sensible that collective nou ns be s ingular in fonn rathe r than plural. T here is another explanation of the plural "kings" in 2C h 32:04. Stopping up all the wells througho ut Israel was a large public works project. This may have requ ired more j ustification than the threat of invasion by one Assyrian king. Sto pping up wells was a draconian policy that incon ve nie nced the population by interferin g with the water supply. Stopping up all the wells may have been implemented only whe n there was a threat of repeated invasion by two o r mo re kings-hence the plura l "k ings: ' At an earlier time the Phil istines had implemented a policy of stopping up wells (Gen 26: 15. 18). Archaeo logy shows that Palestine was rife with invas ions durin g patriarchal times, and that all of Palestine was an armed ca mp. Genesis mentions Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

63

how even Abra ham had 3 18 ser vants who cou ld bear arms (Ge n 14:14 ), and Esau had 400 serv an t so ld iers (Gen 32:( 6). Genesis eve n no tes how Abraham's cla n (Gen 14:0 2 ) and Jacob's clan (Gen 34: 26; 48:22) we re involved in armed confl icts. So Hevek iah 's me n we re sa ying that stopping up t he wells wa s impo rtan t because of the lo ng-term threa t o f invasion by Assyrian kings. Indeed, Hczckiah's me n were presci ent. In the fo urt h year of He zekia h's reig n. Shalmaneser came th reat eningly dose to Ju dea (2K i 18:09 ). In the fou rtee nth yea r of Hczckiah's reign, Scnnac hcnb threatened to invade (2K i 18:13). That plural kings were involved can he see n fro m Hezekiah's prayer : o Yanveh ; the kings of Assyria have laid waste [plural ve rb] the nations and the ir lands (2 Ki 19:17). A Possessor a.\ ..P O.I'.I"I'.\.\"or.\ " For the protec tio n of wisd om is like the protection of mon e y: the advantage of knowledge is that wisdom preser ves the life of its possessors (Ecc 07: 12). Majestic plural proponen ts so metimes offer Ecc 07: 12 as proof of the maje stic plural , s ince the wo rd " possessor s" is plura l. Since more than one person ca n possess wisdom , the plu ral "posse ssors" shou ld be understood as a plural collect ive noun.

TheMalek Ya hveh as Elohim Maje stic pl ural proponents say that the Malek Yahvcb be ing called Elolrim is proof of the majestic plural, for the Ma lek Yahveh is one person but Etohim is a pl ural noun: • The Malek Yahl'eh referred to himself as Elohim (Oc n 3 1: II , 13; Exo 0 3:02, 06), and • The Malek Yahl'eh was called Etoh im often (Ge n 16: 2 1- 22; 3 1-32; Exo 0 3; 14; 23; Num 22 - 24; Jdg 0 2; 06 ; 13; IKi 19; 2Ki 19: and Zec 0 2-03). Elohim is used as a plural co llective nou n when refe rring to the Tr inity, but as a plura l of de lega tio n when referr ing to indi vidua l membe rs of the Trinity. The pl ural o f del egat ion, Elohim, is used to note that the Malek Yt,h l't'h's is a member of the Trinity. Since ma lek mean s " messenger" in Hebrew, the Malek Yahveh definitel y is both a mem ber of the Trin ity. and a delegate of the Trinity, Th e conte xt and ot her cl ue s help the reader to de ter mine whet her Elohini is being used as a plural collective no un, or as a plural of del egat ion. Som etimes. the plain se nse of the vers e te lls the rea der that first one and then another perso n is culled Elo him. For instance , in Psa 045:06-0 7 and Psa 082:01, 08, Elo him is used as a plural o f dele gatio n twice. Each time D olrim refers to a di ffere nt ind ividua l of tbe Trinity, the Father and then the Son . The se ve rses arc d isc ussed in the Trinitarian proo fs append ix.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Yae l Na tan

64 How the

~T

Writers Understood MT Hebrew Plurals

The re are many quotatio ns of the or in the NT. Many of these q uotations incl uded the plural form t 'loilim in origi nal Hebrew. The NT application of these quotatio ns shows that NT writers : • Knew whom the OT passage a pplied to, and • Distinguished whet her the plura l wax a pl ural co llect ive noun or a plura l o f delega tion. For instance: • The writer of He brews knows that the Father called the Son Elohim in Psa 045: 0 6-07 (Heb 0 1:08 ),

• Joh n knows that the Father calle d hu man judges etohim in Psa 082:01 (Joh 10: 34-35), and

• Jo hn kno ws that the Fathe r called the Son, who wo uld be the Messiah, Elohim in Psa 082:0 8 (Joh 10:36). Psa 045 and 082 are di scussed in the Trinitarian proofs ap pend ix. Many NT quotatio ns of the OT are discu ssed further in the cha pter and ap pe ndix on the NT use of OT Yah veh te xts . The NT was writte n in 11 way co nsiste nt with the gra mmar and meaning of the OT. For insta nce, take the Heb rew form f:lohim, meanin g, "God." f:/ohim was ap plied to the Trin ity as a co llective noun , and F./ohim was applied to indi vidu a l perso ns of the Trinity as a plural of de legat ion. Gree k words fo r God like theos were also applied to indi vidua l persons o f the Trinity, and some times to the Trin ity co llectively. The NT writers kne w tha t the OT somet imes ap plied t '/ohim to the Trinity, and so met imes to the indiv idual mem bers of the Tr inity. Thi s is e viden ced not o nly in quo tations of the OT, hut also in doctrine. For insta nce , the NT writers kne w they could ascr ibe NT ac tivity to the Trin ity (Go d), or they co uld d istrib ute the cre d it to one or two membe rs. For exa mple, the Trinity (God ) was cred ited with a ll the fo llow ing act ivities, b ut indi vidu al membe rs of the Trin ity were also given separate cred it: • The Fathe r (Ac t 02:32; 13:30: Rom 06:04 ; G al 0 1:0 1; Eph 0 1:19-20), the Son (Joh 0 2:19-22; 10:1 7- 18), and the Spirit (Rom 0 1:04; 08:09- 11) raised Yes/ilia from the dead, • The Father (Jo h 05 :2 1), the Son (Joh 06 :39-40. 44 . 54) . and the Spirit (Rom 08 : 09- 11) will raise the dead, • The Father (Joh 15:16: 16;23), the Son (Jo h 14:13-14 ). and the Sp irit (Rom 08: 26) answe r prayer, • The Fat her (Gen 02:07 ; Psa 102:25; He h 01: 0 2), the So n (Joh 0 1:03; Co l 0 1: 16: Heb 0 1:02), and the Sp irit (Ge n 0 1:02; Job 33:0 4; Psa 104 :30) c reated the world , and • The Fath er ("Most High" ) and the Spirit (Luk 01: 35), and the So n (Heb 02: 14) we re involved in the incarn ation.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

65

The NT writers not only saw the Trinity in the OT. but also occasionally expressed the Trinity using the same gra mmar. For instance. there are so lecisms in the Gree k that could be thought of as He braisms in ITh 03: I I and Rev 2 1:22-23; 22 :0 1,lB-()4. These verses are discussed in the Trinitarian proofs appendix. Concluding Remark As was stated in the introducto ry remarks to this c hapter. o ne can see that the OT is thorou ghly Trinitarian when o ne has a co rrect understanding of OT Hebre w gra mmar.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Matenal com direlbs autorars

Chapter 2 Proto-Sinaitic Trinitarianism Who the Ma lek Yahveh Was

T he title MlIlek Yahve h literally me ans " Me ssenge r o f Ya h l'eh ," bUI is oflen translated as " Angel of the Lord. " Unlike o ther me ssen ge rs (maleks), the Malek Yohl'eh was the prcincarnatc Son of God. Proofs o f the Malek Yah veh' s div inity are ma n)', a nd are di scu ssed in the Tr initar ian proofs app endix. Corrobora ting passages incl ude those w here the Malek Yllhw'h: • Spo ke as o nly 1'(,1/1'<'" ca n spea k (for instance , Ge l! 16:11; 2 1:17; 22;15- 1K, Num 22 :35; Jdg U2:0 1, 06:14. 16 ), • Called h imself God (EI) (Gen 31: II , 13; Exo 0 3:06) , • Was ca lled God (Elohim ) o r Yah re h in mo st Malek. Yah veh accounts (Gcn 16; 2 1-22; 3 1-32; Exo03; 14; 23; Num 22 -24; Jdg 02; 06; 13; lKi 19; 2Ki 19; andac02 - 03), • Was located in the sa me bush as God (Elollim) and Yahveh (Exo 0 3:02, 04), and • Instructe d Moses 10 say that Yohvch had appe ared and met him (E xo 0 3:16. 18). Note that in the Burning Bush account, Mose s was "afraid 10 look at God [Elohim ]" (Exo 0 3:06). The Malek Yanveh directly quoted the Father once (Gcn 22: 15- 18). Mo sl ofte n, the Ma lek Ya lH'l,h spoke o f the Father in the third person as "Goo" (Gen 2 1:17 ) or as Ya lll'(,h (Gen 22:16 ). T he Malek Ya hveh o ften spo ke in his c apac ity as God, and eve n culled h imself God. for instance. Jaco b said : The Angel (Maid) o f [All ] the Gods f /uiElo him ] sa id to me [Jacob] in the dream, ' ...f um the God (E/) of Bet hel' (Gen 3 1: I I, 13). The Malek Yaln-e h acco unts mention the Trin ity. haElohim , literally, "[ All] the Gods" (Gcn 22 :03 , 09; Num 22: 10; 23:27 ). T he accounts also refer to the Son as the Ma lek of herlohim ([All] the Gods)" (Gen 3 ];] 1: Exo 14 :19 ; Jdg 06: 20; 13: 0 6, 09 ). As was noted abov e. d ur ing many of the MCllek Yohvch appearances . the Malek Yllh ~'e h was culled Y(/h ~'e h and God. This indic ates that the Malek Ya hrch was both God and YCI/II'd ,. and a member of the Trinu y, the IraF.lohim ([ Ali i the Gods). A para llel exists between the Malek Yahveh and the Messi ah, Yeshua. The OT prese nts the Ma lek Yah reh both as a messenger and as Yahveh the Son. L ikewise , Matenal com direlbs autcrars

68

Yael Na tan

the NT presents Yes/lila as both messen ger (Joh 08:28 ; 12:49) and God (1oh 20:28 ; Hcb 0 I:08). This led or readers to conclude that Yeshlla was the Malek Yah"eh in the fle sh, and that Ye.\h,w was both God a nd vah veh the Son . Acti ng as a messeng er , the Ma lek Ya treeh demo nstrated (he prein camate Son's love for fallen humanity. The prcinca rnatc Son was not too proud 10 beco me a messenger. Likewise. the Son was not too proud to become the Messiah (Mat 20: 28; Mar 10:45 ; Ro m 15:08-09 ; 2Co 08:09; Heb 12:0 2). In teresting ly, the Malek Yahveh demonstrated the pre incamate So n's lo ve for fallen humanity when he took o n the form of a man. He tempo rarily appeared in the for m of a man when he made preincamate appearances as the: • Malek Yah veh (Gen 18-19, 32; Jos 05; Jdg 0 6,1 3), • Son of Man (Eze 0 1:26; Dan 07: 13), and as the • Son ofGod (Dan 03 :25 ). The se te xts led tmene stamema l readers like S imeon (Luk 02:25 -34 ) to ex pect the Son's appearance as the God -man Messiah (Isa 0 7: 14: 09:06: Mic 0 5:02 : Mat 01 :23; Joh 0 1:14: Ro m 09 :05 ; Phi 02 :06-07 : Heb 0 2:09- 18).

Jacob and Hi Shaddai (Gcn 32 and 35) We ca n knnw with ce rtai nty that the "man' with whom Jaco b wre stled wa s HI Shaddoi and no t a mere c reature. T he wrestler called h imsel f "God' (Ge n 32:28), Jacob ca lled the wrestler Elol1im (Oen 32:30 ), and Jacob c alled the place whe re they wres tled Peniel ("Fal:e o f G oo" ) (Gcn 32:30-3 1). The wrestler gave Jacob the epo nym Israel. and the narrator of Kings said it was Ya hveh who gave Jacob the name Israe l ( IKi lR:31: 2Ki 17:34). The div ine w restler (Gc n 32) ap peared agai n to Jacob as £/ Shad(lai at Bethel (Gen 35 ). T his appearance occurred after the Father spoke o f the Son in the third person: Then Go d [the Father) said to Jacob, 'G o up to Bethel and settle there , and build an altar the re to God [the Son]. who appeared to yo u whe n yo u were fleein g from you r brother Esau' (Ge n 35:01), The wres tle r (Ge n 32) appeared aga in to Jaco b afte r the narrator, Moses. spoke of God using plural s: [All) the God s [h{l1::lohim ]. they appeared [plural verb) to him [Jaco b] [at Bethel in Gen 28 J (Ge n 35:(7). Then. by way o f introd uction. the narrator. Moses . reca lled ho w the wres tler (Ge n 32:28) had give n Jacob the name Israe l (Gen 35:0 9- 10). This was Moses" way of tell ing the reader that EI Shaddlli. who was abou t to ap pear to Jacob aga in (Oe n 35: 11-13), had pre vio usly wres tled with Jacob (Gen 32). So. based entirel y on evidence internal to Ge nesis. the wrestler ca n be ide ntified bnth as £ / Shoddai and as God the Son. We ca n a lso kno w. based nn the Malek Yahl'cl1's directio ns conce rning Gene sis {Exo 06:0 3). that God the Son was both the Ma lek: YlIIH'ch and EI Sh atlc/ai.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

69

£ 1 Sh adllai mea ns "G od of Migh ty One s." The £ 1 is s ingular and refer s to the Son, Shadda i is a plural co llect ive noun referrin g to the Tr inity, So El Shaddai could be tran slated as "God of Migh ty On es: ' a nd £ 1 Shadllai could be interpreted as "Divine member o f the Trinity." S ince Elo him and El Stmddoi arc titles ami not names , Jacob req uested to know the name of the Ma lek Yclh reh . Th e Ma lek vah veh den ied Jacob 's req uest say ing that Jacob did not have a suffic ient necd 10 know (Gcn 32:29). Th is is not unexpected since God has many sec rets (Dcu 29:29; Ma t 0 7:06 : n :1 7, 35; Joh 15:15).

!\loses and El S haddai (E xo 03 and 06) Mose s learned from Gene sis thai the Father was Yahveh, As was mentioned in the chapter on colle cnve plurals. Eve knew the Fath er was Ya h eh (Gen 04:0 1). The Name . fa hre h. is found 124 time s in Genesi s. Fu rther mo re. the shortened fonn o f Yahreh (Ya) is em bedde d in the names of perso ns born before Exo 0 3 and 0 6, fo r instanc e: Joc he bed (Exo 06 :20 ; Num 26 :S9) and Joshua (E xo 17:09 ). Jacob 's ex perience with the di vine wrestler informed Moses that he needed to presen t a need 10 know the Malek Yahw'h 's name, Mose s sa id that the Israe lites would not bel icve the Malek fahreh had sent h im if Mose s d id not know the Malek Yuhl'eh's name (Exo n:02. 13). Jacob. Mose s and the Hebrew elde rs did not kno w the Malek Yah ~'eh ' s name. T hro ughout the book of Genes is and 10 Exodu s 0 3: 13. o nly the post-Smairic Yah vixt narrator, Mo ses, kne w the Ma lek Yuhl'"h as Ya ln'eh (Gen 16:13; b tl 0 3:04. 0 7). The patriar ch s only knew the Son as: • F.lohim(Gen 16:13; 22:12; 31:13; Exo 03 :06 . 13,I S, 16;04:(5), and as • El Shmlda i (Gen 17:01 ; 35: II ; Exo06:03). Mose s undoubtedly kne w from study ing Gene sis and extra-biblical sources that the man with whom Jac ob wrestled was the Ma lek rah veh, The Hebre ws knew the de tails of Jacob 's enco unter with the d ivine wres tler Stl well that it affec ted their eating habits (Ge n 32:32). T his same Ma lek Yc,hl'eh now met Mose s on Mount Sinai (E xo 03:(2 ). T he Ma id Yahveh thought Moses and the Israeli tes had been in a state of suspe nse lo ng enou gh. and had suffic ient reason to know his Name , Yahveh (Exo 0 3: 14- 16). The Ma lek fa lwe h's (E xo 0 3:02) revealing that he was fahl'eh allowed Hosea to wrue thai the wrestler was both the Ma lek fa ln'eh (Hov 12:04 IBHS 12:0 5 ]) and Yuh l'"h (Hns 12 :0 SI HHS 12 :0 6 ]) : In the wo mb he [Jaco b) took his brother [Esau] by the heel; and in his manhood he [Jacob ] had power with God [i.e.. with the Peniei , literally "Th e Fal.:e( s) of God " (Gen 32:30 -3 1»). 04 Indeed, he [Jacob] had power ov er the Millek [the Son] an d prevailed [Gen 32:24-321; He [Ja cob ) wept. and made suppl ica tion to him [the Son I, He [Ja cob] found him [the Son] at Bethe l [Gen 35 :09- 15]. and there he [Jaco bi spoke with us [the Trinity].

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Yael Natan

70

05 even Yahvch [the Fath er], Goo [the Son] of hosts; Yah veh is his [the Tr inily 'sJ name of reno wn ( Hos 12:03·0 5 [BH S 12:04·06 ]). Since Jacob e nco untered God twic e ar Bet hel (Gc n 28 lind 35), so meo ne might as k. " Which appearance of God at Bethel was Hosea refe rr ing to?" Hosea sa id that after God wrestled with Jacob at the Jabbok ford (ll eb 12:04 : Ge n 32), God ta lked to Jacob al Bethel (Hos 12:04; Gen 35). Th is means that Ho sea had the Oen 35 Bethel meeting in mind - the encounter between Jacob and £ 1 Shaddai (Oc n 35: I I).

Moses Received th e T rinita r ia n Interpretation of Genesis on vtount S inai The Ma lek Yllhw'h re veale d to Mo ses that he was " I AM" and Yah reh (Exo 03 : 14- 15; 06:03). After Mo ses returne d 10 Mo unt Sinai from Egypt. the Ma lek Yah veh further clarified the prope r interpretation of Gen esis. The Mo lek Yah l'eh said the pa tria rchs had know n him as El Shadda i, but not as Yahveh (Exo 06:03). True to the Malek Yah ~'eh ' s word s. only the Gene sis post-Sinainc Yahvist narra tor, Mo ses. kne w that EI Shllddo i wa s al so Yahveh. There is o nly o ne mentio n in Ge nesis o f El Shoddu i be ing fa hreh , and that is hy the narrator. Mo ses: When Abram was ninety-nine years old , Ytlhl'ell appeared to him and sa id. ' I am God Alm ight y lEI Sllluhla;j; wa lk before me and be blameless' (Gen 17:01) . Th e Ma lek Yah veh tho ught it was important to reaffi rm tha i in th e book of Gene sis. the Mo lek Yohreh was the same pe rson as Ef Shaddai. EI Shaddoi had appear ed to the pat riarch s and made prom ise s conce rning Israel (Gen 17:01 ; 35:11), The patriarch s also men tioned /;'1 Shoddui in hlessin gs and prayer s (Gen 21\:03; 43: 14; 48:03; 49:25). Furth e rmor e. the Malek Yu hl'ell did not want Mo ses to th ink that £ 1 Shmltlu ; was a fourth person of the God hea d. Kno wing that EI Shadda i wa s the Mo lek Yahl'ell would help Moses con vince the Hebrew eld ers that Genesis was Tr initarian. A lre ady at th at time the He brew e lders may have leaned tow ard a unit ari an interpretation o f Ge ne sis. The Hebrew ci de rs may have entertained the thou ght that: • /;'1 Shaddai wa s roh veh (the Fathe r), • The Spirit wa s an imp ersonal fo rce. and • The Malek Ya hveh was a created ange l or an impersonal Sl1ekil1ah apparition of Yalweh, Tha i the Malek Yahveh wa s Yah veh mea ns that Exo 0 3-06 is very similar to the Jo s 05: 13-06:05 account. Jo shua doc s not specifically ment ion the Malek Yohreh, but calls the Son Ya h l'eh (los 06:02, 0 6), T he same Malek Yohl'eh to ld bot h Mo ses and Josh ua to take off the ir sanda ls bec au se his prese nce made place s ho ly (Exo 03:05; Jos 05 :1 5 ). Note that , thou gh the Mu le/.: Yalll'eh was Yah veh (Bxo 03:04, 0 7, 14- 16. 18: Jos 06:02, 08), the Mlilek Yahveh dist ingui shed himself from Yfl hl'eh the Father (Exo 06:03; Jos 05:14-15). Clearly, Jo s 06:01-05 is a cont inuation of the conv ersati on belween Jo shua and the Malek Yahre h (los 05:13-15). Th e chapter d ivision betwee n Jo s 05-06 is Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

71

d early misplaced. Othe rwise. the commander of Yah re h's armi es appeared in Jos 05 witho ut having any substantive message for Joshua. So it would seem the Jos 05: 13-06:05 account buttresses the Trinitarian interpre tation of both Exo 03-06 and Genesis, Dtsttngutshing the Trinity in Genesis Specific persons of the Trinity can be distinguished easily in some verses of Genesis: • Ya/weh's saying, " us" (Ge n 01 : 2 6 ~ 03:22; 11:07), • HaE/o/lim is a Hebre w form mean ing, "[All] the Gods," When referring to vahveh, Iw£lo him denotes the persons of the Trinity. The OT menti ons that these people sa w o r talked to hll£/oll i/ll (the Trini ty): Enoch (Oe n 05:22. 24), Noah (Gcn 06:09). Abraham (Oe n 17: 18; 20: 17; 22:03, (9) , Abimc lcch (Oe n 20:06), Jacob (Gen 27:28 ; 35:07; 48: 15), Moses (Exo 03:06, II , 12. 13; 19:03), the Israelites (Exo 18: 1 2~ 19:17; 20:20 , 21 : 24: II). Balaam (Num 22:10: 23:27 ) and Gideon (Jdg 06 :36. 39), • Abraham said , "Gods [Elohinl] . they caused me to wander [plural verb ] fro m my father's hous e ... " (Gen 20 :13). Based o n Ocn 20 :13, we should e xpect to find ar least two persons of the Trini ty in Gen 12:01 ·07. Indeed . God did appea r to Abraham twice to tell Abraham to leave his father 's hou sehold (Oe n 12:0 1. 07). One person appearing twice to promise essentially the same thing makes less sense than an alternative explanation. A plausible interpretation is that two persons of the Trinity appeared consecutively to tell Abraha m to leave Hara n. This allowed two persons of the Trinity to extend promi ses of re ward fo r Abraham acting on his faith by jo urneying to the Promised Land . • The narrator, Moses, recoun ted ho w " fAlI] the God s [h(/£ /olli/ll ), they had appeared [plural verb] to him (Jaco b) when he was fleeing from his brother [Bsuu] [at Bethel in Gen 28]" (Ge n 35:07) . The Ma lek of [Alii the Gods (h(/t'lohim) (Gen 3 1: I I ) said that I'll' was God (HI who appeared to Jacob at Be thel (Ge n 3 1: 13). So Gen 3 1: II , 13 show thai the Mu/ek Yull l'eh was one of the persons of haElollim (" [AliI the Gods") who appeared at Bethel in Gen 28 (Ge n 35:( 7), and • The Mu /ek Yilll l'eh (Exo 03:02) said I'll' was the £ 1Shm ldai (Exo 06:03) who appeared to the patriarchs (Gcn 17:01; 35: II ). One need not distinguish the persons of the Trin ity througho ut Genesi s to see that the Malek Yahreh's Exo 06 :03 interpretatio n of Genesis is a major Trinitarian proof te xt. People are free, however. to attempt to distinguish the perso ns of the Trinity throu ghout Ge nesis, Deduct io ns and infere nce s can be made fro m the data in Genesis as well as from other books of the Bible that touch on subjects in Genesis. We have seen, for instance. that the book s Exodu s, King s and Hosea refer to Genesis. According to the Ma lek Yah w.'h ·s directions, noting whom the patriarc hs kne w as roh veh helps to identify the Father in Genesis. On ly the post-Sinaitic Yahvist Matenal com direlbs autcrars

72

Yael N ata n

narrator, Mo ses. knew that the Son and Spirit were Yah I'!'''. The Name , Ytl hreh, occ urs 165 lime s in 143 Ge nesis verses. The peop le spoke or heard the Name , Yahvrh, in on ly 52 ve rses." so most occurrences o f vah veh in Genes is occu r in the narration . T he NT writers men tio n "God" and " Lo rd" often. The se likel y refer to the Father or to the Tr inity-provided there is no me ntion o f the Son or the Sp irit nea rby. Likew ise. in Genesis, Rlohim and Adona; likely refer 10 the Fathe r or the Trinity when there is no nearby men uon of the Ma lek Yahveh. £ 1 Sh ade/IIi or the Spirit. When the con te xt mentions a spec ific person o f the Tri nit y, then Eloh im an d Adon(/ ; like ly are plurals of delegat ion. A plural of del egation is a Iype of co llective noun that refers to rne Father, the Son or the Spirit's me mbership in the Trinity. Iden tify ing the d ivine perso ns in Genes is by the Ma lek Y{l h ~'eh 's criterion in Exo 06:03 yield s doct rinal d ividends, It becomes clear that the patriarch s referred to the Trinity by the form ha£loh im (" (A ll ] the Gods" ). Ha£lolli m is found 23 lime s in 2 1 verses of Genesis," and, in total. 337 OT verses. The pat riarc hs referred to the indi vidual person s of the Tnn ity by additional names and title s: • In patriarchal times the Father was know n as: o Yahveh, o £ lol1im ("God" ), o £ 1£ Iyo/l ("God Most High" (Ge n 14:1 8, 19, 20 , 22» , o £ 1 Olum ("Ood Eternal" (Ge n 2 1:33». and o Adonai Yahveh (vl.ord Yaill-eh" (Gen 15 :0 2, 08 )), • In patriarc hal times the Son was known as: o EI SJllllldai ("Ood of Mighl)' Ones" (Gen 17:0 1; 28:03; 35: II ; 43:14; 4&:03; 49 :25)). o £ Iohim (" God " (Gcn 16 : 13 ; 22 : 12; 31 ;13; Exo 03:06»), o The Ma lek. I:'lohim ("the Messe nger of God" (Ge n 21 : 17; 3 1: I I ) , and o T he Mulck Yuhl'Ch (Gen 16 :0 7, 09, I I: 22: II , 15), and • The Spirit was known to the patriarchs a s the: o T he "Ruach o f Elohim' ("Spirit o f God" (Gc n 01 :02)). and o The "Ruach o f Yo hveh" (Gen 06:03). T h ree "Cu n t r ols" that Ver ify the Trinitarian Interpretation of Ge nesis: Num 22-24, Job, a nd Rooks I a nd II of the Psalms

The Trinitv ill Nu m 22- 24 Salaam provided sorc e ry services to anyone will ing to pa y the fcc , whether that person happened to be idolatro us or not. Salaam. howe ve r. co nsidered himse lf a Yahvist since he sa id that Yah vch was his God (N um 22: 18, 38 ). Balaam was fro m the "o ld" Yahvist school, as was Mclchizcd ck (Ge n 14:1 8). T he proto -patriar c hal Yahvists wo uld hav e co ns id e red Balaam an erring sou l. Not on ly was sorce ry wrong, but also Balaam hired himself out to anyo ne regard less of his religious persuasion. Salaa m wo uld ha ve been 10 the an cie nt Yahvists what these men were to ear ly C hrist ians; Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

73

• S imon of Samar ia (Act 08:(9). • Bar-Jesus Elymas, the Jew ish sorcere r (Act 13:06-11). and • T he seve n sons o f Sceva . a Je wish chief priest, who likely syncretized pagan and Jewish beliefs (Ac t 19:1 4). E ventually. the Isr ae lite s killed Balaam for pract ic ing sorcery against Israe l (Num 3 1:08). S ince Balaa m lived near the river in "Aram" (Nu m 23 :05, 0 7: Deu 23 :04), he was unaware of doctr inal develo pme nts in vo lvi ng the patri arc hs or Mose s. Balaum's Yahvis m. therefore. was proto-St mnnc and even proto-pat riarch al. The name "J acob" is found nn Balaam 's lips (N um 23:10 , 2 1, e tc.j, hut on ly beca use Hnlak a nd h is pr ince s infor med Balaam abou t Ja co b {N um 23 :07). Sorce re rs a lways needed de tails supplied to the m to develop a: • Rele vant curse or interpretation, • Plausible communication from the "other" side, or a • Self- fulfilling prophecy (Da n 0 2:07 -09). S ince Bnlaum's Yahvism was proto-patriarc hal an d proto-Sinuitic. Num 22-24 is a benchm ark for the Tri nitarian inte rpretatio n o f Genesis. We can ex pect that B alaam wou ld not kno w facts first revealed 10 the patriarc hs o r 10 Mose s on Mo unt S inai. For instance , Balaa m would no t have known that the Malek Yahveh was " I AM" and Yahl'ch the Son (E xo 0 3:13-15 : 0 6:(3). The several Cre ation, Fall and Flood sto ries of the ancient Near East suggest that the Yahvists possessed atteasr Ge n 0 1- 11 as Sc ripture. Gi lga mesh , for instance , is ju st a sp in o lT from the Ge nesis Flood account. Liberal theologians. of course. asse rt ju st the nppos ite. T hey' maintain that the Gen esis Flood acco unt ste ms from the Gi lgamesh acco unt. but without ev ide nce and ju stifica tion. Balaa m wo uld have know n all the na mes of God found in Ihe first part of Gene sis. In Gcn 0 I - II the Trinity is ca lled haElohim ("[AliI the G ods"), As was the case with Jaco b (O en 32:29 ), the patr iar chs had no need 10 know addi tional names for God. Thus. even a proto-patriarchal Yahvist suc h as Balaam would have kno wn all the names of Yahwh that Mclc hizcdck and the patriarchs knew. Bulaam would ha ve know n, for insta nce , that: • The Trin ity was ca lled haElohim ("[All] the Gods") (Gen 05:22, 24: 06 :02, 04 , 09, 11.. .), • The title Elyon, "the Most High: ' was un iquel y the Father's (Gen 14 :18, 19, 20 , 22), • The title (EI) Shaddai, "God of Mighty Ones" was uniquely the Son's (Gcn 17: 01; 28:03: 35: I I: 43 :14: 48:03; 49 :25) , • The Spirit was culled the Ruech, meaning, "S pirit" (G en 0 1:02: 06:03: 41:3R), and • The Son was ca lled the Malek Ya!1l'I;,h (Ge n 16:0 7, 09, 10, I I: 22: 11. 15: Exo 03:(2) and El Snaddai (E xo 06:(3). Indeed , we find that Balaam referred 10 the persons of the Trinity just as the patriarchs had (Nurn 22 -24). As was the case in Gene sis, only the pro ro-Sm uinc narrato r of Num 22 -24 knew that the Malek Yllhl'ch's name was Yll hl'd l (N um 22: Matenal com direlbs autcrars

74

Yael Na ta n

28 .3 1). Balaam often spo ke of the Fat her as Ytlhreh, and S alaam knew the Tri nity as IwE/ohim ("[AliI the God s" ) (N um 22:10. 23:27). Balaam referred to the Fathe r as £lyon (" Mosi lligh") {Num 24:16). Balaam refe rred to the Spirit both as "God" (N um 24:04, 16 ) and as "rhe Sp irit of G od" (N um 24:02). S alaam referred 10 the Malek Yahl'eh as Shadd/Ii (N um 24:04 , 16 ). Snaaaai is short for /;'1 Shlllldlli . mea ning, "God of Mighty One s: ' The Son was called HI Shuddai often during the patriarchal pe riod (Gen 17:01 ; 28:03; 35: 11: 43:14; 48 : 03 ; 49:25). Shl./tMai by itself co uld be understood as a plural of de legatio n, a type of collective noun. Shaddoi wou ld the n ind icate that the Malek Ya hveh is one of the "Mights" (Shaddui ), o r in oth er words, a mem ber of the Trinity. S ince Balaam said he saw a vision of S/wddai and fell down prostrate (Num 24: 16), Balaam must have bee n referring to the Mille/.: YCl hreh by the title Shatldai. The M{l1l.'k Yahveh is the on ly heavenl y' person who appeared to Balaa m [N um 22:22-35 ). The So n is often c alled (El ) SJwddai (Gen 17:0 1; 2K:03; 35: 11 ; 43:1 4: 48:03; 49:25; Exo 06:0 3; Num 24:0 4, 16, and the like). Th at Balaam knew the M ale/.: Yahwh to be £1Shaddai e xplains why Salaam fell dow n prostrate befo re the Malek Yahreh (N um 22:31). That Balaam bowed to the Malek Yahveh may itself suggest that the Malek Yah veh was d ivine (N um 22:3 1). Bowing to angels was not necessa ry (Luk 0 I: 11- 12; Rev 22:08-09). Balaam sa id he saw a vision o f " him" (N um 24:17), mea ning Shaddai (Num 24: 16 ), as the future Messiah (N urn 24:0 7b-0 8, 17): • His [Israel's ) King [The So n a s Mess iah] shall be higher than Agag. His [the Messiah's ] k ingdom sh all be exalted (Nurn 24:07b). £1 [the Fa ther] brings him [The So n as Messiah] fort h out of Egy pt (N um 24:0R), • He [Balaam ] sa id, who he ars the words of t.;J [the Spirit mentioned earlier in N um 24:02 , 04 .]. who kno ws the knowledge of the Mosl High [the r athe r], whn sees the vision of Shaddai [the Son as Malek Yahreh and Shaddai], fa lling dow n, and having h is eyes o pe n [see Num 22:3 1] (Num 24: 16), and • I see him (The Son a s Messiah], but not now; I see h im [T he So n as Me ssiah], but not ncar: T here shallco me fo rth a Star [T he Son as Messiah ] out of Jacob, a scepter [The So n as Messiah ) shal l rise out of Israel [The sce pter or " branch" is associated with the Messiah in Gen 49 :10-1 J. Num 24: 17; Isa 04:02. I I :0 1; 53: 0 2; Je r 2] :05; 33: 15; Zcc 03:08; 06:12, and elsewhere ) (Num 24:17). Shadda i in N um 24:16 is the o nly plau sible re fere nt for the pronou n " hi m" fo und in Num 24:17, So Bulnam saw the M(lIck Yahl'eh who wa s Shaddai. and the n Balaam saw " him: ' mea ning Shadda i, as the future Messiah. T his ag rees with ho w Salaam later called the Messiah "God": He to ok up his pa ra ble. and sa id. ' Alas , w ho s hall li ve whe n E l [meaning Shaddui as Messiah ] does this?' (Nu m 24:2 3). S alaam's passage: El [the Fa ther) hrings him [The So n as Messiah] forth o ut o f Egypt (Num 24:08) . a llowed Ma tt he w to ap ply a simila r passage fro m Ho sea to Ycshua's ch ildhood round trip to Egypt an d back (Mat 0 2:15): Matenal comdirelbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

75

When Israel was a c hild, I [the Father] loved him [the Son]. and OUi of Egypt I called my so n (Hos II :01 ). Balaam's messianic prophecy is similar to other messiani c prophec ies in that Balaam spoke of the Messiah as king (Ge n 49: 10; Eze 2 1:26·27; Mic 05:02 [BHS 05:01 ]). Buluam's prophecy in Numbe rs is similar to Psa 091 in that both speak of the Messiah being 1:.:1 S/wdJa i. The Psalmist wrote that the Messiah wou ld be Shaddai , and the Messiah would la ke refuge in £ /)'0 11 (the Most Highl . meaning the Father (Psa 09 1:0 I. 09 ). The Trinity ill Jo b Job lived between 2.000 and 1.500 Be. Job's Yahvism wo uld have been proto patriarchal s ince Job most likely did not know of the patriarchs. Though Job mennonv /Ill/ leks (ange ls). Jo b makes no mention of the Ma lek Yah veh, Job does. however, mention Slwddai twenty-three times. The book of Job can serve as another benchmark that verifies the Trinitarian interpretation of Genesis. As a proto-patriarc hal Yahvi-a, Job would have kno wn the Son as Shaddai and as Etohim , but not as Yahveh (Exo 0 3:13-15 ; 06:03). Therefore, it is nOI surprising that the Nam e, Ya hl'ell. does not appear in the same chapter as the name Shadda i -cxcept in Job 40. 71 Yah l'eh and Shaddai we re both kno wn as God since Job's friend Elihu said: BUI no o ne says, ' Where is God s [p lura l no un), my Make rs [plural noun] ...?' (Job 35: HI). In Job 40 , the informed , post-Sinauic Yahvist na rrator mentions Yahveh three time s (lob 40 :0 1, 03 , 06 ). while God mention s the nam e Shadda i (Job 40:(2). So Job had a proto -patriarchal theology. while a later narrat or o r redactor had a post-Sinuitic theo logy. Job knew thc Fathe r as Yahw h and Job knew the Son as Shlllldai, hut Job did not know the So n as Yah vch , The Trinity in Books l and 1I 1!{ the P.W/ lm ,I' The usage of divine names in Hooks I and 11 of the Psalms is somewhat akin to Job's alternating use of Ya hreh and Shaddl/; in different chapters. In the Psalms: • To honor the Father and the Trinity, Yahveh is the predominant name for God in 8 00k I (Psa 00 I - 04 1), and • To honor rne Son , Ell/him is the predominant name for God in Book II (Psa 042 -072). Also, to honor the So n, the first mention in the Psa lms of the name Shlldda; occurs in Book II (Psa 068: 14 [BHS 068: 15]). The arrangement of Book I and II was intended to honor the Fathe r and the Son individually. It was appropriate for the Psalm s to hono r the Son since the So n wo uld one day become the God-man offsprin g of David (2Sa 07:12). David was respon sible for writing many psalms. Appropriately, in 2Sa 07 and in the Psalms there are many proofs both of the divinity of the Messiah , and of the Trinity. T hese proofs are discussed in the MT plurals appendix. What better way was there to ho nor the Father and the Son individually than to recall Proto-Sinaiuc theology in poe tic verse? Book I recalls how only the Fa ther Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Yael N ata n

76

was kno wn as Yahveh during Genes is. Boo k II recall s how the Son was know n as £1Shaddai and Elohim, but not as Yahwh (E xo 06:03), Thu s. Books I ami II of the Psalms help to verify the Trin itarian interpretation of Genesi s. The Impact of the Trinitarian Interpretation of Genesis on I<:xegesis The JED P theo ry is buttressed mainly 0 11 the assumption that diffe rent writer s an d redac tors preferred the title Elohim over the Name , Yahveh, or vice versa. The Ma lek Yuh l'eh's instruct jon abou t Gene sis (Exo 06:03), howe ver, sho ws that the different names len d to indicate di fferent perso ns of the Trinity. Thi s mean s that the JED P theo ry is merely eis egevis passed off as ex egevis." II is interesting to notc that if the same JEDP assumpt ions were app lied to othe r text s know n to ha ve on ly one aut hor, the pr ocess wo uld resul t in man)' wild con cl usions. For insta nce. Norman Ge isler make s this interest note about the Koran : . ..the same a nti-supernaturalism that led liberal critics of the B ible to de ny that Moses wrote the Pentateuch. noting the d iffere nt words for God used in different passages, wo uld like wise arg ue that the QlIr 'lIf1 did nOI co me from Muhammad. For the Qur 'ull also use s different names for God in di fferen t place s. AI/uh is used for Goo in suras 4, 9, 24, 33, but Rub is used in suras IR, 23 and 25." Th e Impact of the Trinitarian Interpretation of Genesis on A ngel of the

Lord Theories The Malek Yahveh (Exo 0 3:02) said that the patriarchs knew him as HI Slwdl/ai, bUI nol as Yahveh (Exo 06:03). T his mean s thc Malek Yll hr eh was known 10 be a divine person separate and distinc t fm m Yoh veh the father. The e vidence simply do e s not support any theory that says the Malek Yuhreh wa s a mere s pirit cr eature, much less an impe rso nal Shekil1(( h or apparition of Yah w h. The se theories post ulate that thc Malek Yahve h was "Goo" and '"Yah,'ch" onl y by association with the Father, OUI of deference to the Father, or by derivation from the Father. If the Ma lek vah veh wer e impersonal, this wo uld te nd to ma ke God into a puppe lccr or ventriloq uist. On ene ss Iheo lo gy is pop ular in man y Pemecostal ci rcles. O nene ss is just a warmed -over , repackaged version of the ancient he resy called Mod alism. Onene ss adhere nts believ e tha t there is onl y one person c alled YaJII·eh. lie play-ac ted the part of Father, So n and Spirit-as the occasion required . One ne ss e nth usia sts believe that, among other things, the Son: • Q uoted himself (Ge n 22: 15- 16; Joh 14 :10 , 24), • Spok c of him self as being the Father ot tcu. • Play-act ed two (Joh 12:2R-30 ) or three (Mat 0 3: 16- 17 ) divine persons at a lime, and • Pra yed to the Father often (1oh 17:01 -26 ).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

77

O nly the Ma lek Yllh veh's being a d ivine person disti nct from the Father wou ld a llow the Malek rahveh 10 state that: • He was E/ Shaddai, and • T he patriarchs d id not know him by the Name, Yallreh (Exo 0 6:0 3). Both the Prcdc luvian s and patriarc hs knew at least one perso n to be Yahveh (Ge n 04 :01 , 26). If the Father, the Male/.:. Yahveh and the Spirit were all the same pe rso n, as Medalists asse rt, there is no sideste pp ing the fac t that that pe rson definitel y was k now n as Ytl/ll'eh. On ly di stinct persons of the Trini ty co uld, without co ntriva nce, claim that the Patriarchs d id not know him as rahveh (Exo 06: 03 ). Beside s Exo 06:03, there are many indicat ions that the Father and Son are two distinct persons in both testaments. Examples include: • T he MlIle/.:. Yahveh quoting the Father (G en 22: 15- 1R). and • The prophet)' that the kings o f the earth wo uld speak against YClhl'eli and his Me ssiah (Psa 002 :02) saying: Le t us break their [plural] chains... a nd throw off their [plural I fetters (Psa 002 :03). NT examples that show the Father and Son are distinct persons include Yf'.I'hulI ' s baptis m. At YeJ/llw ' s baptism, the Father spoke fro m hea ven while the Spirit al ighted on veshua in the form of a do ve (Mat 03:16-1 7). Another NT example occ urred when Ye,~JItfII was in the temple a nd the Father spo ke from hea ven (Jo h 12:28-30 ). It would see m that either the Trinity is three distinct persons, or e lse we must believe that God is a ventriloqu ist or a puppe teer. That God is a ventriloquist or puppeteer is a doctrine unwort hy of belief ( ICo 15: 19).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Matenal com direlbs autorars

Chapter 3 The Presences of Elyon

Background The Hebrew wo rd Elvon is ofte n translated as " Mos t High: ' Elyoll is the Fathe r. The Hebrew word panim is translated as "presencets)." "facetx)," or "personts)." Panim looks like a Hebrew plural. bUI is in fact a d ual form. The singular form I/(Im,h we nt unuse d in Hebrew Sc rip ture. Whet her dual forms are Iranxlated as singulars or plurals depends on the co ntext. Dual forms such as panim arc discu ssed in the chapter o n Heb rew co llective nouns. Since mo st trans luncns arc no r literal, Ihc ph rase " before my face [paniml" become s "before me" (Gc n 17:01 ; 33:14). Some times the word panim is igno red altogether. Por instance. Jonah ran aW11) " "from the Presences [PllI/im ] of Yah ,'e" " is so metimes trans lated as "from the LORD" (NIV Jon Ol:()] (twice), 10). The phrase Panim Yahveh: • Preceded by the prepositio n " befo re" ("/" = lamedh) lite rally means " before Yah ~'eh 's pre sence: ' or " before Ya/n>eh," o r wo rds to that effe ct. • Precede d by the pre pos ition " fro m" (m in ) lite rall y mea ns " fro m Ya hl'eh' s presenc e ,'" anu • Witho ut a prepositional ph rase literally mean s " Presences of Yah l'eh .'''' There are two e xce pt ions di scussed later in this ch ap ter (Psa 0 34 :15- 16; Lam 04 :16). As wa s sta ted before , whether Pan im is transla ted as a s ing ular o r plura l depends on the co ntext. This mean s the dual for m Panim can refer to the Son or Spi rit. or both. For insta nce , here the pl ural ve rbs ind icate that Punim refers to the Son and Spirit, and therefo re sho uld be translated in the plura l as "Presences": ra hve h I t " y on the Fa ther] rep lied , ' My Pre se nc es [Heb re w plu ral " ani"' J, the y will go [pl ura l verh] with yo u. and I will gi ve yo u re st.' T hen Mo ses said to him [Efyoll the Father]. ' Your Presences. if they [the Son and Spirit] do not go [plura l ve rb] with us [to the Promised Land i, do not se nd us up from here [Mount Sin ai]' (Exo 33:1 4- 15 ).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Yael Na tan

80 Who Arc Elyon 's Presences?

The Son as E/\'IJIl :~ Presence The existence of God 's omnipresence can be inferred by observing the world an d universe (Act 17:27-28; Rom 0 1:19- 20). Just as no mer e spirit cre ature can con vey God's o mnipresence. ne ither can a mere creature conve y God 's e specia l. pe rsonal presence. It is the refore no sur prise that Script ure associ ates Yalwell's Presence o nly with the So n a nd Spiru." The Son is called a Prese nce o f Y ah veh in these instances: • T he Malek Yah reh (E xo 0 3:02 ; 23 :20 , 23; 33:02) is ca lled the Presence o f vah veh (h o 06 :12. ) 0; 23:1 7; 34: 14. 15. 23. 24,34,35 ; Dell 16:16; 3 1: 11). Note that these passage s are found in, or refe r back to. sections where the Son is sai d to have d ivine names: o Yahveh and the " I AM" (Exo 0 3: 14- 15), o £ 1 Shadda; (Exo 06: 03). and o T he Mu lek with Yah w' h ' s Name in Him (Exo 23:2 1; 33:02) , • The Male/.: Yahl'e1l 's presen ce made the surro undings so holy that Moses and Joshu a were obliged to take off the ir sanda ls [Exo 0 3:05; Jo s 0 5: 15). and • The narrator of the book of Jo shua wrote : Seve n prie sts c arried sev en trum pets before the Prese nce [Pal/im] o f Yuh l'eh (Jos 06:0&). The " Presence o f Ya hl'eh" refers bac k to the co mmande r of Yah l'l' h ' s armies-the M (li ek Yah ~'eh (Jos 0 5:14- 15). Ev iden tly, the Malek Yahveh ma rch ed ahead o f the Israe lites arou nd Jericho j ust as the Malek Yahl 'ch had marched ahead of the Israelit es during the Exod us (Exo 14: 19). Isa iah said that the Messiah wo uld be "Imma nuel." meaning, "God (pre sent ] with us" ( lsa 0 7:14; Mat 1JI :23). T he wo rd " Immanuel" was Isaiah's wa y o f say ing that the co ming Messiah wou ld be a Pre sence of Yah veh, Luke wro te about Y('.I'hul/ as a Presence , .. . .. when time s of spiri tual refreshm ent ma y come fro m the Presence [the So n) of the Lord [the f ather ]. and that he [the Fathe r] may send him [the Son as a Pre sen ce ) who has been appoin ted fo r you-s-eve n Ch rist Ye.l'/ullI (Act 03:19 -20 (Gree k 03:20»). Isaiah also wro te abou t the Messiah bein g the Fat her's Presen ce on the Last Day: Enter into the rock , and hide in the dust, from before the Presence of the Fear [the So n) of Yah l'e1l [the Father ], an d from the g lory [the Son] of his [the Fat her'x ] majesty (I sa 02 :10). Speaking about the Son 's return on the Last Day (2 Th 0 1:07 ), Paul alluded to Isa 0 2: 10 10 say that the Messiah was the Presence and the g lory of the Father: Who shall be punished with eve rlasting destru ction fro m the Presence [the Son] of the Lord [the Father], and fro m the glory [the Son) of his [the Fathe r's ] power (2Th 0 1:09 ). Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

81

Speaking of t he New Hea ven and New Ea rth, the A pos tle John wro te in Revelati on of the Son 's pre sence with the Father. Joh n wrote that the Lord God an d the Lamb "is" a tem ple (Rev 21:22). Jo hn also wrote o f the Son's prese nce with the Fathe r as thoug h the So n were a lamp and as though the Fath er were the emitted light rgc v 2 1:23): I saw no temp le in it. for the Lord Go d, the Almighty, and the La mb, is (sin gu lar verb) its temp le. T he c ity has no need for the sun or moon to shine, for the ve ry glory of God illuminated it, and its lamp is the Lamb (Rev 2 1:22-23). The Apostle John wrote that the Father and Son had one throne , one fuce, and one name. That the Father and Son have a sing ular throne agrees with YlIhl'eh's OT state ment: A glorious th rone , ex alte d from the begi nni ng. is the place o f our sanctuary tJe r 17: 12). Note that there was one thro ne in "o ur sanctuary," Jer 17:12 is me ntioned in the MT plurals appendix . John eve n addressed both the Fathe r and So n together using the singular pro nouns "h is" and " him" (Rev 22:0 1, 03-(4): He showed me a river of water of life. cle ar as crys tal. proceeding o ut of the th ro ne [sin gula r] of God [the Father ] an d of the Lam b [the Son] ... The throne [singular] of God and of the Lam b will be in it, and his [singular pronoun] serva nts serve him [singular prono un]. Th ey will see his [singular pronoun) face, and his [singular pronou n] name will be o n their fore heads ( Rev 22:0 I, 03-(4). The Son is said to be present at the Eucharist. Surely, on ly a Presence of ranven co uld acco mplish suc h a d iv ine feat! T he Euc harist is a meal commemorating Ye.~hIUJ's sacrifice for s ins (Rom OS:0 3; Bph 0 5:02; He b 09: 14; 10:12). Th e wine is ca lled the blond of the covenant (M at 26:26-29; Mar 14:22-25; Luk 22: 17-20: ICo I I:23- 29). To avoid misunde rstandin gs, it would be beneficia l to set ou t the Lutheran posit ion on the Lord 's Supper he re. Koehler wrote: ' ... we he reby utte rly con de mn the Ca pernait ic eat ing of the bod y of Ch rist, as though His body were rent with the teeth, an d d igested like othe r food' (F. C. Epit., A rt. VIII, 42, Trig/or, p. 1317). We do not ' hold that the body and blood of Ch rist are included in the bread loc all y, or are other wise permane ntly united therew ith apart from the use of the Sacrament ' (E C. Th . D., An. VII, 14. Trigtot, p. 977). The Lut heran Churc h does not tea ch 'con substantiatum ,' which means that bread and body form one substance, or that the body is present, like the bread. in a nomralmenner; nor does it teac h "irnpananon.' which mea ns that the body is locally encl ose d in thc bread... Th e bo dy and blood of C hrist arc really, but supematuratty prese nt in the Sacrament, an d all co mmu nicants rece ive them orally, with their mou ths, toge ther with the bread and wine." T he So n's supe rnat ural, met aphysic al prese nce in the bread an d wine is expressed by: Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Yael Natan

82

• The Son ~ ay i n g . "T his is my body" (Mat 26:26; Mar 14:22: Luk 22 :19) , • The Son say ing, "T his is my blood" (Mal 26:28: Mar 14:24: Luk 22:20) . and by • Paul say ing thai the ce lebrants and co mmunicants must recognize the bod y of the Lord ( l e o 10: 16 ; 11 :27). Yeshua:w s upe rna tu ra l. met a phys ica l pre sen ce with the bre ad a nd wine is prefig ured by: • The supernatural be nefits that acco mpan ied the eat ing of manna (Deu 08:0304 ; 29:05-06; Neh Ol}:10 -11 ; Joh 06:4 1, 5 1). Moses said that Yuhw:,h wal ked through Ihe midst o f Israeli te c amp. so the ca mp had 10 remain hol y so Yah veh wo uld not tum away ( De ll 23: 14), • Mclchizcd ck, an ancie nt Yah vist priest- king of Jeru sa lem, came out to meet A hrah am wi th bread and wine (Ge11 14 :18 ). Melc hizedek was great er than Abraham ( Hcb 0 7:0 7). Th e Son bec a me a k ingly prie st in t he order o f Mele hizedek after his dea th a nd res urrect io n (Psa 110:04; Heb 05: 06). T hat the Son is a prie st-k ing in the orde r of Melc hizedek e xpla ins why Yi:',, /wa said that he would not dr ink wine until "it find s fulfill ment in the kingdom of God" (Isa 25:06 -0 7; Ma t 26:29; Mar 14:25; Luk 22: 16, 18). Yeshua the n appeared on the firs t d ay of the week (M at 28:0 1, 09-10; Luk 24:2 1, 33-35; Joh 20:19 , 26) and bro ke bread and dran k wine with the d isc iples (Act 10:41). Th us, wine "found its fulfillment' (its highest use ) whe n it became cus tomary to meet and have the Lord 's Supper on the first day of the week (Ac t 20:07; ICo 16:0 2; Rev 0 1: 10). True comm unio n, of co urse, occ urs only in the kingdom of the priest -kin g Ye.I'hu iI .

• w hen the Tr inity appeared to Abraham. he told Sarah 10 make bread from th ree seahs o f flou r (Gcn 18:06 ). The n Abraham ate with the Tr inity, • Mose s, his father-in-law. and the Israel ite elders ate in the prese nce of Yah veh (E xo 18:12; 24:11), • Mo ses instr uct ed the Israel ites to b uild a n altar and eat and rejoic e in the prese nce of YaJm:,h once they had entered the Promised Land ( Deu 12:07 , 18; 14:23, 26; 15:20 ; 27:07; Eze 44:03). • Dur ing the time of the Judges. Sam uel told Sau l abo ut three men making what seems to be a Trinitarian offe ring to [All] the God s (haEfohim ) at Bethel (I Sa 10:03-04 ): three loaves of bread and three goat s, }'et o ne sk in of wine. T he Trin ity may have posed as three men in ISa JO as they did in Gen 18. Instead of bread made with three seahs of flour (Gen 18:06), the three me n had three loave s ( ISa 10:0 3). One of the me n. perhaps the Son, shared t wo lo ave s of o ffer ing bread with Saul. This see ms to prefi gure the Lord 's Sup per, • The ISa JO inc iden t with Saul has similarities to Da vid and h is men ea ting the Bread of the Presen ces (Exo 25:30 ) at Ihe tabe rnacle ( ISa 2 1:04·06; Mat 12:03(4). Paul sa id a person partaking of the Lord 's Supper should ex amine himself before eating and drinking (I Co 11:28). Before g iving David the Bread of the Presen ce s, the priests as ked Da vid whether his men had kept them selve s fro m wome n. To men on the march, this is likel y a e uphe mistic wa}' o f sa) ing "fo rm-

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

83

cat io n" ( ISa 2 1:04-06; co mpare Rev 14:04). Co nsidered togeth e r, the incidents co nce rning Sau l and Da vid ce rta inly seem 10 fore shadow t he Lord 's Supper, • The So n's d isappearance s durin g Munoah and Gi deo n's blood and grain offer ings (Jdg 06: 19-2 1: 13: 15-20 ), and • The Son 's co ntinuing the co n versatio n with Gi deon even after he d isappeared in the smoke of G ideon's grain offe ring (Jdg 06:23), T he narrator sa id that after the Malek Yahl'eh di sappeared, ¥ll hn 'h said to him: ' Peace be to yo u; do not fea r, yo u shall 110t die " (1d g 06 :23). Ye S/lilli' S su perna tural, met a phys ica l pre sen ce with the bread a nd wine is underscored by: • The Son's say ing h is flesh was bread (1oh 06 :50-58), and " I AM the bread of life" (1oh 06: 35 is discus sed in the "1 AM" chapte r), • T he So n's reappeara nce in Je rusa lem during the disciples' di scu ssion of thc Son's prev ious d isappea rance during thc bre aki ng of bread with the Em maus d isciples ( Luk 24:31. 35-36). The Son said upon his reappearance to the d isci ple s. " Peace be to you" (Lu k 24 :36). This brings to mind how. after the M alek Yah l,t'h had d isappeared : ra hveh said to him [Gideon). 'Peace be 10 yo u; do no t fear. you shall not die ' (1dg 06:23 is noted just abov e ), • The Son say ing: For w here two or three co me together in my name , there am I with the m (Ma t 1&: 20 ), and • The supernatur al be nefit s that accom pany the celebration of the Lord 's Supper nco 10:16-17; 11:29-30). The Spi ,-il ll.\ Elvon \' P resence Scrip ture associates Yahveh'v Prese nce with the Sp irit. The narrator wrote that the Spirit of Yahveh stirred within Samson (Jd g 13:24 ), but tha t Yahveh eve ntually left Samso n (ldg 16:20 ), T his sho ws that the Spirit is more than an impe rsonal fo rce , for Yahveh wo uld need 10 be perso nally present in ord er to lea ve. Ezekie l wro te about the Spirit being t(,h""h's Pre sence: 'N either will I hide my Pre sence IPanilll ) any mo re from them; for I have pour ed OUI my Spirit on the house of Israel.' says the Lo rd Yah l'eh [the Father] (Ezc 39 :29 ). HI/th the SI/II lind Spirit as flyo/l:~ Prese nces Severa l passages show that both the Son and the Sp irit are Elyoll's Presences: • Da vid wrote: o Whc re could I go fro m yo ur [the Father 's] Spirit'! Or whc re co uld I fl ee from yo ur [the Father's] Prese nce [Pll nim] [the So n]"? (Psa 139:0 7), and o Hide you r [the Fathe r's] face from my sins. .. b ut do not ban ish mc from your [the Father 's ] Prese nce [the Son]. nor ta ke your Holy Spint fro m me (Psa rJ5 1:09-11). Matenal com direlbs autcrars

84

Yael Na ta n

•

Isai ah wrote : In their entire affliction he [the Father] wa s afll icted, and the Malek [the Son] , hi s [the Father's] Presence [Pllllim (the Sc m ]. saved them .. .BUI they rebel led. and gr ieved his Hol y Spirit.. . his Holy Sp irit in the midst o f the m r"in the midst" is tantamoun t to say ing the Spirit is a Presence! (Isa 63:09- 11 ). • Th e Son said that the Fat her wou ld send the Messiah and the Sp irit 10 be prese nt with believers. The Son said: Now the Lord Yahveh (the Fat her) has sent me [the Son) and his [the Father's ] Sp irit (lsa 48 : 16 ). • During h is earthly min istry. Ye.~hIUJ said that he (Mat 28 :20) and the Spirit (1oh 16:07) wou ld be present for be lievers. Joh n recorded how Ye.I'lwll said the Spirit is "another Counselor," mea ning tha t both the Sp irit lind Son were Counselors . Ye.~ h u(1 the n sa id th at the Spirit and Yesh ,w would be presen t with Christ ians : I will pray to the Fa ther, and he will give yo u a no ther Counselor, that he may be w ith you forever-c-the Spi rit of truth, w hom the world can not receive; for the world does no t see him or kno w him . You kno w him, fo r he lives w ith yo u. and will be in you. I w ill not leave you o rphans. I wi ll co me ro you rlo h 14:1 6- 1&). • Luke wrote that parents brought infant s to YeIhUil for his blessing {Luk 18: 1517). Thi s incident correlates we ll with what Jere miah wrote abou t the Prese nces of rahvch : Pou r out yo ur heart before the Prese nces [the Son and Spirit) of the Lord [the Father] . Lift up your ha nds to him [the Trini ty ] fo r the li ve s o f you r infants (Lam 0 2: 19). • Isa iah records Ytlh l'eh' s words about the Prese nces after the Last Day: As the ne w hea ve ns and new earth that I make will endure before my Prese nces [the So n an d Spirit).. Prom one Ne w Moon to anot her and from on e Sabbath to a nother, all mank ind will come and bo w down before my Presences [the Son and Spirit) (l sa 66 :22-23). The next section disc usses more events where the Son and Spirit appear as the Presence s of £1)"01/.

Some Encounters with Elyon 's Presences Abraham and /11" Trinitv Ge n 1&- 19 com prise the lo ngest Trinitarian proof text in the Bible . Gen 19 me ntions Ya hl'e ll\ Pre sence s (Ge n 19 :1 3, 27 ). fa/well appeared as three me n to Abraha m (Gc n 18 :0 1·02). Moses. the narrator of Genes is, wrote: ranveh [the Son ] sai d ... ' I will go dow n now, and see if what they ha ve done is as bad as the outcry about it that has come to me [the Son). If not, I wi ll know.' T he men [the Son and Spirit ) turned and wen t toward Sodom. but Abrah am re mained stand ing be fore Yohveh [the Fath er) (Ge n 1&:20-22). Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Th e Jewish Trin ity

85

Yahveh the Father rema ined behind to talk to Abraham, but the n ret urned to heaven without go ing to Sodom (Gen 18:33) . The Son and Spirit we nt to Sodom and Gornorrah because the inhabitants had been s inning aga inst Yahvch for so me time (Gen 13: 13). Still. they were presumed innocent until proven guilty. After dul y invcs ng uring the situation, Yahreh the Son and Spirit called dow n sulfur upon Sodo m from Yah veh the Father in hea ven: Then Yahveh [the Son and Spi rit] rained on Sodom and o n Gomorrah sulfur and ti re from Yll1Il'f'Il [the Fat her) out of the sky (Ge n 19:24). The Son may have called do wn su lfur spec ifica lly on Sodom, while the Spirit may ha ve called down sulfur specifically on Gomorrah.

Lor and the Two "Presences" (Gen / 9: 13, 2 7) The narrator wrote: Then Yllhl'eh [the Son ] said, 'T he o utcry agai nst Sodom a nd Gomorrah is so great and the ir sin so grievo us that I [the Son] will go do wn and see if what the y ha ve done is as bad as the ou tcry tha t has reached me [the Son]. If ne t. I will know,' Th e men [the Son a nd Spirit l turned away and went toward Sodom. but Abraham remained standing befor e Yilh"eh [the Father] (Gcn IIUO-22 ). The above Trinitari an interpreta tion o f Oe n 18:20-22 fits wel l with wha t the two me n to ld Lot in Sodom : We [the So n and Spirit ) will destro y this place [Sodom ), becau se the cry about them has grown great before the Presences [the Son and Spirit] of Yahveh [the Fa ther] . Ya/II'ell [the Father) has se nt us [the So n and Spirit ) to destro y it (Ge n 19: 13). The Son had told Abraham that the outcry had reached him (Gc n 18:2 1). The Father se nt the Son and Spirit to Sodom (Oe n 18:22). O nce in Sod om the Son and Spi rit identified the mselves to Lot as the Presen ces o f Yahvch who had heard the outcry aga inst Sodom (Gen 19: 13). Later the narrator wrote: Abraham got up early in the morn ing to the place where he had stoo d befor e the Presence s [the Son and Spirit) of YuJII'eh [the Father]. He [A braham] looked down tow ard Sod om and Gomorrah. toward all the land of the pla in, and he saw dense smoke rising from the land, like smoke from a furnace (Gen 19:27-28 ). The place with an o ve rlook o f Sod om (Cen 19:27-28) where Ab rah am saw Sodom with the me n is menti o ned in Gen 18:16: The men [the Son and Spirit] RISe up from there, and koked toward Sod om. Abraham went with them to see them on their [the Son and Spirit's) way. The " men" ment ioned in C ell 18: 16 are the Son and Spir it since they we re the only two perso ns heade d toward Sodom (Gc n 18:22 ). The Fathe r remained behind 10 talk to Ahraham , and then the Father returned to heaven to rain dow n sulfur o n Sodom (Gen 18:22, 33; 19:24 ). So a nalys is of Gen 18-1 9 reveals: • The ch apter is thorou ghly Trinitarian, and Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Yael Na tan

86 • The Presence s o f Spirit.

rahveh

who are ment ioned in Ge n 19:13 .27 an: the Son and

Jacob a/ the Jabbok Jacob wres tled with a Pre sence at the ford of the Ja bbok River (Gen 32:28). Jacob named the ford Peniet tPanim + Ef), mean ing, " r ace of God" or " P resence of Go d." Jaco b sa id he saw God " Face 10 face" [Pantm to p al/1m) (Gen 32:30). Yah w,h and the Maid, Yah re h o ften mel peop le "Pace to face" (Exo 33: I I; Num 12:08 ; 14:14 ; Deu 05 :04 ; 34:10 : Jdg 06: 22 ). The G en 32:28 incident is di scu ssed in the Proro-Sinaiuc Trinitarianism chapter. The lsroclites end the Prese nces The Presences of Yahreh we re present at the g iving o f the law (E xc 20) . Moses recou nted the eve nt: This is the blessing that Moses the man of [Ali i the Gods [haE/ohim ] pronounced on the Israeli tes before his death. Yil/well [the Father] ca me from Sinai, and [the Son] dawned over them from Seir; he (the Spirit I shone forth from Mount Pawn. He [the Father] ca me with my riads of holy ones from the sout h, from his [the Father'x] mountain slopes [Deu 33:0 1-02). The N /V Study Bib/t' says S ina i, Se ir and Mou nt Paran (Dc u 33:02) are three mou nta ins assoc iated with the giving of the law. G. R. Hawt ing wrote: In Jewish a nd C hrist ian el aboration s the biblica l sto ry o f Ha gar 's e xpulsion by Abraham (Gene sis 21:14-2 1) had deve loped strong Arabian associa tions. Paran. the place whe re Ishmael grew up and lived (Gene sis 2 1:2 1), wa s idcntified as a re gi on of no rthwest Arab ia, an d in Pau l 's allegorical develo pmen t o f the story Hagar was iden tified with Mou nt Sin ai 'w hic h is a mo untain in Arabia: '" Mark Co he n wrote abou t med ieval Je ws: Ibn Ezra knew the o ld rabbinic midrosh on the Sinai-Se ir-Para n vers e. For De uteronom y 33:2-3 , he quoted Saad ya's apparentl y apologetic treatme nt of the passa ge. "The Gaon of blessed mem ory slate d that Moun t Sinai, Sc ir, and Paran in the biblical verse arc near one another and that this ve rse tells abo ut the revelano n at Mo unt Sm at.'" Mark Co he n add s an ex planato ry note that the Heb rew form translated ... . ..' fro m Sina i' is e xactly like 'at Sinai," as is [the case with the form com monly translated ] ' from Se ir.' "" So Deu 33:02 co uld be tra nslated e ithe r "from S inai. .. from Se ir. ,.from Par an," or "at Sin ai...at Se ir.. .at Paran." The Muslim misinterp retat io n of Deu 33:02- 03 sho uld be noted. Sam uel M. Z wemer wrote: Muslims ha ve always been eage r to find furthe r proof o f the corning of Mu ham mad in the O ld and New Testament Script ures in add itio n 10 their miai nte rpreta tion o f Joh n 16:7 , re gard ing the Pa racle te [Hel per]. T hey ther efore not on ly q uote the wo rds of the Koran but al so refe r to Matenal com direlbs autcrars

87

The Jewi sh Trinity

Deute ro nom y 33:2 ,...The passage in Deuteronom y states that Jeho vah [Ya l/vell ] came fro m Sina i and ro se fro m Se ir unto the m; he s hined forth from Muunt Paran Sinai is a Jew ish mo untain ; Seir, they say, is a mountain in Galilee where Christ died. Paran . however, is a mou ntai n ncar Mecca ami signifies the Muslim religion." O bviously, the Muslim interpretati on is contradicted not only by geography, but also b)' the OT and NT narratives. That YlIhvl'lI appeared o n three mountains in the same region during the giving of the law is confirmed by Moses' later q uotation of a statement the Israelites made during the giving of the law: For what mortal man has ever heard the voice of the Ji ving Gods [plumIs: khavvim E/ohim ] speaking out of fire, as wc have, and survived? (Deu 05:26)."1 That the Israeli tes were spea king ahout the giving of the law (Exn 20 ) is evident from the context of Deu 115 :26. T hat God spoke out of fire (Deu 05:26) at the giving of t he law is well attested ( Exo 19:1 8; 20:19; Deu 05:24-28; 09: 10; 18:1617 ), The Israelites' mention of the "living Gods" (Deu 05:26) is anothe r indicator that the perso ns of the Trinity appeared simultaneo usly: a person on Mount Seir. a person on Mo unt Parun, and the Fathe r on Mount Sinai (Dc u 33:(2). There is anot her indication that Deu 33:02 speaks of the Trinity appea ring on three mounta ins: the previo us verse says Moses was "the man of [All] the Gods " (/IIIE/ohim) (De u 33:( 1). Durin g the giving of the law (Exo 20) as well as at other times, Moses (Exo 03:06, I I, 12, 13; 19:(3) a nd the Israelites (Exo 18:12; 19;17; 20:20, 2 1; 24: II ) saw [All] the Gods (haElohim). Related poin ts disc ussed in the chapter o n He bre w collective nouns include ho w: • lIa Efohim refers to the Trinity, and • Moses is elsewhere called "the man of [All] the Gods" and the "servant of [All ] the God s: ' That chapters Deu 32-33 contain other Trin itarian proo f passages fu rther supports the Trinitarian interpretation of Deu 33:0 1-02, See the Trinitari an proofs appendix for a discussion of these texts: Deu 32:08-09; LXX Deu 32 :43; and Deu 33:27. Furthermore. Deu 33: 16 refers to a divine person in the "burning bush" of Exo 03:02 (sec also Act 117:3(1). This would seem to indicate that the Ma lek Yahveh was one of the persons of the Trinity who appeared o n one of the three mounta ins (Sinai , Seir, or Paran ) d uring the giving of the law (Deu 33:02). Moses and the Presences Awhile after the giving of the law, Moses spoke to the Father at Mount S ina i: Yll /n'e ll I E/yoll the Fath er) rep lied , 'My Prese nces [Hebrew plural Panim ], they will go [plural verb] with you, and I will give you rest.' Then Moses said to him [t 'lyon the Father]. ' Your Presences, if they [the Son and Spirit] do not go [plura l verb] with us [to the Promised Land] , do not se nd us up fro m here [Mount Sinai]' (Exo 33: 14-15).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

88

Yael Na ta n

Many passages discussed in this chapter note ho w the Son and Spirit were sent as Presences 10 ca rry out so me divine purpose." Moses wanted the three members of the Trinit y to go to Canaan for a variety of reasons, the fo remo st reason being de fense (Psa 041\ :0 1-03: 132:13- 14. 18; ba ][:09; Jer 49:01-02: EI.e 35: 10; 36:05; Zec 112:( 5). Moses knew that the Son and Spiri t, the Presences of YiJl1l'ell (Ge n 19: 13, 27), had bee n se nt ( 0 Sod om. Moses knew tha t the) had raine d dow n sulfur from Yanl'f:h the Father in heave n (Gen 19 :24 is disc ussed above). Mose s also saw fir sthand ho w vahveh had brought Israel "OUI of Egypt by his Pre sence s and his grea t stre ngth" (Dell 04: 37: NU Ill 20: 16) . Moses spo ke of how the Prese nces would accom pany Israel into the Prom ised Land: The ete rnal God [the Father] is [Israel's) d welli ng-pla ce. unde rneath are the eve rlasting ar ms [the Son and Sp ir it]. He [the Father] will drive ou t the ene my fro m before you . saying Ito the Son and Spirit]. ' Destroy ! [the enemy]' (Deu 33:27). The Judges Deborah and Barak celebrated how. earlier during the Exodus. the r ather had directed the Son and Spirit to go with Israel toward the Promi sed Lund: o rahveh [the Trinity], when you [the Son ) went ou t from Se ir, when you [the Sp irit] marc hed fro m the land of Edom, the earth shook, the heavens poured, the clo uds poured down water. The mountains q uaked before Yahveh, the One of Sinai [the Father ]. before Yahveh, the E/ohim o f Israel [the Trinity] (ldg 05:04-05). David also wrote abo ut how the Son and Spirit helped con quer the Promised Land: It was not by their sword that they won the land, nor di d their ar m bring the m victory; it was you r right hand [the Son], your [the Fathe r's ) arm [the Spirit ], and the ligh t of you r [the Father's ] Presen ce s (the Son and Spirit], for you [the Fathe r] loved them. You-He (a fah·hu ] lthe Trini ty] are r uy King, 0 God . w ho decrees vic tories for Jaco b (P sa 04 4:03·04 fBHS 04 4 : 04-05[). Mose s wanted the Son and Spirit 10 tra vel to the Promi sed Lund (Exo 33: 14-15) . Mose s kne w that Yohl'l'h was God of both the Jews a nd ge ntiles. but Moses wa nted Yahveh the Son and Spirit 10 functi on as Israel's nation al God for the time being. Mo ses knew that most of Israel wou ld eve ntually fall into un belief (De u 3 1: 16·1 8) . If Yahl'eh the Son and Spirit look up residence in Ca naan, the Promi sed Land wou ld become Ya/ll'ell's land (los 22:19; Isa 14:02; Hos 09 :03). It is not hard to figure ou t ho w Moses got this idea s ince Mose s was at Mount S inai in the Wildern ess of Sin. The names Sin and Sinai likely refe r to Sin the moon god-as j udged from the ety mology and archeologica l ev idence. Mose s knew that if Yllhvell ' s Pre sen ces we re in Ca naa n, it would be harder for Yalll'ell to ab ando n Ytllll'eh's land and Ycl/ll'eh's temp le (Ez e 08 :06) . Th en all three persons rathe r tha n j ust one person of the Trini ty would need to rejec t lsraet if the occasion called for it, as Jeremi ah wrote:

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

89

The Word (the Son] of Ya lll'eh [the Father] came 10 Jeremiah. saying, ' Ha ve yo u [Je re mia h] not no ticed wha t t his people ha ve spo ke n? Spec ifically : 'The two kingdom s that Yahveh chose [Israel & Jud ah], he [Ytl/n'd l] has rejected them. and they [YtI" l'ch ] spurn my peopl e [Judah] so that the)' are no longer a nation before them [Yoh l'eh r 'Oer 33:24). Hosea wrote similarl y: As the y [the Trinity] ca lled [plural verb] the m [Is rael ), so they [the Trinity] went [plural verb) from them [Israe l] (Hos 11:(2 ). With Yahveh in the Promised Land, the separation of Yoh veh fro m Israel wou ld be like: • A divorce (Jer03:08), • Disowning a so n (Hos 11:(1 ), or • Traveling co mpanions parting ways (Amo 03 :02-(3). With Yllh"eh in res idence in Canaa n, it would he surrea l if Yahveh we re to become a stranger in his ow n la nd IJer 14:08-(9). It would be noticeable if Ytlh l'eh retreate d bac k 10 the Mou nt of [All] the Gods (lraF:lohim) (E xo 03:0 1; I Ki 19:08). Ya hveh' w last resort was abando nin g the te mple whe re his Name and Presences re sided (Bxo 25:30 ; 28: 30 ; I Ki 08 :29; 09:03; 2Ki 23 :27; Eze 08:(6 ). Yah l'eh preferred to el im inate (E zc 33 :24- 29) o r bani sh idolaters and ca ree r sin ners from his Presen ces,"' often by e xil ing them to o t her coumnes." In this regard, the prophe ts ta ug ht not hin g ne w. Th e prophets merely rem inded Israel of Yah,'eh' s me thods of dealing with fla gra nt sinners, a po lic y know n 10 Moses ( D eu 30:02-06 ) a nd to Solo mo n (2Ch 06 :24 -39). At first the Father was just plann ing to send the Ma lek with Ya h l'ell' s Name in him to Canaan with the Israelites (Exo 23:20-23). The Father called the Ma lek , "sah veh, your God" (Exo 23:19 ). The Father sa id. "T hree time s a year all your males shall appear before the Presence [the Son] of the Lord Yahveh [the Fathe r]" (Exo 23: 17: repeated in Deu 16:16; 3 1: II ). The Father said that the M alek was "my (the Fathe r's) Presence" ( YL T Exo 23: 15 ), T he Father a lso said : Be watchful because of his [the Son's) Presence [pilll ;m] (YLT Exo 23:21). The Ma lek se nt 10 the Prom ised Land is "the Ml dek , His [the Father 's] Presence [Panim 1" ( IS11 63:(9). So the Malek was the Father's Presence , yet the Ma lek had "his [own ] presence." That the Ma lek had his ow n presence mean s the Ma lek was no mere Shekillllh- the impe rsonal apparition posited hy rabbinic theologians. The early NT C hurch understood Ye.lhl/o to be Yahveh the Son and the Ma lek Yahl't'h with YahH'h's Name "in him" (Exo 23:2 1). Many mentions are made in the NT of " the Name of Yc.I'huiI." "" In Act 05 :40-4 1 the Name of Ye.lh/Ill is called "the Name" (see also 3Jo 0 1:07). Yf'.\'IlUl/ mean s, " YlIhl'ch saves" (Mat 0 1:21; ITi 0 1:15), so the name Yah veh is " in" the name Yeshua as well as "in" Yeshua. A para llel to the Mil /ek's heing se nt with the authority to retain sins (Exo 23:2 1) occ urred whe n Yeshua com missioned the ten disciples in fulfillment of his prom ise; '" will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven" (Mat 16:19). Ye.l'llua breathed

Matenal com direlbs

autcrars

90

Yae l Na tan

the Spirit o n the disc iples, and then sa id that they co uld forg ive or retain sins (Joh 20 :21-23), No tice thai the disci ples were only ab le to forgive o r reta in sins after they rece ived the Spint rhat proceeded from the Father through the Son. Note that it was the OT Maid Ya hveh who became the Messiah and then breathed o ut the Sp irit o n the disciples (Joh 20:21-13). Ultimately only God can forgive or retain sins (Mar 0 2 :07: Luk 05:2 1). The se facts lead \0 the concl usion that the Ma lek Yah I" '" was a perso n of the Trinity. Immediately after the golde n calf inc ident . the Fathe r said that he was still p lan n ing to se nd " m y Malek " to the P ro mi sed La nd ahe ad o f th e Israelite s (compare Exo 32:34 to Exo 23:23). A little later, ho wever, the Father dec ided to se nd 1I creatu re spirit -"an angel" (Exo 33 :02) . The golde n calf incident caused the Father to reconsider se nd ing the Malek with his name "in h im" - as had been planned (Exo 23:20 -23 ). The Father co ncl uded that if he traveled in the mids t of the Israeli tes, he might destro y the Israe lites (Ex o 33: 03 ). T hat the Father d id not want to " go in th e mids t" of Israel also e xplains why the Father d id not want to send his Pre sence . the Ma lek Yah veh ( YLT Exo 23: 15; Isa 6 3:09). The proxi mity to o pe n re bell ion wo uld cause the Malek Yah veh to refuse for giveness (Exo 23 :21; Heb 12: 17 ). The Israelites mo urned ov er the ne ws that t he Father was plan n ing to send a me re angel (Ex o 33:04 ). T hat the Israeli te s mo urned con firms th at the Father de ci ded to se nd a me re spir it c reature {Exo 33 :02) rather th an the div ine " my Malek ," the Malek Ya/weh (Exo 23:20 -23; 32 :34). Another co nfirm ation that the Father was plann ing to se nd " an angel" rather tha n the Ma lek Yah veh is Moses sa id : You have not let me know whom yo u will send with me (Exo 33 : 12). Appare ntly, the l-ather had no t mentioned whether the spirit c reature no w tasked w ith go ing to Canaan would be Mich ael. Gabrie l. or another ange l. There were development s th at c hanged the un fortunate situat io n in which the Israeli tes fou nd them sel ves. The plagues (E xo 32 :35) that resulted fro m the golde n calf in cident we re no t indisc ri mi nate. but affec ted tho se who had e ngaged in "pagan revel ry" (Exo 32 :06; ICo 10 :07 ). Pagan worsh ip often invo lved org ies and othe r behaviors that sociolog ists term "h igh risk beh aviors ." T he d anger, o f course, is the spread o f S·ITIs (Se xually Tran smiued Disease s). That plagues mainly affec ted gross sinners ca n be see n from Num 25 :05- 18 and ot her passages." After the plagues took thei r toll on the hardened sinners, Yahl'el1' s Presence could aga in go with the survivors wi tho ut inflict ing further j udg ment o n the nation as a whole (Exo 33 :0 3-05; Jer 3 1:02; Eze 20 : 18). The Israeli tes who were spared either did not participate in the sin, or had mourned ov er the golden calf incident and were forg ive n (Exo 33 :04) . After the hard hearted were gone and the sur vivors were forgive n, the Fat her said . " My Presences, they w ill go" to C anaa n (Exo 33: 14 ). T he plura l verb " they w ill go " indicates that Panim sho uld be tra nslated in the plural as " Presences," mcaning the Son and Spirit. Before the golde n ca lf inc ide nt. the Father was ju st Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

91

pla nning to se nd Ihe Son, bUI no w the Father was planning 10 send both the Son an d Spiru. Th is is de finitely a n insta nce of grace abo unding more than s in: The law was added so thai the offe nse migh t increase. Bu t whe re s in abou nded , grace increa sed all the more. (Ro m 05 :20) , Mose s liked Ihe Father's idea o f sending both the Son and Sp ir it so much that Mo ses asked the Father not to reconside r this decision (Exo 33:15) . Moses then as ked the Fathe r 10 go to Ca naan wi th the Israeli te s eve n Ihough the Father earl ier had said: I will not go with yo u. because yo u are a stiff-necked peo ple and migh t de stroy you on the way (Exo 34:03 J. Later in the conversation. Moses said : Ye t. how wo uld an yone know that I have found favor in yo ur sight, I an d you r people. unless yo u [the Fath er) go with us, so that we are dist inguished. I and yo ur people, from all Ihe peopl e who arc o n the surface of the eart h'! (Exo 33:16). Moses here argued that the Fathe r's not traveling In the Promised Land wou ld [eave the wrong imp ression-that the Father was still too ang ry 10 be amon g the Israel ites ( Exo 33:05). Mose s and Aaro n had a hard enough t ime holdi ng sway ove r the Israeli te s. Mo ses did not want the Israelit es to think Israel or its leaders were o ut of favo r with Yah reh the Fathe r. Th ey had already rebelled once when they doubted ranveh was with them : And he [Moses] called the place Ma ssah and Meribah because the Israelites qu arre led and becau se they te sted Ytlh l'eh saying. ' Is Yahveh amo ng us or not'?' (Ex o 17:07). The Fathe r's send ing the So n and the Sp irit would parallel how the Fathe r se nt the Son and the Spirit d uring NT ti mes (Isa II :02: 4 2:0 I; 48: 16; Luk 04 :18- 19; l oll 03:3 4). The NT Jews d id not recognize that the Messiah had the Father 's favo r (Psa 022:08 ; Mat 27;43), thoug h the Father voiced fro m he aven that he was pleased with the Son (Mat 03:17; 17:05 : Mar 01: 11: Luk 03 :22; Joh 12:28; 2 Pe 0 1:17 ). So Mo ses was wise in a skin g thai the Father co me to Palest ine, too (E xo 33:16). Moses was not onl y concerned abou t t he Fathe r go ing to the Promi sed Land because o f ho w the Israelit es might act, b ut also o n account of the ge ntiles. The Israe lites had beco me a laughingstoc k to their ene mies on account of the golde n calf incid ent (Exo 32:25). The ge ntiles co uld sense a people 's weakness when that people did not have a good rela tions hip with their grM:1(s) (Num 21:29: Deu 32:27; 2Ch 28:23: 32: 15- 16; Psa 042: 10; 079: 10; 11 5:0 2; l oe 0 2: 17b). Withou t the Father go ing 10 Ca naan, Israel's enemies would not be ab le to d iscern (Isa 10;09 -11; 36: 18-20; Jer 50:07; Eze 25:08 ) that Israel was the apple (pupil) o f the Father's eye ( Deu 32: 10; Zec 0 2:08). O ne of the words for pupil in the O T is 'ivshnwn, me aning. "the little man" (Dcu 32:10; Psa 0 17:08 ). If one loo ks real close al the pupil, onc sees a reflection of one's self. That Israel was the "little man" reflec ted in Yu/n'eh's eyes me ant the Fa ther was lookin g at Israel , bless ing and be ing grac ious to ward and giv ing Malenal com direlbs

autcrars

92

Yael Na tan

Israel peace (Nurn 06: 25-26). Any believ er who has the Aaronic Ble ssing named over them similarly becomes the apple o f the Father 's eye. Moreo ver, a clo se relationsh ip between Yahveh and Israel is implied. On e o nly gels so clo se so as to see the reflection in ano ther 's eye when there is an intimate , personal. affect ionate relation ship. Based o n his ex perie nce in Egypt. Mose s k new that God hel ped nation s in ord inary ways (Psa 145:09 ; Amo 09 :07 ; Mat 05:45: Act 14: 17; 17:27). Moses th ere fore wa nted the Father 10 he lp Israel in an e xtrao rd ina ry way. Mose s con vinced the Fat her 10 go to the Promi sed Land so that the nations wou ld see that the Father favored Israel e nough to dwell with Israel (Exo 19:05-06; Deu 10:1 5; 23: 14; 26: 19; 28:0 I; Hos II :08 ; MalO) : 14- 18). The Father told Moses: I will do a lso this thing that you ha ve spoken [acco mpany Isr ael to the Promi sed Land (Exo 33: 16)J: for yo u ha ve found fa vor in my sight. and I know yo u by name (1-::1:0 33: 17). Tha i the Father we nt to the Promi sed Land was how Jeremiah co uld say that Israellived under the shado w of Yahw h (Lam 04:20). Bec ause of the golden calf incident. the cove nants between Yahveh and Israel had 10 he fonnall y reinstated . The cove nants had bee n annulled whe n Yah veh was abo ut to de stroy Israel. Yahveh co nsidered fult1l1ing his prom ises to the patriarchs thm ugh a nat ion pop ulated by Mo ses' own descendants: Le ave rnc alone now so my ange r ma y burn aga inst them 10 destroy them . The n I will make yo u into a great nation (Exo 32: 10: De u 09: 25 -26). Mose s. how eve r. co nvinced Yahveh to reconsider Ihis course of action. and the n to renew the cove nants. Israel had a co venantal re lationsh ip with the Father that was first es tablished in Gen IS, and a covenantal relanonvhip with the So n that was fir st es tablished in Gen 17. Yanveh the Son referred to his Gen 17 covenant when he sa id: I also established my cove nant with the patriarchs (Exo 116:( 4 ). Yalll'eh invited Moses back up the mountain the ne xt da y to see Ytlh w:h's glory (Exo 34: 0 1-(3). Pre viously, Yahveh was invisible and his presence was kno wn on ly from a voic e, so metimes accompan ied by fire or so me other phenomenon (Deu 04: 12.1 5 ). After Moses saw Yalll'ch's g lo ry, Israel wo uld see Mose s' face glowing with Yohl' eh 's glory. T he n they wou ld know with cert aint y that Israel was once aga in in God 's good graces . The y wo uld a lso kno w the cove nants had been renewed. and Yahreh wo uld again be go ing 10 Pale stine with Israel . The next day the Father stood near to Moses in a nimbus cloud (Exo 34:(15). The Father proclaimed his Name. Yahl'eh - ju sl as he said he would (E xo 33: 19; 34:(15). Th e cl oud was the Spir u who served as a co ver ing " hand" that shielded Moses from see ing the Father's own fac e (Bxo 33:22-23). The Sp irit some times appeared a s a cloud. For instance , as was noted abov e, Barak and Deborah described the Spirn se nt in Exo 33 :1 4- 15 as a clo ud (Jdg 05: 04 -(15). Also, the Trin itar ian proofs appe ndix d isc usses ho w the Sp irit was the pil1arof clo ud in Exo 14:1 9-24.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

93

Acco rding to Pau l, the nimbus cloud at Sinai in Exo 34 e mitted the Sp irit's glory. Paul wrote that the Spirit is the glnry of the Lord that shines on our faces just as the Spirit's light shone on Moses: But we a ll, with unveiled face behold the glory of the Lord. and are trans formed into the sa me image with eve r-incre asing glory that comes from the Lord. the Spirit (2Co 03: 18). Paul mentions Moses and the veil that covered his glowing face starting in lCo 03: 13. so lCo 03: 18 surely alludes to Moses' Mount Sinai experience (Exo 34:33-35). After the rather descended in the nimbus cloud of the Spirit and proclaimed his name (Exo 34:05), YlIheh the So n passed by and procla imed the Name. YlIhreh ( Exo 34:(6). The actio ns of the Fathe r and Son distingu ish the Father and Sonthe Father stood a nd proclaimed while the Son passed by Moses. The wording also revea ls that the subjec t of Exo 34:05 is the Father. while the subjec t of Bxo 34:06 is the Son. The prev ious day the Father said that he wou ld say: I will be grac ious In whom I will be grac ious, and will show mercy to whom I wiII show mercy (Exo 33:19). The Father's stateme nt is in the first person ("I "), while the Son talked of t he Father in the third person ("he"): Yahveh [the Son ) passed in front of Moses, proclai ming, •Yahveh [the Parhcr ]. Yahve h, the compass ionate and gracious God ... Yet he ... he .. . ' (Ew 34:06-07). T he Parher spoke from within a bright nimbus cloud. but the So n showed his face. How the So n appeared in Exo 34 can be asce rtained fro m Eze kiel's So n of Man vision and the Transfiguration accounts. During the Transfiguration. t he Messiah appeared to be as brig ht as the sun (Mat 17:0 2) and his clo thes were as bright as lightning (Luk 09 :29). Ezekiel described the Son of Man: .. .o n the likeness of the throne was a likeness as the appearance of a man. I saw that from what appeared to he his waist lip he looked like glowing metal, as if full of fire, and that from there down he looked like tire, and there was brightness round about him. As the appearance of the bow that is in the cloud in the day of rain. so was the appearance of the brightness round abou t. Thi s was the appearance of the likeness [the Son] of the glory of Y ahveh [the Father] (Eze 0 I:26-28). Even though YeI/llla is now incarnate, Paul wrote that he stilI shows the "glory of God": Even if o ur gospe l is veiled, it is veiled in those who peris h: in whom the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving, that the light of the gospe l of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not dawn on them . Fo r we do not preach ourselves, but C hrist Ye.~hlla as Lord. a nd ourselves as your servants for YeS/lilli'S sa ke; seeing it is God who said, 'Light wiI1 shine out of darkness,' who has sho ne in our hearts , to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ (lCo 04:03-06 ). Matenal com direlbs autcrars

94

Yae l Na tan

Scriptural para llels 10 Moses' e xperience on the moun! {Exo 33 -34) include how the Father spoke to Elijah in a "wh ispe r of a gen tle breeze" (LXX I Ki 19:12; compare Oen 0 3:08. 10; loh 0 3:0R). Just as the nimbus clo ud was the Spirit (Exn 34:05 ), the breeze was the Spirit (LXX lKi 19:12 ). Just as Mose s was protected in the cle ft of a rock on Mo unl Sin ai. Elijah was protected in 11 l:lIVC entra nce o n M o unt Sinai .

Ano ther para llel to Hxo 33 -34 occu rred at the T ransfig uration. T hen: the Father spoke to the disci ples from within a bright nimb us clo ud thai was the Spirit (M at 17:05 ). The Transfiguration and 1Ki 19 arc di scussed late r in this chapter. After Yahveh the Son ap peared to Moses on Mount Sinai (Exo 34:06 ). Moses made this req ue st of the Son: If now I have fou nd favor in yo ur sight, Lord, please let the Lord [the So n) go in the mid st of us la s a Presence ), al tho ugh it is a stiff-nec ked peop le; and pa rdo n o ur iniqui ty and our sin, and take us for thy inheri tance (Exo 34:09 ). That the Prom ised Land was Yahl'eh's "inheritance" is another ind ication that Mo ses here talked to Yu llreh the So n. Moses said elsew he re that Yohvrh the Son had rece ived Israel as an inheri ta nce from Etvon. the Father (Den 32:08-09 ). The r athe r can receive an inheritance fro m ne ither h imse lf nor his SOil. but the So n can rec eive an inheritance fro m the Fathe r. O the r indicators that t he di vine pe rso n to whom Moses spoke in EMI 34 was t he Son are : • Mose s already had the Father's favo r. and • The Father had already agreed to go to C anaan (Exo 33:12, 16-17). Mose s was not askin g the Father a seco nd time for something the Fath er had a lready gra nted . Rathe r, Moses requested the Son's favo r, and that the So n rene w his Ge n 17 covenant. O ut o f courtesy Moses asked the So n to agree to go to t he Pro mised Land as a Presence (Bxo 34 :09 ). The So n wo uld nat urally ag ree to do this last favor. since the Father had alread y ag reed to send the Son and Spirit (Exo 34: 14-15). In re spon se 10 Mo se s' request , Yeh veh the Son made a c o ve nant to go to Ca naan. Pre vio usly, the Father had stated what his intennedi ary, the Ma lek wit h Yahreh 's Na me , wo uld do ( Exo 23 :20-33). No w, ho we ver, the inter medi ary himself, the M o tel: with Yah n ,II 's Na me, stated what he wo uld do in Ca naa n (EJw 34: 10- 26 ). Th ai the Mu lek Yahveh TOughl y restate d in Exo 34:10- 16 wha t the Father had promised the Ma/ek would do in Exo 23:20-33 c an be see n fro m the s imilar clements in each sect ion: • A command to appear before Yuhl'ell the Son three time s a year (Exo 23: 14, 17: 34:23-24), • A proh ibition aga inst coo king a goat in its mother's milk (E xo 23:19; 34:26), • A co mmand to smash sacred sto nes (ido ls and be ryls) (E xn 23:24: 34: U ), and • A prom ise that Yahveh the So n wou ld drive out Ca naani te tribes suc h as the Penzztte s (Exo 23:23; 34: I I).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

95

Tha i both Exo 23 and 34 were all about what the Malek Ya hreh wo uld do is con firmed hy seve ral facts. The promises in Exo 23 and 34 co inc ide with the covenant thnt the Son , £ 1 Sh adllai, made in Gen 17. £ 1 Shaddai, who was the Mo ld Yo hve h (E xo 0 3:02 ; 06:03 ), re ferred to his Gen 17 cove nant when he said: 1 also es tablis hed my cove nant with the patriarchs (E xo 06:04). The Ma lek. Yahveh was involved with the co nquest of the Prom ised Land (Jos 05:13-06:(8). Conque ring Palestine was cond ucted in fulfillmenl of what the So n sa id he would do (Ge n 17; Exo 34) and what Ihe Father sa id the Malek Yllhrt'h would do [Exo 23). The Malek. Yahreh e ven me ntioned his Gen 17 cove nant with the patriarchs, the covenant that was renewed in Exo 23 and 34: The Malek Yah veh went up from Gilgal to Bukim and said, ' I bro ugh t you up o ut of Egypt and led you into the la nd that 1 swore to give to your forefathers [Gen 17].' I said, 'I will ne ver break my [Exo 34 ) co venant with you, and you shall no t make a co ven ant with the peop le of this land, but you shall break down the ir altars [ Exo 34 : I3 J.' Yet you have disobeyed me, Why have you do ne this?' (Jdg 02:01 -02). The Malek Ya hreh sa id that Israel fa iled 10 break down the pagan altars (Jdg 0 2:02). The only covenant in which this was a provision was the Exo 34 covenant between the Son and Israel (E xo 34: 13). Therefore , the Malek Yahveh claimed the Exo 34 co venant was his (Jd g 0 2:02), and this mean s the Ma lek. Yahveh is the Yahwh of Exo 34 :06-29. Mo .\·/.'.\·' Encounte rs with the Presences at the Hoeki' That Hrno ght Forth Watcr O r en'if'lI'

Muse s' other e nco unters with the Presences include the times Mose s struc k rock s that then prod uced a flow of water. One rock was at a place near Sinai c alled Mussah and Meribah (Bxo 17 :( 7). The other ruck was at a place called Meribah Kade sh in the Desert of Zin (Num 27: 14 ). Yah veh stoo d hy the roc k at Mou nt Sinai to show Israelthat Ya lll,/.' h was prese nt in Israel desp ite the ir previous doubts: Ya lll'f,h a nswered Moses, 'Wa lk o n ahead of the people , Take with yo u some of the elders of Israel and take in yo ur hand the staff with which yo u struck the Nile. and go. I will sta nd there before you by the rock at Horeb. Strike the rock, and water will come o ut of it for the people to drink.' So Mose s did this in the sight of the elde rs of Israel. And he called the place Massah and Mer ibah becau se the Israe lites quarreled and becau se rbey tested Yahveh saying, ' Is Yahveh among us or not?' (Exo 17:115-(7). At Mounl Sinai Moses struck the watering rock once (Exu 17 :{)fi), perhaps to indicate that there was one spiritual Presence at the rock: . .. our forefathers were a ll under the clo ud and they all passed through the sea. They were all baptized into Mose s in the cloud and in the se a. They a ll ate the same spiritua l food and drank the same spiritua l drink;

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

96

Yae l Na tan

for they drank from the supe rnatural roc k thai acco mpan ied the m, and that roc k was Christ ( ICo 10 :0 1-04). T hat th e "supc muturul rock . ..accom panied th em " suggests tha t Chr ist was Pre sent both at the rock at Sin ai (Ex:o 17) and at the rock at Kadesh (N um 20 ). David assoc iated the Spirit w ith the rock at Kadesh inci dent: By the waters of Me ribah they angered Yahve h, and tro uble came ( 0 Moses bec ause of them ; for they rebe lled ag ainst the Spirit of God, and rash words came from Moses' lips (Psa 106: 32-33). Da vid also wrote : Tre mble, you earth, at the Prese nce [the Sp irit ] of the Lord (the rathe r]. at the Pre sence [the Son] ofthe God [the Father ] o f Jacob. w ho turned the rock into a pool of water, the Flint into a spring of waters (Psa 114:07.( 8). Co mparing what David and Paul wrote , there see ms to have been two Pre sences at the rock at Kadcsn Prev iously, Mo ses struck the rock at Sina i once - perh aps to indicate that one Pre sence stood by the rock . namely. Ch rist (Exo 17:06; ICo 10:

04 ' . At the roc k of Kudcsh, however. Mose s left the Prese nces (Pallim) of Yahreh. and then returned and struck " that rock" tw ice (Num 20 :07-(9). Also, it is interes ting that the roc k at Kad esh is called " the rock" and Pau l refers 10 C hrist as "the rock" (Num 20:0 8, 10- 11; ICo 10 :04). The two knoc ks see ms to indicate th at the two Presence s mention ed in Exo 33:1 4- 15. the Son and Spirit. were bo th at the rock at Kade sh . At the ro ck o f Kad esh. Yo hvch sa id that Mo se s fa iled to keep rah veh hol y before the peo ple (N um 20: 12 ; Dcu 32:51). T he basic mean ing of " holy" is " to se parate" or to " set apart," So it see ms Moses failed to keep Yahveh " ho ly" by' al[o wing the Israeli tes to make an unaut horized near appro ach to the Presen ce s of Yilhw;,h. B ringin g the e lders of Israel close to Yah veh wa s nOI a co nce rn, but the rebe ls we re : Mo ses and Aaron gathered the assembly to gether in trent of the rock and Mo ses sa id to them . ' Listen, you re bel s, must we bring you water OUi o f thi s roc k'?' (Nu m 20: 10). So Mose s' "rash words " (Ps u 106:3 2-33) were his anno unc ing before Yohveh that some o f th e Israelites we re re be ls . II is one th ing to bri ng peo ple be fore Yahveh, bur it is another thing to decl are them rebe ls eve n if it were true . This decl aration unnece ssa rily rai sed matters of co nscience tlCo 10:25-29 ). Moreo ver, call ing pe ople " re be ls" while the y a re stand ing r ight in front of Yahveh is tant amount 10 calling down judgment before thc rebels' ti me of grace had exp ired (Exo 33 :03). Mose s' rash words were similar to the ra sh words Ye,I'/llla warned agai nst-even if the words could be construed as being true : Anyone who says, ' You foo l!' will be in da nger of the fire of hell (M al 05:22), Yeshua 's words are es pec ially poi gnan t conside ring ho w God calle d the rich ma n who ente rtained Epicu rean thoughts a "fool" :

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

97

The Jewish Trinity Fool ! T his n ight yo ur so ul is required of yo u; the thin gs yo u ha ve prep ared . whose wil l the y be'! (Luk 12;20 ).

A More Dellliled Look Let us. howe ver. tak e a clo ser look at the accounts of Ihe rocks at Ma ssuhMeribah (Exo 17:07 ). and Menbah-K adesh (Num 20). When Israel was in Kadesh. the " glnry of Yahveh" appeared (Num 20:(6). Th e '"glory" is likel y a reference to the Son (ICo 10:04). Yah reh to ld Mo ses 10 gather the people logether and then brin g water out o f "that rock" "before their eyes" (NIV Num 20:0 7-(19). Mos es then too k a staff from Yahl'eh's Prese nce s (Num 20:09), and gathe red Israel to the face (pan;m ) of " tha t" ce rta in rock (Num 20: 10 ). Yalw eh, how e ver. d id not le ll Mo se s to bring the people up to the rock face (panim). vah veh just told Mo ses to bring Israel "w ithin sigh t" of the rock , litera lly " befo re their ey e s" (Num 20 :0R ). "Within sig hl" co uld have mean t a hundred meters or more , not right up to the rock face. Pre viously, the people viewed eve nts fro m "th e foo l o f the moun tain" (E xo 19:1 7 ), and " the people stood at a dist ance " (Exo 20:21). Since the people we re at the rock face (pan im ), th is mean t the people we re in the presence (panim) o f Yohvrh stand ing there (N Ull 20: 10; Deu 32:5 1). No one was suppos ed to com e nca r Yalwell unl ess Yalw eh aut ho rized an ap proach (Exo 19: 12- 13, 21 -25; 24:0 1-02; Lev 10:01-03). Yah vch then told Mo ses that he had fa iled to keep vahveh ho ly be fore the people (Num 20 : 12; De u 325 1). The basic me ani ng of "holy" is " to se parate" or to "set apart." So Mose s fai led to keep Yahveh " ho ly" by allowi ng the Israelites. especiall y the "rebels," to ma ke an unauthorized ncar approac h to Yanven. Also. there is no ment ion of anyo ne removin g his or her sanda ls in rec ogn ition of the hol y pre sence of Yohveh (Exo 0 3: 0 5 ; los 05 : 15). Previ ou sly, the people were always kept separate, and on ly Moses, Aaron , the priests and sometimes elders were allowed to approach roh veh (E xo 19:12 -13,2 125 ; 34:03) . Those few who d id approach Ya hveh remo ved the ir sandals (Bxo 03 : 0 5 ; los 0 5: 15). For insta nce , the first time water gushed from a rock at Sina i, on ly Mo ses and the elde rs we re in Y{/ h ~'eh' s presen ce (pul1 im) (Exo 17:06). Th e people we re nOI in Yahveh's pre sence , since Mo ses and so me elders had wa lked ahead of the people to the rock (Bxo 17:0 5). At Kadcsh, howe ve r, even the assembly came to the face (panim) of the rock were Yaln'eh was standing (Num 20: 10 ). [t is true that Moses also failed to ho no r Yohveh b)' spea king rash words to the reb e llious Israelites in Ya hl'ch's presence (P sa 10 6:32-33). Deu 32:5 1 does see m to mention that Mo ses d id two things wron g at the Kade sh rock : Thi s is becau se [ I] bot h of you brok e fa ith w ith me in the presence of the Israelites at the waters of Me ribah Kadesh in the Wilderness of Zin, and bec ause 121 yo u did not up hold my hol iness [separatene ss] among the Israelites (Deu 32:5 1). Mose s, how e ve r, later said it was the Israel ites ' fa ult that he was no t ahle to enler the Promised Land (Deu 0 1:37; 0 3:26). So me ha ve said th is was bec ause, instead of speak ing to the rock , Mo ses struc k the rock with his sta ff. Yah veh sa id Matenal com direlbs autcrars

98

Yael Na tan

that both Moses and Aaro n committed thai same sin (Num 27:12- 14: De u 32:5052). It wo uld see m hard to believe that Aa ron or any of the peo ple ca used Moses to strike the roc k twice rather than speak to it. T he o nl y sing le s in thai Mo se s. Aaron an d the people co m mitted was no t keep ing the peo ple separate from Yahre h. It seems that allow ing the peo ple to approac h Yohvcb without authorization was the o nly sin that Mose s and Aaron committed tha t wax ser io us enough to : •

Ot he rwise be a stoning offense (Exo 19: 12-1 3. 22 ; 24 :02; Num 16 : 17), and

•

Kee p Mo ses and Aaro n out of the Prom ised Land {Num 20:12, 24: Dell 32:5 152). Exe getes may posit or ded uce ma ny things about Sc ripture. but this doe s not chan ge Script ure. Sc ripture docs nol e xplicit ly state that Moses was in t ro uble with Yohveh over striking the rock twice rather than speak ing to it. The same cou ld be said for Mose s' rash words . In fact, Yahw'h \ g iving Moses a sta ff at Kadexh suggests that Moses was supposed to strike the rock at Kadesh. Striking the reck at Kadesh wo uld bc con sistent wit h Yahrch 's command to strike the rock at MO Un! S inai (Nu m 20:08 ; co mpare Exo 17:06). So it wo uld see m that the s in that kep t Moses and Aaron o ut of the Prom ised Land was the fail ure to kee p the Israe lites sepa rate from Yahreh' s Presenc es . Elijah and the Presences on the Mount of [All) the Gods The account of Elijah confron ting the prophets of Baa l and As hto rah at Mo unt Ca rmel co ntains several Trinitarian ele me nts. The Word of vah veh (I Ki 18:0 I. 3 1) and the Spirit ( IKi 18:12 ) are me ntioned. The Israel ites seem to have all uded to the Wo rd and Spirit whe n the y sa id: Yalwell- he [the Son] is God ! Yllln'('/l- he [the Spirit) is God ( I Ki 18:39)! In the next ch apter, Elijah we nt to Mou nt Horeb . oth erwise called Mo unt Sinai an d the " Mo unt of [All] the Gods" (haElohim) (I Ki 19:08; also Exo 03:01 ; 04:27; 18:0 5 ; 24:13; 2Ki 04 :25). Thc form HaElohim refers to the Trinity, as was d iscussed in the c hapter on Hebre w coll ective nouns. Elijah went to the Mo unt of [Ali i the God s at the invitation of the Malek Yah veh (I K i 19:05-08). Pre viously, the Trinity issued invitations for visi ts on hills and mo unta ins. v ah veh e ven had a rep utation amon g the pagan s for he ing a god of the hills (l Ki 20: 28). Exa mple o f Yahreh's Trinitar ian invitations to mo untai ns includ e: • " [AIlI the G ods" invited Ab rah am to Mount Moriah by (Ocn 22:03, 09) where he met the Malek Ya llreh (Ge n 22:0 2-03, 09. 11-12). T he Malek vahveh also quo ted the Father (Gen 22:16 ). • Jacob mel " [All) the G ods" al Bethel (Gc n 3 1: II , 13; 35 :07). Jacob we nt back to Bethel at the invitauon o f the Father (Ge n 35:(1) where he met El Shaddai, the So n (Ge n 35: I I). Bethel was know n as hill country (Oen 12:08 : lo s 16:0 I; ISa 13:0 2),

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

99

•

Mose s was drawn to the " Mount of [All] the Gods" (Exo 0 3:01 ) by the spectacle of the burni ng bush. Moses ret urned to the " Mo unt of [All] the God s" at the invitation (Ex o 03:12 ) o f the Malek Yohvch (Exu 0 3:02 ; Act 07 :30. 35). During the Exod us, Mose s was invited up the mountain often, for instance, Exo 34:0 2. There Moses met "[ All ) the God s" (Exo 03:06, I I , 12, 13: 18: 12: 19 :03 . 17: 20: 20,2 1:24: I I), and • Aaro n was invited to meet Moses at the " Mount of [All ) the God s" (Exo 04:27). The Malek Yahveh invited Elijah to Mount S inai, and aided Elijah 's trip there (IKi 19:0 5. 0 7). The narrator referred to this Malek Yal/ reh as the Word of Yllhrt 'h (1K i 19:( 9) and as Yoh veh (IKi 19:11). The Word o f Yah re h to ld Elijah to stand before the Presence o f Ya hveh (the Son ) at the mouth of the cave. beca use Ya hl'eh the Father was abo ut to " pass by" ( IKi 19: I I). A wind . an ea rthq uake and a fi re pas sed "before the Pre sence [the Son] of Yahreh (the Father)" (I Ki 19: I I ). Yah l'eh the Fat her. howe ver. was not in the wind. the e art hq uake nor the fire ( I Ki 19 :11 - 12). The n Ya h ~'eh the Fathe r spo ke in a whispe r ( IKi 19:12- 13). T he LXX has " the vo ice of a gentle bree ze" (LXE I Ki 19: 12 ). The whisper was the Fathe r, while the breeze was the Spirit. This is similar to how ea rlier in Exo 34 the Father was in the cloud o f the Spir it. The Hebrew word Ruach mea ns "Spmt." " breeze" or " wind." T he Sp ir it is els ewhe re com pared to the wind (Joh 0 3:01'0. T he statement that "th e Sp ir it of God moved ov er the water" (Ge n 01 :02 ) suggests a breeze. "The vo ice of a gentle breeze" would e xpla in how the Fat her 's whisper co uld " pass by" ( I Ki 19 :11 ). That the whisper was in a breeze explai ns wh y EI ijah proce eded to the mo uth of the cave upo n hea ring the wh isper ( I Ki 19: 13). Elijah had retrea ted into the safet y of the c ave to avoi d the wind. the fire, and the tu mbling rocks d islod ged by the earthquake (IKi 19: 11 -1 2). Tha t the Fathe r would spe ak from within a breez e is not un usua l since: • Yahveh spoke from within a bush (Exo 03:02, 04 ), • Yah veh spok e fro m within clouds (Exo 16:10 : 24:16: 34:05: 40:38: Lev 16:2: Num 11:25:Deu OI :33: Mat 17:05). • The Father's voice once eve n so unded like thunder (Joh 12:28-30 ), and • Yah rch apparently also appea red in a ge nt le bree ze in the Ga rden of Eden. " In the cool of the da y" likely refe rs to the cooli ng breezes that occ ur aro und sunse t: The y [Adam and Eve ] heard the sou nd of Yahl'eh God walk ing in the garde n in the cool o f the day, and the man and his wife hill them sel ves fro m the presences of v ah veh (Fathe r] God [So n] a mong the trees of the garden (Ge n 03 :( 8) . Note that Adam and Eve hid among the trees upon hea ring God in the breeze . Likewise , Elijah pulled his cloak o ve r his face (IKi 19: 13) upon he aring " the vo ice of a gent le breeze" (LXE I K i 19: 12). So it would see m that the LXX tra nslation of " the voice of a gent le bree ze" likely refl ects the or iginal Hebre w text. T he Son being the Word. and the Fathe r Matenal com direlbs autcrars

100

Yael Na ta n

be ing the w hisper in the breeze of the Spirit. makes IKi 19 a thorou ghly Tri nitarian cha pter. i K i 19 will be discussed aga in later in this chapter. Thai the Father mel E lij ah last fits the story line. Elijah left Isra el to meet the Trinity o n the Mou nt o f [Alii the Gods. Sinai. Israel's prob lems cou ld o nly he so lved by foreig n intervention. The Son was Ihe nalio nal God of Israel, while the Father ruled all the nations. as is discussed in chapter un the Song of Moses. The " athe r told Elijah to anoin t Hazael king liver Arum. and Jehu son o f Nimshi king ove r Israel. They we re to dea l wit h God 's enem ies in Israel (I Ki 19: 15- 17). The P revencrs in Jill" Temple

Scripture ofte n ment ions the Presences in the tem ple (I Sa 0 I:22: 02: 17, 18: 26: 20; 2Sa 2 UlI : IKi 13:06; 2 Ki I J:(M; 2C h 33: 12; Joh 0 I: 12; 02 :07; Jer 26:19; Zec 07 :02 : 08:21, 22). Ezekie l me ntioned the two Presences in the tem ple ex tensively. Eze kie l referred 10 the Son as "the G lory," and to the Spirit as "t he man." The narrator referre d to " the man" as Yahveh (Ezc 44:02, 0 5), and "the man" refers to the Glory (Eze 43:0 1) as Yahl'eh (E ze 44:02). So one ca n ded uce thai the two Presences in the temple are the Son and Sp irit. Ezek iel is di scussed further in the chapter o n the Va rious Presentatio ns of the Trini ty. The Name , Ylilw/'h, was horne h)' his Presences (l'anim) in the tem ple (2Ch 20: 0 9; see also Deu 14:23; 18:07; IKi 08:29; 09 :03; 2Ki 23:27 ; Jer 0 7;]() ; 34: 15). The M alek with Yilhw;,h's Name in him wa s one of God's Presences who bore the Name, Yahveh, in the te mple (Exo 13:2 1; Exo 34:20; Luk 13:35). The Father sa id: Put the bread of the Pre sence s o n the ta ble to be before my Pre sence s IP tmim l at a ll times (Exn ')5:30). So it see ms the Son and Spirit were associ ated with the Bread of the Presences. Yah veh sat betwee n the wings of the cher ubim [Ex o 25:2 2; Lev 16:02; Num 07 : 89; ISa 04 :04; 2Sa 06 :02; 2K i 19:1 5; ICh 13:06; Psa 080:01; 0 99:01 ; Isa 37: 16) of the " Ark of [A ll] the Gods" thaI was placed in the " House of [A ll] the Gods." The name "IA II I the God s" (ha Elohim) implies that mem be rs of the Trinity were associa ted with the Ark and the Temple. T he Heb rew collective nouns c hapter d isc usses the: • Thirt y-fi ve me ntio ns of the "Ark of [All] the Gods," and • Fifty-five ment ions nf the "House of IAII I the Go ds." Eve n before the tem ple was built , David we nt before the Prese nces of YlIhl'eh (2Sa 07: 18; ICh 16:0 1; 17: 16) in the ta bernacle that con tained the Ark of [All] the Gods (2Sa 06:1 6-17), T he Spirit in the form of a d our.! o f glory was associated with the: • Ark (Lev 16:02). • Tabernacle (Exo 40:34-38; NU Ill 09 :15-22; 10: II ), and • Solo mon's temple (I Ki 8: 10- 12; 2C h 5: 13-14). Luke wrote co ncern ing Isa 06 that Isaiah ta lked to the Spirit in the te mple (Act 28:25-26: Isa 06:08- 13). The Spirit was sometimes associated with a clo ud, as was d iscussed abo ve concerning Exo 34:05. Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

101

The SOil was also present in the te mple. The Apostle Jo hn wrote co ncerning the Isa 06 te mple vis ion that lsaiah saw and spoke "ahuut" the glo ry of YCShUlI (1 nh 12: 41). The Apostle Paul also knew the So n was an O'T Presence or Face of Yahreh . Paul wrote that }('I'/wa is the "i mage of God," and that the light of the knowledge of the glory of God shows in the face of Yesh ua (2Co U4:04-06 : com pare 2 Co 03: 14- 18 and Rev 0 1:16). The Presences of Elyon in the te mple were the Son and Spi rit, and they allowed the Fathe r to speak as thou gh he we re es pecially present in the temple ( IKi U9:U3; I I:36: Jer 07 :10: 34: 15; EI.e 44:15 and Hag 0 2:14). T hat the Presences dwelt in the templ e is how the Father: • Could he present in heave n (Dan 07:13: Psa 011 :04 ), and • Hear from hea ven (2Ch 07; 14b). while his Faces (2C h 07 :1 4a ) and his eyes, ears and heart were present at the temple ( IKi 09:03 ; 2Ch 07: 15-16 ). Stephen taught that the Fathc r dwe lt in heaven rather than the te mple: The Most High [E1.w lI] doc s not live in houses made by men. As the prophet says: ' Heaven is my throne. a nd the earth is my footstoo l. What kind of house will yo u build for me ?' says the Lord [the Father]. 'O r where will my resting place be? ' (Ac t 07;48-49 ). The Fathe r sent his Presences. the Son and Spirit. to be es pecially present in the temple. T he Most High (E lyon ), ho wever, determined that he wo uld dwe ll in the heave ns and not be es pec ially present else whe re (I Ki 08 :27; 2C h 02 :06 ; 06 :18; Act 07:48-50; Isa 66 :0 1-0 2; Jo h 14:02). This arrangeme nt was mea nt to emphas ize how there were individua l person s of the Trinity, ye t the)' were a united o ne - as the Stoma pointed out. This Trinitarian e xplanatio n solves the apparent contradiction of ho w Ya/n 'dl was sa id to dwell in the tabernacle and temple (25 a 07:05-(7). yet not in the tem ple (Isa 66:0 1-02). T his Trinitarian e xplanation also explains why the Psalmists cou ld speak of ranven having "tabernac les" - one be ing in hea ve n and the other on earth (Psa 043:03; 046:04; 084:0 1; 132:07: Heh 08:05; 09 :24). That the Father d we lt in heaven uve r the Promised Land is ho w Jeremi ah could say that Israel lived under the shado w of Yahveh (Lam 04 :20 ). That Israellived unde r the shadow of Elyon , and the Presences of lh hW'h were in the temple, e xplains why Jonah thought he co uld run from the Presences (Panim) of Y ah veh in the temp le (Jon 0 I:03, 10). The account of Jonah is discussed in the chapter on T he Various Prese ntations of the Trinity. Thai the Father dwe lt in heave n a nd rne Presences d wel t in the temple is why Hezekiah co uld use the paired pronouns " you-he" (atah -hu ) to pray; a Yllh l'eh , God of Israel. e nthro ned between the cherubim, you-he are Goo over allthe kingdoms of the earth (2Ki 19: IS: Isa 37; 16). The other se ven occurrences of the "you-he" (a rah·h u) paired pronouns also were likel y spoken in the vicini ty of the first and second te mples (2Sa 07:28; tCh 17:26: 2C h 20 :06: Neh 09:06a. 07 ; Psa 0 44 :05a: Jer 14:22). II was noted in the chapter on He bre w collective nouns that the "yo u-he" paired pronoun s occur with orher plural eleme nts indicating plural persons. T he members Matenal com direlbs autcrars

102

Yael Na tan

of the Trinity were ofte n addressed with singu lar collective nouns and prono uns as well as pfural collecuvc nouns and prono uns. The "you" of the paired "you-he" pro nouns lIlay have been meant as a co llective pro noun referrin g to the Presences in the te mple. T he " he" of the paired "yo u-he" pronouns may have been mea nt as a sing ular pro no un refer ri ng 10 the Father in heaven. "You" naturally refers to a person or persons who are near- such as the Presence s in the temple. " He" na turally refers to a more d istant person such as the Father in heaven . The Presences Bid Not Always Inhabit th e Temple T he Prese nces who bo re the Name of Yahveh d id not always dwe ll in the temple. T he Presences did no t d well in the first temple until it was dedica ted ( I Ki 08:10- 11 ; 2C h 05:13-14). Like wise, the Prese nces d id no t d well in the ruin s of Solomon's temple (2 Ki 23:27; Lam 05 : I8; Dan 09 :17; Zec 08:03). Apparently. the Presences who bore thc Name. Yahl'eh, never inhabited Herod 's tem ple, apal1 from the time that Ye.I'huiI was there. Ye.lh,w considered the temple a de n of thie ves d ue to the prese nce of crooked moneychangers. Also. the high priestly positio ns routinely went to the shrewdest sc hemers. T he highest bidde rs usually were the He llenistic Sadd ucees who did not eve n belie ve in the resurrect ion or sp irits (Al;t 23:08). Herod the Gre at initiated the co nstruction of the temple in 19 Be. This is the same Herod who tried to kill Ye,llma in Bethlehe m when Yeshua was abo ut two years o ld (Mat 02:07_ 16). When Ye.lh,w came to the tem ple du ring his ministry, it had been under co nstructio n for forty-s ix years (J oh 0 2:20 ). Peo ple picked up stones. perhaps fro m the te mp le co nstr uc tio n projec t, and twice tried to sto ne Ye.I'illfil in the te mple co urts (Joh 08 :59: 10 :31-32; 11:(8). Herod 's tem ple likely would not have been inhabited by the Presence s only after its completion and ded icatio n, if at all. This was the case with Solomon's temple {lKi 08:06- 13; 2Ch 05:13- 14). Herod the Grcat had the temple that Zcrubbabct built destroyed. Herod 's temple was not completed until 62 o r 64 AD - long after Ye.lh"iI declared it deso late (Mat 23:38; Luk 13:35). Then in 70 AD the Ro mans destroyed Herod 's temple. That God 's Presences no lo nge r dwe lt in the temple le ft open the possibility that a Presence might visit the temple. T he Jewish leadership, howe ver, "d id not recognize Ihe time of God's com ing to you" (NI V Luk 19:44), e ven though l ohn Ihe Baptist had cried out: Prepare in the wilderness the way of Yohveh [the So n]; make level in the desert a highway for o ur God [the So n] {lxa 40:03; compare Mat 03: 0 3; Mar 0 1:02-0 3; Luk 03:04 -06; l oh 0 1:23). The Fat he r also said: ' Beho ld, I se nd my messenge r [Joh n Ihe Bap tist] to prepare the way before my Presence [Yaln'ell Ihe Son], and the Lord [Ye.IJuw ] who m yo u see k will sudden ly come to his te mple: the Malek of the covenant in whom Malenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

103

yo u d elight, beho ld. he is coming,' says Yahveh o f angelic arm ies [the l-ather ] (Mal 03:0 1). Ycshua confirmed that the Father spoke of send ing a messenger ahead of his Presence. Yahveh the So n. Yeshull quoted what the Father had told him: I [the Fathe r] will send my messenger ahead of yo u [the Son ]. who will prepare your [the Son \] way before yo u [the So n] (Mat 11 :10: Mar OI:02 ; Luk 07:27 ). what the Father said to the Son is reflected in Isa 40:03 and Mal 0 3:01. lsa 40:0 3 predicted the message of John the Baptist, so naturally, lsa 40:03 reads as tho ugh John the Baptist were speaking. Mal 03:01, ho we ve r. reads as though the Father were speaking to the Judeans. So e ither the Father spoke three times o n the subjec t. o r the So n ada pted the Father's con ve rsation for Isaiah and Malac hi's messag e. YC,I'I" W'S version nf Ma l 0 3:01 sho ws ho w to translate and interp ret Ma l 03:0 1. The phrase co mmonl y translated as .. ... befo re me" sho uld be translated as .. ... send m}' messenger before my [the Fa ther's ] Pre sence [the Son ]." T he rest o f Mal 0 3:01 confirms the " my Presence" translat ion of Pai wn. The Presence is described as " the Mu lek of the co ve nant" who would co me to his temple (Mal 0 3:0 1b). The wo rd Ma lek de scribe s the Son . who is elsew he re called the " Malek. his Presence" (l sa 63 :09). T he Presences were members of the Tri nity, and they dwe lt in the OT temples. So it is natural that the te mple would be called " his te mple" (Mal 0 3:01 ). Yah""h the Son also prophesied abou t his [the Messiah 's ] min istry, "Now the Lord Yahveh has sent me and his Spirit" (Isa 48: 16). Of course, if the Son and Spiri t were alread y in the te mple d uring NT time s, they wo uld not need 10 be "se nt" to the Promised Land. So Herod 's tem ple was no t inhabited by the Prese nces - the Son and Spirit. The So n was sent bac k to the Promi sed Land when Yes/llI{/ was co nceived . lind the Sp irit was sent at Yeshutt' s ba ptism in the form o f a do ve. Mal 03:01 says that the Malek of his Presence would "co mevro the temple, but there is no mention of the Presence dwell ing in the tem ple. The Pharisees made sure Ye,I'hu{/ 's com ing wou ld remain a shon visit. Since Yes/llw was reb uffed at the tem ple, he sa id : Look. your house is left to you [as1 d eso late Ius it was already]. I tell you, you will not see me again until yo u say, ' Blessed is he who co mes in the Na me of t he Lord ' (Mat 23:31':-39 ; Luk 13:35). Yahveh said that he watched his tem ple being turned into a den of thieve s (Jer 07: II ), Yahvch said that he wo uld thrust the e vildoers from the temple and from his Presences (Jer 0 7:15 ). Interestingl y. the evening before Ye,I'IllItI cleansed the te mple, Mark recorded: Yeshua ente red Jer usalem and went to the temple. He loo ked aro und at e verything (Mar 11 : 11 ). YC,I'I"w took note o f the e vil occ urring at the templ e ju st as Yulll'eh had (Jer 07: 11). T hen . the next da y. Yeshua thrust the ev ildoe rs from tem ple and from his prese nce (Mar II : 15; see also Mat 2 1:12 and Joh 0 2:15) ju st as YU //I'('h had (Jer 0 7: Matenal com direlbs autcrars

104

Yael Natan

15). This suggests thai Ye.\h tw was the Prese nce who was pro phesied to ret urn to the tem ple (Isa 40:03 ; Mal O3:Ul ). Later. Yeshua told the parable of the vineyard to say thai he was Yah veh the Son, show ing that he was author ized to cleanse the temple (L uk 19:47 - 20:20). Inte rest ingly, only when he was present in the temple did Yes/ilia ca ll the te mple " his Father's hou se" (Luk 02:49; Jo h 02 :16). T he tem ple that con cern ed Yeshua was hi.s ow n body (Jo h 0 2:21) and the body o f the Chu rch ( ICo 06 :19). T hese bodi es were mystically linked (Jo h 02 :19-2 1; 06:51 -58 ; ICo 06: 19; Eph 0 3:06; 0 5: 30-32; Col 01 :24). Ye.\'huil and his di sciples on ly paid tem ple lax so as not to ca use unnece ssary

offens e. Th e tax was paid fro m mone y found in a fish rather than fro m earned mone y (Mat 17:24 -27 ). This seems as tho ugh Yes/ilia tho ugh t the te mple was a mere building left unoc cupied by rah veh , When Y{',\ hua was in Samaria, he did not affirm the assertion of the Jews that YiI/II'eh had to be worshipped in Jerusale m. Ye.\ h tw in fact said thm the "time. . .has now come' that the tem ple was irrelev ant (Joh 04:20-24). Yeshua also sa id that heav en is his Fath ers house and omitted any refe re nce to the temple (Jo h 14 :0 2). To ward the end of h is mini stry. Ye.\ h tw co nsigned the temple 10 desola non and destruction (Mat 24 :02; Ma r 13:0 2; Luk 2 1:06). YeI hull also sa id that the te mple was " yo ur ho use" rather tha n "m y Parhers ho use" (M at 2 3:3R-39 ; L uk 13:35 ). So YC'I JIlW wax uncon cer ned about the temple except when h i.s life and ministry unav oidably brought him to the tem ple . Thi s see ms to show that Ye.\1I1w had bee n Yah w h's Prese nce in the temple, and that the templ e was de solate whe neve r Yeshua was nOI there. Ye.\'hlUl\ example of foll owi ng ce rta in token Jew ish cu stoms. as well as paying the te mple tax so as not to otfend, ev ide ntly intl uenced the e arly Church (Mat 17: 24-2 7). Th at is why Pau l a nd the Jewish d isciples followed a mod icum of Mosa ic custom s co ncern ing the temple (Act 2 1:20-29). The early C hurch other wise taught that the te m ple was irre levant. The e arly Church did not ope nly teach aga inst the temple. despi te what their detractors claimed (Act 06: 13- 14 : 21 :28). T here was no point in pressing the issue that the temple was desolate s ince the e arly Church knew thai the temple wo uld be destro yed shortly (Mat 24 :02; Mar 13:02: Luk 2 1:06). With the te mple gone, the y co uld stop pract icing ce rtain Mosaic c ustoms without causing un necessary offe nse (Mat 17:27 ). The Con nec t io n Between Exo 33- 34 and t he Aa roni c Hlesslng (Bened iction) Yahveh told Moses: Th is is ho w ) 'OU sho uld bless the childre n of Israe l: you shall te ll them: 'Yil hl'eh bless you, and kee p yo u; Ya hve h make his Face [Panim ) shine on you, and be gracio us to yo u; Yahwh tum his Face [Panim ) tow ard yo u. and give you peace.' Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

105

So shall they [the priests] put my Name [sing ular] on the chi ldre n o f Israel; and I will bless them (N um 06:22-27) . In the Aaronic Bles sing . the Name, Yatweh. is me ntioned three rimes. Onl y after the second and third mentio n of Yahl'eh is there a mention of " Presences" or "Faces." T he Faces refe r to the Spir it an d Son. Th e reason the face of Ya/weh the Father is not mentioned in the Aaronic bless ing is found in Exo 33-34 . Moses as ked 10 see Yahl'('h th e Fath er"s glory (Exo 33:1 R). T he Father said that see ing the Father 's ow n face wou ld prove fatal for Moses {Exo 33:20; co mpare Rl:V 06: 16 ). T he reas on was MOSl:S was a sin ful mortal. since sinkss an ge ls con tinually Sl:l: the Father 's ow n face and survive (Ma t 18: 10). The Fat her invited Mose s up the m ount the nex t day so that Moses co uld see the Son and the Spirit's glory. Moses would a lso sec the Father 's glory, albei t partially sh ielded fro m view. T he glory of the Son and Spirit is nOI necessarily letha l to sin ners. T his is due hoth 10 the concept of grace and the princ iple Ihal the Son is the "form" (Num 12:08: Phi 0 2:0 6 ), "image" (Gen 0 1:26-27: 09 :06; 2eo 04 : 04; Co l 0 1:15), and "lik eness" ( Ell: 0I :26-2X; Heb 01: 03) of rahveh the Father, Likewise , the Sp irit's glo ry is not necessarily lethal du e 10 grace and to the fac t that the Spiru proceeds fro m the Fat her and throug h the So n. Instead of show ing his full glory, the Fathcr said that he would me rely procla im his pre sence. The Fathe r would proclaim his presence by saying his Name, Yalll'eh, and by proclaiming his goodness, grace and mercy {Exo 33:19). The l-ather sa id that when his glory was about to pass by, he wo uld cover Moses with his hand. Upon passing by, the Fat her said he wo uld remo ve his hand so Moses co uld see the Father 's back (E xo 33:22-23). Placin g Moses in the deft of a roc k and covering Moses with his hand was the Father 's way of "blessing and keeping" Moses ali ve . T his parallels the first pari of the Aa ro nic Blessing (Num 06:24). The Father 's hand. meaning the brigh t doud, was the Spirit {Exo 34:05 ; Mat 17:05). In this way the Fath er " made his Face [Pt/llim] shine upon .. .and be grac ious" to Moses (Num 116: 25). Moses also saw the So n both as he passed by (Exo 34:06), and during the Ieeeto-face, forty-day discuss ion that followed (Exo 34:07-28). Th is was part of the Father "t urning his Face fPan im] toward" Mose s an d giving Mo ses peace" [Num 06:26). The prcincurnutc Son turne d his face toward Moses as he passed by Moses, an d talked to Moses face to face d uring the fort y days (E xo 34:06). So Moses saw the back of the Fa ther and the races o f the Son and Sp ir it. who are called the " Presences" or " Faces" of the Fathe r in Exo 33:14- 15. Just as the Aaronic B kssing artic ulates, Mose s was kept safe and was blessed by rbe Father (N um 06: 24). and he saw the Faces of the Son and Sp ir it. Otherwise, Moses wo uld ha ve been o ne of the di sfavored. for according 10 Jere miah, the di sfavored see the back of ranvon b ut not Yahreh's Faces: I [the Father ] will show the m the back, but not the Faces [the Son and Spirit) in the day of their calamity (Jer nU 7). So it becomes ap paren t why in the Aaronic Blessin g, the Name, YlIIIl 'ell . is men tioned three times , but on ly a fter the second and third mentions of Yah l'e ll Matenal com direlbs

autcrars

10 6

Yael Na ta n

are the " Faces" ment ion ed. In the Aaronic Blessing the Fathe r is me ntioned as bless ing and keeping, hut not a s lookin g at the Israelit es. Seeing the Father 's ow n face wou ld prove leth al for the sinners (Exo 33:20). In the Aam nic Blessing, the Fath er is me ntion ed firsl since the Father was t he first to ap pear before Moses (E xo 34:05). T he Spirit is me ntioned second since he, in the fonn of a cloud , shie lded Moses from seeing the Father's own face (Ex o 34: 05 ). The So n is menti o ned third since he appeared last (Exo 34:06). "T um .. .Face" ap plies to the Son since the phrase is anthropo morphic a nd is mo st characteristic of the preincamate Son (Eze 0 I:26; Dan 07; 13). So Ihc Aaron ic Blessing shou ld be unde rstood as being thorou ghly Trin itarian: Th is is ho w ) 'OU sho uld bless the children of Israe l: you shall tell them : 'Y ahveh [the Father] bless you, and keep yo u; Yahveh [the Fathe r] ma ke his [the Father's] Face [Pal1;m, meaning the Spir it I shine on yo u, and be gr acious to you; Yahveh [the Fathe r] turn his [the Father's) Face fPan;m, mea ning the Son] to ward you, and give yo u peace.' So shall they [the priests ] put Illy [the Farhcrs] Name [Yah ,'eh ] on the chil dre n of Israel; a nd I [the Fat her) will bless them (Nu m 06:22-27). Passages with Similarities to Exo 34 and the Aaronic Blessing: (NUll! 06:23-27) There are seve ral passages that spea k of Yahw:h loo king on the favored, but not on the d isfavored. If the OT were unitari an, ho we ve r, the situatio n ou gh t to he reversed. For, if Yahven were on ly o ne perso n and no o ne can see Yllhrt'h's face and live (boo 33: 20 ), the n ¥ahl'('h should look on the d isfavo red and look away from the favor ed ! The above- ment ioned seem ing co ntradiction ca n be reconciled impleme nting a Trinitari an interpretation of the passage s concerned: • Exa mples of the Son and Spirit look ing on the favore d incl ude: o When you [the Falhe r) sa id, 'Seek my Face s' [(l Ch 16:11 ; Psa 105:04) ], my heart sa id to yo u [the Fathe r], ' I will sec k your [the Father's ] Faces [the Son and S pirit] , ¥ahl'/.'h [the Father]. On not hide yo ur [the Fa ther's) Face s [the Son and Sp ir it] from me' (P sa 027:08-09), o Let your [the Fathe r's ) Faces [the So n and Spirit] shine on your ser vant: sa ve me in yo ur unfailing lo ve (Psa U3 1: 16 IBHS 03 I: I 71), o May God [the Father] be me rc iful 10 us. bless us, and ca use his Faces [the Son and Spirit] to shine o n us (Psa U67:0 1), o Restore us, 0 God [the Fath er]: make yo ur Faces [Son and Spirit] sh ine upon us, that we may be saved (Psa ORO:03 [HHS ORO:04] ); also Psa ORO:07 [HHS 080:0 81), and o ' In a surge of anger I [the Father] hid my Faces [So n and S pirit] from you fo r a mome nt, but with everlasting kindness I will ha ve com pass ion on )'OU,' says yahveh [the Father] your Redeemer (Isa 54:08).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

107

•

Examples of the Father lookin g on the d isfavored incl ude : o Ya!ll'eh:~ [the Father 's own] face has d ivided them (Lam 04 :16a ). • Exam ples of the Father looking o n the di sfa vored while the Son and Spirit look on the favored include: o YalH'eh's eyes [the Son and Spirit) are toward the righteous. His ears [the Son an d Spiri t] listen to their cry. Yaln'eh's [the Father 's) face is aga inst tho se who do ev il, to cut off the memory of them from the earth (Psa 034: 15- 16 1BHS 0 34:16-17 ]). • E xamples of the Father not loo ki ng o n the favored, but the Son and Spirit looking o n the favored include: o Hide your [the Fathe r's] face fro m my sins ... (but] do not cast me away fro m your Face [the Son ), or take your Holy Sp irit from me (Psa 051 :09 -11 [BHS 051:11-13 ]). Peter quotes the above passage and said God's face is o n (Gree k: epi), meaning, "toward." bo th the favored and the ev il: The eyes [the Son and Spirit I of the Lord (the Father] arc on [Greck: epi] t he rig hteous. and His [the ~ath er' s) ears [the Son and Spirit's] hea r their sup plic atio n, but the face of the Lord (the Father) is upon [Gree k: epi] those doi ng ev il ( IPe 03 :12). Incidents with Similarities to Exo 34 and the Aarontc Blessing (Num 06:23-27) Elijah at M Ollnt Sinai I Ki 18-1 9 was discussed ea rlier in this c hapter. T his sec tion discusses the co nnectio n be tween IK i 19 an d the Aa ro nic Blessing , Elij ah wen t to Mo unt Hore b. otherwise known as Mount Sinai and the " Mount of [All] the Gods" ( I Ki 19:08: also Bxc 03 :0 I: 04:27: 18:05: 24: 13; 2Ki 04 :25 ). Th e Word of YlIII ~'eh ( I Ki 19 :(9), who was previously called the MlI lek ¥tllll-eh (I Ki 19 :05-07 ), told Elijah to stand before the Face of Yahveh the Son at the mo uth of the cave. From this vantage point Elijah wo uld sec the process ion o f the Fathe r and the Spirit C1 Ki 19: II , 13). Notice that Elijah did not cover his face before standing beside the Presence of Yahveh the Son at the mouth of the cave. Elijah only retreated into the safety of the cave to avoid the wind. the fire, and the rock slides from the earthquake. Only when Elijah heard the Father whisper in a gentle breeze did Elijah cover his face with his cloak. Elijah then proceeded to the mouth of the cuvc a second time ( I Ki 19:13). Elija h knew that El.ro n' s Presence s, the Son a nd the Spir it, would have a gracio us d ispos ition due to Exo 33-34, the Aa ronic Blessin g and other Scriptures. The se passages we re disc ussed abo ve. Elija h, howeve r, kne w fro m the sa me Scriptures that for a sinful per son to see the Father's ow n face wou ld prove lethal. Thi s is why Elijah covered h is face with his cloak on ly upon hearing Yahwh the Father, but not whe n spea king with the M lIl ek and Word of YlIhn,II . Elijah 's covering his face with his clo ak (1 Ki 19: 13) is similar to ho w at a later time the prophet Isaiah saw the face of Yll hr eh in the te mple (Isa 06:01) . Isaiah Matenal com direlbs autcrars

10 8

Yael Na tan

thou ght that becau se of his sinfulness, he might d ie on account of see ing Yah veh {lxa 06 :05 1. Isaiah o nly saw the gracio us face of the Son, perhaps o n account of the train that fil led the te mple (Isa 06:0 1). Yahveh the Son was gracious and had Isaia h's sin blotted o ut (Isa 06 :07 ).

The Transfiguration At the Tran sfigu ration, the Trini ty bes towed the sa me hono r and favor on the three disciples that was prev iously bestowed on Moses and Elijah. T hat honor was heari ng the Father and see ing his Faces, the Son and Spin t. The Transfi guration was a literal act ing out of the Aaronic Blessing and a reenac tment of Exo 33-34. The Father passed by Moses in a cloud that shielded Moses frnm the Father 's g lor y (E xo 34:05 ). So 10 0 , a bright clo ud envelo ped the disci ples and shielded them fro m the g lo ry o f the Father. The br ight cloud in E xo 34 an d at the Transfigurat ion was the Spirit. T he br ight clo ud was the Spirit sh ining his fa ce o n the d isciple s, as the Aaronic Blessing describes (Num 06: 25). T he voice wit hin the clo ud in Exo 34:05 and at the Transfi gu rati on was the r ather kee ping the d iscip les safe (Num 06: 24). The Father ke pt the m safe by adv ising the m to listen to the Son (Mat 17:0S: Mar 09 :07; Luk 09:35) rather than listen to Peter's m mblings (Ma t 17:04-0 5: Mar 09:05-06 ; Luk 09:32-3 4). At the Transfig uratio n, Ye.lhrw's face and clo thes shone brightly (Mal 17:02 ). Ye,lhrla turned from talking to Moses and Elijah to tell the di sciple s, "Do no t be afraid" (M at 17:07 ). This was a real life e xample of the Aaron k Ble ssin gs: Yan veh [the Father] turn his [the Father's ] Face [the Son] to ward yo u and g ive yo u peace (Num 06:26). T hat fe.I'h ull ' S face shone on the di sciples on the Mount o f the Transfigurati on is si milar to Mose s' fort y-da y and night stay o n Mount Sinai: Mo ses did not kno w that the skin of h is fa ce sho ne bec ause of his speaking with him [Yahreh the Son ] (Exo 34:29).

Yeshua's Baptism Anothe r incident with si mi la rit ies to the Tr a nsfi gurati on an d the Aaro nic Ble ssin g is YC.I"hUll ' S baptism (Mat 03:13- 17). A do ve a lig hted on Ye,l /uw 's sho ulde r afte r Ye.l"htw was bapt ized . Then, Matthew said. " the heave n was o pened," and a voice said: Th is is my belo ved Son with whom I am well pleased (Mat 03:17). It see ms clo uds hid the Fa the r's own face du ring Ye.l'hm/ s baptism. Ezeki el, Matthe w and Luke ev en usc the sa me Greek words "anoigw ouranos ' for "h ea ven ope ned" (LXX Ezc 0 1:0 1; Mat 0 3:16; Luk 0 3:2 1). Eze kiel mentions clo uds (Ezc 01 :04. 28 ) after saying the heaven s open ed (Eze 01 :0 I). An interestin g paralle l is when Ye,I'h/1lI was in the tem ple co urts, the Fat her's voic e spoke from heav en say ing: I have glor ified it [his Name]. and will glorify it ag ain, John wrote that some peopl e thought the voice was thunder. This may ind icate that the re were clo uds obsc uring the Fathe r's ow n Face (Joh 12:29 ). So in respect Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

109

to the Father 's voice com ing from within o r be hind clouds, Yeshua ' s bapt ism was similar to Exo 34 and the 'l'ra nsfiguranon. Now returning to Ye.l'/lUl/'s baptism. the Father " kept" John the Ba ptist (Nu m 06:24), The Father told Joh n that the one on whom he saw the Sp irit alight wou ld be the on e who would bapt ize with the Sp irit (Joh 0 1:33), T he Father also "kept" Jo hn by say ing from hea ven that Yes/1lI1I was his beloved so n (Mal 03:17). John did not think it was right fo r him to baptize Yeshua , but Yeshua graciously assured Joh n tha t it was the right thing to do (Mat 0 3:1 5). Thi s was )I(,1II'e1l the Son tu rning his face to ward Jo hn and giv ing him peace (N um 06:26). Afte r Ye,~ h lw 's baptism the Spirit ca me do wn in the form of a dove and alighted on Ye,\ hua' s shoulder (Mat 03 :16). T he clou ds that ope ned and shown light, and the dove that aligh ted are both e xamples of the Father having the Spirit shine his face on Joh n the Baptist and Ye,\hUlI (N um 06 :25). Since the Aaronic Blessing was acte d ou t during Yeshua's bapt ism, one co uld say that the Name of ranvcn was put on Yes/llw d uri ng h is ba ptism (N urn 06: 27; Mat 28 : 19 ). Stephen ',\' Stoning Another in cid en t with si milarities to the Tr ansfig uration an d to the Aaronic Bless ing occu rred a t Stephe n's stoning. Stephe n's face shone like an angel's (Act 06 :15) because Ste phen was full of the Spirit (Ac t 06 :05: 07:55). T hen Ste phen looked to heav e n and saw the glory of God the Spirit. The g lory may ha ve look ed like a halo or sunb urst in the clouds. Stephe n also saw the face of Ye,\ /uw as he stood at the right ha nd of the l-uther (Act 07:55-56). Notice, however, that Step hen did not say he saw the Fat her's own face, which was likel y obscured by the clou ds and the sunb urst of g lory. The First Commandment The first co mmand ment is oflen translated as: " You shall have no othe r gods before me" [Exo 20:03). T he first commandment literally reads : Let there be [singu lar ve rb] to you no oth er s [plural adjecti ve (/('herim] gods [plu ral nou n e/"him] before my Presences [plural noun Pal/im ] (E:w 20:03; Deu 05:07 ). Understanding the First Commandment in Terms of Space O ne mu st think in sp at ial and Trinitaria n te rm s to u nderstan d the fi rst co mmand ment pro perly. As was noted previou sly concerning Deu 05:26 and Deu 33:0 1-02, durin g the g iving of the Ten Command ments. the " Ji ving Gods" appeared on t hree moun tains: the Father on Moun t Sin ai, the Son on Mount Seir, and t he Spirit on Mou nt Paran. During the Exod us, the clouds ge nerally were posi tioned between Israe l and Israel's ene mies for tactica l reasons (Exo 14:20; Num 10: 12). Late r, when the Father sen t the So n and Spirit 10 the Promi sed Land ( Exn 33: 14-15 ). the Father happe ned III he o n Moun t S ina i, the Son was on Mo unt Seir, an d the Spir it Matenal com direlbs autcrars

110

Yael Na ta n

happen ed to be in Edom (Jd g 05: 04- 05 ). Thi s may ha ve bee n meant 10 de te r enemies and 10 g ive Israel a measure of comfort. if Israel was positioned between the three mountains.

Co mpar ing Deu 33 and Jdg 05 revea ls that at the giving of the Ten Commnndrne nrs, the Son was o n Mo unt Se ir and Spirit was on Mount Paran. They were " before" the Father who was on MOUn! Sinai (Exo 20:03; Dell 0 5:07 ). Conce rning the prepositio n "before ," note that the Fathe r el sew here spoke of the Spirit bein g "be fore" him. The Farber said, " . ..the Spirit fro m before me will gro w faint" (lsa57: 16 )."' The fint Commandment l.cgistates Agaillst Pseudo- Trinities T he Fat her used the wo rd "other," lite rall y, "o the rs" (m,'heri m ), in the first command ment to make both a di stinction and an allowance: • T he di sti nc tio n is bet ween the di vine Son and Spiri t who we re "before" the Father. and the so-called gods that the Israeli te s would be tempted 10 pUi before the Father. and • The allowance is that while the so-c alled gods put before the rather arc not worthy of wors hip. the Son and Spiru who happen to he before the Fath er are di vine persons wo rthy of wo rship. By say ing. " You shall have no other gods before my Presen ces:' the Father was warning against a type of syncretism where the lxruelites would swap the Sun or Spirit with false gods to create a pseudo-trin ity. Ge nesis provide s an ex ample of such a pseudo-trinity. As was seen in the cha pter on Hebrew co llect ive plurals. the He brews liked to address the mem bers of the Tri nity as, for instance. the God o f Abraha m. the God of Isa ac, and the God of Ja cob. Laban, however, swore by a pseud o-rnnuy w hen he said : Ma y the God of Ab raham, the god of Nahor. and the god of their father [Teruh]. j udge [plural verb] between us (Ge n 3 1:53). The plura l verb "j udge " shows that Lab an may have been referring 10 th ree de ities me rged into a pse udo- trinity. Scripture docs not say whethe r Abraha m's brother, Nahor, wors hipped false gods, hut Scripmre does reveal that Laba n (G en 3 1:19) and Terah (lo s 24 :02) we re both pagans. Interestingly, Laban was from Haran (Gen 27:43; 29:04). and Sinasi Gund uz wrote: The chil dre n of Sin. l shtar. his dau gh ter. and Sh am as h. his son. are menti on ed with him in on e of the Nabo nidus inscription s from Harran [Arubic spelling of Huran]. It see ms there was a trinity of gods, b ut this ma y be due to the custo m of ment ion ing gods in threes." J. Spence r Tri ming ha m wrote similarly: Mesopotamian cults in particular we re based o n the triad, 'Our Lord. o ur Lad y. a nd the Son of o ur I W O Lord s. with Beet-Shamim: whic h correspon d to the great Syrien de ities . Hadad, Atagali s. Simius. and the Sky-god. BlI 'al SIWIII;III.""

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

111

The comma ndme nt against pseudo-trinities was necessary because sy ncret ism was rampa nt in the ancient world . Several ancient rd igions even had pseudotrinities or triads. Pse udo -tr initi es an d triads may have resulted fro m corru pte d mem ories of Yahvism's Trinity. This situation is parallel to ho w many ancient c ultures have worldwide flood stories that are distant echoes of the Ge nesis flood acco unt (Oen 00-09). Many c ultures knew of the Ge nesis flood upon being dispersed from the Tower of Babel (Gen II :1l8-09). Similarly, many post -Babel cultures remembered that Yohveh was the Trinit y. They especially remembered that Yahl'ch referred 10 himself as "us" (Ge n OJ :26; 03:22; II :1l7). Perhaps, if it were not fo r the fragmented memories of the true Trinity, many cu ltures migh t have lapsed into diffe re nt brands of unit a riani sm rathe r tha n variegated polytheism. Another factor that gave rise to paga n pse udo-trinities is the De vil humors him self by creating religion s that mimic the true faith. In fact, the Apos tle John prophesied how the Devil wou ld create a pse udo-trini ty. Joh n wrote that a second beast that spoke like a dragon appeared (Rev 13;11). T he dragon controlled the first beast whose fatal wound has healed (Rev 13;12). The dragon had an image of the first beast created and caused the deceived people 10 worship the fi rst and seco nd bea st, and the image of the first beast (Rev 13:15). So in esse nce John described Sa tan creating a pseudo-trinity. The First Commandment l.egiskncs Against Unitarianism If the Father had just said, "You shall have no gods befo re me," there wo uld have been serious theological consequences. Without the word "o thers" (acherim), hearers might assume that the fi rst com mand men t taught unitarianism . An omission of the word "others" from the First Co mmandment would he taken 10 mean that the So n on Mount Seir and the Spirit on Mount Pa r,111 were not divine persons of Yahveh, With the word "ot hers," however, the Israelites knew the Father meant "others" besides the Sun and Spirit. It sho uld be noted that the Father elsewhere refe rred to the Son as God . For instance, the Father called the Malek w ith his Na me "God" (Exo 23: 19, 25) . The Father twice ca lled the Son "God" in the Psa lms (Psa 045: 06-07; 082:08 ). Furthermore. the Father sa id his Prese nces always existed with him and were uncreated: Before my Presences [Pallim] there was no God created, and after me there is none [created] (Isa 43: 10). That the Fathe r. Son and Spirit are to be co nsidered divine can be ascerta ined even from the Trinitarian title of MoursItoreb (hllE/olli",) . Horeb is the mountain where the first command ment was given. Moun t Horeb is sometimes called Mount S inai or the "Mount of [A ll] the Gods" (hatJt/ll im) (Exo 03:01 ; 04:27; lR:05; 24: 13; IKi 19:0R; 2Ki 04 :25). The name Sinai has pagan o rigins and refers to the moon god Sin. The name haf/"him, howe ver, refers to the Trini ty, since haf/t/him is repeatedly associ ated Matenal com direlbs autcrars

11 2

Yael Na tan

with the Trinity, Moses. the Ark of the Covenant and the templ e. Huhloh im was d isc ussed in the ch ap ter on Heb rew co llec tive no uns. Further proof that "the Mou nl of [All] the Gods" refers to the Trinity cernes from Sa muel's time. A mu sica l group of Yalll'eh's prophe ts manned a high place on a hill c alled "Gibeah of [All] the God s" (l Sa 10:05). "G ibeah" means " hill" in Hebrew. The hill had different names just as Moun t Sinai was known by different name s. The hill was kno wn as Gibeah of Benjamin ( I Sam 13:2, 15; 14:16 ), G ibeah o f the children of Benjamin (2 Sam 23:29), and G ibeah of Saul ( I Sam I I:04; Iva 10:29). That the hill had d ifferent names does not detract from the fact that the hill was a lso known as " [AIl ) Ihe Gods IIIl1E/ohim]" because the hill was associated with Yahreh , the Trinity. In Deu 13:0 2. Moses showed that in the first co mmandme nt (Exo 20:(3) the plural word "others " (ad lerim) distinguishes between the persons of the Trini ty and so-called god s. Moses wrote that false prophets would sa y: Let us fo llo w others [t/cherim ) gods. gods you have not known, and let us wors hip them (Deu 13:0 2). Notice that Moses dcti ned "o thers [acherim ] gods" as gods "that you have not known." Moses, however, knew that the Israelites already knew "the living God s,' since they had appeared on three mountains during the gh'ing of the law (Deu 05:26; 33:(2 ). By defini ng "othe rs [al'herim ] gods" as bei ng "gods yo u have not known." Moses meant to ensure that the Israel ite s wo uld never come to thin k o f Ya ll l'ell the Son a nd Ya hl'eh the Sp irit as being "other" gods. Like wise, Moses spoke the Shenw to e nsure that Israel would ne ve r co me to think of Trinitarianism as a form of polytheism. T he Shema 's messa ge is that the Fa the r, So n and S piri t are "a united o ne" (ed uIlI). in other word s, that they are the Trinity {Deu 06:04 ). As was d iscussed in the cha pter on Hebrew co llective nouns, theo log ians actually had to change Moses' wordin g from echad to vachid to interpret the Stoma in a non-Trinitarian way.

The First Co mmandment Legislates AKainsr Bini/arianism T he r athe r's usc of the plura l, lite rall y. "o thers" (a cherim ) . instead of the s ing ular "ot he r" ((ldl('r), is impo rta nt. If the Fat her were Hinitariun and no t Trinitarian. he wo uld think that the Son was a d ivine person, but that the Spirit was an impersonal force. Then, in the f irst command ment. the Father wo uld have used the singular word "o ther" and not "others" (acher instead of the plural achcrirm. The singular word "other" would indicate that Israe l s hould worship none other than the Father and Son. To recap-if the Father were a Binitarian. Yahl'e1, co uld have said : Yo u shall ha ve no other [sing ular adjective (It'lIer ] God [singular noun E/] before my Face. T he singular "other" wo uld sig nal to the Isr ae lites that the y were to have no other god before the Father besides the So n. The same cou ld be said if the Binitariani sm were reverse d- if the Father conside red the Spirit. but not the Son, to be God. Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Chapter 4 The Shema

Introduction During the Exodus, Mo ses made many stateme nts that. w hen cons idered toge the r. fo rm a doctrine of God, For instance , Moses' doct rine o f God was bounded at the top by statements that ranventhe Fa ther was the Most High (Elyon) (Gc n 14: 18. 19, 20 , 22; N urn 24: 16; Dell 32:0&). This mean t there was no god greater tha n Yahveh, During the g iving of the Ten Com ma ndments , the Israe lites saw the persons of ¥tlhreh on three mo untains. Thi s was discussed in the chapter o n the Presence s conce rning Dell 0 5:26 and 33:02 . Du ring the giving of the first co mmandment. the " athe r told the Israe lites not \0 ha ve an y other god.s be fore him. So the do ctrine of God was boun ded on the botto m. The Israelites kne w there we re on ly three persons ca lled Yohvr h, Still, the re was one pol yt he ist ic no tion tha t had to be nipped in the bud trithe ism. Trithei sm is the idea thai Israel had three gods rather than o ne God. So Moses spoke the Shcmll to e xpress the unity o f the three person s called ¥lIhr eh : He ar, 0 Israel: YlI hveh [the Father] [and ) our Elohim [the Son], YI.I/H'ch [the Spirit] [are ] a united o ne Iec had 1 (Dec 06 :04 ). The co ncept of unity e xpressed by the Shema was necessary to counte rbalance the man y eleme nts in the Pentateu ch that speak abo ut the pe rsons of the Trinity. These include : • The Trinitar ian proofs suc h as Deu 33:02 that are me ntioned in the pre vious chapters . as well as the Trin itarian proofs mentioned in the Trinitarian proofs append ix, • Most o f the 8 12 instances o f the plural form El ohim (Go ds) fo und in 683 verses of the Pentate uch. So me instances of etohim, of co urse, refe r to false gods . and • 56 of the 57 instances of the form " [Ali i the Gods" (haElohim ) fo und in 54 ve rses o f the Pentateuch. In Exo 18: I I , ho we vcr, haetohim refer s to false gods. So the Shema stresses that the three person s ca lled Yohvch were the Trinity (also called the Triu nity ). O ne can bypass the Trmitanan message of the Shema onl y by Matenal com direlbs autcrars

11 4

Yael Natan

changing the wording, such as by changing echud to .l'l.I chi d. So one co uld say that the Shema is a Trinitarian cre ed. All subseq uent data about the Trinity mere ly adds preci sion 10 the Shema. An analogy wo uld be ho w the value of pi (3. 14 ) has beco me increasing clear-cut o ver ti me (3.1 4 1592653589793 23846 ...). Precision was added to p; and accepted as factua l hy the sc ientific co m mun ity only when such preci sion become mea ningful. use ful or nece ssary. The Shema had been an adeq uate c reed th roughout OT limes as is evidenced by the fact that the or reads Trinitarian thro ugho ut By the time the Son came as the Me ssiah, the Trinitarian Sh/'ll lll had. since Inrertesta me malnmes, been reinterpreted as being unitarian. Beca use their hearts we re harden ed to what the OT actually said, thc motley c rew of Pharisee s, Sadducees, Esscncs and other co uld all cla im to be true OT belie vers along with Trinitarian Yahvis rs. So Y/',\ hu(/ made the Trini tarianism me ssage more explicit by talking o ften about the Father. Son and Spirit. At the end of his earthly caree r, Yeslllm ga ve a 5111'111(/like form ula ju st as Moses had given Snema at the e nd of his caree r. Ye,5huQ gave the command to baptize in the name of the Fathe r, Son and Sp irit. Th is Trinitarian formula was meant to drive a wed ge between true belie vers and unitarian heretics. The NT along with explici t doct rinal state ments arc the sword that YI'shua said would divide families alon g orthodox and hereti ca l fa ult line s (Mat 1034-36; Luk 12:5 1-53). Paul sa id true believers would work toward doct rinal uni ty by a mo re detailed st udy of God's word (Ro m 16: 17; l Co 0 1: 10: 2Ti 02 :15- 16). Paul said d ivisions caused by statements o f fa ith help to dis tinguish those who m God appro ves (I Co 11 :1 8-19). After awhile. " hy poc ritica l liars , whose co nsciences have been seare d as with a hot iron " (l Ti 04:02) we rc able to re inter pret the NT to acco mmodate thc ir unbelief. Joh n had 10 re mind bel iev er s who were confronted wit h sed uc tive teac hings that both the Fathe r and Son were indispen sable to the faith (2Jo 01 :0811). In fact. the NT is fu ll of reminders abo ut correct doctrine (Jo h 14:26: Ro m 15: 15: ICu 04: 17: 15:0 1: 2Ti 01 :06: 2Pe 0 I: 12: Jud 0 I :05 J. After awhile mo re mnemonics such a s the Apostles, the Nicene and Athanasian Creed s were nece ssitated. C hristians have fou nd o ut that other doc trinal statem ents have been and will cont inue to bc necessary so that the Church docs not deg enerate into unendin g don nybrook br aw l until the Last Day. l\-Iaimonides (1135-1204 AD ) Maimonides is the mos t fa mo us med ie val rab binic sch o lar. Maimonides ' nick na me, Ramba m. is an acronym der ived from his title and name: Rab bi Moses Ben Maimo n. Rambum codified the Tal mud. He also wrote the GuidI' for me Perplexed (I 190 A D), an atte mpt In reconc ile Aristo telian philosophy with rabbinic theolog y. Rambam formulated the Thi rteen Ankles of Faith that still serve as a fund amenta l creed of Orthodox Judaism.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

115

Moses used the word edultl in the Shema to desc ribe Yehveh as a " united one ," Rambam, however. substituted yachid for echad to describe God as "alone," "an absolu te one," or "a n only one." The OT neve r refers to Yahveh as being voctud (alone) . By substituting the word ."lIdl id. Rambam though t he could sidestep the Trinitari an implications of the Shema. Rambam's substitution. ho we ve r, does not make the e ntire Shema read unitarian. Ra mbum's vers ion of the Shcma is here trans lated: ·'Yah "eh. our God [Elohellu] [are] Yahveh alone lradlid)." Notice that o ne Trinitarian ele ment is still left intact, literally. "our Gods" (flohr/til). ffohn/U is the plural construct form of Etohim. So eve n Ramb am's modi fied Shema still teac hes that there are divine persons named Yahl'eh! Moses had expressed the un ique ness of Yah l'eh , yet witho ut co mprom ising his Trinitarian beliefs. Moses' .%ema- like state ment uses the plural form Efohim (Gods ) to say that the plural persons of Yllhl'eh are God a lone: Yahveh: he is [All] the Gods [/ltIEfohim], there is none bes ide (Deu 04:

35,39). Note that these passages in Deu 04 are foun d o nly two chapters away from the Shema (Deu 06:04). Solo mon ( IKi 08:60) and Isaiah (Isa 45:05) also echo Moses' stateme nt Ihat there is no God besides the Trinity. Jere miah provided a fifth "alone: ' Slrema- like passage when he said there was none like Yahl'('h who could send rain . Jerem iah wro te: [Are] not you- he [tl/ah -hll] YlI hl'eh, Etohenu (literally, "o ur Gods"]? (Jer 14:22). The reader will recognize thaI Jeremiah used the same phrase, Yahveh Honen u. that is fo und in the Shema. The plural form Elohenu and the "yo u-he" paired pronouns ind icate thaI Jeremi ah knew perso ns named Yahl'eh. So Je remiah expressed Yah ~'f'h 's uniq ueness without comprom ising his Trinitarian beliefs. would God he hono red hy Ramh am's attempt to trans form the Shcma into a unitar ian statement of faith? Perh aps looking at the theological implications of unitaria nism will help decide. A recurring rabbinic theological theme is that since God is a single person. he became lone ly. Loneliness is supposedly why God decide d to create angels and humans. Christians, howeve r, do not posit that God was lonely. bUI say that God created angels and humans for his glory. In rabbinic theo logy. God was like the lone (e('hl ld ) man of whn m Solo mon spoke (Ecc 04:rJR). Solo mon said two persons together were better than one forlorn person (Bee 04:09-1 2a). but a co rd of three strands was best of all (Eee 04 : 1 2b) ~ Surely, Solomon's had the Tnn uy in mind when he said this, In Pro 09 :10 and 30:03. Solomon spoke of Yahveh the Fathe r and Yahveh the So n. In Ecc 12:0 I and Sol 0 I: I I. Solo mon spoke of the Trinity as plural perso ns. These passages arc disc ussed in the MT plurals appendix. Solomon would likel y say that Rambam's yachid versio n of the SlIemll promotes a "dejected loner" interpretati on of God.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

116

Yael N ata n

United in Essence The Shema should he understood til mean foremost that the three persons a re a united in the ir name-Ytlhl'eh. T he Trinity's union in name arises from the fact that three person s are united in esse nce . In fact, all e xpression s o f the Trinit y's unity suc h as being united in action and purpose arise from the Trinit y's underl ying union in ess ence . S ince a single person cannot have the quality of being united, the Trinity is the most powe rful example of the Gesta lt theory: "the whole is greater tha n the sum o f us parts: ' The chapter on Hebrew collective nouns gives many examples of things said ttl be a " united one" (edwJ), such as grapes, day s, slicks, and sol diers . Not once was there any diffe renuuuon as to the si/,e or the importance o f the objects comprising the united one (edull/). The co nsec utive da ys said to be echudim (t'united one s" or "a few" ) were equal. since days mea sured by the sundial are alwa ys twel ve hours long (j oh II :(9). The Shema's insis tence that persons of Ya hveh are on e (('('hm / ) therefore see ms to suggest that the pe rso ns co mprising the whole sho uld he viewed as eq uals-c-at le ast accord ing to essence . Being united in essence means that the Trinity ca n be addressed as: • God of Gods ( Eloll im) and Lord of Lord s (Adonai ) (1os 22:22; Psa 050:0 I : Isa 26; 13; Dan 02:47; I I :36: I Ti 06 :15: Rev 17:14; 19:16). • Lord o f [Alll thc Lords ( haAdonim ) (Dcu 10:17; Psa 136:03) , • God of IAIII the God s (ha t'loh im) (Psa 136:02 ), • Lords (Allon ai ). s ince Ahraham addre ssed three pe rsons as "Lords' (A dona i ). and all three replied (Gen 18:0 3-05) . Also, Lot addre ssed IWO perso ns as "Lords" (AtIO/wi), and they both answered (Gen 19:0 2). Further, Ya/II 'dl ca lled himself " Lords" (Adonim) in MaiO I :06. • Yahveh, since the narrator. Moses. indic ates that there was a Yahveh in heave n and a Yanven on earth (Gcn 19:24 ). Also. Ya/w ell o ftcn spoke in the third person of a nother person named Yah veh , as ts discu ssed in the Tr initarian proofs appe nd ix, • God (El or Eiohim i, since the autho r of Heb rews sa id that the Fat her add ressed the Son as "Cod" in Psa 04 5:06 -07 (Heb 01 :OX), and Ye.l"hua sa id that the " a ther add ressed him as "God" (Psa 082:08; Joh 1O:36a). and • Most High (A ramaic is ltyonin J. since a hea venly dwell er called both the Father and the Son the Most Highs (Dan 07: 18 , 22. 25b. 27). Uni ted in Na me Zecharia h interpreted and ex panded on the Shema saying that the members of the Trinity are united both in esse nce and in name to rule Israel . Zecha riah said: Yoh veh [the Trinity] has become king over all the land, in that day there shan be a united one [echad]. Yahl'e1l [the Trinity]. und his [the Trinity's ] name is a united one [echad ] (Zec 14 :(9). Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

117

The three me mbers of the Trinity each have the Name, Yah reh, and this meant they are united in the pursuit o f ma king the mselves a name ( Exo 09 :16; 2Sa 0 7:23; leh 17:2 1; IS1l 63:1 2, 14; Eze 20:09) . A passage sim ilar to Zec 14:09 shows that Yahvchss n: perso ns united to make themselves a name (Hos 12:04-05). The Son referred to the Fathe r and him self as " us" (Hos 12:04) ,"' and then made the Shema- Ii ke stateme nt: ranven [the Father ]. God [the Son ] of hosts , Yuhl'eh is his [the Trinity] name of renown (Hos 12:051BHS 12:06]). The He brew word that the NI V ua nslares as " name of re no wn" is zeker (Hos 12: 05). Zeker usu ally mea ns " me mory" or " me morial," but here it ma kes better se nse to say that Yahveh is the Trinity's " na me o f renown" Elsewhe re. tekcr is associatcd with the Hebrew word for " name" (sheim) (Exo 0 3: 15 ; Job lit 17; Psa 009: 0 5-06 ; 135:13; Pro 10:07; Isa 26:0&. 13- 14). So 1I0s 12:04 is Trinitarian ("us") and is paired wit h a passage (Hos 12:05) tha t is similar to the Shema- Iike state ment in Zee 14:09. T he concept o f being a united one «('("had) 10 make oneself a name was nOI novel. Perhaps the Tower of Babel builders were ins pired by the concept of the Tri nity when they united to make themselves a name, The y said: Let us build a city and a tower .. ,let us make a nam e fo r o urselves (Ge n 11:(4). God said that the people had become a " united one" techadv who spoke a "u nited o ne" «'rill/d) language (Gen I I :(6). T he rea so n the builders' lan g uage was a "united o ne" (el'had) was that the language as 11 whole co nsisted of a "few d ialects" techadim (J(/l'lIrim) (Ge n 11:0 1). Yahw,h said : If as a unite d one [ec had ] peo ple speaking a un ited o ne [ec had] lan guage-e-lf they have begun 10 do this. then not hing they plan to do will be impossible for them (G en II :06). So God, united in resol ve , sa id, " Let us..." (Gen 11:07). and then proceeded to dis ru pt the plans of the united one people who set o ut to do the impossible, T he Towe r o f Babel account gave co mfort to the Israeli te s who were faci ng man) e nemies. T hough the To wer of Habel builders were united as one, they were sca ttered to the fo ur winds by the united one ranven. So it seems Moses meant the Shema to communicate that the united persons of Yohwh co uld choose to sca tter all lsracl's ene mies -no matter ho w united they appeared (Ge n 34:30; Em 0 1:10; Psa 0&3:04; Est 0 3:(9). ln this way. Yah veh wou ld ma ke a name for himsel f just as he defe ated the Egyptians to make a na me for hi mself ( ICh 17:21; Dan 09 :15: Jer 32:20-21 ).

United in Action Notice that the narrator of J udges referred to people as echad (a united one) and used singu lar verbs with echad:

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

11 8

Yael Natan

• The assem bly is gat hered [singular verb] as lim: [ec bud ] ma n [sing ular no un] (Jdg 20:01),

• All the people rose [singular verb) as o ne [ec had] man (1dg 20:08 ), and • All the me n of Israel were gathered [sjn gular verb ] to the c ity as one [cc had] man , companions Odg: 20: 11 l. In the last verse, Jd g 20 : II . not ice thai the plural nou n "co mpanio ns" is used as an appositive modifying the singular forms echad and " man." This shows that in the Shomo , the fo rm cchad could re fer to united persons : He ar, 0 Isr ael: Ya hveh [the Father] [and ) our £lol1il/l [the Son]. Yahveh [the Spirit! [are] a united on e Iechad] (Dell 06:04). The plural fo rm E/ohim (Gods) is used over 2.000 t imes in the o t with sing ular verbs and other mod ifier s. Oc casio nally. plural ver bs and ot her mod ifiers are used with E/ohim. These sho w tha t three person s united in esse nce arc also united in action. as is d iscussed in the chapter on Hebrew co llective nouns. Simi lar ly, sing ular verbs are used wit h o ve r 300 instances of the plura l fo rm haF./ollim (fAil] the God s) referring to Yah reh. T he many occurrences o f the co llective no uns Eloh im and huE/ollim used with sing ular ver bs a re hel pful in under stan di ng the Shema. Indeed . any collec t ive no un referring to Yahveh used with a s ing ular ve rb ca n be co ns ide red an informal version of the Shema. The coll ec tive noun refers to perso ns ca lled Yahveh; and the s ingular verb sho ws that Yehveh is. and ac ts as. a uni ted on e.

United in Determination and Purpose Echad is often used to show the united determination of a gro up of persons.

For e xample, the Chro nicle r wrote , "The hand o f God gave them one [ee had ] mind" (2C h 30; 12). Joseph lold Phara oh that his IWO dreams (Gen 4 1:32) had o ne ( ed uuf) interpretation (Ge n 4 1:25-26). Josep h ex plained that IWO dreams with o ne t echads uuerpretanon meanl that "the matter has been firml y decided by God , and God will do it soo n" (Gen 4 1:32). The Sncma show s that the persons of the Trin ity arc united [echud ]. The Shema was spoken in c ircumsta nces whe n Israel needed to k now Ihat the Tri ni ty was united in their determination to: • Relocate Israel out of the dese rt and into Palestine , and • Establi sh a theocrac y. The Scrip tures show that the persons of the Tr init y are united in their deter minatio n to make perso ns and peo ples. T he " us" made Adam and Eve (Ge n 01:26; LXX Gen 0 2:18). Peop le have "c reators" (Bee 12:( 1) and "makers" (lob 35: 10), and the nat ion Israel has " makers" (Psa 149:02 ; Isu 54:05 ). These MT plurals are discussed in the MT pl urals appe ndix . S imilarly, per sons of the Trin ity arc united in Ihei r determination as to whe re people and nations live [Jos 24: 18 ; Act 17:26 ): • God sa id, " Let us" when God determined that Adam and Eve wou ld live in Ede n (Ge n 01:26). Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

11 9

• The " us" de termined that it was best that Adam and Eve live ou tside the Garden of Eden (Ge n 0 3:22), • When God determined that the population should he dis trib uted across the ea rth, God said, "Let us" (Ge n II :0 7), • A braham literally said . "Gods [E/ohim] . they ca used me to wander" (Ge n 20: 13) to the Promised Land (Gcn 12:(1), • Jacob lite rally sa id, "Gods [E/ohim], they reve aled himse lf' (Gen 35:07) whe n they promised to bring Jaco b hack to the Promi sed Land (G en 28: 12- 15). • Aaro n sa id that Yahr eh (E xo 32:05). " they brought" Israel out of Egypt (Exo 32: 04, OR),

•

Ya/weh sa id. " My Presen ce s. they will go with you" to con que r the Pro mised

Land (Ex o 33: 14-15). • Mose s. short ly before sayi ng the Snema. sa id that the gods arc not as ncar the natio ns as Yohveh our God fare ne ar]" (De u 04 :07). • Joshua recalled how "the Ho ly Ones" had brought Israel ou t of Egypt to the Prom ised Land (Jos 24:19), • The Philistine s, who were fig hting to kee p land taken fro m Israel, said about

Yahven: These are the Gods. they who struc k the Egyptians wit h a ll kinds of plag ues ( ISa 04: 07-08) , and • David said. "G ods . they we nt to red ee m to himself a peo ple .. .from Egypt" (2Sa 07:23). The MT plur als mentioned above arc d isc ussed furth er in the MT plurals appe ndix.

The Shema as Ancient Israel's National Motto The "uni ted one" inter pretatio n of the Shema is appropriate to the co ntex t of the Shcma. Moses was g iving a motivational speec h to the Israel ites to conq uer the Promised Lund and set up a theocratic state. The Israel ites needed to kno w that the Trinity was united for Israel aga inst Israel's foe s. l-or this reas on. the Shcma became a nation al motto for ancient Israel. To show that the Shel/la is an ent ire ly appropriate mou e for natio nal Israel. one can compare the Sncma to a very si milar national motto o f the Unucd States: e pllf,-ibu.I' unum, Th is is a Lat in phrase me aning. "o ut of many. o ne." Since Moses was the founde r of a Trinitarian theoc racy. he wou ld natu rally speak of the Fathe r, Son and the Spirit as being united for the nation. Like wise. the founders of a rcpublic natu rally would spea k of the mse lves and thei r colonies being united as o ne nation against the nation's foe. That Yahveh were one and the United States were one wou ld not rule OUI the usc of plural verbs and mod ifier s with e ither Ya hveh or the United States. For exa mple. Moses used both singular and plural verbs to refer to Yuhl'ell. Likewise. the founders of the United States co uld say:

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

120

Yael Na tan

The United States is [singular verb] no longer at war with Britain. and mor e tha n two- thirds o f the United States ha ve ratified the Co nstitution. To pro ve that the unify ing moti vatio n and logic was the same in the elise of Israel a nd the United States. co ns ide r this; Benjamin Fra nkli n ap tly said at the s igning of the Decl aration of Independence. " We must all ha ng to gether, or a ssured ly we shall all hang se parately" (l uly 4. 1776). That same day the Co ntinenta l Co ngress appo inted the G reat Seal co mmittee: Benjam in Franklin, John Adams, an d Thoma s Jeffe rson. Interesting ly, it was this trio w ho c hose the mott o: "e pluribus ull um ." Du ring the United St ates C ivil War (186 1-1865 AD ), the wo rds and acti on s o f the Co nfede racy bel ied the moun "c pluribus IIl1l1m: ' So a second mo tto was needed to express unity du ring ci vil war, The argume nt for the second motto ran th us: in a nation with Ju deo-Ch ristian values. "The re is but o ne God." So " In God We Trust" was chose n. Th is sentime nt is the same unifying sentime nt ex pressed by the vochid version of the Shema. From IS64 A D o nward. the United States retained both the echad and vochidtype motto s. In thc hcat of the Cold War that pitted natio ns with Judco -Christian va lues against at heistic communism. President Eisenhowe r signed Public La w 140. This law stated that all Un ited Stale s coinage and paper c urre ncy m ust di splay the mott o " In God We Trust." T his is how the "In God We Trust'· motto became the pro minen t motto of the United States. The histor y of United State s mo tto s par allels the histor y of the Shema. T he echad motto of the fo undi ng fathers , "I.' plurihus tm tlm," ex presses the unity of ma ny, while the yachid mono introduced later, " In God Wc Trust." ex presses the ge neric belief in one God. The echad vers ion o f the Shc ma wa s a motto o f Israe l's fo unding fathe r. Moses. The echad version of the Shemu e xpresses the unity o f the Trinity. while the yochid ve rsion of the Shema, introduced long a fter, merely ex presses the bel ief that there is onl y one God. Both .w lt·h ill monos were introduced because some people rej ected the e ar lier echad mottos , so a compromised yochid mo tto was adopted instead. The NT and the Snema' " Zechariah alluded to the She ma and the n e xpa nded on the Shema : In that day Yahl'eh [the Trinity] will be one (Hebrew mascu line edlllJ]. and His [the Trinity J name will be one [Hebrew masculine echad [ (ill 14:(9). The LXX translat ors tra nslated the He brew mascul ine echad in Dcu 06:04 and Zec 14:09 a with the Greek masculine heis. In zecn l 4:09 b, howe ver, the same Hebrew masculine word echad is translated with the Gree k ne uter hell. T he reason for the dis crepancy is that in De u 06:04 and Zee 14:09 a, echod stands by itse lf and is usually translated as "one." Th e reader must co mplete the thou ght by supplying a word suc h a s " united one ... in name ." So in Deu 06:04 and

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

121

Zee 14:09a, the LXX translators used the G ree k equivalent of erhad with the same mascul ine gender: heis. In Zee 14:09b, however, Zecha riah expa nded and inte rpreted the Shema and supp lied the implied noun : "name." Zechariah therefore understoo d the Snema to mean: He ar, 0 Israel: Yohveh [the Father] [and ) our Elohim [the Son]. Yahw:h [the Spirit] [are] a united one IechaJ ] [in name (Yahl'eh)] (Dcu 06:(4). Because " united one" must now agree in gende r with the neu ter Greek word for "n ame" (onoma). the LX X trans lators used the Greek ne uter word hen to translate the masc uline echad. Evide ntly. the LXX translato rs did not realize that Zec haria h ex panded and interpre ted the SI,t'IIUI and supplied the impl ied word "united o ne. .. . ,. III name. If the translators were not Trinitarian, there would be no sense or purpose in declaring that a single d ivine perso n is "one in name." Ho we ve r. if the LXX translators had been Tr initarian. they wou ld have co nsisten tly used the Greek neuter word hen rather than heis (Deu 06 :04 . Zec 14:09a and 14:09 h ) when translat ing ShcIna-like stateme nts. The Greek NT sometimes fo llows the Gree k LXX tnanslation o f the He bre w Snem«: , .. the Lord is one [masculine hei.lr' (De u 06 :04; Zee 14:09a ; Ma r 02: 07 ; IO: I K; 12:29; Luk IK: 19; Rom 0 3:30; leo OK:04. 06: Gal 03:20; Jam 02:19). At oth e r t imes t he NT follows the LXX trans lat ion of Zech aria h's e xpa nded version of the Shema: "the Lord .. .is one [neuter he n)" (Zec 14:09b; Joh I I:52; 17: 11, 23). Anothe r Sht'lna-li ke state men t thai uses both heis and "':'11 is di scussed in the Trinilarian proofs appe ndix at 11005:07-08The NT use of hen a nd heis in ShwllI-like state me nts is eas ily ju stified. T he NT writers were correct in follow ing either the LXX of the Shema (Dcu 06:04). or the LXX of Zec hariah's ex panded version of the Shema (Zec 14:09). Also. the Hebre w word for "name" (.\"heim) is masc uline. whi le the Greek word for " name" (onoma) is ne uter, So whether the NT writers q uoted or alluded to the Shema usin g the mascu line heis or neuter hen, they likel y understood the Sncma 10 mea n: " united one in name." So nets is correct. while hell is tec hnically correct. When the NT writers used the mascul ine heis in their quotations and a llusions to the Snema, this was probably to accom modate reade rs and listeners familiar with the LXX. For example, Yeslllla likel y was acco mmod ating the teacher o f the law when he quoted the LXX of the Shcma using heis (M ar 12:29, 32). That Ye.lh l/a actually understoo d the Shema as: Ya lm:-h [the Father ]. o ur God [the Son I, YaJm:-II [the Spirit] [are] one [hell ) [in name) (De u 06: 04), can be inferred from Yf .I'hua' s Shfllll/-like state ment, "I and the Father are o ne [hen 1" (Joh 10:30). Here, Yeshlil/'s usc of hell agrees with the LXX of Zec ha riah's ex panded version of the Shema (Zec 14:09). T he neuter hell agrees with the neuter word III/Omil meaning , " name." Matenal com direlbs autcrars

122

Yael Natan

High Priest ly Prayer also has a state ment very simi lar 10 Zechariah's expanded versio n of the Shema (Zec 14:09 ). Ye s/ilia said : Father. keep in your name [onoma is neute r] those you have gi ven me, that they may be one [hen is neuter suggest ing ono ma (name) is meant] as weare [onc llin namc l tIoh 17: 11, scc also Joh 11 :52: 17:23). Ye.I'llIw ' S pra yer was fulf illed be cau se Christi a ns are ke pt by the Name . Christians become "one' b) virt ue how the Name is named over C hrist ians in baptism. Also. the Name is named over Ch ristians d uring blessings such as the Aaronic Blessing (Num 06:27). Thai Yr.I'hu(/ understood the Shl'nlll and the Aaronic Blessing to be Trinitarian can be surm ised from Ye.l,nua 's co mmand that the disciples baptize " in the name [neu ter singular onoma] of the Father and the Son and the Hol y Sp irit" (Mat 28: 19 ). This baptis mal co mmand is similar to the Aaronic Blessing in Ihal the Name is p ut on the Israelites by men tioning the Name, Ya h\'f'h . three times [Nu m 06: 22Yt'.~hU(I's

27 ).

In both the Aaro nie Ble ssing ( Num 06:27 ; LXX 06:23) and in Zechariah 's expanded ve rsio n of the Shemu (Zec 14:09 ). the He bre w word " name" (.I'heim) is translated into Gree k as OIlOm(/ (s ing ular, neuter). Unoma is the Greek word translated as " name" in the Great Co mm ission (Mat 28: 19). So in bapt ism the Name o f the Trinity is pUI on the baptized just as the Name o f the Trin ity was pUI on the Israelites during the Aaron ic Benedictio n.

What Yeshua Said About the Snemo Yt' .I'h,w was in the temple area in Decem ber d uring the Feast of Dedication -

Hanukkah. When Yesnllll walked along Solomon's Colonnade, the Jews dem anded, " If you are the Chri st, tell us plainl y" (Joh 10:24). Yeshull answered , " I d id tell you, but you do not believe" (Joh 10:25). The n Ye.l h,w spoke of how he was the Son 10 the Father, and he said. "I and the Fathe r arc o ne" (Joh 10:30). The Je ws then pic ked up sto nes, likely from the temp le co nstruction sue. The Jews wanted to stone Yes/lIll1. beca use they undersrood thai Ye,I'hua was cla iming to be God (Jo h 10:34). Yeshua purposely foiled the ir " Kangaroo Co urt" con victio n of blasphemy by re ferring to two verse s fro m Psa OR2. Ye.\ hua sa id that the judges 10 whnm the Word of God (the So n) came were called "gods" (Psa 082:06; Joh 10:35), so " what about the one [the Son] whom the Father set apart as his very own and sen t into the world'!" (Psa 082:08 ; Jon 1O: 36a) . This last statement is Yeshua's all usion to Yahveh the Fathe r's statement: Rise up, 0 God [the So n] and judge the earth, for all the nations are your [the Son 's] inheritance (Psa 082:08; Joh 1O: 36a)! Thai Psa OR2:08 is the Father speak ing 10 the So n c an be ascertained hy the fact that the Father cannot have the earth as an inheritance. but only as a possessio n. The Father. however. c an g tve the ea rth 10 the Son as a n inhe ritance. Also. it sho uld be noted that the Fa ther 's ca ning the Son "God" (Psa 082:08 ; Joh 1O:36a ) is Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

123

not a unique occurrence. since the writer of Hebrews said thaI the Father ca lls the Son "Gnd" (psa 045 :06 -07 [8HS045:01-0R J; Heb OI:OR). After defea ting this would-be lynch mob. Ye,I'h /1lI reiterated the cha llenge that if the Jews co uld not rightly con vict him of sin. then they sho uld believe his word s (Joh Ol'l:46-47 ; 10:37- 38: 18:21-23). Per haps the wo rds that YeshliG had in mind that the Jews should believe were: • The Father and he were one (Joh 10:30) . and • The Fathe r is in rnc , and 1 am in the Fathe r" (Joh 10:38). When Yeshlla mentioned tbat be was the Son o f the Fathe r. and that he and the Father were one (Joh 10:30). the Jews understood Yes/ilia to be making an allusion to the Shcma (Deu 06:04 ; Zec 14 :( 9 ). The fact that: • Yeshlla was walking along So lo mo n's Col onnade at the temple when YeshliG said. "00 not belie ve me unless I do what my Father does" (Joh 10:37). and that • Yes nua sa id he wa s God 's SOil who was se nt into the wo rld (J oh 10: 36), se e ms to ind ic ate that Yesllu{! wa s all uding to Sol omon's bonk of Pro verbs (Pro 30:03-04). Ag ur me ntioned that Yalln'h, who ca me to e arth and ascended to hea ven, also had a Son ( Pro 30 :( 4 ). T he implic ation of Yeshlla's allu sion was that the Son does what the Father doe s (Joh 06:62; 10:36-37). namel y, desc end to earth from heaven and ascend buck to hea ven (Pro 30:04). Indeed , Yeshlla said earlier that the discip les wo uld bel ieve once they saw "the Son of Man asce nd to where he was before" (Job 06:(2 ). Agur culled the Father and Son the " Holy One s" (Pro 30:03 ). and the " Ho ly One s" (plural) are previously called rohveh (Pro 09: 10). That thl: Hol y One s are Yah w h show s tha t the Father and Son are one in the Name , Yah veh, Tha t persons are one in name me ans that an informal version of the Shema is found in Prove rbs. The abo ve inte rp ret at io n a nd othe r OT Tri ni tar ia nism is bch ind Yeshua 's stateme nt, " I and the Father are one" (Joh 10:30). Th e anti-Trinitarian Jews kne w this was the case , and were sure eno ugh of Ye,I'Illla's inte nded meaning to pick up stones to sto ne him. Severa l month s after the inc ident recorded in Joh 10, Y/,,\ hua was again at the te mple du ring the Passo ver Week , Yeshua remi nded the audience that Moses had called the Malek Yahveh at the burning bush both: • "God" (Mat 22:31-32; Ma r 12:26-27; Luk 20 :37-38), and • " Lord" [ Luk 20 :37). Thes e state ments di sturbed one scr ibe. The scribe may have also beard Yn hull's Tri n itar ian state me nts spoke n dur in g Ha nukkah (Joh 10). The sc ribe wanted YC'I/IlW to affirm unitarianism and back off his Trinitarian-sound ing statements. The sc ribe asked Yes/ilia what was the greates t commandment, kno wing that Yeshua wo uld say the Shema (Mat 22 :35-36; Mar 12:2R). Y('.\'hlla acco mmodated the scribe (Dcu 06:04-05 ; Mar 12:29-30; Mat 22:36-38). The sc ribe then tried to pUi words into Yeshua's mouth and said:

Malenal com direlbs autcrars

124

Yael Natan

Well said. teac her. You are right in say ing thai God is one [hcis] and there is no other but him (Mar 12:32 ). The teac her of the law's state me nt shows thaI the unita rian misinterpretation of the She ma, which would later culminate in Ramba m's yachid version o f the Shemo, was al ready curre nt in Ye.\,hua's da y. Ye.I'huiI took exc eptio n 10 the teac her of the law's unitari an rmsmterpretauon of the Shema. Yeshuo told the sc ribe that he was only ncar, but not in, Ihc k ingdom of God (M ar 12:34 ). Ye,I' luw 's stateme nt was c alculated to pique the inter est of the sc ribe in the Jewish Trin ity. The Jewish Trinity was a belief that those "in" the kingdom kne w. Tho se on ly " ncar" the kingdom did no t know the Trinity, or refu sed to believe in the Tr inity (Deu 29:29; Mat 13: I I: ICo 02:07 ). Ye.~h Ul/ then proceeded to teac h the scribe about the Trin ity, and he co untered the sc ribe's unitarian yochid interpreta tion of the Shema. Ye.\ h tw said that Da vid spoke by the Spirit when David spo ke of the Fathe r and Son as Lord (Ps a 110: 0 1, 05: Mat 22:4 3-4 5: Mar 12:36-37; Luk 20:42, 44). Note the mentio n of three pe rso ns: the Spirit was the witness to a co nversat ion between David's Lord, the r athe r and Son. In t his wa y Ye,I' lw cI hi nted at the inte nded Trin itaria n interpretat ion of t he Shema. Ye.l hl lll'S statements. of co urse. were guarded and subtle since he was teac hing in the temple (Mat 22:31-4 5: Mar 12:26-37; Luk 20:37-4 7). Onl y a few mon ths carlier Ye.\ lula was nearly stoned at the temple (Jo h 07:06-08, 30; 08:20). Paul was beaten in the temple area (Act 2 1:27-32). James. the brother of Ye.l'hulI, was th rown off the tem ple moun t into the roc ky Kidron Va lley, and then pelted with sto nes." So Trinitarian Yahvtst "rabbis" such as John the Baptist and Yesl llla reso rted to hin ting abo ut the Trinity in pu blic (Mat 26:21, 49: Mar 09:05; W:5 1: I I:2 1; 14: 45: Joh 0 I:38, 49; 03:02. 26; 04 :31 : 06:25 ; 09:02; 11:08 ). Thou gh Ye.l'hull wa s forced to s pea k- and the d isciple s wr ite, in guar de d te rms abo ut the de ity of Christ and the doctrine of the Trinity. thi s is a ble ssing in d isguise. If Ye.l'IlIllI had staled that he was di vine. or if he had coined the word "Trinity," he would ha ve been branded a doctr inal innovator as surely a s he was fa lsel y branded a g lutto n and a dr unkard (M at 11 :19: Luk 07: 34). Besides. the re is no lack of proo f fo r the Trinity in the OT. Anyone who deni es that the deit y' of Christ or the Trinit y is bibli cal merely ex poses his or her willful ignorance of the OT Trinitarianism.

YeIhl/a's Other C omments on the Yach id Interpretation of the Shema H ealing Iht' Pa r atvtic Ye,I'Jlllll fo rgave a man his sins. So me teachers o f the law wer e thinking a long

the lines of the yachid (alone) interpretation of the Stoma when they thou ght: Wh y doe s th is fell ow ta lk like that? lie 's blasp hem ing! Who can forgive sins b ut God alon e 1111';,\ 110 theos [r?" (Ma r 02 :07; Luk 05:21), The thought that the re migh t be a second or third divine perso n who cou ld forg ive s ins was anathem a to these teacher s of the law. Yeshua challe nged their Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

125

vachid interpretation of the Shema by allud ing to the Olin 07 SOil of Man visio n

with these word s: •BUI so thai yo u may know that the So n of Man has author ity on earth to forgive sins·....Then he said to the paralytic , 'Get up. take your mat and go horne.' And the man got up and went home (Mar 09:06-07; Mar 02:10- 12; Luk 05 :24-25). The M

U ll

Who Culled YeI/1I1li "Good"

Ye,I'Illlll also challenged the yachid interpretation of the Shcma when he said :

Why do you call me good? .. No one is good -e-exce pt God 1I10ne [the G reek is h";I'] ( Mat 19:17; Mar 10: 18; Luk 18:19). YCIhua was alluding to Psa 0 14:03: 053: 03 where it says no mere man is good, bill yahveh is good. Nearby is penned: "God is prese nt in the company of the righteous" (Psa 0 14:05). So Yn hua meant that he is Imma nuel (mcunmg. "God with us") who imputes righteo usness 10 sinners (Isa 07:14; Ma t 01 :23 ). The bouom line is that Yeshull said the man's calling him "good" was tanta mount to ca lling Ye.l'hull God - bec ause who co uld plausi bly and co nvinci ngly deny that Yc'.I'/uw was good? Yeshull said Ihal Ihe rich man lacked perfection only because he had not yet give n away his ea rthly possession s 10 follow Ye.l'hua (Mat 19:21; Mar 10:21 : Luk 18:22). Thu s, YeIhuCl implied that the man did not perfectly kee p the commandment attached to the Shema (De u 06:04 ): You shall love Yahveh [the Father] [and ) o ur fit/h ill/ [the Son] with all your hear t. with all your soul, and with all your might (Deu 06 :( 5). The rich man did not ho nor and love God the So n with all his heart, sou l and mind {Joh 05 :23, 36-37). In th is way, Yeshua pointed out the Trinitarian interpretation of the Shell/a. Ye,I'hua also showed thar one can not keep the Shema, the Greatest Commandme nt. withou t honoring God the Son. Parenthet ically. the command to give away riches was not give n to everyone for a ll time, but was meant for this partic ular rich man. T he co mmand was meant to: • Reveal the co nditio n of the rich man's heart . and • Show that Ynhull was Yalll·"h the Son . who was within his rights to make such dema nds. In Psalm 014, two verses after the verse that YeslullI alluded to (Psa 014:03), is the statement "for God is present in the cornpuny of the righteous" (Psa 014:05). The answer to the conu ndru m that there is no one good (Psa 0 14:03), yet "God is prese nt in the company of the righteo us." is that Gnd imputes righteou sness to his followers j ust as God c redited Abraham with righteousness (Gen 15:06). Righteousness was credited to Abraham eve n before the rite of circumc ision was given (Gen 17), and centu ries before the Mosaic Law was handed down. So Yeshua inferred that he is Immanuel ("God with us") (l sa 07:14; Mat 01 :23), and that he impu tes righteou sness to sinners. O n the Last Day, those who think that Yeshull is a mere angel or a human. but not God . will co me before the throne. YO'h,W will then ask, " Why do you call Matenal com direlbs autcrars

126

Yael Na tan

me go od"?" (M at 19:1 7; Mar 10:1 8 ; Luk 18:19 ). The correct answer is. " Because Ye.~ " lIa is God." Man y. ho wever, will respond that Yeshuo is good because he is a great teacher. Yes/lila will ask them : If you beli eve tha t I a m good, the n why did you not beli eve that I am God the SOil as I cla im to be'? Ye,I'Illlll will re spon d to those who thin k him a mere man or an an gel that the y are accuxing him o f not bl:ing good. O nly God is good. and God eve n c harges an gel s w ith erro r (lob 04: 18; 15: 15- 16). Furt her mor e , as C. S. Le wis pointed out co nce rning Yeshua's clai med of deit y, e ither Yeshua was a lunatic, a liar, or Lord. On ly God ca n claim 10 be God and st ill be ca lled sane, truthful, and go od. Ye ,I'n ua 's op inion of those w ho say he is a mere angel is that they are bo ld a nd during. Thcy dare to dc motc YeIhUil do wn to thc le vel of an archangel like Mich ael. who is ca lled "one of the ch ief princes" (Dan ]0: 13). If the archange l Mich ael hesitated to rebuke Satan (2 Pe 0 2:1 1; Jud 01 :(9) . they should defi nitel y not accuse a person greater than M ichael of having erred (Job 04: I R; 15: 15-1 6). Peter's wo rds apply to those who think YCIhua is an e rring angel: Dar ing. se lf-wil led , the y are not afraid 10 speak ev il of dig nitari es ; wherea s angel s . tho ug h grea te r in migh t and po wer. d o nOI bnng a raili ng judg ment against them befo re thc Lord. BUI these, as un reaso ning cre atures. ho rn nat ural animal s to he taken and destroyed. spea king ev il in matters about which they are igno rant, will in their destro ying surel y be destroyed , receiving the wages of unrighteousness (2Pe 02: 10· 13 ). For the impert inence o f ca lling Ye.~ "lIa "good" as thou gh he were j ust another human, Y('.I'huli cou ld re spond: You [mista kenly ] thought the " AM' was like yo u, but I will rebu ke you and accuse yo u to your face (Psa 050 :2 1).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Chapter 5 The Trinity in Daniel 01-05 Introduction Many Christians have a general bias aga inst the spiritual aptitude of pagans. The bias is especially strong ag ainst Neb uc hadnezzar II (re igned 605 to 56 1 B e ) because he set up a gia nt id o l ( Dan ( 3 ). How e ve r. Dan ie l. Shadr ac h. Me shac h a nd A bed neg o informed Neb uc hadnezzar abo u t Yahveh over a period of time. So there is no reaso n for Bi ble reade rs 10 automatically give Ncbuchadnczzar's Trinitari an-so und ing lette r about Yahl'eh (Dan 04) short shrift. This c hapter will show that Nebuc hadnezzar prog ressed in his understand ing of ¥tlhreh , and that Dan 04 has a Trinitarian rat her than a pagan message . Of co urse. it wo uld be anachronistic 10 think that Nebuchadnezzar's understanding of the Trinity was as refined as the Athanasian Creed. One can hold to a simple Trinitarian creed like the Shema and still be considered a Trinitarian. The False Bias A~ainst the Religious Aptitude of Pagans Many people think that pagans had reams of gods with a high god at the top of the heap. Many pagan s, ho we ver , had sophistica ted pa ntheo ns and eve n pseudotrinities . The reaso n paga n c ultures have pseudo- trinities is the same rea son pagan cu ltures have Flood myths. a.s wel l as o ther sem blances and imi tations o f Yahvism or Ch ristiani ty. The awareness of the Trinity was passed down fro m the age between Noah's Flood and the Tower of Babel debacle . Also. just as syncretism OCCUlTed betwee n pagan c ultures, syncre tism occurred betwee n Yahvists and pagans. Pagan c ultures a lso gle a ned some knn wled ge ab ou t God d ire ctl y from nat ure (Rnm 0 I:20 ). The bias against the religious apt itude of pagans is not bo rne ou t by history or Scripture (be 0 3:05-0 7: Mat 11 :23 ). For instance , when the Philistine Abi melec h (Gen 20 :06) and the Ara mean Salaam (Num 22:10: 23:27) saw t he Tr init y (lwElohim), they were not baffled that three persons were one God. In fact. the high gods of the Mesopot am ia, the heart land of Ncbuchadnczzar 's kingdom , were pse udo- trini ties. J. Spencer Tr imingham wrote:

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

128

Yael Na tan

Mesopotamian cults in particular we re based on the triad, 'Our Lord, o ur Lady. and the Son o f o ur IWO Lord s. with Be 'et -Shamim.: whic h correspo nd to the great Syri an deit ies, Hadad. Atagatis, Simios. and the Sky-god. Hll'tll Shmnim ."" Sinas! G unduz wrote: The c h ild re n o f Sin [mo o n ), Ishta r [Ve n us ), his dau ghte r, a nd Shamash [sun]. his son. are me ntion ed with him in one of the Nabonidus inscriptio ns from lIarran [Arabic spelling o f Haran ]. II see ms there was a trinity of gods. but this ma y be d ue to the c ustom of men uouin g gods in threes." The Dreamscape Statile Ncb uchadnczzar d reamt o f a sta tue repre senting the kingd o ms o f the world down to the end of lime (Dan 0 2): • The hea d of go ld rep re sen te d Neb uchad ne zzarv ru le o ver the Ba bylo nian Empire (60 5-562 Be). • The c hest and arms of silver were the two branches o f the Medo-Persian Empire (546-33 I BC ). • The bro nze abdo men was the Macedonian Empire (331-323 BC). • The bron ze thighs were the Ptole maic (323-030 BC ) and Scl cucid (3 12-064 BC) branc hes. • The legs o f iron were the Rom an (27 BC -476 AD) and Byzantine (395-1453 AD) Empires, and • The feet and toes o f c ia)' and iron are natio ns tha t ha ve ar isen since the full of the Ro man Em pire (476 AD). The nations comprising the iron o f the feet are tho se that model them selve s o n the Rom an Emp ire (th e iron ca lves). Th e co pied fea tures tend to perpet uat e and stre ngthe n gove rnment institutions. These features include an offic ia l lang uage , a legal tradition, a senate (leg islative branch], a stro ng e xec utive. a mass ive public wo rks infrastructure, and the like. C lay na tions are those that do not mode l them se lves o n t he Ro man mod el. What kee ps iron and cl ay natio ns ap art are the d iffe rent cu ltures and religion. and the realization that trad ing make s better econo mic sense tha n co nq uest an d occ upation (Dan 0 2:43). The roc k that Nebuchadnezzar saw smas h the statue was cUI out of a mount ain, but not by h uman hand s (Dan 0 2:34, 45 ). The mo untain refers to the mass of huma nity. a nd the rock c ut ou t from the mo untain is Ch rist. the living sto ne (ICo 10: 04: I Pe 02 :04-OR) and Chri stians ( ICO0 3: I6-17; 06 :19; 2Co 06 :16; Eph 02 :20-2 2: lI eb 03 :06 ). The spread o f C hristianity (the rock tumbling do wn the moun tain) se nds se ismic shoc kwaves through the pagan kingdo ms represe nted by the statue, T he tumbling rock represe nts Ye.I'hulI ruling the Ch rist ian C hurc h in the mids t of his ene mies (Psa 110:02: co mpare Psa 106:47: Rom OS:3? : zcc 0 2:14-16 ). The las t day will co me Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

129

when the rock finall y co llides with and smashes the statue represent ing earth ly kingdom s. After the Last Day, Yesh ,w will rule on the mountain that grew from the rock that finally smashed the statue, T he mountain gll.lwing from the rock represe nts the resurrected believers from all ages jo ining the believers who happened to be living when the Last Day occ urred. T hen the re will be a New Heaven, New Earth and New Jerusalem that will last forever (Isa 65:17; 66:22; Joh 18:36; Jam 02:05; 2Pe 03 :13; Rev 03: 12; I I: 15; 2 1:0 1-(2). Nehuchadnezzar's Reaction to the Statue Daniel told Ncbuchadnczz ar that he was the golden head. T here is no mention, howe ver. thai the dream statue even had a golden neck . So Nebuchadnezza r kne w that if Yahwh had his way, Nebuchad nczzar would not have a dynastic successor worthy of a prophetic mention (Dan 02:38). Nebuc hadnezzar was not satisfied being j ust the golde n head , the first of several kingdom s. He either wanted his d ynasty to last forever, or he wanted to be the ete rnal king that Dan iel mentio ned in interpretatio n. Per haps Neb uch adnezzar started to believe the tlallering salute given to him eve rywhere: "0 king, live fo re ver!" (Dan 0 2:04; 03:09). T hat the statue relates to Ncb uchadnczzur or his dyn ast y sugges ts tha t the statue may have been made to look either like Nebuchadnezzar. or a stereoty pical Babylon monarch.

Neb uchadnezzar was not a perso n to sit aro und and ju st hope for fa vo rable change ( Dan 0 2:0 9 ). Ne buc hadnezzar mused abou t how Yoh veh ha d commun icatcd his intcntion abou t the kingdoms of histo ry through a d ream scap c statue. So Neb uchadnezzar dec ided to signal what he wante d the kingdo ms of history to look like us ing a 27- meter high, 2.7- meter wide gold leaf sraruc." The statue was placed in the plain of Dura in the prov ince of Baby lon (Dan 03 :01). T hat the statue was cove red entirely with gold. rat her tban being partl y gold. silver. bronze. iron and clay. had meaning. Nebuchadnezzar wanted to communicate that he wanted his golden kingdom to last to the end of the world. He did not want his kingdom cut off at the neck . The astrologers must have reasoned that Nebuc hadnezzar's gods of the plain wou ld be more acco mmodating than vanven, especially s ince Ncb uchadnczzar had conquered "Yalll'eh 's land" (los 22:19; Isa 14:02; Hos 09:03 ). Sinee Babylon was in the heart of the relatively na t river va lle)' of Mesopotam ia. foreig n gods were like ly often viewed to be mountain gods . T he astrologers per haps co nsidered Yahn,h a "god of hills" ( I Ki 20:23-28 ). and reasoned that is why: • The statue was destroyed by a rock cut out of a mountain ( Dan 02:34, 45), and • The rock subsequently grew into a mounta in that filled the earth (Dan 0 2:35). Th a t ranvcn was co ns idered a mo unta in god is l ikel y the reason why Neb uc hadnezzar si tu ated his statue on the pla in of Du ra in the prov ince o f Ba bylon (D an 03 :0 1), Th ere the gods of the pla in co uld view t he Malenal com direlbs autcrars

130

Yael Na tan

s tat ue, and no ne o f the f avor it e as tra l d eitie s wo uld be hidde n be hi nd hi lls ami rnou nrai ns, Mo reover, the st al ue wo uld be o ut of the vie w of mo unta in gods. T he sta t ue wo uld be we ll a wa y fro m a ny mo u nta in whe re the "g od o f h ills " mig ht smas h the st at ue wit h a t um blin g stone . Thai Ncb uchad nc zznr was ap pealing to the god s of the plain is why the astrologers and Nebuchadnezzar de manded everyone pay ho mage to the statue. Th e gods of the pla in wo uld then 1(M)k favo rab ly on Nehuchadaezzar's pro posed versio n of the future as com municated by the statue . Ce rtain Je ws co nt inued to worsh ip Yohveh de sp ite Nebuchadnezzar 's orde rs. Nebuchad nezzur became infuriated bec ause wors hipping Yahveh was tantamo unt to as king that his go lden dy nasty be c ut off at the neck . After all, it was Yah vch who had se nt Ncb uchadnczzar the statue dr ea m say ing that h is k ingdo m wo uld pretty much end with him (Dan 0 3:0R- 1R; also aga in in 06:07 -13). A :\lisintl'rprl'talion Leads to Mi stranslation That in Turn Reinforces the Misinterpretation Eve ry Bi ble reader is famil iar with Dan 06 acco unt o f Daniel in the lions ' den. Daniel was se nt to the lions' de n becau se he pet itio ned Yll hl'e1l during a ce rtain thirty-day period. Daniel broke a law tha t said d uring a certa in mo nth, everyone was to pe tition King Darius instead o f /hei r gods. It is not clea r w hether the people we re to pennon the king as thou gh he we re a goo , or ju st petition by co urier or through a pe rso nal aud ience. The ratio nale for the co mma nd may have been that Darius wa nted to magnify him self by gra nting pe titions d irec tly. Per haps Dar ius wanted 10 act as high priest and pe tition the gods fo r his peop le. Perhaps Darius j ust wanted the und ivided attention of the gods for his o wn petitions. T he Da n 06 int e rpre ta t ion may hav e influ e nc ed the inte r pretanon and tr anslat io n o f Dan 02 -0 3. D an 06 ma y ha ve led transl at o rs 10 t hi nk that Nebuehad nezz ar ordere d people to wors hip a statue rep rese nting eit her a god or King Nebueh ad ne zzar himse lf. The interpret ers figured that if the peo ple were to pray to a K ing Darius in Dan 06. Dan 0 2 - 0 3 m ust invol ve pray ing to King Neb uchadne zza r o r an idol. So inte rpre te rs appare ntly made Dan 02 - 0 3 co nform to the ir preconce ived no tion s. Th at is w hy a few A ra maic wo rds are no t tra nslat ed cons isten tly througho ut Daniel 02 and 0 3. If the wo rds we re translated co nsistently, one wou ld read that the people were 10 " pay ho mage" to the statue rathe r than " worship" the statue. Furtherm ore, the statue would be ca lled a "statue" or an " icon" rather than an " ido l." Here are the details : • In Dan 0 2:46 , the Aramaic word rcgid is usually translated as "pay homage," but in Dan 0 3 the ten occ urre nces of ccgid are a ll translated as " wors hip" ( Dan 0 3:05,06.07.10, 11 , 12.1 4. 15 , 18, 28) . and

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

131

•

In Dan 0 2, the Aramaic word Helem is translated "statue" four times (Dan 02 : 31, 32. 34, 35). Howe ver, in Dan 03, the same word uetem is trans lated "idot" eleven times (Dan 03:tll , 02 , OJ; 05, 07 , 10, 12, 14, 15, IR , 19). Faulty trans lations ca use readers to miss the intended meaning of the golde n statue. Also lost in trans lation is the tra nsition between the d rearnscape statue in Dan 02 a nd the golden statue of Dan 03. A consistent trans lation . however, re veals that ju st as Nebuchadnezzar had fallen down and paid homage to Danie l. the people were to fall do wn and pay ho mage to the statue. The stat ue was not meant as an idol to be worshipped since it me rely represe nted Ncbuchadnczzur 's ambitious ho pes for the future of his kingdom. The statue that Nebuchadnezzar set up was no more an idol than Daniel was an idol to Nebuchadnezzar. T he Dan 03 landscape statue that Nebuchadnezzar made was no more an idol than the Dan 02 drcam scapc statue that Ncbuc hadnczzar mimic ked. Note that the astrologers a nd Shadrac h. Meshach and Abednego all made a distinction betwee n: • Ncbuchaduczzur's gods [Arama ic is t'lah1l] and the golden image [Aramaic is l.I'dem], and • Worship [Aramaic is pt'lochl and paying homage [Aramaic is ced(I;' J. The pertinent te xts read: They neither worship IAramaic is petach J your gods [Aramaic is dahh] nor pay homage to [Aramaic is celJig] the image [Aramaic is 1.I'e/em] of gold you ha ve set up... we will not worship [Aramaic is pdl/ch l your gods [Aramaic is t'lllhh] or pay homage to [Aramaic is ad;'!;'] the image [Arama ic is 1.I"e/l.'m] of gold you have set up (Dan 03:12, IR). So all the princip le characters in the accou nt knew exactly why Nebuc hadnezza r had set up the golden statue (Dan 0 2:49), They knew Nebuchadnezznr built the statue not as an idol per sc, but to indicate thc altcmanvc future hc wanted the gods to bring about. It shou ld a lso be noted that Neb uchad nezz ar was not pract ic ing sy mpathetic mag ic because he was not trying to manipulate nature or impersonal metaphys ical forces. The gods he was trying to com municate with were perso ns, just as the God who se nt Ne buchad nezzar t he statue d ream was a person (Deu 04: 07). Pagans usually barter with the gods. and some times vowed that if a god fulfilled a prayer req uest. he or she would worship that god forever. Ncbuc hadnczzar may have reasoned that the gods would grant his wish because, unlike Yahvrh, his gods of gold (Da n 05:04, 23) would be happiest with his golden kingdom. Ncbuc hudnczznr perhaps reasoned: Why would my gods want kingdom s made of inferior metals , clay and stone (Dan 02 :39)? Nebuc hadnezzar. of course. unwittingly set himself up against the Son of God and his eternal kingdom as pred icted in the Dan 02 statue dream (Dan 04:03. 34; compare also Dan 06:26). Neb uchad nczzur apparently did not learn from the fiery furnace incident that pagan gods cannot overrule what Ya1l r e1l has dete rmined. O nly after anothe r Matenal com direlbs autcrars

132

Yael Na tan

dr eam follo wed by a se ven-year bou t o f ment a l illness wo uld Neb uchadnez zar ac cept tha t Yaln'ch was the Mo st High God who d o le d o ut the k ingdom s to an yo ne he ple a sed ( Dan 04:1 7. 25. 32, 34 ; see a lso Da n 02 :21 ; 0 5: 18-23 ). So the rea der ca n see that the dreamscape statue and the landscape statue ar c no t t wo isolated a nd d isconnect ed ev e nts . T he y a rc ind ivid ual lesso ns in Nebuchadnezzars spiritual schoo ling lead ing up to Nebuchadnexzar beco ming a Tri nitaria n Yahvist, Trinitarian Proof Texts in Dan 01-05 Ki ngs tho ug ht it wise to know ab ou t the god s of the ir kingd om s (2 K i 17: 26). Kno wing the e nemy's gods hel ped whe n cond ucting psychological warfare (2Ki IR:251. Some kings e ven ado pted the gnds o f the ir e nem ies (2C h 2R:23 ). Nebuchad nezz ar paid homage to Daniel because he to ld Nebuch adne zzar bo th t he dream an d the interpr etation (Da n 0 2:46). Surely, this incide nt must have made Ncbuchadn czzar cu riou s abou t rahven. (AliI the Gods (haE lohim)

Dan iel

undoubte dly to ld Neb uc had nezza r a bo ut "[ All] th e Go d s" ( JwF.{oh im ) ( Dan 0 1:0 2, 09 , 17 ), es pe c ially s ince Neb uc hadn e zzar had ro b be d t he tem ple o f " [A ll ) the G od s" (1w EJoh im) in Je r usa le m (Da n 01: 0 2 ). In 604 Be. Neb uch ad nc zza r may ha ve e ven sto lc n o r de st ro yed the A rk of the Co ven an t. Th e A rk was often ca lle d the " A rk of [All ) the God s" ( hat'{oh im ). The last me ntion o f the e xiste nce of the Ark (Jer 0 3:1 6 ) precedes th e fi rst mcnti o n o f Ne buc had ncz zar by o nly e ig htce n c hapte rs (Jc r 21 : 02 ). T he te mple was d est roy ed afte r 586 Be , the a rk's terminus ad (/"e m . If Daniel tol d Neb uchadnezzur an ythi ng abou t the OT, it wo uld have bee n hard not to ment io n the Tr inity. There are so many Trinita rian proo fs in the O T, Moreo ve r, a former po lytheist likc Ncb uchad ncz za r would na tu rally interpret the thou sands o f plur al no uns, ve rbs a nd mod ifiers referring to Yahveh as refere nces to plura l persons. Da n 0 4, the c hap te r th at Ne buch ad ne zz ar wro te , se e ms to indic ate tha t Ne buc had ncz znr k ne w a lo t abo ut Yah l'eh . ~' Re me mber that Ne buc had ne zzar lived in an age that p red ated transla tions suc h as the LX X. Translatio ns tran sformed nea rly all the Hebrew plurals referring to Yahveh into s ingulars. In fact, it see ms it was not until the ad vent of Trinityadverse translat ions that peop le carne to think of Yahvc h in unitari an terms. Initially. when Neb ueh adnezzar was still a paga n, he to ld Daniel : Truly. yo ur god is a god of gods [a triad ], and the lord of kings [three d ivine per sons]. and a rcvcalc r of sec rets. see ing that yo u have bee n able to revea l this sec ret ( Dan 02:47 ). The pagan triad s we re thou gh! to be the more po werful gods. Pagans may have add ressed their pse udo-trinities as "a god of gods ." Th e phrase "God of Gods" is used elsewhere in the OT to desc ribe the Trinity [Dc u 10:17; Jos 22:22; Psa 0 50: Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

133

01 ; Dan II :36). Ncbuchadn czzar's phrase " lo rd of kings" (Dan 0 2:47) is s imilar to the phrase "Lord of Lords" that is else where used to descnbe the Trinity (Deu 10: 17; Jos 22:22; Psa 050 :0 I; 136:03; Isa 26:13; Dan 02:47; II :36; ITi 06 :15; Rev 17: 14; 19 :16). Nebec bad nezxar told Danie l that y" hl'('h was "your god" (Dan 0 2: 47). Nebuehadnezzar said of Shadrach, Mcshuch and Abednego that Yahveh was "their ow n God" (Dan 03:28). NOIe that Nebuehadnezzar did not say "m y God " or "o ur God." Th is meant that when Ncbuchad nczzar sa id Yelhwh was a "god of gods:' he had a standard Se mitic triad of gods in mind. Neb uchad ne xzar did not mea n the phrase ·'god of gods" to he und erstood as though Yllh l'eh were the head of his pantheon. Ot herwise, Nebuchudnez zar wou ld have said that Yah veh was "his God" and "our Cod: ' So initially. it seems. Nebuch adne zzar merely repeated Tr initari a n ph rases tha t Danie l spo ke abo ut Yahveh, Nebuehadne zzar initially understood these phrases in terms of his Semitic pagan religion . not in terms of Trinitarian Yahvism . The fact that Nc buchadncz zar used Trinitarian language about Yahveh reveals th at Daniel tau g ht tha t rahveh was t he Tr init y. Evide ntly, Da nie l instr ucted Nebuehadnezzar abo ut Yllh l'eh ju st as Joseph instructed Eg yptian roya lty about Yahn'h (Gen 45:08; Psa 105:17-22). Later, Neb uchad ne zzar said that Daniel had "the Spirit of the Holy [plural] Gods [plural I in him " (Dan 04 :08 . 09 . Iln This is similar to Pharaoh's statement about Joseph: Can we find such a one as this, a man in whom is the Spirit of God'! (Gen 4 1:38). It was o nly afte r Neb uc hadnezxar witnessed Shad rach , Meshach and Ahednego be ing saved from the fiery furnace that Nebuchadnezznr started to take Yahveh seriou sly. Onl y then did Ne buchadnezzar ca ll Ya hl'eh the Most High Cod (Dan 03: 26). Yet. Ncbuchadnezzar later had to write that he learned Yel hl'ell was his God the hard way- after another d ream a nd a seven-year bout of me ntal illness. O nly then did Ncbuc hadnczzar accept that Yallreh was the Most High God who doled out the kingdom s to anyo ne he pleased (Dan 04: 17,25, 32. 34; see also Dan 0 2:2 1; 05:18-13) .

One Like the Son of the Gods is Also Called Malek Aft e r Nebuc hadn e zzar had the statue dream (Da n 0 2) e xpla ined to hi m. Nebuchadne zzar undo ubtedly wanted to know more abo ut Ya h re h and the last kingdom 's ete rnal ruler, Daniel told Nehuchadnezzar that the eternal ruler wou ld he the So n of Yahl'eh (Pro 30:03-( 4). Daniel must have told Nebuchadnezzar that the Son had appea red many times ax the Maid Yahveh, Daniel pro bably mentioned that the So n made so me preincamatc appea rances (Ge n 18-1 9 : 32: Jos 05: Jdg 06 , 13)."" T hat Ncbuchadnezzar knew the Son appe ared some times as a man and so metimes as the Angel of Yah veh e xplains why Ncb uchad nczzur said the fourth person in the furnace was a "So n of God" (LXX Da n 03:25) and a malek (vmevse nger'') sent by God (Dan 03:28 ). Acco rdi ng to t he MT re cen sio n reading fo r Dan 0 3:25, how ev e r, Malenal com direlbs autcrars

Yael Na tan

134

Nebuc had nezzar said the Ma lek. (Da n 03:28 ) was " like a so n of God." T his is similar to how Job called the angels "so ns of God" (Job 01 :06; 02:0 1; 38:07). T his does. not contradict the LXX rendering, as though the LXX spoke of the divine Son while the MT recension spoke of a mere angel. The versio ns arc eas ily reconciled if one understand s that the So n appeared in the fiery furnace as a man (Da n 03:25 ), and then Nebuchad nezza r was told he was the divine Malek Yahw'h (Dan 03:28) . In fact. twice d uring the time of the J udges. the So n appeared as a man and the n as the Malek. Y ahveh in fire to Manoah and Gideon (Jdg 06 :21 : 13:20), T he Ma lek. Yahl'ell's appearance in the fiery furnace must have bee n like "a man of fAll) the God s" (Jdg 13:06 ,08) and " like the Ma id of [All ] the God s" (Jdg 13:06 ). Manoah knew the Ma lek. Yuln'en to be God (Jdg 13:22), and Manoah 's wife knew the Ma lt'/.:. Yah reh to be Yilhl'e h (Jdg 13:23). Nebuchad nezzar's spiritua l instincts perhaps taught him that the "one like the Son of God" was God and YuJm :,h. With his interest piqued . Nebuchadnezzar surely searched the Scriptures with Daniel and found OUI more about the Son of God and the Trinity. The S pir it of th e

H ol~'

fl'lural) Gods fPluralJ

Neb uch adne zzar sa id that Daniel had "the Spirit o f the Hoi)' [plural ] Gods [plura lI in him" ( Dan ()4:08, 09 , 18), This is similar 10 Pharaoh 's statement abo ut Joseph: Can we find such a one as this, a man in whom is the Spirit of God '! (Gen 4 1:38). Moreove r, Nebuchadnezzars phrasing is similar to Joshua's statement about Yahl'eh be ing " the Holy [plura l] God s [plural]" (los 24: 19). " Holy" means "separate." The phrase " Holy Gods" means that Yalll'e h was in a separate category from other gods. The characteristics of that category would be that: • Yah l'eh is. the Trinity whereas no pagan gods are true trin ities. So me gods and thei r consorts might be consid ered triads or pseudo-trinities. and • The Trinity is rea lly God while pagan gods are merely demons in disguise. The de mons co mpos ing pagan pseudo-tr inities, of co urse, are not three perso ns united in nature. That Neb uchadne zzar spoke of "t he Spirit of the Holy Gods" who dwe lt in Daniel means that Nebuchad nezzar was rea lly referring to the Trinity. Otherwise, Daniel wo uld have protested and said that he was not possessed by demons (Den 32: 17; Sl.-'C also Psa 106:37), Belshazzar's Impertinence Be lshazza r, the so n of Ne huc had nezz ar, succe eded Nebuc hadn e zzar 10 the thro ne. Be lshazzar threw a party during which the Hand of Yahl'e h wrote o n a wall. The partygoe rs happe ned to be imb ibing from vesse ls from Ya hl'eh' s te mple.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

135

Perh aps the q ueen noticed that the sc ript on the wall was like the Hebr ew script inscnbed o n the vessels. Thi s in turn reminded the queen of ho w Daniel was a lI ebr ew and wo rsh ipped the Hebr ew's Trinity. Of course. the queen knew all abou t Ne buc hadnezzars letter pro m ulg ated thro ugho ut the k ing do m (Dan 04). Th e queen al so remembered that Daniel had succee de d at rendering an interprelation after the oth er wise men had fai led. The q ueen then told Be lshazzar th at Daniel .. . .. .has the Spir it of the Holy [plural] God s [plu ra l] in him . In the time o f your ta rhcr he was fo und to ha ve ins ight and intelli ge nce and wisdo m like thut o f the gods (Dan 05 :1 I) . When Daniel arrived, Belshazzar told Demel mar he had " the spirit of the gods in him" (Dan 05:14). Thi s con trasts with how Nebuchadnezza r had written that Daniel had the "Sp irit o f the Holy (plural] Gods" in him (D an 04:08. 09, 18). Belshazzar's wife had used the same wor ding that Neb uchadnezzar used (Dan 05: I I). No te tha t Belshazza r o mitted the plura l adjec tive " ho ly" before Ihe word " Gods." Bec ause Belshazzar did not ho nor God as " ho ly," a si m ilar fate befell Belshazzar as befell Moses. Yohveh too k a way leade rship from Bel sh azzar j ust as Y{/IIl'el1 had taken away leadership fro m Mo ses w hen Mose s did not hono r Ytll1l'eh as being "ho ly" (N um 20 : 12 ). Befo re Belshazza r rec ei ved his puni shment. he recei ved a good tongue-la shin g fro m D aniel . Be lshazzar's slate ment, me ntioned above. was am big uo us as 10 whethe r the Spir it of the Tnniry indwelt Dan iel , o r whet her a spirit of a pagan god ind well Dan iel. Danie l, of co urse, knew that pag an gods we re really dem ons (Deu 32: 17 ; see also Psa 106:37 ). Th erefore, Daniel to ld Belshazzar that he had fa iled to honor the "G od who holds in his hand you r life and all you r ways" (Dan 05:23). Dani el' s mention of God's " hand" was apt. not on ly because God's finger had j ust writte n o n the wall, bu t bec ause the Spirit of Yahve h is called the ha nd and fin ger of God several lime s in the Bible . Belshazzar 's fail ure 10 call God " holy" mea nt he failed to specify whethe r Daniel was indwelt by the Sp irit or by a demon . Thi s indeed was a sin agains t the Spiril (Mar 03:29-30 ). The wrtttng on the Wall Dunielthen interpreted the wr iting on the wall whic h read: M ell e [numbe red ), mene [numbered]. tekel [we ighed], parsin [divided ] (Dan 05:25). Dani el sa id: T his is wh at these words mean : Mene : God has numbe red the da ys o f you r re ign an d brou ght it to an end . Teket: You ha ve been we ighed on the scales and found wan ting. PI/WI' [sing ular form of plIninJ : Your kin gdom is d ivided and given to the Medes and Pe rsians (Dan 05:27-28). Dan iel's readersh ip no dou bt kne w this passage all uded 10 ho w ancie nt tran sac tions were co nducte d. Ex actly how this passage rela ted to anc ient co mmerce ta kes a lot of ex pla ining to uninitiated modems. Understand ing the hand writing o n the wa ll is of some importa nce. since it was Matenal com direlbs autcrars

136

Yae l Na tan

meant 10 make unfavo rable compariso ns betwee n the polytheistic Belshazzar and the Trimrana n Ncbuc hudnczzar, The dreamscape statue and the golden statue also deserve a lengjhy treatment since they conce rn the history of the world, and the future kingdom of Yclhl'eh the Son.

How the WritinA on the Wall and Nebuchadnezzae's Statue Are Related An cie nts often we ig he d and co unted co ins. whi le mod e rn s ju st co unt co ins. O ne mig ht be surprised to lea rn tha t many muse ums have large collec tion s of co in weights." Wei gh ing coins was impo rtant s ince eac h co in's va lue was, to so me e xtent. based on its met al conte nt. Trea suries and mints d id no t bac k t he face val ue of co ins. whe the r th e y were aut hent ic o r not. O fte n, ancient coinage systems were not we ll standardized, so s ilver and gold coins had to be we ighed. Co ins meant to be weighed wen: ca lled at marco in Arabic.'?' One benefit of empires was a standardized co inage so merchants and taxmcn could forego weighing coins durin g each transacuon at the ir own risk. Co ins standardized for counting were called li t p e:::,o in Arabic. However. eve n a] p l.',;:o coins sometimes were not worth their face value: • Many mints had little quality control. • T he re were many imitat ion and counterfe it coins, • Peo ple would crop (meaning, "d ip" o r " trim") coins. since anc ient coins did not have raised margins or reeded edges where groo ved lines run vertica lly around the w in's perimeter, • Often coins were holed 10 make jewelry, and • Alloy coins would lose precious metal due to wear and co rrosion. Corrosion wears off q uickly. To com plicate matte rs, coins were made of alkiys beca use alloy s resist wear better than pure gold, silver and copper. Alloys do not corrode as quickly as pure silver and copper. Mirus and eve n counterfe iters knew that the face value of coins was greater than the bullion from which the coins were made. IU' SO an ancie nt mint on ly issued a coin with a high gold or silver content until that mint's co in became acce pted. "The coin of the realm" often was debased due to gree d, or the kingdo m experienced financia l distress. Ya'ako v Meshorcr wrote: O f co urse, it was impossible in those days to gauge the s ilve r co ntent of coins .. .whe n, in the co urse of tim e, it became an accepted c urrency. the Nabateans could permit them se lves to red uce the weight of the cotns.v" Interestingly, during Belsh azzar's feast. the Modes and Persians were abo ut to take ove r Babylon. So perh aps Babylo nian coinage was already deba sed at the time of the handwriting on the wall incident. Perhaps the debasing used one of the following me thod s. or a co mbination of the follow ing: • Inflating the face value, • Using less precious and mo re base metal in the alloy , and • Shrinking the size or thickness of the co in flan. c-

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

137

Collectors have many name s for the material s in de based coin s incl uding billon, efectrum. pa le -go ld, go ld- was hed, go ld- plated, gol d-c oat ed. cl ad, and copper core. Color alo ne can not be used to accurate ly peg a co in's go ld or silver content because: • Many ancie nt co ins co nsisted of base metals coated in gold o r silver, • Different co lo red met als could be alloyed with go ld and silver, and • Gold-silver alloys have subtle tones of yellow. The gold -silver alloy only turn s white when the silver content approac hes seventy percent." Gold , howe ver , has a spec ific gravity (de nsene ss) o f 19.3, which make s go ld nearly twice as heavy by volume a s lead (1 1.34), silve r (10.5 ), copper (8.92 ) and iron (7.i'~6 ) . This s izea ble d iffere nce in density mea nt ancient balance scal es cou ld readi ly ferret out coi ns with a lower than e xpec ted gold con tent. The reaso n mene (count ed ) is repealed twice in Dan 0 5:25 is that coins represe nting the day s o f Belsha zzar's reign were co unted. T hen an eq ual numbe r of known good co ins or co in weigh ts we re co unted and lidded to the other s ide of the balance sca le. In order for Be lshazzar's "c o ins " to be acc eptable , they wo uld need to be gold, s ince in Neh uchadne zzars dr eam the statue's go lde n head represen ted the Babylonian kin gdom (Dan 02 :32, 31l ). In fact. the mention o f go ld, silve r and bronze describing Belsh azzar's fea st (Dan 05:02 . 04. 23) see ms to be an allusion to Ncbu chadncz za r's statue of Dan 02 . The go ld co ins o r co in weight s against w h ich Belshazzar 's "coins" we re wei gh ed perha ps represe nted the da ys of Nebuchadnezzar's re ign . Consider how Da niel mad e comparisons betwee n Bel shazzar and Be ls hazza r 's fath e r Nebu chadne zzar (Da n 05:18-22). The sca le tipped in favor o f the coi n weights (or Ncbuchadncz za r's gold coin s) which meant Belshazzar's reign was found wanti ng ( Id el).

Belshazzar 's rei gn was supposed to be more gold than silve r, but we ighin g pro ved h is reign wa s more silver than go ld. The read er will reca ll that the chest a nd arm s o f the statue were s ilver (Dan 02:32), which character ized the ne xt kingdom of the Medes and Per sians. So appropriately, Belshazzar's co ins, whic h were more s ilver than go ld, were div ided (pa {'\') among the Mede s and Pers ians (Dan 05 :21l). Sil ver was the eleme nt that comprised the statue's c hest and arms. Si lver was commonty alloyed with gold to make billon lind elect rum co ins. Gold co mprised the statue's head. Co pper was commonly allo yed with silver to make silver co ins. Copper a nd tin make the allo y bron ze. The statue's be lly and thighs ha ppe n to be made of bronze. Besid es bron ze's use in wea pons and too ls, bron ze was wide ly used in co inage . Most "cop per" co ins are, in fact, bronze, since copper in its pure form is soft. Copper is also susce ptible to tarnishing and wea r. So one c an see that fro m top to bottom. the baser metal in the alloy of one kingdo m becomes the domina nt metal of the next. The statue went from a goldsilv er alloy for the bead , to a silver-co pper for the che st and arms. to co pper-tin (hro n/.e) alloy for the belly and thigbs. Matenal com direlbs autcrars

138

Yael Na ta n

Just as adding too much silver de based gold coins, add ing too much co pper readily de based silver coins. Silve r has nea rly the same de nsity as copper ami other base metals, while gold is nearly twice as de nse silver and othe r base metals. Therefore, debased silver coins are harder to ferret out by use of sc ales than are debased gold coins. This fad meant ancient mints cou ld debase silver co ins with near impunity. Using modern, non-destructi ve techniq ues. numi smat ists commonly find that many ancient silver coins contain twen ty-five perce nt or less silve r! Some ancient co ins even have copper cores and arc ca lled "clad," "silver-was hed," "s ilvercoated" or "stfver-plate d." Such coins are "co mmo nly encountered and are know n co llectively as .w/merutll." "''' The Romans provide an example of how ingen ious debasing techniques became: In the later Roman Empire (3nl cen tury AD) silver issues were hea vily debased with copper; prior to st riki ng, the blanks were immersed in a n acid bath that leaehed out the surface copper to expose more silver. giving a muc h mo re acce ptable ap pe arance to the co ins when they were firs t issued ." IUl That a kingdom or co unterfei ter co uld profit imme nsel y by d eba sing silver re veals why medieval alc hem ists tried hard to produce a secret alloy of base metals that had the same properties as gold . The re also is a con nection between the bronte belly, the bronte thighs and t he iron calves: Bronze is harder than copper as a result of alloying that metal with tin or other metals. Bronze is also more fusible (i.e., more readilv melted) and is he nce easier to cast. It is also harder than pure iron and far more resistant to corrosio n. The s ubstitut ion of iron for bron ze in tools and weapons from aho ut 1000 BC was the result o f iron's ab undance compared to copper a nd tin rathe r than any inheren t advantages of [pure] iron .!" Wh m made bronze more expensive than iron was the scarci ty of tin . Thoug h co pper was plentiful, in ancient times the know n de pos its of tin were small, and these were found in remote locat ions such as Britain and Afghanistan. The scarcity of tin would have led to the ex tens ive use of iron at an earlier time if it were not for the fad that iron's high melting poin t ( 1,535 degrees Celsius) requ ired the development of techniques not nece ssary for copper and tin prod uction. Co pper and t in, when smelted toge ther, have a lo w melt ing po int of 950 de grees Cels ius. Sin" bronze is an alloy, different proportions of copper and tin have different properties : A low propor tion of fro m 2-9% tin to circa 90-9&% co pper produces a 'soft' bronze. T his is the a lloy usually used for casting coin Ilans and most other decorative , voti ve or practical artifacts .,.[co inJ d ies [for example] .. , co ntain variously from 18-22% tin resulting in a very hard cast object."" If enough tin is used. bronze is even harde r than pure iron. Weaponry. howe ver. was one appticerion where "carbunzcd' iron (" iron carbide' or "steel"] was better Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

139

tha n bronze. Iron became im pregn ated with ca rbo n by repeatedly being heated in ch arcoal fires durin g the smelting, forging and que nch ing (tem pering) processes. The hammering process d ro ve slag ou t o f Ihe iro n. and Ihe qu en ching process invol ved plun ging red-hot iron into water to turn the iron brittle . Upon reheatin g the brittle iron forms a crystalline mat rix that makes the iron du rable and springy. So Nebuchadnezzars sta tue's legs o f steel are a prophecy of the militarist ic ch arac ter of the Rom an Empire."" That the statue's legs were made of steel and its feet partly of iron shows tha t the real ce nters of power wou ld move our of the ironpoor Middle East to iron-rich Europe; Indian steel blades were still sought afte r. though by the ninth ce ntury they seem to have taken a back place to tho se from the Rhin eland .. . Bro nze was used to a much grea ter ex tent [in the Midea st] tha n in Europe pres umably because of the shortage of iro n in the Islamic world."'" Inte restingly, bronze was in short supp ly and ex pensive in Medi eval Europe with the res ult thai anc ient Rom an bronze stat uary was melted dow n while mar ble statuary was [eft intact. On ly nne Roman bronze statue has remained above gro und in Ita ly si nce it was made - Ihe equestrian Marcus Au relius in Rome. Th is fact once led a rch t::i.llogists to ass ume that Roma n statuary was made most ly of marble ra the r than bronze. "whic h is not nece ssarily true."!" That Europe had iron , and enough wood and coal to fire the iron , help ed propel Ch ristian Europe and Ihe Bible into Ihe world. Thus. at the very time the gospel and the Bible los t influence in the Middle Eas t, Europe was transformed fro m a bac kwater into an ex pans jomst power with g[nha[ reac h. The ne wly found lands also tended to have iron. limber a nd co al. This mea nt Noah's prophesy abo ut Japheth was fulfilled (Gen 09 ;27). Japheth's te rritory was e nlarged. espec ially whe n Euro peans se ttled ev erywhere land was sparsely po pulated - rel atively spea king. Christianity and the Bible spread glo bally. Truly, God d id determine when and where nations migrate and settle "so that men wou ld see k h im a nd pe rhaps reac h o ut for h im a nd fin d him " (Act 17:26-27). T here a b o was a con nectio n between the statue's feet that are a mi xture of iro n and clay. an d the statue's iron ca lves . Mo lten iron an d oth er me tals were com mon ly poured into d ay molds, Th e mold s we re formed usi ng the "lost beeswa x" meth od . Th e da y mold was not used again . bUI was bro ken up 10 uncove r the cast iron. C lay was used as a mold for iro n for Ihe very reason c ited in Dan 02: 43 - day and iron do not mix. Since the statue" feet were co nst ituted of iron st ill in the d ay mold, this meant the iron was not formed into weapons. T he irnn in the d ay was weaker. 10 0. since il was nol "carburized" into steel by going through the forging and que nching (te mper ing) proc esses. Iron, not steel, de scribes how the western a nd easter n Ro man Empires dis integrated into smalle r co untries that copied the Roman Republic and Em pires in many re spects . The co pycat states. ho we ve r. are nol tempered by cent ury after ce nt ury of warfare. Th ey are not as militaris tic as the Ro man Empire, at [east o n a long-term

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

' 40

Yael Na tan

basis on the order of ce nturies. Weak co untries o f cla y ofte n surro und the Roman copycat sta tes and shape the iron as tho ugh they were a mold or cast. In te restingly, during this last period of the wor ld, coinage of iron-lik e met als such as low-grade stee l and nicke l have nearly replaced go ld. s ilver. bronze and copper co inage. T his is e speci ally the ca se d uring ti mes of war. Furthermore , co ins made of a luminum circulate side by side with iron-like co inage. Because a luminum is reactive c hemically. it IICYer naturall y occurs as nugge ts or in veins. Aluminum , however, is abundant in rocks, vegetation, and animals. No nfer rou s metals like a luminum sho uld be considered pari o f the day of the statue 's feet along with the other components of cl ay: silicon (sand a nd q uartz). potassium oxide, calcium oxide, nitrogen and wha tnot.'!' So it see ms that iro n and day feet foreshadow the coin age of modern nation sta tes.

More on th e Trinity in Daniel The chapter on Hebrew collective no uns and the MT plurals appendix discuss the Trinitarian proof texts in Dan 04 -05 and 07 that involve plura ls nouns and pl ural verbs. T he Trinitarian proofs appendix di scusses Dan 09: 19. The So ng of Moses c hapter discusses the impl icutions of the Trinitarian texts in Dan 0 7.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Chapter 6 The Prophet Behind the Prophets

Introduction The purpose of this chapter is 10 show that the or prop hetic books should be read as the word s o f the prcincurnatc SOil. That the OT prophetic books can , for the most part. he unde rstood as the words of the Son implies Trinitarianism. The first person speech (fo r e xample. " I," " me," "my") that are not q uotations sho uld ge nera lly be co nsidered the words o f the Son. The SOil o ften refers 10 the Father and Spirit in the third person (for e xample. " he," "him," " his") . Quota tions mos t often are the words of the Father as quoted by the Son. T he few phrases and sect io ns that arc ob vious wo rds o f the prophe ts sho uld be con sidered mere interjections interspe rsed in what is otherw ise the Son's narrative. Isaiah Wa s a Proxy for the Prophetic Role of Yah veh th e Son Some have taught that Yahveh did not verbally inspire the OT prophets. So me say the OT prophet s only had a "feel" for what Yahveh migh t have sa id in a gi ven s ituatio n, T he prophets the n ga ve ve rbal message s, some o f whic h were collected a nd written do wn in a nthologies. These antholog ies survived on ly if reade rs of subseq uent generations thou ght the material wa s applicable to the ir times. T his [ow view of the canon and inspira tion invites critici sm . Cr itics might say the prophet and his listeoers mistook a prophet 's sanc tified sentime nts for the words of Yahveh (Ez c 13:02 -07 , 17; 22:2 8 ; see also Jc r 05:1 3: 18: 18: Hos 09:07 ). Yahveh, ho wever, wa rned the Israeli te s that they must di sce rn between sanc tified se ntiments and the inspired word of God: You m ust no t me ntion ' the oracl e o f rah veh : ag a in, because eve ry ma n's ow n word becomes his ora cle tJer 23:36a). vonven d id not ask the prophet s to be h is ghos tw rite rs or his ed ito ria l co lumn ists, God's idea of a prophet is ex pressed alread y in Exod us. God sa id: • ' He will speak to the people fo r yo u, and it will be as if he were yo ur mouth and as if yo u we re G od to him ' (Ex o 04 : 16 ), and

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

142

Yael Natan

• Then Yahvch sa id 10 Mose s. 'See, I have made )'011 like God 10 Pha rao h. and yo ur brothe r Aaron will be your prophet' (Exo 07:0 1). Yahveh said tha t he spo ke " by the hands" of the prophet s. The phrase " by the hand" po ints to " verbal inspira tion" rat her tha n an y wishy -washy, to uchy-feci )' type of insp iration . Unfo rtunate ly, mo st translations do not let Scripture clai m verbal inspiration for itself. f or instanc e, the phrase " by the hand" is co mmon ly mistranslated as " by." T he MT recen sion, however. litera lly say s " by the ha nd of' in dozens of passages. li Z One of Ihe " by the ha nd of' passages reads: By YOUT Spirit you adm onished them by the ha nd of your prophets (Neh 09:30). Another read s: I spoke 10 the prophets, ga ve the m man y visio ns and told pa rables by the hand of the prophets (Hos 12:1 0 ). The prophet's hand was a hand once removed from the anthropomo rphic hand of the Spi rit. who is som eti mes c alled the " hand of Yflh r eh." For instan ce, the ch ronicle r wrote: He [David ] gave him [Solomon] the plan s o f allthat the Spirit hall put in his mind for the courts of the temple of Yllhl'eh ( ICh 2&: 12). Theil David told Solomon: I have in writ ing from the hand of YlI hl'eh upon me. and he gave me unde rstanding in all the de tails of the plan (I Ch 28:19). So David ide ntif ied the ' hand of Yahveh ' (ICh 2& :19) as the Sp irit ( IC h 28:12). Ezek iel also ide ntified the " hand of YoIII'eh" that was upon him (Ez c 1JI :03; 03: 22) as the Spirit (Ezc 0 3: 14 ). So it see ms the phrase " by the hand" indi cates that the prophets' main co ntributio n to the Bible was taking dictation throug h the Spir it from the prcincarnate Son (Eze 43:10). The prophetic boo ks are not ju st the product of a co mmittee o n which God is a membe r. In fact, the pro phets o ften say that God is the rea l a uthor, for insta nce: • David : The Spir it of Yahvch spoke through me; his word was o n my tongue (2Sa 23:02 ), • Elijah : This is the Word of Yatreeh that he [the Word] spoke through his serv a nt Elijah (2K i 09:36), • Isaiah: T he visio n concerning Judah and Jerusale m that Isaiah so n of Amoz saw (l sa 01 :( 1). Al that time 1'(,/1\ ,(,h spoke throu gh Isaia h (tsa 20:( 2), • Jeremiah: The Word of Yahveh came to him [Jeremiah] .. .The Word of Yahveh ca me to me [Jere miah ) say ing (Je rOI:02 , ( 4 ). You [Yahl'eh] know I [Jeremiah] ha ve not desired the da y o f despai r. Wha t passes my lips is on behal f of your Presence s (Jer 17:1 6 ). Th e word tha t Yah veh spo ke con cerning Babylon,.. by Jere miah the prophet (Jc r 50:0 1). • Ezekiel : The hea ven s were ope ned and 1 saw visio ns o f God ... the Word of YlI hl'f'h came e xpresvly to Ezek iel the priest (Eze 01 :0 1. ( 3 ). YlI hl'(,h told

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

143

Ezekiel . ' So n of man. go 10 the house of Israel and speak my words to them' (be OH I4), • Hosea: The Word of Yilhreh who c ame to Ho sea .. .When Yah veh be gan to spea k thro ugh Hosea. Ya/lI'eh said to him." (Hos 0 1:01 -(2 ), • Joel: Th e Word of Yah l'eh who came to Joel (Joe 0 1:( 1), • Amos: Th e words of Amos ...[concerning] what he saw co nce rning Israel (Amo 01:(1). • Obadiah: The vis io n o f Obadiah. This is what the Lo rd Yahveh says abo ut Edom - we have heard news from Yohveh (Oha 0 1:(1 ), • Jonah : The Word of Yahveh came to Jonah (Jon 0 1:0I) , • Micah : The Word o f YaJII'd, who came to Micah...the vision he saw [ Mic 01 : 01) . • Nahum: The book of the vis ion of Nahum (Nah 0 1:0 I), • Habakkuk: T he o racle thai Habakk uk the prophet sa w (Hab 0 1:( 1), • Zephaniah: The Word of Yahw' h who c ame to Zep haniah (Zcp 01 :0 1). • H aggai : The Word o f Yoh veh came through the pro phe t Haggai ,. ,sllying (H ag 0 1:0 1). T hen the Word of Yilh ~'e h ca me through Haggai. the prop het. say ing (Hag 01 :(3), • Zechariah : The Word of Yah veh came 10 the pro phet Zechariah (Zcc 0 1:0 I), • Malachi ; An oracle of the Word of YaJm ;,II to Israel through the hand of my angel [malat'hi] (Mai O1:0 I), and • E lsew here: Do ze ns of o the r passag e s say that Ya hvc h spo ke t hrou gh the prophet s. lll Som eo ne might ask. " If Ya hl-ell is speak ing thro ugh the prophets. w ho is the spec ific pe rson o f the Trinity doi ng the speaking?" Som e Chris tians might say, "The Fa ther," s ince the y re member Yes/lila say ing tha t the Father tau ght Pete r ce rtain truths (Mat 16 :1 6- 17). Ynhul/ also sa id the Father gave him the words that he spoke (Jch 14:10, 24 ). Most Christ ians, howe ver, wou ld automatically think , " the Spirit." beca use: • The Spirit and the prophets are o ften associated (Num II :29 ; ISa 10:10; 19:20: Neh 09: 30 ; Zee 07: 12: Act 28:25; Eph 03:05), • Passages associ ate Dav id 's word s, espec ially h is Psa lms. wit h the Spi rit (I Sa 16: I 3; Mat 22: 43; Ma r 12:36 ; Act 0 I: 16; 04:25- 26 ), • Paul's stateme nt, ' Th is is what we spea k. no t in wo rds taught us by huma n wisdom . but in words taught by the Sp irit. e xpressing spiritual truth s in spi ritual words' ( ICo 02: 13). and • The wr iter o f Hebrews quote s Jer 3 1:33-34 and sa id that the Spirit was q uoting the Father ): The Ho ly Spi ri t a lso te sti fies to us , fo r aft er sayi ng , 'This is the cove nant that 1 [the Father] will make with them: ' After those days,' says the Lo rd [the Father). ' 1 will put my laws on their he art. I will al so write them on thei r mind;" the n he says [the Spirit q uotes the Father]. ' I will remember their sins and their iniq uities no mo re' (Heb 10: 15- 17 ).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

144

Yael Natan

Peter. howe ver, wrote that the spirit of Christ spoke through the OT prophet s. especially of the Son be ing the future Messiah : Co ncern ing this salva tion. the prop hets so ught and sea rched d ilige ntly, who prophesied of the grace that would com e to you. sea rching for who or what kind o f lime the spirit of Ch rist, whic h was in them. pointed to. when he predicted the s ufferings of Christ, and the g lories that would fo llow them . To them it was revealed thaI they were sen . ing yo u and not them selve s whe n the y reve aled the things now announced 10 you thro ugh those who pre ached the gos pel to you by the Holy Spirit se nt out from heaven; whic h things angels desire to look into (I Pe 0 I:10-11). Re velation is the on ly NT hook tha t resembles the OT prop hetic hooks. The Apostle John wrote concerning Re velation that the r ather del ivered the revelation to Yn 'hua , and Yeshua de livered the re vel atio n to Jo hn thou gh the age ncy o f an angel: The apoc alypse of Ye.I'Illiti Christ that God [the Father] gave him [ Ye.~ IJua ] to show his [YesIJ ua's l ser vants what must soo n take place. li e [Yn hull ] made it known by send ing his [Yeslulll's l angel to his IYn hulI' s] servant. John (Rev 0 1:0 I j . In Revelation, Yt·.fIJua is identified as " the spirit of the prophet s." Yeshna said, " I, Yn·hua . ha ve se nt my angel" (Rev 22:16). Thi s meant Yn'hua was the " Lord, the God of the spi rits of the pro phets" w ho had "sent his angel" (Rev 2 2:06). Besides del ivering a me ssage through an angel. Yeshua also delivere d his message through the Spir it. Yeshua said: " have yet many thin gs 10 te ll you . but yo u c annot bear them now. Ho wever when he. the Spirit of tru th. has co me. he will guide yo u into all trut h, fo r he will not speak fro m himself; but whate ver he hears, he will speak. He will decla re to yo u things that are co ming. He will g lorify me, for he will take fro m wha t is mine , and will declare it to you. All things whatev er the Father has are mine; there fore I sa id that he takes of mine , and will declare it to you (Joh 16:1 2-15). Rev OJ and 22 and Joh 16 adeq uately explain ho w the writer of Hebrews co uld say the Sp irit rather tha n the Son quoted the Father in Jer 3 1::B-34 (He b 10:1 5-17, quoted abo ve). The cha in of transrnissiou for insp ired me ssage s we nt thus: Thro ughou t the OT prophet ic honks, gene ra lly the prein ca ma te Son spoke, or he quoted the Father. The Son then gave h is compiled message to the proph ets dir ectly, or through the agenc y of the Sp irit or an angel. In te re stingl y. sometime s a pro phe t ev e n spo ke as thou gh he were him self Yahl'eh the Son, and not just as a prophet inspired by the So n. The Son could have the prophet speak for him and as h im becau se the prophet had the " mind of C hrist" (ICo 02: 16 allu de s to Isa 40: 13). T he prophet s a lso had the spirit of Christ and the Hol y Spirit dwe lling in them (Rom 08 :09-1 1). An ex ample of a prophet speaking as the Son is when Jerem iah told his assistant to say over the Euphrates: Thu s shall Babylon s ink. and s hall not rise aga in becau se of the ev il that I will bring on he r (Jer 5 1:64) . Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

145

Though there is no q uotation formula, this is an ob vious qu ote of Yahreh. A pro phet's spiritual make up was the same as other believers throug h who m God c hose to speak (Mat 10:20; Rom 08: 15 , 26; G al 04 :06; Eph 06:18) . Paul helps el uc ida te the prophe tic phe nom e no n w hen he d e lved into what make s ge nuine to ngues-spe ake rs tick. Pau l sa id tha t tongu es-speake rs were no di fferen t fro m ot her Christians, e xce pt in on e point. Th ey had the gift of being able to verbalize. but not nece ssaril y unde rstand. so me o f what the Spiri t teaches huma n spirits to pray and prophesy. A tongues-spea ker ca n never ve rbalize or understand the to tality o f what the Spirit himself says wh ile plead ing a believer 's cause. Words can only express so much (Rom 08 :26 ). Paul said a person who spoke in tongu es utters mysteries with his spirit ( ICo 14:0 2, 14- 16, 32). Paul said that unless a to ngues-speak er ca n interpret what his spirit says, his mind is uninvo lved in the tong ue speak ing process (leo 14 :14, 20 ). Glossolalia witho ut inter pre tat io n is s imilar to mindlessly rec iting a so ng with ly rics in a fore ign lang uage. O f co urse , if someo ne is mista ken abo ut ha ving the g ift of tongues in the first place, he or she ju st mindle ssly babbles . The human spirit can pra y, sing and spea k in a mean ing ful foreign language inde penden t of Ihe mind . T he mind c an simultaneously carry out independent menta l proces se s such as prayin g. s ing ing and spea king in a mean ingful lang uage ( ICo 14: 10, 14, 15). Most bel ieve rs arc obliv ious to both the co mmunicat ions o f the Spirit within the m, and the prayers of their own human vpuit. Moreover, behevers ca n blurt o ut d ivinel y inspired speec h without know ing it [Luk 2 1:13- 15 l - j ust as t he unbel iever Caiaphas did (Joh I I :50-52). T he prop he ts we re co nsci o us o f, and wro te dow n, w ha t the Spi rit and the spirit o f C hrist taugh t thei r h uman spirit and mind to sa}'. T he prophets we re like tong ues-speaker s in that the words they jolted dow n ca me from the Son. The y d id not rumin ate on a subject and then write an es say in the ir ow n word s. As ranven said, the pro phet s spo ke visions "from the mo uth of Yclhr eh" (Jer 23: 16). The y did no t "follow their o wn spirit" (EJ.e 13:(13) and the " the delu sions o f the ir own minds" (Je T 14:1 4). The NT speakers and writers knew that some of the prophets' writing.s that do not look pro phetic at first glance arc indeed pro phet ic. The Psa lms, for example. do nOI loo k prophenc . however, some events described in the Psalms did not literall y happen to the Psalmists. Many of the e ven ts desc ribed in the Psalms d id , howe ver. happe n to the Mess iah . For instance: • The d isciples (Joh 02 :17 ) and Paul (Rom 15:02-03) applied Psa 069:09 to Ye,I'Il/IlI, • Peter also applied a verse from the same Psal m (Psa 069 :25 ) and a ver se from anothe r Psalm (Psa 109:08 ) to e vent s in Yeshua's life , and • Ye,I' llUli applied Psa 035:19 to himself (Joh 15:25). The Psalm s o ften read in the firs t person (I , me , my). and some Psal ms arc messiani c. T hese facts tend 10 show that reshua was the real Psalmist (Ac t 01 :20 ).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

146

Yael Na ta n

Early on in Ye.\1Il1a's ministry. the d isciple s thought of the Psalms in me ssianic ter ms (Joh 0 2: 17 ). Yeshu a ma y have remind ed the Emma us disciples ( Luk 24: 27) a nd the twel ve d isci ples (L uk 24 :45 -47) that the Psal ms were me ssia nic. Perhap s this is why Pete r applied Psa 0 16: 10 to YesllU(/ at Pentecost (Act 02:29] 1). Matthew sa id Ye.\'hua fulfilled a Psal m's pro phecy by his activity of tell ing parables: I will open my mo uth in parab les; I will utter things hidden Si lK C the c reatio n of the wo rld (Psa 078 :02: Mat 13:33 ). That the Psalms were part of the Me ssiah's scri pt is co nsiste nt with Yes/ilia 's asse rtion that he did not spea k o r act extempora neously, btl! accord ing 10: • Scripture (Luk 04:2 1: Joh 13:18; 17;12; 19:24, 28; 19:36; AcI 0 1:16 ). and • What the Fathe r wanted (Jch 14:10 ). In the Psalm s. David ofte n spo ke in the fiN person (for ex ample , " I," " me: ' " my" ). Da vid d id not o ften use q uota tion form ulas. Us ually this wo uld ind ic ate that the au thor is speak ing his o wn words of h imsel f. Peter. however. said that what David described in the Psalms did not happen to Da vid. For ins tance , there was no O T application of Dav id 's wo rds: You will nOI ahando n me to the grave. nor will you lei ynu r Holy One see dec ay (Psa 0 16: I0). The OT writers, YC.I'hua , Peter and the NT C hurch. belie ved Ihal the Spiril spoke th rough Da vid (1Sa 16:13; Mat 22:43; Mar 12:36; Act 01 :1 6; 04: 25 ). Peter eve n ca lled David a prophet: Brothers, I ca n ten yo u confide ntly that the palriarc h Da vid died and was buried. and his tom b is here to this d ay. But he was a prophet [2Sa 23: 02 1and knew that God had promised him o n oat h that he would place one o f his desce ndants on his throne 12Sa 07:11-16 1. See ing what was ahead. he spoke of the res urrectio n of the C hri-a, that he was not aban do ned to the grave. nor did his body see deca y (Act 0 2:29-30). So Da vid se rved as a pro xy a nd as a type fo r the Messiah who is the antit ype. Isai ah also se rved as a prophetic pro xy j ust as David had. In the same chapter w here Paul sai d that Psa 0 16: 10 was me ssianic (Act 13:35-38), Paul sa id that Ye.lh,w is the Suffer ing Servant (Act 13:34 qu otes tsa 55:03lcom pare 2Sa 07: 15]l. Paul was merely agreei ng with Pete r who sa id the same thing cnruc r-c uuu Psu 0 16:10 was messiani c (Act 02:27-3 1). Another ex ample of where the NT writers read Isaiah as tho ugh the So n were speaking and quotin g the Father is where Matthew quotes Isa 0 7: 14: An this took place to ful fill what the Lord had said throu gh the prophet : 'The virgin will be with ehild and will give birth to a son. and the y will ca ll him Immanuel: which mea ns, 'God with us" (Mat 01:22-231. Another ex am ple whe re Mat thew knew Yahveh was speak ing is his q uote of H o~a 11:0 1: And so was fulfilled what the Lord had said th rou gh the pro phet: 'Out of Egypl I called my son' (Mal 02: 15),

Malenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

147

Anothcr instance is Paul's allusion to l sa 26:19. Isaiah sa id on be half of the future Messiah: Your dead sha ll live [just as] my dead body, they shall arise . Paul wrote : Christ has indeed been raised from the dead , the first frui ts of those who have fallen asleep . For since death came throu gh a man, the res urrection o f the dead co mes also through a man. For as in Adam all d ie , so in Chri st all will be mad e ali ve ( ICo 15: 20-22). Ano ther instance of a n Isaiah e xce rpt he ing read as tho ugh C hrist were the speaker is provided by Joh n (loh 12:38) and Paul (Rom 10: 16- 17).' ]4 The eve nt described by Isaiah occ urred during the life of Ch rist: Who has belie ved our message'! And to whom has the arm o f Yahvc h been re vealed? ( lsa 53:0 1). Pau l wrote: And Isaiah boldly says . ' 1 was fou nd by those who d id not see k me; I revealed mysel f to those who did not ask for me.' But co nce rning Israel he says, 'All day long I have held out my ha nds 10 a disobedient and obstin ate people ' (Ro m 10:20-2 1). Pau l sure ly understood that Isaiah was q uoting Ya/weh"s wo rds. s ince Isaia h wo uld not talk as thou gh he we re God. Also , Yes/lila said that Isa 06:09-10 was fulfilled in Mat 13:14-[5: In them the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled, which says, ' By hearing yo u will hear, and will in no wa y understand; see ing you will see , and will in no wa y percei ve; for this peo ple 's heart has grown callo us, their ears are d ull of hearing , they have closed their eyes; or else perhaps they might perceive with thei r eyes, hear with their ears, understand with the ir heart, and sho uld turn again; and I would heal them' (Mat 13: 14-15). The writer of Heb rews a lso read Isa iah as though the Messiah were the speake r. The au thor of Hebre ws said that Isa OR: 17-1 R appl ied to Yeshua: Again, ' I [the Messiah ) will put m)' trust in him.' Again. "Beho ld, here am I and the children [believers (Joh 17: 12)] whom God [the Father] has give n me ' ( Heb 02:(3). The writer o f Hebrews knew it wa s not unusua l for God to say that he had childre n (l sa 45: I I: Jer 10 :20 ; Lam 01: 16; Eze 16:21 ). so Christ eo uld say he had children. too, Another instance of Isa iah bein g read as though Chr ist were the speaker is Yex /llIa ' s saying he was the speaker of Isa 29: 13 (Ma t 15:07 -0 R): You hypocrit es! Well d id Isaiah prophesy of you. say ing. "T hese people dra w near to me with thei r mout h, and honor me with their lips; bu t their heart is far fro m me ' (Mat 15:07-(8 ). Ye,511uQ also said that Isa 61:0I-02a was fulfilled in Luk 04:17-19 (compare lI eb 10:07. 09): The book o f the p rophet Isa iah was handed to hi m, He o pe ned the book. and fo und the place where it was writte n: ' The Spirit of the Lord is

Matenal com direlbs

autcrars

148

Yae l Na tan

on me. becau se he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me 10 healthe brokenhearted. to proclai m rel ease (0 the captives, recovering of sight 10 the blind, to del iver those who arc crushed, and 10 proc laim the acce pta ble year o f the Lord ' (Luk 04:17- 19). Other sec tio ns in the prophetic books that sho uld be considered me ss ianic incl ude Jer 11 :18- 12:17. 15: 10-21 and 17:14-18. Al so messia nic are those sections that disc uss the Shephe rd in Zechariah . s ince Yes/ili a sa id he was the S hep herd of Zec 13:07 (Mar 14:27). Eve n the ea rly Ch urc h fathers knew that the prop he ts we re prop he ts on ce re moved from the real prophet. Thai is why the c urly Ch urch fathe rs interpreted so me phrases and sec tio ns as pro phecies thai a quick perusal migh t not reve a l In he prop hecie s, for instance, Psa 02 2: 16. So meti mes the assessment that the Son is speaking d irect ly thro ugh the OT prophe ts is not borne o ut by the punctuation mark s. Th is is because the original Heb rew text d id not have punctuation marks. T he Masoretes first add ed di acritical marks and punctuation to the Hebre w tex t in the s ixth through n inth ce nturies AD. The result was the Masoretic Text (MT l recensio n. Unfo rt una tely, the int e nded se nse o f t he o rigin al ma y not have bee n as imponant as what appealed to the Masorete s' unitari an se nsibilities. That the MT is a recen sion mean s the com pilers were free to c hoose what read ing to fo llow and what rea ding to discard or footnote. T he e xact crite ria that the Masoretes used to determ ine the co rrect readin g are sketchy. Tran slators also feel the y have a lice nse to force passages to read as though the prophe t were the o ne spea king or quoting. Texts that do not confo nn to translato r e xpectatio ns regularly have their pronouns a nd punct uation adju sted. In this way. the Son is excised out of Scripture . and most o f the Trinitarian Scripture is made into unitarian literature. Ma ny e xamples of te xtual change s will be g ive n lat e r. Here , ho we ver, is an example of a Trini ta rian passage bein g changed to conform to the unitarian se nsibilit ies of the translators . The Son quoted the Father who said: I [the Father] ov e rth re w some of you as Go d [the Son] overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah (Amo 04: I Ia). Though the MT and LXX both have "G od: ' the NI V translators thought that ch anging "Goo" to the pronoun 'T' would ma ke better sense. Whene ver third person speec h-a-where God speaks o f God, is changed to first person spee ch, another Trinitarian proof text is lost in translation. A similar change is made in Hos 12:U4 where the last wo rd in the Hebrew, " us," is re ndered as "hi m" in the NIV. Still. eve n in translation so me passages are best understood as tho ugh the Son we re speaking or qu ot ing the Father. For instan ce , whe n Isa iah talked to King Ahaz, the narrator wrote the very telli ng phrase , "Again Yahveh spoke 10 Ahaz" (lsa 07: I 0). ELsewhere , the narrator said: At that time Ya hn "h spok e by Isaiah the son of Amoz, saying... (Isa 20:02).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

149

Yahveh eve n told Isaiah 10 take OUI a " large" scroll and a pen to take dow n dictation (lsa 08:0 1)! Isaiah so me times menti oned Yahveh spea king words 10 him directly (lsa 0 I:02: 08:05, II : 20:02 ; 29:11-12, 18; 30:08; 34 :16). Examples where the prophetic ex pe rie nce in vol ved minimal in put by the prophe ts include Eze kiel's saying tha t he saw "God's visio ns" (Ezc 0 1:0 1; 08: 08-04 ; 11 :24: 40:02). Ezekie l said that the "vision I had seen went up from me" tE ze 11:24 ). That Ezekiel wrote dow n what God was seeing and saying about the visio n becomes e vident when Ezek ie l wrote, "l destroyed the city" (Eze 43 : ( 3 ). Unfort una tely, the "I" in the MT rece nsion is often translated as "he ." This masks the fa ct that Ezek iel is recording Yahl'eh's words d irectl y. It was God who envisioned destroying the city. as Ezekiel wrote: It was acc ording to the appearance of the vision that I saw, even according to the vision that I saw when I came to destroy the city ( Eze 43:03). Anot her e xa mple where the prophe tic e xper ie nce in vo lved minimal inpu t by the prophets comes from the NT. Paul said that everyone prese nt co uld hea r what the Son had said to him, but o nly Paul actually saw the Son (Act 09:(7 ). So so metimes bein g a pro phet req uired no special prophet ic insigh t o r presci ence, b ut mere ly the ability to ta ke dictation. Malachi is the best e xample of a prophet who is a mouthpiece. In fact, it is no t known whether there really was an ac tual prophet named "Malac hi." Malachi is discussed further at the e nd o f this c hapte r. When a prophet spo ke in the fiN person (I , me, my) withou t an)' q uo tation for mulas, such as "thus says Yah l'h:' this is likely the word s of YlI hreh the Son. When the So n spoke of, but does not quote, the Father or the Spirit. he uses third person speec h (for exa mple, " he: ' " him: ' " his"). For instance, in the following sec tio n, Ya h eh the Son refers to the Father, the Mo st High, using the pronoun " he": My [t he So n' s ] people are det erm ined to turn from me [the So n ]. Though they cal l to the Most High [the Father] , He [the Father] certainly will not e xalt them. How ca n I [the So n] give yo u up, Ephra im? How ca n I [th e So n] hand yo u o ve r, Isr ae l? 1I0 w can I [the Son ) ma ke yo u like Admah? How can I [the Son] make you like Zebo iim? My [the Son's] he art is turned within me [the So n]. My [the So n's] co mpassion is aroused. I [t he Son] will not e xec ute the f ierc e ness of my (t he So n's ] an ger. I [the Son ) wil l not retu rn to destroy Ephraim: ~or I [the Son ] am God [the So n], and not man [this is the premcamate So n spea king ): the Ho ly One [th e Son] in t he midst o f you: And I [the Son1 will not come in wrath (Hos 11:07-09). Peter mdicated that the perso n of Ya /H 'ell speaking using fir-s t pe rso n speec h througho ut Isa iah is spec ifically t he So n ( I Pe 0 1:10 -1 1). Thi s assertion is co nsistent with the pronou n usage in Isaiah. T here are eve n passages whe re God uses direct speec h and mention s both the Father and Sp irit in the third pe rson, fo r instance, see Isa 34:16 and 48:12- 16 in the Trinitarian proofs appendix. By Matenal com direlbs autcrars

150

Yael Na ta n

the process of elimina tion. one can determine that the person of Yclhl'l.'h who is speaking in Isa 34:16 and 4R:12- 16 is the Son. Double Quotation Formulas When there is a dou ble q uotatio n form ula such as: lIear you the Wo rd [the Son! of Yahve h [the Father]. 'Thus says the Lord Yahw;,h (the Father]' (Eze 13:02b-03a), the prop het is te lling his liste ne rs to hear the words of the Son who then q uotes the Father. So the first phrase is spoken by the prophet, a nd the second phrase is spo ken by the Son. Double quota tion form ulas are found ofte n in the OT. lJ ~ Furthe rmore. the phrase "the Word came" followed by the words "Thus says .. ." sho uld also be cons idered a dou ble q uotatio n formula. T his formula is used to indicate that the prophe t quoted the Son's q uotatio n of the Father 's direct speech Ocr 2 1:01. 04; 25:01-05; 26:0 1-02; 27:01-02; 34:0 1-02; 34:0&. 12-1 3; 44:01-02. The Prophets were Sometimes 11 Proxy for the Priestly Role of Yahveh the Son When Isaiah pleaded with God concerning the sinfu lness of his people and eve n of himself. this is the Spirit and the So n in action working through Isaiah. Il~ As Paul said: The Spirit he lps us in our weakness. We do not know what we oug ht 10 pray for. but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with g roans that words cannot express. And he [the Father] who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit. because the Spirit intercedes for the saints in accor dance with God's [the Father's ) will (Rom 08 :26-27; see also 10h 03 :06; Rom OR :16 ). Here Paul is saying that since the Father knows every thought of the Spirit. the Spirit's intercessi on need not be audible. Paul a b o said the spirit of the Son intercedes for believers : God sen t o ut the spirit of his Son into yo ur hearts, crying. ' Abba, Father !' (Gal 04:06; sec a lso Rom 08 :15- 16). So when Isaiah seems to co nfess the si ns of himself and of the nation Israe l (for instance, Isa 06 :05), that really is Yahreh the So n act ing as the ultimate priest thro ugh his proxies - the prophe ts. Isaiah wrote: Thus says your Lord Yahveh [the Father], and your God [the Son], who pleads the cause of his [the Son's] people (Isa 51:22; see also Jdg 10:16; Psa 043:0 I; Mic 07:09; Heb 02: 18; 04: 15). The re arc instances, howe ver, where the MT recension has the Son confess ing sin where the LXX does not , for exa mple. Jet 04:0&: • LXX: For these things gird yourselves with sack clothes. and lament, and howl : for the anger of the Lord is not turned away from you. • MT: For this, gird on sackcloth, lament and howl. for the fierce anger of ranven hath not turned back from us [Son and Israeli .

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

151

So meone might think it unsee mly fo r the So n to be confessing the sins of the people as thnu gh they we re his ow n sins -i-us he doe s in Psa 069 :05. The alternative. however. is that the prophet co nfessed the sins of others as though the y were h i ~ ow n. The OT prophets were not the ones co mmitt ing g ro~~ sin and idolatry, however. So the issue is a non- issue. a non starter. Besides, the So n is not o nly a prophet, but also a priest and king and even a sacrif ice for sin. So who better than the Son could con fess the s ins of others as though the y were his own '! The Priest in Isaiah Was Also the Sacrifice The Son is not o nly the ultimate priest. hut also the sacrifice (Heb 07:27; 09: 14. 28; Act 08:32-33). T hat Isa 53 spoke of the So n as a sacrifice was con firmed when the eunuch asked Philip about Isa 53:07-08: Tell me. please. who is the prophet talking about. himself or someone e lse? (Act 08:34). Luke wrote: Philip then began with that very pass age of Scri pture [Isa 53:07-08] and told him the good news ahout Ye l'huo (Act 08 :35). The Son confessed the sins of the people. This is si milar to how the OT priests confesse d the sins of the people o ver the sacr ificia l lamb and o ver the scapegoat (Lev 16:21 ; Isu 53: 10; I Pc 03: 18). Since the Spirit and the So n dwell in Chris tians. and the Son takes huma nity's sins on himself, God him self becomes afflicted when his peop le are afflicted (Isa 63:09 ; Act 09:(4). In this way, God thnmu ghl)' identifies himself with his people (Mat 10:40; 18:05: 25:40.45. and the like). Since the So n became the scapegoat, he was afflicted for the sins of hi.s people ( Isa 53:04 : Jer 15:10-21; Mat 08:17; 2Co 05:2 1; Hcb 09 :26. 28; 10:10: I Pc 0 2:24). So he can associate with sinners (Mat 27:43; Luk 07 :39; 19:07 ). and allow himself to be thought of as a sinner (Psa 069:04; 10h 09 :24), and even as a criminal (Isa 53: 12; Mar 15:28; Luk 22:31). Whe n we read Isaiah saying that he is sinful (l sa 06: 05 ), it really was YollI,,,h the So n talking through Is.aiah -talki ng as a scapegoat wou ld. The Son shou ld be seen as the ultimate speaker behind the statement: We [the Son and belie vers ] all , like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and Ya/weh [the Father) has laid on him [the Mess iah] the iniqu ity of us all (the Son and belie vers] (lsa 53:06: see also Heb 10:10-12). Interestingly, there are instances, such as Jer 10:18-20, where the MT rece nsion has the So n suffering punis hment for sin where the LXX does not. T he LXX translators merely translated the first perso n pronouns in the MT as third person pronouns 10 keep the prophet from suffering punishment for sin. The trans lators evidently did not realize that the Son wo uld suffer as a scapegoat.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

15 2 Yah~'eh

Yael Natan the Son Can Properly Call

Yah~eh

the Father " My Goo" and "Ou r Goo"

Though the Servant of Yah veh ca lled himse lf Yohveh (Isa 6 1:0&), the Se rvant of Yaln'eh also calls the Fathe r " my God" (l sa 07: 13; 25:0 1: 49:04: 6 1:10) and "our God" (Isa 01 : 10: 40:08 ; 57:0 7; 6 1:06). A critic migh t say thai this di sproves the Trinity, or at least it di sprove s that a ll three mem bers are eq ual. Thi s criuc ism. howeve r. can be countered j ust like all) ot her straw arg ument. Trinita rians do no t try to prove thai the three persons o f the Trinity are the sa me - j ust equal. There arc not three Fathers. but rather the Fathe r. SOli and Spirit! Moreo ver , Scripture ex plicit ly slates that the Son humbled hi mse lf and took on the form o f a man (Phi 02:08). So a passage showing that the Son submits to the Father do cs 1I0t prove the So n's substance is infe rior 10 that of the Fathe r's. S ubord ina te does no t nece ssar ily mean in fe rio r- as an y prince studying with a tutor realizes soone r o r later. A cr itic might also say that the phrase " my God" sho ws the speake r must hav e bee n the prop he t, or an yone other than the SOli. There arc sev eral poss ible respo nses 10 this c rit icism. To start. the issue is not as important as il migh t see m stanstically. The LXX often does not has the " my God" and "o ur" God" reading when the MT recen sion doc s. This is significant beca use , though the NT write rs has: • Yex/ma say ing, " my God ," a few times (fo r instance , Mat 27:46: Joh 20: 17; Rev 03:12), and • The Father be ing " his IYe.~"lIa 's l God" (Re v 01:(6), the number o f these occurre nces is not so great that it suggests Yr.I'hul/ was on ly a man and not the God -man . So the book of Isaiah can still be viewed as though the Son were the author. just as so me Psa lms arc viewed a s messiani c. though David used wo rds such as "my God" (for ex ample. Psa 0 22:0 I (LX X 02 1J JI Apparently. jhe scribes, espe c ially Ihe Soferim. "e mended" Ihe MT rece nsio n to ma ke the prophet s sound more human. humble and polite. Ho we ver. they did not gi ve due consideration to the d ivine orig in o f the prophets ' words (JeT 08:08-09: Hos 08:12 : Mal 15:06 ). T he Soferim were like the Israel ite s who did not want to hear the direct speec h of Yah veh , bUI onl y wa nted 10 hear Mose s' rendition of what Yahl'eh told him: Speak to us yo urse lf and we will listen. But do nOI have GrM:I speak 10 us or we will d ie (Exo 20:19: see also Dell 04: 33: 0 5:24-28 ; 18:16- 17; Jer 20:09; 36:32; Heb 12: 19 ). The sc ribes wou ld not be the las t people to mistake the humannes s of God 's se rvants as ev ide nce for the human origin of the ir: • Words (Joh 14:10, 24 ), • Dccd s tMar 11:27.29-33; Jo h05: 19).or • Perso n (Luk 0 3:23). For instance , thou gh many wo uld think that Ya hl'eh is talking to Jeremiah in Jer 25:15- 16 , a c areful reading suggests that the Father is talk ing to the Son .

n.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

153

The LXX (second or third century BC) is much older tha n the MT recension (tenth ce ntury AD), a nd t he LXX predates the Trinitarianism vers us unitarianism debates on reco rd. So o ne can assume tha t at lea st in areas affect ing the doct rine of God , the LXX would mort; o ften re flect the original te xt. What one finds is that in one area where the LXX hints of the Trinity, the MT was changed so the autho r of prop hetic books became merel y human. For instance: • The prop het sa id "o ur God" in the MT recensio n. but not in the LXX (Isa 0 I:10; 35:02 : 55:07; 6 1:02. 06 ; Je r 08:1 4 : 14: 22: 23:36: 3 1:06; 37:03; 42: 20: 43:0 2; Hos ORJJ2; Joe OI:16; Zec 13:0 9 ), • The prophet sa id " my Go d" in the MT rece nsion. but not in the LXX (lsa 0 7:1 3; 25:0 1; 57:2 1; 6 1: 10: Hos 09:08, 17; Joe 0 1:13; Hab 01 :12; Zec II :0 4 ), and • The prop het sa id " my Lo rd" in the MT recen sion, but not in the LXX (ls a 2 1: 08). A search sho ws that the LXX has: • Fewe r instan ces of the prophet say ing, " my God : ' tha n in the MT recensio n (lsa 12:0 2; 33: 22: M ic rJ6:rJ6; Hah o I: II ), • Fewer instances of the prop het saying, "o ur God," than in the MT rece nsion (I sa 26: 12; 35:04: Jer 23:3 8; 4 2:04; 46:10), and • No instan ce s of " my Lo rd," o r "our Lord" when the MT rece nsion docs not say the same . Here arc so me e xa mples o f ho w the c hanges in the MT recensio n tend to de mote the au thor fro m being the creator to being a crea ture: • lsa tll : ](J: o LXX : Listen to the law of God o MT: Listen to the law o f ou r God • Isa 07 : JO,13: o LXX: T he Lord again spoke to Ahaz .. .will yo u also co nte nd against the Lord '! o MT: Again Yahveh spo ke to Ahaz ... will yo u also weary my God ? • Isa 25:01 : o LXX : 0 Lord G od, I will glor ify you o MT: Yahveh: yo u are my God • Isa 32:15 o LXX : until the Sp irit sha ll come upon you o MT: until the Spirit is po ured o ut on us • Isa 33:14 o LXX: W ho will tell yo u that a fire is kindled? Who will tel l yo u o f the eterna l place? o MT: Who o f us can d well with the con suming fire? Who o f us can d well with e verlasting burning'! • Isa 35:02 : o LX X: ,. . the maje sty of G od o MT: ... the e xcellency o f o ur God

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

154 •

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Yael N ata n

lsa 47:04: o LXX : Yo ur deli ve rer is Yahveh o MT: Our Redeemer, vah veh lsa52:1O: o LXX : sa lvatio n o f God o MT: salvatio n of our God Isa 55:07: a LXX: Let him ret urn to the Lord. and he shall find mercy: fo r he shall ab unda ntly pardon your sins. a MT: LeI him tum to Yahveh .. .and to o ur God, fo r he will frecly pardon. Isa57 :2 1: o LXX : 'T here is no joy 10 the ungodl y: sa id God o MT: ' The re is no peace,' says my God. 'for the wicked.' Isa 6 1:0 2: a LXX: .. .rhe day o f recompense, to com fort all that mourn o MT: . ,.the day of vengeance of our God. to co mfo rt al l who mourn lsa 6 1:06: o LXX: You shall be called .. .ministers o f God o MT: You will be named miniererv o f ou r God Isa 6 1: 1O: o LXX : lei my so ul rejoice in the Lord a MT: My soul rejo ice s in m}' God Joe OI :1 3 a LXX: .. .yo u who minister to God a MT: ... you who minister befo re my God Joe OI:16 a LXX: Yo ur meat has bee n destroyed before your eyes, joy and g lad ness from out of the house of yo ur God. a MT: Is not the food c ui offbefore our I:YI: _~, joy and gladness from the house of our God? Mic 05:05-o6 1BHS 05:04-051 : o LXX: When Ashur shall co me into you r land, and when he shall co me up upon yo ur co untry. .. .and the re s hall be rai sed up aga inst him seven shepherds .. .a nd He [the Messiah] shall deli ver you from the Assyrian. when he shall co me upon your land. and when he shall invade your coasts. a MT: When the Assy rian in vade's our land and marc hes through o ur fortresses, we will raise against him seve n shepherds... He [the Messiah] will deliv er us fro m the Assyrian when he invades o ur land and marc hes into our borders. Ha b OI :1 2: o LXX : 0 Lord God, my Holy One a MT: My God , my Ho ly One Z I:C II :04 o LXX : Thus says the Lord Almighty Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

155

o MT: This is what Yah ~'l'h, my God, says • Mal 02;10 o LXX : Did not one God create yo u? o MT; Did no t o ne Go d crea te us'! Many manuscripts, e ven a mong the Dead Sea Scrolls. e stablish ho w the LXX read a century or mo re before Ch rist's time. The LXX. generally speaking, was trans lated from o ne family o f Heb rew manu script s wh ile the MT rece nsion was compiled from anothe r famil y. A co mpar ison of the MT recension with the famil y of Heb re w man uscripts that led to the LX X helps to sho w whe re the co pyists and scribes (e specia lly the Sojerim ) made inad verten t o r inten tional c hanges in the MT recensio n. Here a re two mor e e xamples of where the MT and LXX differ. and where the Soferim ma y ha ve made the changes: • Gen 0 2:1 8: o LXX : " And the Lord God sa id, ' It is not good tha t the man should be a lone , let us make [plural verb] fo r h im a help suitable to hirn.?' o MT: " I will make ...·• rather than " Le t us make .. .,'" • Neh 09 :18: o LX X: Nehe miah recou nted the golde n ca lf incide nt using plural no uns and plural verbs: .. .the y even made to them sel ve s a moll en calf, and said, "These are the Gods that bro ught [plura l] us up o ut of Egypt' (LX X Ne h 09:1 R), a nd o MT: The HH S ha s the s ingular form " bro ught." hut the HHS cr itical apparatu s says that the LX X and many Hebre w manuscripts have the plural fo rm "brought." Co mparison of sections of the OT sho ws how changes were made fro m time to time. For instance, the poetry sec tio ns were ha rder to edi t, and so they te nd to have more archai c Hebrew, By cont rast. prose sections ha ve less archaic He brew. That changes wer e made ex pla ins why: ,. ,few traces of dia lects e xist in Biblical Hebre w,., scho lars belie ve this to be the res ult of Masoretic edit ing of the text. l IT Syste matic ed iting resu lted in the bifurcatio n o f the Hebre w into families that led to the MT recension and the family on whic h the LXX was based. If ed its were rarely made. there wou ld only be o ne fam ily with variant readings. Comprehensive ch ange s are only possible when a fam ily of manuscripts is in the hand s o f a few peop le. Then all co pies not ma rked "offic ial" can eventually be d iscarded or destroyed. Wh ile co mprehensive c hanges in the LX X we re not possible afte r the third century Be due 10 the popularity of the LXX, pornons of the MT may ha ve been cha nged up to the ti me of the Masore tes (6th to 10th ce nturies AD), It was the n that the Masoretes standardized the text to c reate the MT rece nsion (lob 05: 12). During the recen sion proce ss. the MT fa mily' likel y underwent the most radica l changes. Th e reaso n is that a unitar ian bia s rather than statist ica l analysis dererrnined what read ings become the standa rd. Matenal com direlbs autcrars

156

Yael Na tan

Hu manizing the prophets, as was d iscuss ed ab o ve, co uld not und o a ll the Trinitarian ism inhcrent in the MT. T hc Gr eck LXX and MT recension still agree co nce rning most Trinitarian proo f tex ts. For instance , the " us" referring 10 Yah veh still survives in both the MT recens ion and the LXX in several places (Ge n 01 : 26; 03 :22; I I:07; Isa 06:08). However, only the LXX retains the " us" referring to Yuhl'eh in Gen 02 : IR. Por ce ntunes the LXX was held in h igh regard. T he Je wish establishme nt d id not consider the LXX translators suspect until afte r Christianity adopted the LXX as its de facto official translation . Even then, the LXX remai ned in usc in the sy na go gues unti l at lea st 130 AD when Aqu ila's Greek translatio n was first introd uced. Aqui la's trans latio n was produc ed under rabbinic supervisio n. The histor y of the LXX shows that we can be sure the LXX tra nslators d id not insert Tr initarian lang uage based on a whim or here tical noti ons. Trinitarian pfl)o fs that survived in the MT recension arc no t necessaril y more legit ima te than those found in the LXX. Th ey were ju st so well kno wn that MT editors co uld not ax the m. MT ed its tend ed to make the MT more unitarian and less Trinitaria n. Trinitarian proo fs had to surv ive the anti-Trini tari an bias of unitarian Sofe rim scnbes. and the unitarian bias o f the Masore tes who com piled the MT rece nsio n. T he provenance !" o f surviving Tr initarian tex ts must have been so und. or e lse the y would not ha ve esca ped the e raser and sc issors century a fter cen tur y. Less known Trini tarian proofs such as the " us" in Gen 02: 18 were not safe from tampering hands. T bcsc passa ges tende d to acc umulate variant readings, becau se unitaria n copyists would assume a plural referr ing to Yi/hl'eh was a mistake. Then whe n it carne time to co mpile a recen sion , the manu scripts with the uni tar ian reading wo uld outnumber manusc ripts with the orig ina l Tr initarian read ing. So o ne ca n be sure that any Tri nitarianism remaining in e ither the MT rece nsion or the Gre e k LXX was a pa n o f the inspired or iginal. Th is wou ld be in accordance with the exege tica l principle: durior tecno praefe ratur, meaning, " the harsher read ing is to be prefe rred."!" In this case . the "harsher' read ing wo uld be the Trinitarian reading, and the mo re palatable read ing wo uld be the unitarian reading. Another response concerning the Son say ing. " my God: ' and "our God" is that cnncs read more into the " my God " and "our God " stateme nts than is warranted. The Son ca n still be d ivine and refer tn the Father as " his God." ju st a s: • The writer of Hebrews says that the Fathe r addre ssed the Son as "God " in Psa 04 5:06-07 (Heb 01 :08), • Ycshua said that the Father addressed him a s "G od" (Ps a 01l2:011 ; Joh 10: 36a). • The Fathe r ca lled the Son " my King" (Psa 00 2:07 ), and • The Me ssiah is the Father's (vyo ur") " Holy On e" (Psa 0 16: 10). So the Son's calling the r athe r " my God " doc s not necessarily prove an involun tary sub ordination on the pan o f the Son Be sides. Paul e xplained why the Son called the Fath er his God. Paul said that thou gh the So n is equal to the Father, w hen the Son becam e the God -m an, he voluntaril y subord inated himse lf so that the Father 's wish became his command (Mat 06 : W ; 26:42; Hcb 10:07, 09 ). Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

157

In Paul's words. Yes/ilia is "in very nature God, [but) d id not conside r equality with God so me th ing to he hel d de arly" ( Phi 0 2:(6). After the res urrect ion. however, Yesh ,w was exalted to be Most High along with the Father (Phi 02:09I I ). Ye,~llUa 's exaltatio n is d iscussed further in the Song o f Moses c hapter. Who is th e Aut hor Behind t he Aut hor in l\Iala chi? The Tt/le Mu ltlt'hi " Malach i" means " my messenger" in Hebre w. Nothing is kno wn abou t a man named Malach i who might be the author of Malachi. The title may refer to the Son , who was o fte n called the Maid YahH,II in the OT. T he So n was a lso the Malek with the Father 's Name. rahveh , "in him" (Exo 23:2 1). The Fa ther even referred to the So n as "Malach i" (Exo 23:23; 32:34). The name Malachi could refer to an angel that Yahl'eh the Son had sent. For instance. Yes hua refe rred to a cre ature a ngel (Rev 22:08-09) who m he had sent as " my a ngel" ( Rev 22 :16). Ma lachi could refe r to a prophet or prie st s ince prophets (Hag 0 I: 13) and priests (Mal 0 2:07) were called matcks. However. eve n if the re were a person named Malachi, the name ultimately refers to the Son in the amitypc-typal sense . This wou ld be similar to how a priest-k ing was named Melch izedek, bur the name is a theophoric name referring to Melc hizedek's God , Yahveh, "Mclchizcdc k" means " My King is Righteou sness" (Ge n 14: I8), The Gree k LXX lists the book's title as "His Malek," rather than " My Malek." Thi s is s ignific ant because it ind icates the LXX trans lators tho ught " Malach i" was not a proper name. Otherw ise. they might have transliterated the Heb rew name directly into Greek. Th is rna}' indir.:ate that the LXX translators thought "M alachi" referred to the Malek Yanveh, who is called " his Ma lek" (Dan 03:28; Oc n 24:07, 40 ; Dan 06:22). Of course. " his angel" may refer to an angel sent by the So n (Act 12:1 1.1 5; Rev 0 1:0 1; 22:06), In any eve nt. as with the name Mek hizedc k, the LXX name " His Mu lek" ultimate ly points to the Malek vah veh who ins pired the whole 0'1' (I Pe 0 I: I0-1 1 was d iscussed ab ove ). The Rook. of Malachi Itself Provides (11/ Il/siMh f Whether an angel o r a prophet named Malachi del ivered the words of the Son, ultimately the Malach i behind the Malachi is the Son . T his is co nsistent with the opening line of the book : The oracle of the Word [the So nI o f Yahveh [the Fat her] to Israe l hy the ha nd of my [the Son's] angel [nwlcwhi] (Ma l 01 :0 1). If the "my nwlek" (malachi) in the ope ning line refers to a pro phet. this shows the prophet's con tribution to the book was merely taking dictat ion. If the Son were the Malachi. this would be es pecially ap prop riate. Then the Son would begin the OT by creating the universe (Ge n 0 1:0 1-0 3; 10h 01: 0 1-(3). and end the OT as the last prophet. Malachi. Sim ilarly, Yeshua bega n the NT as the subject of four biographies called the Gospels, and ended the NT as the main d ivine speaker of

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

158

Yael Na ta n

Revelation (Rev 22: 16. 20). By bookending both the Old and New Testaments. the Son truly is the Alpha and O mega, the Beginning and the End (Rev 21 :06: 22: 13). A n Issue

O ne passage in Malach i that may have been changed in the MT recens ion reads in the LXX as: Have you not all one father? Did not one God create you'? Why have you fo rsaken every ma n his brothe r. 10 profane the covenant of your fathers'? (LXX Mal 02: 10). The MT reads: Do we [the LXX reads "you"] not all have o ne Father'? Has not one God created us [the LXX reads "you"]? Why do we [the LXX reads "you"] dea l treache rously every man against his brothe r. profaning the covenant of our (the LXX reads "your"] fathers? (Mal 02: 10). That the LXX has Malachi saying "you" Israelites were created. but appare ntly docs not include himself as being created, shows that the ultimate author of the book Malachi is the Son. T he LXX was trans lated from the Hebre w sometime betwee n the second or third century BC and 70 BC. Apparently. some time after the LXX was translated but before the tenth century AD, a copyist c hanged a verse in the MT rece nsion. The c hange demoted Malac hi fro m being God to being a creature (Mal 02: 10). That "yo ur God " was change d to "my God" and "o ur God" in many prophetic books apparently was an attempt to demote the author from creator to creature. Th is reflected the general trend in Juda ic thou ght. As Jud aism became increasingly unitar ian. it was tho ught that no malek: not even the Ma lek Yah veh : could be d ivine.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Chapter 7 Various OT Presentations of the Trinity

The Trinity in Ezekiel The 50/1

The Word (Eze 0 1:03). w ho is also called the G lory (Eze 0 1:28) , is Ya llr eh the Son. T he Glory has the appearance of a ma n (E zc 0 1:26-2 8). T he NT refer s to the Son as the G lory a nd as the Word (Joh 0 I:14; Heh 0 I:03). Ezek iel sa id the G lor y by the rive r (E zc OL0 3, 28) was the same G lory me ntioned thro ughout Eze kiel (E ze 03 :22-23; 10:18-20; 43:03). The S"irit "The man" is first mentioned in Eze 08:0 ] -0 ] and is again introduced in Eze 40: 0 3. "T he man" is an anthropomo rphic rep rese ntation of the Spirit (E zc 08:0 2-0 3; 43:05.(}(j). The " Hand of Yllh l'ch" is also the Spirit (Eze 0 3: 14: 08:03; 37:0 I) . Bot h " the man" and the Glory arc ass oci ated with Yanveh oft en. In on e instance. " the man" brought Eze kiel " bac k" to the eas t ga te (Eze 4 4:0 1). Ezekie l had been by the eas t gate with " the man" in the pre vious c hapter [Eze 43:01). Th e rea son they had to go " back" to the gate is. appa rently. the man and Eze kie l had fo llowed the Gl ory (th e Son) from the east gate to the temple whe re the Son had talked to Ezek iel (Ezc 43:0 6-27). S ince the Glory (the So n) was in the te mple and on ly Ezek iel a nd the man were back at the cast gate, the narrato r must have been refe rring to "the man" (Ezc 44: 0 1) as }{,hl'el1 the Spirit (Eze 44 :02 . 0 5 ). The Trinitv The Spirit and the Gl or y are some times mentioned together, but at the same time they are disting uished from eac h other (Ezc 01 :28 - 0 2:0 2; 03:1 2-14. 23-24; 08:0 3-04: 10:18 -11 :01 , 22-23: 43:0 1-0 5). Nei ther the Glory nor " the man" is Yahl'el1 the Father. since: • "The man" quoted the Fat her (Eze 44 :06: 45:09. 18:46:01. 16; 47 :13), and • The G lory quoted the Father (Eze 03: 11 -12; 11 :0 5; 43: 18, II), 27) , The man (Eze 44:0 I ) referred to the G lory who went thro ugh the eas t gate into the temple (Ezc 43 :0 2..()5) as Ya hreh (Ezc 44 :( 2). T herefo re, the Gl ory (also c alled Matenal com direlbs autcrars

160

Yael Na tan

" the Word") is Yil hreh the Son, "the man" (also called " the hand of Yah l'ell" ) is Ya/w eh the Spirit. and the Ya/w eh that is o ften quoted in Ezekiel is vanvcn the Father.

The Trinity in Jonah The Pre'\'("Ke.~ of Yahl'eh In the boo k of Jo nah. the Presences of Y ahveh are mentioned four times (Jon 0 I: 02 ,0] (twice], If)) . The sailors kne w that Jonah was running from the Presences (the Son an d Spirit ) of Yahveh (Jon 0 1: 10). Jo nah wa s not necessarily runnin g from the Father, s ince it was the Word (the So n) who gave Jonah the assignment to go to N ineve h (Jon 0 1:0 I; 0 3:0 I, 0 3).

That Jonah was running from the Prese nces in the tem ple rather than fro m Ya hw'h the rat her in hea r te n make s se nse. Otherwise. the sa ilo rs wo uld har t: thoug ht Jo nah was making a mistake. The sailo rs like ly were we ll versed in astrolog y, espec ially since thcy used thc stars for navigation . The basic co nvictio n of ancient astrologist s was thai de itie s who co ntrolled lives and e ve nts on earth popu lated the heave nly bodie s. Jonah m ust have 1011.1 the sailors that the Presences were es pecially present in the te mple at Jerusalem. Ot herwise, the sa ilors would think il impossible to run frnm astral de ities. If Jo nah did not lell the sa ilors the Presence s were in the te mple . the sailors would have figured it impo ssible to avo id any god. unless the god's star rose and se t with the seasons. If that we re the ca se, Jonah would have had to travel north or south 10 a latitude where the star never clears the horizon. Jonah's destination, however. was Tarshish (Spain ) (Jon 01 :03). which is rough ly west of Pale-nne. Thc re is , ho we ver. no indication in thc book of Jo nah that the sailo rs thought Jonah's itinerary was ill co nceived. So Jnnah must have ment ioned the Presences in the templ e. The Trinitv as [All J the Gods (ho Elolli"') When the storm brewed. the ship's captain told Jo nah : Ge l lip and ca ll o n yo ur Gods [E lohim] ! Maybe [All ] the God s [/IlI Elohim ] will take notice [singular verb] of us, and we will not perish" (Jon 01 :(6) . T hat the ca ptai n used a s ingular ve rb with haElohim may ind ic ate that the capt ain knew Jonah's "own god" to be the Trinity (11t1Elohim). How the captain kne w the Tnnity to be "[A ll] the Gods" (hoElo him) is Jonah had 1011.1 the sailors that he was running from the Presences of Yahveh, Jonah must have then collectively referred 10 Yah veh the Father and his Presences as " [All] the Gods. " Jonah's terminology would have been normal Trinitar ian theology, since, in the OT. the Trinity often is ca lled "[All] the God s [haf:lohim]. " T his was discussed in the chapter on Hebrew co llec tive nouns. Of co urse. if the captain had any familiarity with the Hebrew relig ion, he wou ld have oflen heard the Hebrews using plural nouns and singular ve rbs in refe rence to Yahl'ch. Moreover. the pagans had Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

161

their pseudo-trinities. T he Trinity is called "[All] the Gods" four times in the book o f Jo nah (Jon tH : 0 6; 03:09, 10 : 04:0 7 ). Anothe r indicator of the perso ns of the T rinity, the dua l name "Yahveh Elohim ," is found in Jon 04 :06. T he paired names rohvch Elohim are discussed in the chaprcr o n Hebrew collective nou ns.

The Tr inity in Zechariah The $11/1 The Malek Yahveh is called Yah l'f'll (Zec 03:0 1-02). The Malek Yllh ~'eh spoke as only Yahreh co uld [Zec 0 2:0K- I I: 03:0 2-04 ). The personified " Word o f Yahreh" is Yahwh the So n. The phrase " this is the word of Yah~'eh" (Zcc 04 :0 6). ho wever, is nOI perso nified, and so here the "word" does not refer to the So n. The personified "Word [the Son] of ranven [the Fathe r]" (Zcc 07 :08) spoke of the Spirit and the Father as se parate persons (Zcc 0 7: 12-13). The Malek Yllhrt'h is shown to he dis tinct from Yohvch the Father by the Malek Yahreh's saying that Yahveh the Father "sent me" (Zee 0 2:08-09, II; 04:09; 06 : 15). T he Matek: rohvch has a sp irit that e xtends t hro ughout the earth, Zech ariah mentioned that the " Interpret ing" Malek's spirit extends to a north country (Zec 06 : 08). Com bining these insights with fac ts about previou s encounters with the M alek Yahwll indicates that the Ma lek Yahveh in Zechariah is the Word o f Yahwh, who is Yaln'ell the Son. Ill ' The SI,ir;1 The "Interpreting" Malek who talked to Zechariah is identified as Yahreh (Zec 0 1:20). T he "Imcrpreting " Malek is shown to be a separate person from the Malek Yallreh (Zee 0 I:09- 13; 02:03-04; 0 3:0 I and elsewhere). The "Interpreting" M alek is ment ioned in zcc 0 1:09. 13- 14, 19; 0 2:03; 04 :0 1, 04-05; 05:05, 10; and 06:04OS. Based on the fact that the " Interpreting" Malek is not the M« ld : vahvch , and based on the other facts given by Zechariah , the "Interpreting" Malek in Zechariah is Yahw'h the Spirit. The Father In Zec hariah, Yah~'eh o f hosts refers to a perso n d istinc t from the Word of Yaln'eh (Zec 07:08 ) and the Spir it (lee 07: 12-13). By proce ss o f eli minat ion, o ne can say the "Yahreh o f hosts" mentioned in Zec hariah is vahveh the Father.

Malenal com direlbs autcrars

Matenal com direlbs autorars

Chapter 8 The NT Use of OT Yahveh Texts

Background

The grea ter part of th is chapter co ncerns wheth er Ye.I'hu(I pr imarily spoke Gree k or Aramaic. Th e langu age issue has some bea ring on whe ther Yeshua ident ified himself a s: • Ya/weh the Son b)! apply ing O'I' Ya hreh texts to him self (sec Isa 35:0 2-05; 40: 03. 08 , 09 ; Dan 07: 14 and oth er instances in the NT Use of O'T Yah veh Texts append ix), • The d ivine Son of Ma n o f the Dan 07 vis ion (as is d iscussed in the So ng of Mose s chapter), • The " I A M" (as is d iscussed in the "I AM" and the Son g of Moses chapters) , and

• The subject of the Shema along with the Father (as is dis cussed in the Shema chapter). T he ev ide nce will sho w tha t Yes/ilia spoke both A ramai c and Greek . S ince Ye.l h ,w preac hed in Hellenized area s and his fo llowers and aud ience tended to be Helle nized. Ycshua likel y spo ke as much Greek as Aramaic while in Ga lilee. Aram a ic was prevale nt in Judea. but inscri ption s and ot her literar y evide nce sho w tha t Gree k was co mmon . too. Th is sugges ts that Ye.l'hua may ha ve spoken more Aramaic than Greek in J udea, b ut there too his audie nce te nded to be mo re Hell enized than Judean s taken as a whole. The se above e stimates. o f co urse. are predica ted on the assu mptio n that Yes/ilia drew an aud ience rep re sentative of the po pulation ce nters he visited. In a ll likelihood , ho we ve r, Ye.l hull ap pealed more to He lle nized Jew s and ge nti les, Th is helps ex plain why the NT is written in Gre ek, and why Pilate had the sig n posted on tht:: cruc ifix in three langu age s: Ara ma ic. Uree k and Lati n. Wherever Yeshua wen t, he could count on the majority knowing G reek, at least as a second langu age. Ye,I'hulI. ho wever, v isited areas where he could not ass ume the cro wds kne w A ramaic . Except in spec ial circ umstance s that will be d iscu ssed, Matenal com direlbs autcrars

164

Yael Natan

Ye.~hlw

spoke Gree k whe n the crowd mostly spo ke G reek. and Ara maic when the crowd mos tly spo ke Aramaic. Yes/lila and the Father spoke for the benefit of their heare rs, whether Jew or Genti le (loh 12:30 ). So appare ntly veshua spoke Greek to Gree ks, even when the Gr eek s happen ed to be in Aramaic-speaking Judea (lo h 0 7:35 ; 12:20 -30). On ly later. after the Je ws had rejec ted the gos pe l, did God speak \0 Jews thmug h fo reign tong ul:s(lsa 2K:ll ; leo 14:21). The ev idence will show that Ye.\ htw and the NT writers knew both Aramaic and G reek , and were fam iliar with the in both lang uages. Th is meant that Yeshua an d the NT writers co nscio usly applied OT " I AM" statem ents and Yohvr h text s to reshua . Since the NT writers were fam iliar with the OT in IW O or three languages. no mea ning was inadvertentl y adde d or lo sl in translation fro m the OT to the NT.

or

The Impact of Wh ether the Bible Personages Immediately Recognized Allusions or Quotations The d isciples kep i the OT in mind during Yeshu(/ ' s ministry (Joh 01 :45: 02 :1 7: Mar 09: II ). The dis ciples d id not catch e very subtle allus ion 10 th e OT. but the y did d utifull y teach and record what they heard. For example , when the ow ners as ked why the d isciples were unt ying the ir don ke y, the d iscip les did not say. ' T his is 10 fulfill what was writte n in Zechar iah.,." (M at 2 1:04-05 ). T he disciplex sa id what the y were instructed to say. "T he Lord need s if' (Zee 09:09: M ar 11:04-06 ; Luk 19:32-34 ). In the es tim ation of Yeshua, it made lillie d ifference wheth er the di scip les and other NT characters recogn ized a quote or allusio n as such (Jo h 0 2: 17). He kne w the y wou ld event ually recogni ze h is quotations and all usions becau se he wo uld ma ke thai happe n. Ye.~hu(1 infonned the Emmaus d isc iples that their training an d O T knowledge were sufficie nt 10 understan d the OT. but their attitude needed adjust men t (Luk 24: 25 -32 ). Yeshuo also said "the Counse lor. the Hol y Spiri t. whom the Fat her will se nd in my nam e. he wil l leac h yo u all th ings. and w ill remind you of all th at I said to you" (Joh 14:26 ). Apparent ly. the Spi rit d id co me beca use the inspired NT writers proceeded to refere nce the OT hundred s of times. The NT reader can also mak e va lid as sociations and co ncl usions not alread y s pelled out in the OT or NT. Th is is similar to how prophecies are val id eve n thou gh the prophecies may have been unin telligible 10 the pro phet (Dan 08 :27). Mos t propheci es. in fact, were mea nt to be undcrstood only by later generatio ns. an d the Bi ble does not interpret mos t of us pro phecie s. Future gen erations ha ve mo re informal ion and c an "c onnec t all the dots" ( IPe 0 1:10-1 2; Dan 12:04). Later gene rations are situated in a better position to de rermme ho w literal or fig urat ive a prop hecy was by lonk ing at its fulfillment ( I Ki 2 1:23: 2Ki 09:36) . As the say ing goes , " Hinds ight is 20/20."

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

165

Th e Jewi sh Trinity The NT Writers Distinguished the Persons of the Trinity in th e OT

Th e NT wr ite rs applied O T Ya hl'f'h texts to the T rinity and to ind ivid ua l members of the Trinity. For e xam ples. see the NT use o f OT Yah I"'" Texts appe ndix . The NT wr ite rs were aware tha t ce rtain OT Yahveti texts we re o nly ap plicable to one person of the Trinity. That this is the case sugges ts that the NT writers were able 10 d iscern the persons of the Trinity in the OT Yu/lUa' s Quotations of, and Allusions to, Yahveh's " I AM" Statements and th e Shema

Background T ho ug h e rudite theolo gical books on the OT elucidate plent y of Trinita rian proofs, many people fixate on Yllhrt'h' s usc o f the pronoun " us" in Gen 0 1:26. 0 3: 22 , 11 :07 and lsa Ot):OR . These people usua ll y think that: • The OT o nly "hints" of the e xistence of the Trinity, and • Theologians barel y eke the doc trme of the Trinity c ut of the OT (I Co 0 3:02 ; Heb 05:1 2- 13), Theo log ical liberals often hold the opinion that the OT was e ither unitarian or was adapted fro m poly theistic te xts. Nat urally, they miss or gloss over the fores t of OT Trinitarian proofs. Libera ls also miss or misread the many OT indicators that the Ma lek. Ya hveh was d ivine, and that the co ming Messiah wo uld he divine. Of course . a d ivine Malek. Yahveh and Me ssiah would be an unexpected development if one viewed the OT 10 be unitarian . Liberals who hold that the OT is unitarian often co nclude that Paul and the ea rly Ch urch were myrhmakers. Paul supposed ly transformed three Bible characters into the Tnmty : • The itinerate preacher, Yeshua , into the Messiah. • T he Messiah into the so n o f God, • The son of God into Ihe Son of God. • The Son of God into God the Son . • Yalweh into God the Fa ther, and • The spirit of Yah veh into God the Spirit. The re just, howeve r, was nor e nough lime between the C rucifixion and Paul's death for mythmakin g of this magnitude. Furthermore. this view does not ex plain why the OT has so much mate rial that lends itself 10 a Trinitarian inrerpretauo n. What is more likely the case is that the NT accurately report ed the fact that Y'·.I'Juw iden tified himself as God the Son ,just as the Jews said Yeshua d id (Ju h 05: 18; 10:33). Yeslllla was killed by the Jews because he identified himsel f as thc"] AM" (Exo 03) and as the Son o f Man (Dan 07). The Jews also d id not like how Ye.~hIUJ see med 10 identify the Father and himself as subjects of the 511(1110. The abo ve sce nario is more like ly than any sp in a liberal has tried to put o n the NT and earl)' Church history. Pre vio usly, liberals sa id that Ye.~ Jllfa was killed Matenal com direlbs autcrars

166

Yael Na tan

because he was a messianic " freedo m fighter," Tha i is because liberals wanted to suppo rt socialistic and communist ic guerr illa leade rs. Th en liber als tr ied to say Ye.\hlw was a tra veling rabbi. Then some one rea lized that there would be no reason to kill a traveling rabbi. Lately, liberals have bee n saying that Yt'IhuQ was a v ictim of a dis pute abo ut: • Ceremonia l washings at the tem ple (Jo h 0 3:25 ), and • Whether it was proper fo r priests to e xclude the b lind, lame and lepers from th e temple (M at 2 1:14; Luk 17: 14). Th is inter pret ive shift seems to match the shift in libe ral po litics and ch urc h fu ndr aising effo rts. Liberals church co ngregations are gray ing, and there is a need to raise mon ey for elevators and wheelchair acce ss ramps. Libe ral s know tha t "god- man" my ths ta ke a lo ng w h ile to de ve lop and propagate . Since the NT was wri tten o nly dec ade s after the cr ucifix ion. libera ls would rather not belie ve that the NT calls Yel'lw(l "God" at al l. Liberals say that the NT w riters " application ofOT YI./h ~,t'h text s to Ye.\ h tlll was not me ant to say that Ye.\ lula was Ya/weh the Son incarnate. Libera ls also sa y it is onl y a fl uke that the ·'1 AM : ' Shema, and "Son of Ma n" stateme nts app lied to Ye.I'hua appear to be allus ions to, or quotations of, the LXX a nd MT. How liberals attempt to disco unt the idea th at the " I AM:' Snema , and "So n of Man" statements are allu sion s 10, or quotat io ns of, the OT is hy say ing: • The NT is Gre ek , • The OT is Hebrew, and • Yeshua on ly spoke Aramaic If Yes/lila spoke Aramaic. liberals thin k this wo uld di stance Ye,I'hul/ 's '·1 AM" and Shema stateme nts fro m those found in the Greek LXX and the Hebre w OT. T he libe ra l argu me nt is thwarted , ho we ve r, wh en o ne rea li ze s th at the popular 'l'ar gum s we re writte n in Ar am a ic. A lso, if Ye .I'hul./ s po ke Aramaic , this wo u ld stre ng t he n th e t ie bet ween Ye.l'h lw' s man y Son of Ma n stat em ent s and the D an 07 Son of M an vis io n. D an 02:04b -07 is w ri tte n in Aramaic . while the re st o f Dan iel is written in H ebrew. Per haps it is counterint uitive, but if ¥n hllll spoke in Ar am aic , the tie between the Greek LXX and He bre w Scripture s wou ld still be stro ng. The reason is that translators would be extra carefu l to choose thei r words we ll so as not to givc any false impre ssion s. Por ins tanc e , if Ye.I'II/1lI were not God , the NT writers wo uld ha ve made d isclaimer s wh en writ ing abo ut ¥t'.I'hua 's '" AM" a nd Son of Ma n statements. Whatever view one tak e s, log ic s uggests t ha t ¥esh ll a really d id ap ply ·'1 AM : · "S on of Man : ' and Shema state me nts to hi mse lf. Be sid es, w hate ve r language veshua used . th is fact is dear: the Jews undo ubted ly unde rstood Ye.l'hllll to be claiming to be God the Son. ¥t' shua nev er told the Jews that there was a misunderstand ing. He on ly co mplained o f their stubborn disbe lief (j oh 05:' R: 10:33).

or

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

167

Whether Yeshlla Spoke Predominantly Aramaic or Greek Background The conservat ive scholar Alfred Edc rshcim wrote: f Ye,\'/wlI ) spo ke Heb re w, a nd used and q uoted the Sc np tures in the o riginal ... althoug h, no doubt, He unde rstood Greek, poss ibly a lso Lann.!" Edcrshci m furthe r wrote abou t the language sit uation in first century Palestine: If Greek was the lang uage of the co urt and [military] camp. and indeed [G ree k] mu st have been und erstood and spo ken by mos t in the la nd [Palestine ].. ."" The mantra es poused by liberals such as those in the "Jes us Seminar" has been : the NT contains ~'ery few words actually spoken by Ye.l'huli. Libera l analysis of the literary ev idence had deter mined that Arama ic was the dom inant. if not the excl usive language of the Jews in Palestine. Liberals ta ught that the G reek NT was, at best. a translation of Ye.\"hua' s words. and, at worst. a to tal fraud. Lockstep ping liberals did not question these assertions, evert though Josephus, an eye witness of fiNt century Patesune spoke of the pre valence of G reek . Now. ho we ver, the cherished idea tha t Palestine was who lly Ara maic and Hebre w speaking has been discarded due to archeological evidence. T he ev idence will be discussed shortly. The reader will reca ll from the He brew collective nouns chapter that other cherished ideas have fallen by the ways ide in the last ce ntury. T hese include t he idea s that classical J udaism was anicon ic. devoid of figural art. and free of astrology. Interpolatlng Anachrontstlc Ideas into the Past It is unlikely that Yes/ilia wou ld have been monoling ual in the multilingua l envi-

ronment of the first century Pales tine. Palestine then was a part of the multilingua l Roman Empire. The ancien ts became co nversant or fl uent in o ther langu ages more readily than moderns today'. The reason is that the vocabulary of many ancient languages amounted to me rely several thousand words each. Th e vocab ularies of many mode rn lang uages tot al seventy-f ive thou sa nd words. English runs into more than ten times thaI, according to the Oxford English Dic tionary! By con tras t, the Torah contains 1,104 words .'>' What makes for speedy vocabulary growth is move able type prin ters (circa 1455 AD). cheap wnnd pulp paper ( 1800's AD). and affordable person al co mputers connected to the Web (I 1,l1,l3 A D).

To complicate matte rs, some modern languages are no t spelled phonet ically. Some languages have so many exceptional spellings that teachers are tempted to give up teac hing a plethora of spell ing rules. T he task of teac hing spel ling has fallen to word processing software where the users learn by trial and e rror. In ancient times, howe ve r, spel ling often did not matter since words were spe lled Malenal com direlbs autcrars

168

Yael Na ta n

phonetically, or spelling was not standard ized. or a language was not eve n written down due to the lack of an alp habet. Thai vocabulary and spelling were not major obstacle s to learn ing ancient languages meant people could more readily become conversant or fl uent in: • A seco nd or thirdlanguage. • A hybrid lang uage (lin";IUl/rwl/"(l or 'wine), or • A language with a red uced voca bula ry (creole or pidgin ),

The Langu age Situation in First Century Judea Josep h Ben Mat thias (late r Josephu s Flavius) was a Je wish prie st. Pharisee. gen eral a nd histor ian . Jo se phu s lived from 37/3 8 AD to 100 AD. He wro te , betwee n the ye ars 7 5 and 7 9 A D. Th e Histo ry of th e Jewish Wa r . T hi s boo k is a history o f the Je wish Re volt (6 6 -70 AD) a nd the siege of Masuda (72 - 73 AD) . Jo se phu s fini sh ed writ ing The Antiqu ities of the l e ws in 93 AD. T h is is a hi story o f the Je wi sh peo ple fro m the C reat io n to 66 A D. Joseph us grew up in an aristocratic, priestly fa mily in Jerusalem. Jose phus' nati ve lang uage wa s Aram aic. Undou btedly. Joseph us was tau gh t Gree k because ma ny o f the prie sts were Hellen ists . The G ree k inlluen ce in Judea g rew ncar ly unbounded Irom the days o f Alexander the Gre at (circa 330 Be). Hy 165 He, during the re ign of Antioch us (Epiphanes) IV, Helle nism had made enou gh inroad s into Ju daism to beco me a major cause of the Maccabean revolt. During the Macc abe an pe riod a nd subseq uen t Roma n per iod, the in flu e nce of Gree k ne ver abated. Gree k wa s ubiqu itous in Pa lestine e ve n afte r the se vent h century Muslim conquests. That Greek had made inroads into Judea since 330 Be cx plains why prior to 70 A D, ma ny re lig ionists in J udea read the Greek LXX . Thi s is ev idenced hy the prese nce of Greek scrolls and fragments among the Dead Sea scrolls. These Gr eek fra gments were one or two hund red years old by the time they were left fo r pos terity in 70 AD!I ~4 G ree k LXX fra gmen ts we re even found at Masada. the Jewish fortress besieged by the Romans from 72-73 AD. Tho ugh Eders heim wrote long before these archeo log ical di sco veries, he was on target about the LXX be ing... .. .the people's Bible . not merel y among the Helleni sts. but in Ga lilee, and e ven in Judea.'> Joseph us, a former priest, needed to know Greek for co mmerce, and to talk to the Romans and the Greek- spea king Jews of the diaspore . The Roman aristocrats spoke G reek. so knowing Gree k he lped Jose ph us as a negotiator in Rome from 64 to 66 AD. Edersheim wrote abo ut a nothe r Jewish official: Yet eve n the Je wish patriarch, Gamahcl Il, who may have sat wi th Saul o f Tars us at the fee t of his grandfather, was said to ha ve busied himsel f with Greek, as he certainly he ld liberal views on many points co nnected with Grecianism, To be sure, trad itio n ju stified him on the ground that his position bro ught him into co ntact with the ruling powe rs... 11<> Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

169

Josephus wrote The History of the Jewish I*lr in Aramaic, a version now lost to history, The Greek translation, which was prepare d under Josephus' personal supervisio n by fluent G reek speakers. survives . Josephus wrote his later works in Greek rather than Aram aic. Linguists have concluded that Josephus' later works show that he had a good grasp of Greek, but he used some clumsy idioms. This is what o ne would expect if Greek were Jose phus' seco nd langu age. G ree k was t he native lan gua ge of many peo ple in first ce ntury Palestine. Jose phus, howeve r, likely wrote of the language situation speci fic to Jeru sa lem and Judea. Josephus wrote that there was no incentive for J udeans to learn Greek perfect ly as a mark of educational distinctio n. because e ven se rvants commonly kne w Greek! It seems what Josephus was hinting at was that Greek was used for com merce and government functio ns. Scholars attempting to write great literary works naturall y thought it best to write works in their native language. What was considered an accomp lishment was to lea rn Hebrew a nd Aramaic, and then to beco me famili ar with the Jewish law! Thi s explains why the crowd at the temple became quiet when Paul started to speak in Aramaic. Perhaps t he crowd tho ught Paul , who hailed from the Greek colony of Tars us. would on ly kno w Greek. T hey were surprised when Paul started speaking the lang uage of the learned Jew (Act 21 :40; 22:02). That Aram aic was the langu age of the learned is why Paul bothe red to mention that Y/;'.I'hUl/ spoke some Aramaic (Act 26: 14). Paul ment ioned that Y/;'.I'hUl/ spoke Aramaic while making his defen se before King Agrippa. who was "well acquainted with a ll the Jewish custo ms and controversies" (Act 26:03). Thi s would show that Ye,~hlla had been familiar with rabb inic writings and the law as King Agr ippa was. Otherwi se, King Agrippa might think C hristianity centered o n an unlearned. Greekspeaking Galilean (Luk 23:05- 07). Josephus wrote about the Greek-speaking situation in Judea: I ha ve also taken a great deal of pains to obtain the learning of the G reeks, and understand the e lemen ts of the Greek language, although I ha ve so long accustomed myself to speak o ur ow n tongue that I can not prono unce G ree k wit h sufficie nt ex actness: for o ur natio n does not encourage those that learn the languages of many nations, and so adorn their discourses with the smoot hness of their periods; because they look upon this sort of accompli shment as commo n, not on ly to all sorts of freeme n. but to as many of the servants as please to learn them . But they give him the testimony of being a wise man who is fully acquainted with our laws , and is able to interpret their meanin g; on which account, as there have been many who have done thei r endeavors with great patience 10 obtain this learn ing, there have yet hardly bee n so many as two or three that have succeeded therein who were immediately well rewarded for their pains. III G reek was more prevalent in Pa lesti ne north of Judea and Jerusalem , but Pierer W. Van Del' Horst wrote that even:

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

170

Yael Natan

One of the most surprising fac ts about these fun erary inscription s is thai mo st of them are in Greek- approx imately 70 percent ; about 12 percen t arc in Lat in : and o nly 18 percent arc in Hebrew or Aramaic. These figure s are e ven more instructive if we break t hem down between Palestine and the diaspora . Na turally in Pale sti ne we wou ld expect more Hebre w and Aramaic and le ss Greek. Thi s is true , but nor 10 any great ex tent. Even in Palestine approx imately two-thirds of these inscriptions are in Greek . Apparent ly fo r a great part of th e Je wish popula tion the daily language was Gree k, even in Palestine. Th is is impressive te stimony 10 the impact of Hel leni stic culture 0 11 Jews in their mo the r country, to say nothin g of the d iaspora. In Je rusalem itself about forty pe rcen t o f the Jew ish inscription s from the first century period (before 70 AD) are in Greek. We may assume that most Jewi sh Jerusalenmes who saw the inscription s ill situ (Latin for "on site "! were able to read them .. ..Th is is not to sa y IIebrew and Aramaic ever died out complete ly as lan g uage s fo r the Jews. Especially in the e astern diaspora, Je ws continued to speak a Semitic language . But in the firs t five centuries of the Common Em. e xactly the period when rabbinic lite rat ure was bein g wri tten in Hebrew and Arama ic, a majority of the Jews in Pale stine a nd the western diaspora spo ke Greek. '1' The recently di scov ered ossuary purported to be that of " James, son of Joseph , brother of Ye5hl/a" is inscribed in Aramaic.':" James was ma rtyred in Je rusalem in 6 3 AD. so Jeru salem wa s likel y whe re the ossuary was inscribed . This ossuary inscript ion wou ld be part of the sixty percen t of Jeru salem inscriptions wri tten in a lang uag e other than Greek. So it would seem that the idea that " Ye,l/uUl o nly spo ke Arama ic" is j ust liberal non sense that is needed to make liberal argumentation work . The idea th at Ye.l'hul/ w as mo nolingual is not gro unde d on the literary and archeological data.

8iblical Data on th e Lan guage Sit uation in Judea The Jews were e xposed to Aramaic mainly in the synago gues . while Greek wa s increasingly pre vale nt e veryw here el se . Thi s he lps e xplain why Paul' s speaking in Aram aic silenced the thron g at the temple (A ct 22:02) , The crow d may have qui eted down out of hab it because they heard Aramaic mainly in the synagog ue. As Jo sephu s said above, the popu lace respected most those who took the time to learn Je wish law wel l. This purs uit required an advanced knowledge of Aramaic. Another incident that sug gests not all Judeans were conversant in Aramaic was Yt'.l hIW's appea rance 10 Paul o n the road to Damascus. Ye.lh lW said in Aramaic, "Saul, Saul , why do yo u pe rsec ute me?" (Act 09 :04 ; 26 : 14 ). Pau l should have kno wn who the person was right away since Paul wa s persecuting C hristians. Previo usl y, Paul even he ard Stephen say Ye,I11l1ll was stan ding in g lo ry at the righ t hand of the Father (Ac t 07:55-56, 58). Paul did nut imm ediately recogni ze Yeshna, like ly because Paul figured Ye,lh/1lI was a Greek -speaking Galilean (Joh 07: 35,4 1, 52 ), wh ile the man in the vision spoke Arama ic (Ac t 26: 14- 15a). Matenal com direlbs autcrars

171

The Jewish Trinity

Notably, Pau l' s co mpanio ns heard the voice. but the y did not " unde rstand" the voice (Act 09 :07 ; 22:09) . Th is suggests that Pau l's com panions were no t con versant in Arama ic. Of course, this might be the very reaso n why Yeshua spoke in Aramaic since he wanted to have a private co nversation with Paul. Paul's companions may have been Greek-speaking diaspora Jews who attended the Sy nagogue of the Freed men in Jerusalem (Act 06:(9 ). What ever the case, the accou nt seems til show that not e very resident in Judea spoke Aramaic. Of course, it was for this very reason that Pilate posted his sign on the cross in three languages: Aramaic, Greek and Latin. That no t e veryo ne in Pale sti ne, including Paul's peers, spoke Aramai c sheds light on some of Paul's statements. Paul said he was "a Je w to the Jews" (ICo 09: 20), and "a Hebrew of Hebre ws" (Phi 03:05). Paul said he surpassed his peers in a ll things Jewish CGal 01 :13- 14). Paul may have meant he was a Pharisee while most of his peers were not (Act 23:06 ; Phi m:( 5 ). Paul may also have meant that he kne w both He brew and Aramaic better than his peers. As Josephus said, the populace respec ted those most who rook the time 10 learn Jewi sh law well. This pursuit . of course, required an advanced knowledge of Aram aic. The Fir st Cent ury Language Sit ua tio n in Galilee of the Gentiles Before 70 AD, Galilee was not known fo r being especially Jewish, After the Fjrxt Jewish Re volt and the destruction of Herod's Temple by the Romans (70 AD). Galilee became a center of Jewish learni ng. Rabbi Yohanan ben Zak kai. a lead ing Jew ish rabbi. formed a cente r for Jewish learn ing at Yavneh (Jabnah or Ja mnia) by 'I'ibcnas on the Sea of Galilee. The Romans cru shed the final Je wish rebellion (132-135 AD ) led by the false messia nic figure S imeo n Bar Ko khba (or Bar Ko/.iha). Jew is h scholars then moved fro m the Sea of Ga lilee to Usha near mod ern Ha ifa. Haif a is located straight west of the Sea of Galilee in a nook of Israel 's Mediterranean seacoas t. So Gal ilee became a center of Jewish learnin g after 70 AD, but was a Je wish hinterl and previously. This fact may ha ve led to some anachronistic think ing abo ut the Jcwishncss of Galile e. In the seventh century BC, Galilee was called "the Gali lee of the Gen tiles" ( Isa 09:01 -02). 'Ib is still was a fitting name in Ye.\'/uw 's time (Mat 04 :1 5- 16). T here were many reaso ns thnt the majority of Galileans were gentile: • The Israel ires failed to drive the Canaanite s out of Gal ilee Odg (I I:30-36), • The so uthern border of Ga lilee was seventy miles distant from Jerusale m. T his meant that Ga lilee was far away from where the bulk of the Jewish population res ided. Moreover, gent ile territories bounded Ga lilee on all sides, • T he Assyrian king Tiglathpileser III (P ul] e xpel led so me Jew s and deponed others o ut of Ga lilee in 734 or 732 BC (2K i 15: 19, 29) , • In 165 BC , S imon Mac cabeus evacuated many Jewish Ga lilean s 10 safety in J udea ( IMa 05:23), and Matenal com direlbs autcrars

172

Yael Na tan

• Sama ria served som ew hat a s a barrier that h indered Je ws from spreading into Gali lee. The Assy rian king. Sargon II, de ported ma ny Je ws out of Sa ma ria. The Jew s that re mained intermarried with gentiles that Sargo n II settled in Samaria. Th e Pto lemaic and Se leucid Empires alte rnately ruled Ga lilee from 324 10 166 BC Hel lenistic rulers proselytized thei r subjects 10 adopt G reek c ulture and la ng uage. Th at ge ntiles popu lated G alil ee mean t Gali lee wa s mo re recept ive to Hellen ization than J udea . During this per iod ma ny Greeks immig rate d. and twen ty-nine Greek cities spru ng lip in Palestin e. Helleni zed cit ies inclu de Hippu s, Julius. Gude ra, Scythopolis, Caesa rea and Cae sarea Phili ppi. Helle nistic towns ncar Nazareth inclu ded Scp phoris and Tibe rias . That ge ntile s wer e the majority populat ion in Galilee meant the proc e ss of Hcltcntzanon went fa irly smoothly. Sc r upulo us Je ws in Judea, howe ve r, had qualms over Helle nization, as the lntertestarnental literature points out. T hough the Jewish Maccabees (164 HC-6 3 AD ) ruled Galilee for a lime , they co uld not reverse or eve n ste m the tide of Helle nization. He llenizatio n co ntinued in Gal ilee until Galilee became impover ished and depopulated after the Arab conquest (63 6 AD). Galilee never d id reco ver unlil modern times. Joseph . Ma ry and YI'.11w ll we re Ga lileans who resid ed in Nazareth most of their live s (L uk 01 :04 ; Mat 02 :22-23). Th e small tow n of Nazareth ma y ha ve been e ntire ly lewish, bUI Nazaret h was near Hellen istic tow ns. T his suggests that Y('.~ luw , like most ot her Gali leans, was al least conversa nt with , if not Fl uent, in Greek. Ye.I'!wiI'S upbri nging in the l ew ish town of Nazareth allowed him 10 learn Aramaic well. Th is meant thai al age twelve he co uld con ver se well with the temple teache rs for whom G ree k was 11 seco nd language (Luk 02:46-47). Moreo ver. eve n if res huu wo uld have bee n more co mfo rtable prea c hing in Arama ic, this do cs no t necessarily mea n he used Aramaic much in his ministr y. Ye.l huil may have felt the need to use the langua ge of the peop le in Gal ilee and Syrian Phoe nicia, amo ng whom he lived out most of his ministry yea rs. Yes hua wo uld ha ve been like most missionari es do wn to the pres ent who speak in one language to their con gre gat ion, and in their native lan guage to their co llea gues. So Yeshua likely pre ached in Greek , the lan guage of co mmerce and the arts, rather than in Hebrew and Arama ic, the tradi tionallanguages of his rel igion . That Yeshlw's ministry was co nd ucted in a language for ei gn to Judc an s wo uld be a partial fulfi llment o f Isaiah's prophecy (Isa 28:11; 1Co 14:21). Later, man y nations wo uld evangelize Israel using foreign tongues.

Wh ether Ibh uQ Spoke Predomin an tly Gree k or Ara maic Was Ye sh ua a Hel lenized Je w o r an A ramaic -s peaki ng l ew ? (Act 0 6:0 1). Hellenized Jew s were found all over the ea stern Mediterranean, even in Jer usale m sy nagog ues (Ac t 06 :09 ; Act 09:28-29). Greek -speaking l e wish Christian s we re a lso found in Jerusalem (Mat 27:32; Act 02:10; 09: 29; 11 :19 -20; 2 1:37 ).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

173

Many Gre ek-speaking Christians were d riven OUi of Jeru salem by persecutions and revolts (Mat 24:16: Mar 13:14; Luk 2 1:21). Many G reek-sfll:aking C hristians voluntarily left Je rusalem betwee n 67 and 70 AD. T hey took Mat 24 :15-20 to be a warning of Jerusalem's impending doo m, and decide d to take refuge in the Greco- Roma n city named Pe lla. Pella was named after the Maccdonjun birth place of Alex ander the Gre at. So it would see m that if Helle nized Jews resided in Jeru sa lem and Pella, surely man)' Galilean Jews were Helle nized. Some Helleni zed Jews knew Hebrew and Ara maic. Paul knew Gree k since his formative years were spent in a form er Greek colony. Tarsus. Paul, howe ver, became familiar with the Hebre w Scriptures and Aramaic (Act 21:40 ; 22:02 : 26: 14). Being a Hellenized Jew did not necessarily detract from his Jewish ness. Even non-Hellenized Jews spo ke Aramaic and languages besides Heb re w (Ac t 02:08I I ). Paul wo uld have brooked no sugges tio n that his being Hellenized mea nt he was any less Jewish than his contemporaries. Paul thought of himse lf as being Jewish (Rom 0 2:29 ), "a Jew to the Jews" (I Co 09:20), and "a Hebre w of Hebrews" (Phi 03:05). Moreover, Paul said that while he was in Jerusa lem. he surpasse d his peers in all things Jewish (Gal 0 1:13-1 4). Paul did not need to sacrifice one culture for the other. For Paul. being a Hellenized Jew was a cultur ult'borh-and" situation, not an "either-or" dilemma.

Yeshua's Parents Matthew related that Joseph, Mary and Ye,5hua stayed in Egypt awhile (Mat 0 2: 13- I5). T he Jewish community in Egypt had trans lated the Hebre w and Aramaic Sc riptures into the G reek LXX. T he LXX and its prec ursor translations had bee n used in Alexandr ian synagogues since the seco nd century Be. or e ven earlier. T hat Mary and Joseph [led In the G reek-speakin g Je wish diaspora in Egypt suggests that they spoke Greek well . If the y did not speak Gree k, they migh t have instead fled 10 Aramaic-speaking Jewi sh communities in Mesopotamia. S urely. as natives of Galilee, Mary and Joseph would have been familiar with the LXX (Luk 0 1:26; 02:04. 39 ). T he least that one cou ld safely conclude is that Mary and Joseph 's stopo ver in Egypt increased their exposure to Greek. Yu/lllQ in the Nazareth Synagogue

Some assert that YI'.I·h l/a actually read a Hebrew Isaiah manu script. and read from an Aramaic commentary in the Nazareth synagogue (Luk 04 : I6-30) . Thi s is based o n the shaky assump tion that what was the norm in Judea was the nonn in Galilee. The norm in Judea was that a reade r wou ld read the Hebrew Scriptures, and then a "translator" t turgeman or meturgemani would comment o n the text in Ara maic, or read an Aramaic 'lurgum.!" The language situations in Galilee and Judea could have been entire ly diffe rent. Just beca use Arama ic was spoken in Judean synagog ues does not prove that Yeshu(I Matenal com direlbs autcrars

174

Yael Na tan

s poke Aram aic in G alil ean synagogues ."! Besides. read ing from Targum commentaries would have been a rathe r safe occu pation. Ycshua 's comments, ho we ver, a lmos t gOI him thrown off a cliff. Ce rtainly his comments did not co me from an Aramaic Targum (Luk 04:2 1-30)! YI'I huII made di sparag ing re marks abou t those rab bin ic tea c hi ng s based o n the errors and nonsen se pro pag ated throug h the 'largurns (Mat 15:05: 22:29; 23: 16; Luk 11 :46: Jo h 12:34). Mo reo ver. the LX X and MT arc qu oted in the NT to the near excl usion of the Targum s. The peo ple recog nized that Ye.\1ulII had new teac hings (Mar 01 :27 ). T his all suggests tha t Yeshua did not read from Targums during his minim)'. The nonns cu rrent in J udea say onl y so m uch about the nonns in Ga lilee of the Ge ntiles. Galilee was seve nty mile s aw ay from Jude a. which was several days' walk in anc ient times . Gali lee and Judea were d istan t e nough to ha ve differing accents. likely in both the Greek and Aramaic lang uages (Mat 26:73 ). Bexidex, the norm of reading Aramaic Targums in Ju dea speaks more about ho w Bab ylon was a center of Je wish learnin g than it docs ab out the language situation in Judea. In Isaiah 's day (8'" ce ntury BC), the people spoke Hebrew but not Aramaic . Otherwi se , it would have been pointless to a sk the Assyrian com mander to spe ak in A ramaic rather than in Heb rew if the peop le under stood both (2Ki 18:26. 28; 2C h 32:18: lsa 36:1I , 13). After the exile ( 6' 0 century HC ). man y Jud ean men interm arried with foreigne rs. Half of their children knew the langu age of Ashdod. A mmon and Moab , but not "t he la nguage of Ju dah ," meaning Hebrew (Neh n :24). So eve n afte r vario us A ram aic -spe ak ing e mpires e xercised their in flue nce in the reg ion for ce nturies, sm all states maintained their o wn lan gu age s. So it see ms we can di spense wi th the notion that em pires imposed their lang uages on the conquered peoples to the ncar ex tinctio n of the nati ve lang uages. That mo st of the OT is wri tten in Heb rew shows that the Judean s co ntinued to speak Hebrew rig ht up to the Intenest amen tal period . Interestingl y, the on ly Aramaic portions of the OT cons ist mainl y of correspondence writte n by ge ntiles, an d chapters that concern gentile s (D an 02:04-07:28; Ezr 04:08-06:18; 0 7:1226 ). Also , it see ms many lnter restamental books were originally written in Greek, an d the Greek co pies are the only remnants to survive. Until the Imenestamemal pe riod, Hebre w was able to co mpete with Aramaic in Judea , espe cially since they are siste r lang uages. Hebrew, howe ver, wen t into steep decli ne when Gree k was introd uced. Most peo ple wo uld have been bilingual, given both the circ umsta nces in an cient times an d als o hu man lim itations. The nor m of read ing A ram aic Targu ms in Judea started after the return from ex ile (6'" century BC ). Aramaic did not supplant He bre w. however. Th en Greek arr ived in Palestine wi th Alex ander the Gre at (332 BC). As Heb rew trailed off, A ramaic and Gree k filled the lang uage vacuum. Thi s see ms to ex plain why forty perc ent of the insc riptions in l erusalem we re Greek while most of the res t were A ramaic.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

175

Th e no r m of rea din g mostl y Aramaic in th e synagog ues o f J udea du ri ng Yl'sh ua's time resu lted fro m Hebre w's slow decline. By con trast, in Galilee of the Gen tiles there were fewer Hebrew speakers even before the exile. Then the Greek settlers came spea king on ly Greek. So the language norms in Judea d uring Ye.~hlw 's day spea k even less abou t co nditions in Galilee than one migh t imagine. Moreo ver. archaeologis ts tell us that Aramaic was not as dee ply e ntrenched in Judea and Gali lee as was co mmonly assumed. Be side s, the norms in Judea could not simp ly be im posed e lsewhere si nce the norm s presuppose certain co nditions . For the norm in Judea to be the norm elsewhere required that the sy nagogue have: • A geni;a (s toreroom) stoc ked with expensive scro lls of the Heb rew Sc riptures as well as Aramaic Targ ums, instead of the less expensive G reek eq uivale nts,

,"d •

A perso n o n hand with the required expertise to read Hebrew and Arumaic. Most synagogues o utside of Judea and Mesopotamia d id not have an aud ience that understood Aramaic. In these places it likely was dee med impractical to incorporate Aramaic into the worship services. The Greek LXX was much eas ier to procure than Hebrew Scriptures d ue to: • Sup ply and de mand efficienc ies. • More slave co pyists knew Gree k than Heb rew, and • " From the ex treme laho r and care bestowed o n them, Hebrew manu scripts of the Bible were e normously dear."!" So the majo rity of e aste rn Medi terrane an sy nagog ues used the LX X. As Ederxhei m wrote: Accordingly, ma nuscripts in Gree k or Lati n, although often incorrect. must ha ve been easily attainable, and t his would ha ve cons ide rab le influence of making the Gree k version of the Old Testame nt the 'people's Bihle: llt T he LX X was most like ly rea d eve n in Jeru sale m sy nagogues such as in the Sy nagog ue of the Freedmen. Thi s synagogue dre w members from Cy rene. Ale xandria. Cilicia and Asia where lI eb rew and Aramaic were conside red foreign languages (Act 06:(9). As was noted prev iously, Paul' s co mpa nions see m not to have known Arama ic (Ac t 09:07; 22:(9)! Luke has Yeshua read ing the LXX word for word (lsa f 1:0 1-02; Luk 04: 1819). So all things co nsidered, the LXX sure ly was a text that Ycshua read from his childhood at Nazareth. Moreove r, Ye,\'1w lI cer tainly used the LXX ex te nsively in his Galilean ministry, if not a lso in his Judea n ministry, YeIhl/a Was Unschooled

Man y nine tee nth a nd twe ntie th ce ntu ry libe ra ls read that Ye,\,lltlll had no t "stud ied" (Joh 07: 15 ), and that Ye.l h ull ' S disciple s were " unschooled" (Act 04: 13). Having been misled that the language of Galilee was almost exclusively Aramaic,

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

176

Yael N ata n

these liberals ass umed that anyone schoo led in Galilee must onl y have kno wn ho w 10 write Ara maic (Jo h 08:(6). Thi s assu mp t ion in t urn led man y 19'" and 20 '" ce ntu ry libera ls to o the r ass umptions. For instance , liberals wrote that ¥e,I'Im u ' s disc iples were not ca pable of writing the good Allie (in ot her wo rds. " Athe nia n") Koi ne Gree k found in the Go spel s . So some li ber al s taug ht that the Go spe ls and the NT ori gin als were written in Aramaic . Other libe rals wrote tha t the NT was conceived and writte n by both the Apostle Pa ul and apocr yphal writers using pseud ony ms. This prej udice ag ainst ho me -schooli ng and synagogue-sc hoo ling is unwarra nted. Even tod ay, home-sch ooled ch ildren ofte n excel be yond the ir peers at cd ucanona l institu tio ns . C hildren in Ga lilee likely we re bilingual or even pol yglot because of the nece ssit ies of Ga lilea n co mmerc ial and c ultural life. The d iverse society served as a lang uage laboratory that reinforced langua ge lessons learned at hom e. Nea rly every Jew ish boy wen t to synagog ue-school. So so me body who was " not stud ied" and " unschoo led" had schooling- just not at a theo logical seminary. Pa ul, by co ntrast. was "s tud ied" and "sc hoo led." He learned fro m the Rab bi Gam aliel, the g randson of Rabbi Hillel , who started a religious se minary of sorts in Je rusalem (Act 05:34; 22:03: 26:24 ). Ye.~ htlll ' s attending se minary wo uld have been a supe rfl uous activity since he had already " amazed" the learned doctors at the te mple at age twel ve (Luk 02 :4247). Besides. the farther the ancie nt Je wish teache rs progr essed beyon d the basics, the mo re e rror cre pt in. When the people said that Ye.l hull and the disciples were unsc hooled , the y we re merely not ing that YeIhuli was unma tch ed in wisdom and authoritativeness (Mat 13:54: Mar 06: 02: Joh 06 :45: OR: 2R). Similarly, the Sanhed rin wondered ho w the disciples had honed their o ratorica l skills without unending seminary (Ac t 04: 13).

The Form of the Gospels Some scho lars assert that Ye,I'hu a spo ke primarily, if not e xclusively, in Aramaic. Thi s asserti o n is made despite the fact that : • T he re are only a few scaue red quo tatio ns o f Ye.I'huli speaking Aramaic, while the vast majorit y of Ye,I'hlla ·s words were recorded in Greek, • T he majori ty of OT qu otations fo und in the NT. incl uding tho se of Yeshua, follow the G reek LXX rathe r than the MT recension . • No Ch urch father uneq uivocally mentioned the e xistence of any Aramaic co llect ion of Ye.l hlw 'S say ings or an Aramaic gos pel, and non e has bee n unearthed. • Archeo logists have di scove red that Greek was quite pre valent in first ce ntury Pa le st ine , ju st as the first cen tur y Je wi s h his tor ian Jo se phu s sa id it was (Antiqui/ies of the Jews, Book 20: 11 :0 I). and • The only incid ents where the NT reade r is sure that Yeshul/ spoke Aramaic are those times that: o Th e ge ne ral pu blic ap pare nt ly d id no t under sta nd wh at Y/,Sh lill sa id in Aramaic , and Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity o YeIhua purposel y downplaycd a miracle to avoid un wan ted publicity, espec ially so the civ il an d religious a utboruies wo uld not feel they had to jailor kill Ye.\'hua just ye l. The above-listed facts suggest that the ge neral publi c unde rstood Gree k. So when Ye5hua k new that only those persons familiar with the OT cou ld possibly kno w about his role as Messiah, he chose 10 speak in Aramaic . This st rategy made sense because. on average, Aramaic speakers knew the O'T better than those who on ly spoke Greek. Yt-.5hua wanted to avo id situations where people wo uld dec lare him their "b rea d king" (Joh 06: 15I, or wo uld offe r sac rifices to him as thou gh he we re Zeus, and to his d isciple s as thou gh they were O lympian gods (Ac ts 14:12), Most ag ree that all the NT book s, except perhaps Matthe w, were first penned in G ree k. T he ea rly Ch urch fat her Papias wrote that Ma tthew's gospe l was wr itte n " in Heb rew." Some have ta ke n " in Hebre w" 10 mea n " in Arama ic ," bu t no t eve n a frag me nt of a n A ra ma ic prot o -M at the w has bee n fo u nd . T here is no indepe ndent co nfirmation hy another C hurc h fathe r or historian that Matthe w's gospel was o rig inally writte n in Aramaic. Matt he w was a tax co llector, so it wo uld see m he wou ld need to know Greek 10 talk 10 the Romans (M at 09: 09; 10:03) . Not surprising ly, scholars co nsider Papias" asse rtion a du bio us tradition. O thers hold the op inion that Papius' words "in Hebrew" should be understood as " in the Jewi sh sty le" or "using Hebraisms." In any eve nt, Matthew still q uoted from the Gree k LX X far more than from the Hebrew, This ind icates that: • Matthew's audience was G ree k-speaking. • Ycx/lIla 's prefe rred OT tex t was the LX X, and • Yn hua 's audie nce was mainly G reek spea king (Joh 0 7:35). Intere sting ly. Matt he w ex plained simple Heb re w and Ara maic te rms in his gos pel (Mat 0 I:23; 27:33, 46). These explana tions suggest that Matthew wrote his gos pel in Greek fo r He llenized Je ws and Greeks rather than for Aramaic speake rs. That Matthe w q uoted from the LXX as well as from the Hebre w or Aramaic sho ws that Matt hew was Iluent in two or three langu ages. O ne can easily assume that Y('.~luw was Fl uent in as many la nguage s as Matt hew was. Perhap s lou king at the big picture wo uld help. 110 1.11 wo uld o ne expect the gospels to re ad if Ye,I'llI/a spoke c hiefly G reek and prima rily quo ted the Gree k LXX'! Ho w might the gospels read if both Aramaic and G reek were wel l kno wn in Palestine? Bilingual peo ple often prod uce biling ual boo ks. Bilingual books usua lly are wriuen in o ne lang uage, but ha ve a smauering of a second language. Like wise. most quotat ions wou ld natu rally be so urced fro m books wri tten in on e lan gu age , and a sma tter ing wo uld be so urced fro m boo ks written in u sec ond language. T hat is exactly what we have in the gos pels . The gospels are G reek with a sma tte ring of Ara maic, an d sim ilarly the qu otations mai nly co me from the Gr eek LXX. In the NT there are scatte red Aramaic place na mes and phrases tra nslite rated into Greek, some times accom panied by an ex planation ( Mat 27:46; Mar 05:4 1: 07: Matenal com direlbs autcrars

178

Yael Na ta n

34; Joh 0 1:38. 4 1). Also, there are a lterna te, no n-transliter ated Gree k names and place names (Jo h 19:13 . 17; 20:24: 2 1:02 ). Natu rally. Aram a ic an d Hebra ic tho ught and cu lture arc reflec ted in both the NT storyline and in occasional Heb raism s. The good Allie Koinc Greek a nd the absence of clumsy, wooden translations suggest that the NT was originally writte n in Greek and not Aramaic. The Aramaic Words and Phrases in the NT Thai Aramaic was fadin g in im portance in Palest ine exp lains why NT Je wish Greek spea kers occasionally used Aramaic words as cognates. Most NT instances of mbbi and ahfxl are indeclin able. which sugges ts they were loa n wo rds. The re are two NT inst anc e s of rtlbbol1; used as an A ramaic wo rd rat he r than as a borrowed word. Inte rest ingl y, bot h occurrences (Mar 10:51 ; Jo h 20: 16) were spoken in Judea near Jeru salem (Mar 10:01 and 11 :01 ). T he Apos tle Jo hn wrote tha t Ma ry addre ssed Ye ,111l1ll with the A ra maic t itle Rabboni. Th is seems to show Mary's su rprise and d isbe lief at Yeshl/a's res urrection (l o h 20: 16).0' Mary had thoug ht she was ta lki ng ttl an Ara maicspeaking gar dener. Mary fa iled to switch fro m Aramaic to Gree k w hen she fou nd o ut she was addressi ng the Gree k-spea king G ali lean. Joh n's Greek -s pe aking gos pel reade rs would have (aught ho w surprised Mary m ust ha ve been 10 address Yeshna in Aram aic rather tha n Gree k. In areas of Palestine populated by Gree ks, natu rally Gree k was spo ken more an d Ara maic less. Lest Ness po ints out: It was almo st unknow n for a G ree k to learn a 'barhariantlang uage. !" This fact exp lains why Yes/lI/11 used Aramaic in these are as the seve ral limes he did not want publicity. Th is is simi lar to how Ye,I/l/1lI spoke Ara maic 10 Paul on the road to Dam ascus. Evide ntly, Yeshl/o wanted a priva te conversa tion with Paul. Paul said his co mpanions heard but did not understand Ye.l'hull' s voice (Act 09 :07; 22 :(9), The sit uation was the same in the Decarolis. Mark wrote: Yt',f hl/a too k a man aside from the crowd ... YeI/llla looked up to heave n and with a deep sigh said to him , I:phphtltha! meaning. ' Be ope ned!' .. , Yes/lI/11 co m manded them not to tell an yone. T he mo re he co mmanded, however, the mo re they kep t talk ing abo ut the miracle (Mar 07:33-36). Ye,5hua's purpose in speaking Aramaic while performing a miracle served the same purpose as taking the ma n aside, o ut of view of the market. The Decapoli s crowd was ge ne rally G ree k speaking, so spea king A ramaic helped to keep the miracle unde r wra ps. Unwan ted pu blicit y had caused Yes/ilia to mo ve out of areas hefore (Ma r 0 I:45 ; Luk 05:16; Jo h 04:0 I-OJ). Ye,I'/wli was sent mainl y to the Jews who o ften ha ppened to know Greek and A ramaic (Ma t 15:24-28). Ye,lhflll was not sent to the G reeks who often happe ned to kno w G reek and Latin (Joh 19:20) . Keeping publicity down mea nt that thoug h the Jewis h leaders might investigate (Joh 09: 08-35). (hey would not con clude that

Malenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

179

they had to kill Yesh lltl just yet (Joh 07:25-26; II :47-51). The same could be said for the civ il authorities [Luk 13:3 1l· Gree ks unfamili ar with the OT would not put Ye,~hlla's miracles in the proper context. Yeshna knew that the Gree ks in the Decapol is naturally spoke more Gree k tha n Aramaic . So the situation at the market was similar to how Ye.~/lIIa quoted Psa 0 22:0 1 in Aramaic fro m the cross (Mat 27:46). The G reek speakers who heard veshua ca ll from the c ross mistake nly thought he called o ut for Elijah. or for so mething to drink (Mat 27 :47-49). Th e discip les understood Ye.~ lw a ' s Aramaic, and eventual ly they carne 10 understand the OT. The NT write rs wrote about the Decapolis miracles in the Greek NT. It is interesting to think that some of the Greek speakers who witnessed the miracle in the Dcc upohs may have later read the acco unt in a Greek Gospel. Then they would have kno wn a Gospel writer 's translat ion of what reshu a spoke in Aramaic. T hey also would have read a prope rly comextuahzed acco unt of the miracle thev had seen earlier (Le k 24:25-27). y,'.I'hUlI crossed the Sea of Galilee from the Deca pohs and went to Capemau m. Ye,~hlla then went to the synagogue ruler 's house and raised Juirus' daughter from the dead. Ye.111UlI attempted to minimi ze the miracle both by te lling the mourners to disperse. and by saying that the daughter had only been sleeping (Mat 09:24; Mar 05:39). Ye.~ lrull then put the crowd out side Jairu s' home so they wou ld not be able to blab the details of the miracle all o ver the countryside (Mat 09 :25; Mar 05:40) . O nly Pe ter, James and John and the girl's parents were present inside the home (M ar 05 :37; Luk 08:5 1), but Ye.I'hulJ spo ke in Aramaic anyway. Undou btedly. people were eavesdrop ping outside the house . Most houses at that rime wert': ope n and airy to take advantage of Pa lestine's temperate climate. Ye.~ h llil said, Tafilllll kOI/In! which meant, " Little girl, I sa)' to you, get up!" (Mar 05:4 1). Just as at the Decapolis, Yeshua gave strict orders that no one speak abou t the miracle at Jairu s' house (Mar 05:43). It is notable that the same three disciples who witnessed the resurrect ion of J uirus" daughter were at the Transfiguration. There, too , they were o rdered not to talk about the Transfiguration until after Yeshua rose from the dead (Mat 17:01,09; Mar 09 :0 2. 09 ), Apparently. Yesh ua spo ke Arama ic among the Greek-s pea king Ga lileans 10 keep the miracle so mewhat hushed up. Thi s wou ld be consistent with his usc of Aramaic while performing a miracle in the Decap oli s to keep the miracle secret. Thi s shows that the Gal ilean Jews tended In speak G reek rather than Aramaic. just as the Decapoli s gentiles tended to speak Greek rather than Aramaic. That Aramaic was used in the Judean sy nagogues, while the Judean populace tended 10 speak Greek outside the synagogues, ex plains why: • The crowd was able to converse with Pilate though Pilate undo ubtedly spoke G reek (Mat 27: 17. 24; Mar 15:08, II . 15; Luk 23:04), and • Pilate posted a sign on the cruc ifix in Aramaic. Greek and Latin (Joh 19:20) . There is another indicatio n that much of the J udean populace spoke the same lan gua ge as the Rom an so ldiers, that bein g G ree k. A Ro man centurio n said that Ye,\hulJ was the So n of God (Mat 27:54; Mar 15:39). He had gained this Matenal com direlbs autcrars

ISO

Yael Na tan

information from passersby who hurled insults (Mat 27:40. 43 ). Pilate 's trili ngua l sign d id nOI men tion the title Son of God . but merel y said, .. Yex/Illa o f Na zareth . the King of the Je ws ." Many o f the passers by undoubtedl y knew Aramaic . hut appare ntly the y chose to cast their insults in Greek. The y knew Ye.l'hua was Ga lilea n, so the y figured his native langua ge was Gree k. Th is can be ascertained fro m the fact that one perso n who mentio ned "Son of God " q uoted Psa 002:08: He tr usts in God. Let God rescue him now if he wa nts him. fo r he said, " a m the Son of God ' (Mat 27:43 ). Yet, when Yes/ilia qu oted Ihe same Psalm in Arama ic (Psa 0 22:00 1; Mat 27:46), the people arou nd the c ross did not understand what he said. T his sho ws that the "So n of God" insults (Mat 27:40 , 43) must have been spoken in Gre ek rath er tha n Aramaic. That many in the c ro wd did no t know Aramaic e xplai ns why' Ye,~ h lla cried o ut from the cross in Aramaic , " £/0 ;, Eloi, lumu sabachthom?" (Mat 27:46; Mar 15: 34; Psa 0 22:0 1 [LX X 0 2 1:0 11) . Ye.~ lmll want ed to make sure his quote of Psa 02 2 [LXX 0 2 1J was understood in its scrip tural co ntex t. Arama ic speake rs tended to kno w the Psal ms bener. Ye.I'!lUu did not want the Roman so ld ier to hear him say in Gre ek, " My God , my God, why have you forsaken me?" Wit hout knowledge of Psa 0 22, the Gr eek spea king Roman cen turiun wo uld have misunde rstood the q uo ta tio n, Then he wo uld have dis counted the idea that Yeshna had a d ivine origin (Mat 27:54 ; Ma r 15:39; Ac t 21:31 ). Those who kne w the Psalms the best in Judea tended to be Arama ic speake rs. The y wo uld have kno wn that Psa 022 starts ou t with the speaker dow ntrodden hy h is e nemies, but ends up on a happy note. The early Ch urch figured it all out and deemed Psa 022 to be messianic. By the way. the fact tha t Yeshlla reci ted Psa 0 22 in Aramaic is no reason to accept the MT Hebre w renderin g of Psa 022 rather than the Greek LXX. Rabb is ha ve lo ng pointed out tha t the MT does not describe a c ruci fixio n since the MT s upplies the nonsensical phrase " like a lion my hand s and my fee t" rat her tha n " they pierced my hands and feet," S ince the MT recension co nve rts "they pie rced" into " like a lio n," the reade r must supply anoth er verb to ma ke sense of the no nsensical phrase " like a lion my hands and my feet," Interest ingly, the rea der does not need to sup ply the ve rb in othe r " like a lion" passages (e .g .. Psa 00 7:02 ; 0 I 0:09 ; 0 17: 12; Isa 38 : 13). The " they pierced" readin g of Psa 022 :16 (BHS 02 2: 17; LXX 021: 17) is mo st likel y the COITCl:t read ing since: • The Hebrew of the DSS (Nul/(// H eW',. (X Hev/Se4 , f,1 1. line 4 ),'-'" as wel l as the Syriac, LXX and other tra nslations, have the verb " pierced," • The BHS critical appara tus says that o ther Hebrew man usc ript s hav e " they pierced."!" and • l sa 53:05 a nd Zec 12:10 also say the Messiah wo uld be pierc ed (loh 19:37; 20: 25 ), Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

181

People who did not know Arama ic thought Ye.I'hua sa id, " He is calling Elijah." The Greek word for Elijah is Elias, so the Gree k speakers fig ured f /; or f lo; must be Aramaic fo r Elija h (Mat 27:46-47. 49; Mar 15 :35-36). Ano ther G reek spea ke r assu med that Ycshua was compla ining about the suo and waoted his thirst q uenched (Mat 27:48). T he Greek speake r arrived at this conclusion becau se he thought thai Ye.I'Il/Ill. instead of saying. "Elias" (Elijah), said "hetio s" (the sun). During the c rucifixion the land was dark from the sixth 10 the ninth hour (Mal 27;45). T he sun may have ju st appeared when Yeshl/a 's said. "f lo;. I-:Ioi...,'· during the ninth hour (Mat 27;46 ). So me of Ihe Greek-speaking Rom an soldiers may have concl uded that Yeshua called out to the ir favorite god . Hetios (the sun), Later the centurion and guards aro und the cross sa id. "S urely he was the Son of God (rhcos)!" (Mal 27:54; Mar 15:39), Unlike the thie ves o n the cross, the soldiers were not Jewi sh. so they drew the ir co nclusions from Ihe earthquake and the abnormal darkness rather than the Torah. So when the soldiers said Ye.l /uflI was t he So n of God (Ihe{/,\). they probably had a son of Hetios (Apollo ) in mind. Th is was s imilar to how Barnabas was mistaken for Zeus, and Paul was mistake n for Hermes at a later date (Acts 14:12). The similarity bet ween the Aramaic for "God" (Eli or Eloiv. "Elijah" (Elias) and "the sun" (helios) continued to play a role in Cbrt snan times. J. S. Trimingham wro te how astral shrines we re converted to C hristian usc: The cult of the prop het Elias [Elijah] is known to ha ve replaced the c ull of the Sun in Heljeni suc places and the similarity between the names Elias and Helios [G reek sun god popular in Late Antiquit y) is adduced .!" The cruc ifixion account sho ws thai YI,.\ hua spoke Ara ma ic on the cross for the same reasons he spo ke Aramaic: • In the Decapolis. • At the quickening of Jairus ' daug hter. and • O n the road 10 Damascus. In certa in peculiar situations. spea king Aramaic was Yeshm!'s way of reac hing out only to those who were most inclined to be spiritually minded (Mat 07:06 ; Gal 06:0 1),

YeIhl/a's Aramaic Phrases The NT record s that Ye.I' lma spo ke a fe w Aramai c phrases. but this does not mean that Yeshua genera lly' spoke Aramaic. The sa me logical leap would pro ve that the Apostle John s poke Aramaic in his ministry amo ng the Greeks, John mentions Ara maic place names such as Bethesda [Io h 05:02 ). Gabbatha {I uh 19: 13 ). Golgo tha (Joh 19:17 ). Abaddon (Rev 09:11) and Arma geddo n (Rev 16:16 ). Joh n ce rta inly wrote hi s go spe l and e p istles in G reek 10 Greeks and to Helle nized Jews. Tradition says that John wrote Rcvclunon on Parmos. o ne of the Dodecanese Islands so utheast of Gre ece in the Aegean Sea . The Apostle Jo hn was

Malenal com direlbs autcrars

182

Yael Na ta n

a flue nt G reek spea ker - as Jo hn's gospel and the boo k of Revelation show. That Jo hn was a fluent Gre ek speaker suggests that Yes/ilia wa s, too . If the use of a fe w Aramaic phrases indica tes that Ye.\ /1II11 mainly spo ke Aram aic, the same leap of logic co uld prove the absurd-that Jo hn and Paul spo ke Aramaic du ring his ministry to the gen tiles. Paul inclu ded a fe w Aram aic phra se s in letters to the Corinthians. Romans and Galatians ("' M{mI1111 ]1Ul" ( ICo 16:22); A hba (Ro m 08: 15 ; G al 04 :06»). Pau l is note d fo r ha ving conversations in Arama ic once 0 11 his way to Damascus and once at the tem ple (Act 2 1:40 ; 22:02; 26:14). Pa ul's native la nguage was Gree k. Paul grew up in Tars us, a fo rmer G ree k co lony on the south co ast of Asia Minor (mode rn Tur key) (Act 21:37-39). Paul kne w Aramaic (Ac t 2 1:40; 22:0 2; 26: 14) because he was an e xceptional stude nt of things Je wish (Ga l 0 1:13-14). Pau l also studied at Jerusalem under e xceptiona l teac hers IAcl 22:03 1. If Pau l learn ed Aramaic in Asia Mino r. it wo uld have been as a fo n: ign language since the seac oast c ities spo ke Gree k. The Asia Minor inte rior spoke Anatolian d ialec ts (Act 14: 11), Paul appended the Aramaic phrase "Mara na Tho" tothe Greek word anathema. The resultant phrase "Anathema. MlIfw l(/ Thu" has the loo k and feel of an a nagra m and palindrome , tho ugh it is neit her. The phrase means, " . ..a c urse be on him . Come, a Lord !" ( ICo 05:05). Apparently, these Ara maic phrase s were part o f the liturgy that the Greeks knew. T h is borrowing is simi lar to ho w nati ve Eng lish speakers may k no w a sm atle ring o f Gree k ("K urie Ele i.I'OII " ) and He brew (Ha llduja!l )Y · Simi lar ly. Paul appe nded the Greek article and no un "ho Pal er, " meaning. "the Father." to the Aramaic noun A hha , meaning, "Fathe r" (R om 08:15 ; Gal 04:06). The G reeks kne w this phrase beca use fe,I'I1/1lI said. "A bba Pate r" (Mar 14 :36 ). T hai feshull mixed Gree k and Ara maic in his speec h sugges ts he was bilingual.

reshu a Talked to G ree k Speakers Ye,5!lUQ held several conversa tions with perso ns whom one would suspect kne w

G reek. but not much. if any. Aramaic . The reason for this is, as u SI Ne ss points OUI:

It was almost unknown for a Gr ee k 10 learn a 'barba rian ' lang uage. '''' I( a lso is reason able to suppose that Latin spe akers suc h as Pilate, o nce having lea rned Greek. wou ld not fee l the need to learn Arama ic. Beside s, a rule o f thumb is there are ma ny mor e mo no lingu al peo ple than bili ngu al peo ple. and mo re biling ual perso ns than polyglots. Ye.l'!lull talked to a Rom an cen turio n (Mat 08:05. II ; com pare ACI 2 1:37 ), and to a G ree k wo man al Tyre who was a nati ve of Syrian Phoenici a (Mar 07:261. Greek was ce rtainly the co mmon lang uage bet ween Yeshull and Pilate (l oh 19:20 -22; Act 02:07-08, 10). Pilate. being an aristoc rat. wo uld have known Gree k, and Pila te had ma ny G reek-speak ing subjects of Jewish and gentile extractio n. Ga lilean Greek (Luk 23:05-06 ) must not have bee n as d istinctive as G alilean Aramaic (M at 26:73 ; Mar 14:70 ). Peter may have spoken Arama ic to the Jews in Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

183

Jeru salem, but he was recognized for having a Galilea n accent. This sugges ts that Aramaic was the second language in Galilee . 1'('.~ luw surely spo ke Greek to Pilate, but Pilate had to be told that YeIhua was a Galilean. Thi s suggests that YeshuG was a fluent Gree k speaker, and that G reek was the indigeno us language of Galilee of the Gentiles. That Ga lileans spoke Greek may he why the J udeans were prej udiced aga inst the idea of there heing a Ga lilean prop het (Io h 07:41, 52) . As Edersheim wrote: A Jewish Messiah who would urge his cla im upon Israel in Greek, seems almost a contradiction in rerms.!" That is apparently what the Jewi sh leade rs mistakenly thought. too, as thoug h being biling ual or trilingual were a handicap ! Edc rshcim's argument . ho we ve r, see ms based o n the false assu mption that reshuu was mo nolingual. and that he either kne w Greek or Aramaic. but not both. Ye,~Jltfa used Aramaic. G reek and Hebrew as approp riate. No o ne should reject the Messiah on account of his use of Greek durin g his eart hly ministry. Wha t helped Y('.I'hua and others speak G reek flu ently withou t a st ro ng, distinctive accent is that Attic Koine G reek was standardized o n Athenian Gree k al ready in Alexande r's time . Moreover, Aristophanes of Byzantium c reate d a system of acce nt and breathing marks that helpe d standardize the pronunc iation of Allie Koine Greek start ing aroun d 200 Be. Later. Peter spoke to Cornelius of the Italian Regime nt as well as to Cornel ius' friends and family (Act HUll ). Cornelius did not learn Aramaic in Italy, but he likely learned G reek there. Learnin g the Greek language and culture was commo n in anc ient hal)'. The Romans were helped in their quest to learn Greek by the fact that ancient Latin and G reek arc relatcd Indo-European languages. Pro ximity helped Rom ans learn G reek, since the Greek main land was not far from Italy. Moreover. in B.C. times the Greeks had colonized the so uthern e nd of Italy and other nearby areas. So the accou nt of Cornelius is further proof that Ye.l'/uUI must have spoken Greek since his disc iples both spo ke and wrote Greek well.

YeIhl/a Taught in Greek-speaking Areas The Gree ks had se ttled ma ny areas in Pa lestine, The Hell enized c ities of Se pphoris and 'Iibenas were near Naza reth. Since Yeshua visited Hellenistic cities durin g his ministry years. it wou ld be co nsistent for Ye.l'hua to have done so also durin g his pre-mini stry years. The disciples seemed to have had no scruples about buying food at Sa maritan towns (Joh 04 :0&). In fact, the disciples were shocked that the Samaritans o nce refused them food. The refusal occu rred only because Yeshua and his disciples were trave ling to Jerusalem for a feast (Luk 09 :53). It seems the rift between the Jews and Sam aritans was kept a live main ly over the dispute about whether the templ e belonged at Mount Ge rizim or Jerusalem (Joh 04 :20-21). It is wel l known that many Jews avoided Samar ia on their way betwee n Matenal com direlbs autcrars

184

Yael Natan

J udea an d Galil ee whe n possible (Joh 04 :04 ). T he Samarita ns wer e not happy a bo ut Galilean Jews bypassing Mount Gerizim to attend feasts at Jeru salem (Luk 09:53). Th e S amarita ns thoug ht that o nly the Penta teu ch was cano nical. Mo unt Ge rizim (Dell II :29; 27: 12; l os 08: 33; Jd g 09 :07 ) figu res more pro minently in the Pentateuch than does Jer usalem (Ge n 14:18). So this may have been a reason why the Samaritans fig ured Ge rizim o ught to be the site of the te mple rather tha n Jeru sa lem. Several of Ye.\ /mll's d isciples gre w up fishin g on the Se a of Gal ilee. Surel y, the ir c ustomers incl uded the inhabi tants of the Hellenized cit ies of Tibe rias and Ga dara. Tibenas was situated on the Sea of Ga lilee. which is also named the Sea of Tibe rias and Luke Kineret. This lake is me ntioned seve ral times in the gospels (Mat 04: 18; 15:29 ; Mar 0 I: 16: 07 :31; Joh 06:0 I, 23 ; 21 :01), G ada ra wa s a fe w mi les so uthea st o f the Sea o f G alilee , in the re g io n ca lled the G adarene s ( Ma t 08 :28 : Mar 0 5:01 ; Luk 08:26 ). Gadara bel o nged to the Decapolis (Mat 04 :25; Mar 0 5:20; 07:31), a co nfederacy of ten Romanco ntro lle d ci tie s in northea st P alestine ori gi nall y se ttle d by G re ek s . The co nfede rac y was formed afte r 6 3 Be a nd wa s do minat ed by Dama scu s . T he Gre ek cyn ic philoso phe r Menipp us an d o the r G ree k thinker s lived in Ga dara . Some liberals have pro posed that Ye,\'1lUtI was a wandering Stoic-C ynic preacher who called on men to repe nt and to be virtuous. To propose that Yeshll o was a G ree k th in ker mu st me an the se li bera ls th ought Yeshua spo ke G re ek . T he Gr eeks mu st ha ve not iced that Yeshna preached in the Gr eek -speaking are as o f Palest ine. That must be why so me Gr eek s c ame to sec Yeshll(/ at the te mple (Joh 12:20-22) . Interestingly, right before the Greeks came In see Yn ·hutl . the Phari see s co mplained that the whole wo rld was fo llo wing Yesh tw (Joh 12: 19). It wo uld see m odd for Gree ks 10 searc h YeS/ilia om at the temp le if YeS/ilia did not speak G reek ~ The Jewish authontie v in Jer usale m also noted that Yeshua taughl Greeks and Greek -speaking Jews in Pale stine. That is why the Je wish author ities at the temple figu red Ye.f hll(/ migh t go teac h the Greek s as well as the diuspora. Gree k-spea king Jew s arou nd the Medi te rranean (Jo h 07 :35. 4 1. 52; also see Act 2 1:28). T he Jewish autho rities' word s we re: W here do es this man inten d 10 go that we will be unable 10 find hi m? Will he go where our people live sca ttered among the Greeks . and teac h the Gr ee ks? (Joh 07:35). That the Je wish author it ies thou ght restwa wo uld teach Gr eek speake rs IS s ignific ant. If Yes/lIIa ' s d iscipl es mainl y spoke A rama ic. the Jewish authori ties wo uld ha ve s upposed Ye.\'/IU(/ would go a mon g the Aramaic -speaking diaspora Je ws in Mesopotamia (Act 02:( 9) . Th at the Jewish authorit ies figured Ye,\'1111l1 had a better chance of elud ing their grasp amo ng the G reek-speakin g diaspora sugges ts that YeshuG was fluen t in Greek. Be side s. the Jewish author ities may have he ard thai Ye.\'/lII a was o nce taken to the G reek -spea king d iaspo ra in Egypt to el ude Herod 's forc es (Mat 0 2:13-15 ). Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

185

Even after his return from Egypt, Joseph was warned in a dream to leave Aramaic s peaking Ju dea I'm G ree k-speakin g Ga lilee ( Mat 0 2:21 -22). So the Je wi sh authorities likely figured o ut that. to avoid arrest (Mal 2 1:46 ; Mar 12:12; 14:0 I; Luk 20: 19), YC.I'J/Uu avoided Judea and traveled in Gree k-spe aking Galilee and Syrian Phoenicia (Mat 15:2 1: Joh 04:03,. The factor that suggested to the Jewish authorities that Yeshua would go to the Greek-speaking diaspora must have been his usc of G reek . It was not as though the Jews had greater access to the Fert ile Crescent than to the Mediter ranean, The NT sho ws that the Jewi sh leadership could send letters and ca use evange lists trouble around the Mediterranean as surely as they co uld chase do wn people in the Fertile Crescent (Mat 23: 15; Al:t 09 :02; 21 :28; 22:05; 28:2 1-23). Ycshua likel y spoke G reek to his arreste rs. The y were a Ro man cohort. officers of the te mple guards, and officials of the chief priests and Pharisees (Luk 22:52; Joh I K:03). Jeru sa le m was an intern ation al c ny where seve ral languages were spoken, and the Jew s and Ro mans who arrested Yt-.shua were likely more so ph!sne ared than most. Apparently, o nly offi cers of the tem ple guards, but not the tem ple g uards themselves, were se nt. The guards were not trusted since they had failed to arrest Ycshua once befo re due to Yeshua's persuasive wo rds {Joh 07 :32, 45- 47). T he commander of the cohort was a trib une (t-h ifitlfrhm') . Tribun es we re usually in charge of Roman troops {Joh l K:12; Act 2 1: 33; 22:24. 27, 2K, 29; 23:10, 19,22; Act 24:22). T he co hort is called a speira (Joh nU B , 121, a Gree k word derived from the Latin word meaning, "coho rt." Spdm is found se ven times in the NT. and each time speira refers to a Ro man cohort (Mat 27:27; Mar 15:16; Joh l K:03, 12; Act 10:0 1: 2 1:3 1; 27:0 1). Unfortunate ly, the word speira is often translated as "soldiers" in Joh 18:03 and 18:1 2. So the reader is given no clue that a Roman cohort assisted with Yes/ilia 's arrest. T hat Rom ans were involved with Ye.l'huu·s arrest wo uld not be a unique occ urre nce in the NT. Roman s arrested Paul and handed him o ver to the Sanhedrin (Act 21 :3 1-41 . 22:24-30). Ycsh/lu like ly spoke Greek to the xpeiro that arrested him, s ince Paul spoke G reek to the commander of the speira that arrested him (Act 2 1:3 1, 37). Likel y the sa me cohort arre sted both Yeshua and Paul. T his cohort was statio ned next to the te mple at fortress Antonia. Of course, the coho rt likely had diffe rent personnel s ince the arrest of Yt'-I'hu{/ and Paul occ urred decades apart. YC,I'JIllU like ly spoke Gree k to his arresters since Greek was the o nly language that the entire arresting party understood. Surely the "off icers" and "o fficials" and Roman soldiers all kne w Greek. So Y/'shuu's "I AM" state ments that cau sed t he so ldiers to fall to thei r knees were quotations of the name " I AM" as given in the LXX (1oh 18:05-08). T he '" AM " and the Song of Moses chapters discu ss the "I AM" statements in Jo h 1Kfurth er.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

186

Yael Na ta n

Whether the Disciples Were Hellenized or Hebraic Jews Background Wheth er the di sc iples we re Helle nized Jews o r Hebraic Je ws speaks volumes about the leader who chose them, es pec ia lly since they c hose to stay' with him (1nh 06:67-7 1).

The Evidence in Names A person' s name lends 10 ind icate the culture into which the pe rso n was bo rn. A ro ll call otrhc d isc iples reveals that : • TWIl di sc iples had Arama ic nick nam es (C ephas and T ho mas), but were abo kno wn by the Greek eq uivalents (Peter and Didym us), • Two d isciples had Gree k names (Andrew and Phili p). • Two disciples we re known by the GrcCiZIXI (Hellen ized) Hebrew na me " Jame s: ' w hic h co mes fro m the name " Jaco b," and • O ne d isci ple. S imon, was kno wn by a Greek title Zelotes, meaning. "Zealot." So s ix of the ele ven discip les fro m Galilee we re known by G reek or Greei zcd names, and a se venth was known by a Greek title. Na mes hel p 10 de termine the degree of Hel leni za tion in firs t century Gali lee. Conside r ho w so me Gr eek s at the tem ple wa nted to see Ye.11ulII (Jo h 12:20-22). Th csc Greek s first approa ched Philip, who in turn approached A ndrew. Then bo th Philip and A ndrew approach ed Ye.I'huiI with the Gree ks' req uest to see him. So it see ms significant that the onl y IWO d isc iples with Gree k g iven name s were involved whe n the G reeks wante d 10 sec Ye.I'hun. T he name s see m to ind icate tha t the d isc iples were more or less Helleni zed Je ws . This is what one would ex pect since all the disciple s but Judas were fro m the Ga lilee o f the Gen tile s (Isa 09 :0 1: Mal 04:15). T his e xpla ins w hy Ye.l h /Ill had to tell h is dis ciples 10 go to the prcdo minantly Aramaic -speaking Ju dcans fir st before go ing 10 the G ree k-spea king gentiles (Mat 10:05; Luk 24:47: Act 0 1: OS). The ele ven Gali le an d isciples wo uld have found il easier to ev ange lize Greek speakers, and the o nly disci ple fro m Judea (Ju das) was no more. Ye,I'Illlll 's Arama ic title MeS,l ill,I' is mentioned o nly twice in the NT (Joh tll A I: 04: 25 ). Messias is Ihe Aram a ic equi valent of the Hebrew Me,I'him'h (Mess iah), mean ing, " A no inted." Ye.I'h/IlI , howe ver, was co m mo nly c alled b y the G reek equivalen t of the Aramaic Messias, namely, Ctvistos (Ma t 0 1:16; 27:17 , 22; Joh 01 :4 1; 04 :25) , Yeshul/'s po pular title Christos wa s used 546 t imes in the NT instead of the Aramaic fonn Messias. If Yesh Uil d id nol spea k G reek , o ne wo uld ex pect thai mo re titles and more words wo uld be rranslue rated rather than transla ted in the NT. These facts suggest that Ye.l hua 's fo llowers were thoro ughl y Helleni zed , and that Yeshlil/ himsel f was a Hellenized Jew. Th is may be one reaso n why Pilate had the sign o ver the cross

Malenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

187

written in Aramaic, Gree k and Latin (Joh 19:20). The Latin , of course, was meant for the Romans from all parts of the emp ire. Ye.\,hua's ministry was mostly carried on in Helleni zed areas. T hus, one cou ld say thai Yi:'shll
188

Yael Na ta n

there were fewer Jews, and the na tive lan gua ge was A nato lian rather th an Greek (Ac t 14: 12). The min istry shift in Act 13 is indicated by a quote of Isa 49 :06 after the con version of some Greek -speakin g ge nt iles: For th is is w hat the Lo rd has co mmanded us: " have made yo u a light for the Gen tiles, that you may bring salvation to the e nds of the earth' (Ac t 13:47) . Paul's turning 10 the ge ntiles eac h time the Jews rejected him (Act 09:29; 13: 46) was a fulfillment of Isaiah's prophec y. This is paralleled in Yeshua's min istry. Yeshua atte mpted to conduct his ear liest minim }' in Jud ea (Joh 0 1:43 ; 04: 0 1-0 3). Wh en Jo hn was put in prison . fe.l l lt/i l withdrew (0 Capema um in the G alilee of the Genti les (Mal 04: 12- 13). Ma tthe w the n quoted Isaiah 's prophecy that said alight came to the gentiles who lived in darkness (Is a 09:0 1-02; Mat 04: 14- 16). Inte restin gly. we find that a Roman ce nturion had the sy nagog ut: in C apernaum b uilt {L uk 07:0 1-06). Since the Rom an centurion sure ly knew Gree k, o ne c an ass ume the synagog ue used the G reek LXX for rea dings . Later. Ycshua aga in retreated to the Galilee of the Genti le s whe n the Ph arisee s plotted 10 take h is life (M al 12 :1 4- 15). Matthe w then qu ote s Isa 42:0 1-04 that spe aks of the Messiah preaching to the ge nt iles (Mal 12: 17-21). So fro m the time o f Isaiah to the tim e C hrist. G alilee was considered the land o f gentiles (Isa 09:0 1). During the Passio n w eek, Y{',\ h u <J sa id: Is il not wriuen: ' My house will be ca lled a hou se of prayer for all nat io ns?' But yo u have mad e it into a den of robbers (Ma r II : 17). So the se fac ts see m to indic ate that Ye,I'hl/lI'S ministry was co nduc ted mainly among Greek-speaking Je ws and ge ntiles (Mat 15 :26-27 ).

Beyond the Evidence of Names Some of Ye.l,hu a 's d isciples we re form erly fo llowe rs of Jo hn the Bapti st (1oh 0 1:37-4 2 ; Act 01 :2 1-26). Joh n ministered in at least two locatio ns. O ne plac e w as "Bethany beyond the Jo rdan" across fro m Jeru salem. and another was at the Samar ita n-Galilean borde r at Ae non by Sa lim. Ae no n is ofte n loc ated ncar the Jord an about fifte en m iles south of the Sea of Galilee . A ndre w and John were o ne-t ime d isciples of Jo hn (1nh 01 :35-40). The Ae no n lo cat io n helps e xp la in w hy so me of Ye.l h /IlI ' S d isciple s we re from the heavi ly Hell enized Galilee of the Gentiles (l sa 09: 0 I; Mat 04: I S). Juda s, howe ver. was from so uthern Judea. John spo ke to Ro man so ld iers, almost certainly in Greek (Luk 0 3:14; Act 2 1: 37 ). Jo hn 's bapt ism made its way 10 Gree k-speakin g areas such as Alexandr ia and A sia M inor (Ac t 11U 4-25; 19 :03-04 ). So it see ms appropriate that Luke's quote o f Isaiah applied 10 Jo hn the Bap tist follow s the Greek LXX. T he phra se " a ll flesh shall see the salva tio n of God" is especi ally apro pos since it refers 10 both Jew and ge nt ile (l sa 40:03-05; Luk 0 3:04-06).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

189

John bap tized ncar the heavily Helleni zed Gal ilee of the Ge ntiles an d minislered to Hellenized Jews and even 10 Roma n so ldiers. This suggests that Jo hn the Baptist an d his discip les were Helleni zed Je ws. Thm so me of Jo hn 's disc iples became Y(',~Juw 's di s, iples sugges ts that }('I'JW(l wa s a Hellenized Je w, 100 . If Yes/ilia prima rily spoke Ara maic, o ne would e xpect that: • Most of his d iscip les and followers wo uld spea k Ara maic, • G reci an Jews and G reek s would have o nly tric kled inlo the Ch urch while the gospe l ignited the Fertile Cresce nt (Ael 0 6:0 1; 11 :20 ), • All the gos pels wo uld have been wr itte n in Aramaic or iginally, and there wou ld be plent y of ext ant copies even today, and • Th e re wou ld a lso ha ve been severa l e p istles 10 t he Ar amaic Je ws in Mesopo tamia, an Aramaic apoc aly ptic book sim ilar to Re ve lation, and mo re Aram aic apocry phal an d pse udepigra phal boo ks. Compared to the volu me of early C hurch Gree k literature , ne xt to nothing was written in Ara maic Instead. the NT boo ks and early Ch urch literature were writte n in Fl uen t Attic Koin e Greek. C hris tian wr itings in Aram a ic on ly came at a later dale except in far-o ff Mesopotamia . as J. S. Trimi ngham wrote: .v.within a few years o f Jesus' dealh -ri sing". owi ng to the strong hold that Hellenist hum anism had gained in Sy ria. the Go spel ex press ion was almost excl us ive ly thro ugh the medi um o f Greek , though with ou t being ab le 10 d o mo re tha n submerge Ihe Aramea n subst ratum wh ich was find ing mor e direct ex press ion in Mesopotamia."-' Tri min gha m noted the language situation in Palestin ian churches in the fourth century : The worship o f the Ch ris tia ns was cond ucted thro ugh Greek , but the fact that the services. es pec ially the gospel lecnons a nd d iscourses, were trans lated ora lly into Aram a ic, shows that the majorit y of the peop le were Ararnucans. !" Notice that Trim ingham on ly says the majority race was Aramea n. T he fact that the serv ice was conducted in Greek suggests that the majority of Ara means in t he fo urth ce ntury knew G ree k. Here are so me det a ils that Tri min gham provide s to bac k up h is state men t: Buse bius [c irca 264-340 A DJ repo rts that Procopio ». a native o f Ael ia [Aelia Ccpitotina: a Roman name for Jer usalem ]. used to translate for the congrega tion of Scythopolis ( Bcisan in Palestin e II). Ege ria (ci rca 385 AD) writes, ' In this pro vince [Palestine ) there are some people who know both G ree k and Syriac. hut othe rs know on ly one or the other. T he bishop ma y kno w Syriae . bUI neve r use s it. He always speaks in Gree k, and has a presbyte r beside him who translates the Greek into Sy ria" so that eve ryo ne can understand what he means. Sim ilarly, the lesso ns read in chu rch have to be read in Greek. but there is always someone in atte nda nce to transla te into Syria, so that [allJ the peop le can unde rstand.':" Matthe w. Mark. Jo hn. Ja me s, Peter, Jude , an d perhaps even Luk e and the a uthor of Hebre ws , heard YC-\'h IUl speak at so me po int. Th ey ap parent ly kne w Matenal com direlbs autcrars

190

Yael Natan

Greek very well, jud ging from the books rightl y attributed to them. If Ye.\'h ull were challenged by G reek and needed an interpreter. one wo uld e xpec t this to be noted somewhere in the NT. No interpreter is me ntioned eve n when Yeshua visited predominantly Greekspe aking areas of Palestine . Yt'IhUil apparen tly had no difficult y ta lking to people who may have kno wn only Greek and some Lat in, such as the Greek woman fro m

S}Tian Phoenic ia, the Roman so ld iers, and Pon tius Pilate . Pau l also talked to YeI hl/u seve ra l t imes (Act 09 :04-06 ; 23 : II ; leo 12:02). The conve rsa tion may have been in Greek. Paul's nat ive tongue , e xcept for the lime that Pau l was on his way 10 Damascu s (Act 26:14). D uring this incident , Aramaic was spo ken to kee p the co nve rsatio n confidential be twee n Paul and Yes/llIl1. After introducing him se lf in Gree k to the Ro man comm and er (Act 2 1:37), Paul addressed the crowd in Aramaic and recounted how Yeshua me t him on the ro ad to Damascus (Act 22 :(2). Ano the r time Pau l (old the account in Gree k, but me nuoned that Ye sh/lll had spoken in Aramaic (A ct 26: 14). Those who he ard a recounting might have bee n surprise d o n two co unts - that the : • Greek-speaking Galilean , Yeshua, spo ke Ar ama ic , too, and • The apostle who ta ught Greeks and brou ght Greeks to Je rusalem (Act 22:2R-29) spoke Aramaic beside s (Act 2 1:40; 22 :02; 26: 14 ). The crowd (Act 22 :2 1-221 an d Festu s (Act 26 :23-24) both inte rrupted Pau l at the same point in the acco unt. T hey co uld stand to hear no more once Pa ul said Ye,I'hulI to ld him to bring the go spe l to the ge ntiles . Festus said . " Your great learning is dr iving you insan e" (Act 26:24). Evidently, it wa s j ust too incredible that Ye.\ h,1lI and now Paul could evange lize e./fec/il'ely in two lan gua ges (emphasis on "effectively"). The re WlI S no interl ude after the asce nsion whe n the apostle s had an opport unity to learn Greek Ilue ntly fro m scratch . Earl)' o n the C hurc h had to deal with perce ived conflicts between Grecian Jews and Hebraic Jews (Act 06:01 -1 5). In fact, Yeshua had al ready attrac ted Greeks dur ing his ministr y at the temple (Joh 12:202 1). Also , the re mu st have been Gree k speakers in Galilee and in Sy ria Phoe nicia w ho bec ame C hristian ea rly o n due to Yes /ilia ' s ministry there. This all sugges ts that the di sc iples knew Gre ek Fl uently fro m childhoo d . Simila rly, o utreach to fore ign Greek-speaking ge nt iles came very early. Fer instance , Philip spo ke tuthe Ethiopia n e unuch . The language used was likel y Greek, since Philip sure ly did not kno w Coptic or anoth er Ethiop ian language. After bap tizing the eunuc h, Philip preached in the Greek-speak ing coas tal town s includin g Cacsarca (Act 08:27-40). Ano ther instan ce of the evange lizat ion of Greek speakers oc curred whe n Peter ta lked to Co rnel ius of the Italia n Regimen t, as well as to his fam ily and frie nds (Act 10:0 1). Cornelius surely knew Gree k as othe r Ro man comma nders d id (Act 2 1:371, and there is almost no cha nce that Co rne lius learned Aram aic in Ita ly. So anyway , it is signific ant thai after Pentecost, w ith 11 few e xceptions, the rest of the NT records contacts with Greek speakers.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

191

The Post-Ascension, Pre-Pentecost Evidence Another incident that shows the disciples were Helleni zed Galileans is Act 0 2. The diaspora Jews were surprised that the tongues-speake rs from Galilee (Act 0 2: 07) could speak the lang uages of many nations - including Judea (Act 02:09). T his shows that the majority of Galileans were percei ved as being Greek speakers. while the majority of J udeans were perceived as being Aramaic speakers. That the Judcans tende d to speak Ara maic while the Ga lileans tended to spea k Greek explains the necessity' of Peter's explanation to his followers. who at the time were mostly Galilea n: Eve ryone in Jeru sal em hea rd a bout t his, so the y [t he Judeans in Jerusalem] called that field in their own [Aramaicllanguage Akeldama, that is. 'Field of Blood ' (Act 0 1: 19). The G reek words translated " in thei r o wn lang uage" arc "iaios aiateaos? It is true that bilingual Galileans, who spoke both Greek and Arama ic, had a diffe rent Ara maic accent than that found in J udea (Mat 26:73 1. The fact that Peter had to give a detinitio n of the word Akeldama shows that Peter was referring to diffe rent languages, not to distinct dialects o r acce nts. This is also consistent with ho w t he Greek phrase "idios diatektos" is used in the rest of the LXX o r NT. All three occurrences refer to distinct lang uages rathe r than dialec ts or accents (Act 01 :19; 02 : 06,08). So me translations put parentheses around Act 01 :111- 19. Thi s is an attempt to construe the " in their own language" verses as Luke's aside to Theophilu s [ Luk 0 1:03; Act 0 1:01). The note would indica te that Akeldama was an Aramaic word transliterated into Greek, The NIV is o ne of the mode m translation s thai treats Act 0 I:18-1 9 as tho ugh it were Luke's rather than Peter's comment. So that the passage still makes se nse in contex t, the NIV inserts the words "said Peter" after the co mment (Act 01 :20). Ho we ver, if Luke mean t Act 01 :111-1 9 as a com ment. it seems he would have inse rted the word "said Peter" himself. So mehow Luke would ha ve indicated that he was making a parenthetical comment. Modern translators e nclose Act 0 1: 18- 19 in parentheses based o n misi nfor mation. Modern exegetes and trans lators were taug ht in school long ago that both Gali lean and Judeans considered Aramaic to be their native language. So it just wo uld not do to have Pete r, a Galilean, say ing that Aramaic was "the ir own language" when Aramaic was Peter's language. too. By contrast. the King James Bible translators apparently had no pr oblem with Act 0 1:111- 19 being part of Peter 's speech. The KJV translators must have thoug h! the Galileans spoke Greek while the Judeans spoke Aramaic. Rec ently, archeologists have changed the ir story and say tha t Greek was prev alent everyw here in first century Palestine. Exegetes and translators, howe ver. have yet to catch up to the new evidence and findings. So Peter, the Greckspeaking Ga lilean. likel y referred to Arama ic as "their own language ," beca use Judeans tende d to speak Aramaic while Ga lilea ns tended to speak Greek. T hus. Matenal com direlbs autcrars

192

Yael Na ta n

Act 0 I: 18- 19 sho uld be interpre ted as an integral part of Peter's speec h, and not just a co mment by the narrator; Luke. The Evidence from the Act 02 Penrecnst At Pentecost, the Jews of the dia spo ra were onl y interes ted in how the Galile ans (Act 0 2:(7 ) could mirac ulously speak in "other lang uages" (Greek: "hcterais ,;/w.\.I'tl i,~") (Ac t 02 :04). So a nation o mitted from the Act 0 2 list of nano ns wo uld be one that spo ke the sa me lang uage that the Ga lilea ns tended to speak. The dom ina nt langu ages of the nations listed in the Act 0 2 were Anato lian, Arabic. Aramaic. Co ptic. Demo tic Egyptian, Doric Gree k. and Latin. The g laring o mission from the Act 0 2 list of nations is the nation where Attic Koine G ree k origi nated: Greece and its environs. T he Jews must ha ve perce ived that both the first ce n tury Ualjleans an d the Greeks tended to speak the sa me language- Attic Ko ine Gree k. Greece is not found in the Act 02 list o f nations for the same rea so n that Ga lilee is not in the list -it would not have been miraculo us for G alilea ns 10 speak their ow n language! By contrast. Judea d id make the Act 02 list of nations because the d iaspora Jews perceived that the tlrst cen tury Judc ans tended to speak Ara maic while Ga lileans tended to speak Greek. Whether the Pentecost Tongues-speakers Were All Galilean The det ails o f Act 0 2 serve to buttress the above interpretatio n of Act 0 2 aga inst possi ble o bjections. For ex ample. so meone might propose that the to ng uesspeakers we re not all G alilea ns. The n no con cl usions could be draw n from what natio ns were included or excl uded frn m t he Act 02 list. Note that the dias pora Jews indicate that all the tongues-speak ers were Ga lilea n (Act 02:07). Be sides. if the tongue s-speake rs were not all fro m Ga lilee. than the miracle o f Pentecost would not be as awe some as was desc r ibed by the dia spo re Je ws (Act 02 :08, 11-12). The re ma y ha ve been twe lve or one hundred twenty to ngues-s peakers (Act 0 1: 15. 26 ). Approximately seven major languages arc represented in the Act 02 list of a doze n or so nations and pro vinces . Thi s suggests that on ly the twelve d isciples were speaking in to ngues. Th e dia spora Jews said: We hear the m de claring the wo nders of God in our own tongues ! (Ac t 0 2: 11 ). This see ms to indicate that on ly about seven lang uages were re prese nted. If there were more langu ages than seven, it wo uld have been a cacophony. The n no one wou ld ha ve been ab le to say they understood a nything (Act 02: 11). T he fact that they all had been in o ne house when the tong ues of name res ted o n their heads suggests that there we re just twelve tongues-speakers. If there were just twelve. the Je ws wo uld have been able to de termine their nationality easi ly. Their Ga lilean accen t and perhaps the ir clothing we re cl ues (Mat 26:73). Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

193

The diaspore Jew s' statement that the tongue s-speake rs were Galilean was con firmed by no less than angels. Shavuot (Pe nteco st, Wh itsund ay) occurred se ven week s after the resurrection. Ye.l'Il ua's ascension occurred forty days after the resurrec tio n (Act 01 :03). This meant that Pentecost occurred on ly ten days after the angels called the ascension watchers "men of Gal ilee" (Act 01 : II), The ascensio n watchers were the sa me Galilean s who spo ke in to ngues on Pen te cost. This analysis further sugges ts that there were on ly twelv e tongue s-speakers. The tongues-speakers likel y were all Galilean for vario us reaso ns: • Ye,I'Illlll 's disciples and follo wers tended 10 he Gali lean because of the language barrier. Whi le many Galilea ns a nd Judeans were biling ual, still. the Galilean's lang ua ge of c hoice was G reek while the Judean's la nguage of c ho ice was Aramaic, • Judea n suppo rters of Ye.IIl/1lI likely we re dis illusion ed when Yesllllu's o nly Judcan disc iple committed suicide after betraying Ye .l h/w (At't 0 I: I1'1 -19). • The disciple s kept a low profile out of fear of J udcan Jew s (Jo h 20:19 ). T his meant J udeans would not as readily be included in their cki se-knu group. a nd • Logistics caused Judea n follo wers to d rift away becau se the disciples had traveled to Galilee and then back to Jerusalem sbortl) befor e Pentecost (Mat 21'1 : 07,16; Mar 16:07).

Analysis of th e Languages oflhe Nations Listed in Act 02 Language purists might cruicize the analysis of what languages were spo ken in the natio ns listed in Act 02 . Further analysis, ho wever. sho uld leave this inference intact: the Galileans and near by Hellenists such as the G reeks in the Decapohs tend ed to spea k an Allie Koinc Greek that so mewhat approximated the Gree k spoken in Greece by commoners. The analysis is s implified in that the diaspora Jews only referr ed to languages they spo ke personally. They said: We hear them decl aring the wonders of Gnd in our own tongues! (Ac t oz. ni. The diaxpora Je ws wen: no t refe rring to minor dialec ts. T hey were referrin g to the languagcs of commerce and government that they, but not Galileans. spoke. Th e diaspora Je ws from the Midea st co unt ries of Parthia. Media, Elam. Mesopotam ia and Judea likely were referrin g to Aramai c. The Arab Jews likel y we re referring to the proto-Arabic spoke in Nab ataea. T he Jews and gentile convert s from Rome referred to Larm. The Jews fro m Asia Minor (modern Turkey ) ca me from the prov inces of Asia, Cappadocia. Pamph ylia, Phrygia and Pomus. They were likely' referri ng to the Anatolian language. the native language of interior Asia Minor. The Jew s who lived in the interio r of Asia Minor were able to speak the language of the indigenous pop ulation. That is why in Lystra . in the interior of Asia Mino r, the Jews were able 10 win over the gentile crowd from Paul and Barnabas. Paul and Barnabas did not speak Lycaonian. an Anatolian dialect (Act 14:11). Matenal com direlbs autcrars

194

Yael Natan

T he reaso n Pau l d id not know A natolian is that Pau l grew up in a southern co astal cit y o f Asia Mino r. Tarsus used to be a Gree k colony, and Greek. was likel y the dominan t langu age there. Paul did not have a chance 10 le arn Anatolian befor e he wa s sent o ff for schoo ling in Jeru sale m. Gr eek is why most of Paul's miss ionary journe ys were spent alo ng the coasts of the Mediterranean. On the coasts that Paul visited, he could count un Attic Greek be ing enher the primary or secondary language o f co mmerce and governme nt. For instance, it wo uld be hard for the Je wish C hristians Aqu ila and Prisci lla nOI 10 kno w Attic Greek wh ile doin g business in Ro me (Ac t 18:02 : Ro m 16:0 3). Cor inth (Act 1&:02). Sy ria (Act 18:18) and Ephesus (Act 18: 19, 26; l eo 16:08. 19). The Je ws in the major c it ies o f Egy pt spo ke Allie Ko ine Gr eek . There rne OT was translated into the All ie Koin e G reek LXX. All ie Ko ine Greek was the lan gu age o f commerce and gove rnment in the Hellenized la nds co nq ue red hy Alexander the O rear (356-323 BC) . and the se lands inclu ded G alilee and Egypt R ichard C avend ish wrote: Afte r the co nq uest of Egypt by Ale xande r the Gre at in 33 1 Be the country was ruled by G reek s for 300 years. and d uring this period the c ull o f Isis beca me co mpletely Helleni zed. When the Rom ans too k over the gove rnme nt in 30 Be the y relied on the suppo rt o f the Greek middle class in Egypt and the lang uage o f ad ministration remain ed Greek .!" So at Pent ecost. the Jews fro m Egypt wo uld not th ink il mirac ulous that the Ga lileans spoke Alli e Koine G reek. es pecia lly since the LXX he lped standa rdize the G reek spoke n and written by the Galilean Jew ry. Th is would be similar to how Martin Lut her 's Bible translation helped to standardize German. The rea der migh t wo nde r w het her Arne Ko ine G ree k re se mbled the G ree k s poke n o n the Greek pe nins ula. The Greek lang uage developed on a nd otf the Gr eece ma inland togethe r. Evident ly. there wa s enou gh sea and o ve rland tra ve l an d trade , and shared literature and gove rnment (empires ), that Allie Ko ine G reek rem ained fairly unifo rm for centuries o ver a wide geog raphica l area. Not until the fiflh cen tury A D was there a split. The influent ial Auicist schoo l co nvince d writers In re turn In wr iting in cl assical Att ic Greek. which bec ame kno wn as Byzantin e Gre ek. Th e co ntinuing deve lopment of spo ken Artie Koine Gr ee k from the fift h 10 the fifteenth cent uries AD ca used an e ver -widening di verge nce be tween Attic Koine and Byzantine Gr eek. Attic Koi ne Gr ee k wa s sta nd ard ized by a sys te m of ac cent an d breathing marks introdu ced aro und 200 BC, repu tedl y by Aristophanes of Byzantium. Arne Koin e Gr eek may have been the only language 10 ha ve dia critical mark s until the Masoretes pointed the Heb rew MT recensio n fro m the sixth to ten th ce nturies AD. O nly in modern limes d id d ictionaries prov ide pronun ciatio n keys that serve the same purpose . T hat At nc Koine wa s stand ardized had its benefits. At lea st d uri ng the NT period . A rtie Koine Greek speakers in Greece and aro und the Med iterr anean found the ir speec h and writing mutually co mprehensible. This e xplains w hy Paul was ab le to ev a ngel ize many place s in Greek. Also, Paul was ab le to walk around Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

195

Athe ns reading inscriptions. q uoting Greek poets. and converse with the philosophers at the Areopagus (Act 17). The language situatio n in the interior of Greece , ho wever. is a separate matter fro m the coasts where Attic Greek was the norm . Athe ns was a sea power. and rarel y controlle d the interior main land of Greece. Aristophanes ' pro nuncia tion syste m and other means of standardizatio n did not e xist when differe nt dialects became established in the G recian interio r. The dialect s resulted from geographica l isolation and Dorian immigrat ions. So early Greek colonists spread Doric, Aenlie, lonic-Aui c, and Arcade-Cypriot Gree k around the Mediterranean in the ce nturies preceding the conque sts of Alexander the Grear. who spread Attic Greek. Attic Koine G reek and the other G ree k dialects were on different de velopmenta l paths e ven befor e leaving the mainland. So after several mo re centuries of development, the lingu istic rift between Attic Koine G reek and othe r Greek dialects borde red o n mutual unintelligibility. Doric G ree k was spoken in Libya, Crete, and elsewhere, and Arcade-Cypriot was spoke n in Cy prus. During Pentecost. there were Je ws in Je rusalem from Libya's chief city, Cyre ne, ax well a.s from the island of C rete. Doric-speakin g Gn:eks had colon ized these and other places long before Alexa nder's conquest s. so the Jews fro m these places were familiar with Dor ic Greek. Doric Gree k was a dialect many miles and se veral centuries removed from Artie Koine G reek . It took some effort fo r Koine Gree k spea kers to communicate with the Doric G ree k speakers of C rete. Libya and

elsewhere." The same situatio n pertained to Jews from C yprus, since the language situatio n with Arcade -Cypriot Greek was simila r 10 that of Doric G ree k. Th is e xplain s why, even though Jews spoke a Gree k dia lect in Libya and Cre te, these places made the Act 0 2 list of nations (Act 0 2:10-11 ). T hai Galileans spoke dialects of G ree k incomprehen sible to Attic Koinc G reek spea kers seemed miraculous. Since the majori ty of Egyp tian s did not s peak G reek , Je ws in Egyp t who traveled outside the Hellenized cities needed to kno w e ither Coptic':" or Demone Egypti an. Thi s is analogo us to how Paul grew up in Tarsus a nd spo ke Gree k Fl uently. T he Anatolian dialects spoken in the interior of Asia Mino r, ho wever, were inco mprehensible to Greek speake rs on the coasts (Act 14: I I) . That most Egyptians did not know Gree k is reflected in a curious incident in Jeru sa lem. A Roman commander was surprised that Paul spoke Greek . Rioters misled the commander by clai ming thai Paul was the notor ious o utlaw fugitive. "The Egypt ian" (Act 21 :37-3RI.' w T his shows why Egypt made the Act 02 list of nations- most Egyptians did not know G reek . The Egyptian Jews were surprised, not that Galile ans could spea k Aurc Greek, but that the tongues-speak ers spo ke Coptic or Demo tic Egyptian.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

196

Yael Na ta n

The Implications of Whether re shua Spoke Primarily in Greek or

Predominantly in Aramaic This chapter has shown that Y(' .I'h lUl spo ke Gr eek. T his chapter also makes the case thai Yeshua spo ke pri marily in G reek. So me c ritics. of co urse, will hold tenac iously to the misconceptio n that Ye,s/ulli nearl y a lways spo ke Aramaic. T his likel y has 10 do w ith the theol ogil:al liberal s' de sire to den y that Y/,shua eVICT ide nt ified him self a s: • The "I A M," as is dis cussed in the " I AM" and the So ng of Mo ses chapters. and as • The subject o f the Shema along with the Father, as is d iscussed in the Shema chapte r. T his sort of deni al see ms plausible to those who do not see the Trinity in the OT. Moreo ver. it helpx denie rs if they ca n also miss or misconst rue the man y passages that speak o f, or suggest. the de ity of the Messiah. These pass ages are discussed in the Trinitarian proofs appe ndix . Fo r the sake of argument. howe ver. let us ass ume there are no Trin itarian proofs in the OT. Also. let us ass ume that there are no te xts that sugges t, or speak clearly of, the Me ssiah's de ity. Still, it is a fu rtive ploy for c ritics to say that YeI hlIG spoke Ara maic just so no one can tell whether: • ¥e.l'/Illa said he was " I A M," or • Ye.I'hua applied OT Yahl't'h texts 10 himsel f. The reason the denial is futile is thaI material written in o ne langu age is o ften quo ted in another language , and the qu ote is st ill recog nizable as a quote. We need nOI eve n go ou tside the Bihle for exam ples: • T he ve ry s ign that hung o n YeshlIG's cross translated Pilatcs o riginal Latin words into G ree k and Aram aic (1nh 19:20), • The LX X is, mo re o r less, on e long quote of the OT Heb rew. and • The NT G reek co ntains numerou s recognizable quotations o f OT Hebr ew. At least so me of Yeshua's aud ience and the d isc iples were bili ngua l or e ve n po lyglot. as was arg ued ear lier in this c hapter. T hese persons wo uld have recognized a q uote or an allusion, no ma tter whet her Ye,l h ll l l was speaking in Greek, A rama ic o r He bre w, T hus , it make s no d ifferen ce whe the r Ye.l /w (J qu ote d or a lluded to rohvch'w OT " I A M" stateme nts u ~ i n g Gree k (eK"' eimi ), Arama ic, or lI ebrew (A llee lIu) . The NT wri ters record ed Ye.11ullI·S quotat ion o f YalH'ell 's OT "I AM" stateme nts as they arc found in the LXX (Dc u 32: 39, Isa 43: 10, and the like ). The NT writers a lso have Ye,l'hll a app ly ing Yahveh te xts to himse lf (as is disc ussed in the ap pendi x on OT Yatreeh quota tions). The NT aud ience and NT writers knew the LX X wel l. There is no chance that they inadvert ently made Y/'I hUil sou nd as thou gh hc wcre applying " I A M" and Yohvch texts to himself. So in the case o f the " I AM" q uotations, whether Ye,l hul / spoke in Gree k, Aramaic o r Hebr ew make s no d iffere nce. The NT writers also kne w that a phrase is not always seen as a quote or allusion just on the basis o f word ing. T he co ntext should be take n into co nsiderat ion. So Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

197

the NT writers ca refully gave the context for each "I AM" state ment. For example, it wo uld he farfetched to think every "I AM" in the Bible is a quote of YlIhrch's " I AM" statements (Joh 09:09). Howe ver, when: • The RHS Hebre w of Exo 03:14 has Yahveh say ing .'h.w'h (" I AM" ) three times, • Ycshua was almost stoned (Joh 08:59) for say ing, " I AM" (e~w eimi) three times (Joh 0&:24, 28, 5&), and • " 1AM" (e~w eimi) is mentioned three times in a few verses and a detachment of soldie rs fell to their knees upon Yt'Ihua's mention of " I AM" (Joh 18:05-08), then a pparently at least so me of Ycshuo '< " 1 AM" state ments sho uld he con side red quotations of Ya/weh's or "I AM" stateme nts (Exo 03:14, Isa 4 1:04. and the like ). In concl usion. this chapter shows that the Galileans and J udcans were fam iliar with both G reek and Aramaic. Many even knew Hebrew. So there is no chance that YeIhua's many apparent " I AM" statements, and o ther o vert q uotatio ns of O'T Yahl'eh texts, arc unin te ntio nal. T here is no cha nce that so me meaning was added in translation , e ither intentio nally or unintentionally. It cannot he plau sibly asse rted that YC.I'hua's "I AM'" state ments are anyt hing but q uotations or allusions to O'F Yahl'('h te xts.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Matenal com direlbs autorars

Chapter 9 The "I AM" Stateme nts

T he c hapte r on Pro ro-Smuiuc Trin itar ianism men tio ns that Mo ses asked the name of the M il /ek Yull l'f'h (Exo 0 3:13). Previo usly, the patria rchs k new o nly the Fathe r as Yllhreh , while the Son was kno wn as t he Malek Yllhreh , E/ Shaddai, Elohim (God) and the like (Exo 06 :03 ). In respo nse to Moses ' reque st for a name , Yah re h the Son told Moses thai his Name was Yahl'eh (EI\o OJ: 15). T he Son also declared himself to be '" AM:' a surrogate Name for vah veh foun d in the OT and NT (Exo 0 3:14 ). fahn'h the Son's wo rds about be ing " I AM" read: I AM who I AM [Th e Hebrew is "ehveh ashe r elm-'!,' ].L'" T his is what . . you arc to say til the Israelites: I AM [The Hebrew is ('hyeh] has sent me to you (Exo 0 3: 14). Note thaI the Hebrew word ch.w'" is used a s a signifier o f de ity whether ehveh is the subject o f the predic ate. or is in the predic ate. So apparently the "I AM" signifier of de ity ca n be fou nd in mo re than on e gra mmatica l con struct ion. Some, howeve r. have cla imed that the " I AM" signifier o f de ity is only found in "prcdic utcjcss ab solu tes" such as in Joh 08 :58. This view contradicts Exo 0 3: 14, the very ver se where the " I AM·' Name was fiN re vealed . He re , " I AM·' does not stand alone , but has the predicates: I AM w ho I A M... I A M has sent me to you (Exo 03: 14). T he Hebre w of Exo 0 3:14 has Yahveh say ing, " I A M" (e"yeh ), th ree times. Inter esting ly, the Gr eek tra nslato rs d id no t tran slat e the sec o nd and thi rd e!lyeh with the same wo rds used to translate the first". AM." " EKw cimi " translates the first ·'1 AM" (ehre!l), while "I/O W/I" is used in the LXX to tra nslate the seco nd and third instances of " I AM ." "Egw eimi" is the no mina tive pro no un ( I) pl us the p re sent indi c at ive o f the ver b " to be" (a m) . "Ho wn " i s t he defini te a rt icle plus t he p rese n t active part ici ple o f the ve rb " to be ." T he partic ip le ca n her e be inte rp re ted wit h ex is te ntial c o n no tat io ns s uc h as "the Be ing On e ," o r " He Who Ex ists ," b ut a more l ite ra l re ndering is " W ho is ." Matenal com direlbs autcrars

200

Yael Na tan

The Gr eek LXX has Yahweh the Son say ing: I AM legw d m ;1W HO IS tho 11'''1.' '' This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ' WHO IS tho 11''' 1has sent me to yo u' (LXX Exo 03: 14). The LXX translates the Hebrew subject o f the predi ca te eh veh intn Greek as " C1¢'W eimi." The Heb rew predic ate "asher ehyell" is tra nslated into Gre ek a s "110 11'11" (WIl O IS). The third instance of the Hebrew "ehyeh" is the subjec t of the se ntence: "I AM [ellyelll has sent mc to you:' This chye h is translated into Grec k as "110 11',," (W HO IS). In the second se ntence " I AM [ehyehl has sent me to yo u," on e might think that the LXX translato rs wo uld have used thc "C1¢'W eimi" rat her than "ho 11'11 ." T his wou ld have been consi stent wit h the first ph rase , which has "eg w eimi" as the subject o f the pred icate: " I AM [e1¢'w eim i] W HO IS [ho WII ]." T his tends to show that the LX X translato rs tho ugh t of "egw eimi" and "11 0 11'1 1" as eq uiva lents, and that bo th we re surrogate names for Yanveh mea ning, "I AM." Additional facts that sho w the equivalency are: • T he underl y ing He bre w translated into Greek as " egll' d m ;" and "110 11',," is nearly the surnc ("I AM" versus " Who I AM"), and • No matter the language o f translation, Exu 0 3:14 has been interpreted to ind icate a Name with e xistential con notat ions, "I AM who I AM." Exo 03: 14 has not been interpreted as God being co mplacently resigned abo ut his personality, " I am who I am." That Jews in the early ce nturies AD used " WII O IS" [ho WII ] as a name for God is e vident in the writing o f Philo (circa 20 BC-circa AD 40 ). Philo co m me nted o n "~ I shall beco me known to thee fro m the re" (LXX Exo 25:22 ) thus: T he purest and mo st propheti c mind [Mo ses) receives knowledge and unde rstand ing of the Ex iste nt O ne (ho 0 11 [/w 11'11 ]) not fro m the Existen t O ne himse lf.. . but from his primar y and guard ian Po wers (Q E II 67), m Goodenough al so not es that on Jewish a mulets tha t the angel represe nting thc sun was som eti mes called by the theophoric name the " Existing On e" (ho II',, ) .I~' The NT Use er-r AM" ("eg ll' eimj") and "WHO IS" (Ho Wn) The NT writers followed the lead o f the LXX tra nslators and the Sp irit. T hey ap plied the "I AM" ("eg w eimi") and " W HO IS" (110 WII) from Exo 03: 14 and other OT passage s to Yr,~ h lla o ften. This is especially shown in Revelation where: • The five " ho 11',," passage s in Revelation (Rev 0 1:04,08; 04:08 ; II : 17; 16:05) ha ve relative clauses similar to the wording -t AM WHO IS" fo und in LX X Bxo OJ: 14, and • Re v rJ l: OR has both surroga te names for roh veh menti oned in LXX Exo 0 3:14 : "t1¢'w timi" and "h o WII ." This indic ate s that Ye.\-fllw was Yahveh the Son who said: I AM [rKII' timi ] WI10 IS Iho WIl].,. WIIO IS [/10 wn]. , .(LXX Exo OJ: 14 ). The e ight times thai the NT writers applied the " 110 wn" of Exo 0 3:14 to Yn-fl/f{/, and the one time Yes/ilia applied the "ho wn" of Bxo OJ: 14 to himself (Rev 0 1:08), are: Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

201

I ) God the One and Only, ' WHO IS 1110 II'lI r at the Father 's side. has made him kno wn (Joh 0 I: III), 2) No on e has see n the Father except the one ' Wil D IS [/10 11'111' from God (Joh 06 : 46) , 3) Thei rs arc the patriarchs. and from the m is traced the human ances try of Christ, 'WHO IS [/10 Will' G od over all. forever praised ! Amen (Rom 09 :05), 4) The God and Father of the Lord Yeslllla, ' W HO IS Iho Wil l' to be praised foreve r (2Co 11:3 1), 5) Gra ce and peace to you from him ' W HO IS rho II'IIJ,' and who was , and who is to come ( Re~' 0 1:04 ), 6 ) "'1 A M "'XII' dmiJ' the Alp ha and the Ome ga,' says the Lord God, " W HO IS rho WIlJ.' and who was, and who is to come, the Al mighty " (Rev 01:08). 7) " Holy, hol y, holy is the Lord Go d Al mighty, w ho was, and 'WHO IS rho 11'11 ): and who is to co me" (Rev 04:08), H) "Lord God Almighty. the One ' WHO IS rho 11'11]' a nd who was (Rev I I:17), because yo u have take n )'our great powe r and have begun to reign," and 9) ... .. you ' W IIO IS [/10 WII]' and who were, the Holy O ne" (Rev 16:05 ). That Yi;'shlltl is the su bject o f the "I", WIl" ca n be ascertained from the context. Th at YeshllG is the subject of"lw 11'1'" in the: • Fi rst four passages is clear to see. unle ss grammatical gymn ast ics are employed to de ny the ob vio us (Joh 0 I: 18: 0 6:46; Ro m 09: 05: 2Co II :31), • Fifth, s ixth and seventh passa ges ca n be de term ined by no ting that Joh n sa id Ye,I'/llltl is " to come" o n the Last Day (Re v 01: 04 , OR; 04JJII), • E ighth passage can be estab lished by not ing that Joh n sa id Ye .lhua has "begun to reign" after his ascen sion (Rev 11:17), and in t he • Nin th passage can be recog nized from a nalysis of the detai ls. Re v 15:08 me ntions that only Go d was in the tem ple and no one el se co uld enter the temple until the seven plag ues were finished (Rev 16:0 1-21 ). Rev 15:03 mentio ns the Song of the Lamb . A lo ud voice from the temp le warns that he will return like a thief in the n ight (Re v 16:15; compare wi th Mat 24:44 a nd IT h 0 5:021. The voic e from the te mple also said. " It is don e" (Rev 16:1 7: compare with Joh 19: 30). T he men tion of the lamb, the thief and the word s from the cross suggest that the Son is the person of God spea king from the temple. So he is also the person of G od in the te mple ca lled "/10 WIl" (Rev 16:05). What the "I AM" Phrase Means Until now scholars have made their best guess as to what the phrase, "I AM who 1 A M," mea ns. Refe rence has been made to seve ra1 fi elds of stud). includ ing comparative rel igio n studies, e tymology, gra mmar, philosophy, metaphysic s, and cos mology. T hen eac h to rtured interpretation has been run thro ugh the ideo logica l gantlet of the his to rical -cri t ic al and histor ic al-g rumm ancal ca mps. In the end tho ugh, the lack of co mpe lling arg uments mea nt eac h reader c hose the version that sounded best based on his or her co nservative or liberalleanings. Matenal com direlbs autcrars

202

Yael Natan

Yah l'e/l. the "I AM:' is not like huma ns (Psa 050:2 1). So the best way 10 figure

o ut what '" AM" means is to study the context of e ac h occ urrence of "I AM" khyeh ). This reveals that Yuln'eh's predominant use of the word ehveh is to say. "' I AM ' with you [or him I." '''' This phrase has also heen interpreted in the future tense as. " I will be with you:' This meaning fits the context of Exo 03: 14. since YlIh reh said that he would be with Moses when he we nt to Egypt (Exn 03 :12). The NT writers" use of "flo wn " gives a n addit ional perspective on the intended meaning of "I AM" in Exo 03: 14. " Ho 1\'11 " and "egll' rimi" are fo und in a variety of contexts in the NT. II is worth noting. howe ver. that the main thrus t of the NT is that Yes flllll is "Immanuel," "God with us" (Mat 01:23). Yes/llIa also sa id he would be with Chri st ians until the e nd of the world. This is similar to the meaning behind " I AM" in Exo 03: 14. T he book of Re velation. where se veral " /III w,," statements are found, exte nds the -t will he with you" thought to heaven itself: 1 heard a loud voice from the throne saying, ' Now the dwe lling of God is with men, and he will live with them. They will be his people , and God himself will be with the m and be the ir God' (Rev 2 1:03). The Slats on " Ho Wn" (" \ '11" 0 IS" ) and ..eg..... eimi" ("I AM")

T he re are three instances nf"ho 11'11" (W HO IS) in two LXX verses, LInd thirteen instances of "lltJ 11'1 1" in the G reek NT, On ly five of the six teen instances of "flo 11', , " are applie d to people besides Ye.l'flull (LXX lKi 16:22: Joh 03:31: 08:47: 12: 17; HUh The re are 30,926 verses in the LXX (incl uding the Apocry phal books ), and 7.957 verses in the NT. II is statistically significant that there are only sixteen instances of "ho 11'11 , " a nd e leven are applied to Yesluw. One gets the impression that " 110 wn"' (who is) could have appeared mo re often in Scri pture. Also. " fill W/I " co uld have bee n applied to a more represe ntati ve sample of the persons ment ioned in Scripture. Instead, "110 W I/ " is used reservedly. Per haps this is becau se the LXX translators and the Gree k NT writers figured that "ho ll' n" (W HO IS) is thc equiv atc nt of -t AM," lntcrcsringly. the same could be said. 10 a lesser e xtent. of the phrase "e,lll\' eimt· (" I am" or "1AM"'). Liberal s criticize some conservatives for trans lating ../' ,11 .... cimi" as "I AM"' too often in the NT. Libe rals hesitate 10 translate as "1 AM" the " e.!:1I' eimi" in the predicateless ubsolu te of Joh OR:5R : "Before Abrah am was, " AM:"' The reaso n is that the less co nvinced one is of the deity of Ch rist, the less favorab ly one is d isposed toward applying '" AM"' statements 10 Ye.l'/lIm . The issue is not so much over grammar, but one of belief versus unbelief. The case ca n be made that " 11lI W II" ("WHO IS" ) is the equivale nt of "I AM" in eleven o ut of sixtee n occurrences in the LXX and Greek NT. Twice "11lI 1\'11" is used with " e.!:w eim i" to prove divi nity (LXX Exo 03: 14: Rev' 01 :08). The co mplemental)' and para llel uses of " /',I(1t' dm t ' and wn" suggest that the phrase " ex it' elmi" really doe s mea n " I AM" in more than just one o r IWO passage s: Exo 03: 14 and Joh 08 :58.

"'Ill

Ma rial om dlr ibs actor

The Jewi sh Trinity

203

The Predicated, Non-Absolute '" AM" ("egw eimi") Statements It was shown above that thc signifier of deity. " I AM." can be the subject of a predicate (LXX Bxo 0 3:14 ), T his mcans Yeshua's famou s seven predicated " I AM" ("e,\lll' d mi" ) statements in Jo hn ca n he translat ed as " I AM..." Instead o f saying. " 1 A M who I AM." Yeshua said, " I A M thc true vine. YI'slwa's famo us seve n "I A M" stateme nts from the Gos pel of Jo hn are: I ) "' I AM kgw dmi] ' the bread o f life" (Joh 0 6:35), 2) ''' I AM [egll' eimi]' the light ofthe world" (Joh 08: 12), 3) '" I AM [egw dllli] , the sheep gate" (Joh lO:tl7). 4) " ' 1AM [egl\' eimi] ' the good She pherd" (1oh 10:11), 5) ''' I AM [egw eimil' the res urrec tio n and the life" (Jo h 11:25) , 6 ) ''' I AM [egl\' eimi]' the way, the tru th and the life' (Joh 14:06). and 7) "'I AM [cgw cimil' the true vine" (1oh 15:rJI), The se stateme nts ind icate that if o ne belie ves YI'shua is " I A M" and Yahveh the Son, the n Yeshua will provide for his eternal life (Joh06:27. 41,51,58). Th is point is made clear in the di scussion between Ye.~ llIta , Tho mas and Philip (Jo h 14:08-21) regardin g Yeshua's statement: "' I AM ' the way, the truth and the life" (Jo h 14:( 6 ), Thl' "I AM" Sterements in the MT Yahl't,h created surrogate names and signature phrases by appe nd ing a pred icate

to "1AM." Two ex am ples are: I ) T he Hebrew phrase "ehyeh asher ellyeh" means "I AM [ellyeh] who [asher ] 1 AM [ehwll]" (Exo 03: 14), and I ) Th e He bre w p hrase "all!'f' h u"l~~ mea ns "" A M [allf'e]' he [hu l" with or without an ap pended predi cate such as ..... who am speak ing" (Isa 52 :06). MT passages that ha ve " I AM" with a pred icate incl ude: I ) "I AM kh)','h l who I AM k hyeh ). .. 1 A M kh,whl has sent me to yo u. .... (Exu rJ3:14), 2) "S ee now that 1myself AM he ~ [altee ali a II/IJ"':-<> (Deu 32:39). 3) " I. Yahl't'h-[a m wi th] the first an d [I am] with the lasts Iplurall - 'I AM ' he [I.m !'e h,,1" (Isa 4 1:04), 4 ) "Unde rstand that ' I AM' he ranee hu]" (l sa 43: 10), 5) " hom anc ient days ' I AM' he [allet' hu J" (Isa 43: 13), 6 ) "Even to yo ur o ld age and gray hairs, ' I A M' he [ant'l' hu], and I am he who will sust ain you" (Isa 46:0 4), 7) ''' I A M' he ranee 111I], I a m the first. .... (Isa 48: 12), ami 8) " Peo ple will know my Name .. .they will kno w that ' I AM' he [allt'e hu] who foretold it" (I sa 52:06). Quoting the surrogate names and s ignature phrases created by the above predicates allowed Yeshua to identify himself as Y ahveh, T he se quotation s imply that: • He wax a perso n of Yahl't,h who spoke so me of the OT Yahreh te xts tha t he is quoting or alluding to , and Matenal com direlbs autcrars

204

Yael Natan

•

He c an speak ju st as Yoh vch the Father or Yah vch the Spir it di d sin ce he is Yah l'e/l the Son and "I AM. " How the NT writers applied DT "1 AM" for mulas such as Iva 52:06 to Y/,.\1IUlI win be d iscussed later in the ch apter. The NT up plic a uon s of ' 'I AM" to YeJlw a arc discu ssed in the Son g: of Moses chapter. and are not ed in the NT Use of DT Yahvch Te xts ap pendi x.

The "I AM" Statements in the LXX The LXX translators kne w that Moses (Dc u 32:39) and Isaiah used surrog ate names for Yah veh: • The Heb rew word anec (" I AM" ). and • The Hebrew ph rase "anee hu" ("' I AM' he"). The LXX translators used the G reek word s "egw eimi" (" I AM") to translate the Hebrew ance [" I AM" ]. The LXX tnanslarors so metimes did not translat e tht': hu [he) in the phrase "unee IIlI" (Deut. 32:39 : Isa. 4 1:4; Isa. 43:10: Isa. 43:13: lsa. 46: 4: Isa. 4 l'1 :1 2; Isa. 52:6). It is as tho ugh the LXX translato rs thought lUI [he ] was superfluous. The LX X tra nslator>; and NT write rs used the G ree k words "eXIl' cimi" and "IIlI W/l " as surrog ates of the Nam e. Ya/l l'eh: • Without any predic ate, and • With a pred ica te that rneu ns substantially the samt': thing as the subject " I AM: ' Pred icates that mean substantially the same thin g as the subjec t " AM" incl ude -wuo 15" I /'o wn ] (LXX Exo 03:14) and "mysel f" (LXX Isa 52:06 ). A predica te that docs not give much additional informa tion is mean t to e mphasize " I A M." Th ese pred ic ates serve as an exclamatio n po int to indicate that the "I AM" is a specialusage. Exa mples of such LX X passag es incl ude: I ) " I AM (e.';'1l' eimi] WHO IS [ho wlI] ... WHD IS rho W II ] has sen t me to you" (LXX Exo 03 :14), 2) " See. see that ' I AM (eKII' eimi]: and there is no God but me" (LXX Deu 32: 39) , 3) " I, God. the first and to futurity, '1 AM Ie.';'w rimi ]'" (LXX Isa 4 1:04). 4 ) "U nders tand that ' I AM [eXIl' eimi ]: before me there was no other God" (LXX Isa 43: 10). 5) ''' I AM [e1;'1I' eimi ]: I am he who blots o ut transgression s for my own sake.."• (LXX lsa 43 :25). 6) " " AM [eKW eimi]: and there is no ne e lse" (LXX l sa 45: 18). 7 ) "' 1A M [e!ill' e;mi].' 1 am the Lord speakin g righ teou sne ss" (LXX ls a 45:19 ), tI ) " Even to o ld age . ' I A M [e.';'1I' timi ].' and un til you gro w o ld, ' I AM [e!iW eimi ].' I bear you" (LXX Isa 46 :04 ). 9) ' '' I AM [e.';' lI' rim i]" 1 am yo ur co mforter" (LXX Isa 51 :12), 10) "People will kno w 01) ' Name ... that ' I A M' mysel f [.. .hoti ell»" eimi (Ill tO I ]" (LXX 52 :06), and

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

205

The Jewi sh Trinity

I I) "The n yo u will know that in the midst of Israel, " I AM k !l" w eimi],' and I am Yahveh your God" (LX X Joe 02:27 ).

The Agreement of the MT Recension with the I.XX Translation Seve n ver se s with "I AM " in the MT rece nsion and LXX are in subs tantia l agreement (Exo 03: 14; Deu 32:39 ; Isa 4 1:04 ; 43 :10; 46:04; 4!'\:1 2; and 52:06). In fi ve LXX verses, howeve r, the LX X clea rly has Yuhw h say ing. " I AM," when the MT rece nsion is not so cl ea r (L X X Isa 43:25: 45: 18. 19 : 5 1: 12: L X X Joe 02:27): I ) & 2) LXX Isa 43:25 and 5 1:12 have "egw eimi, egll' eimi" (" ' 1 AM: 1 am") , whic h translates the Heb rew "aeokee anokcc hu" (" I mysel f AM he... ") , 3) LXX l sa 45:18 has " egw eimi" (' I AM')," wh ich translat es the ph rase "alice Yahveh" ( " I am Ytlh l'eh "). 4) LXX Isa 45:19 has "egw eimi e!l"w elmi Kurios : ("' I AM: 1 am the Lord" ), which phrase translates the wo rd "anee Yahre" " (" I am Yahreh·· ). and 5) LXX Joe 02 :27 has "egw dmi," which translates the Heb rew word ,11I1'1' (" I am") . In this verse, the Heb re w word order sugges ts. " I AM:' more tha n do the words themse lve s. T he He brew ''I'' ((//1('1') e nds one ph rase and bt::gins anot her, with onl y an "and" (prefixed conjunctive I'm ') in between. In a sixth ve rse. the MT recen sion verse has Ya"l'eh saying, "1 AM," cle arl y (Isa 43: 13), but the LXX does not In a seventh vers e , the LXX has " I AM," twice. b ut the MT recension only has " I AM" on ce (lsa 46:04 ). Some of the d isc repancies betwee n the MT recen sion and LXX may have been caused by textual tran sm ission errors. Perh aps a study of the Dea d Se a Scrolls foc using on the " I AM" staternems wo uld shed more ligh t on the subjec t. The di screpanci es ma y have bee n caused by translato rs who were no t aware tha t Ya hl'e h occa siona lly said. " I AM," rat her than just "I am:' So me d iscr epanci es bet we en the MT recen sion and LXX actuall y hel p the argument that Yahl'eh sometimes meant " I AM" when he said, "anee? An ex ample is where the LXX transla tors used "egw eimr (" I AM" ) to translate the phrase "una Ytlhl'eh" (" I am Ytlhl'eh ") (Isa 45:18) .

The " I A~I " Statements in the Greek NT Yeshu a 's NT " I AM" statements show tha t he can spea k as

ranvehd id in the OT.

Thi s fac t was already shown in the OT when Yohveh the Son (who late r became Ye,~Jltfll ) spoke ' I AM ' statements suc h as in Exo 0 3: 14 and: I. Yilhl'eh [the Son], mil the first and am with the lasts-'I AM' (I SH 4 1:(4), The Hebrew for "lasts" in lsa 41:04 is plural. The "lasts" here art: the Fa ther an d the Spirit. The "lasts" are the " us" and "we " me ntioned els ew here in Isa iah (as is discussed in Isa 06:08 and Isa 4 1:22-23, 26 in the MT plural appe ndix). In the NT Yeshl lQ sa id. " I AM," eithe r with o r without a predicate (Joh 04: 26): I ) "' I AM Iegw eimi ]: said Yeshuu" (Mar 14:62), 2 ) "You say [it ] because ' I AM legw eimil''' (Luk 22:70 ). Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Yael Na ta n

206

3) " See thai ' I AM' myself [.. .hoti egw eilll; 1I1110.1T' (Lu k 24:39 ), 4 ) " Yeslllla said to her. " I AM [e,;w eimiJ' who a m speaking to you'" (Joh 04: 26). 5) " Ye,I'lm ll said to them, " I AM legw eillli );' do no t be afraid" (Joh 06 :20), 6 ) "If yo u do not bel ieve that " 1 AM [e,l,'W dlll i ].' you will indeed die in your sins" (Joh 08:24) , 7 ) "When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will kno w that ' 1 AM (e,l,'W d llli] '" (joh mU ll ),

8) " Before Abrah am was born. ' I AM k ,l,'1I' dllli]"" (Joh 08:58)," ' 9 ) "I am telling you now befo re it happens, so Ihal when it docs happen, you will belie ve that ' I AM k g\\' e;III; ] ". (Joh 13: 19), and 10) "' I AM Iegw eimi l: ' Yes/ilia said. As soon as Ye.I'hlU.I said, " I AM (eg w eimi l," they d rew back and fe ll to the ground ... ' I told you that ' 1 AM [e,; w dllli]," Ye.l"hua answered .. ." (Jnh 11\ :05-06. OR).

Would Yeshua Quote Yahveh' s " I AM" statements from the LXX Rather

Than the Hebrew or Aramaic? Libe ra ls often are biased against the LXX for the reaso n thai a tran slatio n cannot be as accurate as the original. A prob lem with this thinking is that the re arc nn Hebre w or iginals extant. T he MT recensio n is derived from co pies that are centuries removed from the o rigjnalx. T he Aramaic Targum uanslauo ns with running commentary have no more overall merit than does the LXX. II is worth noting that from the secon d ce ntury Be through the first century AD, believe rs fell no co mpelling need for a better G reek translation. T he attempt to re place the rime-honored LXX came only after the LXX had becom e the de fiKtll official translatio n fo r C hristians. Start ing in 126 or 128 AD , the Jews unerupted to rep lace the LXX wuh Aq uila's G reek translation. The peop le thought that Yesh ua and the apostles taught with authority, unlike the rabbis and scribes (Mat 13:54; Luk 0 2:47; Joh 07: 15; Act 04 :13). The rabb is and sc ribes rel ied on Aramaic commentaries (Mat 07 :29; 2Ti 03:(7 ). It wou ld seem thai if talking with author ity derived in pan from quoting Aramaic o r Hebrew so urces. the NT quotations wo uld not follow rne LXX. Nevertheless, the majority of Yeshua and the apo stles ' OT quotations follow the LXX. Part of the reason that the peo ple tho ug ht Ye,I'huli and the disc iple s preached with authority is the peop le knew the LXX we ll. Hebrew and Aramaic ma nuscripts were expens ive and hard 10 procure compared to the LXX. As Josephus said. it was an acco mplishment to learn thc law (Antiqu ities of the Jews. Book 20: 11:( 1). The Aramaic-speaking Ba bylo nian Jews wro te the law and co mme ntaries 10 which Josephu s referred . Since the people were nOI as versed in these Aramaic commentarie s as they we re in the LXX , the Pharisees tho ught: This mob thai knows nothing of the law--there is a curse on them (Joh 07:49). The split between the Jewish leaders and the people resulted from the leaders' reliance on Targum commentaries, astrology. apocryphal literature and Greek philosophy, all of which dive rged from what scripture ta ught. Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

207

Apparently, eve n the Father was plea sed to speak in Greek to glor ify his Name (Joh 12:20 -30 ). So me Greeks who wanted to see Yc.\ hua ap proached the discip le with a G reek name, Phil ip. He and another disciple with a Greek name. Andrew, went to see YI'shu" , who was commonly known by his Greek name, I CI'(lU S , and G reek title, Christos. with Ihe G reeks in his audience . Yeshua said: No w is the lime for ju dgm ent on the world. Now the princ e of this wo rld will be driven out. When I am lifted up from the ea rth, , will draw all men to myself(Joh 12:32). The rea son Ye .I'IlUa made th is statement was to show the time was fast approac hing whe n Yeshul/ wo uld be c rucified , and then the evan ge lization of the Greeks would co mmence in earnest (Act 11 :20 ; 17:( 4 ). The Je ws at the temple had previo usly wondered alo ud whether the Galilea n wo uld teac h both the Greeks and Greek-speak ing Jews (Joh 0 7:35, 4 1, 52). Also. Ye.~hIUJ had j ust spoken o f the evangel ization of the world. Surely, Yeshlla wou ld not now start speakin g Aramaic to the Greeks who ju st came to sec him! To show thai the Father 's Name wo uld be g lorified also amon g the Greeks. Ye.lhua sa id, "Father. glorify your Name!" A loud voice came from heaven saying, " I ha ve g lorified it, and will g lo riI') it again !" k \ /uUl lo ld the G reeks and his G reek-speaking d iscip les . "This vo ice was for your benefit. not mine " (Joh 12:30). Thi s sugges ts that the voice from heave n must have spoken in G reek. The G reek speakers in the crowd unde rstood the vo ice and said that an angel had talked to Yc.11wa (Joh 12:29 ). The G reek s probahly f igured th at an a ngel quoted the Farher. as was the case after the near-sacrifice o f Isaac (Gen 22: 15-1 R). The non-G reek speakers thought that the Father's Greek words, "edoxasa kai palin doX(utl," so unded like the clap and rumble o f thunder echo ing in the K idron Valley ne xt to the tem ple. The Fathe r said from hea ven: I have glo rilied it [his Name]. and will glorify it [his Numc ] again (Joh 12:28 ). How the Fathe r 's Name is glo rified is throu gh the work of the So n (Isa 49:03 07 ; Joh 09:03; 11:04.40-44 : 13:30-32: Eph 02:07: 03 :10- 11. 21 ). How the Father had glorified hi.s Name was hy having the Son publicly proclaim their Name, " I AM" (Joh 08:24, 28. 58 ). How the Father will glorify his Nam e "again" (Joh 12:28) is by having the Son proclaim their Name '" AM " repeatedl y (Mar 14:62: Luk 22:70: Jo h 13:19 and 18:05-06, 08 ). The Fat her 's Name '" AM" will also he glorified when the Son commands the d isc iples 10 baptize all nation s in the Name (" Name " is s ingular ) of the Father. So n and Spi rit (Mat 28:19). Baptizing the G reek nation is ultimatel y what YI'shua had in view when he asked the Father to g lorify his Name among the G reeks in the temple . Why the voice from he aven had to speak in G reek for the Greeks ' sake (Joh 12: 28) is that previously in the temple area, Ye .~ hIUJ said, "1 AM" ("eg l\' eimt' ) three times (Jo h 08 :24, 28, 58), the same number of lime s Yahl'eh said , "I AM " (ehwh ) in bntl3:14: Malenal com direlbs autcrars

208

Yae l Na tan

God said to Moses. 'I AM [ehyeh ] who I AM [ehyeh ).' And he said. 'Say this to the people of Israel, 'I AM lehych ] has se nt me to you" (Exo 03 :1 4 ). Then the Jews tried to sto ne Yes/ilia right on the temple gro unds. So in a bid not to harden the ir hearts an)' further, Yeshull said that he was not ab out to provide any more special sig ns to meet the demand of Jewish unbe lievers. Ye.I'hu i/ said that Jewish unbeli evers wo uld only get to see the s igns meant for all natio ns to see such as: When you have lifted up the So n of Man [crucified him], then you will know that'l AM' (loh 08:28).'" Ministering among the Greeks, whether in Palestine o r in the te mple, allowed Je wish bysta nders to see the signs meant for the ge ntiles. Many unbel ie ving Je ws from J udea were no t co nversan t in Gree k, so the y thought the Father 's thunderous voice was mere ly thunder (Joh 12:29 ). T his underscores ho w tbe vo ice was meant for the sake of tbe visiting Greek s rather than for the unbelieving Jews. Joh 08 also showed why the s ign had to be from the Father rather than from Ye.l /mll. Ye.l h ,w said: If I glorify myself, my glory mea ns nothing. My Father, whom yo u claim as yo ur God, is the one who g lorifies me (Joh 08:54 ). The Father spoke at the temple (Jch 12:28) to verify that previously Yesh'llI had indeed g lorified the Father's Name while in the temple area , Earlier Yeshui/ sa id, "I AM" in the te mple area (Joh 08:24. 28. 58). and the Jews tried to stone him (Joh 08:59). Tha t the Father appa rently spoke in Greek s uggests that Ye.11tua' s " 1 AM " stateme nts in Joh OS were also spoken in Greek. Also suggestive of this faa is what occ urred the day before Yn 'hua spoke the "I AM" statements of Joh 08 in t he te mple co urts. The Je ws at the templ e noted that Yeshua was a Galilean who wou ld be comfortable teaching Greeks and Greek-speaking Jews (Joh 01 :35, 4 1, 52). That the Father spoke in Greek to verify that Ye,l h,w had glorified their Name meant that Ye,I'hulI also did not have any q ualms abo ut quoting the LX X. Yn hull used the Gree k LXX to identify the Father and himse lf as the subject o f the Shema. The Shema was discussed in the chapter on the Stwma. Yl'.\'Jlllll '.1' q uotin g the Greek LXX wo uld be another fulfillment o f the prop hecy that God wou ld speak in fo reign ton g ues to unbelie ving Jews (Isa 28: 11; leo 14:21 ). Jews who believed were predo minantl y from Galilee where Greek was spoken. Jews such as Judas who disbelieved were predomin antly from Jude a. where Aramaic was the predom inant language.

Yeshua's "I A:\I" Statements of Joh 08 Ye.\ hUll said: If you do not believe that '1 AM [egw eim i],' yo u will indeed d ie in yo ur sins (Joh 08:24)... When you have lifted Ill' the Son of Man, then yo u will know that '1 AM [egw eimi ]' (Joh 08:28) .. .Before Abraham was born. ' I AM [e,liW dm;]' (Joh 08:5 8). Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

209

resh ua' s " I A:\I" S ta tements of Joh 08: 24, 28 Yeshua warned listene rs that the y must believe that he was " I AM," or the y wo uld rem ain in their sins (Joh 011:24). By this. Ye,I'hua indicated that he is Yah veh the So n, The Father also said: ' I AM ' [the LXX reads "e8 "" e im i " l, I a m he who blots out yo ur transgressions for my own sake. and remembers your sins no more (LXX lsa 43 :2S). If a perso n doe s not be lieve that Y" .I'hua is " I AM ," then he will not forgive the person his or her sins. The '" AM" o nly' fo rgives sins fo r their own Name's sake. Long before Yt'.l hlfa' s mini stry the Son had the autho rity to forgive s ins for his own Name's sake. During the Exodus, the Fathe r warned that the peop le shou ld listen and do e verything that the Ma lek Yllh ~'eli commanded. The Malek had the Name, Yll li ~'eh, "in him" and so he had the divine right to refu se to forg ive s ins (Exo 23:21-22). The Father's warning was a negative way of saying that the Ma lek Yalin ,h co uld also forgive sins. Josh ua also spoke in this manner abo ut the Maid Yahw h, as is disc ussed at Jos 24: 19 in the Trinitarian proofs appendix. The early NT Church understood Yeslllla to be Ytlh ~'eli the So n and the Ma id Yahwh with Yahreh's Name " in him " (Exo 23:2 ]). Many mentions arc made in the NT of "the Name of Ye.I'hu
Matenal com direlbs autcrars

210

Yael Na tan

Yesllutl also gave the Ministry of the Keys to individual C hristian c hurches . Ye,~ hl/a sa id: I tell you [pluraJ) the truth, whatever you (plural] bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you [plurallJoose on earth will be loosed in heaven (Mal 18: 18). Churches should refuse Comm unio n (Eucharist) to those unrepentant over gross public sin.s com mitted agai nst c hurch members or the Church ( fa lse doctrine] (Mal 18:1 5. 2 1). The refus al of Communion would be imposed o nly after repeated interve ntio ns and attempts at reconciliation ha ve failed (Mat 16:19; 18:15-22; ICo 05:04-(5). Ye.I'hllll also gave the Ministry of the Ke ys to the C hurch as a whole (Mat 16:19; 210 0 1:10). This was do ne so that the Church's message would not be corrupted by teachers who say, for e xample. that Ye.l hua was a me re prophet ( Mat 16:13-20 ). T here are other irnpficauon s of Y".lhlla 's being both Yahveh the Son a nd the Ma lek with the Father's Name in him. For instance, Yes/llw was able to co mmand the disciples to baptize the nations in the (singular) Name of the Father. Son and Spirit (Mat 28: 19). So if anyone ref uses Ye,I'hl/a' s comm and to be baptized, YI'.11111l1 as the Malek with the Father 's Name in him may refuse to forgive his rebellion (Exo 23 :2 1). Indeed, Mark points out that to belie ve mean s to acce pt baptism, while to adamantly refuse baptism means the perso n never rea lly belie ved in the first place (Mar 16:16; Luk 07 :29-30).

Yeshllo's " I A~f" Statements of Joh 08:58 Yah veh the So n retained the Name, Yohveh, whe n he became incarnate. Yeshllu

said. " Unless you belie ve that ' I AM: you will d ie in your sins" (Joh 08:24). To make sure that the Jews kne w Ye.I'/llla was saying that he was '"1AM" in Joh 08 :24 and 28. he sa id, " Before Abraham was, ' I AM'" (Joh 08:5 8). The Messiah 's eternal existence before Abraham is mentioned in man y passages (M ic 05:02 (BHS 05:0 I); Gen 0 1:0 I, 26; 02:04 ; lsa 09 :06; Joh 0 1:0 1,1 5; 08:58; 17: 05, 24 ; He b 0 I:11; 110 0 1:01). It should be noted that in Isa 09 :06, what is often trans lated as "E verlasting Father" (KJ V, N tV, NS\!) is a He brais m that literally translates as " r ather of Eternity" (YLD. "Father" ca n mean " author" or "so urce" in Hebrew. T he intended mea ning is that Yah veh is outside of time, and is the creator of time and eternity. 10h 08:58 is similar to Exo 06:03. In Exo 06 :03, Ya hl'ell the Son wanted Moses to know that he had the Name, Yahveh; even during patriarchaltimes. In Jo h 08: 58. Ye.l h ,w pointed o ur rbar he was Ya hve h and "I AM " (Exo 03: 14) even before Abraham's time. That Ye,l'hlia had the Name, Yahveh, during patria rchal times (Exo 06:03) and e ven before patriarchal times (Joh 08 :58) is q uite reasonable. It does not matter that the patri arc hs were unaware that the Son was named Ya hveh, Sim ilarly, Pharao h, Samuel and the Israelites "did not know Yahl'e" " (Exo 05:02 ; ISa 03:07; Jer 3 1:34; Heb 08:11), yet Yahl'ch was stilled named Yahvetd Malenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

211

reshua's "I A:\I " Statements Yet to be Discu ssed Ye,5hua's "I AM" statements that will be discussed in the So ng of Moses chapter include tho se he said to: • The woman at the well {Joh 04 :26), • The d isciples while walk ing on the Sea of Galilee (Jo h 06:20 ), • The Je ws in the temple co urts (joh OR :24, 2R. 5R), • The disciples during the Lust Supper (Joh 13:19), • Thomas and the disciples (Joh 14:( 6), • The so ldiers in the Garden ofG ethscmane (Joh 1~:05-06, O ~ ) , and • The High Priest during Yeshua' s so-called trial (Mar 14:62; Luk 22:70).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Matenal com direlbs autorars

Chapter 10 The Song of Moses (Deu 32)

Introduction The Apostle John wrote that the So ng of Mose s (Den 3 1:22, 30; 32:44) and the Song o f the Lam b we re sung in heaven (R ev 15:03). Th us, the Song o f Moses pertains to both OT and NT study, The So ng of Moses is part history a nd part prophecy. and concerns the period between the time of Jacob and the end of the world. The Song o f Moses sho ws God 's st rategy fo r sa ving Jews and ge nules, The Father 's strategy is to II) to save erra nt Israel by every mean s. including that of se nding his only So n. Th e Son is far super ior to Moses, and is se n! to save the gentiles as well as the Jews. The gentile s' rela tionship with God the Father and Son sho uld make Israel jea lo us eno ugh to co me back into the fol d. T his c hapter d wel ls on the Song of Moses strategy, and also o n hnw the Son is superior to Mos es. Top ics include the So n's being " I AM :' the d ivine So n of Ma n ( Dan 07), and the Son o f God .

Yahveh thc Son Rccctvcd Israel as an Inheritancc Mose s wrote in h is Song of Mo ses: Wh en the Mos t High [He bre w IS £/)'OIl J gave the na tion s t he ir inhe ritan ce , when he [the Fath er] se parated the c hildren o f me n, he set the bou nds o f the peo ples accor din g 10 the number o f the so ns of God [angel sJ,!"" Yahl'ch\ [the Son 's] po rtion is his people, and Jacob [Israel] is the lo t o f his [the Son's] inheritance (De u 32:OS-(9). The Song of Moses ex pla ins Israel 's relationship to the Trinity. Israel is refer red to as Yll h ~'f'h the Son 's inheritance or heri tage , By co ntras t, Israe l ts refe rred to as the Most Hig h's ( /;'/yo ll) "trea sured possession." This is because "the who le ea rth is mine [the Father's)'"(Exo 19:05 ). Nat urally, Israel is not ca lled the inheri tance or heritage o f the Father. T he Most High c an on ly possess since there is no one who co uld eve r pass o n an inheritance to the Father. S imilarly, the Father can swear by none higher than himsel f (Heb 06: 13). Matenal com direlbs autcrars

214

Yae l Na tan

The Most High apportioned land to all the nations (Ac t 17:26), and the n put angels (the "sons of God" ) in c harge of those natio ns. Angels did protect Israel (Gen 28:12; 32:0 1-02 ; Dan 12:0 1), but a mere angel never ruled Israel. The Fathe r and Son are the " makers" of Israel. as is discussed at Psa 149:02 and Isa 54:05 in the MT plurals a ppendix. As soon as Jacob's famil y beeame the nation (Gen 32:07. 10) of Israel (Gen 32: 28; 33:20; 34:07; 35: 10 ), the Son received Israel in trust. The idea of a promised inheritance is common throughout the Bible. including in the NT (Mat 25:34; Act 07:05; Col 03;24; He b 11 :08; 12;16; IPe 0 1;(4). Israe l became the So n's promised inheritance when the Father, £ fyon. told Jacob to sacrific e to the Son, El Shaddai tGen 35:0 1). To convert Israe l from be ing promised inhe rita nce 10 a n actua l inheritance, the So n only needed to bring Israel out of Egypt and into the Promised Land. 16 1 The Father said that £ 1 Shaddai was "the God who appeared" in Jacob's dream at Bethel in Ge n 28 (Gen 35 :01) . The narrator said that the Father and So n, "they appeared" (plural verb) together in Gen 28 (Oe n 35:07) . Previous to Gen 35, the patriarc hs only called o n, and sacrificed to, ¥(lhr eh the r athe r (Gcn 04 :26). The patriarchs o nly sacrificed til the Son when directed In, as when Abraham sacrificed to the So n, the M u lek Yahveh of Ge n 22: 11 ·1 3. Another instance is when the Father told Jacob to sacrifice to the Son, El Shaddai: .. .then God [the Father] told Jacob. ' Arise, go up to Bethel, and live the re. Make an altar there to God [the So n] who appe ared to you when you fled from the face of Esau your brother ' (Gen 35:0 1). Jacob had his d an get rid of their foreign gods . Then Jacob built an altar at Bethel where "[ All] the God s, they had appeared to him" (Gen 35:07). Here Jacob refer red to the epiphany of Gen 28. Jacob sacrificed to £ f ShatMlli the So n. ju st as Elvon the Father had instructed (Gen 35:0 1). T hen £ 1 Slullldai the Son appeared to Jacob (Gen 35: 11·1 2). After Jaco b worshipped the Son (Ge n 35). the name of the Father. Yuhl'ell. is rarely heard or spoken by the patria rch s. As was discussed in the proto-Smainc Trinitarianism chapter. the patria rchs on ly knew the Father as Yolll'd l and Etvon. The patriarc hs did not know the So n as YlI III"('h, but the patriarc hs did kno w the Son as £1Sluuldai and Etohim (Exo 03-06) , The last mention in Gen esis of the Father's title, "Most High" (£fyon). is made during conversunon s betw een Abraham and Me jchizedek . and Abraha m and the king of Sodom (Gen 14:1 8-22). Balaam is the next person to mention the title Etyon (Num 24: 16). Buluam was Se mitic, but not an Israelite, so Balaam only knew the Father as Kl111'ell. Buluum o nly knew pre-patriarchal Yahvism si nce he was not pri vy to the theological developments that too k place durin g the patriarchal period . No Israelite after Abraham mentioned the Father's title £Iyoll until Moses' day. Moses on ly me ntioned the epithet Elvon once, and that was d uring the last days of his minist ry (Deu 32:08-09). Here Moses noted that Yohveh the Son was Israel' s natio nal God since the Son had inherited Israel from the Father, Elyon. who rules Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

215

all nation s. The fact that , in the Pe ntateuch, the title Most High is mentioned on ly in co nversations with gent iles (Melchizedek, king of Sod om, Balaam) shows that the title Most lli gh pertains 10 the Father ruling over all na tio ns. The Name , Ya"l'eh, is said or heard by Bible personages 5 1 times in Genesis ch apters 04-32, but on ly once in Genesis cha pters 33- 50 m cn 49: 18).' 61 Eve n the post-S maitic Yahvist narrator, Mo ses, does not me ntion the Name , Yahvch, much aft er Gen 32, From the start of Ge nesis thro ugh chapter 32, the Name , Yllh veh , appears a tota l o f 128 times in 11 6 verses, By co ntrast, from chapter 33 to the end o f Gene sis (G en 50), the Name, Yah reh. appears o nly twel ve t ime s in eight ve rses. Thi s sho ws that the patriarch s had accepted the So n (E /ohim and EI Slwdda i ) a s their prox y nat ional God , j ust as the Fat her had instructed Jacob (Gc n 35:0 I ). The Son receive d Israel as an inherit ance (Dell 32:08-(9) after Mo ses learned the Son's name was Yah veh (Exu 0 3 -06). Exo 0 3 -06 coi ncided with the Son's bringing Israel out of Egypt. Th us Israe l was take n out of trust and was made the Son's full inheritance . After Exo 0 3 -06, the Son was kno wn by every title by whi ch Yah veh the Father was know n. exce pt the Most High (£/yon ). Only later. acco rding 10 the vision of Dan 07 , d id the So n inhcri t all thc natio ns. Then thc Fathc r and Son were kno wn as the Most Highs, as is di scussed at Dan 07: 18 , 22, 25b, 27 in rne MT pl urals appe ndix. Da n 07 de scr ibed an even t similar to what the So ng o f Moses descri bes. In Deu 32 :0 8-09. Elvon promised "Jacob." meaning Israel, as an inhe ritance to the Son, Th e nation Israel e ventuall y came to kno w the Son as Yahveh (Exo 0 3 -06). In Deu 32. the Son was promised Israel as an inherita nce. but in Dan 07 , the Son was prom ised the nations as an inbc ntaucc. In the NT the Son often is spoke n as bcin g the heir of all creanon-c ro incl ude the nations (Mat 2 1:38; 28:18: Joh 16:1 5; 17: 02 ; Rom OR: 17; Heb tl \:( 2), In a propheti c sense, the Son began 10 rule with the Father over all the nations a lready in OT times (D an 07), In the pro phetic sense , the rather and Son ca me to be ca lled the Most Highs. Jeremiah and the Evangelis t John wrote that the Father an d So n have on e thro ne in one sa nctua ry, a s is discussed in the MT plurals appendix (Jc r 17:12; Rev 22:0 1, 03 -0 4). T he NT often says thaI Yeslllla has powe r over all things .'·" After Moses me t the So n a t Mo unt S ina i. Yahvch Ihe Su n also ca me to he known as "Adonai p'my Lord") Yllh l'eh." Genesis onl y records how the Fathe r was kno wn as "A donoi Yohveh" (Gen 15:02, OK). After the Son recei ved Israel as his inheritance. the Malek Ytlh l'eh was also known as "A dO/wi Yuhl '!:'h" (Exo 23:17; 34: 23; Deu 09:26; Eze 20:0 5; 36:07; 44: 12). Tha t the " Adonai Yahw h" in E xo 23: 17 and 34:23 was the Son was dis cussed in the c hapter on the Prese nces of t :lYO/l. That the " Adonui Yahveh" mentione d in Deu 09 :26 is the Son can he ascert ained from the fact that Moses said that Israel was this person of Ya/weh's inheritance. The Father does not inherit from anyone, so in Dell 09 :26 the person of YtlhW'h is the Son . Matenal com direlbs

autcrars

216

Yae l Na tan

To summarize this sec tion. from Gen 0 1 to 3 1, the So n was known to be a member of the Trinity. The So n was known as Eto ntm and EI Shaddai , The Son a lso "moonlighted" as a messeng er, the Ma lek Yohvrh ; se nt by the Father. T hen. from Gen 32 to Exo 0 2, the Son became the proxy national God for Israel , his pro mised inbcrnaucc. The Malek Yohvch made no appeara nces from Gen 32 until Exo 03:02. That is because the Son was busy being Israel 's national God. Afler de tegating autho rity over Israel 10 the Son. the Father co ntinued with his rule ove r the gentiles . From Gen 32 to the Exodus, thcre was no point in the Son acting as the Malck Ya hl'ch. The Son made the decisions concerning Israel. so there was no need for the So n to be a messe nger be tween the Fathe r and Israel. During Exo 03 to 06. the SOil came into his inheritance, Israel. Upon Moses asking his name. the So n was know n as }'lIhl'('h. Dan 07 depicts ho w the Snn after the ascen sio n (Act 01:09 ) would become Most High alon g with the "ather (Phi 02:09). Then the So n and Father will nile ove r the Church (Psa 11 0 :0 2) and all natio ns as the Most Highs (Dan 01). Yalireh the Son Later Stood to Receive the Natillfls as His Inhcrjtence from E1YOil

Moses wrote in his Song of Moses: They have mo ved me to jealousy with that which is not God ; they have provoked me to anger with their va nities; I will move them to jealousy with those who are not a people; I will provoke them 10 anger with a foolish natio n (Deu 32:2 1). Yah veh made commitments and covenants to both the patriarchs and to Israel that he would be the God of Israel. Yahveh kept his e nd of the bargain, but the Israelites often wo uld no t acce pt him as thei r God (2Ch 29:06; Isa 0 I:04 : Jer 0 2: 27; 08:05; 32:33; Dan 09: I I ). Yah ~'eh's several recourses are mentioned in the Song of Moses and e lsewhe re. Yahl'ch's options included temporary bani sh ment of s inners from the Promised Land. or YlIhl'eh 's tem porary aba ndonment of the Promised Land. Yah ~'e" 's response optio ns were limited somew hat. becau se a recou rse take n too far might backfi re and not produce the intended result. Timeliness of the rebuke is critica l, beca use peo ple indu lging in " pagan reve lry" suffer the conseq uences of risky be havio rs (Exo 32:06; ICo 10:07). The y also lend to on ly reme mber the "good times" they had serving pagan gods (ler 44:19; compare Je r 07:18). Ce rtai n reco urses might not backfire completely, but still yie ld unintended conseq uences . For instance, Israel's suffering 10 0 many disastrous "acts of God" would ju st be numbing (Jer OR:14-1 5; Mal 03:13- 15 ). The c hastisement might serve to harden hea rts ( ISa 06 :06 ; Isa 63:17; Mat 11 :23-24 ; 12:31 -32). For exam ple, Pharao h came to thin k Ihat he could with stand anythin g that Ya hvc h wo uld throw at him until his bitter end (Exo 14:05). Yahveh stated that he wou ld not destroy the Israelite s lest the gentiles misunderstand (Exo 32: 10- 12; 33:03. 05). as Yahvch said: Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

217

I dreaded the tau nt of the ene my, lest [Israel's) adversaries misunders tand and say, ' We have triumphed; Yah veb ha s not done all this' (Deu 32:27). Yahveh was always co nscie ntio us abou t whar the nations thought (De u 04: 06; Psa 126:02; lsa 51:04; EIt~ 36:23; 39:27 ). Y(lI/l'(,11 wanted the nations 10 kno w that his eternal, spirit ual kingdom neve r faile d (Dan 04 :03, 34; 06:26; Psa 125:01 -0 2: lsa 54:17; Mat 16:18; Joh 10:27-30; Heb 12:28). That way they wo uld eve ntually crowd. rather than trickle, into the Chu rch (lsa 52:14-15: 56:07; Mar II :17). Yahveh cou ld not rely o n Israel to inform the ge ntiles that Israel's troub les were caused hy its abandonme nt of v ah veh, It is the nature of unbelief that unbelie vers can not admit that it was their disbelief thai led 10 Yahveh abandon ing them (Je r 22: 08-09) , In fact, most unbelie ving Israelite s wo uld onl y have the pass ing thou ght that Yohl'e h had abandoned them (De u 3 1:11). Others wo uld become so pagani zed as to not care about Yahveh at all (Jer 44: 15- 19): For they are a natio n void of co unsel. T here is no understand ing in them . Oh that they we re wise, that they unde rstood this, T hat they wou ld consider their latter e nd! Ho w could one chase a thousand, Two put ten tho usand to flight, Except thei r Rock had so ld them , Except Yahveh had de livered them up'! (Dcu 32:28-30). Mose s k new tha t so me unbelieving Isr ael ite s wo uld no t think Yahl'eh had ab andoned them. These particular Israelites would de ny that they had stopped worshipping Yalll'eh in Sp irit and in tru th. Mo ses was fa miliar with how Kornh and his followe rs though t the y were wors hipping Yahveh in tru th and purity to their bitter end (N um 16:0 I-50). Moses also remembered that after the K orah episode, the surviv ing Israelit es still thou ght Korah and his followers were righteous. The Pen tateuch records: The ne xt d ay the whole Israeli te co mmunity grumbled aga inst Mose s and Aaro n, and sa id, ' You ha ve killed YClhl'eh's people ' (N um 16:41 ). Yo/well also knew that Isra el wou ld not reco gn ize thai they "come near to me [Yahwh[ wit h their mou th and honor me with their lips, but their he arts are far from me" ( Isa 29:13). Yahveh knew that thcv would not admit: Their worship of me is made up only o f rules taught by men (Isa 29: 13; Col 02:08). W hen tragedy struc k or time s became hard, Yahveh kne w that Israel wo uld not resort 10 cr itic iz ing their o wn unbelieving selves . Instead, they wo uld ha ve some unco mpli mentary thin gs to say abou t how Yah l'eh fai led them in the past or present. They wo uld speak of Yohveh as thou gh he were 8a a/: Eithe r he is musing, or he is busy, or he is traveling. or pe rhaps he is slee ping and must be awakened ( I Ki 18:27 ). If unbelieving Israel d id not mock Yahvcn, then it wo uld sent imcntally plead Yaln'ell's cause as though God were in the dock et (Jdg 06:31). They wo uld say

.

Matenal com direlbs

autcrars

218

Yae l Na tan

that Yahveh was too weak to keep bad things fro m happening to good people (2C h 32: 15). So God is tried ill absentia, a nd is essentially stripped o f his dei ty by his sup posed suppone rs. With these theologian s for advoc ates and frien ds, Yahvrh has no need for prosec uto rs and enem ies ! Unbelieving Israel would wax philosophic and in keeping with 2K i 01 :16 , the y wo uld say there was no God in is rael. The y sa)' YI1Jn'eIJ was mythical and never ex isted anyw ay. Th en they wou ld a llude to Isa 46:0 1 and say Yahvism o ught to be revised o r reinterpreted beca use this " ism" has burde ned Israel too long. Th ey woul d refer to I Ki 18:17 a nd say Yahvisrs have only bro ught tro uble to Israel. Unbeliev ing Israe l wo uld also lend to rationalize its tro uble s away and say that the ir relat ionship with Yahveh was fine. They still have their we alth and hea lth. a nd that "all is we ll that ends well:' They wo uld n ailer themsel ves o n ho w the y success fully they end ured anot her round o f ex treme testing - as thnugh it were t he natio nal sport (Ge n 22: 12; Jo b 13:15- 16). Yuh l'ell figured the only way OUi of this predicament would be 10 co nve rt the natio ns (Dc u 32:2 1, 43). Th en the nations wo uld read Moses ' so ngs (Dan 0 9:11 13) abo ut wh ich Ytth reh sa id: No w write do wn this so ng and teach it to the Israe lites, and ha ve them sing the so ng so that it may become my witne ss against the m (Dc u 3 1:19; see als o Deu 31:2 1, 26; lsa OR:02 ; 30:0R). Yahveh knew tha t ge ntiles who we re informed by the Son g o f Moses wo uld kno w e xactly what motivates Yflhl'eh to tro uble Israel (2Ki 14:27 : 13:23: Isa 45: 04). Yahveh means to save Israel in a roundabout way, since a direct relationsh ip pro ve s co unterproduct ive ( IKi I R:17- 18; Jer 02 :19 ). Infor med ge nnles wo uld kno w why Israel always find s itsel f in a to ugh nei ghborhood. !" Informed ge ntiles would not jump to unfounded co ncl usions such as: Our hand has triumphed , and rahveh has not done all this (De u 32:27 ; see al so Exo 32:12; Num 14:15-16; Psa 115:02 : 140:0 8, and the like ). Yuh reh kne w tha t o nly conve rted ge nt iles wo uld know the Je wish reject ion of Ye.~"lIa was what really preci pitated the loss o f the ir homeland. T he lac k of a hom el and was the event that meant Jews wo uld o ften be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Minori t ies and di splaced pe rso ns usually suffer the most whe n tw isted, evi l men appear o n the world sce ne with an axe to grind (Est 0 3:(6). In t he diaspora . Je ws were alwa ys de pende nt nn the tole rance of rulers and po pulace s who tended toward s intolera nce. In short. just as the Jews e licited the worst be hav ior imaginable o ut of Pilate. they were abo ut 10 go o n a road trip 10 ma ke "Pilate," o ut of many ge ntile rulers. On e ca n onl y imagine how many ev ils reco rded in history wo uld nOI have occ urred if the Je ws had acce pted the Gospel and kep t the ir ho melan d. Howe ver. it was minoritie s Iikc the Je ws who pioneered in the field of relig ious rights. T hcy pa id the price so the rest of us can e xpe rience at leas t a semblance o f religious toleratio n and freedo m of co nscie nce . It is ironic thou gh that the Jews ' wor ldwide campaig n for relig ious to lera nce began with an ac t o f religious intole rance -c. Yeshua's trial. Mo reo ver. it is ironic Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

219

that st ill. even in mod ern rimes, Ch ristians and Mcssianic Jews a rc restric ted in the ir evangelis m e fforts among Jews in Israel - e ven though many or most Jews are secu lar! Yal,,'.,I, exec uted his Song o f Moses str ategy for co nverting the gent iles 10 make Israel jealou s. Yahveh develo ped a sav ing rapport with Jewish and gentile Ch r istians. T he Father unite s all C hris tia ns an d a ngels in so ng by ex ho rting eve ryone to praise Yahveh the Sun, as is disc ussed at LXX Dcu 32:43 in thc Trinitarian proof's appendix. T hat the faith- based nation is united in song and in brotherly love (Joh 13:35) has the effec t of making many in the race-based natio n of Israel jealo us. As YlIhl'eh said : T hey [the Israelites] have mo ved me to jealousy with that whic h is not God; they have pro voked me to anger with their vanities: I will move the m to jealousy with tho se [Christians] who are nu t a people [yet]; I will provoke them to ange r with a [curren tly] foolish nation [paga n ge ntiles] (Dell 32:21). So so me person s in the race-based natio n act o n their jealousy an d say, " If you can not beat the m, you migh t a s wel l join them." Then these Messianic C hristians sing along wi th the faith-based nation in worship o f ranven the Son (Rom 11 :2526). The NT writers relate that the "people" and the "n at ion" ment ioned in the Song of Moses (De u 32:2 1) are the fai th-based natio n of C hristianity (Ro m 09 :24-26. 30; 10:19 -2 I; II :30 ; I Pe 02 :10). Th e natio ns were wo n o ver starting with the ministry of the apostles, After Ye.l"hua ' s resurrection Yohveh the Father told Ye.l"hua: Arise, God , judge the earth, fu r all of the nation s are you r inheritance (Psa 082:06-08). T his passage is di sc ussed in the chap te r o n the Shemo, as we ll as in the Tri nitari an proofs app endix. In the NT, the jealousy factor men tioned in the Song of Moses comes into play between Jews and Chris uu ns.!" l-or instance , Paul alluded to the Song o f Mo ses whe n he wrote: By their fall, salvation has co me to the gen tiles 10 make Israel je alous .. , I make much o f my ministry in the hope that some how I will provok e my' own people to je alousy so as to save so me of them (Rom II : II . 13- 14). Since Yahreh the Son has clai med his inhe rita nce , the ge ntiles arc no lon gcr looking in from the outside ."'·\ The gentile insiders tend to arouse the envy of Jews shut n ut of thei r rel ations hip with Yllhl'eh. Jew ish ou tsiders a re inclined to se nse the ir lack of re lationship with Ytlhl'eh, especially when gentiles as k the outsiders poin ted ly, " Whe re is your God'?" (Psa 042:03, 10; 079:1 0; 115:02; Joe 02: 17), Acco rding to the Song of Mose s plan, Israel notices that Ye5h ua is mak ing Ch ristians into a nati on " high above all nations that he made , in praise, name, and honor" (Dell 26: 19: 28:0 1). Forme rly, the Isracli tes had thc Name, Yah reh, named ove r the m ex clusively (Num 06:24-27; 2Ch 07:14; Isa 43:07 ; ha 63: 19).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

220

Yael Na tan

Now. Jewish and ge ntile Christians call on God and have God 's name ca lled over them (Num 0 6:24-21 : Isa 65:0 1; Amo 09 :12; Mat 28: 19; Act 15:11-18 ). Moreo ver, eve n a rebuiltJe wish temple wou ld lack the di vine presence (Mat 23:3 8; Luk 13:35). God d we lling o n earth is in Christians (Joh 04 :23; ICo 03:16- I 1; 06: 19). Israel can no longer feel ju stifiable pride that they are not invo lved in gross idolatry as the ignorant ge ntiles (Deu 32:2 1; Eze 16:56-57; Act 17:30; Mat 2 1:43). The vast majority of gentiles has either become Christian, or has moved o n from ido ls to so me philosophic form of unbelief. God c an hand temporal and spiritual kingdoms o ver to the lowliest of men (Dan 04 :17 ). Now the sidelined and be nched nation of Israel e nvies how ¥('.I'hUll is in the proce ss of making eve n anim ists and idol worshipers into Ch ristian s who are. .. . ..an elect peop le, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God 's o wn possession . that you rna)' sho w fo rth the excellencie s o f him who called yo u o ut o f dark ness into his marvelous ligh t ( IPe 02 :09). The Divine Son of Man Whom Daniel Saw (Da n 07) The Son of Man visio n (Dan 01: 13-28 ) gives mo re detail o n how Ya hl'eh wou ld make Israel jealous, as was prophesied in the Song of Moses (Deu 32:2 1). Danie l saw a vision of the future ami wrote: I saw visio ns in the night. and, behold. there c ame with the d o uds o f the sky one like a son of man. and he carne eve n to the ancie nt of d ays. and they brought him [the Son] ncar befo re him [the Father ]. There was give n him [the So n) dominio n. and g lory. and a kingdo m that a ll the peop les. nations, and languages should serve him [the So n): his do minio n is an everlasting dominion. which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that shall not be destroyed (Dan 07: 13-14) . Thai the inherited nanons wors hipped the So n of Man (Dan 07: 13-14 ) shows that the Dan 07 Son of Man visio n is a prop het ic parallel 10 Deu 32:08-09. In Deu 32:08 -09, the So n inherits Israel from the Father. Elyon, and then the natio ns and ange ls are co mmanded 10 worsh ip the So n ( LXX Deu 32:43). Dan 01 also is a prophet ic paralle l to the Psalm s 00 2. 045 and 11 0 where the Father g ives the nations as an inheritance to the Messiah. The Father and Son then rule the nat ion s toget her. T he Trinitarian proofs append ix disc usses these Psalms and LXX Deu 32:43 further. In the OT, except for the Dan 07 prophecy, the Fathe r is the Most High. The Hebrew for Most High is Elyo/l . and the Aramaic is Ill/yah (Da n 03:26; 04 :0 2, 11, 24, 25, 32, 34: 05: Is' 2 1: and 01:25a). After the So n o f Man vision, ho we ve r, t he Father and Son to gether are called the Most Highs. The Aramaic plura l is Ilyo nin (Dan 01:18. 22. 25b. 27). Most translatio ns di sregard the fa ct that the Aramaic plural ltvonin mea ns " Most Highs." T he)' translate the plurals in the singular as "Most High. "

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

221

The Father and Son are called the Most Highs upon the Son's inhe riting the nations. As was already' noted, the Father was kno wn as Most High hy virtue of his owning and ruling the nations of the world, In fact. Melchizedek even says thatthe Most High is "the posses.'iOr of heaven and earth " (Gen 14: II}, 22) Now that the So n has inherited and rules the nations. the Father and Son are calk-xi the Most Highs. Paul sa id that Y/;'.I'hulI: .. .who , being in very nature God. did not con sider equ ality with God some thing to be grasped (KJV Phi 0 2:(6). Paul had in mind ho w Ye,\ /uUl did not rush his !lecoming eq ual with the rather in terms of his ow ning and rulin g all the nations. Ye.lhl/l/ follow ed the script and went o n to inherit all the nations after his ascension. When Paul wrote Phi 0 2:U6. he likely was thinking about how Yeshua did not grasp at Satan 's offer to hand o ver all the nations to Ye,I'hull immediately (Mat 04: U8-I I; 10h 17:0 2: Phi 0 2:07-1 1). In a twink ling of an eye, Yeslllla could have take n what was his from Satan. but instead Ye.I'hua patiently wailed 10 inherit the nations according to plan (Dan 07). Ye.lhl/l/ alluded to Ihe Dan 07 plan in his parable of the nobleman. The nobleman c haracter was Ye.l'hua 's allusion to himself. The noblema n went to a far country (heaven) to rece ive a kingdom (the earth) and then return (the post-resurrection appearances) (Luk 19:1 2-27). On a se parate occasion Y('.\'hull also alluded to the Dan 07 plan. Yeshua said that upon his ret urn to the Father, the disciples would be able to do greater thing s than eve n Ycshua had done (Joh 14:12, 2R). Ye.l'hllu 's mention of the Dan 07 Son of Man receiving his kingdom explains why: • Ye.lhull told Pilate his kingdom was "from anothe r place" (Joh 18:36 ). and • The disciples often thought the advent of the messianic kingdom was imminent (Mat 20:2 I-28; Luk 19:11-27; Act UI:U6).'''1 After his resurrection but before the ascension, the So n inherited all the nations from the Father in accordance with the Dan 07 So n of Man Vision. Thu s. the Father and So n became the Most Highs (Dan 07 : I R, 22, 25b, 27) . Ye.l'/IlUl let the disciples kno w that Dan 07 had bee n fulfilled during o ne of his post-resurrection appearanc es when he spoke at the Great Commission: All authority in heaven a nd on earth has been given to me (Mat 28: 18). At the same time Yesill/a said he would be present with believe rs as the Church conquered Ye,I'hl/lI 'S inheritance (Mat 28:19-20 ). Yeshl/ a had predicted his post-resurrection appearances as the conq uering Son of Man (Mat 2R: 18-20 ) when he said that: • Some of his listene rs wou ld be alive whe n he inaugura ted the C hurch Age: I tell you the truth, so me who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man com ing in his kingdom (Mat 16:28; sec also Mar09:01 ; Luk 09:27 ), and • lie would not drink of the fruit of the wine unt il " it f inds fulfillment in the kingdom of God" (Mat 26:29: Mar 14:25; Luk 22: 16,18). Not only did Yeslllla becom e one of the two Most Highs upon his asce nsion , but he was also ordained into the kingly' priesthood of Melchizede k (Psa 110:04; Heb 05:(6). The Matenal com direlbs autcrars

222

Yael Na tan

ancient Yahvist priest-kin g of Jerusa lem c ame out to meet Abraham with bread and wine (Gc n 14:1 8). Likewise, Ye.~ "lIa appeared on the first day of the wee k (Mat 28:0 1. 09 - 10; Luk 24:2 1, 33-35; Joh 20:19 , 26) and broke bre ad and drank wine with the d isciples (Ac t 10:4 1). Thus. wine "fo und its f ulfillment" (its highe st usc ) when it becam e customary to meet and hav e the Lord's Supper o n the first day of the week (A ct 20 :07 ; ICo 16:0 2; Rev Il l : 10). The writer o f Hebre ws q uoted Psa 00 8:04·()6 to say that the Son o f Man had inherited the world in accordance with Dan 0 7. T he writer of He brews also sa id the effort to con quer h is inheri tance thro ugh ev ange lism had com menc ed: For he [the Father) did not subject the world to come . of which we spea k, 10 angels. But o ne has somewhere testifi ed . say ing: W hat is man that you thi nk of him? Or the Son of Man [Dan 07: 13J that yo u [" the Anc ient o f Days" (Dan 07:09, 13, 22 )J care for him ? You made h im [the Son o f Man J a lillie lo we r than the a ngels: yo u crow ned him [ Ye.I'!w iI ] with glory and ho nor. You have put all things in subj ecti o n unde r his feet. For in that he [the Father] subjec ted all thin gs to him [the So n). he [the Fa ther] le ft nothing that is not subject 10 him [the Son]. But no w we do nOI see all things subjected 10 him as of ycr.!" But we see him who has bee n made a lillie lowe r than the angel s. Ye.I'/uw . beca use o f the suffe ring of dea th, crow ned with g lory and ho nor (H eb 02:05 ·09a ). Paul alluded to how the Son of Man recei ved the title Most High after his res urrection. Paul said: God also highly ex alted him, and gave to him the name that is above e very na me. In othe r words. the So n recei ved the t itle " Most High" (Phi 0 2:09 ). The OT (Psa 002:(17 ; tH6 : I I; (}(iR : IR IBHS n6R:19 J; OR9:27; 110 :01 : lsa 52: 13) an d NT speak abo ut the exaltation of Chri st to the position of Mo st High with the Father (Act 0 7:55 ; ICo 15:24·28; Eph 01:20-23; Phi 0 2:09 -1 1: Col 01:18-20; Heb 01 :0 3-09; I Pe 03:22 ; and Rev 11:17). Not e that Paul q uotes Psa 068: 181 BHS 068: 19] when referring to Ch rist in Eph 04 :07 ·10. Joh n the Evangelist wrote of the exa ltat ion, too , when he noted that the Fathe r and the Lamb, meaning YeS/ilia , have a s ingle throne (Rev 22:0 1, 03 ). Peter, like wise, understood that veshua had become Most High alo ng with t he Father a s predicted by the Dan 07 Son of Man visio n. Peter app lied an O T Yahreh tex t to Ye.I/IlI11 to say that Ye.111l111 was " Lord over all" (Psa 103:19; Act 10 :36). Peter wrot e that Yes/ilia was "e xalted to the righl hand of Go d ," and that Yeshua had poured OUI the Sp irit (Act 0 2:33). The So n's pro mise to se nd the Spirit at Pen tecost is recor ded in both the NT (Joh 15:26 ) and OT (in Act 0 2:1 6·2 1 Peter quo ted what the Son spoke in Joe 02 :28 -32). That the Son co uld pour o ut the Spi rit suggests Ye.I'hua's d ivinity. Danie l fo und the prop hetic d eve lop me nts of Dan 0 7 troubling, and kep t the matter 10 himself (Dan 07: 15, 28). Per ha ps Daniel realized the Bi ble 's expression

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

223

of Trin itaria nism was gell ing brighter all the time. but many l ews were dr ift ing tow ard uni tariani sm . Perhaps Dani el ke pt the mailer 10 himself because man y th o ug h t Yahvis m sh o uld be a race -based reli gi on ( Ma r 11 : 17 ), de spite the prophecies that Yahvi sm wo uld bless the nations (Gen 18:18: 22: 18; 26:04; 49 : 10; Psa 072:0S- II: !sa 02:02; 11:10. 12-13: 42:0 1). Pre vio usly, Yahvism had been fai th-based. Afte r the R ood. Noa h's immediate descen dants we re Yahvisrs. After aw hile, the vast majori ty became polythei sts. as arc haeo logy shows. Ho we ver, through patr iarc hal time s and up to the ti me of the Exod us. Yah vists we re fou nd in scanered loc ales (Gen 14: IS: Num 22: 18. 38 ). Eve ntually, Yahvism became kno wn as Judaism since the ge ntile branch of Yahvists became extinct. Also. there was no broad-based co nsens us on any major doctri ne by wh ich the group co uld be known, such as: • Baptism of re pentance - the leaders we re agai nst it (Luk 0 7:29·30 ), • Trini tarian ism - the leaders taught unitar ianism despite the Trinitarianism found in the OT. and despi te the pro phecies of a divi ne Messiah. • The resurrection- the leaders could not agree whethe r or not the re would be a resurrec tion (Mar 12:27 ; Act 23:06-oS). • The Messiah- there was too much disinfor mation and too ma ny co ntradic tory theories abo ut the Messiah (Joh 07:27 ). The focus o n the Messiah (Jo h 09 :22; 12:42; 16:02). howe ver. became the ma instay of Ch ristians (Act 11:26). • T he tem ple - it was supposed to he a " house o f prayer for all nations" (I sa 56: 07 ), but gen tiles cou ld be killed if they approached the templ e as near as the Jews di d (Mar II : 17: Act 21:28), and • The Name - Yahl·eh fel l into general d isuse because the Name was co nsidered " ineffable." How cou ld anyo ne call Ju daism "Yahvis m" when laws were c rafted to make the utter ance of the Name. Yllh~'eh. a sto ning offense? These laws were enforced tho ugh David said all sho uld glor ify YlIhl"eh's nam e rather tha n a race of people ( Psa 11 5:01 ). Th e Name, YlIh l'ch, became ineffa ble even tho ugh the Name, Yahw'h, was the real rea son Israel ex isted (Jos 07 :09: ISa 12:22; Psa 0 79:09: Jer 14:07; Eze 20: 14). The Ch ristian Ch urc h was created to be the new Yahvisrs (Isa 65:15). C hristians glorify the Name Yeshua (Act 05: 40-4 1J. and Yeshua just happens to mean, " Yahveh saves" (Mat 0 1:2 1; ITi 0 1:151.

A Reason Why the Messiah Idenurled Himself as the Son of Man, Son of God, and as " I AM" The Father said he would try all his op tions. suc h as first se nding his pro phets to warn, and then sen d ing ene mies to chastise. At last the Fathe r would send his Son to Israe l as the Messiah. as Amos states: ' I [the Fathe r) overthre w so me of yo u as God [the So n] overth rew Sodom and Gom or rah. Yo u we re li ke a burni ng stick snatched fro m

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

224

Yael Na tan

the fire, yet yo u ha ve not returned to me: declares Yo hveh [the Father ]. 'T he refore this is what I will do 10 you , Israel. and because I will do this to yo u, prep are to meet yo ur God [the Son], 0 Israel.' He [the Son] who forms the moun tains, c reates the wind , and reveals his thou ghts to man , he who turn s da wn 10 dark ness, and tread s the hig h places of the eart hY ehveh God Alm ight y is his [the Son' s] name (Amo 04: 11- 13 is di scussed further in the Trinilarian proo fs appen dix). Amos shows that the Father was determi ned to ex tend the same op portunities to Israe l as he extended 10 Sodo m. Sodo m had been si nning against Yahreh for so me time (Gen 13:13). Before Sodom was destro yed by fie ry brimstone (Gen 18- 19 ), LOI was an ex ample to the m of righteo us living (Luk 17:2R-29 ; 2Pe 0 2:07 ). Yohveh a lso caused Sodom to be de feated by a co alit ion of kings (Gen 14:0 1- 16), The Father the n sent the Son and Spirit ro Sodom, not on ly as a sort of ultimatu m. but to save Lo t and his daughters (Gen 18-1 9). So after the prophets warned and the e nemy arm ies invaded , the Fath er sent his So n and Spirit to Israel (Mat 03 :16; Joh 14:26; 15:26 ). Their coming was even pro phesied in passages such as Isa 48:16 , a passage d iscussed further in the Trinita rian proofs append ix. T he Son and Spi rit deli ve red Ihe last wa rning 10 Israel.ju st as they (as the two vis ttors r had do ne at Sodom. The Son and Spirit also saved the ele ct by warning them of the impending doom of Jerusalem (Ma t 24:02) an d the Last Day. To fu lf ill A mo 04: I I-13, Yeshua need ed to s ho w thai he was God th e Son de liverin g the Father 's fin al uh imatum to unbe lie ver s whil e re scu ing believe rs. Ye.~ hIUl showed his God credent ials by his miracles (Joh 0 2:23; 10:25, 38: 12:37; 14: II ), and hy his saying tha t he was the Son of Man, th e Son o f God, and the " I AM ." Ye.l'/1l1t1 de livered the last warning a nd said that the di rest predictions o f the Song of Moses we re about 10 be fulfilled (De u 32:21). The kingdom of God was a bou t to be ta ken from the Israelit es and de livered 10 ge ntiles ( L u k 19:44-46 ). Yes/lila e ven alluded to the Father 's s ta te m e nt "prepare 10 meet yo ur God , 0 Isr ael" (Amo 04: 12). Ye.~hu(/ said Jerusale m wo uld be destro yed because the y fai led to " recog nize the time o f yo ur [Jerusalem's] inspection" (Luk 19:44). The N/V has "yo u did not recognize th e time of God 's co ming to you" (L uk [9:44 ). Yeshua also preser ved the e lect by warning the m of Jeru salem 's impen di ng doo m ( Mat 24: I5-22 ; Mar 13:14-20: Luk 2 I :20-24). Man y Christ ians heeded these wa rnings ahead of the Roman reoc ccpano n. left Jer usalem, and loo k refuge at Pell a between 6 7 and 70 AD. Thl' Son of .'\Ian to " I AM" Strutegy The NT reco rds the title So n of Man seve nty-eig ht limes, and sec urely th reads NT doctrine into the OT. Mentioning the OT mtes Son of Man (Dan 0 7:13 ) or Son of God (KJ V Dan 03 :25 ) made the Jewish religious author ities uneasy. T his is sho wn in the acco unt of Stephen's stoning :

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

225

' Loo k: he [Ste phen] said, ' I see heave n open and the So n of Man standing at the right hand o f God.' At this they cove red their ears and, yelling at the top of their voices, they all rushed at him, dragged him out of the city and began to sto ne him (Act 07:56·58). Ste phen definitely was all uding to the Dun 0 7 Son of Man vision where the So n ap proac hed the Ancient of Days ( Dan 07 : 13 ; Act 07:56-58). T he Je wish religious autho rities d isliked the mention of the OT Son of Man and Son of God figures, who prefigu re Christ. The Jews recogn ized that Trinitarian theo logy acc ommodates these OT figu res better than doe s unitariani sm. T he Penta teuch men tions fe we r see mingly divine figu res , so the Je ws respect the Pen tateuch more than the rest of the OT. The Jews recognized the implici t ch alle nge thai the Son of God figure posed to their unitarian misinterpretation of the OT. Thu s, a law was fashioned speci fica lly \.;Jrge ting anyo ne who would cla im to he the Son of God (Joh 19:07). If the Son of God claim had not been considered so theolo gically threatening. o ne would think that the c atchall blasphemy law would have sufficed. The seventy-eig ht NT mentiuns of the So n of Man show that Ye,5hua wanted to make himself known as the di vine So n of Man (Dan 0 7). Ye.\'hua's strategy was that the people would think of him us the Dun 0 7 "Son of Mun." Then. with a little prompting, people wo uld realize that the Dan 07 Son of Man was hoth the divine "Son of God" and the "I AM: ' That the Dan 07 Son of Man was also the Son of God apparently was an eas ily drawn co nclusio n, as is show n from Yeshua's trial. Here is a cou rt exce rpt: IYe,5huQ said.] ' But fro m now on. the Son of Man will be seated at the right hand o f the mighty God.' They all asked . •Are you the n the So n o f God '!' He replied. 'You urc right in saying ' I AM" (Luk 22:69-70). At first. howe ver. the peop le did not make the connection between Ye,I'/IlI{/'S "S on of Man" statemen ts and the Dan 0 7 vision. Yes/lIlll healed a man so the crowd would " know that the Son of Man has authority o n ear th 10 forgive sins." The crowd only marveled that "God had given suc h authority to men" (Mat 09:06. 08). Th is observ ation ment ion ing " me n" indic ates that the crowd initially thou ght the title "Son of Man" only indicated humanity. So me persons d id make an im rncdiutc co nncction between Yeshua's Son o f Man stateme nts and the Dan 07 Son of Man . They also kne w that the Dan 07 Son of Man was unc reared and divine, and worth y o f won;hip. The se peop le had read or heard abou t how all nations worship ped the Son of Man (Dan 07: 13-14), Take, for example, the reaction o f the blind man whom Yel'hlla gave sight. He at first thoug ht that YeS/ilia was a me re prophet (loh 09: 17): Ye,l-!llIa asked the man. '00 you believe in the Son of ManT The man replied, 'Who is he. sir'! Tell me so that 1 rnuy believe in him.' Yeshua responded, 'You have now seen him; in fact, he is the o ne speaking with you.' Then the man said, 'Lord. I believe.' and he worshiped him (Joh 09 :35-38). Ch rist's words were especially poignant and timel y since the Pharisees had told the blind man earlier. "G ive glory 10 God. for we know this man is a sinner" {I uh Matenal com direlbs autcrars

226

Yael Na tan

09 :24). Even so. the blind man worsh ipped the Son of Man who he knew 10 be God (Joh 09 :3&). Notice that Ye,l hml d id no t ~top the ma n as Paul and Barnabas Slopped the Lycaonians from wor sh ipp ing them (Ac t 14: 12- 15 ). Mm l people had to be info rmed that the di vine Son o f Man (Dan 01) was the"] AM " and the Son o f God. Yesh lltl said it was necessary that people believe that he is the "I AM": If yo u do not believe that ' I AM,' you will indeed die in your sin s (Joh 0 &: 24 ). Immed iately, the people asked, " Who are you?" (J oh 08:25). Ye,I'h ul./ answered: Whe n yo u have lifted up the So n of Man, then yo u will know that 'I A M' (Joh 08 :28). Ye.I'!w lI made three " I AM" state ments in l oh 08 (Jo h 08:24, 28, 58). To ma ke sure the people knew he was cl aiming to be "l AM," Ye.IJufI./ said. "Before Abraham was, " AM'" (Joh 08:58). The Jews showed Ihal they under stood that Ye.~ "lIa was cl aim ing to be the " AM" by picking up sto nes 10 stone Y/,.11lUlI (Joh 08:59 ). Notice that Y/,shml d id nOI try to stop them by saying that the y had s imply misunde rstood what he was suy mg. At orhc r times Ye.~ hlw took steps to COITec t his discip les when they mistook him for a g ho~t (Mat 14:26 ; Mar 06:49: Luk 24:3139). Surely Yeslll /ll would have corrected his audie nce if he had wrongly give n the impression that he was God . Judas and thc "l AM" Statements of

Ye,~ hua

YeI/IIW moved his d isc iples from believing that he was ju st the So n of Man to belie ving thut he was the " I AM. " So me OT and NT back groun d in formation is requ ired before the discu ssio n proceed s. Ya hveh the Son said tha t w he n his propheci e s cam e true , the blasph e me rs would know that his name was Yahveh, T hey would als o know that it was he who had prophesied (see IPe 0 1:' I: also see Isa 4 2:09 a nd Isa 52:05.(6). T his wo uld happen "in thai da y" ( Isa 52 :06 ) when the Good Ne ws (Gospe l) c ame 10 Zion ( Isa 52 :(1), in o the r word s. d uring the NT period (l sa 61:0 1; Mat 04 :23, Ro m 10:15). Isa 52:05 refl ects ho w unitariani sm was alread y taking hold in Isaiah 's day. lsa 52:05 reco rds Ytlh l'eh the So n prop he sying that he, a s Ye.l h,ll/, wo uld rebuff the unitarians. He wo uld do this by leaching that he was a person of the Trinity and .., A M" (Isa 52:06). There are am ple instances of Ye5hl/a's saying that he is the " 1 A M: ' as is discu ssed in the "! AM" ch apter. An example o f the ongo ing fulfi llment of the prophecy of Isa 52:06 is illustrated in the acco unt of the Samaritan wo man at the we ll. Ye .~ hlw told the wo man, " You Samaritans worshi p what yo u do not kno w" (Joh 04 :22 ). Ye.l·huli was alluding to h is co mplaint that many did not know him (ls a 52:(6). Ye.lhl/ll then said, "a lime is coming and has now come" (lo h 04 :23). Thi s is an allusion 10 his phrase " in that da y" whe n the Good Ne ws wo uld co me to Zion (Isa 52:06). Ye,I'huII then informed the Sa ma rita n wo man thai he was " ' I AM : who am speaking" (Joh 04: 26 ). This is nea rly the same phrase as is fo und in Isaiah, '''I Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

227

AM ' myse lf who am speaking" (LXX Isu 52:06bj , The Greek of Joh 04 :26 is " 1'11' 11' eimi. ho tatwnr T his is nea rly the same as the G reek of LXX lsa 52:06 b: "egll' dm ; au tos ho tatwn.: Notably, these "I AM" statements are similar to Yah l'eh the Son's " I AM " stateme nt of LXX lsa 45: 19: " AM leg", eimi]', I am the Lo rd speak ing righteous ne ss. lsa 52:06 will he disc ussed further later in this chapter in co nnection with the di sciple Thomas . Surely, Ye.I'!wa told his di sci ples of his con ver sat ion with the woman at the we ll [Ioh 04 :27), The discip le John even wro te the account (J oh 04:01 -43 ), Juh 04: 26 is the firs t recorded '" AM" stateme nt that the disc iples heard YeIhua sa)'. The second recorded incid ent whe n the disciples heard Ye.l ht/Il say, "I AM," occu rred when YeJlma walked on water. YeJhua sa id, ''' I AM [e,J:w eimi]'; fea r not" (Joh 06: 20 ). Y ahveh said, " I AM," and "Fear not !" many times in Isaiah (Isa 07:04 ; 08 :12; 35:04 ; 40:09; 4 1:10, 13, 14; 43 :0 1, OS; 44 :02; 5 1:07; 54:( 4 ). The Greek phrase translated ..Pear nor:" in Joh 06:20 is "may p/rohdw/r<'. " This exact ph rase is found four times in the LXX of Isaiah (LXX Isu 13:02; 35:04; 40:09; 5 1:0 7), ''''' Toward the e nd of Joh 06, o ne re ads that Ye.l h /Ill' s d iscip les grum bled about Ye.lh,w 'S do ct rine. John wrote that Yeshua kne w Judas d isbelie ved. Apparently, Ye,lh /Ill's " I AM" state ments we re ca using Judas so me indi gestion (l oh 06:6 1, 64, 70-7 1). Later, Judas and the d iscip les we re presen t at the te mple when they saw ho w the Je ws wa nted to stone Yeshua (Joh 08:59 J. Th e Je ws wa nted to stone Y('.I /UW for his thrice say ing, " I AM" (Joh 08:24, 28, 58). At the Last Supper, J udas heard Ye.111lw say: I am tell ing you now before it happe ns, so that when it [the betrayal] docs ha ppen, you will believe thut ' I AM ' (Jo h 13: 19). Joh 13: 19 ma y be a parallel to ' sa 52:06, but reshua was de finitel y alluding to Isa 43:10 whe re Yt,hl 'ch the Fathe r sa id: You are my witne ss [to the tim ing of the prophecy and its fulfillment] so yo u ma y believe that ' I AM ' lisa 43: 10 ). The words common to both Isa 52:06 and Joh 13: 19 are: hillll [tha t] pisteusete [you ma y belie ve].. .JIO/i [t hat ) egw eimi [" I AM"]. So at the Last Suppe r, Yeslw a alluded to the Father's '" AM" sta teme nt in lsa 43;10. This was Ye,\ /ulll's prop hecy that the discip les wo uld posuiv el y know him both as '·1AM" and as Y ahveh the Son at the betraya l. After Ye,\ /wa said, " I A M" [Iuh 13:19), Juda s' unbelief became even mo re palpable to Yes/1I1ll (Mat 17:20 ; Mar 06:05-(6) , Judas, of co urse , did not believe that Ye s/ilia was " I AM" (Mar 02:08; Luk 06:08). Yes hua was troubl ed in spirit and te stified: I te ll yo u the trut h-c-one of you will betra y me (1oh 13:21 ). YCShUll chose his wording carefully so that, o ne by o ne, the ele ve n d isciples wo uld den y that the y had plans to be tra y Yes/IIU1. T he wo rds ofte n translated ,

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

228

Yael Na tan

"Surely, not I," are literally. "Surel y 1 am nOI feg w eimi meli] [the betrayer]" (Mat 26:22 ). Mark's gospel has the same phrase, but the eimi C am" ) is only implied (Mar 14:19 ). This lacuna is common in Greek writing, so it would seem that Mark has the disci ples saying the sa me phrase, Mark 's version reads: Surely 1 am not [egw (eimi is implied) m eli] (the betrayer]. B y Ye.I'!wa's design, Judas heard the words " eglt" eimi" (lite rally, "I am") ele ven times before J udas also said, "Surel y, not I [egll" eimil, Lord" (Mal 26:25). In this way, Yes/1lI1I allowed Judas 10 express with a do uble-entendre his rationale for the betrayal: J udas did not believe that Ye,I'hua was the "I AM [eglt- eimi !" as Yeshul/ claimed 10 be. Judas was telling YeS/ilia thai he was one with the sto ne throwers of Joh OR and 10. Judas' state ment could no t, of co urse. go unan swe red. While J udas was still present at the Last Supper, YeS/ilia tied an " I AM" statement (Jo h 13:1 9 ) 10 the vision of the Son o f Man that Daniel saw (Dan 0 7). Ye,5huQsaid: The Son of Man will go ju st as it is writt en abo ut him, but woe 10 thai man who betrays the Son of Man ! (Mat 26:24; Mar 14:2 1; Luk 22:22 ). The n. after Juda s left , YeIhuli said: Now is the So n of Man glorified and God is glo rified in him (Joh 13:3 1). Later. in the garden Ye.l'hua twice said, "I AM" (Joh 18:05-06 , OS ). Ye,I'!WlI also tied these "I AM" stateme nts to the Dan 07 Son of Man visio n by saying, "Judas, are you betrayin g the Son of Man with a kiss'!" (Luk 22:48). YeIhua 's questio n a lso con nected the "Son of Man" and "I AM" statements at his betra yal to a Psalm: Kiss the Son , lest he be angry and you be destroyed in your way. for his wrath can Ilare up in a momen t. Blessed arc all who take refuge in him (Psa 002:0 12). Judas was present at Yeshtw's arre st when the sold iers d rew back and fell 10 the ground upon heari ng Ye,I'!lUlI say, "I AM." Then Ye.I-IWlI said, "I to ld yo u that 'I AM '" (Jo h 18:05·06,08). The soldiers were encumbered with armor, c hain mail and weapons. so they undoubtedly ca me 10 a knee ling position 10 get back on their feet. So one co uld say they knelt at the na me "I AM" (Joh 18:05-06 , 08). This is similar 10 how e veryone 0 11 the Last Day will kneel at the Name o f Yahveh (lsa 45 : 23 ) and YeshUlI , which means "Yahvch saves" (Phi 02:10). The events of Joh 18 at the arrest surely came across to Judas as though Ye.l'hua were telling him . "I told you so--l told you that I was ' 1 AM.": Judas and the disciples then came 10 know Ye.5h,1a as the Dan 07 Son of Man and as "1AM ." So what Yes hu a had prophesied earlier thai evening occurred: 1 am tell ing yo u now before it happe ns, so that when il [the bctruyul] docs happen, you will believe uuu 'I AM ' (Joh 13:19). The so ld iers fallin g down at Yeshull 's words, " I AM ," surely reminded Judas of Ye.lhua's previous "l AM" statements. J udas may also have thought of how: • People fell at the presence of the Ma lek Yilh l,...h (Num 22:3 1; Jdg 13:20; tC h 2 1:16). • It was prophes ied that unbel ievers would be snared and fall because o f the Word of Yah veh (lsa 28:1 3), and they would quake at the Name of Ya llreh (Isa 64:(2),

Malenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

229

• The Malek Ya/n'c!, (Exo 03:02) said that he was the " I AM" (Exo 0 3:14 ), and • How the Fathe r said the M alek Yahveh had his name in him (Exo 23:21). Afte r Judas saw the soldie rs fal l down at Ye.I·/lUa ' s words, " 1 A M," Ju d as rea lized that Yesh llll really was the " 1 AM." Judas reversed his j udgme nt abou t Yeshua and co nfessed to the priests, "I have sinned, for I have betrayed innoce nt blood." Thomas Also Came to Know Yeshua

3.<;

the ". AM"

T homas told Yeshua: Lord, we do nor know whe re you are go ing, so how can we know the way? Ye.11ulII answered. ' 1AM' the way and the tru th and the life. No one comes to the Fathe r e xcept through me (Joh 14:05-(6). After his resurrection. Yes/ilia told a gro up of wo men follo wers that no ne shou ld touc h him until he had returned fro m see ing the Fathe r (loh 20: 11). T homas wan ted to touch YeI/llla , and was commanded 10 by Yeshua. This wo uld verify that Ye,IJllfll had retu rned from b odily seeing the Fathe r as he sa id he would (loh 20: 11). II wo uld also prove that he had rece ived " the sure mercies of David " from the Father (l sa 55:03; Act 13:34). lI is ret urn wou ld prove to Thomas' satis faction that YeIhua really was telling the tru th when he said. "' 1 AM ' the way to the Father" (Joh 14:06). Yeshul/ truly the n wo uld then he the Son of the Father who both asce nds to and descen ds fro m heaven (Pro 30:04) . T homas had other reason s for do uhting Yeshul/' s res urrect ion. T homas' Greek name was Did ymu s. Bot h Th om as and D idymu s mean "twin." If so meone is ca lled "twin" in two language s. it likel y is a nickn ame. Peo ple fro m two entire ly differen t cultures ca lled Thom a s a Iwin- and Why? Obv io usly, because Thomas was a t win, per haps even a n ide ntical twin . Th e Eas tern Orthodox Church has ne ve r lost sigh l o f this fac t, and their non-Greek trans lat io ns call Thomas not Didymus, but "t he twm." Bein g a twin . T homas was acut ely aware o f the poss ihililY that Yeshul/ had a twin, and wanted proof thai no dou ble look the place of Christ. So T homas wa nted to meet Ye.I'Jw lI persona lly, an d eve n touc h his wo unds to ensure that a twin or dou ble was not act ing the part of a resurrected Ch rist. Th om as ma y have also wanted to ens ure that Ye.l'h'lll was nOI 11 ghost. The disci ple s had mom e ntarily though t thai Yeshlla was a ghosl when he walked o n the wate r (Mat 14:26 ; Mar 06: 49) . Besides . Yeshllll was not the only person that res urrected on Easler Sun day, as Matthe w wrote: T he to mbs broke open and the bodies o f ma ny hol y people who had died were raised 10 life. They came out of the tombs. and after YeS/lilli'S res urrect ion they wen t into the holy city and appeared 10 many people (Mal 27 :52-53). Also, Yes/ilia raised Lazaru s not long befo re Yeshlla died (Joh 11:11 ; 12:11 ). So a 101 of spooky even ts occurred between the c rucifixion and the asce nsion, That Matenal com direlbs autcrars

2 30

Yael Na ta n

is why d uring a post-resurre ct ion ap pearance the len di sci ples were nOI convi nced that Ye.rhull was flesh and blood until he ale some food (L uk 24:36-43). wheth er Yes/ilia was a ghost o r not was a rea l issue s ince Yes/ilia's soul had bee n se parate from his IXKly for three da ys . Tho mas knew Ihal the Romans had gua rded Ye.l hua's body w hile u lay in the grave for three d ays (Ac ts 2:23- 32). Thom as also knew that Yes/ilia said his soul wo uld be in paradise along with the thief' s soul the very d a) o f their crucifix ion (Luk 23:43 ). Between the crucifi xion and resur rect ion. Ye.I'hulI was at the right hand of the Father (Ac t 0 2:25). He d id , ho we ver , ma ke a n e xcursio n to a metaphysical hell to preach abou t his upcoming victory (I Pc 0 3: 19 ). So eve n those who were " under the e art h," so to speak, bowed at the name Ye,l /uUl , which means "Yah veh saves " (Phi 02 : 10). Th ree days after the cruci fix ion. Ye.111Ua ·s soul returned 10 his body. He then returned to see the Father after making some post- resurrec tion appearance s. The second time Yes/wa saw the Father after his crucifi xion, he saw the Father bodi ly (Joh 20: 17 ). To addr ess Thomas' doubts, Yeshua told Thoma s: Lo ok at my hands and my feet [and see] ' that I A M myself [hoti eK.... eimi 1/1110.1' ].' Touch me and see; a ghost doe s not have fle sh and bo nes, as you see I have [ Luk 24:39 ). "Holi e~ .... cimi outos" is a q uote of the Greek phrase spoken b )' Yahl'eh the Son in LXX Isa 52:06. As was mentioned above, Yes/wa once befo re allude d 10 Isa 52:06 whe n he talked to the Sama rua n woma n. Tho mas, no w knowi ng that the implicatio ns of Ye5/lIw ' s many "I AM" statem ents were true. said, "My Lord and my God!" (Joh 20: 28 ). The Son or Man, to Son of God, to "I AM" Strategy Ye,I-}lUlI was called the Son of God often.'?" Ye,I-}lUlI , however, did nOI p uh/idy

refer 10 himself as the So n of God because of a blasphe my la w against saying just that. T he punishme nt for breaking this blasphem y law was death (Jo h 19:07 ). So it is nOI surprising thai Ye.l /w a' s e nem ies ofte n re fer red In him as the Son o f GrK!. Ye.l hua's e nemies were trying to gel him to divulge whethe r he was the Son of God in order 10 end anger his life (Mat 26:63-65). S ince no one under Je wis h law was lega lly allowed to refer 10 him self as the Son of God, Ye.l hull referred 10 hi mself mainly as the Son of Man. The Son of G od and Son of Ma n we re equa ted in sev eral passage s Ihal will be disc ussed later in this ch apter. T he desc riptions o f the fie ry Son o f Go d (KJ V Dan 03:25; Re v 02: I R) and fiery Son of Man are similar (Dan 07 :13; Eze 01 :26-28). Yeshtw appeared as lightning at the Tra nsfigurmion [Luk 09 :29), and was bright d uring his appearance 10 Saul (Act 09:03). Th is suggests tha t Yeshllo is the So n of Man and Son of God desc ribed in prophetic and apocal yptic boo ks.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

231

The Son of Mall Theotogv As far as type s of Christ go, the Son o f Man theology is fairly developed. Of COUrSl:, the So n o f Man is more than a type of Christ since I'll: was the preincam ate Son just as the Angel of Yuhl'(' h was. Ye,I'h uli spo ke of the So n of Man's preexis tence (Joh 06 :62; 08: 28, 58). veshua used the nue "Son of Man" and alluded to the Dan 07 vision of the Son of Man (Mat 24:30; 2fl: M; Mar 13:2fl; 14:fl2; Luk 21:27; Re v 01 : 13: 14: 14). Ye.lllua eve n said that the Son of Man was the " 1 AM kl('II' eimir (Ma r 14:6 2; 10h 08:28 are discussed in the " I A M" cha pter). Stephen me ntioned that he saw the So n of Man in he aven at the right hand of the Father. Step hen knew what he was seeing from read ing the Dan 0 7 Son of Man Vision. Dan 0 7 desc ribes the Son of Man approach ing the Ancient of Days (Dan 07: 13; Act 07:56-5R). By contrast, Paul did not origina lly believe that reshua was the Son o f Man . So whe n Ye,l /ruu c alled 10 Paul from heaven, Pau l had to ask who the Lo rd was (Ac t 09:05). Yc.l'/IIlU said it was written that the So n of Man must suffer much and be rejec ted (M at 26:24: Mar 09:1 2: 14:21: Luk 18:31). Yeshuli said the Son of Man wo uld be raised from the dead on the third day (Mat 17:09 ; Luk 09 :22: 24:07). Th is is si milar to ho w Yeshu1l said it was written that the Christ wou ld be raised o n the third dav (Luk 24:46). T he reade r might ask. " Where was this wnuen Ihal the Son of Man and Christ wou ld be resurrected?" The answe r is it must have been writte n in the OT and not any apocryphal book s ince Ye.l'/Illa said : Th is is what 1 told you while I was st ill with you: Everything must be fu lfi lled that is written abou t me in the La w of Moses, the Prophet s and the Psalms (Luk 24:44). Exactl y where in the OT it is written that the Son of Man wo uld d ie will be d iscussed in a moment , bUI first co nsider Ihis: Ihe majo r OT types of Ch rist suffer, presumably di e , and are raised to life. The resu rrection of these OT types o f Christ was a gi ven fact since hea venly figu res were presumed to be immonal. Ye,I'hulI said that even the mortal A braham was alive in he aven because Yahn'h is nOI the Go d of those who survive onl y in blessed memory (Mat 22:32: Mar 12:27: L uk 20:38: 23:43). Ye.l,h ,la poin ted out ho w the OT does nOI say '' WAS the God of Jacob: ' but""] A M' the God of Jacob." T his illustrates how Ye,l /uUl co nsidered even a single word of Scripture such as "is" to be fo undat ion al in establishing bel iefs as important as concern ing the afterlife. Th e belief in the immortality of the sou l goes back to Adam. lie named his wife Eve. me aning. "liv ing." because she wou ld be the mother of all the living (Gen 03 : 20). Moreo ver, Enoc h walked with God and then was taken awuy (Gen 0 5:24 ). S urely Enoch went to heaven like Elijah (2Ki 0 2:11) . A tree that has been cho pped dow n. ye t has shoots that spring forth from the stu mp. sy mbo lizes de ath and res urrec tio n (Job 14:08-15: 19:27; Dan 04:15, 23, 2fl). Two of thl: major ty pes of C hrist were described as a reju venated stu mp: Matenal com direlbs autcrars

232

Yael Na ta n

• The nation Israel, due to the Babylo nian Exile and the Ret urn from Ex ile li sa 06: 13: 49:0 3),

" d • The Me ssiah 's royalline extending from Judah to Ch rist (Isa II :01). Jacob had predicted the reason that the ro yal line was de scribed as a stum p. He sai d the scepter wou ld depart fro m l udah for a sho rt while befo re the Messia h arose fro m David's stoc k (Ge n 49:10-11 ). That is why the Messiah is c alled a Branch (l sa 04:02, II :01 ; 53:0 2; Jer 23:05 ; 33:15: Zec m:OK ; 06:12). Th e scepter de parted fro m Ju dah when the Herod s ruled. The firs! Herod was an Edomire . and the seco nd Herod was half-Edom ite , half- Samaritan. Yeshua sa id that the Son of Man came to serv e (Mat 20:28: Mar 10:45). The Apostles said YeS/lIl ll was the Father 's servant (Act 0 3: 13. 26; 04 :27 , 30: Phi 02: 07). Con sid e ring 11 11 the data abou t the types of C hrist. this see ms to identify Ye.~hu(/ as the Suffering Servant of Yllh ~'e h (l sa 4 2:0 1; 43: 10: 49:06-07: 52: 13: 53: 11). It was prophesied thai the Servant wou ld suffer and be disfig ured (Isa 50:06: 52: 14: 53:02-05). Based on the othe r types of Christ. one co uld easily presu me that the Suffering Servant was to die and be res urn..-ctcd. Dav id pre figured Ch rist , an d David wrote various Psa lms mention ing the Me ssia h's deeth and resurrect ion (PsaO I6: 1O- 11: 22:01 , 12-21: Mat 27:46: Mar 15: 34: At1 02: 3 1; 13:35-37). David was a shephe rd and he h imself served as a pattern for the Shepherd figure that was a type o f C hrist (E ze 34 :23-24). Yllh ~'eh said the Shep herd . who was Yi'lh l't'h's assoc iate, wou ld be k illed (ZlX: 13:07). }(:~"I/ltl said that the Shepherd fig ure prefig ured him (Mal 26:31 ; Ma r 14:27). Da vid a lso was called the anointed one (Hebre w: meshiach) ( f Sa 02: 35: 2C h 06:42 ; Psa 028:08: 089:38 . 5 1: 132:10, 17). David prefigured " the Anointed Onc," whieh is often trans lated as " the Mess iah" or "the Christ" (Psa 002:0 2: ACI 04 :26 ). Dan 09:25-26 is a prophecy that the Anointed One, the Ch rist. wo uld be c ut off.. The Da n 09 visio n came very elose in time to the Dan 07 Son of Man visio n. T his suggests that the Son o f Man is the Christ, and that the Son of Man would be c ut off. The "Son of Man" type of Christ was firs t introduced in Ge n 0 3:15. Adam was told that if ate of a certain tree. he wo uld d ie (Ge n 02: 17). Ada m was given a reprie ve, and was to ld a descendant wo uld die in his stead: I [God] will put e nmity betwee n yo u [Satan] and the wo man , and between your offspring and he rs: he [the Son] will c rush your head. and yo u [Satan] will strike his heel (Gen 03:1 5 ). Upo n he aring Gen 0 3: 15 , Adam na me d his wife Eve , meaning. " li ving, " beca use she was to beco me the mo ther of all the living (Gen 0 3:20; ITi 0 2:15 ). Yeshua was both the s ubstitute for the first Ada m. and his desce ndan t, so Paul called the Son the last Adam (lCo 15:45 ). Luke e ve n traces Ye.~h,w 's ge nealog y back to Adam (Luk 0 3:38) . The Son of Man's title co mes fro m the fact that he is Ada m's de scendant spoke n of in Ge n 03:15. The Hebrew word adam mea ns " man," and the "Son" is a wa}' of saying, "desce ndant." So the Son of Man co uld just as well have been called "the Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

233

So n of Adam." In fact, Ezekiel desc ribed the So n of Man as "a figure like that of a man [lldlllllJ" ( Eze 0 1:26 ). In Danie l and Eze kiel's visio ns. they see the Son of Ma n who wou ld fulfill the prophecy of Gen 03:15 (Dan 07:13: Eze 0 1:26-2K). Adam was a gentile, so it seems appropriate that Daniel and Ezekiel bo th saw the So n of Man visions in gentile territo ry near Babylon (Dan 07:0 1: Eze 0 1:03). Dan 07 is written in Aramaic, The paris of Daniel written in Aramaic deal with gentile issues. while the paris written in Hebrew dea l mainly with Jewish issues. The Dan 07 Son of Man vision definitely dea ls with gentile issues, since the Son of Man is prophesied to inherit all nations. "All nations" wou ld be the gentiles. si nce the Son had already inherited Israel back in Exo OJ -06 (De u 32:08-( 9), A snake bit ing the hee l of the Son of Man symbolized the death of the last Adam. The imagery of Ge n 03:15 was appropr iate s ince Satan had j ust caused the Fall by possessing and speaking through a snake. Also, snake biles cause death but do not break any bones . T his signifies the type of death that the Mess iah wou ld suffer (Num 2 1:08-09; Psa 022:14, 17; 034:20; 035 : Ill: Ioh 03 :14; 19 :34-37). Sa tan possessed a snake in the Garden of Eden 10 temp i Ada m and Eve. The words of the snake were deadly veno m 10 Adam and Eve. Similarly, peop le listening to the words of de mon-co ntrolled persons wou ld eventua lly kill the last Adam. Early in Ycs/lIIa"s ministry, peop le were not ready to hear certain facts. The reason was that during Inte rtesta menta l times , so me OT truths simply we re not taught, while other OT truths were twisted. O ne truth that people co uld not immediatel y handle was that the Messiah would be the So n of God. In fact. the Jews had eve n enac ted a law specifically aga inst saying that one was the "Son of God" (Juh 19:07). Cognizant of this. the demons got off o ne last parting shot as they were driven out of the demon- possessed by say ing Yeshua was the So n of God (Mat 08:29; Mar 03:11; Luk 04 :4 1; 08:28). S imila rly, a demon announced thai the Apost le Paul was the servant of the Most High (Act 16:17), because some were nOI yet ready to handle this truth (Act 14: 11- 15 ), In the e nd Satan and the demo ns were success ful. The ir taunts about YC.I'hua be ing the Son of God ( Mat ()4:03 , 06 : 08:29 : Mar 03:11; Luk 04 :03. 09. 4 1; OK: 28) became the jeers that the Jews used ( Mat 27:40, 43). The Jews asked Yeshua whe ther he was the Son of God in order to charge him with a capital offense whe n he answered (Mat 26:63: Luk 22:70). So o ne cou ld say that ultimately it was the dem on's venomous words that d rove the fang-like nails into Ycs/uw' s hands and feet (Joh 20:25), and a snake-like spear into his side (Jo h 19:07 , 34), The Mi,u iml of the SOli of Ma ll

T he above was a rev iew of the theology of the Son of Man in a nutshell. Ho wever, Yes/1lI1I still had 10 co nvince his listeners that not only was he was the So n of Man, bUI also that he was the Son of God and "I AM." YeI /lIIa therefore tal ked abou t how in the OT the Son of Man was concerned with spreading the gospel and end ing spiritual rebellion. Matenal com direlbs autcrars

234

Yael Natan

Yt'.\'huil ta lked abo ut how sin ning again st Chr ist was forgi va ble. but blasphemy

ag ainst the Sp iril was nOI forgivable (Mal 12:32 ). Interesting ly, in Eze kie l the Son of Man (E zc 0 1:26-28 ) and the Sptru arc me ntio ned tog ether when the prophet was co mm issioned (Eze 02:02). Also , the Son o f Man said that the Israelit e s had rebe lled again st him, so the Spirit and Eze kiel were sent to preach repentance and forgi ven ess (Eze 02 :02 -03). Yeshua kne w tha i once people acce pted him e ithe r as the Son o f Man or as the Son of God . they wo uld find il eas ier 10 accept him as bot h. Then their next spmrual step would be to figure OUi either that " the Son of God " was "God the Son," or thai the "So n of Man" was "God the Son: ' Fin ally. Ye..I'hua's fo llo wers would co nclude that God the So n was " I AM : ' and the ir God and Lord. Yes/lila' S followe rs ca me to know h im as God and Lord (Joh 13: 13-14; 20: 28 ). Ju st as YeS/ilia spo ke 10 the cro wds in parables, his public claims of div inity were purposely' ambiguous (Mat 13: 10- 13: Jo h 10:24). The Son of Man title was a mbiguous in that the "s o n of man" title oflen was ap plied to mer e humans in the QT, es pec ially th rou gho ut Ezek iel. Howe ver , jud ging from the descri ption and details, the "Son o f Ma n" de picted in Dan 07 and Eze 01 :26- 28 is the d ivine Son of God (Dan 07: 13-14 ). The title "Son of God" wa s o utlaw ed (Jo h 19:117 l, even thou gh the title was ambiguou s: • Ada m was c alled "th e son of God " [Luk 0 3:38 ), • Hu man s were called "s o ns o f God " (Ge n 116:02, 04; Ma t 0 5:09: Ro m 08: 14, 19: Ga l 03:26), and • Angels we re called "sons of God" (Job 0 I:06 ; 02:0 I; 38:(17). YCShUll used the ambig uous Son of Man tit le so that the uni nformed c rowds would not be offended before the elect we re led to fait h ( Isa 42:03: Mal 12: 15-2 1). The Son of Ma n title was also ambiguou s e nough 10 keep Ye,\-IlUtI out of trou ble with the a uthori ties (Ma l 26:63-65 ; Luk II :53-54; 20:20-26: Joh 08:06: 10:24- 39). Y('.\'huil referred to himse lf pri vate ly. nOI publicly , as the Son of God. A perusal of Ihe Gospels shows that il was e ithe r third partie s who made public me ntion of the title Son of God , or Yes/ilia spoke of the So n of God in the third person. Ju st as YC,\ /UUl refused to answer ot her q uestion s (Mat 2 1:27; Ma r 11 :33: Luk 20:08 ), he left the question abo ut his d ivin uy unanswered in the public sphere . This wa y Ye.\1/Uil's o pponents could not invoke the blasphemy law aimed at anyone who claimed 10 be the Son o f God (Joh 19:07 ). That Ye,\'/lUiI se ldom publicly referred to himself as the Son of God e xp lains why the High Priest needed to ask Yeshua whether he was the Son o f God (Ma t 26:63 ). The High Prie st did nOI ask the que stion OUI of cu riosity, bu r as a ruse so YC,\ Jltfll wo uld inc riminate him sel f in the e yes o f the unbelie ving San hedrin (Mat 26:65 -(6). The h igh priest used this blasphemy law j ust as the demons d id when they c alled Ye,\ hlla "t he Son of God " or "t he Son of the Mos t High." The y me rely wanted to pUi Y('.\'hul/ ·s life in jeopardy (M at 04: 03, 06; 08:29: Mar 0 3: II ; 0 5:07; Luk 04:03,

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

235

09, 4 1; 118 :28). S imilarly, the possessed prophetess at Philippi followed Paul and S ilas ye lling that the y were servants of the Most High God (Act 16:17-18). The re, too. the dem on hoped to cause a fatal confrontatio n between the e vangelists and the pagan profiteers (Act 16: 19-2 1; 19:24-4 1). Yeshua 's strategy of moving people to accept one title and then a second title is appare nt when ¥eshll ll complimented Nathaniel o n his belie ving that Yexlllla was the Son of God (Joh 01 :49).171 T hen Ycshua prom ised that Nat haniel wou ld co me to kno w Ye.lhu ll as the Son of Man (Joh 0 I:51). Y,'s/w a el sewhere linked the So n of Man title to the So n of God title. For e xamp le, Yeshlla told the temple crowds (Joh 05:14) that he was the Son of Man and the So n of God who gave spiritual life to his hearers, and would resurrect and j udge both sa int and sinner on the last day (Joh 05:25-27). In Re velation, the So n of Man (Re v I:13; 14:14) is also called the Son of God (Rev 02;18). a mong other titles. Ye.I'IwlI also linked the Son of Man title to the Son of God title when the high priest asked Ye" llI/a whether he was the Son of God. Yel'/w lI said, " I AM [e,ll W dm ; !" (Mar 14:62: Luk 22:69-70), which indicated that Ye,5hua is Yahw h the Son. This "I AM" statement is discussed in the "1 AM" c hapter. Ye.l hlfll also added that he was the So n of Man who m the)! would see coming in the clouds . T his is a clear refer ence to the Dan 07 So n of Man vision (Mat 26:63-64). ¥e,I'Illlll's mo ving peop le In believe that the Son of Man was God the So n was appare nt when Ye,I'Il/ 1lI said the Son of Man had the autho rity to forgive sins (Mat 09:06; Mar 02:10: Luk 05:24 ). Yeshlla kne w that the Jew s wou ld think, "Only God can forgive sins" (Mar 02 :07: Luk 05:2 1). As if to sa)'. "You are e xactly right !," Yeshna healed the paralyz ed man. thereby proving that he was both the Son of God ami God the So n. ¥e,I'Im ll \ faith-building strategy was apparent when veshua asked the disciple s. " Who do peo ple say the Son of Man is'?" Peter res ponded. " You are the Christ. t he Son of the living God ." Ye.l hul/ said that the Father had reveal ed this fact to Peter. and that on this fact Ye" hll a wou ld build the Ch ristian Church (Mat 16:13-19),1Jl Ye.I'IlUiJ was the Son of God as we ll as the Son of Man. T his meant that betwee n the resurrec tion a nd the ascensio n, he wo uld be given authority o ver the earth in accordance with Dan iel's Son of Man vision (Dan 07: 14. 27: Mat 28:18). At that point veshua had the author ity to send his disciples to the ends of the earth to preach the Gospel and to build the C hurch (Mat 28:18: 10h 12:31; 17:02, 07 , 09, 18; ActI 6:09-1(1 ). Peter 's mention of the "living God" (Mat 16:13-19) is signifil:ant because in t he Hebrew. the phrase "living God" is sometimes the plural "living God s" (De u 05:26; ISa 17:26. 36; Je r 10:10; 23:36). The "living Gods" OT passages are discussed in the MT plurals appendix. The plural "living Gods " sugges ts Yahl'l.'11 is the Trinity. That "living God" is mentioned in connection with the Son of Man (Mat 16:1319 ) supports the interpretatio n that ¥e" luUl was the div ine So n of Man (Dan 07 : 13 ). The Son of Man was prophesied to be one of the two Most Highs (Dan 07:18. 22,

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

236

Yael Natan

25b,27). A co nnectio n was made between the Son of Man and the "livi ng God " at Ye,l hlfll 'S "trial:' The Mistrial of the Mill ennia That Ye.\'hltl/ used the Son of Man title often is not lost on the NT writers (Act 07 :56; l leb 02:06; Re v 0 I:13; 14:14). The Jewish officials, ho wever, fixated o n the Son of God title because there was a law tailored for that offe nse (Joh 19:07). Th e blasphem y la w agains t saying one was the So n of God was patent ly unbiblical-a law made by unitar ians and anti-Trinitarians. There was no builtin exception for Yohveh the Son who would he the di vine Messiah . T hat the So n would be the Messiah is discussed in the Trinitarian proofs appendix. As Yes/lII11 pointed out (Joh 10:34-35), even humans were ca lled "gods." The OT referred to human judges as sons of the Must l ligh (Psa 082:06-07 ), and judges were called god s (Exo 21:06; 22:08-09 rBIIS 22:07-081; Jos 24:01: Psa 082:01 . 06 ). The judges' honorifi c tide of "god" was appropriate because the Of-era law code was based on the Mosaic laws inspired by Yah ~'eh . Hosea eve n prop hesied that the J udeans would o ne day be ca lled "sons of the li ving God" (Hos 0 1:10: Rom 09 :26 ). Due 10 co ntradicto ry witness accounts, the Sanhedrin could not mak e any charges stick. They felt they had no choice but to con vict Ye5hl/a on a blasphemy charge. The specific s of the blasp hemy charge had to be that Yeshua claimed to be the Son of God rather than So n or Man or "I AM ." The reason is that the pagan Pilate would no t unde rstand how ca lling o nesel f the "So n of Man" or "I AM " constituted blasphemy (Act 18: 14- 17). The Jews hoped that Pilate wou ld cr ucify an audacious person without Roman citizenship who claimed to be the Son of God (Aet 14: I2- 19). They also knew that Pilate could be manipulated into imposing the death sentence if: • A riot was about to ensue (Ma t 27 :24; Luk 13:0 1: 23: 15;Act 19:35-41). and • Pilate's relati onship with Caesar were threatened (Jo h 19:12-16 ). Let us skip ahead for II mo me nt to see whether the Sanh edrin's csrimatiou of Pilate was accurate. Since Pilate was not a unit arian, he did not auto matica lly disbelieve anyon e's cla im about being the So n of God. Ancient s took such cla ims by miracle workers seriously (Ac t 14: 11- 12; 28:06). Pilate 's mindset was the same as that of his centurion who was co nvinced by e vents at the c rucifi xion that Yeshllo was the Son of God (Mat 27:54 ; Mar 15:39 ). Pilate likel y kne w what Herod kne w- that Yes/ilia was an itinerant miracleworker (Mat 14:02; Mar 06:14; Luk 23:08 ). After finding out that Yes/ilia cla imed to he the Son of GrM:!. Pilate asked Ycshua where he was from. Appa rently Pilate thought Ye.l'hll(/ might answer "heaven" (Joh 19 :07- 12; com pare Joh 18:36-37 ). Let us now return to discussing the trial before the Sanhedrin, When Yeshlla was being interrogated. he attempted to redirect the Sanhedrin to cross-e xamine witnesses about what he had s aid publicl y (Joh 18:20-2 1). It makes perfect sense that no person should be tried on the ba sis of his private con victions. Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

237

In YeS/lilli ' S case, however, he seems 10 have wanted to die for nothing less than his claims of divinity. Ye,5huQ knew that he would die based on the result s of tile Sa nhedrin trial. since he was acq uitted three times by Pilate {Luk 23 :04; Joh 18:38; 19:04, (6 ). Y/,.11IUlI wanted to place on the witne ss stand those Jew s who tried to stone him (Joh OlU9; Joh 10:3 1). They wanted to stone Yeshua for : • Publicly ide ntifying himself as the " I AM" and Yah veh (Joh 08 :24, 28, 5R; 10: 30), and for • Impl) ing that he was eq ual to God (Joh 05: I R: 10:33). Th e priests co uld have had J udas testify that Yeshll Q sai d. "I AM : ' often . including that very eve ning (Joh 13:19 ; 18:05-08). Indeed , perhaps it was Juda s' intent ion to testify in Ye.5/ma's behalf whe n he came to the c hief priest s and elders at the templ e. Judas said, "I have si nned, for I have betrayed innocent blood." This is beca use Judas was belatedly convinced that YI'.I'IllIlI was " I AM." Tho ugh the priests sco ured the Passover feast crowds for witnesses (Mat 26:60 , 65; Mar 14:63), they were not interested in due process, or in any witness who might e xonerate Yeshlla. They knew J udas would inform the Sanhedri n that e veryone "d rew back and fell to the ground" upon hearing the incriminating words. "I AM." So the priests turned Judas away saying, "W hat is Ihat [betraying an innocent manl to us? That is your responsibility" (Mat 21:03-04 ). Out of fairness, it should be noted that later, a large number of priests did become Christian (Act 06:07). During Ye.I'IIUl/'S "tria l" the high priest Caiaphas said: I c harge you under oath by the living God-c-tellus whether yo u are the Christ, the So n of God (Mat 26:63 ). At this point. if Yes/lI/a did not know all things ahead of time, he might have become exasperated . Ye.5hua had argued thar the Jews ought 10 co nside r OT doctrine when e valuating anyone's "Son of God " claims. Not co nsidering OT doctri ne led people to attempt to stone "the stone that the builde rs rejected" (Psa 118:22; Mat 2 1:42: Mar 12:10; Luk 20: 17; Act 04: II ; IPe 02:(7). Interesti ngly, "the stone that the builders rejected" metaphor is apt since the Jews picked up stones from the con struction site of the templ e to stone YI'.111Ua (Joh08:46-47; 10:37-38; 18:2 1-23),17' YeshuQ gave an e xpanded answer to the High Priest' s q uestion as 10 whethe r he was the Son of God. Ye,lhml said , "I AM [egw eimi l" (Luk 22:69-70 ), mean ing that he was Ya hl'/'h the So n. Ye,l /uw added that he was the Dan 07 Son of Man whom they would see coming in the clouds (Mat 26:63-64). By this statement YeS/lUll identi fied himself as the So n of Man prophesied to becom e one of the Most Highs a lo ng with the Fathe r in Dan 07: 13-28. Ye,I'llI/a cla imed more tha n j ust the Son of God title because he did not want anyone reading about the trial 10 doubt his divine status. Yes/ilia did nor want anyone to think that he only cla imed to be a mere human, a mere angel. or anything less tha n God the So n, equal to the Fat her [Ioh 05:18). Tn he co nvicted of o nly claiming 10 be the Son of God would be ambiguous, because to emphasize their e xalted. God -give n roles: Matenal com direlbs autcrars

238

Yael Natan

•

Angels we re called "so ns o f God" (Job 01 :06; 0 2:01 : 38:0 7) and were ca lled small "s' "gods" (Psa 008:05: co mpare to He b 02:07), and • Human judges were called small "g" "gods" (Exo 2 1:06; 22:08,09; Psa 082:01. (6) and "sons of the Most High" (Psa 082:(6). Yeshua was con victed withou t being afforded the opportunity to call witnesses to prove his innocence (Mat 26:64-68; Mar 14:63; Joh 18:2 1-23). The reaso n no d ue process was afforded Ye.I'IwlI was the priests were unitarians who d id not be lieve there even was a God the So n. much less one stand ing in front of them. Ye,I'lwl/ did not object to the S anhed ri n's misc o nduct as. later . the Apostle Paul d id rigorously d uring his trial (Act 23:02-05). Nei ther did YeshuG attempt a vigo rous defense as did Paul during his trials (Act 23:06; 24:2 1). Yeshua kne w that no sc riptural arg ume nt wou ld pe rsuade the San hedrin (Luk 16:31: 22:67-68). Besides, thcy would rejec t Yes/lI llI's testimony o ut of hand beca use they de manded a min imum of two witnesses to prove anything: T he Phar isees c halle nged him, 'Here you are appearing as your own witne ss; yo ur testi mon y is not valid' IJoh 08 :13: also see Joh 05:3 1). reshua remained silent in court for the sa me reason that Yeslllla told Judas to get the betraya l over with quickly (Joh 13:27). Judas would betray reshuG, and thc Sa nhedrin would have Ycshu(/ killed , no matter what. Argui ng would have been futile , si nce the high priest tore his garm ents ove r the fcw co mment s Yes/ilia d id make (Mat 26:65). On the deeper level, Ye.\ hua stood silent becau se he stood in the place o f sinners, and he wan ted to die on his ~ather's time table . His Passo ver death would atone for sins, to incl ude the sins of the priests (Ac t 06:07). Ye,llIua's producing a miracle to con vince the Sanhedr in that he was the Son of God was not an option. Bach subsequent miracle that YeJlw a performed produced diminishing return s as far as the priests were concerned. !" In fact. miracl es we re co unterproductiv e s ince the priests conside red eac h miracle or sig n to be more evidence that Ye.l hua was in league with Satan (Luk I I:15- 17 ). S imilarly, Herod wanted to be entertained with miracles (Luk 23:08-09). Herod had deri ved no spiritual benefi t whatsoever from the accou nts of Ye.l h fw' S miracles. So reshua was determi ned not to perfo rm an y more s ig ns fo r those who wou ld disbelieve anyway. More miracle s would only serve to harden he arts (ISa 06:06; Isa63: 17; Mat 11 :23-24; 12:3 1-32). Yeshua dete rmined that unbelie vers wou ld o nly sec the s igns mea nt for the whole world to see and hea r abo ut. Ye.l'/uw said that people wo uld know that he was the Son o f Man by the sign o f Jona h (Mat 12:40 ). T his in vol ved Ye,lhua's death, burial and resurrection (Mat 12:39-40; 16:04 ; Mar 08 :12; Luk I I:29_30) m The sign of Jonah wou ld also let people know that he was the " I AM:' YeshuG said: When you have lifted up [in other ......ord s. "crucified"] the Son of Man . then you will know that 'I AM'" (Joh 08: 28). Joh 08:2 8 is d iscussed in the "I AM " c hapter. The specifi c even ts at the crucifixion to which YI'shl/a referred-the even ts that wo uld co nvince people of his bein g the Son of Man and "~ I AM:' were: Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

239

• The midday darkness (Mat 27:45, 51-54). • The earthquake (Mat27:5 1, 54). and • T he temple curtain ripped from tnp to bottom (Mat 27:51; Mar 15:38: Luk 23: 45 ). Th e temple vei l ripping into two sig nif ied that Ye.11IU a· s sacrifice for s in demol ished the "dividing wall of hostility" between Yahveh and those "on who m his favor rests" [Luk 02:14: Eph 02: 14). The temple c urtain's being halved also signifies how the temple had indeed been left deso late, as Ye,I'hul./ said it was (Mat 23:38: Luk 13:35). Cy ril Gla ssc wrote : .c.the veil of the Temple was rent in twain and the Shl'k imlh we nt nut of the Holy of Holies into the world .I'" T he Shekinah is not a n imperso nal pheno menon . but is the Son and Spirit. Gla sse is also wrong abou t the Spirit leaving the temple when the curtain ripped. The te mple was intended to be a hou se of praye r for all nations, but it was not (Mar 11: 17). The curtain rippin g in two signified that the Spirit had already left the temple and had taken up reside nce with all nations. Early in his ministry Christ indicated that the Spirit had already left the temple: A time is co ming when you will wo rship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem.v.a time is coming and has now co me when the true worshipers will worship the Fathe r in spirit and truth (Ioh 04: 21 , 23). The "time is co ming" in Joh 04:2 1 proba bly refers to when the temple curtain ripped at the cruc ifixion. or when the temp le was destroyed (70 AD). The n the fact that the Spir it had alread y left the temple beca me kno wn. T his, howe ver, was a long while after the actual event had occ urred, Even at the stan of Ye.I'hua 's ministry. the Spirit was makin g baptized Ch ristians his abode and tem ple (Mat 03 : I I. 16: Joh 04 :20-24: ICo 03: 16: 06 :19; Eph 02:22 : I Pe 0 2:05). We have been discussing how peop le wo uld come to know YeshuG as " I AM" after his crucif ixion (Joh 08:28). T he crucifix ion was mentioned prom inently at Pentecost, and later, "Christ c rucified" was the main the me of Paul' s missionary work (I Co 0 2:0 2). At Pe ntecost, many Jews came to kno w Yeshua as the "l AM" (Act 0 2:36-39 ), Pentecost was the first time that Diaspora l is rael heard ho w t he cr ucified Ch rist is the " 1 AM." That the message would be delivered in fore ign tong ues was predicted by Isa iah (Isa 28:11: ICo 14:2 1). Peter said that Joel's prop hecy (Joe 0 2:28-32) was fulfi lled at Pentecost (Act 02 :16-21) . Inte restingly, in the verse just before the passage that Peter quoted. Joe l has Yah l'elJ say ing: The n yo u will know in the midst of Israel [that] ' I AM' [eRlf eimi] (LXX Joe 02:27). It was noted in the chapter on the NT use of OT Yllh l'eh texts that most of the Diasporal Jews used the LXX. T hey wou ld have also known the context of Peter's quo te, perhaps by heart. At his trial. Ye,I'huli knew he would be vindicated at the cruci fixion, at Pe ntecost, and thereafte r. So Yes/1I1Cl made no defense d uring his trial before Ihe Je wish

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

240

Yael Na tan

Sanhed rin (Mat 26:63), be for e Hero d (Luk 23:09 ), and before Pilate (loh 19: 09 ). Yeshua made no defens e eve n thoug h Pilate prodded him (Joh 19:10), and sardonically asked , " What is truth'!" O oh 18:38; ICo 0 1:22) . YC.I'/ IIIlI ' S strategy of acce pting his vind ic ation at a later time worked (Mat 11 :19: Luk 07: 35). Many priests were co nvinced by the resurrection that Ye,I'I1/1lI was the Son of God (Act 04:02: 06 :07 ). Also. the NT writers. apolog ists and polemici sts ha ve conv inced coun tless souls that the cruc ified Ch rist was the Son of God (Joh 20 :31). Espec ially co nvinci ng to many is that the Father (Act 13:33; Heb 0 5:05) and the Spirit (Ro m 0 1:03- 04 ) raised Yeshull from the dead. YeI/1I1l1 said that those at his trial would kno w that he is the Son of God and the " I AM" at the Last Day. Th en they wo uld see him co ming in the cl ouds (Joh 05: 25: Mat 26:64; Mar 14:6 2; Rev 0 1:07 ). The phrase "coming in the clou ds" is a clear refere nce to the Dan 0 7 Son of Man vision. After coming in the cloud s, Ye,~ h lla will say to those at his trial: Th ese things yo u have do ne, but I ke pt silent [d uring his trial ]. You tho ught the ' 1 A M' was like yo u, hut I will rebuke you and accuse you to your face (Psa 050:2 1). T he " I AM" in Psa 0 50:21 is the sa me Hebre w form eh veh (" I A M" ) found three times in Exo 0 3:14.

Whether Ynhua Spoke Aramaic or Greek During His Mlstrlal Caiap has must have though t Ye.~ llUll clai med to he the "I AM" in e ither Aramaic or G reek. It docs not seem plau sible that Caiaphas would rip his expe nsive prie stly garment over a lesse r for m o f blasphemy (Mat 26:65; Mar 14:63 ). If Ye.l'hull spoke Aram aic duri ng his trial, his " 1AM" state ment may have come across as a quote of YlIIIl 'eh's " I AM" statem ent in the Ara maic Targums. If Ye.11w lI spoke Greek, than he would ha ve come acros s as quoting the Gree k LXX . T here is a good ch ance the tria l was conduc ted entire ly in Gree k. As was noted in the chapter on the NT Use of OT ranvon Texts, abo ut fort y pe rcent of insc riptions in Jerusale m we re Gree k prior to 70 AD." 7 Joseph us mcnnoncd that e ven se rvants learned Greek in the first ce ntury Palesti ne (An/;lI,.itie,I' of the Je ws, Book 20: 11:0 I). The priests were thoro ugh ly Helleni zed eve n before Maccabe an times (before 165 Be ). T he prie sts were co nversant eno ugh in Gree k to speak to Roman s, and write lett ers to the Gre ek-spe aking Je ws o f the di aspor a (Act 28: 2 1). If Ye .~ h u a tol d the San he dr in, " I A M [1'.': "" eimi l" in G reek rather tha n in Ara maic , this wo uld ex plain why Pau l quoted Exo 22:27 b to the Sanhedrin : .. .do not speak evil ahou t the ruler o f yo ur peo ple (Exo 22:27h: Eng lish 22:28b; Act 23:05 b). Paul knew the LXX versio n o f this passage would irk the San hed rin. for the firs t pa rt of the verse reads, "Do no t blaspheme the God s" (LXX Exo 22: 27a IEnglish 22:28aJ). Here , "Gods" translates the Hebrew plural Eloh im, and the LXX Gree k pl ural theoij. I?' LXX 22 :27 is d iscussed further in the MT plurals appendix. Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

241

Paul knew the Sa nhedrin would eve ntually catch the meaning of his OT quote ( Exo 22:28 b; Act 23:05b) since they we re familiar with the LXX. The Sa nhedrin also knew that Paul considered both the Father and Son to be divine perso ns (Act 17:18; 20:28; Rom 09 :05. and the like ). Paul made two implici t points by q uoting Moses: I. The re were plural divine persons whom the Israelites were not to rev ile. T his meant the Sanhed rin should not have a utom atically dism issed Ye,I'!lIw'S cla im to be God the Son. the divine Son of Man. and "I AM."' Ye.\ hl/{/ was automatically condem ned on ly because the priests had adop ted a unitarian belief system. T his system demanded that there be only o ne divine person and no Son o r Spirit, and 2. The re were two High Priests until the destruction of Jerusale m, yet eac h High Priest was to be considered the [singular] ruler (Exo 22:27b; English 22:28b; Act 23:05 b). Just the sa me, two divine persons co uld be considered a singu lar God.

Ooctrinall'oints Relating to Ynhuo's Trial The reason why Yes/lI/a claimed to be the So n of God is that sons are of the sa me nature as the ir fathers. That YeJlma claimed to be "I AM" further underscores that he is of the same uncreated nature as Yahveh the Father. Nevertheless, Yeshull kne w that in the minds of some, the Son of God title might leave the impression that the So n was somehow lesser than the Father. So Ye.lhua also claimed to be the Son of Man who approac hed Yahveh the "ather in the clou ds, as seen by Daniel in his prophetic visio n ( Dan 07:13-14 ; Mat 26:64; Mar 14:62). Yes/uw' s claiming that he was the So n of Man wou ld eve ntually indicate his equality with the Father, for the Dan 07 Son of Man vision would be fulfille d shortly after his resu rrec tion. T hen the Son of Man would become one of the two prophesied Most Highs ( Dan 07: I8. 22, 2511, 27). So one can concl ude from the NT transcript of Ye.I'llI/u's tria l that by cla iming to be the Son of Man, Ye.l'hua unambiguously claimed equality with the " athe r (joh 05: 18; 10:33). Say ing that Ye.111l1ll was the Dan 07 So n of Man was a touchy point. Caiaphas tore his clo thing after Yes/lI/a identi fied himself both as the Son of Man and as "I AM ."' Tearing clothing is a partic ularly Jewish gesture , ex press ing uncon trollable anguish and accom pan ied by a lo ud c ry after someth ing unbea rable was said or done. In this case, Caiaphas considered Yeslwlt's reply to be blasphem y (Mat 26: 65; com pare Lev 24: 16 ). Another altercation involving Son of Man claims occurred when Step hen said that he saw "the Son of Man stand ing at the tight hand of God" (Act 07:55-58). Though Stephe n was ju st stating what he saw, the Jews covered their ears, yelled at the top of their voices. rushed at. and then stoned Stephen. Ironically, Stephen's speech only caused the Je w s to gnash their teeth (Act 07:5 4). So it seems that Stephen's saying that Ye.\hm! was the So n of Man was more provocative than his tongue-lashing speech to the Jews (Act 07:02-53).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

24 2

Yael Na ta n

Earlier, Peter ide ntified Ye.\ hlw as the Son of the " living God ." Yeshua said that the Father taught Peter this respo nse (Mat 16:16- 17). Caia phas al so linked " living God " with Son of God when he said: I charge you under oath hy the living God- tell us if you are the C hrist, the Son of God (Mat 26:6 3). So it would seem that Caiaphas' line of questioning was not said o n his own. just as Caiaphas earlier made a prophetic statement that was nut said on his own (Joh I I:50-52). Caiaphas' oa th form ula ment ion ing the "living God " lends support to Yexhull's as sertion that he is the "I AM : ' Caiapha s' oath also len d s suppor t to the fact that Ye.I/llla is the So n of Man fro m thc Dan 07 vis ion who is prophc sied to bc one o f the two Most Highs (D an 07 : 18. 22, 25h, 27). T he reason is that the word s translated as " living God" in the OT are sometimes plural in the Heb rew: " living Go ds [£lol1 il/l k/w l'vim]" (De u 05:26: ISa 17:26, 36; Jer 10: 10: 23:36 ). Interesti ngly, two of the "living God s" refe rences (De u 05:26; Je r 23:3 6) are associa ted with state ments say ing that: • Yah veh is " near" (De u 04 :07 ; 05:27; Jer 23:23), and • Ya /we h is " [All] the Go ds'" (ha £fohim ) (De u 04 :35, 39). Furthermore. Deu 05:2 7 ties in with Dell 33:01- 02 whe re Moses sa id that at t he g iving o f the law, Yahveh appeared on three mou ntain s in fire. Hagar also refers to the Mulek Yahl'el1 as "the living one who sees" (Gen 16:14; see a lso 24:62 ; 25: I I ). Tha t the "living Gods" are " nea r" re minds one that Yeshull is Immanuel (God with us). That the " living Gods" are "[ All] the Gods " ( IIaE/ohim) rem inds on e that reshuu is a membe r of the Tr inity. The fact that Caiaphas was o ne o f two High Priest s (Luk 03 :02) lends support to the arg ument that Y/,.I hua was o ne of the two Most Highs ( Dan 07: 18, 22, 25h , 27). An nas and Cuiaphas were both High Prie sts at lea st since the start of John the Baptist's mi nistry (Luk 03:02 ).11" and rem ained so for so me time after Yex/lIw's death (Joh IS: 13, 24; Act 04 :(6). Ha ving two high priests was not a on e-time flu ke.!" There wer e two high priests until the Ro man destruct ion of Jerusalem in 70 A D. '"' In the Talmud the re is al so a di scussion of two high prie sts, one for temple service, and one appointed for war. ' ~' So it is ironic that the co -Hig h Prie st Cainphas embraced unitarianism beca use they reasoned that the re co uld not be co- High Gods.

fahYeh the Father Provokes Israel to Jealous)' By Sending a Better Moses To fu lfill the Son g of Moses (Deu 32), the Father (E1.wm) sent Y/'.I'hua to he a better Mose s to make Israel jealous. One , ho wever. must have an ho ne st evaluatio n o f the first Moses before he ca n apprecia te the greatness of the Sec ond Mose s. Th e Second Moses is so great as to make unbelieving Israe l jeal ous. Moses and Ye.l'huil ha ve man y points of compariso n such a s: • Mose s (Num 16:28) and Ye.~ "lIl1 (Zcc 0 2:09, II ; 04 :09 : 06: 15; Joh 17:23) we re the only two se rva nts w ho sa id that belie ver s would " know tha t Yahveh has se nt me" (th e e mphas is is on " know"), and Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

243

•

Moses and Ye.I'hu(/ were rne only two se rva nts who work ed miracles by rne "finger of God " (Exo 08: 19; Luk II :20 ). veshua said that the "finger of God " was the S pi rit (Mat 12:2R; Luk 11 :20 ). Ye.lhl/a said: If I drive out demons by the finger of God. then the kingdom of God has come to you (Luk II :20). Yf;'.I'hua was pointing out that only he and Moses exercised the finger of God. Therefore , he was the " prophet like Moses"-only better ( Deu IR:15; Act 03:22; 07:37). When Moses was tasked with bringing Israel oul of Egypt, Moses said 10 God : Who am I.. . that 1 should bring fo rth the children of Israel OUI of Egypt? (Exo 03 :1I). God told Moses that it was not abo ut who he was, bUI about whom he was with. Yul n'ell the Son's words were. "S urely, I will be with you" (Exo 03:12). So Moses was no different from many other heroes of the faith to whom God prom ised , "I am w ith you," and " I will be with yo u:' Moses was o nly important because he was with the Son! Yahveh many limes lakes all the c redit for retrieving Israel out of Egypt (Bxo 29:4 5-46). So it wo uld see m that Moses' greatness was derived only from Yahveh bei ng great As the ....Tiler of Hebrews said, YeI /llla ... ha s bee n counted wo rthy of more glory than Mo ses, j ust as the builder of the house has more honor than the house (Heb 03:031. By co ntrast, the greatness of the Servant of Ya hr eh , who would be the Second Moses, was inhere nt in himself. He was so great that Yohveh the rather said: This task is too small that you [the Son ) should be my se rvant just 10 raise up the tribes of Jacob and restore the preserved of Israel. I will also give you for a light to the gentiles so that )'OU rna) be my salvation to the e nd of the earth (Iva 49:06: Act 13:47). Ye.l'hu ll was superior to Moses, which allowed veshu a to attract enthusiastic crowd s of Jews and gentiles to himself. This would make the unbelieving 1cws take note (Joh II :47-4R ; Mat 27: I R; Mar 15: 10), especially since crowd s tended to come to, and stay with, Moses only o ut of dire necessity. God also does not allo w tho se who are une nt husiastic abo ut Ye.I /ll/a 10 be apath etic or dismteresred. God uses jealousy and env y in a roundabout way to sa ve as many Jews and gentiles as possible (Mat 21 :15; 27: 18; Joh 03:26; 11 :48; 12:19; Act 05:16- 17; 07:09; 13:45,50; 17:05). Jews may deny this. Though the e motion of jealousy is ugly green and is not considered socially acceptable behav ior, still. hints of je alousy can be discerned about e ve ry aspect of Chri stianity, including the numbers game. For instance , Sau l Singer wrote: In an ed itoriallast week, the Wall S tree t JOltr/1tI1 noted that, 'co ntrary 10 percei ved wisdom , Christianity is booming.' At around 2 billion adherents, Chri stianny is not o nly the largest worl d religion, but grow ing by leaps and bounds ... As Jews, we tend to prete nd that we do not have a horse

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

244

Yael Na tan

in this race . ..We are the prog e nitors of monotheism. and the refore of C hristianity and Islam, so what does it matter that we are liny? We eve n reve l in the notion that we are tiny and indestructible, a nd subconsciously connect the two an rib utes. We ha ve tra ined ou rse lves 10 believe t hat to be s mall is a good, per haps ele vated conditio n. Let's stop kidding o urselves. It is one thing to make a virtue out of necessity, another out of decline ... Does it matter that we are mo ving hu m tiny to tinier? Yes, if it means we are abandoning precisely what makes many of us pro ud to be Je ws... At the risk of so unding like Osama bin Laden and his d ream s of past Islamic glory. I would point out that Jews once numbe red 10 percent of the population of the Roman Empire, the mode rn [known ) world of that time. If the modern world today numbe rs 2 billion people [hypoth et ically spea king]. perhaps it is too ambi tious to aim for 200 million Jews. But why sho uld not we aspire to a pop ulatio n of 50 or 100 million, partic ularly' at a time when the modern world is itself growing rapidl y?'!' During the Transfiguration, Moses and Elij ah talked to Ycshua . Then the Father said: T his is my Son. whom I lo ve; with him I am well pleased. Liste n to him! (Mat 17:05; Mar 09:07 ; Luk 09: 35). The Father is clearly alluding to Moses' statement: Yahveh your God will raise up for you a prophet from among you of your brothers. and he will be like me; to him shall you listen (Deu 18:15-19). The Transfiguration teaches that though Moses and Elijah's words are true and arc benefi cialto read, the Father now commands us to listcn to the Son (Gal 03: 19, 23.25; 04:0 1-04). The NT writers saw Ye.I'!wlI as the prophet like Moses, but only better (Act 03 : 22-23: 07:37; Heb 0 1:01-02), The writer of Hebrews wrote that C hrist is worthy of more honor tha n Moses, j ust as the builde r is wort hy of more honor than the house (Heb 03:03-06 ). The writer of Hebrews wrote : He [Mose s ] rega rded disgrace for the sa ke of Christ as of greater value than the trea sures of Egypt, because Moses was loo king ahead 10 his reward (Heh II :24). Ye.I'!wlI said that Moses wrote of him (Joh 05 :46). Paul wrote that one of the perso ns called Yahveh (N um 2 1:25) and God (N um 2 1:27) wit h who m Moses had dealings was Christ (l e o 10:09). Th is shows that Moses was a disciple of Yahve h the So n. Also. when Yes hu a followed Mosaic Law. YC.\ htlll was reall y just follo wing his o wn code (lsa 09:06 -07 : Mat 03 :15; 12:08; 17:24-27; Mar 02 :2K; Luk 06 :05; Joh 19:1 1; Rom 13:0 1-(4). ¥ah l'ch required the death of both Moses and Ye.l-huli (Deu 32:50; Luk 22 :42). If one's idea of a Messiah did not die like Moses (Dell 34 :05· ()7) and then live aga in (Mat 17:03-05; Mar 09 :04). then one's idea of a Messiah is ne ither "like Moses" nor Biblical (Dell 18:1 5).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

245

At the Transfig uration, Moses appeared with the cloud that soon enveloped him ( Mat 17JI5). YeshulI, howe ver, shone as bright as the sun. Furthermore, Yeshull will not be hidden by a clo ud like Moses at the Transfiguration. but will appear in the do uds before the inhabitants of the entire earth (Dan 07: 13; Mat 24:30; Al.:t 0 I: 09- 11; ICo 15:51-52; Rev 01 :07; Re v 14:14). Moses was not a llowed 10 enter the Prom ised Land (De u 0 1:37; 03:25-27). Moses did, ho we ver. appear in the Promised Land after his deat h-as though o n the sly. T he Je wish authorities effectively rest ricted most of Ye.I'hua 's min istry to places outside of J udea hy stirring up the Judeans (L uk 23:05) . Yesh ua cou ld on ly e nter Judea and atte nd feast s as tho ugh o n the sly (Joh 07:10, 14 ; 11:56). Moreo ver, the resurrected Y{>,\ hua will re turn when no one is e xpecting him - as tho ugh on the sly (Mat 24:42-43; Luk 12:39-40). Though Satan thought he had a ri gju ro Moses' body (Jud 0 1:09; see also 2Pe 02:11 and let· 03:0 1-02), Moses' body was allowed to R.I.P.'''"' in an unmarked grave (Dcu 34 :06). By contrast, the bodie s of Enoch (Gcn 05:24). Elija h (2Ki 02: 17 ), and veshua never saw decay (Psa 016:10; Act 02:27-31). Moses was a leader and Aaron was a priest. Yesh lw . however, is both a king and priest forever in tbe order of Melchizedek (Psu 110:( 4). Melc hizedek, which means, "My King is Righteousness," was simultaneously a king and pries t (Oe n 14 :1 8 ). Ye.lhlfa is a priest in the order of Melchizedek. YI'.\1wlI was not the same person as Melchizedck, since the writer of Hebrews said that Ye Jlw a was "a nothe r priest like Melchizedek" ( Heb 07 ;11 , 15. 17). Since reshuu is a king and priest fore ver. he is a beue r guarantor of a covenant than were Moses and Aam n (Heb 07: 22,27-28) . In Psa 110, the Father sa id that the Son wo uld rule " in the midst of your ene mies" (Psa 110:02; compare Psa 106 :47; Rom 08:37; 2Co 02: 14-1 6). Moses a lso ruled Israel in the midst of enemies. but his caree r as ruler was cut short, and Israel fell uway.! " T he Son will rule hea ve n and ea rth foreve r whe n the unbelie vers are sifted o ut (Mat 13: 24-43; Re v 11:1 5; 2 1:0 1-(4 ). The belie vers will then he changed in the twinkling of an e ye ( ICo 15:52). By fulfilling the la w, Yeshuu se r aside the fi rst law wri tten o n stone, and extahlished the secon d law of C hrist that is written on ou r hearts (Jer 3 1:33; 2Co 03:03; l leb 08: I I; 10:09b. 16; Gal 06:02). Paul said that Moses' O'F covenant is now the "Old Cove nant" (2Co 03: 14). The O'I Cove nant has been set aside and replace d b)! the " New Covenant" Ocr 3 1:31; Luk 22:20; ICo I I:25; 2Co 03:06; Heh 08:08; 09:1 5; 12:24). Moses sp rinkled Israe l with blood and wate r ( Exo 24 :08 ; He h 09: 19 ). hUI Ye.l/ullI sprinkles all nations (lsa 52:15) with his blood (Heb 12:24; IPe 01 :( 2), warer tbze 36:25: Mat 28:19; I Pe 03:2 1-22), a nd the Spirit (Ad 1\ : 16). Moses had the Aaronic priests name the Name, rahveh, ove r one nation three times-once for each person of the Trinity (Num 06 :24-27). Y('.I'h ulI told the disciples to bapt ize all nations in the name (singular) of the Fathe r, Son and Spirit (Mat 28: 19). The Fa ther sai d that sa ving one nation was 100 small a task for

Malenal com direlbs autcrars

246

Yael Na tan

Yeshna (Isa 49:06 ; ACI 13:47). but Mose s was barel y up to the task of saving o ne nati o n (Exo 04 : 131. Mose s was able to ge l the Fath er 10 se nd the Presen ces to the Promi sed Land with the Israelites {Exo 33:14- 15). YeI/lUlI ret urned til the Father 10 send the Spi rit to the e nds o f the ea rth to be with all Chri stian s forever (Joh 14:16 -18: 16:07 ; Act 0 1:08). Ye,l1ullI, h imself, is with us until the end of lime (Joh 14:1 8; Mat 18:20; 28:20 ). Mose s' spir it, ho we ver, is in heaven, while e rosio n has probably e ntirely disintegrated Moses' body (De u 34:06). Moses wished he cou ld dispe nse the Spiru to mo re peopl e (Num I I: 17. 29; Deu 34:09 ). Elijah sa id that for Elisha to receive a do uble-port io n of the Spirit was a hard thing (2Ki 02:09 -10 ). "Double-portion" refers 10 the el dest son's share of the inheritance that was allot ted so he co uld act as a fami lial or spiritual father. Ye.l/ullI, ho we ver, was given the S pirit without me asur e (Joh 0 3:34: Col 02:09 ). Ye,l hlla baptizes wi th the Spirit (Joh 0 I:33), and d ispe nses the Spirit to all believers (Joh 07: 37-39; 15:26; 16:07 ; 20 :22). Mose s was a mere man. bUI Ye,l11l1ll was the Goo -man. Th is poin t is di scussed in the Trinitarian proofs appendix. As Bulaam said, he saw that £1 S/lIldda; wou ld be t he Messiah (N um 24:04 -( 7). When awa y from the so urce of glory f Num 06 :25) , Mose s- reflec ted glo ry faded (Ex o 34:33-35; 2Co 0 3:07-13). Moses needed 10 cove r his face with a veil so that the Israelites would not see the fading glory. T he fading glory would ha ve too strongly underscored the impe rmane nce of the Mosaic cove nant. T he Mosaic cove nant had 10 last until Christ fulfilled irs req uire me nts (Mal 05:1 7- 18; Io h 19: 30). Paul w ro te tha t believers no lo nger need to look upon a lead er with a vei led face. Christians look to the unfading souree of Mo ses' glory, Yahveh the Son (2 Co 03: 14-( 8) . Paul wrote that Yex/lIw is the "image of Goo :' and that the ligh t of the kno wledge o f the glory of God sho ws in the face o f Yeshua (2eo 04 :04-06 ; see also Rev OI:16) .

Yeshua was Greater Than Any Hero of the Faith The reader can surely lin d more poi nts of uneq ual comparison betwee n Mose s and Ye.l1IU iJ. However, just in case the read er thinks that someone other than Moses was the greates t OT hero o f faith, o ne last po int need s to be made: no matt er how one ra nks the heroes of the faith. Ye.l hllll is always the greatest. Yeshua is greater tha n Joh n the Baptis t (Joh 01 :1 5, 30 ). John was sa id to be the greates t (mere ) man ever bu rn (M at II : I I; Luk 07:28) . but onl y because of the mission wnh w hich he was entrusted (Mal II : 10; Luk 07:27 ). Ye.l /uUI was grea ter tha n Jacob (Joh 04 :1 2- 14 ), and greater tha n any prophet (Joh 09 :17, 35-38) . The writer of Hebrews sa id that a priest like Yex/llla who has an indestruc tible life (Heb 07:08. 16) is grea te r than Melc hizedek. Melchizedek must have bee n sinful and mort a l because he had to be re placed by Ye.l hllll (lie b 0 7:23). Sinee

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

247

Melc hizedek was greater than Abraham (Heb 07:04. 06-(8), and Ye.l'/uUI is grea ter tha n Mefchizedek , then Y/',\ huo is greater than even Ab raham, In fact, Y/,shuo can be considered grea ter tha n Abraham just on the basis of Ye5hua's pree xistence as " I AM'" (I oh 08:58).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Matenal com direlbs autorars

Appendix A: MT Plurals Referring to Yahveh

:\IT Plurals Referring to Yahveh There are over a thousa nd instance s o f Elo him (Go ds ) referring 10 YlI hveh. Due to the prejudgments and dict ates of unitarianism. ne arly all translation s tran slate the Hebrew pl urals referr ing to ranven in the s ing ular. Beside s the instances of Elohim, there are other Hebrew plural s referr ing (0 Yah veh.

List of Verses with II,1 T Plurals in 38 Cha pters of III MT books I. Ge ne sis: • Plurals: Gen 01 :26 ; 0 3:22; 11:0 7; 20: 13; 35:07 • Un iq ue Plura ls Run ning Total : 05 2. Exod us: • Plurals: Exo 12:36; 32:04. 05, OR; 33:14- 15 • Unique Plurals Running Total: OS

3. Deuteronomy: • Plurals: Dell 04:07; 05:26 • Un ique Plura ls Run ning Total: 10 4. Joshua: • Plurals: Jos 24 :19 • Uniq ue Plurals Run ning TOIal: 11 5. 1 Sa muel: • Plurals: ISa04:07 -0" ; 17:26, 36 • Unique Plu rals Running Tot al: 13 6. 2 Sam uel: • Plurals: 2Sa 07: 23 • Unique Plurals Run ning TOIal: 14 7. 2 C hroni cle s: • Plurals: 2Ch 32:14,1 5 • Uniq ue Plu rals Run ning Total: 15 8. Job: Matenal com direlbs autcrars

250

Yael Na tan

• Plurals : Job 35: 10 • Unique Plurals Running Total: 16 9. Psalms: • Plurals: Psa058:11 [BHS 057: 12J; 149:0 2 • Uniq ue Plurals Running Total: I R 10.Provcrbs: • Plura ls: Pro 09: 10; 30 :03 • Uniq ue Plurals Running Total: 20 ll.Eccle siastes • Plurals: Eel: 12:01 • Uniq uc Plumb Running Total: 21 12.Song of Solomon • Plumls: SoIO I: 11 • Unique Plurals Running Total: 22 13.lsaiah: • Plura ls: Isa 06:08 : 24:16; 4 1:04. 22-23, 26; 43:09 : 54:05 • Uniq ue Plurals Running Total: 27 14.Jcremiah: • Plurals: Jer 10:10; 17:0 1. 12; 23:36: 33:24 • Umquc Plurals Running Total: 3 1 15.Da niel: • Plurals : Dan ()4:08, 09 . 17. I X, 25, 26. 31, 32 [BHS 04 :05, 06 . 14, 22, 23, 28, 29): 05: 11. 20.2 1; 07: 18. 22. 25b. 26. 27 • Unique Plural s Running To tal: 34 16.Hosea: • Plurals: Hos 11 :02. 12 IBHS 12:0 I J; 12:0 4 [BHS 12:05 J • Unique Plurals Running Total: 36 17.Haba kkuk: • Plurals : Hab OI :1 2 • Uniq ue Plural s Runnin g Total: 37 I8. Malal: hi: • Plurals: Mal 0 1:06 • Uniq ue Plurals Run ning Total: 38 A Detailed Look at th e Plurals Referrin g to Yahveh Found in 38 C ha pters of 18 MT Books Plura ls 01-11 (First Person Plura l Pm /IOu/Is ): The " we" or " us" in these verses refers to Yahw h: Gen 01 :26; 03:22: 11:07; Isa06:08 ; 24:16; 4 1:22-23. 26; 43:09; Sol 0 1:1 1; Hos 12:04 IBHS 12:05 J; and Hab 0 1: 12). The "we' or " us" in eae h of these ve rses is the translation of e ither a first perso n plural pronoun , or a first person plural verb. The reade r sho uld be a ware that translators think they have a "license" 10 adapt Trinitarian speech 10 the exegetical stipulations of unitarian ism. For example. Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

251

" my" o ftcn is tran slated as " his" in Isa 34:16. and pronouns such l IS "w e' or " US" in the Hebrew or Ara maic are some times re nde red as "he ' or "they" in translation. For instance. in the NIV tra nslatio n of Bos 12:04 [BHS 12:05 ), " us" is rendered as " h im," So rec ou rse to the ori gina l Heb rew o r a lite ral tran sla tion like the YlX is necessary. First Person Plural Pronouns in Cell 0/ :26 Go d [pl ural nou n ] said [s ingular ver b ], ' Let us make (p lural ver b] ma n in our [plural suffix] image (sin gular noun], according to our [plural suffix ] likene ss [singular noun ].. .' (Gen 0 I:26 ). A passage with a plural related to Gen 01 :26 is found in the LX X, but not in the MT, The LXX has God saying: It is not good that the man should be alo ne. Let us make [plural verb] him a helper suitable for him tLXX Gen 02 :18). The MT, howe vcr, ha s " I will make. " The LX X translato rs ha ve Satan say ing: ... ) 'OU wo uld be as God s. knowin g [plural partic iple ) goo d a nd ev il (LXX Ge n 03 :05 b). In G en 03:05 Satan meant that Adam and Eve wo uld be like the Trinity rather than like false god s, since Ada m did not kno w abo ut false gods yet, T his is refl ected in the Greek LX X tran s lation of the He brew plural Eloh im using the pluml lheoi (Gods). The LXX translat ion o f "Gods" likely preserv e s the ori g inal Trinitarian se nse of the Hebrew. Th e plural "Gods" in G en 0 3:05 wo uld be co nsistent with the plural " us" in Ge n 0 3:22, After Adam and Eve ate of t he forbidden fru it, G od said that they had become " Iike on e o f us" (Ge n 03:22). Ge n 0 1:26-28 does not xpecifically sta te tha t e ither the man o r the wo man was created in the image o f God . but God sa id "man" was created in the image of God. " Ma n" is meant as an inclusive te rm for both man and wo man (ma nkind. humankind ), as is sho wn clearly by : • The male and fem ale being called " ma n" (Gen 0 5:02), • T he fo ur times God re ferred to " man" as " them" (Ge n 0 1:26-28) . and • God refe rring to "m an" (Gen 0 1:26-2 7) using the plural "yo urs" (G en 0 1:29), That the Trinity made "man" in the ir sing ular image, and that " ma n" is an incl usive ter m for two persons. is a stro ng Trinitarian proof. This is es pecially the case in the co nte xt whcr e God is refe rred to in the plu ral so o ften - as "Gods" (t'lohiml. as "Yahveh Elo him ," and as " us" (Gen 0 1:26; 03 :22; and LXX Gen 0 2: 18 ; LXX Ge n 03 :05b ). Also. a stro ng Trin itarian proof is the fact that the Trinity see ms to be invo lved in making perso ns and nations; The "u s" made Ada m a nd Eve [G en 01 :26; LXX Gen 0 2:18). Peopl e have "c reators" (Ecc 12:0 1) and " makers" (Job 35: 10). and the nation Israel has " ma kers" (Psa 149:02; Isa 54:(5). T hese MT plurals are d isc ussed in this appe ndix.

Matenal com direlbs

autcrars

252

Yael Na tan

Firs t Pen on Plural Pronoun ill Gen 03 :22 Yanveh Elohim said, 'The man has no w become like one of us, knowing good and evil' (Gen 03:22). Earlier. the LXX translators have Satan saying : . ..yo u would be as Gods [the Gree k is the plural theo il . know ing [plura l participle] good and e vil (LXX Gen 0) :05h). By using plurals in LXX Gen 03 :05b, and else where (for example, in LXX Gen 02: 18 and LXX Exo 22:27 (English 22:28))), the LXX tran slato rs showed that the original Hebrew pointed to the individual persons of the Trinity - the " us" mentioned in Gen 01 :26: 03:22, and e lsewhere . First Person Plural Pronou n ill Gen 11:07 Yohveh said. ' Let us desce nd [plural verb] and confuse [plural verb]' ( Ge n II :07).

First Pe rson Plural Prono un in Sol 01 : II Yoh veh said. 'We [the Trinity] will make you [the Chu rch] earrings of go ld... ' (SoI OI: I I ). T he So ng of Solomon is a so ng abou t pure love. The rea son the So ng of Solomon is a cano nical ho nk is Yclh ~'l' h 's lo ve Ior his bride, the C hurc h, is perso nified (Joh 03:29: Rev 19:07: 2 1:02 , 09: 22: 17). T he "we" therefo re indicates that Yahveh are perso ns. First Perso n Plural Pronoun in Isa 06 :08 Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, 'Whom shall I se nd? And who will go for us?' (Isa 06 :08). va hveh used the plural pronoun " us." Jnh n sa id that Isaia h saw and talke d "about" the glory of Yesh tw in his vision in the temple (Jch 12:41), but Isaiah actually talked to the Spirit (Act 28 :25-26 ). Firs t Pen on Plural Ver b in I.\'a 24: 16 Yahveh told the earth to glorify Yatreeh (lsa 24: 15), and the same divine person said. "We hear" (pl ural verb) (lsa 24 :1 6). O nly Yahveh could dem and and receive such praise from the e ntire earth (Isa 25:15). Note that Iva 24: 15-16 is similar to Joh 12:28 where the Son asks the Father to glorify his name, and the Father 's voice is heard from heaven as loud as thunde r. First Pen on Plural Pronouns in lsu 41:22 -23, 26 God mentio ned the plurals "us" twice and "we" once in Isa 4 1:22, God mentioned "w e' and "we. .. together" in Isa 4 1:23. God mentio ned " we" in Isa 41:26. Ab o in lsa 4 1. Yohvch refers to himself as "the Lasts" : I, Yilh veh [the Son], mil the first, and am with the lasts-'I AM' (lsa 41 :(4). The Hebrew for "lasts" is plural. The "lasts" here are the Father and the Spirit. The

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

253

The Jewish Trinity

"lus ts" are thc " us" and "we" mentioned elsewhere in Isaiah (1S
Plural s 12-17 ("lIoly Ones" ); God is called the 1I0 ly Ones (p lura l adjective Qa tlo.l'him) (Jo s 24: 19; Pro 09: J 0 ; 30 :03; Dan 04: 17 18HS 04: 14 ]; 05 : I I: Hos II : 12 18 HS 12:0 I Josh ua spoke o f the "holy Iplu ral adjective Qadoshi m] Gods [Elohim I" (Jus 24: 19). The context has Yah veh twic e be ing c alled "[All l the God s I/ItIE/oh i", )" (Jos 22:3 4; 24:0 1), and a " God of Gods" (Jos 22:22). Elsew here . God is culled a "God of God s" (Deu 10: 17; Psa 050:01 : Dan 0 2:47 ; 11:36), and a "God of IAIl I the God s Ihl/Hohim ]" (psa 136:(2 ). The co ntex t in Jos 22 sho ws that the Trunsjordan tribe s were calling upon the Father and the Son to fulfill the Mosaic requiremen t that there be a m inim um o f two concurring witnesse s (Deu 19: 15 ). The Transjordan tribcs said: God of Gods, Yahvch [the Father) ! God of God s, Yalll'ell [the Son]! He kno ws (Jos 22:22). Similarly. Nebuchadne zzar referred to the Trinity as " the Holy [Arama ic p lural adjective qaddiy,I'h ] Gods Il:.'lo n;/II)" (Dan 04:011. 09, III [HHS 04 :05 , 06. 14 ]). A lso, Be lsha zza r 's w ife referred to the Tri nity as "the Ho ly [Aramaic plural adjec n ve qadd(nh ] Gods (E{ohi m]" (Dan 05: 11).

n.

" Holy Ones " in Pm 30:03 A gur called the Fathcr and Son the " Holy One s" ( Pro 30 :03). Th e " Ho ly Ones" are previous ly ident ified as Yan l'ell ( Pro 09: 10). The next verse , Pm 30 :04. me ntion s a Father who ascend s to heave n, and his Son. What is imp lied is tha t the Son ascend s to heaven as the Father doe s. So Solom on belie ved in Yohveh the Fathe r and Yahveh the Son. T his is especially plausible give n the fact that Solomon wrot c three plurals referrin g to (Pro 30 :0 3; Ecc 12:01 : Sol 0 1:11), not to mention all the tim e s So lomo n called Yahveh " Eloh im" (litcrally, " God s" ). Inte restingly, Yahr ch appeared to Solomon tw ice ( I Ki 03:05 ; 09:02 ; 11 :09). Perhaps the f irst appearance wa s the Father and the sec ond the Son .

ranven

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

254

Yael Na tan

Ancie nt Heb rews may have assoc iated Pro 30:03-04 with the Dan 0 7 visio n where the So n rides the clouds to meet the Fathe r. Anc ient Hebre ws may have also associated Pro 30:03-04 with Psa 068:04. 18. 33 [BHS 068:05. 19. 34] where YlIhn'h rode to heave n. Piml q uoted Psa 068: 18 [BII S 068 :191 in Eph 04:08-10 and applied the passage to Ye.I'Illl ll . Also. Ye,I'IlIw may ha ve alluded to Pro 30 :03 when he to ld his d isciples tha t they wo uld be lieve once they saw "the Son o f Man ascend to where he was before" (loh 06:62).

"Holv Ones " in DUll 04: J 7 {BHS 04: J4{ Nebuc hadnezzar mennoned a single "Watcher" and " Ho ly One" (the Son ) (Dan 04: 13 [BII S 04 : IOJ). who in turn mentioned plural " Watchers and Holy Ones" (Dim 04:17 [HH S 04: 14 ]). Since only a s ing ular "Walche r" and " Ho i) o ne" anno unced a dec is ion of God to Neb uchadnezznr (Dan 04 :13 [BHS 04 : 1O j), it ca nnot late r be sa id that the dec ree is "an nounced " by plural " watchers" and "ho ly o nes" ( Dan 04 :1 7 [BH S 04 :14]). T he ver bs "10 announce" and "to declare" are not in the MT recensio n. but translators have added these ver bs so they can co nstrue the " Watcher" and the " Watc hers," and the " Holy O ne" and the "Ho ly One s." to be me re angel s. Witho ut the imerpolated verbs. Dan 04:17 (HHS Dan 04 :14 ) translates as: The decree of the Watche rs is t he command, and the saying of the Ho ly O nes is the affair. This is con sistent with the phrase " the decree o f Ihe Mosl High" (Dan 04 :2 1 [B HS 04: 18]). which also has no verb. God, not angels, make decrees (Act 0 3:2 1: Re v 10:07 ). God is e lsewhere ca lled a "watc her" (Job 07:20 : see also Gen 16:13) and a " watchman" (Hos 09:08). who keep s vigil (Exo 12:4 2) and ne ve r s lumbers (E xo 12:42 : Psa 121:tlJ-(4 ). So it wo uld see m the fo llowing word s refer to the Trinity: the singular "watcher" (Dan 04: 13 [BHS 0 4: 10]) and plural "Watchers" (Dan 04 :17 [BHS 04 :14]). and the " Ho ly O nes IQadoshim l" (Dan 04 :17 [BHS 0 4: 141 : see also Pro 09: 10 : 30:03; Hos II :12 [B HS 12:01] in this append ix). Daniel also showed that the "Watc hers" and "Holy O nes" were the Trin ity by referring to them as the Most High (Dan 05: I Hj, and the n saying that "they caused his glory ttl pass from him" whe n Nebuchadnezzar became Ion arrogant ( Dan 05: 20) . O ther plurals used to refer 10 the Watchers and Holy Ones incl ude : • "They ca use yo u to e at grass" (Dan 04 :25, 32 [Dan 04:22. 29): 05:2 1). • "They dri ve you away from men" (Dan 04 :25 , 32 [Dan 04 :22, 29 lJ, • "They drench you with dew" (Dan 04:25 104:22]). • " Whereas they said. ' Leave the stump... "· (Dan 04 :26 [04:23)). and • "They say to you, ,," (Dan 04 :3 1 104 :28 ]). See Dan 07 in this appendix for more d iscussio n on the watc hers and the Hol y O nes.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

255

The Jewish Trinity

It should be noted that it wou ld not be unus ual for the Trinity to appea r to

Ne buchad nezzar, s ince the Trinity appea red to other kings and famous persons. HaEfohim is a He brew form meaning. "[A ll] the Gods [/wEfohi m]:' and is used to refer 10 the Trinity. The OT men tions that these people saw "lra F.lahim" (the Trinity): Enoch (Gcn 05:22. 24), Noah (Gen 06:09), Abraham (Gen 17: 18: 20: 17; 22:03. 09), Abimelech (Ge n 20:06). Jacob (Ge n 27:28: 35:07: 48: 15), Moses (Exo 03:06, I I , 12, 13; 18:12; 19:03. 17; 20:20. 2 1; 24: 11 ), the Israelite s (Exo 18:12; 19: 17; 20:20, 2 1; 24: II). Bulaam (Num 22: 10; 23:27), and Gideon (Jdg 06: 36, 39 ). " Hof\' One.l" in

Ho.~

IJ :02, 12 [ BHS 11:01 J: Ho.~' 11:04 [ BHS 12 :05 J

HO.'iCa wrote: As they [the Trinity] called [plural verb] them [Israel ), so they [the Trinily] went [plural verb) from them [Israe l] (Hos 11 :02). Hos 11 :02 has similarities to Jer 33:24 where Yahw h is called "they": The Word (the Son] of Yahl'eh [the Father] came 10 Jerem iah, saying, ' Ha ve yo u [Jerem iah] nOI no ticed wha t t his peop le ha ve spo ke n? Specifically: 'The two kingdom s that Yalll'ell chose [Israel & Judah], he [ ¥ahw h ] has rejected them , a nd they [ ¥ahl'f'h ] spurn my people [Judah] so that they are no longer a nation before them [Yahl'l'h ]"O er 33:24). Hosea referred to the Tnn ity as the "lIoly Ones" (Q(/do.~him ) (Hos 11 :12 [BH S 12:0I J). Hosea pro vides ye t anothe r Tri nilarian proof in this c hapter. Hosea records Ya hveh the So n say ing that e ven if Israel appeal ed to the Most Hig h ( f:ll"lllli. even he, the Fathe r, would no t e xalt b rad. So the Son referred In the Father in the third person as " he" (li os 11:07 ), and t h en the Son refe rred 10 himself ax "God" (Hos 11 :OlJ). Hosea wrot e thai Yahvch the Son referred to the Malek Yah l'eh as Elohim (Hos 12:03-04a (BHS 12:04-05a]). and sa id that Jaco b talked 10 " us" (Hos 12:04b [BH S 12:05bJ). Not only doc s the repeat ed subject-object sentence structure indicate that the "us" is the Trinity, but God seemed to appear to Jacob when Jaco b was alone. So humans are mostly ruled out as being the " us." Besides, the narrator. Moses. asserted: [Ali i the God s [ha Elo h im J. the y appea red [pl ural ver b] to him [Jacob). .. (Ge n 35:07). Therefore, the " us" must refe r 10 the Trinity. The Son co ntinued to speak and iden tified the two spec ific perso ns of the Trinity meant hy the " us." The So n spoke this Shelllil-like statement: ¥llh n ,h [the l-a the r]. God [the So n) of hosts , Yahveh is his [T he Trinity's] name of reno wn (Hos 12:05 [BHS 12:06] ). By co mparison, Moses' Sh('IlU/ read s: rahveh [the Father] [and] o ur God (the Son]. Yahl'eh [the Spirit] [are] a united one (Dell 06:(4). In the So n's Shema-like statement. the Hebre w word that the NIV translat es as "na me of renown" is ~eker (Hos 12:05 [BH S 12:06]). Zeker usually means

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

256

Yael Na ta n

" me mo ry" or " me mor ia l:' but it mak es bett er se nse to s ay that Yllh\'eh is the Trinity's " name of reno wn" rather than a " memo ry" or " memorial." Also, zeeer is associated with the Hebr ew word for " na me" (.I'hl/me) several times (Exo 0 3:15; Job 18:17; Psa 009:05·()(j : 135:13; Pro 10:07; Isa 26:08. 13· 14 ). A lite ral translation of Hose a's word s in Hos 12:0 3-05 [HilS 12:04..(J6l read s: 0 3. In the womb he [Jacob] took his [Jacob's ] brother [Esuu ] by the heel ; a nd in his [Jacob's] ma nhood he [Jacob ] had po we r with God [in other wo rds. the Peniel, translated "Pace of Goo" (Ge n 32:30-2 Il ]. 04 . Inde ed , he [Jaco b] had po we r ov er the Mal ek [the So n] and pre vailed [Ge n 32:24-32 ]; lie [J acob] we pt. and mad e s upplication 10 him [the Son] . He [Jaco b] fou nd him [the Son] at Beth el [Gen 35:09. 151. and there he [jacob i spo ke with us [The Tr in ity]. 05. even Y(lh ~'e " [the Trin ity] . God [the Trinit y] of host s [angels ); Yohveh is his [the Tr inity's] name o f renown , Plural 18 (Ge n 20:13): Abraham sa id: Gods IE/ohim], they c aused [plural verb] me to wa nder (Gcn 20:13). Nehem iah wrote aho ut the persons of the Trinity who ca lled Abram o ut of Ur using the paired pronouns "y ou- he." Nehemi ah wrote: You-he are Yahveh.. . yo u-he are Y ahveh, [All] the God s [ha£l ol1im], who chose Abram and brou ght him out of Ur of the Cha ldea ns and named him Abraham (Neh 09:06-07). Nehemiah's use of the defin ite article with t '/ohilll (Neh 09:07). and Nehemiah's twice using the joined pair of pro noun s " yo u-he" (N ch 09:06-0 7). ind icate that pl ural perso ns of the Trinity called A bram o ut o f Ur. Th e narrator. Mo se s , sa id tha t "[A ll] the God s [h aElohim ]" appe ared to Abimeleeh (G en 20:06). That Abimeleeh knew Yahl'eh to be pers ons ex plains wh y Abrah am sa id , "God [£ lohimJ, the)' ca used me to wande r" (G en 20 :13 ). Appropriately, Abraham prayed to " [All] the Gods " to hea l Abimelech (Gen 20: 17 ). 1I0£101lilll is a Heb rew form meaning. "[All] the Gods." lIa£lohim oft en refe rs to the Trinity. T he OT mentions that the se peo ple saw or talked 10 J/{/ flolrim (the Tri nity): Enoch (Ge n 05:22. 24 ), Noa h (Ge n 06 :09), Abra ham (Gen 17: 18; 20: 17; 22:03, 09). Abimelech (Ge n 20:06). Jacob (Ge n 27:28 ; 35:07; 48: 15), Moses (Exo 0 3:06 , II , 12. 13; 19:( 3), the Israeli tes (E xo 11'1 :12; 19:17 ; 20:20. 21; 24: I I ), Salaam (Num 22 :10: 23:27) and G ideon (Jd g 06: 36, 39). Hutitohim is not me nt io ned in c o nnect io n wi th Neb uch adn ez zar. hu t Neb uch ad ne zz ar d id see " Watc hers" and " Holy One s" (Dan 04 :1 7 [Dan 04: 141).

Malenal com direlbs autcrars

257

The Jewi sh Trinity Plural 19 (Ge n 35:07): The narrato r, Mo ses, sa id: [A li I the G od s [ haE/ohi m ], the y appe ar ed [p lural ve rb] to hi m [Jacob ].. , (Gen 35:0 7). Plural 20 (E xe 12:36 ):

A lite ral tran slation that doc s not hide the Trinitarianism is: Yohveh gav e his people favor in the sight of the Egyp tians, and they [ Yah l'eh ] caused them [the Egypt ians] to g ive. and thu s they [ Yllhl'eh ] plundered the Egyptians ( Exo 123 6). Ya/weh said elsewhere that he would ca use the plunde ring me ntion ed in Exo 12: 36 (Ge n 15:1 4; Exo 03:2 1-22; 11:03: 12:36). Othe r indica tors that persons o f Yahl'eh arc the subjec t of Exo 12:36 arc the me ntions of " Yahl'eh Elohim" (Exc 09 :30). Yil hl'd l Efohim refe r to the Father and Son. as is d isc ussed in the ch apter on Hebre w co llective plurals . Also , the form " [All) the Gods [haElohim )," meaning the Tr inity. is mentioned often in co nnect io n with Egypt and the Exod us (Oen 4 1:25, 21:\, 32; 45:08 : Exo 0 1:17, 2 1: 02 :23; 03: 01 , 06,11 , 12, 13; 04:20,27; 14:19; ISa 04 :08 ; lCh 17:2 1). Nehemiah spoke of Ya llr eh in co nnect ion with the Egyptians and the Exodu s (Nch 09 :09 -1 2). In the same c hapter that Nehemiah referred to Yahreh as " IA lI ] the God s Ihat.;/ohim )"' ( Neh 0 9:0 7). and as "you-he" (Neh 09:06-07 ), the L XX has a plural verf referring to Yahl'eh : These are the Gods thai brou ght [plural ve rb] us up ou t of Egyp t (LXX Neh 09 :18). The Hebrew verb form of sha :at that is translated "they ca used them to g ive" (Exo 12:36), is a IIip hil with a suffix. T he Hip hil mood gi ves a verb a ca usati ve se nse, and the suffix: g ives the object of the verb. Examples of othe r Hiphil verbs wuh suffixes are "th ey ca used him to drin k" ( 1Sa 30 : I I ). "ido ls caused them to st um ble (e rr)" (Je r 18:15 ; Amo 0 2:04 ), and " they' [t he pr ie sts ] ca use the m [the Israelites] 10 discern" (Eze 44 :23 ). Grammar note: The Hiph il of .l"h,, ·a{ wi th a th ird pe rson suffix appears twice in the OT ( Exo 12:36; ISa 01 :21:\). In Exo 12:36 the form sho uld be translated " they [Yc,h n ' h ) c aus ed the m to gtve." Similarl y, in ISa 0 1:28 the for m should be translated " I ca use him [Sa muel] to give [a lifet ime o f serv ice I to Yall reh, for his w ho le life will he g iven to Yah l'eh."' Noti ce how in the two verses. the o bject g iven, jew el ry (Exo 12:36) and "l ifet ime of serv ice" (I Sa 0 1:28 ), is spec ified nea rby the Hiphil verb. The accou nt o f Samuel's mother 's vow shows how Hannah and roh veh caused Sam uel to give h is life to rahveh (I Sa 0 1:0 1-28). Evident ly, Yah"eh was to "make good on his wo rd" (I Sa 01 :23) by giving Ha nnah oth er ch ildre n (I Sa 0 2:0 1, 0 5. 19-21) s ince Hannah had Samuel give his life to Yahw ll (l Sa 0 1:0 1-28: ISa 02 : 11). O ther pare nts also caused their c hildren 10 g ive themsel ves to Yah veh (Jdg I I: 30- 40; Jet 35:0 1-19 ). Matenal com direlbs autcrars

258

Yae l Na tan

Plural 21 (E xo 32:01, 04, 05, OS, 23): That the Israelit es told Aaron to " make us Eloh im who will go [plural verbs] before us" (Exo 32:0 1, 23 ) is c uriously similar to how Yah veh said. " My Presences. they will go with yo u" (Exo 33: 14-15). During the go lde n calf inc ident , Aa ro n said that the Israeli te s would ha ve a festi val 10 Yah l't'h (Exo 32:05 ), who was "your God s [pl ural no un], 0 b rad. who bro ught [plural verb ) yo u up OUI of the land of Egypt" (E xo 32:0 4, 08). Tha t Aaro n mentioned the feast to Yahveh, and used the plural form Elo him (God s) alon g wit h pl ural verbs. shows that Aaron was speak ing of the person s of Yah veh as Gods. Aaron was no t speaking of the single go lde n calf as gods . Besides, " [AIlI the Gods [haEloh im]" previou sly had spo ken to Aaro n (E xo 04 :27). Aaron had eaten with "[All] the God s Iha f/ ohim l" (Exo IR:12 ), a nd Aaro n had see n the Trinity o n three mounta ins du ring the g iving o f the law (De u 33:01 -02 , as was d isc ussed in the Presence s of Elyo/l cha pter). Sec Exo 32:0 1, 04 , 05. 01'1 , 23 in the Trin itarian proofs append ix fo r further expla nation as to ho w Aaron managed to connec t go lde n ca lf worship and wors hip of Yahveh, Plural 22 (E xe 33 :14 ·15): Yahveh (Ely o/l the Fa ther) rep lied. ' My Pre se nc es [Heb re w plural Panim ], the y will go [pl ural verb] with yo u, an d I will give yo u re st.' T hen Mo ses said to him [Ely o/l the Father]. ' Your Pre sences, if they [the Son and Spirit ] do not go [plura l ve rb] with us [to the Promised Land], do not se nd us up fro m he re [Mount S inai]' (Exo 33:14- 15). Exo 33; 14- 15 has s imilarities to Ho s II :0 2. Hosea wrote: As they [the Trini ty] c alled [plural ve rb] them [Israel], so they [the Trinity] went [plural verb) from them [Israe l] (Hos II :02). Exo 33:1 4- 15 is d iscussed in the Pre sence s o f Elyo n chapter.

Plural 23 (Dcu 04:07): "Coming near" (pl ura l adjecti ve) modifie s both the gods o f the na tion s and " Yall l'ell , our God : ' Moses said: What othe r nation is so great as to have their gods near them as Y ahveh ou r Elohim [G od s)... (De u 04: 07 ). T he co nte xt of Deu 04: 07 has Mose s ca lli ng Yohveh bo th " [A II) the God s [hat.;lohim ]" (Deu 04 :35. 39 ) and the "living Gods [khll.l'yim t.:lohim]" (De u 0 5:26). Je remiah supplied a parallel passage: A m I on ly [All] the God s [ht/ f /t/ him] nea rby- a n affirma tio n o f YtllH'eh. and not a Gods [Elohim] afa r off? (Je r 23:23 ). The n, in the same co nte xt, Je re miah refe rred to Yahveh as " the living Gods [khan-illl Elohim1" Ocr 23:36). Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

259

Appa re ntly, Jerem iah is allud ing to Mose s ' wr iting s s ince bot h Moses and Je rem iah have sect io ns that refer to vah veh as "[A ll] the Gods [Iwflol!imj" and as " the living Gods [khayy im Eloh lm]." Th ese sectio ns sho w that Jerem iah understood Deu 04:07 to ha ve a plural adjt': l:tivt': re ferrin g 10 Yahvch,

Plural 24 (lSa 04:07·08 ): The Philisti nes knew of the Trinity, since thcy sa id: God s [pl ural no un ) ha ve co me [xingula r ve rb]... who can deli ver us fro m the hand [singular no un] of the migh ty [plural adject ive ) [All] the Gods [ha Elohim j'! They [plura l pronou n I art': the sam e [plural prono un] [Alllt he God s [ha EJohim ] who struck [plural verb] the Egyptia ns with all kind s o f plag ues ( ISa 04 :07-08). Whe n the Ph ili stine s we re plagu ed fo r lak ing the Ark of [A lii the G od s (haE/oh lm) (I Sa 04 :04, 13, 17. 18, 19, 21, 22; 05:0 1, 0 2, 10 (twicc j] , they sa id that " the hand [sing ula r] o f [All] the God s [ha f /ohim ]" had come dnwn hea vily o n their cities (1 Sa 0 5: I I). The Philistin es knew of the persons of rahveh fro m the Abra ham and Abirnele ch acco unt, a nd from the Exod us (Cell 38:23; Num 14:14; Deu 32:3 1; Jos 0 5:0 1).

Plural 25 (25a 07:23): David said: God s [plural] we nt [plural] to redeem to himself a people . ..(2Sa 07: 23), 2Sa 0 7 begins with the Wo rd of Yah l'eh (the Son ) telling Nath an. "Th is is what ¥ahl'eh (the Father] says ..... (2Sa 07:0 4-05). Other plural references to yahveh that David recorded in 2Sa 0 7 arc : • "[All ] the Gods [haE/olrim l: ' meaning the Trin ity, is me ntioned twice in this chapter (2Sa 07 :0 2, 28), • D:wid called God " Y(lh l'eh E/ohim " (2Sa 07: 25), • Da vid sat before the Presen ces of Yohve h in the tabern acle (2Sa 07 : 18), and • Da vid used the paired pronouns "you-he" (2Sa 07 :21'0. The acco unt o f 2Sa 0 7 is re peated in IC II 17. This acco unt mentions so me of the same plural reference s to Ya/we h: " [All ] the God s IhaE/ohim l" (JCh 17:0 2, 2 1, 26), ,. Yah vch t "lohim" ( ICh 17: 16 , 17), the " Presences of Yalll'ell" (J Ch 17:16; com pare 16:( 1), and the paired pronou ns " yo u-he" ( ICh 17:26 ). Da vid's Trinita rian acco unt in 2Sa 0 7 sho ws that David belie ved YOIII'eI, the Fathe r wo uld send Yah re h the Son to be tht': God -m an Messiah. Da vid kne w ho w the Fathe r had sent the Son to rede em Israel from Egypt. After Da vid heard that the Messiah wo uld be his de scen dant and wo uld rule on David 's th rone fore ver (2Sa 0 7: 11 -29 ), Da vid recollected ho w grac iou s Yah l'e h Elohim (the Fat her and Son) were (2S a 07 :25). David notes ho w "Eloh im [plural] we nt (plural ] to red ee m to himse lf a peop le" (2Sa 07 :23 ). Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Yael Na tan

260 Plural 26 (2C h 32:14, 15):

Sennaeh erib's office rs spoke in He brew (2K i 18:28), and asked: Ho w muc h less shall your t:lohim [plura l noun ] de liver [plural ve rb] you out o f my hand" (2C h 32: 15)'! T he C hro nicle r wrote : Sen nac herib's officers spoke furthe r again st YU/II 'ch , fAIlI the Gods [lw E/ohim ] (2Ch 32:16), Also no te that f ahl'cll is called " [All ] the Gods [ha E/oII,.", I" twice in this cha pter (2C h 32: 16, 3 1), Plural 27 (J o b 35:10): Elihu sa id: But no on e says , ' Where is God s [plura l no un), my Mak ers [plural noun] ".'!' (Job 35:10 ), 1'lural21l (Psa 058:11 (BHS 057:12)): " Mos t assuredly, God s [plural nou n], they judge [plural participle) the ea rth" (Psa 058:II [BIfS 057: 12 ]). Plural 29 (Psa 149 :02): " Let Israel rejoice in his Make rs [pl ural nou n]" (Psa 149:0 2), Plural 30 (E ee 12:01): " Reme mber now yo ur creators [plural nou n]" (Ecc 12:0 1). fa /well is ca lled "[ All I the God s [haE/ohim 1" three times in this chapter (Ecc 12:07. 13- 14). E lsewhere, Solomon said that two persons tog ether were bette r tha n one alone (Ecc 04 :09-12a) , but that a cor d of three strands was best o f all (Ec c 04: 12b ). The inspi ration for this thou gh t- that three perso ns were insepar able as a three-stra nded cord, ma y ha ve been the Trinity. Plurals 31-35 (Da n 07: 18, 22, 25b, 27, and "Living Gods"): The MT wo rd translated " Most High" is the singular "Elvon" and the A ramaic wo rd translated " Mos t High" is the s ing ular l tovah. The e arlies t hint that two person s arc the Most Highs is whe n a Psalmist talked abo ut the Most High having " holy place s": The re is a rive r whose strea ms make glad the ci ty of God , the holy places [plural] whe re the MostlIigh dw e lls (Psa 046:04 ).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

261

During the first year of Belsha zzar's reig n. Daniel sa w a VIS io n where the Son of Man would inherit all nations from the Father, and then all nations would worship the Son of Man (Dan 07: 13- 14). The So n of Man vision is a prophetic parallel of Deu 32 : 0 ~-09 where the So n inhe rits Israel from the Father, Elvon , and then the Son is worshipped by the na tions and angel s (LXX Deu 32:43 ). The n there are mention s of plural Most Highs (Aramaic plural Jlyoni u) (Dan 07: 18. 22, 25b. 27). A heavenl y dwelle r said of the Most Highs: The j udge is seated and they will cause its dominion to pass away (Dan 07 :26). Th is MT readin g co ncurs with the LXX of Dan 07:05 where the Most Highs are called "they" in Creek : "they said to the second beast," Thus, it seems that all along the Father was Most High merely by the elective decisio n that the Father woul d rule all the nation s acco rding to the plan of salvation. This is discussed in the chapte r on the Song of Moses. T hus, the Father was no t Most High by virtue of his having an intrinsic qua lity that the Son and Spirit had in less measure, or lacked altogether. No w that the Father shares the rule of all the nations, he also shares the title Most High with the So n. The full title, as Mefchizedek states, is "Most High, Possessor of Heaven and Ea rth" (Cen 14:19, 22) Interestingly. John the Evangeli st wrote that God and Ycshua . the Lamb , have a single throne (Rev 22:0 1, 03). During the last night of Belsha zzar's reign (Dan 05:30). Daniel refe rred bud; to the warn ing given by the Watchers and Holy Ones who said that the Most High had given Nebuchadnezzar his throne ( Dan 05: IR), but that "they caused his glory to pass fro m him" when Nebuc hadnezzar became too arrogant (Dan 05:20). The "they" are the Most Highs (Dan 07 :18. 22. 25b, 27), who are also called Watchers and 1I0ly Ones (Dan 04 :17 104 :14 ]). Daniel's referring to a Dan 07 passage while discussi ng a Dan 05 passage (see para graph above) mighl seem anachronistic; however, Daniel saw the vision of the So n of Man in the first year of Belshazzar 's reign (Dan 07:01 ). Daniel saw the vision of the Ram and Goat in Belshazzar'« third year (Dan 08 :0 1). So Belsh azzar ruled at least three years before the Handwriting on the Wall incident (Dan 05:30). So the vision of Dan 07 occu rred before the e ve m-, of Dan 05! Though the Son had not yet recei ved the title of Most High, the Dan 07 vision told Daniel that it was a "done deal" in a metaphysical se nse. Daniel could call the Son "the Most High" ju st as we refer to the elect as "the saved" in a me taphy sical se nse. though Christians o n earth are not yet in heaven. In the same future se nse. John the Baptist's fathe r, Zechariah. referred to the Messiah as "Most High" [Luk 0 1:76; see lsu 40:03, 05, 09 in the Trinitarian proof s appendi x). Daniel's prophecy that Y('.I'h U( 1 wo uld share the title Most High with the rather was fulfilled so metime between the resurrection ami the ascension. On the day ofh is resurrection, Yeshua told the Marys that he had not yet returned to the Father (loh 20: 17). Howe ver, by the fo rtieth day after Yeshll(J 's death (Act 01 :03). Yeshua said: All authorit y in heaven a nd on earth has been given to me (Mat 28: 18). This meant Ye.I'Illlll was one of the Most Highs. Matenal com direlbs autcrars

26 2

Yae l Na tan

Paul a lluded to how the Son of Man rece ived the name Mo st High after h is resur rcction when he sa id. "The refore. God also highl y e xalted him, ami gave to hi m the name that is a bove e very name: ' in ot he r wor ds the title "Most High" (Phi 0 2: 09; see also Psa 089:27; Eph 01 :20- 23; 0 4:10 ; Phi 0 2:09- 11; Co l OI : I8-20; Heb 0 I : 04 -09: I Pe 0 3:22). During Ye,I'Illlll 's trial, the high pr iest sa id to Yc.I'hua: I charge yo u unde r oa th by the living God : Tell us if you are the C hrist, the Son of God (Mat 26:63). Yeshua respo nded : '1 AM .. .and yo u will see the Son o f Man srttmg at the right hand o f the Mig hty On e and com ing on the clo uds o f heaven (Mar 14:62 ). By this state ment Yes hua identified h imsel f as the ''I AM" who would be on e of the two Most Hig hs men tioned in Dan 07:13-28. Unde r closer inspection . Caiaphas' line o f ques tioning was no t sa id o n his o wn (Joh 11 :50 -52). Ea rlier , Peter had identified Yeshu(/ as the Son of the " living God:' and Yesh ua sa id that the Father had ta ughl Peter that respon se (Mat 16:1 6 -17 ). Caiaphas said: I charge yo u under oath by the living God : Tell us if you are the Christ. the SOil o f God! (Mat 26:63 ). As was the case wit h Pete r, the High Priest c harging Ye.l /mu o n oath hy the " living God" was a statement not sa id on his o wn (Joh 11:50 -52). The wo rds translated as "living Go d" in the OT arc so metimes the plural words "l iving Gods [£/ohilll khayyi m r' ( Dcu 05:26; ISa 17:26, 36: Jer 10: 10: 23:3 6). Interestingly. two of the " living God s" references (Deu 0 5:26: Jer 23:36) are associared with sta teme nts say ing that Yuhl'eh is " near" (De u 04:0 7; 05 :27: Jer 23: 23), and that Yahl'e" is " [All] the Gods [hll E/ohilll ]"' (Deu 04: 35, 39). Furthermo re, Deu 0 5:26 ties in wit h Deu 33:0 1-0 2 where Mose s said that at the g iving of t he law, Yahl'eh appeare d on three mo untains in fire. This is d iscussed in the Presences of Etyon chapter. Since Hagar referred to the Malek Yahveh as: "T he living one who sees" (Ocn 16: 14; see a lso 24:62; 25 :11), Ye.I'h/1ll was a pe rso n o f Yahvch " near" humans. Thu s, the High Prie st' s o ath formula men tionin g the "living Goo " lends support to Ye,I'hua's assertion that he was the " I AM," and that Yeslllla was the Son of Man of the Dan 0 7 vision who is prophesied to he one o f the two Most H ighs (Dan 0 7: IS. 22. 25b , 27). See the Song of Mo ses c hapte r for mo re d iscussion of Da n 07. Plurals 36 Usa 54 :05 ): For yo ur Maker s [plura l] are your husbands [pl ural]. Yah veh of host s [the Fath er ] is his name: and the Hol y One of Isracl jthc Son] is yo ur Redee mer; the God (the So n I o f the w hole ea rth shall he [the Son) be ca lled (ha 54:05 ). In Isa 45:18 and Ecc I I:05 , Yahveh is referred to as the creator and maker, and is called " [All] the Gods [ha£lohim]:'

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

T h e Je wi sh Trinity

263

Plurals 37 (jer 17:01 , 12): "The sin of Jud ah is writte n.. .on the horns of your altars" (Jer 17:0 1). The Hebrew suffix "yo ur" is plural. therefore, "yo ur al tars" refers 10 the Trinity' s altars. Else where it is sa id that Yah"eh has plural a ltars (Nu m 03:31; IKi 19 :10, 14). S imilarly, Yah veh said, " A glorio us throne, set on high from the beginn ing. is the place of o ur sanctuary" (Jcr 17: 12). The "our" is a Hebrew plural suffix referring to Yahwh . That the Trinity has a throne in an "o ur sanctuary" (Jcr 17:12) agrees with Jo hn's statement that the Fat her and So n have one throne (Re v 22:0 1, 03-(4).

Plurals 38 (J\lal 0 I:06 ): Yahveh said that he is "Masters." The He brew plural form translated "Maste rs"

is Adonim, not Adonai. In Mal 0 2, there is a mentio n of "Yah\'eh Efohim" (Mal 02 : 16).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Matenal com direlbs autorars

Appendix B: OT Texts That Suggest or Speak of the Deity of the Messiah

Legend Te xis marked with : • An asterisk (* ) are foun d in the Trinitarian proofs appendix . and • A number s ign (# ) are fo und in the MT plurals refe rring to Yohveh appen dix .

33 OT Texts That Suggest or Speak of the Deity of the l\1e-ssiah I) • 2) • 3) • • 4) • • 5) • 6)

• 7) • 8) •

Ge o03: 15 * Su mmary: Eve's see d is prophesied 10 defeat Satan Ce ll 111 -19* Summa ry: The Trinity visited Ab raham in the loon of three men Gen 32:24-30 >I< Summa ry: Jacob wrest led a man and sees the Pace of Cud (Peniel) Cross-referenc es: See Hos 11 :02. 12 [BHS 12:01) ; lI os 12:04 [BHS 12:05] # Num 24:07b, 16-17 * Su mmary: S alaam saw £1 Snadaai as the future Messiah C ross-refer ence: See the sec tion on Nu m 22-24 in the ch ap ter on Proto Sinaitic Trinit arianism Deu 32:08-09. LXX Deu 32:43 >I< Summa ry: Yahveh the Son inherit ed Israel from Elvon the Father. an d then the natio ns and angels are comm anded to worship the Son Jos05:13-06:05 >I< Su mmary: The Son ap peared as a man to Joshua Jdg 06:11 -27 >I< Sum mary: The Malek. Yahveh appeared as a man to G ideo n Jdg 13:02-23 '" Summa ry: The Malek. Yahveh appeared as a man to Mano ah an d h is wife, and called himsel f " Wonderful"

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

266

Yae l Na tan

• Cross-reference: See lsa 09:06 [BHS 09:05]"' 9) & 1O) 2Sa07:13 - 14: ICh 17:13-14 • Summary: O ne of David 's desc endants wou ld be an eternal king who wo uld also be the Son of fa /weh the Fathe r • Cro ss-referen ce: See 2Sa 07:23 # I I) Psa 00 2:0 2-1 2 "' • Summary: The Messiah is the Son of fllhl'eh the Father 12 ) Psa045:06-07 [BHS 04 5:0 7-mq * • Summary: The ano inted Messiah was called God [the Son] by God [the Father ) 13) Psa 068: 18 [BHS 068 :19 1 • Summary: The Son ascended to heaven in victory • Cro ss-referen ce: See Pro 30:03 # 14) Psa OS2:06-0S * • Summary: Elvon the Father told God the Son 10 go lak e his inheritance 15 ) Psa09 1:0 1,09 * • Summary: £ 1 S/llIddiJ ; would be the Me ssiah who would lake refuge in £ 1.1'011 the Father • C ross-refe re nce: Sec the sec tion o n Num 22-24 in the chapter o n Pro toS inaitic Trinitarianism 16) Psa 110:0 1.04-05 * • Summary: The Father spoke 10 David's master, the Son, who then became a priest forever 17) Pro 30:03 -04 # • Summary: The Father and Son desce nded and asc ended to heav en • Cross-referen ce: See Pro 30:03 # 18 ) Isa07; 14 >I< • Summary: T he Messiah would be tho ugh t o f as " Im manuel," meaning, "G od with us" 19 ) lxa 09:01-02,06-<17 * • Summar y: The Messiah would be called Wonderful. The Messen ger of Gr eat Coun sel (LXX), Co unselor, Migh lYGod . and the Author of Eterni ty • Cress-references: Sec BHS lsa 08:23--09:01 ,05-06 * and Jdg 13:02-23 * 20) Isa 40 :03. 05. 0 9. 10 '" • Summary: Yah ~'e11 would se nd a messen ge r to pre pare h is way and say, "Here is your God!" T hen the G lory of ¥iI/well wou ld be revealed 2 1) lsa48 :12-16 * • Summary: The Father sent the Son and Spirit 22) Isa 49 :05-06 "' • Summary: The Messiah wa s give n a God-sized task 23) Jer 23:05 -06; 33: 15- 16 >I< • Summary: Belie vers will associate the city where the Branch d ied (Jcr 33:16) with lhe Messiah , who is "Yl lil r eh [the Son], our righ teousness" (Je r 23:05-06 : 33: 15),

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

267

24) Dan 0 7: 13-27 # • S um mary: The Son of Man fif';( appeaN in Daniel a s the "Son of God " (KJV Dan 0 3:25). and as the Angel (of Yahreh) (Dan 03 :28). The Son of Ma n is predicted to inherit the nation s. He is worship ped by the nations. and then the Fathe r and Son are called the Mo st High s (Dan 07 : 13-27). • Cross-reference: See Dan 07: 18, 22. 25 b, 27 #, Pro 30 :03 #, and proph etic parallel s in Psa 002 ", 045 '" and 110 *. The Son of Man fig ure is also by Daniel' s contemporary, Ezek iel (Ezc 0 1:26-28 ). A lso. sec the d isc ussion o f the Son of Man in co nnection with Oen 0 3: 15 in the Song of Mo se s c hapter. 25) Ho s 0 I :06-0 7 '" • Summary: rahvch the Son saved Judah by se nding Yahw,h the Spirit 26) Hos 12:0 3-0 5 IBHS 12:04·061 # • Summary : Ho sea wrote that the man with whom Jacob wrestled (Gen 32 :24-30) was a person of the Trinity • Cross-reference : Sec Hos 11:02, 12 IBHS 12:0 I J: Hos 12:04IBHS 12:05 1# 27 )Amu04 :11 · 13 * • Summary: The Father calls the Son both " God" lind " Ytl hl·eh, the God of hosts ," The r ather also said tha t Israel sho uld prepare to mee t their God (the Son ), who is their creator 28) M ic 0 5:02 fEHS 0 5:0 1] * • Summary: The Mess iah wo uld be born in Bethlehem .•md the Messiah existed fro m etern ity 29) Zec 02:tl3- l 3 '" • Summary: The M alek. Yalll'eh called him self Yahveh, and twic e the M alek. Yahl'.'h said that the r ather wo uld send him 30) Zcc 11:1 2·1 3 '" • Summary: YlIhl'f: h sa id hi s she pherd ing wo uld be val ued at thirty piece s of s ilver. Yahveh said these pieces of silver would e nd up go ing to a pot ter after being tossed hack into the temple 3 1) Zec 12:](1* • Summary: Yldll'eh the Son sent the Spirit to make Israel mo urn over their ha ving pierced him 32) Zcc 13:07 '" • Summary : Yeshua sa id he was the Shepherd of Zec 13 :07 (Mar 14:27) w ho is the fellow (or " a nei ghbo r" or " an associate") of Yallrell 33 ) Mal 0 3:0 1 '" • S um mary: The Fa the r said he would se nd a messen ge r (John the Bapt ist ) o n ahead of h is Presence, the Mil/eli of the Covenant. Th is ind icates that Ytlh reh the Son became the Messiah and visited the temple (Lu k 19:44).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Matenal com direlbs autorars

Appendix C Trinitarian Proofs

Categor ies of Trinitarian Proofs PO UT

major categories of Trinitarian proofs are :

1) MT Plurals Refe rring to Yah veh

Many passages co nta in MT plurals thai refer 10 Yahveh, Th is fact is prima f ade evidence for the doctrine of Trinity'. Plural s referring to Yah l'eh arc disc ussed in the chapter 0 11 He brew collective nou ns, and arc listed in the MT plurals append ix.

2) OT Yahveh TextsApplied to Individual Persons of the Tr inity in the or and

NT That or YlIhveh texts are applied to the person s of the Trinity in the NT is prima facie e vidence for the doct rine o f Trin ity. O'I Yahl'eh texts in the NT arc disc ussed in the chapter 0 11 the NT Usc of or Yahw h Texts. the "1AM" Statements chapter, the So ng o f Moses (Deu 321 chapter, and the NT Use o f OT Yohvch Texts appendix.

3) Texts T ha t Spea k of th e Deity of the Messiah Trinitarian proofs tend to support the Biblical assert ion that the Messiah is a member of the Trin ity. Likewise. all proofs of the dei ty of the Mess iah te nd to support the doctrine of the Trmuy. Examples of lexts thai do uble as proo fs fo r the de ity of the Messiah a nd as proof of the doc trine of the Trmiry include: • Texts thai sho w that the Malt,k Yah veh was a member o f the Trinity and the future Messiah. In most Angel o f Yahwh accounts. the M ajek Yo hl'eh is referred to as God and Ya hveh (Gen 16; 21 - 22; 31- 32; Exo 0 3; 14; 23; Num 22 - 24;

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

270

Yael Natan

Jdg 0 2 (as is discussed at Jos 24): Jdg 06; 13; I Ki 19 ; 2Ki 19; and Zec 02 -03). The Ma lek vanven te xts arc d iscussed in this Trinitarian proofs appendi x. and • Te xts that sugges t or speak of the deity of the Mess iah (see the ap pend ix o n this s ubjec t). 4) General Trinitarian Proofs

These are listed in this ap pendi x (below).

General Trinitarian Proofs

Gell O/:02-Trinirarilm Proof Now the earth was formless and empty. Darkness was on the surface of the deep. God 's Spirit was ho vering ove r the surface of the waters (Ge n 0 1:02). Discussion : The Sp irit is an agent of God and is Goo. T he Spirit is a distin ct person of the Trinity. T he Spirit can be provoked (Psa 106: 33). T he Sp irit has the q ualities of a person that an impersonal force lac ks: wisdo m, understanding, co unsel and knowledge (Isa II :02), and a mind (Rom 08:27). The Spirit g ives g ifts of wisd om and knowledge If Co 12:0 R). The Spirit speaks (Act 13:021 and intercede s (Rom 08: 26). The Spirit can be tested (Al: t 05:(9 ) and grieved ( Eph 04: 30), and can be lied to (Act 05 :03-(4). In Act 05:03-04 the Holy Sp irit is c alled God : Peter said, ' Ananias. why has Sata n filled your heart to lie to the Ho ly Spirit?...You have not lied to men, but to God.' C ell O/:OJ-Trinir(lrian t' roof God said, ' Let there be ligh t.' and there was light (Gen 0 I:0 3). Discussion: If a tree falls in the woods and there is no one to hear it, did the tree make a sound? If God g ives a co mmand to create and the re is no o ne in earshot c apable o f com plying with the command, is it still a command? So the fact that God can say, " Let there be .. ." shows that a personal age nt of Yah veh was prese nt at the c reation, and that the age nt acted as o nly God can act by c reating mauer ou t of nothi ng (ex /lihi/o) . So the age nt is God alo ng with t he Father (co mpare Joh 0 1:01-(3).

Gcn 02:07-25-Trinitarian Proof Th is is the history of the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were c reated, in the da y that Yahveh Hohim made earth and the heavens (Ge n 02:04 ). Discussion : Ge n 0 2:0 1-rJ3 speaks o f the Seventh Day, Gen 0 2:04-rJ6 spea ks of the T hird Day, and Ge n 02:07-25 is an expanded account of Day S ix o f Creatio n (Gen 0 1:24-3 1). In Gen 02:07-25. the Fathe r and Son immed iatel y ca rried o ut

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

271

what they determ ined to do on D11Y S ix when they said " Let us.. ... (Gc n 01 :26). The "Yahveh DoMm" mentioned twenty times in Gen 02 -03 is the "us " mentioned e lsewhere in Gene sis (Cen 0 1:26, 03:24; 11:07 and LXX Gen 02: 18): the Father ( )'(,hl,,'II) and the So n (Elo/'im ). Ce ll 03: 15-Triniltlriall Proof I will put c nm it y bet ween yo u and the wo man , a nd be twee n your offspring and her offspring. He will bruise your head, and you will bruise his heel (Gen 03: IS). Diseu s...ion : The promi sed "offspring" or " seed" is o ne person (Gen 03: IS; 15: 18; Cal 03:16) who would defeat Satan. Someone might ask: Why did this 'seed' need to be the Son of God, the Cod-man, to destroy the works of Satan" (lCo 15:45-49; 11003:08)1 Coul d not a cres turety angel have done the same" A reaso n is that Satan seemed to have bee n in the top echelon of ange ls (Eze 28: 0 1- 19). Satan once rna)' have been at the sa me level as , or higher than. Michael . who was ca lled "one of the chief princes" (Dan 10:13 ). The archangel Mich ael hesitated to rebuke Satan, and referred the matter to God (2Pe 02 :11; Jud OI:OlJ), So it is logica l that a person of the Trinity would be the one to utterly destroy Satan's works (I Jo 03:08). Besides. the ultimate destroyer of Satan would need to be perfe ct, but Cod charges angels with error (l ob 04: 18; 15:15- 16). Satan wanted Moses' body, perhaps for targe t practice (I Co 05 :05; Eph 06 :16; lTi 01 :20), or to enshrine Moses' body in hell like the bndy of Lenin (1870- 1924 AD) is enshrined in Moscow. God. however, was determ ined to let the worms ha ve Moses' bod y (Deu 34:( 6), Michael recused hims e lf from rebuking Satan and referred the matter to Yahw h, since rahveh happened to be standing there (2Pc 0 2: 10-1 1; Jud 0 I :08-(9). The reason was that the archange l Michael might have met his match in the person of the fallen archangel Satan (Ezc 28:0 1-19 ). The two duking it o ut a lone on the spiritua l battlefield might have led to a dra w (Dan 10 :13, 2 1; 12:0 1). O n another s imilar occasio n. the Malek Yilhreh, whom the narrator called Yahn 'h (the Son ), refe rred the matter of rebukin g Satan 10 Yahveh the r ather. The Son, however, o nly referr ed the matte r to the Father after rebuking Satan him self. The reason Ya hveh the Son rebuked Satan was Satan had accused Joshua the Priest of sin. Acc using JOShU11 W11S impertinent beca use Yuhl'eh the Fathe r, who had chose n Jerusalem , had already saved Joshua as thou gh Joshua were "a burni ng stick plucked out nfthe fire" tzec tl3:(2), Saving Joshua as through from fire did not mean that Joshua was necessarily a weak Christian ( leo 03: 15 ), o r a hero uf the faith (Heb I I:32-34). What was meant was Yahveh the Father had alread y pruned Jerusalem of evildoers by various mach inations d uring turbulent times. So Ya hl'eh obviously did not save Joshua only for Joshua to be judged by Satan (Arne 03:02; 04 : II ). See the discu ssion of Gen 03:15 in reference to the Son of Man in the So ng of Moses c hapter, Matenal com direlbs autcrars

272

Yael Na ta n

Cell 06:03-T(;/I;/a(;/I11 Proof Yanveh [the Father) said, ' My Spirit will not strive with man forever, because he also is flesh; yet will his da ys be one hundred twenty years' (Gen 06:03). Discussion: The Spirit is an agent of Yahl'eh and is Yahl'eh. Cen /fI:0 7-/J-Trinitariafj Proof Discussion: The narrator. Moses, ident ified the Malek Yi/nl'eh as Yahveh, and Hagar identitied the Malek Yahl'eh as God (£Iollim) (Gcn 16:07). Gen /8- J9-1"r;nitaria/l Proof Discussion: Gcn 18-1 9 arc two related accoun ts in Genesis. so to avoid any logica l discon nects, rev iew all the notes on Oen I R-19 below. Gen I R-19 also are discussed in the Hebre w collective no uns chapter. as well as in the Presences of £/.1'0/1 c hapter. Gen /8:03-05- Trinita rian Proof Discussion: Abraham addressed three men as Adonai, literally as "Lords ... your [singu lar] sig ht [singular]" (Ge n 18:03). AdO/w i literall y means "Lords," but AdO/rai is often transla ted as " Lord," so met imes even when perso ns are bein g addresse d (Ge n 18:03 ). T his is due to the ove rly persistent belief that plu rals referr ing to Yahveh are majestic plurals rather than plural collect ive nouns. That "they answered Abraham " (Gen 18:05) shows that each of the three me n were , in fact, Lord. That eac h Lord, rather than a Lord, replied shows that e ither there was no such thing as a majestic plura l. or at least these heave nly visitors were unfam iliar with the majestic plural. T hat "they" re plied and that "they" have a singular "s ight" suggests that "t hey" we re three persons. yet one God. in other words. the Trinity. For the sake of argument. let us assume the unitarians are correct that: • The majestic plural existed in the OT, • The three visitors were a ll angels, or God and two angels. but, in any case, not the Trinity. If this were the case, the n the two ange ls would have ass umed Abrah am addressed God using a majestic plural Adonai. Thi s is especially the case since Abraham said: If now I have found favo r in yo ur [singular] sight [singular] (Gen IR:03). Similarly, Lot addresse d two persons as " Lords" (Adollai) , and "they" both answered (Gen 19:02). If the two angels were familiar with the majestic plural, o ne of the two angels wo uld have assumed Lot had addressed the other angel as "lord," but instead "they" both answered (Gen 19:02). Gen I R-1 9 s ho w th at t here was no s uc h thi ng as t he majestic plural . Trin itarian accounts such as Gen I R- 19 and the three men of ISa 10:03 served as the basis of later theological asse rtions that Yahl·eh was the Trin ity: a God of Gods and a Lord of Lords (Jos 22:22; Psa 050:0 1; lsa 26: 13; Dan 02:47; 11:36; ITi 06 : Matenal com direlbs autcrars

273

The Jewi sh Trinity

15 ; R e~' 17: 14; 19: 16), a Lord of [All] the Lord s (/wAdollim) (Deu 10:17; Psa 136: 03 J, and a God of [Alii the Gods (I",[("hi/ll) (Psa 136:02), Cell 18: 14- Tri" illlriall P roof Is anything too hard for Yahveh'l At the set time I will return to yo u. when the season comes round, and Sarah will have a son (Gen IR:1 4 ). Dtscusston: Yllhreh spoke of YlIJII'eh in the third person. Gen loS: I9-Tri/lilariall Pmo] For I [the Son] have known him. 10 the end that he may comm and his children and his household after him that they may keep the way of Yalwell, to do righteousness and justice; to the end that Yahveli [the Father] may bring on Abra ham that which he has spoke n of him (Ge n ]R: 19 ), Dtscusston: Yo hveh spoke of v ah veh in the third person (see Euse bius. I' m of of the Co.Ipel, Book Y, Chapter 9), A clear indicator that there are at least two Yahl'ehs in Gen 18-19 is that one Yahveh said that he would go down to Sworn, and then two of the three (Gen 18: 02.22; 19: 12) men went toward Sodom. Meanwhile. Abraham remained standing before ano ther person called Yahveh (Gcn 18:21-22), La ter, a perso n calle d Yahveh is mentioned as being in heaven a nd a person called vahveh is mentioned as being in Sodom (Ge n 19:24 ), If o ne accepts the logical co nclusion that there are at least two Yah l'ehs in Gen 18-1 9. then it a lso makes se nse to concl ude that the three me n who visited Abraham were the Trinity. This especially makes sense consider ing the extens ive a mount of Trinitarian evidence there is in Genesis. Cell 19:24-Trinilllria ll Prrmf Then Yahveh [the Son and Spirit] rained on Sodom and o n Como rrah sulfur and tire from Yllhl'l'h [the Father) out of the sky (Ge n 19:24) , Dtscusston: Two Yelhl'd,s are mentio ned in Gen 19:24, Ce ll 2J:OI-02- Trinilarillll Proof r I] ranven visited Sarah as he had said, and [21 Yahveh did to Sara h as he had spoke n, Sarah conceived, and bore Ahraham a son in his old age, at the set time of which [31 God had spoken to him (Gen 21:01 -02). Discussion: T hree times the narrator. Moses, referred to Yahl'CII 's pro mises abou t Isaac's birth in Ge n 15-1 8, T he Hebrew verbs in Oen 21:0 1-02 that a re used 10 say that Yahl'l'h spoke three times are amar. and davar (used twice), This sugges ts that three persons named YlIhl'eh predic ted Isaac's birth. Cell 2 J:17-20-Trinilaritm Pmof Dtscusston: T he M elle k Yohveh said that he wou ld make Ishmael into a great nation-some thing thai only God is able to both promise and do .

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

274

Yael Natan

Gen 22:01-18-Trinitaritm Proof Discu ssion: The Ma lek Yahveh spoke using first person speec h (for example, " I," "me" ) whe n he said thai Abraha m feared God, beca use Ab raham did not withhold Isaac from "me" (Gen 22:11-12 ). This sho ws that the Ma lek Yohveh is God . a nd that Abraham was sacrifici ng to the Malek Ytlh l'eh . Abraham's "fear" of the Mlilel.: Yahveh included how Abraham knew thar the Son had the power to raise Isaac from the dead (Joh II :24; Ileb I I:19 ). Abraham knew that the Malek Yahve h would resurrect Isaac. if necessary, because of the prom ise that the Messiah would co me from Isaac's seed (Ge n 17:19. 2 1: Heh I I: 19 ). T hat is why Abraha m was able to tell his se rvants "we will re turn " from Mount Moriah (Ge n 22:05 ). Gen 22: I6--Tr;lIitliriall Proof 'I have swo rn b)' myself, ' says Ya hl'eh [the Fathe r], 'becau se you have done this thing. and have not withheld yo ur son, your onl y son.. .' (Ge n 22: 16), Discu ssion: T he Malek Yahveh, who elsewh ere is ca lled Yahrell and God, is a distinct person from Yahvch the Father. That the MIlIek v ah veh is a distinct person is why he was able to quote fa lH'ell the Father in the third person, Cell 26:02-05. l4-Trinitarian Proof Discussion: Yt,h w:h the Father appeared to Isaac, blessed him, and said that he would confirm the oath he swore 10 Abraham (Oen 26:02; see also Gen 22:16). Then Elohim the Son appeared to Isaac with the same blessing (Ge n 26:24). The patte rn of God appearing twice in success ion occ urs e lsewhere Genesis (for instance, Gen 06:112·08, 11-22; 12:0 I-OJ, 07; 3 1:03, 11- 13). God appearing twice a lso occurred out side Genesis. An exa mple is when Ytllwe ll appeared to Moses at Midian (Exo 04 :19 ) after meeting him at Mount Sinai (Exo 03). Both times Ya hl'e h told Mose s to go to Egypt (Exo 04: 19 ), God appeared twice 10 Solomon (I Ki 03: 05; 09:02; II :(9). This suggests two perso ns of the Trinity, the Father and the So n, made successive appearances. Ce ll 28: 12-22 (also 3 I: 1/·13: 32:24·30; 35:01-03. 07) -s-Trinitarian Proof Discu ssion: Eusebius wrote concerning Gen 28:20-22 that Jacob spoke of two person s of the Trinity who appeared to him (Eusebjus. Proof of the Gospel, Book V. C hapter 12). Eusebiu s pointed out thai in Gen 35:01, God spoke of God in the third person (Euscbius, Proof of the Gospel , Book V, Cha pter 12). In Gcn 35 :0 1, God the Fathe r said that God the Son had appeared to Jucob at Bethel in Gcn 28. T his interpretation is uphe ld by: • The statement of the narrator. Moses, that " [All] the Gods [fw Elohi m ]. they appeared [plural verb) to him [Jacob]" at Berhel in Gen 28 (Ge n 35:07 ). • The Malek of] Alii the Gods (ha E!ohim ) (Ge n 3 1: II ) said that he was God (EI) who appeared 10 Jacob at Bethel (Ge n 3 1:13). So Ge n 3 1: I I, 13 shows thai the

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

275

Malek Ya hl'eh was one of the persons of haElohim (" [AlI) the God s") who appeared at Bethel in Gen 2R (Ge n 35:07). • Afler Jacob built the altar as co mmanded by the Father (Gen 35:0 1). £ 1Sluuldai (the Son ) appeared to Jacob (Ge n 35: I I), and • During the time of the Judg es. Sam uel told Saul about three men making what seems to have been a Trinitarian offering to [All] the God s (hll£/o llilll) at Bethel ( ISa 10:03-04): three loaves of bread and three goat s. yet one skin of wine. The Trinity may have posed as three men in J Sa 10 as they did in Gen IS. Here are so me proo fs that the "man" with whom Jacob wrestled was Yahveh the Son: • The man with whom Jacob wrestled said that Jacob had wrestled with God (Ge n 32:28). and Jacob believ ed the man was telling the truth (Ge n 32:30) . That the divine wrestler said that Jacob had wres tled with "me n" (Oe n 32:28) means that Jacob had wrestled with the prcincematc Messiah at the Jubbok . Jaco b also wrestled with Esnu (Gc n 25:26; Hos J 2:03 ) a nd Laban (Gcn 3 1:42). • Jacob said that the man with whom he wrestled was f lohim. Jacob sa id that he saw Etoh im "fa ce 10 face" (Ge n 32:30 ). Elsewhere. Yahveh and the Ma lek Yt,h l,,'h spoke to peopl e "face to face" (EM) 33: 11; Num 12:08 ; 14:1 4; Deu 05: 04 ; 34: 10; Jdg 06: 22). • The God-man with whom Jacob wrestled c hanged Jaco b's name to Israe l (Ge n 32:28). The wrestler gave Jacob thc name Israe l. and the narrator of Kings said it was Yaln'eh (the So n) who gave Jacob the name Israel ( I Ki l ID I; 2Ki 17:34). • The narrator. Moses, recoun ted the wrestling match and the renamin g of Jacob in Gen 32. Thi s was to indicate that this same God -man wres tler appeared to Jacob at Bethel (Ge n 35:0l}- J3) . When he appeared this time, he said he was HI Shaddai (Ocn 35: II ). The Malek Yahve h was known as £ 1 Shaddoi, ju st as the Malek Ya hveh (Exo 03:02) sa id in Exo 06:03-he was known to the patri archs as £1Shaddai but not as Yalw eh . and • Hosea said that Jaco b wrestled with a Miliek (referrin g to Gen 32:24-25), and then he met the Ma lek again at Be thel (referrin g to Oen 35:09- 13). Hosea declared that this Malek was one of the persons of the Trinity who was both God and "Yahveh , God of Hosts. Yohvch is his Name of renown!" See the discu ssio n at Hos 11:02, 12 IBHS 12:011; Hos 12:04 [BHS 12:05 J in the MT plurals append ix. Gen 28:20-22-Trinitaritm Proof

Jacob vowed a vow, saying, 'If God will he with me, and will keep me in this way that I go. and will give me bread to eat, and clothing to put on, so that I come again to my father's house in peace. and Yohveh will be my God , then this stone that I have set up for a pillar. will be God 's house. Of aJ1 that you will give me I will surely give the tenth to you' (Gen 28:20-22). Discuss ion: Jacob ment ioned God three nrncs in his vo ws to God (Gc n 28 : 20-22; and see Gen 3 1:42 in this appendix). This sugges ts that Jaco b made a vo w 10 the three person s of Yohveh who appeared in Gen 28. Th is would he consistent Matenal com direlbs autcrars

276

Yael Na tan

without ho w the narrator. Mo ses. lat er sa id , "[ AlI] the God s [hII Elohim J, they appeared [pl ural verb] 10 him [Jaco b]" at Bethel (Gen 35:07 ). II is worthy of note that Jacob spo ke of G od as " they" (Gcn 35 :07 ) righ t after the Father spo ke o f the Son in the third per son : Then God [the Fathe r] said to Jacob, 'Go up to Berhe! and settle there , and build an alt ar the re to God [the Son]. who app eared to yo u whe n yo u were fleeing from yo ur brother Esa u' (Ge n 35:0 1), T he An get of God (Gen 3 1: II ) wa s one o f the "they," "( AII) the God s [/Ill l:'l ohim l." who appe ared 10 Jacob at Bethe l (Ge n 35: 07) . T his fact ca n he asecrtained from the state ment of the Angel of [Ali i the Gods (I/II £lohim ) (G cn 3 1: I I, 13). The Angel said thut he was the Cod of Bethel In who m Jacob had a no inted a pillar (C en 31: 13). So C e n 3 1: I I, 13 and Gen 35:07 ta ken together are evidence both o f the Trinity and of the deity of the Malek Yahveh. The five Tri nitarian stateme nts of Jaco b are Ce n 28:20- 22, 3 1:42,32:09, 48: 1516 and 49:24-25. Gell 3/: 11-I3- Trillilllrilln Proof The Angelof Cod said to me in the dream , ' Jacob.' and I said, ' Here I am,' He sa id, ' Now lift up your eye s, and be hold. all the male goats which leap on the flock are streaked. speckled, and grizzled, for I have seen all that Laban does to you . I am the Cod o f Bethel, whe re yo u ano inted a pillar. where yo u vo wed a vow to me. Now arise, get OUI from this land, and return 10 the land of yo ur birth' (Gen 3 1: I 1- I 3). Discussion: Thc MIlIt'k of [All] the Gods (I/11 £lohilll ) sa id that he was God (E f) and one o f the person s who appeared to Jaco b at Bethe l. T his is d isc ussed al Gen 28:12-22 in this appendix. GCIl 3 1:4 2-Trinitarian Proof Unless the God of my farber. the God o f Abra ham, and the fea r o f Isaac, had been with me , surely no w ) 'OU wou ld have se nt me away e mpty. Cod has see n my afflictio n and the labo r of my hands, and rebuked yo u last night (Gen 3 1:42). Dtscusston: Jaco b mentioned God three times in his vows to God (Ge n 3 1: 42 ), as he did in Gen 28:20- 22 . Gen 28:20 -22 is discu ssed in this appe ndix. Jaco b me ntioned the word s "Elohim of my father" ( Gen 3 1:42). The "fathe r" ma y refe r to Abraham as "fathe r" doe s in Gen 32:09, or the "father" may refer to Isaa c. Eithe r way', Gc n 3 1:42 is still Trimranan. Here arc two poss ible interpret atio ns of Jacob' s oath invoc atio n: • The God o f my father Ahraham , the C od o f my fat her Abra ham, the Fear of Isaac , or • Th e Cod of my father Isaac, the Cod o f my father Abraham , and the Fear of Isaac.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity Jaco b may be diffe rentia ting t he t wo persons of the Trinity that Abrah am se rved, the Malek Yaln'ell (Oen 22: 12) and Elvon the Father (Oen 14 :1&, 19, 20, 22). Remember that Abraham did say: Gods (f lohim ]. they caused me to wander (Oe n 20: 13). Other wise. Jacob is diffe rentiat ing the two persons of the Trinity that Isaac se rved. Yahveh the Father (Gen 25:21; 26:02) and £ 1Slwddai (Gen 28:03). The five Trinitarian stateme nts of Jacob are Gcn 28:20-22. 3 1:42, 32:09, 48:1516 and 49:2 4-25. Cell 31:09-Trilliwrial1 P roo f Jacob said, 'God of my father Abraham . and God of my father Isaac, Yohvch, who said 10 me: Return to your country. and to your relatives, and I will do you good (Gcn 32:(9). Discussion : Jaco b prayed to the three mem be rs of the Trinity. who m Jaco b called floMm, flolrim. a nd rahveh. The five Trinitarian stateme nts of Jacob are Oen 28 :20-22, 3 1:42, 32:09, 48 :1516 and 49:24-25.

Ce ll 31:14-30-Trinilan"an Proof Discussion: See Gen 28:12-22 in this appendix. Cell 35:01·03, 07 -Trinilorian I'mof Discus...ion: See Gen 28:12-22 in this appe ndix. Gcn 48: 15-/6-Trinilarian Proof Discu ssion: See the sec tion in the Hebre w co llective no uns c hapter t hat discusses how the re petition of Elohim indicates persons. Cell 49:24·25-Trillilaritm I' rmif Disc uss io n: Ja cob men tioned the three pe rsons of the Tr inity whe n Jaco b blessed Jose ph. The logical divisions of the blessing each mentio n one person of the Trinity. In the KJV translation. these divisions ju st happen to be introdu ced by the word "by,' Here is an ab brev iated vers ion of the KJV rendering: .. .by. .. the Mighty O ne of Jaco b.. .by the Elohim of your father ... b)! the ShadJoi. Here is an imerpre tanon of Oe o 49: 24-25 us ing the KJV translation . Jacob said .. . ... by the hands [the Son and Spirit] of the Mighty O ne [the "ather ] of Jacob; (from thence is the Shepherd (the Son ], the Stone [the Son] of Israel), eve n by the Elohim (the Spirit] of yo ur father ... by the SlwdJoi [the 5001 (Gcn 49:24-25 ). Jacob differentiated the two pen;ons of the Trinity that he served when he said, "by the Migbty One of Jacob" (Ge n 49:24) and " by the Hlohim of your father" Matenal com direlbs autcrars

278

Yael Na tan

(Gen 49:2 5). lI ere Jacob is saying. "By God the Father. . .by God the Spint' (Gen 49:24-25). Thi s imerpretation is supp orted by: • The many Trinitarian proofs of Genesis, • The statement of the narrator, Moses, that "[All] the Gods [haElohim ], they appeared [plural verb) to him [Jaco b]" ut Bethe l (Gen 35:07), and • The we ight of Jacob's five Trinita rian statements: Gen 211 :20-22, 3 1:42, 32:09, 48: 15-1 6 and 49:24-25.

Exo O.t02-l8-Triniwrilm Proof The Angel of Yah",..h appeared to him in a nam e of fire out of the mids t of a bush. He looked, and behold, the bush burned with fire . and the bush was not consumed (Exo 03:02 ). Muse s said to God , ' Behold, when I come to the child ren of Israel, and tell them, 'The God of your fathe rs has se nt me to you; ' and they ask me, 'What is his name?' What should I tell them ?' 14 God said to Mose s, 'I AM WHO I AM,' and he sa id. 'You sha ll tell the children of Israel this: 'I AM has sent me to you" (Exo 03: Ul. Discu ssion : In Exo 03 the narra tor, Moses, refe rred to the Ma lek Yahve h as Eloh im and as Yuhreh. In Exo 03 the Malek Ya hveh referred to himself as Elohim, I AM, and as Yahwh. The narrator placed the Ma lek Yahve h (Exo 03:02 ) righ t in the same bush as God and Yahvrh (Exo 03:04 ). Thi s meant the Ma lek Ya lll'eh was Yah veh the Son. That both the Fathe r and the Ma lek Yahveh are named Yah veh tend s to sho w that the concept of the Trinit y is biblical. See the chapter on ProtoS inaitic Trinitarianism on these points. Yeshtltl said that he is "I AM " (Joh 08:24, 28, 58 and e lsew here). It see ms significa nt that Ya lll'dl said, " I AM" three limes in Exo 03 :14. and Yf .I'!llIl1 sa id HI AM" three limes in Joh 08. Also, Yeshlla's me ntion of saying, "I AM," is repeated three limes in the narranve of his arrest (Joh 18:05.08 ). This helps 10 identify Ye.~ hlw as the person of ranven who said, "I AM" in Exo 03: 14. Sec the discu ssion on the '" AM" stateme nts in the "~ I AM" and the Song of Moses chapters. Exo 06:01-0 j-Trill i/tlrilm Proof God spoke to Moses. and sa id to him . 'I am Ya/n'fh; and I appeared to Abraham. to Isaac, and to Jacob. as God of Mighty Ones; but b)' ruy Name, YlI h ~'e h, 1 was not known to them ' (Exo 06:02). Discu ssion : The Malek Yahveh (Exo 03:02) later mentioned in Bxo 06:03 that the patriarchs did not know him as Yll hrd l. but they did know him as £ 1 Slw ddai. Readi ng Ge nesis with 1:'1 Sh addlli's stateme nt in mind re veals thai the M(lld Yahveh was known as £1 Sh addai, and that only the narrator. Moses. knew the So n to be Yahveh, The patri archs knew the Son as the Ma lek Yah vch and as £ 1Shcukla i; bUI not as Yah ven the Son. O nly the Father was known as Yahveh , See the Proro-Stnaittc Trinitarianism c hapter.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

279

Exo 06:08- Tril1i/llria/1 Proof I will bring you into the land that I swore to give to Abraham, to Isaac. and to Jacob; and I will give it to you for a heritage: I am Yohl'eh (Bxo 06:08), Discussion: Yah veh the So n sw ore with uplif ted ha nd. wh ich s ugge sts that Yahveh the So n was swearing with Ya/well the Fathe r in heave n as a witness (Ma t 23:2 2 ). The Malek rah veh later said that he swore 10 the forefathe rs to bring Israel into the land o f Can aa n (ldg 02:0 I-04 ). H :2J -22; I4 : J9-24-Tr;I/ilorian Proof Discussion: Yahl'eh was in a pillar (Exo 13:21-22; 14:19-24 ). The fa ct Ihal the pilla r moved from the vang uard to the rearg uard w hen necessary (Exo 14:1 9-24) suggests that there was only one pillar. The pillar changed ap pearance. whic h fact might mislead peop le to think the re were sepa rate pillars . The same pillar was a cloud by day and a fire by nig ht [Exo 24:15-1R, 24: N um 09 : 15-16). T hat the pilla r co uld c hange appearance is de mon strated by an incid ent that happened a t nigh t. The pillar appeare d a s fire on one side, but as a dark cloud o n the other side (Exo 14:19-20, 24). Mose s wrot e: Then the M al ek of [All] the God s [IIII£lohil/l ). who had bee n tra veli ng in fron t o f Israel's army. withdre w and we nt behind the m. T he pillar of clo ud 111.1 '0 mo ved from in front and stood behin d them (Exo 14:19 ). Vario us translations o f Exo 14: 19 h inclu de the word "a lso " (LXE . RSV. NI V). The "also" indic ates that the MI licI<. Ytlh l'cll (Bxo 14:19a) is a se parate ent ity fro m the pillar (Exo 14:19b), This wo uld agree with how Isa 52:12 see ms to speak o f two di vine perso ns: Ya/II'ell (the Father) is sa id to be the van guard and the God of Israel (the So n) is the rear gu ard. In Exod us the Fath er was not the pill ar itself since the Fat he r ca me dow n and tal ked to Moses from within a clou d. but not "as" the clo ud (Exn 24: 16; 34: 0 5), T he Fathe r was no more the pillar itself th an the Mal ek Yohvch was the burning bush from within whic h the So n spoke (Ex o 03:(2). S imila rly. during the Transfiguration the Father was the voice. a nd neit her the Father no r the Son were a cloud. The Son is d esc ribed as being the spiritual rock du ring the Exodu s ( ICo 10: 04 ; al so see I Pe 02:0R). The Exod us pillar was Yalll'eh (Bxo 13:2 1-22; 14:19-24). Since , howeve r. the pilla r was neithe r the Father nor the So n, the pillar must ha ve been the Spirit. The ch apter on the Presences of EJw ln di scusses the seve ral times the Spirit ap peared as a pillar or cl oud , including Exo 34, Isa 06 , and at the Transfiguration . [VI

Em J5:26- Trilli/llrilll1 Pf/HI! ' If yo u will d iligently listen to the voi ce o f YIII" 'eh yo ur God, and will do th at w h ich is right in hi s eye s, and will pay anen t io n to his co mmand ments. and keep all his statutes, I will p ut no ne of the disease s o n you that I have put o n the Egyptians: for I am Yohveh who hea ls yo u' (Exo 15:26).

Malenal com direlbs autcrars

280

Yael Na tan

Discu ssion : Yahl'eh spoke of " Yahreh, your God " in the third person , Ew 10:07, 1O·/ 2- Trillita ricm Proof You shall not take the Name of Ytdll 'ell your God in vain, for YI.I/H'eh

will not hold him guiltkss who takes his Name in vain (Exo 20:(7). But the seventh day is a Sabbath to Yalll'eh your God. You shall not do any work in it, you, nor yo ur son, nor your daug hter, yo ur man- servan t. nor your maid-se rvant. nor your cattle, nor yo ur stranger who is within your gates; I I for in six days Yah veh made heaven and eart h, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day; therefore Yohveh blessed the Sabbath day, and made it holy. 12 "Honor your fa ther and your mother that you r days may be long in the land that Yahveh your God gives yo u (Exo 20:10- 12). Discussion: Yohveh spoke of Ya ln'('h in the third person. See Eusebius. Pro of of the Gospel , Book V, Chap ter 16. Exo 22:27 LXX { ElIfoIli.I'h 22:28{ -s-Tri nitarian t'roof

Dtscu sston: Moses wrote. "Do no t blaspheme the Gods. .. " (LXX Exo 22:2 7 [English 22:28 1). T he Hebrew translated "Gods" is " F:lohim," a nd the LXX Gree k is theoi (Greek plural meaning. "Gods"). See the chapter on Hebrew collective nouns. and es pecially the Song of Moses chapter for more discussion of this verse.

Exo 23:20·2 / -s-Triniturian Prlmf ' Behold, 1 send an Angel before you. 10 keep yo u hy tbe way, and to bring you inlo the place that I have prepared. Be watchful because of his prese nce. and hearken to his voice , rebel not against him, for he bears not with your transgression, for My name [is] in his heart (Exo 23:20-21 ). Discu ssion: The Ma lek Yu lll'eh has Yilh l'ell' s Nam e in him . The Father referred to "the M alek with his Name in him" as "God" (Exo 23: 19, 25 ). This parallels ho w the Father twice ca lled the Son " Goo" in the Psalm s (see Psa 045:06-07 and OR2: 06-08 in this appendi x). The early NT C hurch understood Ye.\ lI/ia 10 be Yahveh the Son and the Ma lek Yah l'(,h with Yah re h 's Name "in him" (Exo 23:2 1), Many mentions are made in the NT ofvthe Name of Yeslllw" (Act 02 :3R: 03:06, 16; 04: 10, 1R; 05:40; OR: 12: 09:27; 10:48; 16:18; 19:13; 26:09; Phi 02:10). In Act 05:40-41 the Name of Ye.l h,w is called "the Name" (sec also 3Jo 0 1:07). Ye.I !llw made a statement that sounds likc so mething Israel's protector. the Angel with Ya lw eh ' s name, would sa y: I will rem ain in the world no longe r. but they arc still in Ihe world. and I am co ming 10 you. Holy Father, protect them by the power of your name- the name yo u gave me- so that they may be o ne as we are o ne (1oh I7: 11). Ye,I'/lUU mean s. " Ya!ll'elt saves" (Mat 01 :21; ITi 01:15). So, like the Angel with Yaltw ll's Name " in him" (Exo 23:21), the name YalJwh is " in" the name Yeslllla as well as "in" YCShUll (Exo 23:2 1). Exo 23:2 1 and othe r similar passag es are Malenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

281

mennone d in the discussion of the Aaronic Bless ing INum 06:22-27) that is found in this appendix.

E m 32:01.04.05.0....1. 23-Trillilliriall Proof Discussion: T he lsrachtc s told Aaron to "make us Elohim [gods ] who will go [plural verb] before us" (Exo 32:0 1, 23). The Israelite s were trying to replace the Ang el of Yahveh (Ihe Son) and the Spirit (the pillar of cloud and fire) who we nt before them as they marched out of Egypt (as was discussed at Exo 13:2 1-22; 14: 19-24 in this appe ndix). The Son and Sp irit were not with the Israelite s, bUI pe rhap s were on Mo unt S inai with Moses for forty days. It seems this was the reaso n the Israelites had lost faith and thought the Trinity and Moses had abandoned them (Exo 32:0 1. 23). That the Israelite s were trying 10 rep lace the po wer vacuum the Son and Spirit left is co nfirmed hy' the fact thai shortly after the Golden Calf incident, the r ather told Moses: My Presences [the Son and SpiritI. they will go [plura l verb] with yo u (Exo 33: 14-15 ). Exo 33: 14-15 is similar 10 the words that the Israe lites had spoken about the gods that they wan ted Aaron to make (Exo 32:0 1, 23). That the Israel ites were trying to replace the Son and Spirit with gods sugges ls thai the Israelites knew the So n a nd Spim tn he di vine persons, and members of the TrinilY. Calves wou ld have gone ahead of the Israelites as the So n and Spirit had previously, So me ancients tho ught that gods hovered above represemauons of hulls and calves. as Bernard Goldman wrote: We are accus tomed to the motif of go ds standing o n the back s of animals which beco me their vehicles , o r avatars. and come to represen t the powe r of the divine.!" The calf that Aaron made was meant to replace of the Ark of the Coven ant that was only in the planning stages at the time (Exo 25:15). The Ark of the Covenant was meant to go before the Israelites (Num 10:33; Jos 04 :07; Jos 06:08) with the So n and Spirit in the vanguard (Exo 23:20; 33:1415). This imerpretation of the lsraeluev' intentions is continued by the fact that shortly after the Golden Calf incident. the Fathe r told Moses to make the Ark of the Covenant thai wo uld he carried before the Israel ites (Deu 10 :03). Around the same lime. the Fa ther promised thai the Son and Spirit would go with Israe l into the Promised Land (Exo 33: 14- 15 l. Now, the question remains as 10 whethe r there was one calf o r two . Apparently. there was o ne calf. perhaps split in two as each ceremo ny demanded. The Israelites had asked for two ca lves. but Aaron o nly made the m one. T he Israe lites told Aaron to ma ke plural "gods," The Israelites did not intend the plural "gods" to be understood as a majestic plura l. as though they wanted Aaron to make a singular. majestic god, The above interpretation is con firmed by the Israelite s' use of the plural Hebrew verb ("Ihey [the gods] will go"), Naturally, the Israe lites wanted two ca lves to Matenal com direlbs autcrars

282

Yael Na tan

replace the Son and the Spirit. Also. Stephen used the plural fo nn 111m ; (Gree k meaning, "gods") in ACI 07:40 when he reco unted the go lden ca lf incid en t. Evidently, Aaron only half com plied with the Israelite de mand, and made o ne cal f rather than Iwo. Aaron neve r e ven called the go lde n ca lf a "god" or "gods.' Durin g the go lden calf incident Aa ron said thai the Israelite s would have a fes tiva l to Yall l't'h (Exo 32:05). who was .. .yo ur Gods [plural noun ]. 0 Israel. who bro ught [plural ve rb] you up o ut of the land of Egy pt (Exo 32:04, 08). Exo 32 repeat ed ly ment ion s " they said," meani ng that it was the erring Israel ites a nd not Aaron who spoke o f the c alf o r calves as "gods" (dohim ): • T hen they said: These are your gods, 0 Israel, who bro ugh t yo u up out o f Egypl (Exo 32:04) , • They have bo wed down to n and sacrificed to il and have said: These arc yo ur gods , 0 Israel, who brou ght yo u up o ut of Egypt (Exo 32:08),

"d • The y sa id to me , " Ma ke us gods w ho will go before us" (Exo 32:23). So Aaro n mentioned the feast to Yah ~'t'h and used the plural noun Etohim (God s) and pl ural verbs referring to rah veh, This sho ws th at Aaron spoke only o f the persons o f Ytl hl"l'h, a nd not the go lden calf, as "Go ds." After all, Mose s recog nized that Aa ron had been forced 10 do something against h is will and bette r judgme nt (Exo 32:2 1; Deu 09 :21 ). Someo ne might ask, " How did the lsraelnev syncretize the wors hip of Ytlhn 'h with the go lden calf?" Becau se of the cresce nt shape o f hulls' horn s, hulls were a com mon symbol of moon gods . Cal ves do not have horn s. but archeolo g ists found a co pper ca lf at Tcli-et-Oheid wit h a c resce nt moon on its forehe ad, the sign o f t he moon god Sin, During the Byzan tine period. horses in the hubs o f zod iac ci rcles had crescents on the ir forehe ads. S in and his consorts or muses we re worshipped widel y in the Midea st including a lo ng the Nile. T he Israelites j ust happ ened to be in the Wildern ess of Sin. hence the name Sinai. Similarly, Plutarc h wrote that not far fro m Haran, a major Sin the moo n god ce nter in Syri a. the h ill where Crassus was assassinated was c alled "Sinnacu.vv" Sinas i G und uze wro te tha t dose to Haran was a pla ce ca lled. .sanamsin, " the ido l o f Sln .?" Perhaps the Desert of Zin (mea ning. "flat"] also was originally named after the moon god Sin. but the fonn of the na me may have ch anged o ver lime (Num 13: 2 1). T his see ms plausib le given the fact that Mount Nebo was named afte r the S ume rian god Nabu. and Z in and Nebo arc mentioned ju st two verses apart (D cu 32:49, 5 1). Also , Sin " the moon god was re garded as the supreme lord and o wner nOI o nly o f the co untries of Harran and Ur, but al so of the vast terri tories de scribed by the geog rap hic term Amurm ." "" Since the Israelite s though t Moses was de ad , who better to t urn 10 than the god whose pe nins ula they were in-or so Ihe) thou ght (2 Ki 17:26 ). T he Bible see ms to indicate tha t the sync retism between the moon god Sin worship and Yahvism involved walk ing thro ugh two halve s of a golde n ca lf (Jcr 34:18- 19). Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

283

So the calves may have se rved multiple purpo ses. The ce remony may have been patterned after both anc ient custo m a nd how Yohvch walked thro ugh the hal ved ca lf and other halved animals in Abram's dream (Gen 15:08-2\). A stove and a la mp ho ver ed throu gh the carcasses to fin alize a swo rn cove nant . The smoking stove represented the Father, and Yah reh the So n was represen ted by the flami ng torch. The rat her and So n wa lked through the halved calf as part of an a ncie nt Meso potamian covenant ritual to assure Abraha m that his desce ndants wou ld inherit Ca naan (Gen 15:(8). T he ceremony was done in response to Abraham's question , "0 Lord Yahve h, how can I kno w that I will gain possession of it'!" The idea behi nd the ceremony was: may the gods make me like this divided calf if I do not fulfill this oath. In later times, the go lde n cal f was used as a prop in the ree nact me nt or the recounting of Ge n 15:08 -2 1. T he ce remo ny represente d Aaro n's atte mpt to reass ure the Israelites that they would inherit the Prom ised Land. This is another reason why the Israelite s wanted the golden calves to go ahead of them into t he Promises Land , They wou ld se rve as a talisman to reassure them that the land was theirs for the taking (Exo 32:0 I ). King Jeroboam copied Aaron's golden calf ceremony to reassure the lsruclircs that they wo uld still remain in the Promised La nd. Perh aps there were do ubts because they did not worship rahveh in Jerusa lem (Joh 04: 20). Jeroboam had two calves made. Each o ne was perhaps halv ed and then walked throu gh (Jer 34:1819). Jeroboam said: Here are yo ur Gods, 0 Israel , who broug ht [plural] yo u up o ut of Egyp t. One calf was set up in Bethel . and the other in Dan ( I Ki 12:28-29), Like Aaron. Jero boam was not so much interested in introd ucing a false god, but he wanted the people to worship the persons of Yahreh at Dan and Bethel rather than in Jeru salem (I Ki 12:25-28), So Jerobo am tried to mimic the temple worship at Jerusalem (I Ki 12:28-33). Just as in the case of Aaron's calf (Exo 32:06; ICo 10:07). the wors hip at Dan and Bethel immediately degenerated into crude. pagan idol worsh ip (2Ki 10:29 ; 12:30: 2Ch 13:08 ). The Samantans also had rites that include a calf that, apparently, was ha lved. Thi s would ex plain why Hosea mentioned "calves: ' but then refers to the calves using the singula r " it"; T he peop le who live in Samaria fear for the [literal trans lation] calves of Beth Aven . Its peop le will mo urn over it. and so will its idolatrou s priests, those who had rejo iced over its splendo r, because it is take n from them into exile (Hos 10:05 ). Num 06:22 -27-Trillitu I"iall Proof Dtscusston: The Aaromc Blessing was given so that the priests could put the Name on the peop le by me ntionin g Y(lhrcll's Name three times. In the follow ing

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

284

Yael Na ta n

passage, the Ponim, mea ning, " Face s" or " Prese nces;' refer to the Son and Spirit. Yahreh said: Th is is ho w you sho uld bless the childre n of Israel. You shall te ll them: ' Yah veh [the Father] bless ) 'OU, and keep yo u: Y ahveh (the Father) ma ke his [the Father's] Face [Pil l/ i lll, the Spirit] shine on yo u. and be gra cious to you; Yahveh [the Fatherl turn his [the Father's l Pace [Panim. the Son] toward you, and give yo u peace.' So shall they [the priests ] put my [the Father's ] Name [ Yclhl'eh J o n the c hildren of Israel ; and l ithe r athe r) will bless the m (Nurn 06: 22-27). The Tr initar ian interpret ation o f the Aa ronic Blessing -that three perso ns have one singular Name , Yahl'eh , is a fact reflec ted in ot her passages such as: • Yah l'eh the Father told Moses that the M a lek Yahveh (the Son) has his Name in him (E xo 23:21), • David me ntioned God as the subjec t of three verbs: o May God [the Father] [ I ] be gracio us to us and 121ble ss us and 13 J ma ke his [the Fathe r's] r aces [the Son a nd the Spirit) shine upon us (Psa 06 7:0 1), • David me ntioned God three times as the subject o f two instances of the ve rb "to bless": o God [the Fathe r]. God [the So n]. will bless us. God [the Spirit] will bless us (P sa 067:06-(7), • Da niel me ntioned Lord (A donu i) three times, God (Elohim) once , and Dan iel mentio ned the singular Name once: o 0 Lord [the Fathe r], listen ! 0 Lord [the So n), forgive! 0 Lord jthc Sp irit], hear and act! l-or yo ur sake, 0 my God [the Trinity], do not delay, because your cit y and your people bear yo ur [sin gular] Nam e (Dan 09: 19), • Jeremiah ment ioned the phrase the "Templ e of Yfl hl'eh" three times (Je r 0 7:04). and then the te mple was said to bear the Name o f Yahvc h (Je r 0 7:10), and • Ye.\'huil to ld the d isciples to baptize in the sing ular Name of th ree persons, the Fathe r, So n and Spirit (Ma t 28: 19 ). Thi s is in keeping wit h how O T bel ie vers, incl uding infa nts, had the Name ca lled ove r the m d uring the Aarouic Blessing (Num 06 :22-27 ). Toda y, even c hurc hes that do nor baptize infants . or baptize in the name of Ye,lhllll (Ac t 0 2:38; 08: 16; 10:48 : 19:0 5), rather than using the Ma t 28:19 for mula. oft en usc the Aaron ic Blessin g as a benediction Also. other scr iptures mention. " I AM:' three times (E xo 0 3: 14; Joh 08: 24. 28, 58). and the se are re ad to the co ngrega tion. Thus the Namc is named thrice over children. So Paul's wo rds hold true conc erning all believers: For this reaso n I knee l before the Father, fro m whom his whole family in heaven and o n eart h deri ve s its [singu lar] Name (Eph 03: 14 ). The above points d iscuss the three mentio ns of Y ahveh and the singular Name in the Aaronic Blessing. For a d iscussion o f the two men tions of "Face' (Pal/im ) in the Aaronic Ble ssing, see the Presenc e s of Etvon chapte r.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

285

Num 22-24-Trinittlriw l Proo f Discu ssion : See the section o n Nurn 22-24 in t he chapter o n Proto-Sinai tic Trinitari anism. Deu 32:08- 0 9. LXX .12:4.1-Trinirarian Proof Rejoice, ye heavens, with him , and let all the ange ls of God worship him : rejoice ye Gentiles, with his people, and let a ll t he so ns of God strengthen themselve s in him : for he will avenge the blood of his sons, and he will render vengeance, and recompe nse justice 10 his e nemies, and will reward them that hale him : and the Lord shall purge the land of his people (LXX Deu 32:43). Dlscusslon: A text that sugge sts or speaks of the deity of the Messiah shou ld be considered a Trini tarian proof. In Deu 32:0S-09, Yahveh the Son is depicted as inheriting brae I from the Father, who is Elw!II, the Most High. Afte r b rae I abandons Yldll'eh , the gospe l is preached to the nations 10 make Israe l jealous (Deu 32: 16. 21). T hen, according to the MT Hebrew of Deu 32:43, a ll the natio ns join Israel to praise Yahve h the Son. In the LXX of Deu 32:43, ho wever, the ange ls and nations are to rejoice along with Israel, and all arc commanded to praise the Son. Since parallel verse s shou ld be taken into co nsiderano n. a verse similar to LXX Deu 32:43 is the LXX and the Synac versio ns of Psa 097:07: ... . .worship him. all )'ou his ange ls." A prophetic paralle l to Deu 32:08-119 and LXX 32:43 is the So n of Man vision ( Dan 07:13-14). Here the So n of Man inherited the nations from the Father, f lyrlll. Then the So n of Man is worshipped by the nations (Dan 117 :13- 14). Afterw ard the Son and Father are called the Most Highs (Aramaic plural lI)"oni,,) (Dan 07: 18. 22, 25b,27). Interestingly, Je remiah and the Evangelis t John wrote that the Father and So n have one throne in one sanctuary, as is discussed in the MT plurals appendix [Jer 17:12; Rev 22 :0 I. 03 -04 I. The writer of Hebrews quoted the OT phrase: "Let all God 's ange ls worship him" (LXX Deu 32:43; Heb 0 1:061. DSS 4QDT (the Dead Sea Scrolls in Cave 4) and the LXX both contain this last phrase, burt he MT omits the phrase. T he writer of Hebrews views the "him" in the LXX and the DSS versio ns of Deu 32:43 to be Yahveh thc Son (Hcb 01 :(6). This sugges ts that in the parallel verse, the "him" also is the So n: ... worship him, all you his a ngels (LXX. Syriac Psa 097:07). The co ntext of a verse sho uld always be take n into co nsideration. Two verses after Heb 0 1:06, the writer of Hebre ws con siders the "God" in Psa 045 :06-07 [BHS 045:07-(18) to be God the Son (Heb 1l1:IlS-09). This poi", is discussed further at Psa 045:06-07 [BHS04 5:07 -11S] in this appendix. The fact thatthe Greck verbs "rejoice" and "worship" arc impe ratives suggests that the Father is commanding the ange ls, since a prop het would not co mmand ange ls. Also, no mere human has a voice that could carry a co mmand thro ugho ut the heaven s and earth (De u 04 :36; Isa 06 :118; 24: 15- 16; Heb 12:26).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

286

Yael Na tan

De u 33:01 -01- Trini/a ritm Proof This is the blessing that Moses the man of [All] the Gods 1/1lIt.:/ohim ] pronounced on the Israel ites before his death. Yahveh [the Father] came from Sinai. and [the So n] dawned o ver them from Seir: he [t he SpiritI shone forth from Moun t Puran. He [the Father) came with myriad s of holy ones from the south. from his [the Father"s] mounta in s lopes (Deu 33:0102). Discus sion : IAII] th e Gods (lIlI Elohim) . t he Tr ini ty, a ppeared on three mountains durin g the giving of the law. See the discuss ion of this text and other related te xts in the Presences of £ /)"0 11 chapter.

Deu ss. 27- Trilli/arial1 Pmof The e terna l God [the Father] is [Israe l's ) d welling-place. underneath are the everlasting arms [the Son and Spirit]. li e [the Father] will drive out the enemy from befor e you. saying [to the Son and Spirit]. 'Destroy ! [the e nemy]' (Deu 33:27). Discussion: Moses spoke of how the Presenc es would accompany Israel into the Promised Land . The eternal (the Hebrew is qeJ"m ) f ather is cal led the eterna l (the Hebrew is olam) God (Gen 2 1:33). T he Father commanded the eternal (the Hebrew is otam) arms . the Son and the Spirit, to destroy the Canaa nite settlements so that Israel could occupy the Promised Land . So the So n a nd Spirit. who are the eternal (olwn) arms. are as eternal (olam) as the Father is eternal (otw n). Thi s text is discu ssed further in the Presences of Eiyon chapter. Ios 05: /3-()(j:05- Trinill,riall I'mo/ Discuss ion : Exo 03-06 is similar to Jos 05 :13---06:05, The Malek. Yah l'eh told both Moses and Joshua to take off their sandals because his presence made the surro undings holy (Exu 03:05; Jos 05 :15). Though the Ma lek. Yah l't'h was Ya hl't'h (Exo O]:(M, 07 ,14-16 , IS; Jos 06:02, OS). the Malek. Yoh veh distinguished hims elf from Yah l'eh the Father (E xo 06:03; Jos 05:14 - 15). This show s that there arc persons called Y(/h ~'l'h , The narrator also wrote: Seve n priests carried seven trumpets before the Prese nce of Yahveh (Jos 06:(8). Thi s passage refers to the commander of Ya hl'eh\ armies (l os 05:1 4-15 ) as the Presence of Yah vch, a person se parate from Yah veh the Fath er. Clearly. Jos 06:02 is a con rinuution of the sa me conversation between JOShU11 and the M alek Yah"eh started in Jos 05: 13-15 , T he c hapter divis ion between Jos 05-06 is clearly misplaced. Othe rwise, the comm ander of '1u/ll ,,,h ' s armie s appea red in Jos 05 for no reason, and had no substantive message for Joshua! So Jos OS: 13-06: OS appears 10 buttress the Trini tarian interpretat ion of the parall el sectio n. Exo 03-06.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

287

l ns 14: 19- Trini/arian Proof Josh ua said to the people. You ca nnot serve Yo llI'ch; for he is a holy God ; he is a je alous Go d; he will not fo rg ive )'OUr disobedience nor your sins (Jos 24: 19 ). Discus si on : Jo shua referred to ranvcn as " ho i)' [plu ral adj ec ti ve ] G od s [t'lohim]" (1os 24:19) . If Joshua were a unitarian warning the Israel ites agai nst having man y gods . it wn uld he co unte rprod uct ive to use a majest ic pl ura l to call Yllh ~'e h "holy [plural adjective ] Gods [Eloh im]:' Th is is es pec ia lly the case conside ring the fact that ea rlier, the Transjordan tribes seem to ha ve ca lled upo n the Father and Son as the Mo sa ic mi nimum of two co nc urri ng witne sses. T he Tra nsjordan tr ibes sa id: The M ight)' O ne , Go d. Yah reh [the Father}' The Might)' O ne , God. Yohvch [the Son]! He knows (1os 22:22), Joshua matter-o f-fact ly mentio ns there are pe rsons o f rehveh, Thi s is beca use the Ma lek YlIhl'eh , who is o ften identified a s YlIhl'eh and Go d. had ju st appe ared and said that he was no longer planning to d rive out the Ca naanites (1dg 0 2:0 1-(4 ), That Jos 24: 19 and Jdg 0 2:0 1-04 desc ribe the sa me eve nt can be ascert a ined when one real izes that Jos 24:28-3 1 an d Jdg 0 2:06 -10 are parallel accounts. Joshu a said: You are not able to se rve Yllhl'ch. He is a ho ly Go ds; he is a jealo us God, He will not forgive your reb ellion and you r sins (Jos 24 : [9 ). Joshua is me rely repeating how Ya lll'eh the Father had warned that the services Yahveh the Sun re nder ed we re cond itional upo n the Israeli tes ob edi e nce to the Ma lek with Yal1\'Ch's Name in him (E xo 23:20- 2 1: Jos 05 :14- 15). By saying, " You are not able to serve Yli/well" (Jos 24: 19 ), Josh ua mea nt that due to Israel 's sinfulness, an)' of God 's promise s co nd itio ned on the ir obedie nce were tem porary in nature , Joshua kne w. howeve r, that Israel's overall relatio nship 10 God was not co nd itioned on obedien ce. hut o n grace. So on the spiritual pla ne. Go d would forgive breache s until the Israelite s finally te rminated the ir relatio nship with Yahveh altogether. Jdg 02:01 -04- Trilli/aricm Proof Disc ussio ns See Jos 24: 19 in this appe ndix, since this verse d escribes the same e vent as Jd g 02 :01 -04. JdK 06: 11-27-Trinitarian Proof In the acco unt o f G ideon 's offe ri ng, the narrator referred to the Maid Yoh veh as Yah l'ell (1dg 06 :14, 16. 18, 23. 25, 27), Ya/Il'eh the Father is distingu ished from the Mu lek Yllh"ell t Jdg 06 :12) and the Spirit (Jdg 06 :34 ). The Tnni ty is ment ioned as being "[All ] the Gods [ila Elohiml" seve ral times (1dg 06:20 , 36 , 39; 07:14), These fact s make the sec tion Jdg 06 : 11 -27 thoroug hly Tr initari an, Th e offeri ng s o f Gideo n (J d g 0 6: 19 -2 1) and Manoa h (Jdg [ 3:1 5 -20) are d isc ussed in the cha pte r o n the Presences of Elyon in the sect io n o n the Lo rd 's Supper. Matenal com direlbs autcrars

288

Yae l Na tan

l dg /3 :02-23- Trini/ar;llll Proof Discu ssion: In the account of Manoah's offe ring, Yahveh the Father, the Ma lek Yahwh and the Spirit arc each dis tinguished from the othe r Od g 13:25) . Munoah jdenufied the Ma lek. Yah l'eh as Elohim (Jd g 13:22). Both the narrator (Jdg 13 : 19) and Manoah 's wife (Jdg 13:23 ) refer 10 the M alek. Yahl'ell as Yahveh (the Son ). The Trinity is mentioned three times as being " [All ] the Gods (lwE/ollim ],"' on ce by Manoah. once by his wife, and OIKe by the narrator (Jd g 13:06 , 08-(9). The Malek Yahveh calls himself "Wonderful," which is a wo rd similar to the " Wonde rful" in the prophecy of the Messiah (see Isa 09 :06 in this appendi x). Mano ah's offering is discu ssed further ur Jd g 06 : 11 -27 in this appendix.

/Sa 1O:D.t-Trini/ariclll Proof Then yo u will go on fro m there until yo u reac h the great tree of Tabor. T hree men going up to [An] the God s (hoE/ollil/l) at Be thel will meet yo u there. On e will be carrying th ree you ng go ats . another three lo aves o f bread, and a nother a skin o f wine (I Sa 10:03 ). Discussion: Dur ing the ti me of the J udge s. Sa muel lo ld Sau l abo ut th ree me n making what see ms to have bee n a Tri nitaria n offering 10 [All ] the God s (/IIIEl01lil/l) at Be the l ( ISa 10:0 3-04 ): three loaves o f bread and th ree goats, yet o ne skin of wi ne. T he Trinity ma y hav e posed as three men in ISa 10 as they did in Gen 18. ISa 10:03 is mention ed in the disc ussio n of Gen 18 :03-0 5 and Gen 28: 1222 in this appe ndix, as we ll as in the Presences of Elyon chapter. /Ki /8:24; /9:05·/I- Trini/arhl/l Proof Discus-sion: T he narrator referred to the Word o f v ah veh ( I Ki 19:(9) as Yohveh (the Son) ( I Ki 19: I I ). The Wo rd of Ya/well wa s culled the M alek Yah ve1l earlie r in the account (lKi 19:07): Yo hveh said [to Elijah ], 'Go out and sta nd o n the mount before the Presence o f ¥tlh n ·h ( the Son), for Yahveh [the Father] is abo ut to pass by' (l Ki 19:11). Thai ¥tl hn 'h spoke of Yahveh in the third person, say ing that Yllhl'eh was abo ut 10 pass by, sho ws that there are person s named Yahveh. 1Ki 19 is d isc ussed furt her in the Heb rew collective nou ns and the Presences of Elvon cha pters. / Ki 22: / IJ-14- Trinifarion Proof Dtscusston: Unitarians somenmes say that I Ki 22:19 -24 shows Yahve h is o nly a single pe rson whom a ngel s surro und. Unitarians completely miss ho w Ihe prophet Mic umh refe rred to two persons o f Yilhl't'll: Micaia h said , 'The refore, hear )'ou the Word [the Son] of Yah veh [the Fathe r]: ' I [the Son) saw Yahveh [the Father] sitting o n his [the Father 's] throne " ( I Ki 22:19). This sec tion is thoro ughly Tri nitarian since there is mention of the Father, the Word and a personal Spint.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

289

The Jewish Trinity

Job -s-Triniturian Proof D isc uss io n: See the se ct ion on Jo b in t he c hap te r o n Pro to-S martie Trinitari anism. Psotms -s-Trinitarian Proof Discu ss ion : See the section on Books I and II of the Psa lms in the cha pter on Pro to-Sinaiuc Trinitarian ism. Psa 002:02-12-Trinifwian Proof The kings of the earth take a stand , and the rulers take co unsel toge ther, against Yahn ' h, and against his anointed, saying, ' Let us break thei r bonds apart, and cas t away the ir cords from us.' I will tell of the decree. Yo/well said to me , ' You are my son. Today I have become your father. As k o f me , and I will give the nations for yo ur inheri tance , the uttermo st pa ris of the earth for your possession. You shall brea k them with a rod o f iron. You shall da sh them in pieces like a potter's vesse l.' Now therefore be wise. you kings. Be instructed, yo u j udges o f the e arth. Serve Yahveh with fear. and rejoic e with trembling. Kiss the son. lest he become angry, and you peri sh in the wa y. fo r his wrath will soon be kindled. Blessed arc all those who take refuge in him (Psa 00 2:02-1 2). Dtscu sston : A tex t that sugges ts or speaks o f the deit y o f the Messiah sho uld be co nside red a Trinitarian proo f. See Psu 045:116-07 [BHS 04 5:07-118] in this appendix for a d iscussio n o f Psa 00 2. P.m 022:01 [LXX 021 :O J} -s-Trinitarian Proof My God . my God, why have yo u fo rsa ke n me'! Wh y arc you so far from he lping me , and from the words o f my groaning? (Psa 02 2:01). Dtscu sston : Ye., luUI quote d Psa 022 :01 from the cross , say ing: ' EIi [the Father], Eli [the Spirit] , lama .\/Ibll d Uhal1iT that is, ' My God [the f a ther]. my God [the Spirit], wh y have yo u forsa ken me?' (Mat 27:46; also co mpare Mar 15:34 ). Psa 03.1:04, 06-Trinirarian Proof For the word of Yllhl'eh is right. All his work is done in faithfu lness ... .By the word of Yllhl'eh were the heavens made , All the host of them hy the breath of his mouth (Psa 033:04, (6). Discu ssion : The Wo rd (the Son) o f Yaln 'eh (the rat her ), and the breath (the Spiri t) o f his (the Fathe r's) mouth made the hea vens. Psa 045:06-07 {BHS 045:07-08 } -e-Trinitarian Proof Your thro ne. God , is fore ver and e ver, A sce pte r of equity is the sce pter o f yo ur kingdo m. You have loved righteo usness. and hated wickedness. T herefo re, God , yo ur God, has ano inted you with the o il of glad ness abo ve yo ur fel lows (Psa 045:06-(7). Matenal com direlbs autcrars

290

Yael Na tan

Discussion: The author of Hebrews wrote that God the Father addressed God the So n in Psa 045 [Heh 0 1:0 &.(9). The section from the Psalms quoted by the writer o f Hebre w reads: Your [the So n's ) throne, 0 God [the So n), wil1 last forever and e ver; a scepte r of justice will be the scepter o f your [the So n's ] kingdom . You [the Son] love righteousne ss and hate wickedness; therefore God [the Father], your [the Son 's) God [the Father]. has set you [the So n) abov e your [the Son's 1co mpanions by anointing you [the Son1 with the oil o f joy (Psa 045: 06-07 IBHS 04 5:07-0RI). The NT C hurc h kne w that many of David 's Psal ms were me ss ianic, and d id nol app ly to David d irectl y. If they applied 10 David ut all. it was only by way of David bein g a type o f the anuty pe, the Mess iah. For example, Peter sa id that t he prophecy about not being abandoned to the grave refers 10 the Me ssiah. but nol to David (Psa 016: I0; Act 02:27·31). Psa 045 is a Book II Psalm thai honors God (E/ohim ) the Son . Book s I and II of the Psalms are d iscussed in the chapter on Proro-Stn ainc Trinitarianism. Accord ing to the first verse, the sons o f Korah wrote Psa 045 as a royal wedd ing song. Psu 045 ascribes di vinity 10 David o nly 10 ce lebrate how David was the type o f the anuty pe, his God-man descendant (2Sa 07: 13·14 ; IC b 17: 13· 14 ). If Psa 045 we re me rely a bo ut David, the psalmist wo uld ha ve com mitted blasphemy. T he Psal m would have asc ribed divine actio ns and att ribute s and the name "God" (Psa 0 45:06 ·0 7) to a mere human king (Ac t 12:21 -23). Surely the Le vtres wo uld have torn their garment s rather than read or s ing such btasphemies (Mat 26:63·65; Mar 14:61 -( 3). During NT time s it was e ven co nsidered blasphemy 10 say one was the Son of God- much less God (loh 10:35-36; 19 :07)! Psa 002 is similar to Psa 045 in certain re spects. Though the words o f Psa 002 came to David throu gh the Spirit (Act 04 :25-26), Psa 002 was likely used at the te mple as a co ronation Psalm. The Psalm cele brates ho w David was the type of the aunty pc, his God-mall descendant (2Sa 07 ). Psa 002 portrays the Messiah as being God 's So n (Psa 002: (07 ). Psa 002 also portray s the Me ssiah as being so powerful that he could onl y be the God -man (Psa 002:12). Psa 110 is similar 10 Psa D02 and Psa 045 in certain respects. The statement, " Yahl'f' h said tom}' Master IAdO/re er' ( Psa 110:(1 ) may also have meant, "Yahveh said to my master [David]." just as Je wish rabbis assert. St ill, it was applied to David o nly in antici pation of David 's descendant. the God-man . He would one da y be a priest foreve r (Psa 110:04) and s it on the throne of Dav id foreve r (2Sa 0 7:13, 16; Mic 05:0 2 [B H S 05:0 I ]). Dav id wa s not eve n allo wed to b uild the tem ple ( l C h 22:0S), much less be a prie st forever in the orde r of Me lehizedek (Psa I lll :( 4 ). So e ve ryo ne m ust have known that Psa 110 did not apply to David, but rathe r 10 David's God -man desce ndant (2Sa 0 7:23; lI eb 05 :06: 06: 20: 07 :03, 17,2 1). David's death left no dou bt as to whether Psa 110 applied to the Messiah. since David 's bod iless so ul surely is not now acting as priest in heaven fo re ver (AcI 02:29-3 1).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

291

David himself believed that Ytdll'f'h the Father would send Yahveh the Son 10 be the God -mall Messiah. This wou ld be sim ilar to how the Fathe r had se nt the SOil to redeem Israe l from Egypt. Da vid heard from Natha n that the Messiah would be his descendant and would rule on Da vid 's th rone forever (2Sa 07:11-29). Then Dav id recollected how gracious Yah reh (th e Fat her) Etohim (the Son ) were (25 a 07: 25,. Da vid remembe red es pecially how : fi t/h im [pl ura l nou n] we nt [pl ur al ver b] 10 red ee m to hi msel f a peop le . .. (2Sa 07 :23). Th ai Dav id was Trinitarian ca n also be seen from the se verses d iscussed in MT pl urals appendix : • David twic e called God the "living Gods" [Elohim khuyyim l (I Sa 17:26. 36, as is disc ussed in the MT plurals append ix). • David's stateme nt that "Gods, the y judge [plural verb j the earth" (Psa 0 5R:I I [HHS057: 12J as is d iscussed in the MT plurals append ix), a nd • Ye.~h u{/ 's state ment: Da vid himself, speak ing by the Huly Spirit, declared: 'The Lord [the Fathe r] said tu my Mas ter [the Son)' (Ma t 22:43 ; Mar 12:36- 37; see Psa 110:0 1 and Mal 22:4 3 in this appendix].

P.\(/ 06 7:01. 06 -07- hinilurhm Pmof May God he mercifu l to us, hless us, And ca use his face In shine on us. Se lah....The earth has yielded its increase. God . eve n our own God, will hless us, God will bless us. All the ends of the ean h sha ll fear him ( Psa 067:0 1,06-07 ). Discu ssion: God is the subject of three verbs in this verse: May God [Fathe r] be gruc jous to us and ble ss us and make his [the Fathe r's ] Faces [l'tm im , the Son and Spiru ] shine upon us ( Psa 067:0 1). God is also menti oned three times as the subject nf two instances of the verb "to bless": God , our God, will bless us, God will bless us [ Psa 067 :06 -(7). Psa 06 7 and similar passages are mentioned in the di sc ussio n of the Aa ron ic Blessing. See Num 06:2 2-27 in this appendix. P.\(/ 08 2:06- 08 -Trinituritln PlY/of I said, ' Yo u are gods, a ll of yo u a re so ns o f the Most High. Nevertheless yo u shall die like men, and fa ll like one of the rulers. Arise , God . j udge the earth, for yo u inherit al l of the na tio ns' ( Psa 08 2:06-(8). Dtscu sston: Ye.\1ullI sa id thaI the j udges to whom the Word (Ihe Son) of God (the Fath er] came we re ca lled "gods" (Psa OR2:06; loh 10:34 -35). Yes/1l1t/ the n as ked: What about the one [the Son. the WordJ who m the Father se t apart as his ve ry own and se nt into the wo rld? Why then do you accuse me o f blasphemy beca use I said, ' I am God 's Son'? Uoh 10: 36 ).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

292

Yae l Na tan

So if " the Word" co ming 10 hu man j udges or rulers made them into "gods," Ye,lhlfll asked why " the Word" himsel f (Joh 0 1:01) co uld not refer to himse lf as "God"? T he ph rase "se nt into t he worl d" (Joh 1O :36 a ) is Y" Sh IW' S allu sio n to the Father 's state ment: Rise up. 0 God [the So n), j udge the earth. for all the nations are your [the Sun's] inheri tance ( Psu 082:08). So Jo h 10:35-36 is an allusio n to Psa 08 2:06 ·0 8. Ye.l'hli ll said he was God the Son (Ps a 082:08; Joh 10 :36). Psa 082:0 7, howe ver. applied 10 a ll who wou ld op pose Ye .~ hlw : Bu t yo u will d ie like mere men; yo u will fall like every ot her ruler (Psa 1182:(7). Psa 0 82:08 m ust be the Fat he r address ing the So n as "God ," si nce God the Father cannot ha ve the eart h as an inheritance , b ut only as a posse ssio n. T he Father. howe ver. ca n gi ve the ea rth 10 the Son a s an inheritance. It should be noted that the Father 's ca lling the Son "God" (Psa 08 2:08 ; Joh 10:36a) is not a unique occ urrenc e. The write r of Hebrews sa id that the r athe r el sew here called the So n "God" (ps.a 045:06·07 [BHS 04 5:07·ORJ; He h 0 1:OR) . Para llel s to Psa 1182 inelu de the prop heci es that the Father wo uld give Israel (Deu 32:08-09) and the natio ns 10 his Anointed So n (Dan 07: 13- 14). In Psa 002: 07- 12 the Father tells the So n to start the co nq uest of his inheri tance. Psa 082 is discussed further in the chapter on the She ma.

P.m 091:01, 09- Triniwrilm Proof Discussion : Due tn the dem ands o f unnaria nism, most rran slauo ns o f Psa 0 91: 0 1. 0 9 follow the LXX ruther Ihan Ihe MT recensio n. T he literal read ing of the Hebrew d istinguishes El SI1tu!d(/i (the Son as Messiah) from Yah!'eh (the Fath er): li e [a belie ver] who d wells in the sec ret place of the Most High [the Father] will rest in the shadow o f Shll Jdlli [the Son] (Psa 091:01 ), and For yo u, ruh veh [the Son], are my refuge! You ha ve made the Most High [the Fathe r) your habitation (Psa 09 1:09 ). Psa 091 is me ntioned in the sec no n on Num 22- 24 in the c hapter on ProtoS inaitic Trinitarianism. LXX P m 097:0 7- Trinitarian Proof lei all that wo rship grave n image s be asha med. who bo ast o f their id uls; wo rsh ip him, all yc his angels (LXE Psalm 97:7). Discu ssion: See the d iscuss ion o f Dcu 32:08·09. LXX 32:43, in this append ix. P.m 102:25 LXX; 102:26·27- Trilliltlr;(/1I Proof In the begi nning. 0 Lord [the Son]. you [the So n) laid the fou ndation of the ea rth; and the heaven s are the wo rks of your [the Son 's ) hands ( LXX Psa 102:25).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

293

They will perish, but you [the So n) will endure. Yes, all of them will wear ou t like a garment. You [the Son] willchange them like a cloak, and they will be cha nged. But you [the Son ) are the same. Your [the Son's] years will have no end (Psa 102:26·27 ). Discussion : The LXX version o f Psa 102:25 trans lates as: In the heg inning yo u, 0 Lord, did lay the fou ndation of the earth: and the hea vens are the wo rks of your hands. T he au thor of Heb re ws quoted Psa 102:25 LXX an d Psa 102:26-27 where Elvon, the "ather, ass ures the suffering Lord (Kurio .I·), the Son . The Father spoke wo rds of co mfort to Yeshua , who was in anguish at the end of his life. Th e Father said that just as he, Y( .I'hllll, had created the earth. so also he, Yeshua , wo uld ou tlas t the earth (Hcb 0 1:10-12). This is si milar to how the S uffering Se rva nt is co mforted that his acc users were mere mortals who "w ill all wear o ut like a gar ment. and the moths will ea t them up" (lsa 50:09). S imilar passages whe re the Son is spo ke n of as being eternal are: • The Son said tha t he is ete rnal (Isa 5 1:06 , OX), • The Mess iah is prophesied to he eternal (as is dis c ussed at Isa 09:06 [8 HS 09: 051 in this ap pendix), and • The Son tells the Father that they are e ternal (as is d iscussed at Hab OI:12 in the MT plural s appe ndix) . Psa J07:20-Tril/ilorian Proof li e sends his word. and heals them. and del ivers them fro m their graves ( Psa 107:20 ). Discussion: T he Word is a perso nal age nt of Yahl'eh and is Yahl'eh .

/',\(/ 110:0 / , 04 ·05-Trinilllrian I'roof Yl/hl'eh [the Father ] says to my Master [the Son ). ' Sit at my right hand, until I make yo ur e ne mies yo ur foo tstoo l for yo ur feet' ... . Yalll,eh [the Fathe r) has sworn and will not c hange his mind : ' You [the Son) are a pr iest foreve r in the order of Me1c hizede k. The Lord [the Spirit] is at yo ur rig ht hand. He [the Spirit I will crush ki ngs in the day of his w rath' (Psa 110:01 , 04-05 ). Discussion : Pea 110 d isting uished Ylln l'c h the Father from the Son, w ho was Davi d 's Master (Adonee) . In the NT, Ye.11I1W 'S int e rpret ation of Psa 110 di stinguishe s the Spirit from the Fath er a nd the Son. Psa 110:01 beg ins, "Yahveh [the Father ) said 10 my Master [Adol1l'I' j..... That the Adonee is div ine is suggested by the fact that the Son will be a priest forever (Psa 110:(4). The usc of Adonai and Adonee (or adoncei is discussed in deta il in the Hebrew co llective noun s ch apte r in the " Maste rs as A dona!"' section. The chapter shows ho w the plural Adonai (vrny Lord" ) is a plural of delegatio n, a co llec tive noun varia nt that indicates the Fat her had delegated author ity to the Son. The singular Adonce (" my Master" ) shows t hat the So n was the Farher'v del ega te. The Hebre w Matenal com direlbs autcrars

294

Yael Na tan

collective nouns chapter, es pecially the "Masters 11.\ IldO/w t · sec tion, shows why the following makes perfec t sense: • The Father was no t ca llcd Adm u'e (" my Maste r"], but o nly AdO/llli ("my Lord" ). The Malek. Yohvch, ho wever. is so metimes ca lled Adonce (" my Master") (Jos 05: 14: Jdg 06:13; Psa 110:01: Zec 04: 13). Likewise. the Spirit is so metimes called Adonee (" my Master") (Zec 0 1:09: 04:0 4-05: 0 6:04 ). In Psa 11 0:0 1. David spoke of the Son as Adonee (" my Master" ), just as Josh ua culled the Co mmander of Yclh reh 's Ar mies, the Son, Adan oe (" my Master") (Jos 05:14),

"d • The ser vant Eliezer called Abraham ado nai (" my lo rd") (Gc n 24:09 - 10 ). Thc same servant. Eliezer, ca lled Isaac odonee (vmy master") (Gen 24:65). It see ms thai upo n dele gatin g au thority. the fat her 's title was ele vated from adonee (vmy master") to adonai (vmy lord"). The So n was then called adonee (" my master" ). So in the ca se o f the Trinity, the Father had delegated authority to the Son, for instance. authority o ver Israel (Deu 32:08-09 is discu ssed in the Song of Moses c hapter ). So the Father was appropriately called Adnnai (vm y Lord"). and the Son was called Adonee (" my Master"). Ye,I'1llla showed that David was Trinitarian when he q uoted Psa 110:01 and said: Da vid himse lf, speaking by the Hol y Spirit. decl ared: 'T he Lord [K urio.I') sa id to my Master [Kurio.\ ]' (Mat 22:43; Mar 12:36-37). In the abo ve NT quote of the or. the sa me Gree k wo rd Kunos is used to translate two Hebrew words: AdO/w i and A donee, The Greek word Kurios can mean " maste r, lo rd. o wner. o r sir." In a ny c ase. the Gree k sho uld fo llow the Hebrew. In the ca se of Adonai, Kurios should be translated as " Lord." In the case o f A done e, Ku rio,I' should he translated as "M aster," Ye.I'1wlI co nnec ted the Spirit with Psa 11 0 :0 I. and so does Peter: Exalted to the right hand of God. he [Ye.11w lI] has recei ved from the Father the promised 1I0l y Spirit and has po ured out what yo u no w see and hear. Fo r David did not asce nd to hea ven. and yet he said. 'T he Lord [the Father] sa id to my Master [the So n]: 'S it at my right hand until I make your enemies a foot stool fo r you r feet" (Act 0 2:33-35). Ye,I'1llla and Pe te r ca n co nnect the Spirit to a quo te o f Psa 110:01. beca use they can asce rtain that the " Lord" (Adonai) in Psa 110:05 refers to the Spirit: The Lord [the Spirit ) is at your [the Son 's] right hand ; he [the Spirit] will ( rush kings on the day o f his [the Sp irit' s1wrath (Psa 110:05). In Psa 110:0 1. the Lord (the Father ) had to ld the Master (the Son ) to s it at his right hand. Th us, the Father is at the So n's left hand. Since the Fathe r is already at the So n's left hand (Psa 110:0 1). the Spirit must be " the Lord" at the So n's right hand (Psa 110:05). Psa 110:05 is a prophecy of how Yeslll/ll will be raised from the dead and will return to the Father to rule over the Church IJoh 20:17). T hen the Father will send out the Spirit 10 spiritually co nq uer the ea rth for the Son (Joh 14:26: 15:26) until all the elect are saved (Rom 11 :26; ITi 02:04).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

295

The Jewi sh Trinity

Thai the Lord (Adonai) in Psu 110:05 is the Spirit is ver ified in at least two ways: • In the O T, the perso n who helps is sa id to be at the right hand of the perso n Ixing helped (Psa 0 73:23; lsa 4 1:13). Since the Spirit helps the Son, il is t he Sp irit who is at the right hand o f Yeshlla. T he Spirit was already at Yes/w a 's right hand when he he lped raise Ye.\h,w to life (Act 02:25; Rom OR: I I: IPe 03 : 18), and • Thur thc Lord (AdO/wi) in Psa 11 0:05 is the Spirit is shown by the fact that the Sp irit was not po ured out on the C hurch unt il a fter Psa 110:05 was fulfi lled . Ye.~ h u(1 was the n at the Father 's right hand in he aven (Act 07:55-56; Heb 0 1: 03; Eph 01:20) . T he Spiri t at Yeshlla' s right hand was sent ou t on Pe ntecost to co nq uer a spirit ual kingdo m for the Son (Joh 0 7:39; 16:0 7; Act 02:1 7-18, 33; 2eo 03 :08) . Act 02:33-35 shows that Peter understood the Son wo uld co nquer the nat ions by send ing the Spirit. T he state ment tha t the So n wou ld rule in the midst of his enem ies shows that the Spirit-built C hrist ian Chu rc h is indicated . The C hurc h exis ts in the midst of its ene mies and will eva ngelize until the end of the age (P sa 110:02; compare Psa 106:47; Ma t 10:23; 24:1 4; Luk 18:08; Rom 08:37; leo 15: 24; 02: 14-16).

zco

Psa //3:0/-03-Trinirarian Proof Prai se Yalt[ ,'ehj! Praise. you se rvants of rahvch, praise the Name of Yohveh, Ble ssed be the Name of Yah veh, from thi s time forth and foreve rmore. From the rising of the sun to the goi ng down of the same, the Name of rahveh is to be praised IPsa 11 3:0 1-( 3). Discussion: T he "Name of Yahveh" is me ntioned three times. Psa 119:89-Trinitarian Proof Your [the Father's] Word [the Son [, Yahvrh [the Father]. is eternal; and abides in the heavens (P sa 119:89). Diseus...ion: Th e Word is a perso nal age nt of Yahl'eh and is Yalll'elt. Psa / 47:15-18- Trinilllrian Proof He se nds ou t his co mma ndment on ea rth. His word runs ve ry swi ftly. He gi ves snow like wool, and scatters frost like ashes. He hu rls dow n his hail like pebbles. Who can sta nd before his cold? He sends ou t his word, and melts them. He causes his wind to blow, and the waters now (Psa 147: 15- 18). Discussion: T he Word is a perso na l age nt of Yahl't'h and is Yahwh. En' 04:08-/l-Trillillirian Proof There was a man all alone: he had neither son nor brother...two arc be tter than o ne...a co rd of three strands is not q uick ly broken (Ecc 04 :08-12).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

296

Yael Na tan

Dtscusston: So lo mon said IWO perso ns together were better tha n one forlorn person (Ecc 04:09-12a ). bUI a cord of three stra nds was be st of all ( Ecc 04 :1 2b). S urel y. Solo mon had the Trinity in mind whe n he said this. Just as three strands comp rise one cord. three persons are one God .

I.m OJ :03- Trilli/llrial1 Proof The ox knows its ow ner.the donkey irs masters' manger. but Israel does not know, my people do not perceive (Isa 0 1:03). Dtscu sslon: Isaia h ca lled a don key's ow ner "m asters" (Iva 01:03). Majestic plural prop on e nts pro vide no overriding re ason why the plural for m " maste rs" sho uld he tran sla ted in t he s ingula r. Be side s , why wo uld a don ke y's o w ne r necessari ly be maje stic ? If Eliezer had two masters, Abraham (adO/wi) (Gen 15: 02 ) and Isaac (adrmee) (Gen 24:12. 65), surely a don key co uld have IWO master s! T he Trinitarian inte rpre ta tion o f lsa 01 :03 is appare nt whe n on e notes that e lsewhere Ya hn 'h says they are " masters" (the Hebrew is Adrmim) (M al 0 1:06 ). That Yahveh is "masters" hints al the Trinitarian me aning of Isa 01 :0 3. lsa 01 : 0 3 has para llel co nstr uc tions : ow ne r, master s .. .O wne r, Ma sters. Th e parall el construction shows that there are ellipses in the train of thoug ht [xa 01 :03 sho uld be unde rstood as .. . .. .The ox knows its o wner (s ingular), the don key its ma sters" (plural) manger, but Israel does not know .. . [.. .its sing ular Owner, in othe r wor ds, God (Exo 06:07; 19 :05-(6)]. my people do not perceive.. . [.. .their plura l "M asters." in other words, the Trinity (Mai O1:(6)1 (Is a 01 :03 ). txa ()(j :03- Triniwrilln l'mof One cried to another. and said, Ho ly, holy, holy, is Yah l'eh of hosts: the whole earth is full of his g lory (ls a 06:03 ). Discussion: The Tnsagion (vl'h rice Holy") liturgical form ula is said or sung by the angels, ev ide ntly amiphonally : " Ho ly, Ho ly, Hol y is Yah l'f' h of hosts." Isa 06 : 03 has three mentions of " holy" while the Name. Yah veh, is ment ion ed once. The three and one aspect o f Trisagions suggests that God is the Trinity. Th e First pari of Isa 00 is es peci ally 'Irm ua na n since Yohveh asked. "Who will go for us'!' (I sa 06: ( 8). Another Trisag ion is di scussed at Rev' 04:08 in this ap pendi x. t sa U7:14- Trilliwriall Proof Therefore , the Lord himse lf will give you a sign: behold, a virgin shall conceive , ami bear a so n, and shall ca ll his name Imm anuel (Isa 07 :14). Discussion: Mat the w w rote that Isaiah prop he sied o f the Messiah's be ing " Immanuel." mea ning, "God wit h us" (Ma t 01 :23 ). All the arguments against the "v irgin" translation of Isa 07: 14 are fau lty. Some say Isa 07: 14 prophecies the birth of Isaiah 's sec ond son by a prophetess (Isa 07 : 0 3; 08:0 3 ), Isa iah 's secon d so n, howe ver. was named " Ma hen ha la IJ1ll5hba :" (" swi ft is booty, speedy is prey") , not Im manue l ("God with us" ).

Matenal com direlbs

autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

297

Eve ry passage in scripture must be taken in con text, and it seems that the lsa 07: 14 and 09 :06 prophecies are mea nt 10 be taken to gether, T here is no way Isaiah 's seco nd so n fulfilled the Isa 09:06 prophecy ! Cri tics arg ue that if Isa iah had meant " virgin," he wo uld have used the Hebre w word navarah or bendah ruther than ahnah , Nayorah, howe ver. ca n refer to a nonvirgin (1 Ki 01 :02), and hctuluh is app lied to a widow (Joe 01 :0&). B)' con trast , Alma h is never applied to a non -virgi n, a lthou gh Solomon doe s w rite " the wa y o f a ma n with a maid [alnwh]" (Pro 30 :19). T his may refe r to chaperoned d ating and lo ve leiters, rat her than sex . Moreo ver , the LXX has " the way of a man in his yo uth [CIt l/a 'uU'r J." so alma h may not ha ve been in the original Hebrew o f Pro 30: 19. Cri tics a lso say the Greek trans lated " virgin" (pa r/henos) should read, "yo ung, unmarried woma n" (LXX lsa 07: 14; Mat 01 :23). This is based on the not ion that Dinah was ca lled a parth enos (Oe n 34:03 ) after she was raped (Oen 34:( 2). W here the cr itics e rr is assumin g that verse o rder in the Bible always indicates chronolng jcal order. The author o f Genes is liked to preface a sy nopsis statement of the narrat ive befo re giving the details of the account (Gcn 0 I:UI. 0 2:U4a. 4b , 05:0 I; 06:09 ; 10:01: 11 :10,27; 25: 12.19; 36:0 1. 09; 37:0 2, etc.) So the critics mistook what is essentially the title and subtitle of the account for the narrat ive itself. C rimino log ists wou ld agre e that the rape mentioned in Gen 34:02 occurred after C en 34:(13 : Shec hem's so ul was dra wn to Dinah the da ughter of Jacob; he loved the maiden rvirgin maiden] and spoke tenderly to her (Gen 34:(3). The details suggest this was te xtbook "date rape." not a classic "stalker" rape case. The ruler Sheehem did not comm it rape on fir st sight, and then sweet talk with Dinah afterward. So, D inah was a "v irgin" ipa rthenosi in Gcn 34:03. and purttsrnas should he translated as " virg in" in Isa 0 7:14, Mat 0 1:23, and e lsewhere. I.I-a 09:01 -02. 06-07 {BHS 08:2.t-09:01. 05-06J -s-Trinitarie n P roof Fo r 10 us a child is born , to us a son is given; and the government shall be on his shoulder: and his name shall be ca lled Wonde rful, Counselor, Migh ty Cod, Everlast ing Fathe r, Princ e of Pea ce (Isa 09:06). Dlscu sslon : Isaiah prophe sied that the Messiah wo uld be Mighty Cod (£/) and Everlast ing Father. " Everla sting Father" is a Hebraism that is acc uratel y tra nslated as "A utho r o f Eternity" (Isa 09 :06 IHHS 09:05J; compare Ecc 03: 11; He b 12: (2 ). Matthew appl ies Isa 09 :01 -02 10 Ye.l'hul/ (Mat 04 :15-16) , T hat the So n is the "Counselor" (lsa 09:(6) is discu ssed at lsa 40:13 in this appen dix . T he Ma lek Yahveh told Samson's pare nts that his nam e was "Wo nde rful" (LX£, YLT Jdg 13:1 8). Isaiah prophesied that the Me ssiah would be " Wo nderful" ( lsu 09:(6). The words for " Wo nde rful" arc slightly diffe rent in each verse , b ut the meaning can he the sa me: Jdg 13:18 is pil'iy, Strong's # 63&3, while Isa 09: 06 [HHS 09:05 J is pete', Strong's # 63&2, So this wo uld indica te that the Ma lek Yahveh was the Son, an d the Son became the Messiah.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Yae l Na tan

298

The interpretation that the Mu lek Yu hn ' h was prophesied to beco me the Messiah is supported by an additional fact. The LXX of Iva 09:06 has " the An gei lMalek ] of Great Co unsel. " co mmonly trunslarcd "Messe nge r o f G reat Cou nsel. " Th is see ms to be a clear refe rence to the Malek roh veh, the Angel o f v ahveh. The Ange l of Y,l!Il'f'h was often called Ytlhl't'h and God in the QT, as was noted at the stan of this append ix. So it is not su rprising that here in Isa 09 :06, the Me ssenger of Great Co unsel is called " Mighty God" and "A uthor of Eterni ty." So the assoc iation betwee n the M,dek Yahveh and the Messiah suggests the Messiah is divine. This, in turn . leads one to believe that the Trinity is a biblical co ncept. 1,I'a J3:22- Trinif(l rian Proof For Y,l!lI't'h is our judge. Ytl hl't'h is our lawgiver. Ytl hl'eh is our king; he will save us (Isa 33:22). Discussion: T he Name, Yahl'eh. is repeated three times. 1,I'a J4 : I6 - Trini/llrian Proof Discussion: Me ntion is made o f Yahvch, my (t he So n's ) mou th, a nd the Fat her's Spirit. The co m binatio n o f pronoun s in lsa 34: 16 makes se nse if Yohvch the So n were the speaker: See k yo u [the reade r] OUI of the book of Yuhveh, and read: ' Not one o f these shall be missing, none shall want her mate;' for my [the Son's ] mou th has commanded, and his [the Father 's] Spirit has gathered them (MT tsa 34:16). T he YLr and KJV follow the Hebrew and translate " my mou th: ' However, other translations change the pronoun to read " his mou th" (NI V Isa 34:16). The reason is that the translators do not recog nize that the Son is the speaker o f this passage. Translators he re e xercise their "license" to adapt Trinitarian speec h to the demands o f unitarianism b)' c hanging the pronoun " my" to " his." C hang ing prono un s is don e e lsew here in the QT, fo r inst a nce. in t he NI V translations o f Hos 12:04, the Hebre w pronoun " us" is re ndered as " him:' This is discussed in the MT plurals appendix under Hcs 12:04. ba 40:03, 05. 09, IO-Trinilaritlll Proof

The voice of one who cr ie s, ' Prepare in the wildern ess the way of Yahveh: make level in the desert a highway fo r our God' (Isa 40 :03). The glory o f Yahveh shall be revealed. and all flesh shall see it toge ther; for the mouth of Yahveh has spoken it (Isa 40:05 ). You who tell good ne ws to Zio n, go up on a high mountain ; yo u who tell good news to Jeru salem. lift up )'our vo ice with stre ngth; lift it up, do not be afraid; say to the cities of Judah, Beho ld, your God ! Beho ld, the Lord Ya/H't'll will co me as a mighty one, and his arm will rule for him: Behold, his reward is with him, and his recompense before him (Isa 40 : 09 ).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

299

Blessed be the Lord, the God of Israel, for he has visited and wo rked redemption for his people [Luk 0 1:68). You, child, will be called a prophet of the Most Ili gh. for you will go before the Lord to make ready his ways (Luk 0 1:76). Discu ssion : Joh n the Baptis t would prepare a path for Ya/well (the Son) (lsa 40: 10 ) who is "our God" ( Isa 40:03. 09 ; Mat 03:03; Luk 0 1:76b). Thus, "the glory [the So n] of Yahveh [the Father] will he revealed" (!sa 40 :05). Isaiah prop he sied that Iolm the Baptist's me ssage wou ld be equi vale nt 10 publicly saying of Ye,\hua. "H ere is your God !" (Isa 40 :09; Luk OI:76a). Indeed. John's public statements about the greatness of Yeshlla we re tantamo unt to saying that Ye.\ hlfll is God (Mat 03: II ; Luk 03 :16). Perhap s John did refer to Yeshua as God privately to his disc iples. but o vert stateme nts saying Yeshlla was God wou ld have been incendia ry (Joh 01 :4 1, 45). Joh n the Baptist's father Zechariah understood "the pro phe ts of long ago" (Luk 0 1:70), such as Isaiah (Isa 40:03, 05. (19), to say, "the Lord . the God of Israel. ..has com e" (Lu k 0 1:68). John's father Zechariah a lso understood that his son Juhn would "be called a pro phet of the Most High: for you will goo n before the Lord to prepare the way for him" (Luk 0 I:76). Zechariah was not referring to the Targum o n lsa 40:09. Targums arc Aramaic paraphrases and explanatory trans lations of the He brew. The Targum for lsa 40 : 09 changes the wo rds " Beho ld yo ur God !" to "T he Kingdom of your God is revea led."?" Ze chariah also referred to the Messiah as "a hom of salvation" (Luk OJ :69), a phrase previously used to refer to Yahveh (25 a 22 :03 ; Psa 018:(2). The Messiah e lsew here is called a "horn" (Eze 29:2 1). Th is suggests Zec hariah knew the Messiah to be Yah l'eh the Son. txa 40: I J - Trinita rian Proof Discu s..ion: Y{/ hl'eh the Son asked: Who has understood the Mind [literally, the RUl/('h , mean ing the Spirit] of Yahveh (the Father], or as his [the Father's] Counse lor (the Son ) has taught him [the Fathe r)"? (Isa 40: 13). In Isa 40: 13, wha t the So n ask ed was ta nta mo un t to ask ing, " Who ca n comprehend any member of the Trinity?" Later in Isaiah, the So n asks a similar rhe tor ica l q uestion abo ut who was with him (t he So n] and with "the lasts [the Father and Spirit]" (Isa 4 1:(4). Isa 40: 13 is similar to Isa 48 :12- 16 and Isa 63:0714 in that these passages mentio n all three person s of the Trinity, lsa 48:12-16 and Isa 63:07-14 are discussed elsewhere in this appendix. In Isa 40: 13, the Spirit is the " Mind" of Ya hveh. The Hebrew word Ruat" h is vario usly translated "mi nd," " wind" or "S pirit." When Yeshua co unse led Nicodem us, Yeshua alluded to Isa 40: 13. Yeshull referred to the Spirit and said, "The wind blow s whe re it pleases" (Joh 03:0R). Then, j ust as all three persons of the Trin ity are me ntioned in Isa 40: I] (as was noted just above ), Yesh,w associated himse lf with the Father and Spirit: Matenal com direlbs autcrars

300

Yael Na ta n

What we [So n and Spirit] have known we speak, a nd what we have seen we testify, . . For he [the Son ] whom God [the Father] hath sent spea ks the words of God [the Father]: for God [the Fat her] g ives the Sp irit to him [the Son as Messiah ] without measure (Jnh 03: [J, 34). The " we" in l oh 03 : I I refers back to the Mind (the Spiri t} and Co unse l (the So n) of Yahveh in Isn 40: 13. That the " we" in Joh 03 : II refers to Ye.\1w lI and the Spirit can be seen from Nicode mus' state ment that Ye5hua ca me from God (the Father ), yet was also with God (the Sp irit): He [Nicodemu s] came to ves hua at night a nd said, ' Rabbi, we know you are a teacher who has co me from God [the Father]. For no one could perform the miraculous signs you are doing if God [the Spirit] were nOI with him' (Joh 0 3:(2). The seco nd time the So n alluded to Isn 40 :13 was in Jo h 14:16 when he ca lled the Spirit "an other Counselor." Ye5/lIIa sa id: I will pray to the Father, and he shall give you another Co unselor 10 be with you forever (l oh 14:16 ). YeI/1I1l1 identified Ihis "another Co unselor" as the Spirit (l oh 14:26). T he Gree k word translated "another" is 1II1o,~, mea ning, "another of the same kind." Nota bly, hete ros is the Greek word for "another o f a differen t kind." a word never used to refe r to the Trinity. So YeS/lilli's statemen t saying that the Spiri t was "another Counselor" (Joh 14:16,26) was tantamount to saying Ihat the Son was a Co unselor as divine as the Spirit. By saying the Spirit was "another counselor:' fe ,I'/1/1lI was saying thai he was the "Counselo r" of lsa 09:06 [DHS 09 :05] . Inte re stingly, Isa 09:06 also rela tes that the Messiah would be t he "Mighly God" and the "A uthor of Eter nity." Passages related 10 Isa 40: 13 are those where the Father said: • The Messiah is Yahveh of hosts (A mo 04: 11- 13), and • The Son reveals his tho ughts to man as would a co unselor, as is d iscussed at Amo 0 4: 11-13 in this appendix. So when Ye.I'IUla sa id the Spi rit was "another Co unselor" (Joh 14:16, 26 ), he was dctin itely speaking in ter ms of divinity. Paul shows that he understood Isaiah 10 refe r 10 three persons of the Trinity in Isu 40 :13. In Ro m I I :36, Paul me ntions "him" three limes in reference to God after q uoting Isa 40 :13 in Rom 11:34: For who hath known the Mind [the Spirit 1o f the Lord [the Fathe r]'! or who hath been his [the Fathe r's] Co unselor [the Son]?... because of him [the Father]. through him [the Son], and by means of him [the Spim] all things exist (Rom 11 :34, 36). Even more clear are Paul's statements associating the Spirit with the thoug hts and mind of God . Pau l said that the Spirit co mmu nicates God 's thoug hts 10 humans, Ch ristians understan d these thoughts because we have both the Spiril and the mind of Christ (I Co 0 2: I0 -16 ). Paul definuely wrote leo 02:10- 16 with Isa 40:13 in mind, since he quoted Isa 4():13 nearby ( ICo 0 2:16). 1Co 02: 16 is Ihe seco nd time that Pa ul q uoted Isa 40: Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

301

13. Paul's first quote was in Rom 11 :34. Paul therefore interpreted lsa 40: 13 to mean that the Ruach (meaning, " the Sp irit" or the "Mind") o f the Father is the Spirit, and that the Father's Co unse lor is the Son.

tsa 43:Jo-Trinira riall Proof ' You [the Israel ites I are my witnesses.' sa id rah veh [the Father]. 'and my Se rvant [the Son] whom I ha ve chosen, that you may kno w and belie ve Me, and unde rstand that I am He. Before Me there was no God formed, nor shall there he after Me' l isa 43 :10 j. Discussion: Here the Fathe r said that the Se rvant is his witness that no God was ever forme d before or after the Father. This means that the Son. who is the Se rvant of Yllhl'eh, is as ete rnal as Yahveh the Fathe r is. Lo gicall y, this bears ou t, too, since if the Son were not as ete rnal as the Father, how cou ld the So n attest that no god was formed before the Fa ther? The "you," meaning the Israel ites, cou ld only attest that, to the ir kno wledge, no gods were formed d uring their lifet ime s. t sa 48:12·/6- Trinirarian Proof Discussion: lsa 48: 16 and 61:0 1-02 are fa mous Trinitar ian pro phecies where Yah veh the Son said that the Father wou ld send him to be the Messiah, and the Father would send the Sp irit with the Messiah. That the Son and Spirit are sent toge ther is not surp rising since the So n and Spirit are sent out singly often . T his is the elise evert when j ust Isaiah is conside red (Isa 11 :1l2: 34: 16; 40: 13; 42:11 1, 48:1216; 59:20-21 : 6 1:01 -02; 63:10-14), Several verses after lsa 61:0 1-02, the Servant o f Yahveh calls him self Yahvch: "For I. Yahl'eh, love justice .. ." ( lsa 61:08). Yeshua q uoted Isa 61:0 1-02 in Luk 04 : 18- 19. This fac t suggests that the Messiah, Yeshlw , is the same person as the "sent" Yahl'eh (the So n) who spoke in Isa 48: 16 and Isa 6 1:08. T he Trinitarian interpretation of lsa 48:16 is co nsistent with lsa 61:0 I, 08 , and with the rest of Isaiah in that Yllhl'ell the Son is speaking. Isaiah did not break into Yahw,h 's mo nologue 10 say that YIIIIl'd, had se nt Isaiah and the Spirit. as some ha ve sugges ted . See the chapter on the Prophet Behind the Prophets.

l sa 49:05·06-Trinira rian Proof Now says Yahveh who form ed me from the wo mb to he his Servan t, to hring Jacob again to him, and that Israel he ga thered to him (for I am honorabl e in the eyes of Yahveh, and my God is become my strength): yes, he says, "It is too light a thing that you should be my Se rvant to raise up the tribes of Jacob , a nd 10 restore the preser ved of Israel : I will also give you for a light to the Gentiles, that you may be my salvation to the end o f the earth' tl sa 49:05). Iuscusston: A text that sugges ts or speaks of the deity of the Messiah should he co nsidere d a Trinitarian proof. Yahl'eh the Fathe r gave the Serv ant o f Yohvcb (the Me ssiah ) a God-sized task of saving the natio ns. Moses was not even up to the job of saving Israel, and he knew it (Deu 3 1:27). Matenal com direlbs autcrars

302

Yae l Na tan

T he difference betwee n Christ' s starting C hristianity and innovators starting other religio ns is that C hnstiamty actua lly saves people for eternity. By co ntrast, it takes no talent whatsoever to ens ure that peop le on the broad road get to their final destination ( Mal 07: 13).

I.m 52:12-Trini/llrial1 Proof For you sha ll not go out in haste , neither shall you go by n igh!: for Yah "eh will go before you; and the God of Israel will be your rearguard (!sa 52:12). Discussi on: The fact that Yah ~'e h is the vangu ard and the God of ISrJcI is the rear guard sugges ls that there are persons of the Trinity. Isa 52: 12 is mentio ned in the discussi o n o n Exo 14:1 9-24 in this appendix. t sa 55: II- Trinitarian Proof So shall my Word be that goes forth out of my mouth: it shall not return to me void, hut it shall accomplish that which I please. a nd il sha ll prosper in the thing whereto I sent it (Isa 55: 11 ). Dtscu sston : T he Word is a persona l age nt of Yahl"eh and is Yllhl"eh. 1.I'1l 59:20·21-Tril1itarial1 Proof A Re dee me r wi ll co me to Zion. and 10 those who turn fro m disobedie nce in Jacob. says Yahl'eh. As for me. this is my cove nant with them. says vah veh : my Spiril who is on you, a nd my words that I have pOI in yo ur mouth, shall not depart 0 01 of your mouth, nor out of the mo uth of yo ur seed. nor out of the mouth of your seed's seed , says Yahl"eh . from hencefo rth and forever (lsa 59:20-2 1). Discu ssion: The Redeemer, the So n (Isa 59 :20a), who is divine (lsa 07: 14: 09 : 06 ). is distinguished from vativen the Father by the Fa ther's words: "As for me .. ." (Isa 59:2 Ia). lsa 61:08- Triniw riall Proof For 1. Yllhl"eh.lme j uslice. 1 hate robbery with jmquny: and I will give them their recom pense in truth, and I will make an eve rlasting cove nant with them (Isa 6 1:08). Discu ssion : T he Se n-ant of Yahveh said tha t he is Yanveti. Isa 6 1:08 mennone d in Isa 48:12- 16 in this appe ndix .

IS

lsa 63:07·/4- Trillitarian Proof Dtsc usslon : Yohvch (Ihe Fath e r), "tbe M a lek [the Son] , His [the Falher's ] Presence [the So n)" (Isa 63 :09b), and the Spirit of God (Isa 63: Ill- I I and 14), are a ll mennoned as co-causes .

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinit y

303

f er 07:04, l V-Trinitarian P roof IXI not trust in d ecepti ve word s, saying, 'T he temple o f Yahveh, the tem ple o f Ya hvch, the temple of Yahveh, are these' ....a nd curne and stand before me in this ho use. that is called by my Nam e , and s ay. ' We are del ivered; that you may do all these abo minations'!' (Jcr 07: 04, 10). Discussion: Th e phrase the "Temple of Yalll'eh" is ment ioned three times (Jer 07:04 ), and the n the tem ple is said to hear the Name o f v ah veh (Jer 07 :10 ). T his three and one pattern is Trinitarian, Men tio ning Ya hl'eh three times and then once are "false wo rds" (Je r 07:04 ) on ly in the sense that in Jeremiah's day, the Trinity had alread y aba ndo ned Solom on's te mple to destruction. So to thin k that Jerusa lem would not be destroyed because the pe rsons of the Trinity still inhabi ted the tem ple was a false hope. Besid es. the tem ple was Yalll'eh's in nam e only. At so me point it became a ho use o f perju re rs (Jer 07:09 ) and ro bbe rs tJer 07: II ). Similarly, when Ye.\ hUl/ le ft Hero d' s tem ple desola te (Mat 23:38; Luk 13:35 ), it became a de n of rob bers (Mat 21:13) and a house of false swe arers (Mat 23: 16 ). So the temple fell under Ya/H'eh's c urse on the houses of robbers and thieves {Zec 0 5:04 ). For more discussio n o n this subject. see Jer 07: 11- 15. 34 and Luk 13:35; 19 :46 in the NT Usc of OT Ya llre h Te xts appendix. An intere sting pa rallel to ho w the Name. rahveh. was me ntioned thrice, and the n on ce in rega rd to the te mple , is when Eli di d not k no w that the Word of Yahveh was ca llin g Sam uel. Samuel was slee ping next to the Ark in the temple (I Sa 0 3:0 3-(8 ). Yohveh ca lled o ut to Sam uel three time s he fore Eli realized Ya hl'dl was c alling Samuel. Then Ya hveh called Samue l again an d Sa muel said the Name, Yahveh, in the te mple. accor ding to Eli's instructions ( I Sa 0 3:(9).

l er 16 : /6·2 t -s-Trinttanan Proof Yohveh [the r a ther ), my [th e Son 's] st re ngth, an d m y (the Son 's] stro nghold, and my [the Son' s] refuge in the d ay of affliction . to yo u [the r at he r) s ha ll the nation s come fro m the ends o f the earth.v.There fore, behold, I [the So n) will cause the m to know. this onc e will I [the Son] cause them to know my [the Son 's) han d and my [the Son 's ) might; and the y shall kno w that my [the Son's] name is ranven [the Son] (Jc r 16: 19. 2 1). Discus-sion: Ya hl'eh [the Son] said: No w I will se nd for many fisherme n and they will catc h them [the Jews of the diaspora] (Je r 16:16 ). T hen Yahveh [the Son] ack now ledg ed Yahveh (the Fath er ] as his [the Son's] stre ngth and strong hold. The Son sa id: There fore , I will teach them- this time I will teach the m my power and migh t. Then they will kno w that my Name is Ycihl'eh (Jer 16:21 ). S imilarly, Ye.l·hua sa id, "Co me, follow me , a nd I will make ) 'O U fis hers o f me n" (Mat 04 :19). This parallels Jer 16:2 1. Yes/1I1t1 really did show the wo rld he is Yahw'h, since billions of C hristia ns have been baptized into the Name of the r a ther, Matenal com direlbs autcrars

304

Yael Na ta n

So n and Spin t by Yes/IlIll'S comma nd (Mat 28 :19). Also. many know him as the "I AM" (Joh 08:58 ), so they know his name as he predicted they would (Jer 16:2 1). See me discu ssio n in the '" AM" a nd the Song of Moses chapters. and in Eusebiu s, Prnof of the Go,\ pd , Book Y, Chapter 30. Jer 23:05-06; 33:J5-J6-Tr;l1;farial1 Pro of

' Behold. the days are co ming,' says vahvch, ' when I win raise to David a righteo us Branch. and he shall reign as king and dea l wisely. and shall execute j ustice and righteou sness in the land. In his days Judah shall he saved . and Israel shall dwe ll safe ly; and this is his name whereby he shall he called: 'Yllhreh, our righteou sness" (Jer 23:05 -(6). Dtscus..ion: The "Brunch" is the Messiah and. by assoc iation, the scepter (Gen 49: 10-11 ; Num 24: 17; Isa 04:02. I I:0 1; 53 :02: Jer 23:05; 33:15; Zec 03:08; 06 : 12). Jeremi ah said the Branc h is " Yahl'eh, Our Righteousness" (Hebrew: Yahvehf.I'iJkl'lllf) (Jer 23 :06). Yahveh-tsidkenu is the on ly OT persona l name that uses the complete Tetragramrnaron. Most composi te names use o nly o ne (Y) or two (YH) of the four consonants ( YHVH) that co mprise the name Yah ~'e h . Becau se the Mess iah was sacrifice d for o ur sins in Jer usale m, bel ievers will associate Jeru salem with the So n, who is " Ya/II'ell . O ur Righteo usness" (Jer 33: 16 ). Jeru salem will also become known by the eponymy. " Yulll'l' h-Shli mmuh," meaning, "God Is T here" (Eze 48:35), This is similar to another name for Ye5hl/a , " Imma nue l: ' mea ning. "God is with us: ' So il is not surprising that Jerusa lem is called "the holy ci ty" in both the OT and NT (Neh II :01, 1R; ' ~a 48:02 ; 52 :0 I; Dan 09:24; Mat 04:05; 27:53; Rev 11;0 2; 21 ;02 , 10; 22; 19). Th e con nect ion wit h Je rusa le m furth er ex plains the nam e "vahveh, O ur Righteousness." Yahveh the Son is the priest-king replace ment for Melchizede k, a priest-king at Jerusalem (Gen 14:18; Psa 110:04; He b 05:06.1 0; 06:20; 07:01 , 10, II , 15, 17). Mefchizedek means "K ing of Righteousness." A king who came after Melchizede k at Jerusalem was similarly called Adoni -Zede k. meaning, "Lord of Righteousness" (l os 10:01). So it is co nsistent that both Yahveh the So n and his "holy city" should be called " Yll hn ·h. Our Righteousness" (Jcr 23:06; 33: 16). Epiphan ies led to plac e name c hang es. Abraha m called the temp le mou nt. Mount Moriah, meaning, "C hose n by Yllh[I'eh]." Afler the Malek Yah l'eh appeared at the near-sacrifice of Isaac, Abraham called the temple mou nt . Yahvehjireh; meaning, "Yahveh will provide " (Ge n 22:14). Similarly, Jacob ca lled a place by the Ia bbok River Peniel because the So n appeared there (Gcn 32:30). Pen iel is Hebrew for "Face of God." Gideon called a place "Yahveh is Peace" after the Son. the Mo lek Yahveh. appeared the re (Jdg 06: 24 ). So because Ye.\ /IlI11 was himself an epiphany. it is consistent that the "holy city" should be called by the eponymy, " Yllhveh. Our Righteousness" IJer 23:06; 33:16). That Jerusalem has held on to its origin al name is in keepin g with huw places were referred to by differen t names eve n after being rena med by Yahvists. For example. Luz became Bethel , meaning, "Ho use of God ," afte r " [Ali i the Guds Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

305

[HaE/ohim] . they appeared to Jaco b there" (Gen 35:(7). T he new name for LUI ,

namely, Bethel. did not "take" unti l hundreds of years later (Ge n 28: 19; 35:06; 48 : 03; los 16:02; 18:13; Jdg 01 :23, 26). Even after LUI was destroyed. the surv ivors went off and built a new city in another area with the sa me name. Luz (Jdg 01 :26). Eze 02:02-Trinitllriall Pnmf T he Spirit entered into me when he spo ke to me, and set me on my feet: and I heard him who spoke to me (Eze 0 2:02). Iuscusston: T he Spirit is an agen t of Yahvcti and is Yahl'eh. See the section o n Ezekiel in the chapter on Various OT Presen tations o f the Trinity. Eze 08:03-Trini/llrian Proof He pUl forth the fonn of a hand, and took me by a lock of my head; and the Spirit lifted me up betwee n e art h and the sky', and hmught me in the visions of God to Jerusalem. to the door of the gate o f the inner [cou rt] that looks toward the north ; where was the seat of the image of jealou sy, which provokes to jealousy (Eze 08 :03), Discussion: T he Spirit is an agent of Yahveh and is Ya" l'eh. See the section on Ezekiel in the chapter on Various OT Presen tations o f the Trinity.

Eze 40:0/ -47: /2- Trinitarian I'mol Dtscus..ion: The narrator refe rred to " the man" as Yahveh (Eze 44:02, (5), and "the man" referre d to the Glory (b ,e 43:0 1) as Yahl'd, (Eze 44:02). "The man" is the anth ropomorp hized Spirit and the "Glory" is the So n. See the sect ion o n Ezekie l in the chapter on the Various OT Prese ntations of the Trinity. Dan 02:22-Trinitaritlll /'mol .. .he re veal s the dee p and sec ret things: he kno ws wh at is in the dark ness, and the Light d well s with him (Da n 02:22) , Iuscusston: Light (the Sun) dwells with the "ather (com pare Joh 01 :09; 09: 12, 12:46). Dan Ol-Trini/ariall Proof Iuscusston: The Song of Moses chapter and the MT plurals appendix discuss Daniel's visio n of the Son of Man (Dan 07). Prophetic parallels to the Son of Man vision (Psa 002, 045 and 110) are disc ussed in this append ix. Dan 09: 19- Trinitllriall Proof Lord. hear: Lo rd. forgive; Lord, liste n and do: do not defe r. for your own sa ke, my God, because you r ci t)' and your people arc called by yuur Name (Dan 09 :19). Discussion : In Dan 09: 19, there are three ment ions of Lord (Adonai) , one mention of God (E/ohim), and o ne mention of the (s ingular) Name. The Father hxtens, the Son forgi ves, and the Spiri t hears and acts. The three persons who a re Matenal com direlbs autcrars

306

Yael Natan

Lord and God do not delay because the c uy and peop le bear their (singular) Name.

tonveh. Dan 09: 19 and similar passage s are mentioned in the discussion the Aaronic Blessing (Num 06:2 2-27) in this appendix. Hos O/ :06.07-Trillilllricm l'/THif She conceived again, and bore a daughter. [ Yc.,hl't'h the Son] sa id to him, 'Call her name Look-Ruhamah; for I will no more have merc y on the house of Israel. that I sho uld in any wise pardon them. BUI I will have merc y on the house of Judah, and will save them by YlI hl'eh the ir God (the Spirit). and will not save them by bow, sword, banle. horses, or by ho rsemen' (Hos 01 :(6). Discu ssion : A text that suggests or speak s o f the dei ty of the Messiah should be co nsidered a Trinita rian proo f. Hosea wrote that rahveh (the So n) wou ld save the peop le o f Judah by Y(lhl'.'h, their God (the Spirit). A similar text is Zec 04 :06 where the Sp irit quot ed YaJIl'ell the Father as say ing that he (the Spirit), would help Zerubbabe l rebuild the temple.

Has JJ:0 7·0 9-Trini/llrian Proof My [the Son's) people arc dete rmined 10 tum from me [the Son]. Tho ugh they call In the Most High [the l-uther'], He [the Father! ce rtainly will not exalt them. Huw can I [the Son ] give you up. Ephraim? How can I [the Son) hand you o ver, Israel? How can I [the So n) make you like Admah? How ca n I [the So n) make )'OU like Zeboiirn? M) [the Son's ) heart is turned within me (the Son]. My [the Son's] co mpassio n is aro used. I [the Son] will not exec ute the fierceness of my [the Son's] anger. I [the Son] will not return to destroy Ephraim: For I [the Son] am God [the Son]. and not man [T his is the preincamate Son speaking I: the Holy One [the Son ] in the midst of you ; and I [the Son) will not co me in wrath (Hos I I:07-(9). Discu ssion: See the d iscuss ion of this passage in the MT plurals appendix in the sectio n on 1I0s II :02 , 12 [BHS 12:01 J: lIos 12:04 [BHS 12:05 J. Amo 04: 1J. J3-Trinilllrilill PnHlf ' 1 [the Fathe r] have overthrown [c ines] among you, as when God [the Son] o verthrew Sodom and Gomorrah, and you were as a brand plucked o ut of the burn ing: yet have you nor returned to me,' says Yuhl'e1, [the Fathe r). 'Therefore. thus will I (the Father) do to you , Israel; [and ) because I will du this to yo u, prepare to meet your God [the Sonl. Israel. For, beho ld, he [the Son] who fo rms the mountain s, and creates the wind. and declares to man what is his thoug ht: that makes the morning darkness. and tread s on the high places of the Earth Yahl'eh [the Son]. the God of hosts, is his Name' (Arno 04: 11-13) . Discu s...ion: A text that sugges ts or speaks of the de ity of the Messiah sho uld be co nside red a Trinitarian proof. Yahveh (the Father ) sa id that Elohim (the Son) overthrew Sworn. The Father's words were: Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

307

l jthc Fathe r] have overturned you as God (the Son] overturned Sodom ... decla res Yahveh [the Father ] (A mo 04:11). See the men tio ns o f Amo 04: 11-1 3 in the So ng of Mose s eha pter, and see Eusebiu s. The Proofof the GtI.\pd, Hook V, Chapte r 23. M it" 05:01 [ BHS 05:0fJ -Trinitllriwl Proof

BUI yo u, Bethlehe m Ephrata, which are small among the tho usan ds of Juda h, out of you shall nne come forth In me that is 10 be ruler in Israe l; whose goings forth are fro m of old. from eve rlasting f Mic 05 :(2). Discussion: A text that suggt':sts or spt:aks of the deity of the Messia h shou ld be con sidered a Trinitarian proof. Micah says the Son. who wo uld becom e the Me ssiah. existed from ete rnity (Mic 05:0 2). The Son is as eternal as the Fathe r and the Spirit (Psa U4 1: ]]; 090:02; 103: 17; 106:48). Matthe w applied Mic 05:02 to Yes/llw (Mat 02 :06). That the Son is ete rnal is co nfirmed by Ye.f hul.I' s statement, " Before Abraham was. ' I AM'" (joh OS:5S). Huh Of: f2- Trinitaricm Pm"f o Yohveh [the Father ], art': you not fro m eve rlas ting'! My God . my 1I0l y O ne [The LXX does not have the prono un " my:' but reads "Lord God. my Hol y O ne." ]. we [the Fathe r and Son ] will no t d ie. 0 Yatrvcn , you have ap pointed the m to execu te judg men t: 0 Roc k, you ha ve ordained them 10 punish (Hab 0 I: [2). Diseus...ion: In his intercessio n for Israel, the Son reminded the Father that they will ne ver die. be' 02:03-f3-Trillitll ricm Pm of Discussion: The Mal ek Yahwh referred to himself as Yahveh througho ut this section (Zec 0 2:05. 0 6 (twice ). OS. 10 , 12). Twice the Malek Yahvch said that Yuhl'eh the Fa ther would send him (Zec 0 2:fJS , 09. II). T he key to ascertainin g the: • Re ferent for each prono un in this sect ion (Zec 02 :03-13). and • The person of Yahveh meant by each mention of the name "Ya/weh." is 10 note that Zec har ia h wro te down word for wo rd what he (Zec haria h) overheard Ya h l'eh the So n (the M a l ek Ya h l'eh ) te ll ing the Sp irit to tell him (Zec hariah). That the sent " me" is YlIhl'eh the Son not on ly can be seen from the pronoun usage. b ut in Zec 02 :12. Yahveh (t he So n) said he wou ld inherit Judea and Jeru sale m. T he Son can inherit. hut the Father cannot inherit. Also, Zec 0 2:0313 is si milar to Isa 48: 12-16 and lsa 61:01 in that Yal!l'eh the So n said that he was se nt. Isa 48:12-16 and Isa 61:01 are d iscussed in this appe ndix. See the chapte r 011 the Various P rese ntations of the T rinity. and Euscbius, The P rrmf of the Go.\pel. Book V. Chapters 25-26.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

308

Yael Natan

Zec 03:01-04- Trilli/ilr;i/ll Proof He sho wed me Joshu a the high priest sta nding before the Ange l of Yahveh, and Sa tan stand ing at his right hand 10 be his adversary. Y ahveh said 10 Sata n, Yohveh re b u ke yo u. Sata n; yes, Yah vch that has c hosen Jer usalem rebuke you: is nol this a bra nd pluc ked OUi of the tire? Now Jo sh ua wa s clothed wit h filth y g arme nts . and was sta nd ing before the ange l. lie answe red and spo ke to those who stood befo re him, saying, Take the filth y garments from off him . To him he sa id. Be ho ld, I have c aused your iniquity to pass from you. and I will cloth e you with rich clo thing (Zee 0 3:01-04 ). Dtscusston: T he Mille/; v ah veh is ca lled Yah veh, The Male/.: here forgives sins. so met hing only God c an do (Mar 0 2:07 ; Luk 05 :2 1). Ze(' 04:06-TrinitariGiI Proof Then he (the Spirit] answered and s poke to me. saying. 'This is the word of Yillll'eh [the Fathe r] to Zerubbabel, saying. ' Not by migh t, nor by power, but by my [the Father's] Spi rit [the Spirit],' says Yflh ~'e h [the Fathe r] o f hosts" (Zec 04:(6). Discu ssion: The Spirit q uoted Y(/ h ~'eh the Father 's state ment that the Spirit wo uld help rebuild the temple. A s imilar text is Hos 01:06-0 7 where Yuh ,'eh the Son sa id he would save Israel by sending his Spirit. See the discussion of Hos 01 : 06-07 in this appe ndix. Z('{' 06:08-TriniTll ril/ll Proof

The n cried he 10 me, and spoke 10 me. saying, ' Behold. those who go Iowan! the north country have quieted my spirit in the north country' (Zec 06:(8). Discussion: T he Mille/.; Ytl/ll'eh 's spirit e xte nds thro ughout the earth. Zec hariah also says that the sp irit of the Ma lek Yan ven ex tends to the north co untry (lee 06 : 08). lii' 07:08-13-Trini/a riflll Proof Dtscusston: T he "Word [the So n] of Ytlh"eh [the l-at her]" (Zec 07 :0R) spo ke of the Father and the Spiril as perso ns d istinct from himself (Zee 0 7: 12- 13 J.

Ze(' 10:12- TrinitariGiI Proof ' I [the Fathe r] will strengthen them in Y ahveh [the Son]; and they will walk up and do wn in his [the Son's] name,' say's Yall"ell [the Father] (Zcc 10:12). Dtscusston: Yahveh the Father said t ha t he wo uld strengthen Israel in Yohveh the Son and in his [the So n's] name. li(' JJ :/2- 13- Trinirarian Proof I said 10 them. 'If yo u think il best. give me my wages; and if not, keep the m.' So they weighed for my wage s thirty pieces of silver. Yahw h sa id Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

309

to me, 'Throw it to the potter. the handso me price that I was valued at by the m!' I too k the thirty pieces of silver, a nd threw them to the pouer. in the house of Yah!'eh (lee 11 : 12- 13). Dlscusston: A text that sugges ts or speaks of the dei ty of the Messiah shou ld be co nsidered a Trinita rian proo f. Yalll'eh the Son said that his wo rk was val ued at thirty pieces of silver. Judas was paid thirty pieces of silver to betray Ye.l'hull ( Mat 26:15 ). Ycshua twice sa id , '"I A M," at his betrayal, and twice the soldiers fell back (loh 18:05-( 8). This is d iscussed further in the '·1 AM" and So ng of Moses chapte rs. Judas then reali zed Yel'''u o was the " I A M." So the proph ecy of Zec II : 12- 13 was fulfilled at Ye,5hlla's prompting, an d Juda s' lift: c ut shurt as Yeshlla anticipated (Psa 109:08). Ln ' 12:08 - Tr;n;lllr;oll Pn mf In that da y v ah veh [the f ather ] will de fend the inhabitants o f Jerusalem . He who is fee ble amo ng them at that day will be like David, and the house of David will he like God [the Father ], like the Mold , [the Son] Yahveh (Zec 12:08) . Dtscusston: Notice the fa vorable co mparison or eve n the equ ation in term s of stre ngth between the Father and the Son, the Malek Yahl'eh.

Zec 12: IO- Tr;n;lllr;ol/ I'n mf I [the Son] will pour on the house of David, and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the Spirit of grace and o f supplicatio n: and they will loo k to me [the So n) who m they have pier ced: an d they sha ll mo urn for him [the Messiah]. as one mou rns for his only son. a nd will grieve bitte rly for him [the Messiah ]. as o ne grieves for his firstborn (Zcc 12:10). Iuscusston: Zec 12:10 was fulfill ed in Act 02:33 when Peter said that the Son poured n ut the Spirit at Pentecost, Luke then wrote: W hen the people hea rd this [tha t the Messiah had been killed for their sins]. the y wert: cut to the heart and said to Pete r a nd the other apostles. 'Brothers. what shall we do ?' (Ac t 0 2:37). A text that sugges ts or speaks of the dei ty of the Messiah should be co nsidered a Tri nitari an proof, Ln'13:07 - Tr;n;lllr;ol/ /'n mf ' Awa ke, swo rd. aga inst m y She pherd, and against the man who is my fellow;' says Yahveh of hosts: 'strike tbe Shepherd, and the sheep shall be scatte red; and I will turn my hand on the hnle on es' (Zec 13:(7). Dtscusston: A text that sugges ts or spe aks of the deity of the Messiah sho uld be co nsidered a Trinitarian proof, Zcc 13:07 is a prophec y about the Me ssiah. Yes/ilia said he is the Shepherd of Zec 13:07 (M ar 14:27 ). Th at this Shepherd is the fellow (or "neighbor" or "assoc ia te") o f rahveh suggests the Messia h' s de ity. Zec 13:0 7 is similar to passage s such as Psa 045:06·()7 [BN S 045:07-08 ), where Yahveh the Father calle d rbe So n, "God: ' and se t him above the Son 's co mpanions. Matenal com direlbs autcrars

3 10

Yae l Na tan

As Eusebius notes, the re are many passages where o ne person of the Trinity spoke of another in the third perso n, such as in Gen 35:0 1, Mal 03 :01-Trinitarian ['mof ' Behold, I se nd my messe nge r, a nd he will prepare the way befo re me; and the Lord, who m you seek, will suddenly come to his temple; and the messenger of the covenant, whom you desire. behold, he comes!' sap Yah"eh of hosts (Mal 03:0 I), Discu ssion: A text that suggests or spea ks of the deity of the Messiah should be considered a Trinitarian proof. The Father said that he would se nd John the Baptist as a messenge r to go before his [the Father 's ] Presence [the So n] (Mal 03 :0 1), T his is similar to how Efyoll said his Presences (or "Faces"), the Son and Spirit, wo uld go with Moses into the Promised Land, On this last point, see the discussio ns of Exo 33: 14- 15 and Mal 03:0 I in Presences of Elvon chapter.

The NT-Trilli/llriall Pm of Discu ssion: All the Ne w Testament books contain prima !acit' Trinitarian texts except perhaps James a nd T hird Joh n, Belo w is a representative sampling of NT Trinitarian passages, Mar 03 :16-I7- Tri"ifarial/ Proof Ye,l'hua. whe n he was bapti zed, went up dire ct ly fro m the wate r: and behold. the heave ns were opened to him, He saw the Spirit of God desce nding as a dove . and co ming 011 him, Beho ld, a voice o ut of the heavens said : 'T his is my be lo ved Son, in whom I am well pleased' (Mat 03 :16- 17), Discu ssion: The Father is represented by a voice from heave n, the Spirit by the dove, and the Son is YcshuG. Mat 17; IS-Trinitaria/l Pmof Lord, have mercy on Illy son, for he is epileptic. and suffers grievo usly; for he often falls into the fire. and often into the wate r (Mat 17:1 5 ), Discu s...ion: A text that suggests or spea ks of the deity of the Messiah should be considered a Trinitarian proof, A father asked Ye,I1uIlI , "Lord. have mercy on my son," The English transliteration of the Greek for "Lord. have mercy" is "Kurie £Iei,I'OII," This common liturgical phrase is fo und in the Greek LXX (Psa 040:05. 11; 122:03 ; Isa 33:(2). By itself, Mat 17:15 may not be the most compell ing proof of Yeshl/a' s deity. Note, ho we ver, ho w often Ye,l llI/a is asked In ha ve merc y, or is said to be merciful (Mat 15:22: 17: 15; 20:30, 3 1: Mar 05:19; Luk 0 1:58 : ICo 07:25: ITi 0 1:02: 2Ti 0 1:02, 16. 18: IPe 0 I:03; l ud 0 I:2 1), This freque ncy suggests Ye,\hfll/'S de ity,

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

311

MI11 22:4.l-45-Trini/aritm Proof He said to them , ' How t hen does David in the Spirit ca ll him Lord, saying, 'The Lord said to my Master, 'S it at my right hand, until I make your e nemies a footstool for your feet?" If David called him 'Lord: how is he his son?' (Mat 22:43-45 ). Discu ssion: YC.I'hull sa id that David spoke in the Spirit and said, "The Lord [the Fa ther ] said to my Master [the Son )." Note the mention of each person of t he Trin ity. A parallel account is fo und at Mar 12:36-37. Mat 22:43-45 is mentioned in t he Sh,'n/(/ and the Prophet beh ind the Prophets chapters. and in the NT use of OT Yuhl'eh texts appendix. Mar 28:IY-Triniwriun Proof Go and ma ke disc iples of all nations, baptizing them in the Na me [singular] of the Fa ther and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit ( Mat 2R: 19). Diseus...ion : Mat 28: 19 and the baptisms at Pentecost (Act 02:41) are the start of the fulfillment of Zec hariah's prop hecy: It will happen in thaI day, that liv ing waters [baptisma l water] will go o ut from Jerusalem; half to ward the eastern sea, and half toward the western sea; in summe r and in winter will it be. Yahl'eh will be King over all the earth. In that day Yah",'h will he one , and his name o ne (Zec 14:0R09 : see also Joh 07:3R-39: Act 02 :3R). Zec 14:08·09 refers to the fact that the mem bers of the Trin ity have the same Name, Yah veh, When the disciples spoke of "the Name" being "Yeshul/" (Act 05: 40-41), they were conscious of the fact that Ye.l hffll means "Yahveh saves" (Mat 0 1: 2 1; ITi 01 :15). The disciples also knew that the Father said in the LXX of Isa 42 : 04b that the gent iles would trust in the Name of the Servant of Yahl'eh (Mat 12:2 1). Mat 2R :19 and o ther similar passages are men tioned in the disc uss ion the Aaronic Blessing (Num 06:22-27) in this appendix. l.uk02:2I, 25. 29, 49-Trinifllrian Proof Discussion: Ye,I-IlUtI means. "Yalll'ell saves" (Luk 0 1:31; 02:2 1), The Holy Spirit was upon Si meon [Luk 02 :25). Simeon thanked the Sovereign Lord (Luk 0 2:29 ), who is YeJlma's Father {Luk 02:49). loll OI :OI -Trini/(lf/'tllI l'flHJf In the begin ning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God (Iuh 0 I:01), Discussion: The Word (the Son) was with God (the Father). and the Word was God (the Son). l oll 01 :OI·03- hini/arilm Pm of In the heginnin g was the Word, and the Word was with God , and the Word was God. The same was in the begin ning with God. All things were

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

312

Yael Na tan

made throug h him. Witho ut him was not an ything made that has been made (Jnh 0 1:01 -03). Discu ssion: T he Wo rd (the Son) created everything. Interest ingly, the Word said t hat he even created the vege tation in the Garden o f Eden on the Six th Day (compare Eze 31:0 I, 09) . T hose who wou ld say the So n is a c reatu re cre ate d by the Father mu st interpolate the words "except himsel f ' twice into Jo hn's statements like this: All thing s were made through him [except himself]. Without him was not a nything made thai has been made [e xcept himself]. So without the interpolations, it is clear that the So n is divine and nOI a c reature. Joh OJ: J5, 30-Trini/aritm Proof Discussion: John the Baptist said that YC.~JIIf(J existed before him, even though John the Baptist was born six: mon ths before YeIhl/a (Luk 01 :24, 26, 36. 56 ). John the Baptist was speaking in an erernal se nse. Joh OJ: J8-Triniwrilm Proof No one has see n God [the rather] at any time . The o nly begone n God [the Son]. who is in the bosom o f the Fathe r, he [the So n) has declared him [the Father] (Jo h 0 I:18 ). Discu ssion : Abraha m, Moses and other mere humans talked to the Father, but his essential essence and glory were hidden from them so they wo uld not die (Exn 33: 18-20 ). Some tran slation s read, "o nly begotte n So n," beca use so me copy ist long ago changed Jo h 01: 18 to match the familiar Joh 03: [6 passage. The change to "So n" is refl ected only in manuscripts from one area, but the study of olde r manuscripts fro m a rou nd the Med ite rrane an s hows tha i the original de finitel y read , "o nly begotten God," Howe ver, proo fs o f the deity o f Ch rist as so many and powerful. that C hristians need not insist on this reading. Joh 03:02 , tt , .l4-Trinitarilln Proof Discussinn : The se passages a re d iscussed in rel at ion to Isa 40: 13 in thi s appendix. Joh 05: 17- TrinitariGiI Proof YeS/1lI1I said to them. 'My Father is alway s at his work to this very day, and I, 10 0 , am working' (Joh 05: 17). Discu ssion: T he Jews belie ved that since God rested on the first Sabbath, Je ws ought also rest eac h Sabbath da)'- as was directed by Moses, Ye.\ hua informed the Je ws that this reasoning was not appl icable to him, since the Fathe r and the So n have always bee n at work (Joh 05:1 7, 36; 14:10 ). T he Father and the So n worked through the Sab bath , so the person o f Yahveh who rested on the Se venth Day was the Spirit. Yes/1lI1I defi nite ly thought and spoke in Trinitarian ter ms.

Malenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

313

Joh OS-Trini/ariall Proof Disc ussio n: Yeshlla a lluded to YaJ,,·, .,h's "J A M" state ments by mak ing vario us " I AM" state ments himsel f (Jo h 08:24, 28. 58; 13:19; 18:0 5-08 ; see Exo 03: 02. 13-1 4 in this ap pendix) . Y".I'hlllt'S statemen t, " Before Abraham..l AM'" (Joh OR: 58), is a parallel to Mic 05:02 in tha t both statements show the pre-existence of the Messiah. Mic 0 5:02 is disc ussed in this appe ndix. Concerning the " I A M" suneme nts. see the " I AM" and "So ng o f Moses" chapters, es pecially. Joh 09:24. 3H-Trhti/ariclll Proof Discu ssion : T houg h the Phar isee s to ld the blind man: Give glory to God . for we know this ma n is a sinner (Joh 09 :24 ), still the blind man worshipped Yes/ilia O oh 09 :38) . Sec the Song of Mo ses ch apter for disc ussion abo ut this incid e nt. Joh JO:_W-Trini/tlritlll Proof Discussio n: " I a nd the "ather aft: [G reek for "a re": 1',1'111('11) one" (Joh 10:30). The verb "are" is plural, so the " I" and "t he Father" indicate two persons. T herefore. One ness Theolo gy, a.k .a., Moda lism, is comradicted by this passage . Joh 10:30 is d iscussed at Psa 082:06-08 in this appendix, and in the chapter on the Shema. Joh U :16./7,16-Trinitarianl'mof 1 will pray to the Father. and he will give you another Counselor, thai he may be with you forever, the Sp irit o f truth, whom the world cannot rece ive; for il does not see him, ne ither knows him. You kno w him. for he lives with you . and will be in yo u. But the Co unselor, the 1I0 ly Spmt. who m the Father will send in ruy name , will teac h yo u all things and will remind you of eve ryrhi ng I ha ve said 10 you (l oh 14 :16). Dtscu sston : See the d iscussion o f these passages in Isa 40: 13. Joh 14:2.t-26-Trinilarial/ Pmof YeS/ilia an swered him, 'If a man loves me, he will keep my word. M y Father will love hi m, and we will co me to him. and make ou r home with him. He who docs no t love me docs not keep my words. The wo rd that yo u hear is nOI mine , but the Parhers who se nt me. 1 ha ve said these things 10 yo u, while st ill living with yo u. But the Co unselor, the Ho ly Sp irit, whom the Fathe r will sen d in my Name, he will leach you all things, and bring 10 yo ur memory all that I said to yo u' [Jnh 14:23-26), Dtscu sston: Ye,lhrw engaged in Trinitarian speec h. and talked as onl y God the Son co uld talk. loh 15:26-Triniltlriall PnHlf Whe n Ihe Cou nse lor has come , who m I will se nd to you fro m the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will te stify about me (Joh 15:26 ). Matenal com direlbs autcrars

31 4

Yael Natan

Dtscusston: The Father, Son and Spirit are mentioned. Joh 17:05 , 24-Trinitarhm Proof Now, Father , glo rify me with yo ur ow n self with the glo ry that I had with yo u before the world ex isted .. .. Father. I desire that the y also whom you have given me be with me where I am, that the y may see my g lory, that you have give n me, for you love d me before the fo unda tio n of the world (Jo h 17:05,24). Discu ssion: YI' ,I'Ima i ~ pree xistent. l oll 20:28-Trinif{lrillll I'rlmf Thomas an swered him, 'My Lord and my God !' (loh 20:2 8). Discu ssion: The lite ral rendering of what Thomas said to Yes/ilia is: "the Lord of me and the God of me," Nea rly the same Gree k construction and word ing arc used in Rev 04:1 I where the twenty-fo ur hea ven ly e lders said: "the Lord an d the God of us." David sa id nea rly the same thing in Hebre w: " My God , and my Lor d" (P sa 0 35: 2:\). T his s uggests that David. T hom as and the twen ty-fou r cide rs spoke o f Ye,I'IlIlll as being God, Notice tha t Ye.l'/lIIa made no attempt to co rrect Tho mas by den ying he was God. If Ye.l'/w a were not God , the n a co rrection certainly wo uld have been in orde r (Act 14 :1 5 ; Col 02: 18 ; Rev 22:08-(9). Th is is similar to Joh 08:59 where people kne w Ye,l lIl/a was cla iming to be God. a nd Ye.l'hua neither retracted or cla rified his remarks to deny that he was God the So n.

A /'f 16:J/, 34- 1"rinifarilln l'mof T hey replied, ' Believe in the Lord Ye,lhafl , and you will be saved-c-yo u and your hou se hold: The j ailer bro ught them into his house and set a me al before the m; he was filled with jo y becau se he had co me to believe in God-he and his whole fam ily (A ct 16:3 1. 34 ). Iuscu sston: A text that sugges ts or speaks of the de ity of the Messiah sho uld he considered a Tri nitarian proof. T he jailor believed in the Lo rd YeI h uli (Act 16:3 1), whom the narrator calls "001.1" (Act I fl:34 I,

Ad 17: 18. l J-Trinilarian Proof Som e o f the Epic ure an and Stoic philoso phers also we re conversing with him. So me said, ' What does this babbler want to say ?' Others said, ' He seems to be advoca ting foreig n d eities [plural],' because he preached YeI /II /(/ an d the resur rect ion ... .Tor as I passed along, and observed the obj ects o f yo ur worship, I found a lso an altar with this inscriptio n, 'To an unknow n god [singular ): What the refore yo u worship a s unknow n, this I proc laim to you' (Act 17: 18, 23). Discu ssion: A text that suggests or speaks of the deity of the Mess iah sho uld be c onside red a Trinitarian proof. The narr ato r Luke asse rted that the Gree k

Matenal com direlbs

autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

315

philosop hers tho ught Paul was talking abo ut "go ds" because Paul was ta lking about Y('.~luw and the resurrec tion (G reek: w/(/,\/al'is) (Act 17; 18). Evidently, the G reek philosophers tho ught Paul preach ed tha t Yeshua ha d a co nsort named Anastasia. since (lIIlI,I'/(l.I'i.\ is a fe minine noun. T he ancie nts worshippe d personifications s uch as the Seasons, Fate, and Po wer, as wel l as " Revere nce. Tempe rance and O bed te nce-to-Law."!" So Paul d isab used them of this notion by proclaiming that Ye.I'lw a was their " unknown god [G ree k: /11('11,1' (s mg ulurj]" (Act 17: 23).

Act 20:28-Tril/i/arial/ Proof There fore, take heed to yourselves and to a ll the flock, among which the Holy Sp irit has made you ove rsee rs. to shepherd the Church of God [Ye.11w a l whic h He [YeshulI] purch ased with His own [Yeshul/'s ow n] blood (Act 20 :28). Diseus...ion: Paul called Ye.l'hua "God: ' Rom 08:09·11, 16-Trinitarian Proof You, however. are co ntrolled not by the sinfu l nature but by the [lioly] Spirit. if the [Holy ] Spirit of God [the Fathcr j Iivcs in you. And if anyone does not have the spirit of Ch rist. he does not belong to Christ. But if Ch ristl's spirit] is in you. you r hody is dead beca use of sin, yet your spirit is ali ve because of righteousness. And if the [Holy] Sp irit of him [the Fathe r] who raised Yt'shua from the dead is living in you, he [the f ather] who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodie s through his [the Fathe r's 1I01y] Spirit, who lives in you ...The (Holy) Spirit himself test ifies with our spirit that we arc God's [rho Father's ] children (Rom 08:09- I I, Hi). Dtscusston: Paul referred to the "spirit of Christ" living in all C hristians, along with the Hol y Spirit sent by the Father. That Paul mean t "spirit of C hrist" rather than the "Ho ly Spirit sen t by Christ" is seen from the subsequent stateme nt, "Hut if Ch rist is in you:' Christ's sending the Holy Spi rit would not, by itself, constitute Christ living in a Ch ristian. Rom 09:05- J"rini/(lrian Proof

C hrist ca me, who is o ver all, the ete rnally blessed God. Amen (Rom 09:(5). Iuscusston: Paul here referred to Ye.I'hua as being God. Rom JJ:36-Trilli/arill/l Proof

.. .because of him [the Fathe r]. through Idia ] him [the Son ], and by' me ans of him [the Spirit I are all things (Rom 11:36 ). Dtscusston: T he typ ical pattern seen in the NT is: ultimate agency is anr'ibuted to the Father, intermediate age ncy is cred ited to Ye.l'huli. and means is ascri bed to the Holy Spirit. So according to the NT patte rn, the first " him" re fers to the Father, Matenal com direlbs autcrars

316

Yael Natan

the second "him" to the Son. and the third "him" 03:04-07 in this appen dix.

10

the Spirit. For instance, see Tit

ICo Il :04·06-Trinitllriwl /'mo! Discu ssion: Paul sa id that each membe r of the Trinity is the so urce of diverse gifls thai are manifested in the Church. In Paul's Trinita rian summations, ge nerally the "Spint" refers 10 the Spiri t, "Lord" refer s 10 Yeshua , and "God" refe rs to the Father. For e xa mple: • No w there are various kinds of gifts. but the same Spirit. There are various kind s of se rvice. a nd the sa me Lord [the Son ). The re arc vario us kinds of workings. but the same God [the l-ather ], who works all things in all (l Co 12: 04 -06), • There is one body. and one Spirit. even as you also were called in one hope of your calling: one Lord [the Son]. o ne faith. one baptism. one God [the Father] and Father of all. who is over all. and thro ugh a ll. and in us a ll (Eph 04:04-06).

,"d • May the grace of the Lord Yeshua Chri st. and the love of God [the Father). and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all (2Co 13: 14).

2e o 13: 14-Trini/llrilll1 Proof Discu ssion : See ICo 12:04-06 in this appe ndix. Ga l OJ:OJ. I j· J6- Trini /llriall Prrmf Puul, an apostle (not sent from men no r thro ugh the agenc y of man. bUI throu gh Ye,~JIlfII Christ and God the Fathe r, who raised Him from the dead ).. .Bu t when God, who had set me apart even from my mother's womb and called me thro ugh His grace.. .(Gal 01 :01, 15). Discu ssion : Paul wrote that the Father and the Son se nt him . Paul also said he was not se nt "from men, nor by a (mere) man" (Gal 0 1:01 .1 5-16 ). So he re Paul specifica lly excl udes Ye,I'hu ll from the category of mere men. Paul pUis Yex/llla in the sa me catego ry as God. In a parallel passage, God said, "Who will go for us?" Isaiah answered, "Here am I. Send me!" The NT writers say that Isaiah saw and talked about the glory of Yeshua (Joh 12:4 1). but tal ked 10 the Spirit in his visio n in the temple (Act 28:25 26 ). So the Spirit se nt Isaiah for the Son and Spirit (the " us"). Ef' h 04:04-06-Trinitarian Proof Discu ssion: See ICo 12:04-06 in this appe ndix.

Phi 02:05· 07-Trini/arilll1 Proof Let this mind be in you, which was also in Chri st Ye.l h flll , who being in vel)' natu re God, did no t con sider eq uality with God so mething to be held dearly. but made himself nothing. takin g the very nature of a Servant. be ing made in human likeness (Phi 02:05-07). Matenal com direlbs autcrars

317

The Jewi sh Trinity Discussion: Ye.\'Jwll was by his very nature God. Col 02:09-TrinitariGlI Proof For in him all the full ness of the God head dwe lls bodily (Col 02:09). All the fullness of God d wells in C hrist. Surely Yeshua is the God-man.

l Ti 01:16-17- Trinitarian I' m of Ho wever. for this cause I obtained mercy. that foremost in me, Yeshtw Christ might display all his patie nce. for an example of those who would be lieve in him to eternallife . Now In the King eternal, immortal, invisible . to God who alone is wise, be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen (I Ti 01 :16-1 7). Discussion: In many passages in the Bible . it is hard to disting uish which phrase refers to which member of the Trinity, T he reason is that to some extent. most phra ses co uld a pply eq ua lly to all three mem be rs of the Trinity, ei the r individua lly or coltecuvely, /1i 03: 16-Trinill1riwl PrrHJf AmI witho ut co ntrove rsy great is the myster y of godli ness: He was manifested in the flesh. justified in the Spirit. seen by angels. preached among the gentiles, believed on in the world, received up in glory ( ITi 03: 16). Dtscus..ion: The " He" in the above passage is the Son. Some early ma nuscripts have "God" instead of " He," /1i 06:14- 16-Tri/litaricm Pm of ,. .until the Lord Yeshua Christ' s appearance . which he will manifest in his own time. he who is the blessed and only Ruler. the King [the Son] of Kings [Father a nd Spirit] and Lord [the So n) of Lords [Fa ther and Spirit). who a lo ne has irmnortaliry, d we lling in unappro.achable light, who m no man has seen or can see, to who m be honor and e verlasting power. Amen ( ITi 06 :14-16). Dtscusslon: Paul ca lled Ye.\'hua the "o nly ruler," but then said Ye.\1/UiJ was a King of Kings. Since Pau l ju st said Yes/lila was the only ruler. Paul must be speaking of the Father and Spirit when Paul spoke of plural Kings and Lords. So perhaps " King of Kings" is better trans lated " King among Kings," meaning that Ye,\ /lIfll is a King a mo ng Kings, the Trinit y.

Ti t 02: 1J-14- Trinitarian Pm o! . ..looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of o ur great God and Savior. Ye,\'hua Christ (Tit 02 :13). Discussion: Paul spoke of the Son "appearing" else where (21 h 02:8; lTi 06: 14; 2Ti 0 1:10; 04 :0 1. OR). According to the Granville-Sharp G ree k grammatical :I and Savior" ( Tit 02: 13). rule (defined below), Paul ca lled Ye,\ /uw "the Great GrM Paul alluded to Psa 130 :07-08 in Tit 02: 13. The psa lmist said believers are said to wait on rah veh their redeemer, Paul said believers wait o n "the Great G(MJ Matenal com direlbs autcrars

318

Yael Natan

and Savior" Y/,.\1IUlI who redeems them. Yahveh is called the "Great God" seve ral times in the OT (Deu 10:17; Ezr 05:08; Neh 08:06; Psa 095:03 ; Dan 02:45 ). These passages arc discussed in the NT Usc of OT Ydhl'eh Texts appendix under Psa 130: 07-08. So by saying, "we wait." on Ye.~hu(/ (Tit 112 :13- 14), Paul alluded 10 Psa 130:07 and so appl ied a Yah l'el1 text to Yes/lIIl1. The OT ca lls Yd/lI'el1 "Great God " several times. so Paul applied se veral Yahveh texts to Yeshua by say ing he is "Great God." Here is a defi nition of the Granville-Sharp rule: NT Greek some times uses two singular nouns joined with a kai (and ) to re present a single entity or perso n. This compound structure is a hendiadys: article + noun + kai + noun = o ne unit. The nouns must be of the same ge nder and case, and should both he singula r. The first noun must have an art icle while the seco nd noun must not have an article. TIf 03:04-07-Trinitarian Proof But when the kindness and lo ve [Yesllll(/ ) of God o ur Sav ior [the Fathe r] appeared, he [the Father] saved us. not because of righteous thing s we had done, but because of his [the Father 's ] merc y. He (the Father] sa ved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, whom he (the Father] poured OUI on us generously through Ye,I'Il/1lI Christ o ur Savior, so that, hav ing been justified by his [Ye ,\'1w a 's ) grace . we might become hei rs having the hope of etemaltife (Tit 03:04-01 ). Discussion: A typical Trinitarian pattern see n in the NT is: ultimate agency is attribu ted to the Father, intermediate age ncy is credited to Yex/llIa, and means is ascribed 10 the Holy Spirit. For instance, sec Rom 11:36 in this appe ndix.

/ Th OJ: l t-s-Trinitariun Proof Now may [ I ) God and our [2) Father himself and our [3] Lo rd YeS/ilia clear the way [the ve rn is singular) for us to come to you . Discussion: T he singular verb for three divine subjects indicates the Trinity. Heb 0 1:0 1-14: 02:05-Trilliwriall Proof Dtscu sston : A text that suggests or speaks of the deity of the Messiah should he considered a Trinitarian proof. The write r of Hebrews says Ya hveh the Father calls the Son . "God" (lleb 0 1:08). Heb 01:08 is disc ussed e lsewhere in this appendix (Deu 32:08-09, LXX 32:43; Psa 082:06-08). T he writer of Hebrews argues that Yeshna co uld not be a mere ange l. "All" angels are ministering spirits who are to worship the Son, Yeshua. Ye.~ hIUJ is not a ministering spirit. but is rulin g the world and the heave ns (Heb 01:06). Elsewhere. the angels arc sa id to serve Yahl'e11 (Psu 103:20 ), and are commanded to wors hip Yllhr eh (LXX Deu 32:43: Psa 097:07 ). This sugges ts the Son is Ydl1 l'e h the Son. Heb 03:07- I I-Trinira rial/ Proof There fore, eve n as the 1I01y Spirit said. 'Today, if you will hear his [the Fathe r's ] voice, ' Do not harden your hearts, as in the provocation, like as Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

319

in the day of the tria l in the wilderness. whe re your fathers tested me [the l-ather] by proving me [the f a ther]. and saw my [the Father 's ] works fo r forty yea rs.' The refo re I [the Spirit! was displeased with that ge neratio n. and said. 'They always err in the ir heart, but they d id not know my [the Spirit's ] ways;' as I [the Sp irit] swore in my [the Sp irit's] wrath. 'T he)' will not e nter into my [the Spirit's ] rest ' (Heh 03 :07- 11). Dtscusston : The writer of Heb rews wrote that the Spirit spo ke of v ah veh (the Father ) in the third person. An impersonal force like elec tricity would not refer to others as third person s,

Heh 09: J4-Tri"i/llrilill Proof How much more will the blood of C hrist, who through the ete rnal Spirit offered himself withou t ble mish to God, clean se your co nsc ience from dead wor ks to serve the living God? (Heb 09 :14). Dtscu s..ion: Ye.I'!WlI offered the sacrifice of himself to the Father thro ugh the age ncy of the Spirit. The sacrifi ce o f a me re man would not cover the sins o f many. but the willing sacrifice of the God-man would. Yahveh said that the righ teousness of men like Noah, Danie l and lob barely sufficed to save a few people from a te mporal d isaster (El e 14: 14, 20). It would req uire the righ teousness and sac rifice of a God-man to suffice for a ll believers for an eternity. 2Pe OJ:OJ-Trini/arian Proof Simon Peter, a servant and apost le o f Ye.~ luw Christ, 10 those who have obtained a like prec ious faith with us in the righteousness of ou r God and Savior. Ye,I'!lUa C hrist (2Pe 0 1:0 I ). Discussion: Pete r said tha t he was "a bondsc rvunt and apost le o f Yes/lila C hr ist, " Peter ca lled r es trua "o ur God a nd Sa vio r Yesh lUl C hrist ," Sim ilar passages include Tit 02: 13; 2 Pe 0 I: II : 02 :20; 03 :02 and IR. Uo 05:07-OR-Tril/i/arial/ Pmof For there are three that bear reco rd in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Ho ly Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witne ss in eart h, the Sp irit, and the water, and the blood: and the se three agree as one (KJV 110 05 :07-0R). Dtscusston : Appare ntly. a co pyist augmen ted the Trinitarianism of 11005:07. The original KJ V translato rs relied o n the Textus Recepms; and did nor have the benefit of later manuscript finds, so a non-revised KJ V reads: For there are three that bear record in heaven , the Father. the Word. and the Ho ly Ghos t: and these three are one ( 110 05:07). Perhaps this was the same copyi st who augmented the Trinitarianism of Rev 04: OR as passed do wn in the Greek Majority Te xt, as is d iscu ssed at Re v 04:0R in this append ix.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

320

Yael Na tan

The inspired o riginal perhaps literall y read : For there are three thai testify: the Spirit. the water and the blood; and the three are o ne [lids ] into the one [hen ] (Uo05:07-08). T his last ph rase is so metimes tran sla ted as "and t he thre e ag ree as o ne ." Though lJo 05:07-118 is not talking about the Tnmty, it see ms 10 be mode led on a Trinitarian understanding o f the Shema in that three e ntities are united as one. See the chapter o n the Sncma . lJo 05:10- Tr;n;lllriulI Pnmf And we k no w that Ihe SOil of God has eome a nd has give n us an understanding. Ihal we may know Him [the l-uther] who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Ye ,\'1ultl Christ. He [the So n] is the rrue God and eternal life ( Uo 05:20 ). Discussion: Note that John else where associates Ye,~hlla with "eternalfife" ( IJo 0 1:02; 05: 11. 13). A text that sugges ts or speaks of the deity of the Messiah should be co nside red a Trinitarian proof. Rn ' 04:0fl-TrillilllriUII Proof

The four living creatures. having each one of them six wings, are full o f eyes around abo ut and within. The y have no rest d ay and night, saying: 1I0l y, holy, holy is the Lord God, the Almighty, who was and who is and who is 10 co me (Rev 04:08). Discu ssion: The angels sa ng the Trisagioo (vfhrice Hol y" ) liturg ica l formula. This refrain is similar to Tnsagiou in Isu 06 :0 3.

Re I' 05: / / ·/4- Trinitarian Pmof Discussion: John wrote that all c reat ures wo rshipped God and the Lamb. who is Ye5hua. Note that John d id not include Ye5hl/a with me re creatures, meaning that he was the God-man. Rei' /5-/6-Triniw ritm Pm of Discus-sion : Rev 15:08 mentio ns Ihal o nly God was in the temp le and no o ne e lse co uld ente r the temp le until the seven plagues were fi nished (Rev 16:111 -2 1). Rev 15:03 men uons the Song of the Lamb. A loud vo ice from the te mple warn s tha t he will return as a thief in Ihe night ( Rev 16:15; co mpare with Mat 24:44 and ITh 05:02). The voice from the templ e also said. " It is done" (Rev 16:17; co mpare with Joh 19:30 ). The men tion of the lamb , the thief and the wo rds from the cross sugges t that the So n is the person of God speak ing fro m the te mple. So YeI/lIIa is called God (Rev 15:01': ).

Re I' /9:09·10; 22:06·09- Trinitaril/n Proof Discussion: The Apostle John heard the angel say, "T hese are the true words of God" (Rev 19:09). Joh n thoug ht that the ange l had called himself God . John

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

321

then bow ed down to worship the angel becau se he mistook the an gel for the Ma lek Yah vch , the Son (Rev 19:10 ), Later. John hea rd another angel sa)': The Lord , the God of the spirits of the prophets. sent his angel to show his se rva nts the things Ihat must soo n ta ke place (R ev 22:(6). Once again , Jo hn thou ght an angel was identifying himself as the Mu lek Yalll'eh . the Son (Rev 22:01\-(9). That this second an gel that John mistakenly attempted 10 wo rsh ip was an an gel is con firmed a few verse s later where the Son said. " I. Ye" /rl/u . ha ve sent my angel" (R ev 22: 16). This mean t Yeshlla was the "th e Lord, the God of Ihe spirits o f the prophets" who had "se nt his angel " (Rev 22:06). The reason John thou ght the Rev 22 ange l wa s Yeshlla is beca use the Fathe r spo ke of the Mll1ek Yahveh (the Ang el o f Yllhreh) as " my Malek " (Exo 23:23; 32: 34). To ot hers, the M(llek Yohveh was kno wn as "hi s Angel" (Ge n 24:07. 40; Dan 0 3:25.28; 06:22 ). So the reaso n Joh n bowed do wn to worship the second angel (Re v 22: 0 8-(9) wa s bec au se Jo hn mistakenl y tho ught the second angel wa s the Son, the Angel o f Yahl'e h (Heb 0 1:(6). Joh n wou ld ne ve r worsh ip any person he kne w to be a mere angel (Gal 01 :08: Co l 02: 18). The two angel s ' react ions show th at J ohn was bowing dow n 10 wo rship j ust as on e wo uld worship God in pers on (Re v 19: 10; 22:09). Th e ange l co uld have accepted Jo hn 's bow ing dow n if John we re merely show ing honor or obeisance . as was the custo m in the ancien t Near East (Gen 19:11 1; Nu m 22:3 1; Dan 02 :46). Th is shows that John thoug ht the Mah,k Yahvch , the So n, sho uld be worshipped as God-God eq ua l to the Father.

Re I' 2 / :22-23-Tril/iwrian Proof I saw no temp le in it. for the Lord God, the A lmight y, and the Lam b. are ils temp le . The city has no need for the sun, neit her o f the moo n, 10 shine, for the very g lory of God illum inat ed it. and its lamp is the Lamb (Rev 2 1:22-23). Discu ssion: The Lord God and the Lamb " is" (sing ular verb) a templ e. The next verse also shows the compound unity in that " the glory of God [the Father] ligh ts the city, and the Lamb [the Son] is its lamp." Notice that the Fat her is the light tha t co mes from the proximity of the Son who is the lamp. Re I' 22:0J ,03 -04-Trinilllritlll Proof He showed me a river of water of life , dear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God an d of the Lamb.. .The throne of God and of the Lamb will be in it. and his servants serve him . They will see his fac e. and his nam e will be on thei r forehead s (Re v 22:0 1, 03-(4). Iuscu sston: The Apostle John shows the compound unity of the Trinity in that God [the Fat her) and the Lamb [the Son ] to geth e r have a (singular) thro ne, his (singular) servants serve him (singular), and they wil l see his (singular) face and have his (sing ular) name on their foreheads. Matenal com direlbs autcrars

322

Yael Na ta n

T hat the Fathe r an d So n have a singular throne ag rees with Yal" 'eh's OT stateme nt: A glo rious thro ne, ex alte d fro m the begi nning, is me place of our sanctuary tJer 17: 12. as is mentioned in the MT plurals ap pendix). Note Ihat in Jer 17:12. a singu lar throne is found in "ou r" sa nctuary.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

AppendixD A Sam pling of the NT Use of OT Yah veh Texts A sample of the Yahveh texts ap plied to the Father in the NT

OT C itat io ns: Lev 26 : 12; lCh 22: 10; Isa 52: 11 : Eze 37 :27 Extract: 2Co 06 :16-18 Extract Usage: Q uote Summar}': The mention of the Father in l eo 06: 18 indicates that Pau l kne w th e Fath er spoke the four OT pas sage s (Lev 26: 12; lCh 22 : 10: Isa 52: I I: Eze 37 :27) that Paul quoted in leo 06: 16-1 R. OT C itat io ns: De u 32:43; Psa 0 I8:49 ; 117 :0 I Extract: Ro m 15 :0 8-1 1 Extract Usage: Q uote Summ ar y: Pau l's mess ian ic read ing o f MT peu 32:43. Psa OJ 8:49 a nd I J 7: o I (Rom 15:08-1 1) me ans the person mentioned as being Ya hreh and God is the Father, and the Son is the God-ma n who instructs Jews and gentiles 10 praise the Father. OT Citation: Psa 0 16:08 Extract : Act 02:25-3 1 Extrac t Usage: Qu ote Sum mary: Peter read Psa Ol6 messianica lly (Act 02 :25-3 1) where the Father is called God (Psa 016:0 I ), Lord (Psa 016:02) and ranven (Psa 01 6:02. OS, 07 . 08 ). The Son tru sted the Father to resurrect hi m be fore parrc fucnon (Psa 0 16:10), OT Citation: Psa 0 31 :05 [El/S0 3 1:06 ) Extract : Luk 23:46 Extrac t Usage: Quote Summary: Ye,\' h/lu read Psa 0 3 1 me ss ianica lly. meaning that David prophetically penned the words the Me ssiah would spe ak to the Father whi le on the cro ss (Psa 0 3 1:05 ; Luk 23:46 ), Th e person o f Yahl'eh in view in Psa 031 is the Father. Matenal com direlbs autcrars

324

Yael Na ta n

OT Citation: Isa 66:0 1-0 2a Extract: Act 07 :48-50 Extract Usage: Q uote Summary: Stephen spoke of the "Most High" (Act 07 :48) before q uoting Isaiah (Isu 66:01 -02a; Act 07:49-50). T his sho ws that Stephen understood that the So n was quo ting the Fat her. who is e lsewhere ca lled Elyoli. meaning the Mns t High. OT Citation : Je r 09 :24 Extracts : ICo OI :3O-31: 2Co 10: 17 Extract Usage: Quot e Summary: Paul wrote: Because of him [the Father) you arc in C hrist Y/'Ihua ...as it is written, ' Let him who boasts boast in the Lord [the Father)' (Jer 09 :24: ICn Ill :3 1). Much credit for one's salvation goes to the r at he r (1oh 03: 16 ), OTCitation: Amo09:11-12LXX Extract: Act 15:16-1 7 Extract Usage: Quote Summary: T he Father wou ld raise David's falle n te nt (LXX Amo 09:1 1- 12: Act 15:1 6- 17). T his meant that af ter the scepter departed Juda h (Ge n 49:](1), the Messiah would conq uer the earth through e vangel ism (Mat 28:18-20). A sa mple of the Yahveh text s a pplied to the Father and So n in the NT OT Citatio n: Gen 0 1:26 Extract: Joh 0 I:03 Extract Usage: Allusion S ununarv : God the Father said to God the Son, " Let us make .. ." (Ge n 0 1:26). The Fathe r's creating thro ugh (he agency of the So n is sho wn clearly by Jo hn's writing that everything was made "through" and "with" the Son (Joh 01 :(3). OT Citatio n: Gen 0 1:26 Extract: HcbOI:03 Extract Usage: Allusion S ummary: Ye.~ h u(1 is the exact image of Elyon (Heb 01 :03). and this is why the Father could say "our [singular) image," rather than " your image," or " my image" or "our images" (Gc n 01 :26). OT Citatio n: Exo 23:20-2 1 Extracts: Jo h 08 : 19, 24, 58 Extract Usage: Allusion S ummary: The Fat her said to obey the M alek with his na me ("I AM") in him, or e lse the Mli lek wo uld not forgive their rebellion (Exo 23:20-21 ). Ye.l"llIUI said one ought to believ e he is " I AM ," or else dic in c nforgivcn sin (Ioh 08:24). Malenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

325

or Citation:

Deu 06:04 Extract: Joh 10:30-33 Extract Usage: Allusion Summar}' : The Jews understood Yeshll
or Citation:

Deu 06:04 -05 Extracts: Mat 22:37; Mar 12:29-30 Extract Usage : Q uote Summar}' : To show that the Shema (Deu 06:04 ; Mat 22:36-40 ) is Trinitarian. Ye.~11I1a sa id that the Sp irit inspired David when David said the Fathe r and Son were his Lord (Psa 110:01,05: Mat 22:43-45: Mar 12:36-37: Luk 20:42. 44).

or Citation:

Deu 30 :10- 18 Extracts: Rom 10:05-09, 17 Extract Usage : Q uote Summar}' : Moses said the Word was in mou ths and he arts (Deu 30: 14 ). Pau l equated the Wo rd (Dcu 30: 14) and the Voice (Dcu 30:02,08 . 10, 20) of the Father with the " Word of C hr ist" (N1V. RSV Ro m 10: 17. but the KJ V reads " word of God"). OT Citations: Deu 32:43 LXX & OSS 4QOT; Psa 097:07 LXX & Syriac Extract : He b OI:06 Extract Usage: Quote Summar)': Heb 0 1:06 quoted the DSS and LXX of Dell 32:43. and the Syriac and LXX of Psa 097:0 7. where the Father tell s the angels to worship the So n. The MT of Deu 32:43 has the So n instructing Heb rews and gentiles to praise the Fathe r. OT Citations: 2Sa 07: 11-13, 27; Psa 069:09 ; "Lec ()6 : 12 Extract : Joh 02:16-21 Extract Usage: Allusion Su mmary: Yah \'eh sa id Yah vch wo uld e xtend Da vid 's dyn asty and b uild a temple (2Sa 07:11). T he So n raised his bod y to both e xte nd David's line and build a temple (l oh 0 2:21 ), so Yeshlw is the person of Yahl'eh spoken of by the Fathe r. OT Citation: Psa 00 2:0 l- rJ2 Extract : Act 04:26 Extract Usage: Q uote Summar)': Psa 002: 12 speaks o f the Messiah as a God- man (sec the Trinitarian proofs append ix). Ye.~ hull·s saying thai rulers com mitted s in (Joh 19 : II ) ju st ified Peter's application of Psa 00 2:0 1-02 to Yes/ilia' s moc k trials (Act 04: 26-(8).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

326

Yael Na tan

O T C itation : Psa 002:07 Extract: Mat 0 3:17 Extract Usage: Allu sion Summary: The Spiri t was se nt to Yeshua at his baptism in fulfi llme nt of Iva 42 : 0 1.48:16; 61;01 and o ther prophecy. Then the Father alluded to Psa 002:07. 2Sa 07 : 14 and other tex ts b)' his saying, "This is my belov ed Son" (Mat 03: 17). O T C itation : Psa 04 5:06-07 [EHS 045:07-08 ) Extract: Hcb 0 I :08-09 Extract Usage: Quot e Summary: The writer of Hebrews noted that the Father called the So n "God" (Psa 045:06-07; Heb 0 I:08-(9). Psalms ascribin g d ivinity may have been applied to kings only in nnuci patiou of the God-man who wo uld ru le fmm David's throne. OT C itations: Psa 069: 25 [BHS 069:26); 109:08 Extract: Act 1JI :20a Extract Usage: Quote Summary: Peter read Psa 069 and Psa 109 as messianic Psalm s (co mpare Psa 069:09 and Joh 02; 17). The Messiah as ked that the Father e nsure the position vacated b)' the Messiah's betrayer would he filled hy another d iscip le (Act 0 I:20). OTCitation : Psa 091: 11 - 12 Extracts: Mat 0 4:06; Luk 04:10- 11 Extract Usage: Quote Summary: The Devil's temptatio n of Ycs/Illa is co nsistent with the me ssianic read ing o f Psa 09 1. and with the Psa lmist's bel ief that the Me ssiah would be Shoddui and Ya /II'ch the So n, and that the f ather was f.'Inm (Psa 091 :0 1. 09). OT C itations: Psa 102:[25 LXX ) 26-27 [BHS 102:26-27] Extract: Hcb 0 I:10- 12 Extract Usage: Quote Summary: Hell 0 1 co nta ins several q uotes of the Fathe r speaking both to the So n and about the Son. Heb 01:1 0 says LXX Psa 102:25-27 is the Father ass uring the So n that since he (the Son) created the earth, he will o utlast the earth. OT C itations: Psa 118:22-23 ; Isa 28:16 Extracts : Mat 2 1:42; Mar 12:10 -11: Luk 20 :17-18; 1Pe 02:06 Extract Usage: Quote Summary: The Father himself is a stumbling sto ne (Isa OS: 14 ; Rom 09:32; ICo 0 1:23; IPe 02:08). The Fathe r also makes the SOil a stumbling stone (Psa 118:2223; Isa 28:16; Mat 2 1:33-46; Mar 12:0 1-12: Luk 20:09-19: Rom 09 :33; lPe rJ2:rJ6 ).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

327

O T C itat io n: Psa 118:26 Extract : Luk 19:38-39,44 Extract Usage: Q uote Summar}': T he Father said : Israel , prep are to meet yo ur God [the Son] ... Yahvch, the God o f hos ts is his name (Amo 04 :12- 13). The cro wd wa s prepared and sang Psa 118:26 at God 's visit, but the lead er s wanted them reb uked (Luk 19:39). O T C it at io ns: Pro 09 : 10: 30:03: Ho s I I: 12 [BHS 12:0 I] E xtrac ts : Mar 0 1:24: Luk 0 1:35: 04 :34: Jo h 06: 69 : Rl:V 16:0 5 Extrac t Usage : Allusion S ummar}': Y ah veh are the Holy O nes (Jos 24: 19: Pro 09: 10: 30:03: Dan 04 :17 [BHS 04:141; 0 5: II : Hos I I:12 [BHS 12:0 I J (see the MT plurals appe nd ix). The Fathe r a nd So narc Ho ly On es (Pro 30 :03 -04). and the So n is a Holy One (Rev 16: 0 5 ). OTCita t ion: Isa 0 2:10- 11 Extrac t: 2Th 0 I:09-10 Extract Usage: Q uote Summary: 2Th 01 :07 says that Yeshua will be re vea led as the Fathe r's Prese nce and Gl ory (Isa 0 2: 10 - 11: lTh 0 1:09 -10 ). The So n is the Fear (Ge n 31:42. 53: Isa 0 2:10 ). Iva 0 2 and 2Th rJ I are d iscussed in the Pre sences o f I:"(WIII c hapter, OTCita t ion: Isa 0 7:14 Extrac t: Mat OI:22-23 Extract Usage: Q uote Summary: The Messiah would be " Immanuel," meaning . "God with us." ThaI the name " Im manuel" is meant to be taken literally can he seen from prophecies that suggest or speak o f the Messia h's deity (see the Tri nitarian proofs app endix). OT C ita t ion: lsa 28: 16b Extrac t: Ro m 10: II Extract Usage: Qu ote Summary: The Father himsel f is a stumbling sto ne (Isa 08: 14 : Rom 09 :32; ICo 0 1:23: I Pe 02:08 ). The Fat her a lso ma kes the Son a stu mbling stone (Psa 11 8: 2223: lsa 28:16: Mat 2 1:33-46 ; Mar 12:0 1-12: Luk 20:09-19 : Rom 09 :33: I Pe rJ2 :rJ6 ). OT C ita t ion: lsa 34:04 Extrac ts: Mar 13:24-28: Luk 21:26-29; Re v 06 :04, 08, 13-17 Extract Usage: Allu sion Summary: Isa 34:04, Mar 13:24-26. Luk 2 1:26-27 and Re v 06:13- 14 note a fig tree. Isa 34:05 -07 and Rev 06 note a sword and sc roll. Bot h Re v 06:16- 17 and the first (Isa 34:rJ5) and third per son speec h in lsa 34 deno te Fa ther and Son Matenal com direlbs autcrars

328

Yael Na ta n

OT Citation: Isa 43 :10 Extract: 10h 13:19-20 Extract Usage: Q uote Summary: Word s commo n to Isa 43: 10 and 10h 13:19 are: hina IthatJ pisteusae [yo u may believ e]...hoti [thaI] I'.!:'h' eimi [" I AM" ]. Ye,I'Illlll applied lsa 43: 10 to himself to prove hy his prophesying future e vents that he is " I AM" and God. OT Citation: Isa 53:0 1 LXX Extracts: Jo h 12:38; Rom 10:1 6-1 7 Extract Usage: Quote Summary: The q uotes of LXX Isa 53:01 in Joh 12:38 and Rom 10: 16- 17 say the Messiah spoke to the Fa ther. Greek NT manuscript finds attest that the phrase in Rom 10:17 is "wo rd ofChrist" (N / V, RSV) rather than "word uf God " ( KJV) . OT Citations : lsa 53 :05; 55:03, 07 Extract: Joh 20 :17 Extract Usage: Allusion S ummary: YeI IlUIl alluded to lsa 55:07 in Joh 20:17 to say nOIlC should to uch him until he was pardon ed for o thers' sins (tsa 53:05 ), and had received "the sure mercies of David" (tsa 55:03: Al:t 13:34). OTCitations : Dan 07 :13; zcc 12:10 Extracts: Mat 26:64; Re v 0 1:07 Extract Usage: Allusion S ummary: T he vision of Dan 07 relates that the Son of Man becam e Most High with the Father (see the Snng uf Muses chapter). Rev nu n a lludes to Dan 07 :13 and Zec 12:10 when it says that those responsible for Yesh ul/'s death wo uld see his return. OT Citations : Hos 11 :0 1; Num 24:08 Extract: Mat 0 2:15 Extract Usage : Q uote S ummary: Hos 11 :0 1. a verse similar to Num 24:08. is applied to ¥e.I'IlIf u (Mat 02: 15). Num 24: 16-1 7 says the Messiah would be Sllallt/ai (One of the Mighty Ones) (see the section on Num 22-24 in the Proto-Sinai tic Trinitarianism chapter). OT Citation: Joe 0 2:32 fBIIS 03:05] Extracts: Rom 10:09, 13 Extract Usage : Q uote Summ ary : Paul quo ted (Rom 10:09 . 13) a Y(lIl ~'eh text (Joe 02 :32>spoken by the So n (Act 02: 33). The NT and "the Elect" call Yeshua "Lord" often (Act 08:16; 09 : 27 ; 15:26 : 19:05, 13, 17: 2 1:13; ICo 0 I:02: 2Co 04:05 and many like texts).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

329

O T Citation: Zec 11 :1 2- 13 Extract: Mat 27:09-10 Extract Usage: Q uote Summar}' : J udas realize d that YI'shll(l was "I AM" when his sa)ing, " I AM," knock ed down sold ie rs (Joh 18:05-08). So the prompting o f the Shepherd (ZCl: 13:0 7; Mar 14:24 ) fulfi lled Zee 11 :12-13 (see the " AM " and Song o f Moses chapters). OT C itatio n: zec 13:07 Extract : Mar 14:27 Extract Usage: Q uote Summary: Yeshua said he was the Shepherd o f Zcc 13:07 (Mar 14 :27). That the Shepherd is Yiih l'eh 's fellow (Zec 13:0 7) suggests the deity o f the Mess iah, and this in turn is a proof for the Trinity (see the Trinitarian proofs chapter]. OT C itatio n: Zec 14:(}4-O5 Extracts: Act OI: I I; IT h 0 3:13 Extract Usage: Allusion Summary: Thc Father said the So n will retu rn with his ho ly one s (Zcc 14:0405), The angel s and Paul alluded to Zec 14:05 to say that the So n will return in the clouds with his ho ly ones-the saints and angel s (Act 01 : I I; IT h 0 3:13). OT C itatio ns : Mal tl3:0 I; 04:05-06 Extracts: Mat 11:1 0; Mar OI :0 2-03: Luk OI :I b- 17 Extract Usage: Q uote Su mmary : T he Fathcr se nt the Baptist ahead of his Pre se nce. who was the Ma lek of the Covenant and the person of Y ah veh who would co me to his te mple (see Mal 0 3:0 1 in the Presences of Etyon c hapter and the Trinitarian proofs appendix). A sa m ple of the Yah l'eh texts a pplied to the Fathe r a nd th e S piri t in th e NT OT C ita tion: Psa 09 5:lJ7b- 11 Extracts: lIeb 0 3:07- 11, 15; 04:0 3-04. 07 Extract Usage : Q uote Summary: The writer of Hebre ws quoted the Sp irit who spo ke of himself in the first perso n 0 , me, my), and the Spirit spoke of the Father in the third person hy saying: ...he ar his [the Fathe r's ] vo ice ( Pxa 095:07b-1 I; Heb 0 3:07-1 I: (}4:07 ).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Yael Na tan

33 0 A sample of the

Yah~eh texts

applied to the Son in the

~T

OT Citation: Gen 16:13- 14 Extracts: Jo h 04 :26, 29. 39 Extrac t Usage: Allusion S umma ry: T he Malek. who met Hagar at the wel l wa s " Yah ~'/'h" and "th e God who sees" (Ge n 16:13). Ycshua said, " I A M." and the wo man at the wel l sa id he was on e "w ho to ld me all I d id" (Jo h 04; see the " I A M" and Son g o f Moses chapters). OT Citations : Gen 32:30; 35: II , 14 Extract: Hos 12:0 3-05 Extract Usage: All usion S umma r}' : Hose a sa id tha t Jacob wrestled with God (Hos 12:0 3), and mel God again at Bethel (lios 12:(4). T his God (Gen 32:30), £1 Shaddai (Ge n 35:11), is a member of the Trinuy-c-tbc "us" of Hos 12:04 (see the MT plurals appendix ). OT Citation: Exo 0 3:02-07 Extrac t: Aet 07:30-38 Extract Usage: Q uote S umma r}' : Step hen said the Maid (Act 07:30 , 35, 38) a t the burning bush was both Lord and G od (Act 0 7:32-33). The narrator loc ated both the Ma id Yahreh and Yahwh in the sa me bush (Exo 0 3:02, 0 4; see the Trinitar ian proofs appendix ). OT Citation: Exo 0 3: 14 LXX Extrac ts: Rev 0 I:04, 08 ; 04: 08; I I: 17; 16:05 Extract Usage: All usion Summary: Yah reh said that he is " 1 AM WHO ' S" le./;'lI' eimi ho WII ] (L XX Bxo 03: 14). Ye.I'hUlI is God, Lo rd, " I AM kgll' eimi )" and " W HO IS rho uu ]" (Re v 0 1:08). See Ihe '·1 AM" chapter to find mo re or and NT " I AM" and " W HO IS" stateme nts. OT Citations: Exo 0 3:14 LXX; 06:03 Extracts: Jo h OR:5R: 1R:06

Extract Usage : Allusion Sum ma ry: Yahveh sa id, ''' I AM' [Gree k is " eg w eimi'')'" (LXX Exo 0 3:1 4). Yeshua told o f h is preex iste nce by sayi ng, " . , A M' legw eim il befo re Abraha m was" (loh OR: 5 R). See the '" AM " c hap ter to fi nd mo re OT and NT '" AM" stateme nts.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

331

OT Citation: Exo 17:06 Extract: lCo 10:04 Extract Usage: Allusion Summar}' : Yahveh the Son was the "spiritual rock" that gave Israe l living water (E xo 17:06; ICo 10:04; see the Presences of Elyan chapter). Similarly, the Son offered water to Hagar (Ge n 16) and living water to the Sa maritan (loh 04 ). OT Citation: NU Ill 21 :05 .()9 Extract : lCo 10:09 Extract Usage : Allusion Summar}' : T he narrator said the lsraefite s spoke against God (Num 2 1:25), and the people said the y spoke against Yahl'eh (N um 21:07 ). Paul said the Israelites tested C hrist (KJV. YLT ICo 10:09). so Paul knew Yf.I'hu(/ as Ya hveh the So n. OT Citations: Jdg 06:21 ; 13:20 Extract : Joh 06:62 Extract Usage : Allusion Summar}' : Proof of Y/',Ihua's metap hyvical presence in bread (Joh ()f i) was t he ascension after the c rucifix ion (Joh 06:62) , an allusion to the Malek Yahw h's ascending at Gideon and Manoah's offerings (see the Presences of Elvon c hapter). OT Citations : 2Sa 22:03; Psa 0 I R:02 Extract : Luk 0 I:69 Extract Usage : Allusion Summar}' : John the Baptist' s father, Zechariah, referred to the Messiah as "a horn of salvatio n" (Luk 01:69), a phrase used to refer to Yah w h (2Sa 22:03; Psa OIR:02; see Luk 0 1:69 in the Trinitarian proofs appendix under Isa 40:03). OT Citation: 2Sa 24: 16 Extract: Mat 26:51-53 Extract Usage : Allusion Summar}' : The Son told an angel o utside Jerusalem. " Enough! Withdraw your sword" ( ICh 2 1:1 5 ). The discip les said. " Here are two swords." YCS/ IU G said, "That is enough" [Luk 22:38). Outside Jerusalem Yeshua told Peter put away his swo rd. OT Citation: 2Ch 30 :18-20 Extracts : Mat 12:06: 19:21; Mar 10:2 1; Luk IR:22 Extract Usage : Allusion Summary: Yahl't'h pardoned seekers who failed to comply with purity laws (2Ch 30: I1'1-20). Yahveh the Son is greater than the Sabbath and the temple, and he pardoned his seekers who broke man-made rules and the Mosaic Sabbath (Mal 12:0 1'()R).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

332

Yael Na ta n

OT Citation: Psa 002: 12 Extract: Luk 22:4 8 Extract Usage: Allu sio n Su mmary: Psa 00 2 spea ks of the Me ssiah as God -man (see the Tr ini tar ian proo fs appendix}. YeI hUil alluded to Psa 00 2: 12 (Luk 22:48) at his be trayal when he sa id he is '"I AM" (Joh l R:0 5-0R: see the "I AM" and Song of Mo ses c hapters). OT Citations : Psa 014:03: 0 53:03 [BHS 05 3:04] Extracts: Mat 19:1 7: Milr 1O:1 l!:Luk 18:19 Extract Usage: Allu sio n S umma ry: Yeshua allude d to Psa 01 4:0 3 (Mat 19 :17), and nearb y is pe nned : "God is prese nt in the co mpany of the rig hteo us" (Psu 014:05). Ye.I'hua meant that he is Immanue l and he imputes righteousness to s inners (see the Sh ema c hapter). OT Citation: Psa 02 8:04 Extracts: 2Ti 04 :0 1, 08, 14 Extract Usage: Allu sio n Summa ry: The Lord is identified as Ye.I'llUll who will appear at the Last Day (2Ti 04:0 1, 08). If Paul meant the person ( ailed Lord to be YesllUa throughout this sect io n, then Pau l applied a vah veh ted to Yo ·hUll (P sa 02 R:04: 2T i 04 : 14). OT Citation: Psa 0 34:0 8a [BHS 0 34:09] Extract: I Pe 02:03 Extract Usage: Q uote Summa ry: Th at Ye ,I'hulI is "Lord" in IPe 0 2:04-08 suggests Peter ap plied Psa 0 34 :08 to the So n (I Pe 0 2:0 3). "God" in I Pe 0 2:09 is the r ather who possesses but does not inherit belie vers (see the So ng of Moses c hapter on that las t point ). OT Citation: Psa 0 39:0 7 [BHS 039:08 ) Extract: Co l OI :27 Extract Usage: Allu sio n Summa ry: David sa id that the Lor d is a belie ver 's " hope" (Psa 03 9:07), and Paul sa id that YI'I/wa is a believe r's "hope of glory" (Col 01 :27). OT Citation: Psa 0 50:21 Extract: Act 08:32 Extract Usage: All usion Summa ry: " I [}-'llh l'l' h ) kept si lent. You thou ght the " AM ' was like yo u. but I will re buke you" (Psa 0 50:2 1). Ye shua kept s ilent. but sa id all wo uld know him as the "I AM" and Son o f Man o n the Last Day (see the So ng of Moses cha pter].

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinit y

333

OT Citation: Psa 06 2:12 [EllS 062: ]]1 Extracts: Mat 16:27; Re v 22: 12 Extract Usage: Q uote Summar}' : David said that Yahveh re wards "every man according to his wo rk" ( Psa 062:12), and Yes/ilia said that he "will lender to eve ryone according what he has done" (Mal 16:27; Rev 22:12). OT Citation: Psa 066:16 Extract : Mar05: 19-20 Extract Usage : Allusion Summary : Y{',\ hll a said, "Tell what great things the Lord has don e for you" (Mar 05: 19 ). T he man took "Lo rd" to mean '" Yes/ilia " (Mar 05:20 ), just as Yeshll a intended. So Ye.\ hull seems 10 have applied a Ya hve h text (Psa 066: 16) 10 himself. OT Citation: Psa 068: 18 [BlIS068:191 Extract : Eph 04:07-0" Extract Usage : Q uote Summar}' : Paul applied a Yah veh te xt Psa 068:18 to C hrist (Eph 04 :(7) to say that Yes/ilia was with his disciples to the e nd of time as they flee sin's captives through evangelism (Mat 28:18-20). Yeshua leads these belie vers heavenward . OT Citation: Psa 094:01 Extract : IT h 04:06 Extract Usage : Allusion Summary: T he "Lord' in ITh 04 :0 1. 0 2, 15, 16, and 17 is Ye.~ h u u , so the " Lord" in IT h 0 4:061 ikely is Ye.~ "lIa . So Paul q uoted a Ya/weh te xt (Psa 094:0 1) in reference to Yeshuu ( ITh 04:06), and vengeance be longs also to ¥allreh the Son. OT Citation: Psa 10 2:27 [BH S 102 :281 Extract : Heb 13:08 Extract Usage : Allusion Summary: Psa 102:25-27 is q uoted in Heb 01 :10-1 2 in reference to the S Oil ( sec this appendix ). T hus, the second q uote of Psa 102:27 (Hcb I H IS ) shows that the author of He brews be lie ved the Psa lmist ascribed change lessness to the Son . OTCitation: Psa 103:1 9-21 Extract : Act W :36 Extract Usage : Allusion Summar}' : Peter applied a Yohve h text IPsa 103:19; Al: t 10:36) to Y('.I"hll(l to say he was rahveh "o ver all," since he became Most High along with the Father in fulfillment of the Dan 07 Son of Ma n Visio n (see the Song of Moses chapter).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

334

Yael Na ta n

OT Citation: Psa 118:06 Extracts: Hcb 13:06,08 Extract Usage: Q uote Summary: The nearby text noting Ye,I'nua's e temality (Heb 13:08 ) sugges ts the Yanl'eh text (Psa 11 8:06 ) q uoted in He b 13:06 refe rs to Yeshua. Kunos (Lord) is the LXX and NT translation of Yah vch, and the NT ca lls Ye,I'nl/a Kurios often. OT Cita tions : Psa 130:07-08: also Dell 10:17: Ezr 05:08: Neh 08:06: Psa 095: 03 : Dan 02:45 Extract: Tit02: 13- 14 Extract Usage: Allusion Summary: By saying, "we wait" o n Ye.~'III (J (Tit 0 2: 13-( 4), Paul alluded to Psa 130:07 and thus applied a Ya /II'(' h te xt to Ye.l hua. The OT ca lls Yah veb "Great God ," so Paul appl ied seve ral Yahveh texts to Yeshua by sa ying he is "Great God" OT Citation: Pro 03:11-1 2 Extracts: lIeb 12:02,05-06 Extract Usage: Quote Summary: Hcb 12:0 2 says Yt'shua is "the a uthor and perfecter of o ur faith." A text saying Yahveh is a reprover (Pro 03: 11 -1 1 ) is quoted near by (Heb 12:(15-06 ) and is applied to Yeslllla since a perfecte r would natura lly be a reprover. OT Cita tio n: Isa 06:05 Extract: Joh 12:4 1 Extract Usage: Allusion Summary: Isaiah saw and spoke "abo ut" the glory of the SOil whe n he recorded the lsa 06 vision in the temp le (Joh 12:4 1), but Isaiah actually ta lked to the Spirit (Ac t 28:25-2 6; Isa 06:08-1 3). Isa 06:05 applies specific ally to the So n. OT Cita tio n: Isa 09:06 [BHS 09:05 1 Extract: Re v 01:08 Extract Usage: Allusion Summary: The Son is ca lled "the Almighty" (Re v 01 :08) and "Mighty God" ( f:l Gihbor) (tsa 09 :(6). Th at £ / Gihhor speaks of the Messia h and Yahl'('h's deity (Isa 10:2 1) is consistent with the Son's being the Author of Eterni ty (lsa 09:06 ). OT Cita tio n: Isa 35:02-05 Extract: Mat 11 :03-06 Extract Usage: Allusion Summary: Yes hna alluded to "the blin d see ...the deaf hear" (Isa 35:05: Mat I I: 05 ). Isaiah said the Messiah would be God nearby: They shall see the glory of Yohveh; the excellency of our God (Isa 35:02; co mpare Isa 09:02; Mat 04:16 ).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

335

OT Citations: Isa 40 :03, 09 Extracts: Mat 03:03: MarOI :03: Luk 03:04 ; Joh Extract Usage: Q uote Summar y: The "v oice" is the Baptist's ( Isa 4{):{)3,06, 09 ; Mat 03 :03; and elsewhere ). Jo hn's message about the co ming "Ya hwh" and "God" (l sa 40:03 . 10) was tantamount to introduci ng Ye .l'/uw by the words: "H ere is yo ur God! " (Isa 40: 09). OT Citation: lsa 40;(111 Extract : Mar 13:31 Extract Usage: Allusion Summary: Ye shu a alluded to a verse ( lsa 40 :011 ) of the prophecy about John the Baptist's heralding the Messiah (Isa 4O:06 b-I I ). Ye sh u(/ applied a Yah veh te xt (Isa 4O:011) to himself to sa)' he is "God," proving his wo rds arc eternal. OT Citation: lsa 42:04 LXX Extracts: Mal 12:2 1; Luk 24:45 Extract Usage: Q uote Summary: Matthew q uoted ..... in his name shall the gentiles trust" ( LXX Isa 42:04: Mal 12:21). Here the Father spoke of the Serv ant of Ya hvch, the Messiah. That the nations trust in Christ's name is confi rmed by Christ (Luk 24:45-47). OT Citation: lsa 45:23 LXX Extract : Rom 14:11 Extract Usage: Q uote Summary: Paul q uoted a Ya h l'e h text (l sa 45:23 ) where Yahveh the Son said eve ntually everyo ne will bow down to him. That Ye,I'hull is the Lord in view in Rom 14:11 can be see n from Rom 14:09, 14, so Paul applied a Yahveh text to reshua . OT Citation: Isa 45:23 LXX Extract: Phi 02:09-11 Extract Usage : Allusion Summary: Paul alluded to a Yahveh text (Isa 45:23: Phi 0 2:09 -11) to say that Ye.~hIUJ recei ved the title £ (\"011 , and so was Most High along with the Father in fulfillment of the Dan 07 So n of Man prop hec y (see the Song of Moses chapter}. OT Citation: Isa 52:06 LXX Extract: Luk 24:39 Extract Usage : Allusion Summary: Y('.\'h u(/ said, "that ' I AM ' myself [h ot; exw e ;m ; aUlo.l' )" {Luk 24:39). This is an exact q uote of a phrase in LXX Isa 52:06 spoken by the So n. Sec lsa 53: 05 in this appendix about reshua being touched after the resurrection.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

336

Yael N a ta n

OT Citation: Isa 52:06 LX X Extract: Joh 04 :26 Extract Usage: Allu sio n Summary: Yuln'!'h the Son sa id: I AM [the Hebrew is "anee hu," and the LXX G reek is "ej?w eimf' l myself who speaks (LX X Isa 52:06). YC.I'/Illa app lied this Yohveh te xt to himself by say ing, " I A M [e~ ", eimi]. who a m speaking" (Jo h 04 :26). OT Citation: Isa 52:06 LXX Extract: Joh 13:1 9 Extrac t Usage : Allusion S umma ry: Words co mmo n to lsa 52:06 and Joh 13:19 are : "hoti [that] e~", dllli 1" 1 AM"] " Yc'.I'hua a lluded to this Yul/l'(:,h te xt to prov e that by his prophesy ing future eve nts . he is both " I AM " and Yahveh the So n who spoke in Isa 52:

06. OT Citation: Isa 65 :0 1 Extract: Ro m 10:20 Extract Usage: Q uote S umma ry: Paul quo ted lsa 65:0 1 (Rom 10:20 ). Th at Paul knew Christ spoke Isa 65 :0 I ca n be infe rred from Rom 10:17. Recent G reek manu scri pts finds attes t that the last wo rd o f Ro m 10 :17 is "C hrist" (N I V. RSI!) ra the r than "God" (KJ V). OT Citation: Isa 66 :15 LXX Extrac t: 2Th 0 I:07b-08a Extract Usage: Q uote S ummary: Paul quoted Isaiah w here the Father said the Son will return at the end in na ming fire (LXX Isa 66:15; 2Th 0 I:0 7). Paul applied this q uote to Ye.\11Ua by writing, " the Lo rd Yeshua is reve aled ...in flam ing fire" ( LXX Isa 66 : IS). OT Citation: l e r 17:10 Extrac t: Rev 0 2:23 Extract Usage: Q uote S ummary: Ye .\hua q uoted h is o wn words . " I, Ya/weh search the mind and try the heart" and reward acco rdi ng to dee ds (Jer 17:10 ; Rev 02 :23) . That the Son is the speaker of Rev 02: 23 can be a scertained from Re v 0 2:18 and 27. OT Citations : Jer 23 :05 -06; 33:15- 16 Extrac t: Joh 08: 24 Extract Usage: All usion S ummary: The Messiah is a branch or sce pter. Believers will associ ate the city w here the branch d ied for our s ins with the Son who is "I AM'· and "Ya hveh our Righteou sness" (see Jer 23:06 and 33: 16 in the Trin itarian proofs appendix]. Matenal com direlbs autcrars

337

The Jewi sh Trinity

OT Citation: Ezc 0 I:26-28 Extract : RevO I:13-16 Extract Usage: Allusion Summar}' : EI.t.-: kid depicted a preincam ate appearance of the Son who is "t he glory of Yahl'ch" (Ezc 0 1:26-28). Daniel saw the same Son of Man (Dan 07:1314). and lohn described the same So n of Man in Revelat ion (Rev 01: 13- 16). OT Citation: Dan 07: 14 Extract : Mat 28: I8 Extract Usage : Allusion Summary : Dan 07 depicted the Son of Man becom ing Most High with the Father (see the Song of Mose s chapter). Dan 07 was fulfilled before the asce nsion, a llowing Ye.I'huiI to say he had all authoruy to evangelize the earth (Mat 28: I8). OT Citation: Mic 05:02 [B H S 05:0 11 Extract: Mat 0 2:06 Extract Usage: Q uote Summ ary : Mica h said the Messiah pree xisted and his or igin is from e ternity [Mic 05:0 2b). Matthew appl ied Mic 05:02a to the Messiah (Mat 0 2:(6), Matthe w expected the reader to kno w Mic 05:02(a) and (b) to appreciate the full implication. OT Citation: Zec 09:09 Extract s: Mat 21 :05:Joh 12:1 2-16 Extract Usage: Q uote Su mmary: In 'lee 09, Ya hvch the So n prop hesied what he wo uld do as the comin g Messiah. Yah veh the Son is the prophesied King Messiah who ca me to Je rusalem riding on a donke y (lee 09:09: Mat 2 1:05: Joh 12:12-16). A sa mple of the Yahveh texts a pplied to the So n and the Spirit in the NT OTCilation: Zec 12: 10 Extracts: Jo h 19:37; Act 0 2:33b. 36-37; Rev 01:07 Extract Usage: Allusion Summary: The Son wo uld pour o ut the Spiri t so many wo uld mourn how their represe ntative institut ions killed the So n (the " me" in Zec 12:10). The Spirit carne at Pentecost , ma ny "were c ut to the heart ," and then repen ted (Act 0 2:33-37). A sa mple of the Yahveh texts applied 10 the Spirit in the NT OT Citations: Oen 13:13; 19:06-09 Extracts: Mal 10:14-1 5. 20 Extract Usage: Allu sio n S umma ry: The discip les e vangelized and perfo rmed miracle s (Mat 10:08. 1415. 20 ; 11:23), but some to wns rejec ted ( Yuhl"ehj the Spirit (Mat 10:20 ). Likewise. Sodom ites s inned aga inst Yll hi"t'h (the Fathe r) (Ge n 13: 13). but saw no miracles. Matenal com direlbs autcrars

338

Yael Na ta n

OT Citations : Gen 18:10, 14 Extract: Ga l 04:29 Extract Usage: Allu sio n Summary: Isaac was born by Ya hl'('I! 's power (Gen 18:10, 14). which was the S pirit's power (Gal 0 4:29 ). Sarah 's infertility suggests the Sp irit. along with the Fat her and So n, willed both Isaac's conception and spiritua l rege neratio n. OT Citation: Exo 3 1:18 Extract: Luk 11 :20 Extract Usage: Allu sion Summary: That Mose s and reshua were the nn ly prophets to work miracles by the linger of God (Exo 08:19; Luk 11:20). who is the Spirit (L uk I I:20: Mat 12: 28 ). shows that Ye,\ /uUl was the prophet like Moses [ ljeu 18: 15; Act 03:22: 07:37). OT Citation: Isa 06:09- 10 Extracts: Joh 12:40: Act 28:25-26 Extract Usage: Q uote Summary: Isaiah saw and spoke "abo ut" the glory of the Son whe n he recorded the Isa 06 vision in the temple (Joh 12:41 ). but Isaiah ac tually ta lked to the Spirit (Act 2R:25-26; Isa 06:0R-13). A sa mple of the Yahveh texts applied to the Trinity in the NT OT Citation: Num 06:22-27 Extract: Mat 2R: 19 Extract Usage : Allusion Summ ary : Yeshua said to baptize in the singular Name of three persons (Mat 28:19) . In the Aaronic Bless ing, priests put the singular Name on the peop le by saying Yahveh thrice (see Num 06:22-27 in the Trinitarian proofs append ix). OT Citation: Psa 110:0 1 Extracts: Mar 22:43-46 : Mar 12:35-37; Act 02:34 Extract Usage : Q uote Summ ary ; The Spirit informed David that the Fat her and Son were his Lo rd (Psa 110:01: Mar 12:36). Psa 110 desc ribes David's God -man descendan t (2Sa 07), so it is nonsensica l to say Psa 110 refe rs to David except as a type of C hrist. OT Citation: Psa 110:04 Extract: He b 07 :21 Extract Usage : Q uote Summ ary ; Ye.\JuflI said the Spirit told David that the Father s po ke tn David 's master, the So n (Psa 110:01 ; Mar 12:36 ). who is a priest fore ver (Psa 11 0:04). David was not a priest, and he was not allowed to build the temple ( IC h 22:08).

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewi sh Trinity

339

OT Citation: Psa 110:0 5 Extrac t: Act 02 :33 Extract Usage: Allusion Summar}': The Spirit sa id the Fa ther spoke to David 's ma ster (P sa 110:0 1). The Fathcr said tha t thc Lord (the Sp irit) was at the Son's right hand , a nd tha t the Spi rit wo uld help co nquer (eva nge lize) the earth with the So n (Psa 110:( 5). OT Citation: Isa 4S:16 Extracts : Mat 03 : 16-17; Jo h O3:0R, II , 34 Extract Usage : Allusion Summar}': lxa 48:16 was fulfilled when the rathe r se nt the Spirit wit hout lim it at Yes/ilia 's baptism (Joh 0 3;34). Thcn Yes/ilia spoke of the Spirit and himsel f say ing: we spcak... we te stify (Joh 0 3: II ; sec lsa 40: 13 in this appen dix]. OT Citations: lsa 61 :0 1, 08 Extract : Mat 03 ;16-17 Extract Usage: Allusion Sum mary: The Sp ir it alig hted on Yeshua at his baptism ( Mat 0 3:16-17) in fulfi llment of l sa 42:0 1; 48:16 and 6 1:0 1. YeS/Hili is the Servant of Ya hl"/11 who is preexi stent (l sa 4S:16: 6 1:0 I). and he is Yahveh the Son (l sa 6 1:08). OTCitation: Isa61 JII -0 2a Extract : Luk 04: I S-19 Extract Usage: Q uote Sum mary: Yeshua q uoted the Servant of Yahveh who mention s that thc Fathcr se nt him with the S pirit (l sa 6 1:0 1-02 : Luk 04: 18). and who sa id he was Yah veh (ls a 61 :08). Th e Serv ant and the Spirit arc also the "sent' Yahl'ehs of Isa 48:16. OT Citation: Joe 02 :28-32 [HHS 0 3:0 1-05 J Extracts: Act 02: 16-21, 33 Extract Usage: Q uote Sum mary: Pctcr said (Act 01: 33 ) that Yah"eh thc Son spoke Joe 0 2:28-32, the OT quote found in Act 0 2:16-2 1. The So n sa id he wo uld send the Spir it (Joe 02 : 28-32: Joh 16:07 ), and Pctcr said Yeshua scnt the Spirit (Act 0 2:33).

Total Number of Extracts Listed AIHwe: 97

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Matenal com direlbs autorars

Endnotes " In WIerI' Testamento novum late r, in noro vetus ! NUt" " (A ugustine, Questions on the Heptll/t'uch . ll , 73) . ' Hodder and Stoug hton. The ltlustra tcd Rib/I' Dictionary, 1980 , Part 3. p. 1597 . l W ile y. H . O rt e n. Christian Theologv, Vo lume II. Part III , Cha p te r X X, "Chnstology," Beaco n H ill Press o f Kansas C ity, Kansa s City, Mi ssouri, 1940. • "Co llective Noun," The American Heritage Dictio nary of the EnKlish LanguClt:e, Fo urt h Editio n , Pu bl ishe d by Ho ug hton M iffli n Co mpa ny. 20 00 (see I

atormcu.com ).

Gese r nus. W. Gesenius :Hebre w Grammar (GKC) (ed ited by A. E. Cow ley and E. Kaut zseh; 2J Eng. ed., based on the 28 th G er. ed.: Clarendon . 19 10), p. 462. • " A tha na sian C reed," The Cotu mb ;a Electronic Encyclopedia, Co lu mbia U nivers ity Press, 1999. 1 T he word " prove" in the pro verb "exce ptions prov e the rule" come s from the Latin p robat by way of Eliza beth an Engli sh. Etymo log ically spea king. "pro ve" means "test." Th e meanin g of the proverb is that on e understand s a rule o nly when on e considers the exceptio ns. Also, when Ihere are 100 many exceptio ns, the ru le mu st be aba ndoned o r mod ified. For e xample , earlier English grammarians made a rule again st splitt ing infini tive s. There are. how e ve r. too many exceptio ns of split infin itives that sound pe rfec tly natural. so the ru le was tested and di scarded by most gram marians . The rule was made on the basis of th e rules of Latin and G reek gra mmar. which. how ev er. do not e xac tly apply since they do not have the wo rd " to" (in form at io n supplied by Pro fesso r Frederick Blume ). • Ba rker. Mar gar e t. Tire Great Angel: A S fll dy of ts raels Secon d God . West min ster/Joh n Kno x, Lo uisvill e . Ke ntucky. 1992 , as q uoted in Gieschen. C harles A. Angelmorp hic Christotogv: Antecede nts & Early Evid ence. Brill, Boston. 199 8. p. 23. • Gei sler, Norman L. and A bdul Saleeb. Answering lstam: The Crescent ill till' Light of the Cross. Baker Books. Grand Rap ids. Michiga n. USA. 1993. pp. 9 192 . IQ Warraq, Ibn. Why I Am Not (I Muslim, Promethius Books. Amherst, New York, 1995. p. 54. 11 Because the Koran has so many anac hro nistic mistake s. translators should ha ve inserted sit- [Latin: " thus" 1350 times into the text rathe r than the word. "Say!" l

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

342

Yae l Na tan

11 Warraq. Why I Am NO! o MII.I'!im. Op. Cit .• pp. 54-55 .

" Goode nough. Erwin R. Jewi sh Symbo/,5 ill the Greco-Roman Period, Edited and Abridged by Jaco b Neusner, Prince ton Universit y Press. 1911 11. p. 1411. " Goodenough. Erwin R. Ibid., pp. 155-1 56. 'I Josephus, Flavius. Wan of the Jews, Book V "From The Coming Of Tinn To Be.l iI.'!w Jerusalem , To The Great F.ttremilr To w hich The Jews Were Reduced, C hapter 5, "A Descr iption O/TI,t' Tem ple," Paragraph 4. Note: The curtain that Josephu s desc ribed likely hung in the temple from some time after the er uctfi xion (30 AD'? ) to the destruction of the temple in 70 AD. The c urtain hanging in the temple during the crucifixion was ripped in two, and surely was rep laced (Mat 27:51 : Mar 15:311: Luk 23:45). ,,, Josephus, Flav ius. Antiquilies of IIII.' Jews, Book III "Containing The l mer vat Of Two Y{'(/ n . From The £xod"s 0 " , 0 / E!D'pl, To The Rejection Of That Genera tion, " C hapter 7 "Concerning T he Garments Of T he Priests, And O f T he High Priest. " Paragraph 2 and 7. 17 Jose phus. Antiquities of the Jews, III. vii,7 confer III . vi. 7: V, v,S . Phi lo I udaeus, Q"i.5 Rerum Di vinarum Heres, XLV, pp. 224-225. '" Philo, De Vltll Mosix, II, 12. See Goldm an, Bernard. The SlUTI'd Po rtal : A Primar y Symbol in A nd ell/ Judaic Art. Wayne State Univers ity, 1966. p. III . ," Ness, Leste r. w ri tten in the Stan: Ancienr Zodiac MO.Wlics . Shan g ri-La Publications. Warren Cen ter, Pennsylvania. USA, 199'-.l, p. 14 1. ~' Good e n ou gh , Erwin R. Jewish Symhols in the Greco-Roman Period. 0". Cit., p. 167, l' Goldman. Bernard. The Sacred Po rtal : A Primary Sym lml in Ancient Judaic Art. Wayne State University, 1966. p. 68. 11 Meshore r, Ya'ako v. A.ncit'lIl Je wish Co inag e : Vo lum e I : Persia n Per iod Through Hasmonaeu ns . Amphora Books. New York, 1982. pp. 67-68 and plates 8-55 have corn uco pias . but especially see coins Jc l-Jc'r . 1.' Go itein . S. D. Iews ami A rahs: Their Contacts througb the A}ie.I', Schocke n Books. New York, 1970 , pp . 7· IL as quote by Newby, Go rdo n Darnel l. A H istory of the l ews of Arabia: From A ncient Times 10 Their Eclipse Under [slam. University of South Carolina Press. Columb ia. South Carol ina, USA. 1988 , p. 107. 1. "H e brew language: ' fncyclopll't!ill Britannica. Accessed Nove mber 6. 200 I, 1~ Drucker. Mal ka. Hiezer; Ben-renuda: The Fa/her of Modern Hebre w. Lodestar Book s. E. P. Dutton. NY, 19117, pp. 63. 67. l ' Massey, Ke ith Andrew, Doc to ra l Dissertatio n: "The Co nco rd of Collective Nouns and Verbs in biblical He bre w: A Co ntro lled Stu d y." Un ivers ity of Wisconsin-Madison. 1998. p. 211 and foo tnote {infolearning.com/hp/Prod ucts/ Disse rtations.html, O rder Numbe r: 9825726). l' Massey, Ke ith Andrew . Ibid., p. 211 l ' Most instances of haElohim (9 1.5% or 335 instances of 366 total instances ) occur in just twelve OT books: (Gen (23). Exo (27), Jdg ( 15), ISa (24), 2Sa (20 ), IKi (26), 2Ki (36). lCh (48). 2Ch (5 1), Ezr ( 12), Neh (23). Bee (30)). n

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

343

~

295 of the 366 total instance s (found in 337 O T ve rses) of haElohim are cluste red in these R3 Hebrew O'r chapters: I. G en 0 5 (2); 2. Gen 06 (4 ); 3. Gen 20 (2); 4. Ge n 22 (2); 5. Gen 41 (4); 6. Gen 48 (2); 7. Exo 0 1 (2); 8. Exo 0 3 (5 ): 9. Exo 04(2); 10. Exo 1~(6) ; II. Exo II} (2 ); 12. Exo20 (2 ); 13. Exo 22 (2 ); 14. Exo 24 (2 ); 15. Dcu 04 (2); 16. Jdg 06 (3); 17. Jdg 13(5); 18. Jdg 20 (2); II}. 15a04(9);20. 15 a 0 5 (5); 2 1. ISa 09 (3 ); 22. ISa 10 (3);23. ISa 14 (3); 24. 25 a 06 (8) ; 25. 25 a 0 7 (2); 26. 25 a 14 (2 ); 27. 2Sa 15 (4 ); 28. IK i 12 (2); 29. IKi 13 ( 14 ); 30. IKi 18 (6); 3 1. 2Ki Ol (4 );32. 2Ki 04 (l0) ; 33. 2Ki 0 5 (5 ); 34. 2Ki 06 (4 ); 35. 2Ki 07 (4 ); 36. 2Ki OR (51; 37. 2Ki 23 (2); 3R. IC h 06 (2) ; 39. IC h 09 (4 ); 40. ICh 13 (7 ); 41. ICh 14 (4) ; 42 . ICh 15 (5) ; 43 . ICh 16: (4 ); 44. ICh 17 (3 ); 45 . lCh 2 1 (4 ); 46 . ICh 22 (4) ; 47 . ICh 23 (2); 48. ICh 25 (3) : 49. ICh 26 (2 ): 50. ICh 2 ~ (2); 5 1. 2Ch 0 1 (2); 52. 2Ch 04 (2); 53. 2Ch 05 (2); 54. 2Ch 23 (2): 55. 2Ch 24 (6): 56. 2Ch 25 (5): 57. 2Ch 26 (3); 58. 2C h 28 (2) ; 51). 2C h 30 (3); 60. 2C h 3 1 (3); 61. 2C h 32 (2); 62. 2Ch 33 (2); 6 3. 2Ch 36 (3); 64. Ezr 01 (3); 65. Bzr 0 3 (3); 66 . Ezr 10 (3): 67. Neh 08 (4 ); 6R. Neh ](I (3); 69 . Neh II (3); 70. Neh 12 (4 ); 7 1. Neh 13 (4 ): 72. Joh 02 (2 ): 73. Ece 02 (2): 74. Ece 03 (4 ): 75. Ece 05 (7) : 76. Ece 06 (2 ): 77. Ece 07 (4 ): 7R. Ecc 08 (3): 79. Ecc 09 (2); 80 . Ecc I I (2); ~ I . Ecc 12 (3 ); R2. Dan 01 (3); Dan 09 (2); and 83. Jon 0 3 (3). '" .,Syrian and Palestinian re hgion," Encyclopcedia Briumnica, accessed Aug ust 12. 2002 . " Warraq. Why I Am No t a Mus lim. Op. Cit., 1995, p. l OR. n Hast ings. Jam e s . Hnc vrlopa c dia of R eligion ond f Illies , volume I, Pa rt 2 (Algo nq uins- Art), Clark, Edinburgh (r eprinted by El ib ron C las sic s, ehbron.corn ). 190R . "Arabs (A nc ient}," p. 66 1 (r ight column , bottom ). 1.' Hastings, James. Ibid" p. 664 (right column. top). .. Warraq. Op. Cit., p. 80 (al so see p. 335). v w ansbrough. J. Qura nic St udies , Oxford . 1962, p. 20, as q uoted in Warraq. Op. Cit. , p. 74. '" lshaq . Ibn. Sirat RCl.1'll1 Allah. Translated by Alfred G uillaume under the title The Life of Muhammall . Paki stan Branch. O xfo rd Uni versity Press, Karachi. 1955, p.622. 31 Op. Cit., p. 239. " Lings , Ma rtin. M"hu/II/IIad: H;.~ Life BlIsell til! tile Earliest Sources. Inner Tradnions Internationa l. Rochester, Vermont. USA. 1 9 ~ 3 , p. 130. .. L ings, Martin . Ih id.. p. 239. ... Gouein. S. D . Jews l ind A rahs: Their Contacts througb the A1(es , Schocken Books, New York, 1970 , pp. 7- 8, a s quote by Ne wby. Go rdo n Da rne ll. A History of the Jews of Arab ia: From Ancient TI mes to Their Eclipse Under Islam. University o f South Carol ina Pres s, Columbia, South Carolina. US A, 19RR, p. 107. 41 Newby. Gordon Darnell. A History of tne J ews of Arabia : From A nciem Time s 10 Their Eclipse Under Islam. University of South Ca rolina Press, Co lumbia. South Carolina. USA, 19RR, p. 22. Matenal com direlbs autcrars

344

Yael Natan

Newby. Gordon Darnell. Ihid., p. 66. -1.1 The reade r will reme mber that British and American collective nou n usage was d iscussed at the beginning of this chapter. .... Larnosse Encvctopedia of MytllOloKY. Prome the us Pres s, New York, 1960 , p. 32 1. ., Alhrig ht, Will iam E ArI'haeoloKY and the Religion of Israel , Jo hns Hop kins Press, Baltimore , 1942, p. In. "'" Kemosn said in line 05 that Kemosn was ang ry at Moab and thus Kemosh let King Om ri o f Israel co ntrol Moabite territory. Amends were made betwee n Moab and Kemosh , so Mesha sa id in line 18, "Kemosh d rove [the king of Israel] out" of Moab territor y. In othe r lines, Mevha said several t imes that Kemosh told him to attack variou s c it ies, and the n each time Mesha gav e Kemosn the cred it for tak ing those territorie s and c ities. T he Moabue Stone confirms what Jephthah said abou t Kemosh '< interest in terri to r) , and about ho w natio ns wou ld not pass lip land thaI was theirs fo r the taking. 47 Dearman , And rew (Editor ). Studies in Ihe Mesha inscr iption and Moab, Scholars Press, Atlanta. Geo rg ia 1989, p. 98. -I, Dearm an, Andrew . ttnd., p. 308. .... " Moabite is cl early a separa te la ng uage. thou gh it is mo st cl osely rel ated to Hebrew. with whic h it shares many feature s. Aside fro m the nu n o f the masculine pl ural. Moabite shares little else of a dis uncuve nature with Ara maic" The degree of similarity of the Northwestern Semitic d ialectical family is show n on this spectrum: Sta ndard Phoenician, Ammonite , Edomne . Moabirc . Heb rew, (space), Deir Alia. (space ) Aramaic " (Jackson, Ken! P. "The Langu age of the Me sha Inscription," fro m St udies in the Me .I'hll Inscription and Moab , Edi ted by Andrew Dearman , Schol ars Press. Atla mu, Georgia 1989, pp. 100, 129 -130 ). .~J "Among the numerous obsc ure notat ions in the genealog ies o f I C hro n. 1-1I ... is the men tion of a Moa bite ruler of Judea n descent (1 Ch ro n. 4: 22 ). I Chron . 8: 8-10 speaks of one Shaharaim (presumably a descenda nt of Benjamin ..,) who •... had sons in the country of Moab, .. '" (Mi ller, J. Maxwell. "M oa b and the Moabites," fro m Studies in Ihe Mrsha Inscription and Moab , Edited by Andrew Dea rman, Scholars Press, Atlant a, Georg ia 1989, p. 18). II Byblos was an ancie nt c ity o f Phoenicia no rth-northeast of prese nt-da y Beirut, Lebanon . Baolat o f Bybki s is me ntioned in many inscriptions. See the article Jackson. Ke nt P, "The Literary Ge nre of the Mesha Inscript ion," fro m Studies in the M eshu Inscription WId MOt/b , Ed ited by Andrew Dea rman. Scholars Press, Atlanta, Geo rgia 1989. pp. 132,134. I3IL 140- 142. ." "Syrian and Palestinian rehgion." Encvctopaidia Britannica, acc e ssed August 12, 2(Ml2. ' .1 Pe rhaps Dagon 's consort was a single siren, or 1I schoo l of mc r rnuids! .'-' In the ca se o f A shtar, however, things may ha ve been a hit more co mplicated. Depending on the culture and time per iod. As hlar was al so known as A J/arte, lnanna , lshtor . Astuorah , Ash /ore/h. A sheruh o r Ashe rim. Astune was the Qu een of the Mo rning Sta r. goddess of war, and Qu een of the Eveni ng Sta r. -12

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

345

godde ss of passionat e love . When astrolog ers figured out that the mornin g star and evening star were the same planet Ve nus, Ior awhile Astarte was viewed as bei ng "androgynous, being male in the mornin g and fem ale in the evening" (Albright. William E Ardul('ologr and the Religion of tsraet; Op., Cit., p. 83). "There is a shortened fo rm of the Name, Yahwh. nam ely, Ya. Ya is found 49 times in 45 verses, for instance, Psa 068:04 (BHS 068:05). '" The 52 verses whe re the Name , Ya hl'eh, is spoken or heard by hum ans in Genesis arc: Gen 04:0 1. 26 : 05:29: 09:26; 10:09: 12:08; 13:04: 14:22: 15:0 2, 07 , OR ; 16JJ2, 05, I I; IR:1 4: 19:13, 14: 2 1:33: 22 :14.16; 24:03.07, 12,27, 31. 35. 40 . 42. 44. 48, 50, 5 1. 56: 26:22, 25. 28,29. 27:07 ,20,27: 28:13. 16, 2 1; 29:32.33 ,35: 30 :24. 27, 30: 31:49; 32:09: 49: 18. " That the Son spoke for the Trinity at Mount Sinai will be disc ussed further in the chapter on Proro-Smattic Trinitarianism. " Yahw h is assoc iated with haElohim in most of these 80 verses: Exo 04:27 ; 18: 11 ; 19:03; Oeu 04: 35, 39; 07:09; 1O:1 7; Jos 14 :06 : 22:34; Jdg 13:08; 16:28; ISa 04 :04; 06 :20: 25a 06:02, 07, 12; 07:28; 15:25: 1Ki 08:60: 13:05, 06. 2 1, 26: I Ki 18:21.24, 37.39; 20:28 ; 2Ki 05;20;07:02:07: 19; 08 :08: 19: 15; 23: 16; lCh 13: 06,14; 15:0 2. 15, 26: 17:26; 2 1:15, 17: 22:01, 19: 23:2 8; 25:06; 28:12: 2C h 01 : 03: 05:0 1, 14; 10:15: 11:0 2; 13:12: 23:03: 24 :07, 20; 25 :07: 26:05: 28:24 : 30: 12. 19; 31: 14 ; 32:16; 33:13: 36:16, 18: Ezr 0 1:03, 05; 02:68: 03:08: 06:22: Nell 05:13: 08:06; 09:07 : 10:30; Job 0 1:06: 02:0 1; lsu 37: 16; 45: 18: Jcr 35:04. -'" II should he noted that the NIV omits the word "companio ns" in its translatio n of Jdg 20 : I I. "" Tha t the plura l of "one" is best translated "a few" is similar to how the plural of J/(l.W/1It (time) is best translated "twice' in the d ual (plural-Iooking ) fo rm. •, Note that in NIV Dan 11 :20, the Hebrew for "a few days" is interpreted as "a fe w years: ' .; Another place where Jacob spoke in a colle ctive sense about individuals occurred whe n he s po ke to Ephra im a nd Man asseh say ing. " In you [si ngular "y o u" mean ing, " in ynur name"] will Israel bless. saying, 'God make )'ou as Ephraim and as Mnnasseh" (Gen 48:20) . ' .' Th is secno n is es pecially important since it helpx to ex pla in a Trinitarian proo f Sec Psa I IlJ:Ol , 04-05 in the Trinitarian proo fs append ix. ... The Ea.\ fo,, \ Bible Dictionary entry on " Familiar Spirit" reads : " Sorce rers or necromancers. who professed to call up the dead to answer quest ions. were said to have a 'familiar spirit' (Deu 18:11, 2Ki 2 1:06: 2C h 33 :06; Lev 19 :3 1: 20:06: lsa OR; 19; 29:(4). Such a person was called by the Hebrews "an 'oh.: whic h properly mean s a leathe rn boule ; for the sorce rers were reg arded as vess e ls containing the inspiring demon . Thi s Hebre w word was equiv alent to the JlYfho of the Greeks , and was used to denote both the person and the spirit that possessed him (Lev 20:27: 1Sa 28:08; compare Act 16:16). The word 'fa miliar' is fro m the Lat in fa mifiaris. mean ing. " ho usehold servant." and was intended to express the idea that sorcerers had spirits as their servants ready to one)' their cornrnands." Matenal com direlbs autcrars

346

Yael Na ta n

O wb is also me ntioned else where in the OT (Le v 19:31: 20 :0 6. 27: Deu 18: I I; 2Ki 2 1:06 ; 23:24; ICh 10:13; 2C h 33:06 ; Isa os:19; 19:03; 29:(4). M Zwe mer, Sam uel M. Tile Infl uence of Animism til, lstam: An Account of Popular Superstitions. Th e Macm illan Co. New York, 19 20, Chapter 6: "T he Familiar Spirit or Oarina." (See onlin e vers io n at unswc riug- islam .org.] "7 Lego n. Jeordan. " Scholars: O lde st e vide nce of Je s us?" CNN term.com). Monday, October 21, 2002 . •, Ishaq , 0 " . Cn., p. 625. tH "Syrian and Palestinian religion," Encyclopozdia Britannica. accessed Augus t 12, 2002. la The 52 ve rsev whe re the Nam e. Yllh ~' eh . is spo ken or heard by human s in Ge ne sis arc: Gen 04:0 1, 26 : 0 5:29: 09: 26; 10:09 ; 12:0 8; 13:04: 14:22; 15:0 2, 07 , OR; 16JJ2, 05, I I; IR:1 4: 19: 13, 14; 2 1:33; 22 :14, 16; 24:03.07, 12. 27,31 . 35, 40, 4 2, 44. 4 l'1 , 50 , 5 1, 56: 26:22, 25,28 ,29.27:07,20,27: 28:13, 16, 2 1; 29 :32.33.35 ; 30:24. 27.30; 3 1:49 : 32:09; 49: 18. 11 HaEloh im is found in Genesi s and Exo 0 1-03 in the se verses : Gen 05: 22, 24; 06: 0 2. 04 ,09. II ; 17: 18 ; 20:06. 17; 22:03. 09 ; 27: 2R; 3 1:I I; 35:07; 4 1:25. 28, 32; 42:18;44:16; 45 :R; 4R: 15; ExoOI :17. 2 1; 02 :23; 03 :01. 06 , II . 12. 13. 71 The book of Job me ntio ns the name Shaddai in the se ninetee n c hapte rs (Job 0 5, 06, OR, II, 13, 15, 2 1, 22. 23, 24, 27. 29. 31, 32, 33. 34. 35, 37, 40). Yohvch is men t ioned in these six c hapters (Job 0 1, 0 2, 12, 38, 40 . 4 2). The 23 verses where Sh(/(fdtli is mentio ned are: Jo b 0 5:17; 06:0 4. 14; 08 :03. 0 5: 11:07: 13:03; 15:25: 21: 15, 20; 22:03 , 17,23,25,26; 24:01 ; 27:02, W , II , 13; 29:05; 31:02 , 35; 32:08: 33:04; 37:23; and 40:2, Th e 2 1 verses where Yahveh is me ntioned 27 times are: Jo b 0 I:06 , 07. 08, 12. 2 1: 0 2:0 1. 0 2. 0 3. 06 , 07 ; 12:0 9; 38:0 I; 40 :0 I. 03, 06; 42:01 , 07, 09 .10, I I and 12. 1.\ Eisege sis is a form of misinterp retatio n where in on e read s his or her own ideas into the text. By co ntrast. exegesis is a deep, thorough, de tailed and painstaking ana lys is o f a te xt. 1. Geisler, Norma n L and Abdul Salccb. Allswerill~ Islam: The Crescent in the Light ofthe Cross . Baker Books, Grand Rapids. Michigan. USA, 199 3, p. 2 14. l ' The " Prese nces of Yc,hreh" phrase is fo und in these verses: Ge n 19:1 3. 27: Exo 32: 11; 34:24; Deu 16 :1 6; 3 1:11; ISa 0 1:22; 02: 17.1 8 ; 26:20; 2Sa 2 1:0 1; IK i 13:06 ; 2 Ki 13:04 : 2Ch 33: 12; Jnh 0 1:12; 02:07 ; Jer 26 : 19; Dan 09: 13; 07 : 02 ; 08:2 1,22. 1<> See the di scussion of how the Spirit is a distin ct pe rson of the Trin ity at Ge n 0 I: 02 in the Tr initarian Proofs append ix. 11 Koehler, Edward W. A. A S ummary of Christ ian Doct rine (Seco nd Re vised Edition). Concordia I' ub/i.\ /r ing House, St. Louis. Mi,\'\"ou ri, /952. 1'1'.219.220. " Hawting. G . R. The Idea of Idolatry and the Emergence of Islam .' From Polem ic 10 History. Ca mbridge University Press, Cam bridge , United Kingdom. 1999. pp.36-37. N Cohe n. Mark R. Under Crescent & Cross: The Je ws ill the Mi ddle Age.I'." Princeton University Press, New Jer sey, USA, p. 156. Ol

ac

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

347

"" C ohe n. Mar k R. Ibid. , p. 250 , note 8 1. .. Zwerner. Samuel M. Til e Moslem Christ (First Edition ). Oliphant, Lo ndon . 1912. Chapte r I, as quoted in Zwemer, Samuel M. tstam and the Crass: Selections f rom ' The Apm tle to tstam. ' Edited by Roger S. Greenw ay, P& R Publishing Company, Phill ipsburg, New Jersey, 2002 , p. 16. "' Deu 0 5:26 is di scussed in the MT plurals appe ndix. •' Gen 19: 13; Bxo 23:20-23; 32:34; 33:14- 15; Isa 48 :16 ; Ma l 0 3:01 : Mat 11:1 0 ; Mar 0 I:02 ; Luk 07:27; Joh 14: 16- 18; Act 0 3: 19-20 (Greek 0 3:20). .. Gen 04 :14. 16; 2Ki 13:23; 17; I ll, 20; 23:27; 24:tl3; Jer 07 : 15; 23:39; 52:03. " Ge n 03:23; De u 28:64-68 ; 29 :28 ; 30:04 ; Jer 08:03; 16: 15; 23:08 ; 23: 12; 24:09; 27; 10; 27: 15; 29:14; 32 :37; Jon 02:04; "X( 05:03; 13:02. "" Act 02 :38; 03:06. 16; 04: 10, 18; 05:40; 08: 12; 09: 27; 10:48 ; 16:18; 19:13; 26:09; Phi 02: 10. •, T hat God ta rgets s inners with his plagues can be seen from how often sinner s die fro m complicunons of their s in. and see these Bible ve rses : Exo 20:05; 34:07; Num 11:04, 34; 14 :11\; 16:31\ ; 25:05-11\; 27:03; De u 02 :14- 16; 04:03-04; 0 5:09 ; Jos 22: 17; Psa 0 2 1:10; 091 :06-08 ; 106: 16- 18 ; 43; 107:39-4 1; Isa 48:18. 22; Eze 09:04-06; 18:04 ; Amo 09 :10 ; Zep 0 3:11-12; Heb 11 :28; and Re v 0 2:22-23. Those who say that God only allow s co nseq uences to punish s in in genera l (Gc n 0 3). but does not target speci fic sins he stro ngly wa rns against in the Bib le. cause un necessary suffer ing. They do not deli ver the warning (Jc r 23:22; Eze 33:0 1-09) and so dil ute the det erre nce effe ct that the co nseq uence of sin has (Deu 13: II ; 2 1:2 1). Som e peo ple try to be nice and "tolerant" ut al l cos ts. ineluding the staggering cos t of peop le dy ing premat urely. thereby e nding their time o f grace prematurely (Heb 09 :27 ). Ove rly meek indi viduals should worry less about whether they might appear judgmental. an d worry more that so meone will acc use them of keep ing sile nt ju st so ce rtain insutferable individuals will leave this earth prematurely withou t tca vmg any tro ublesom e offs pring. The se meek individ uals could worry about thei r being labe led "Sons o f Balaam" [Num 3 1: 16; Re v 02 : 14). "Sons of the O ld Prophet o f Beth el" ( IK i 13:11-32), and "So ns of Zedek iah the False Prophet" (I K i 22:05-24: 2Ch 18:04-27; see also Ac t 08:09-24: 13:06- 11; 19:13-16 ). "' The LXX translators understood the "Spirit" in Isa 57;16 to refer to the Spirit of Yah veh. Som e translations try to make l sa 57;16 read as thou gh the Spi rit were the spirit of men . The)! do not want to think that the Spirit co uld ever be weary. The wea riness, ho wever, is not caused by a weak ne ss in God . Wearine ss is a respo nse that sinful humans need to see from the ir God in order to apprec iate how their s in is ruin ing their relatio nship with God. Scripture shows that the Spirit of Yall re h indeed ca n ex hibit wea rines s (Ge n 06:03 ; IKi 19:12; lsa 01 : 14; 63: 10; Neh 09:30; Act 07 :5 1; ITh 05:19). ' " Gu ndu z, S inas i. The Knowledg e of Lif e: The Origins of Early History of tnc Mandaeans and Their Relation to 'he Satnans of the Quran and to the Harrunians. Oxford University Pre ss. Ox ford . United Kingdo m. 1994, p. 137.

Malenal com direlbs autcrars

348

Yael Natan

.., Trimingha m, J. Spencer. Chri.H il/llilY Among the Arabs ill Pre-lslamtc Times. Longman Group Limited. Lon do n, 1979, p. 20. •, Hos 12:0 4 is discussed further in the MT plurals appendix . •, The chapte r o n the NT Use of OT Yahveh Text s has a di sc ussion on whethe r YeI h11a ta ught mainl y in Gree k or Aramaic , which is a pe riphe ral but pe rtinent issue in the study o f the Shcma. "' Mcgimie, Wm. Ste wart . The Search }!Jr the Twel ve Aposth'.I'. Tyndafe House . W heaton. Ill inoi s, 1973, p. 18 8. qu ot ing Newman. Do rman . Th e Live s and Deaths ofthe Hol y Apostles, 1685 AD . ...Triming ham, 1. Spencer. Op. Cit.. p. 20. •~ Gu ndu z, Smas i. The Knowledg e of Life : 1"I,e Origi n,\ of Ea rly Hi story of Ihe Manaaeans and The ir Relation 10 th e Sobians of th e Qllran and 10 uw Harranians. O xford University Pre ss, Ox ford, United Kingdo m. 1994, p. 137. .... The statue was app ro ximatel y n ine ty-feet high and nine- feet wide. ., Neb uchadnezzar is o ne of the few ge ntiles to author parts of the Bible. Other aut hors who may have been gentile include the author Gen 0 1- \1 . Job and Luke. •, The vision where Da niel saw the Son of Man (Da n 0 7:1 3) did not happen Unlit the first year of Bels hazzar 's reign (Dan 07:01). Belshazzar reigned at lea st three years (Da n 08:(1). "" Blair, Shei la S. Islamic Inscriptions, New York University Press, Ne w York, 1998, p. 182. "" Alb um. Stephen . A Ch ec kli st oj tstemic Coins, Second Edition . ISB N: 096 36024·1· 1. Santa Rosa, CA . 1998, p. 5. "" "T he value of a co in was substantially ele vated ove r its billo n value. as was co mmo n ly the case in pre-mode rn monetary sys te ms, e spec ially for silver" (Alb um. Stephe n. A Checktist of Islamic Coins, Seco nd Edition. IS BN : 0 96 36024·\ · 1. Santa Rosa, CA, 1995, p. 10 ). "'2 Yaakov, Meshorer. Nabotean Coins. Q ede m: Mo nographs of the Institute of Archaeo logy. The Hebrew University, Jerusale m. 1975, p. 30. '0, Gold-silver alloys are no t so -calle d "white" go ld, which is a gold-n ickel-copperzinc alloy ("Gold," Encydopletlia Briumnica. Acces sed O ctober 9, 200 \). ".. Alb um. Op . Cit. , pp. 10· \1 . ">'; "Co in:' Bncyclopadia Brita nnica, Accessed No ve mber I. 200 I. ".. " Bronze ," £ncyd0!JiI'Jiu Hritannu:a , Accessed Octoher 10, 200 I. "" Ab raham H. Leve y's articl e " Making of Coin Dies," pp. 137- 141 is co ntained in SIItJi/'.~ in Memory of Pau l Btllog , Edited by Dan Barag. T he Israel Numi smmic Society. Jerusalem, 1991 , p. 139. Thc artide was also pu blis hed in "Israel Numismatic Jo urnal. " Israel Numismatic Societ y, Vol. 10, 1985-1989. "'" Interestin g ly, the Koran even says Allah se nt iro n for the purpose of warfare: " We se nt aforct imc o ur messengers with clear signs and se nt dow n with the m the book and the balance (o f right and wrong ), that men might stand fo rth in justice. And we se nt down iron in which there is material for mighty war, as well as many be nefits for mankind that Allah may te st who it is that will help unseen . . ." (KoraIl 057:025). Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

349

''''' Nicolle, David. Armies of Ihl' Caliphates . 862 -1098. Me n-at -A rm s Serie s, Os prey Puhlishing. O xford . I99 R, p. 16. "" " Interior desi gn:' Encyctopedia Brhonnico, Accessed December 25, 200 I. III "A luminum, " Enl-ydo/lwdia Hritan ntca, Acces sed No vember 12, 2001. 11 ; Exo 09: 35 ; 35:29: Lev 08 :36; 10: I I; 26:46: Num 04: 37, 45. 49 ; 07:08; 15:23: 16:40; 27: 23 ; 33:01: 36: 13; Jos 14:0 2; 20:02; 2 1:02, OR; 22:09; Jdg 0 3:04; 2Sa 12:25 ; IKi 01'1:53, 56; 12:15 ; 14:18; 15:29; 16:0 7, 34; 17: 16; 2Ki 09: 36; 10:10 ; 14:25, 27: 17:13, 23; 2]; I0; 24:02; ICh I I:03; 16:07; 24: 19; 2C h 10: 15; 29:25 ; 33:0 R; 34:14; 35:0 6, 15; Neh OR :14; 09:14, 30; 10:29; lsa 20:02 ; 37:24; rer 27; 03; 29:03; 37:02; 50:0 I; Eze 38:17; Da n 09: 10; 1I0s 12: 10; Hag 0 1:0 I. 0 3; 0 2: 01,10; Zec07:07, 12; and Mal 01 :01 . IlJ 2Sa 12:25; I Ki 14: I 1'1 ; 16:07 , 12; 22:01'1; 2 Ki 03 ; I I; 14:25; 17: 13, 23; 2 1:10; 2Ch 18:07; 29:25; Ezr09: 1I; Neh 09: 30; Jer 37:02; 50 :0 1; Dan 09:10; Ho s 12:10; Hag 0 1:0 I, 0 3; 0 2:0 I; Zcc 07 :07 , 12; Mat 0 I;22; 02 : 15, 17, 23; 03:03 ; 04 :14; 08: 17; 12: 17; 13:35; 21:04, 15; Lu k 01 :70; Act 03: 18, 21; 28:25; Rom 01:02; 16:26 ; HehOI :O I. ' 1' At the end of Rom 10: 17, the NIV and RSV have "C hrist," wh ile the KJV has "0I t ... '" 2Ki 07:0 1; Isa 31'1 :04-05; Jer 02 :04-05; LXX 0 2:3 1; 07:02-03; 10:0 1-02; 11 :01 03; 17:20 -21 ; 19:03; 2 1: 11- 12; 22:0 1·0 3; 22:29-30 ; 28: 12- 14; 29:20·21 ; 42 :15; 44:24 -26; Bzc 06:03; 25:03; 34:0 7- 11; 36:0 2-05; 37:04 -05; Zcc 01 :01-04. Il ~ The word s in and its permutations are me ntioned 70 times in Isa iah: Isa 01:04. I R, 2R; 03 :09 ; 05 :0 1. I R, 24 ; 0 6:07; 07 ;17; 09;14; 10:17; 12:0 5, 06 ; 13:0 9, I I; 14:0 7, 2 1; 16:10; 22: 14; 23:16; 24 :16; 26:2 1; 27:02 , 09; 30:01, 13,29; 31:07; 33: 14. 24; 35; 10; 36: II ; 38:17, IS, 20; 40:02, 2 1; 4 2;10 , 11, 24; 43:(14, 24, 25, 27; 44:07 , 22, 23; 46:03; 47:09,1 2, 15; 48:04; 50:0 1, 03, 11: 53: 12; 54:0 1; 57: 17; 58:0 I; 59:02, 07, 12. 20; 64:04. OS, 06. 0 7,09; 65:07 and 14. II I " Hebrew language ," Encyctoposdia britannica , Acces sed November 6 , 200 I. 11. " Prove nance" is a term from the an and antique co flecring world meaning: " Proof of origin authe nticity or o f past owner sh ip." m Latin: "Durior tectio praeferat ur ei, qUII posita, oralio suavner tenuerque ftuit . Durior (1/1/,'/11 I'.~ I teato ellipllea, hehra tnms, ,mlocl'a, a loo ncndi /l SI( graccix con sueto adhorre ns autverboru m sono aures offendens" (Griesbach, The Gre ek New Testame nt, Seco nd Ed ilion . Halle. 1796 AD, ''The Introduction"). English translatio n: "The ha rsher readi ng is preferable 10 thai whic h inste ad flo ws pleasan tly and srnoorhly in sly le , A harsher read ing is one that invo lves an ellipsis. re flects Hebrew idio m. is ungra mmatical, repugnant 10 cu stomary Gree k usage, or offen sive to the ears" (A lford . Greek Testament, Lond on. 1849. "The Introduction" (Moo dy reprint). 1",' T he So n and the Spirit a rc the s ubjects o f several messianic prophec ies in Zecha riah. Th ese are discussed in the NT Use of OT Yahveh TeXiS app endix. III Edcrshcim . Alfred. The Life and Times of JeSIi I the MeSIiah, T hird Edition. He ndrickson Publishers . Peabody, Massachu setts. USA, 1886. p. 252. (Se e the public domain ver sions on the Internet ). Matenal com direlbs autcrars

350

Yael Natan

Edershe im. Alfred. lhid .. p. 129. '" Drucker, Maika. Elieecr. Ben-Yehuda : The Father of Mod ern Hebrew, Lodestar Book s, E. P. Dutton , NY, 1987. p. 67. ," For e xample, 4QLXXDe ut I I is a 2 nd ce ntury Be parchment roll, 4Q I 22 is fro m t he 2 nd ce ntury BC , 7Q I LXXEx, Exod us 28 is from 100 BC , 4Q I 19LXXLev\.a is a parc hment ro ll from 100 Be, 4Q I20LXXLev\h is a papyrus roll from the liNt century Be. 4Q I2 1LXXN um is a parc hme nt roll from the turn of the era. 7Q2LXXEpJe r is from 100 Be. I;) Eocrshenn. Op . Cit., p. 23. 110 Edershejm. On. Cil., p. 22. Also. see p. 131. m Josephus. Flavius. Antiouities oftile Jews; Book 20: I I:0 1. II > Van Dcr Horst. Pic tcr W. "Jewish Funerary Inscriptions - Most Arc in Greek," Biblica l Arrhaeo iogical Review (BAR) , Sep-Oct 1992, pp- 48-54. 1:!'l Van Biema, David. "T he Brother of Jesus'!" Time Maxa::.ine, November 4, 2(X12, Vol. 160. No. 19, pp. 70-73. "" A Targum is an explana to ry tra ns latio n or paraphrasin g of the He bre w Scriptures. I." Edersheim was writing about the s ituation in Jeru sale m whe n he wrote that YeI h l IG spoke Aramaic and Hebrew. This should not be taken out of context and appl ied to Galilee (Edersheim, Alfred. Op. Cil., pp. 129- 130). 1.11 Ed ershe jm, Alfred. Op, Cit., p. 23. l'.' Edershe im. Alfred. Op. Cit .. p. 24. I ." So meone might think that Mary ne ver talked to YeI /llla after his resurrection because the resurrection stories are askew or co ntradictory. So it sho uld be noted that the re are ways to reco ncile the testimon ies. Reconciling the accounts is easier if the resu rrection story in Mark is held in abeyance, T he most reliable earl)' manu scripts and other ancient witnesses do no t have the resurrection to ascension summatio n of Mar 16:09-20. Mar 16:09-20 reads like a copyi sts attempt to make the Gospel of Mark terminate like the other gospels. The resurrect ion to ascen sion accounts in Matth ew, Luke and John arc well attested by manuscript e vidence. To reco ncile the accounts. there is no need to divide the women into two groups led by two different Marys who see reshua at different times. as some authors have done. The three accounts (Mat 28:0 1-11; Luk 24: 01- 12: Joh 20:0 1-18 ) merge like well-cut puzzle pieces. At the first s ign of dusk. an angel appeared causing the soldiers to faint. The angel opened the tomb e ntrance for Ye,I' h/1lI (Mat 28:0 1-04 ). Also, an earthquake opened the to mbs of man y ho ly pe rsons. and the y a ppeared to peo ple in Jerusalem o n Easter Sunday (Mat 27:52-53). One could say that Ye.\,llUlI ·S raisi ng Lazarus presaged the resurrection o n Eas ter Sunday as we ll as the general resurrection on the Last Day (Jo h II : 17. 12: 17). A little later on Easter Sunday mo rning. when the sky was gray and there was just enough light to see the footpa ths. Mary Magdal ene and anoth er Mary went to the to mb. The y went and told the disci ples that the tomb was empty. That Mary Magdalene was with someone else can be ascertained from the "we" in 121

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

351

Mary's state ment, "We do 1'101 know where they have put him! " (loh 20:0 1-02) _ The n. Peter and Jnhn ran 10 the tomb, found il e mpty. and we nt horne ass uming the body had me rely been moved (Joh 20:0 3-10 ). Then, still ve ry early in the morning. Mary Magdalene went back to the tomb with ot her women who were carrying spices. T hey came back because they thought they had better inspect the tomb when there was more da ylight. They though t perh aps the body had bee n moved , Some wo men we re in the tomb when two angel s sudde nly appeared. Both angels spoke to the wome n [L uk 24:01 -08, 23; Jo h 20 :12-13)_ One a ngel. howeve r, must ha ve been the dom inant spea ker s ince Matthew on ly men tions that the a ngel who moved the sto ne spoke to the wome n (Mat 28:02(7).

Since Mary Magda lene had alre ady inspected the tomb. s he decided to wa it outside while the other wo men inspected the tomb. since the re was not much walkin g space in the tomb. Mary Magdal ene d id. howe ver. cro uch to sec in the tomb. and then she saw the two " men" (angels) who talked to her and the other wome n (Jnh 20:11- 12). Mary Magdalene the n turned aro und and ta lked to Ye.~h/la outside the tomb (Joh 20: 13- 17). Mary did not recog nize Ye.l'hua likely because of her tears. so Mary tho ught Yel'lwa wax a gardener. Mary to ld him that "th ey" (the two men whom she saw in the tomb through her tears) had taken away Y('.l h IW · S body away. Yeshua said Mary's name. and Mary called Yeshua "R abboni" Mea nwhile, the women carne out of the to mb to tell the d isciples what the angels sa id, but then saw reshua ta lking to Mary Magdalene. The y c lasped his feet and worshipped ves hua (Mat 2R:OR-11 I, Ye,I'Illla told Mary Magda lene. " Do not [co ntinue 10 ] hold on to me, for I have not yet returned to the r ather" (Jo h 20:17). Late r. Mary Magdale ne and the other women together told the disci ples they saw the Lord (Le k 24:09- 10; Joh 20 :18). Peter returned singly to the tomb for his seco nd loo k. but d id not see Ye.I'hulI. Peter went away and saw Yeshua somewhere else tLuk 24:1 2, 34). Before the Emmaus disciples reported Ycsh ,w' s appearance to the e leve n d isciples (Luk 24:33. 35). Peter had already told the ten d isciples abo ut Yc.I'hua ·s appearance to him [ Luk 24: 34). Then Ye.l'hut/ appeared to the e leven disc iples and the Emmaus disc iples tog ether (L uk 24:33, J6 ). l.t' Ness. Leste r. Wril1en in the Stars: Ancient Zodiac Mosa ics, S hangri-La Publicatio ns. Warren Ce nter, Pennsylvania, USA. 1999 . p. 8 3. n. Flint , Pete r W_ The Dead Sea Psalms Scrolls and the Boo k 01' Psalms, Brill, 10/)7 , In The BH S cnuca l apparat us says that a few manuscript s have "they pierced." but with an ex tra letter (Ilel,h, and two manuscripts have the same Q(Il form that is fo und in Psa 057:06 (BHS 0 57:07 ) and Psa 119:85. The ex tra letter alt'ph in

" they pierc ed" in so me Hebre w manusc ripts may just be a variant form. Dr. James D. P nce , Professor of Hebre w and Old Te stame nt, Temple Baptist Semina ry, Chattanooga, Te nnessee, wrote in his 15 Dec 1995 "Response To J im Lippard 's 'The Fab ulous Prophecies of The Me ssiah "': Hebrew words that have the sa me kind o f middle Aleph and the same kind of reMatenal com direlbs autcrars

352

Yae l Na tan

lationship: ho'r; bor (pit, cistern) from the verb bur (dig); (lu 'I{, d(11{ (fish) from the verb dug (fish for); tar. tat (secrecy) fro m the verb lui (be secret) ; m'um . ilium (ble mish); n'od, nod (sk in); q'cm, q a lll (he arose); rash, rash (poor) from the verb rush (be poor); .l'h 'at (co ntempt) from the ve rb shut (treat with co nte mpt); a lso in Aramaic. aa'e r (dweller) from the verb d ur (dwell); and qaem (riser) from the verb qwn (he arose ). These examp les are sufficient to dem onstrate that a middle aleph frequently occurs in words and form s deri ved from middle Wa ll' verbs as in this passage. ''" Trimingham, 1. Spencer. Op. Cit, p. 79 (also see p. 24 1). B. KIII·ie Eleison is G reek for "Lord, have mercy" (Psa 040 :05 . I I; 122:03; Isa 33: 0 2; Mat 17:15 ) and Halleluja h is He brew for "Praise Yahl l'l'h l (Rev 19:0 1. 03. 04,06 ). '''', Ness, Les ter. Wrilten in the SUI,.I·: A ncie nt Zodiac Mosa iC\". S hangri -La Publications. Warren Center. Pennsylvania. USA, 1999, p. K3 . , <1 Edershe im. Op. Cit., pp. 129- 130. 'e Dcissmann, Bible Studies, Edinburgh . 1903 , pp. 3 13-317, as q uoted in Prat, F. "St. Paul," The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XL Robert Apple ton Company. 191 I. '" Trimingham, J. Spencer. 0 " . Cit.• p. 47. ,.. Trimingham . J. Spencer. Ibid., p. RI. H .I Trimingham , J. Spencer, Ibid.• p. 81. ,... Cavendish. Richard (ed .]. Mall, My/h & Magie' All lttustrated Encyclopedia of the Supernatural (vol. I I). New Yo rk: Marshall Cavendish Corp. (1 970 ); p. 1461. ,n There has been a lot of history between the f irst century and modern times, but it is worth noting that con temporary mainlan d Greeks still cont inue to have a hard time understanding some Cretans and Cypnans. These are those whn are not exposed to travelers from modern mainl and G reece, sueh as those in fishing or moun tain villages . ,.. The na me Cop t is derived from Ihe G reek word Ai,;yplos. The Coptic language is the ancien t language of the Pharaohs that had been wrinen in hieroglyphs. Coptic was written in Greek characters by the seco nd century AD. ". "The Egyptian" was an infamou s outlaw who el uded capture by the Rom ans. The Jews who were trying to beat Paul to death no dou bt told the Romans that they were making a citizens" arrest of "T he Egyptian." Thi s ploy mea nt that the assau lters would not be rounded up and whipped fo r disturbing the peace and for the attempted murder of Paul. a Rom an citi zen. This ploy probably wor ked well and like ly was used oflen in the contentious. occupied areas of Palestine . The ploy mea nt that the Roman soldiers would tell the assaultcrs to scalier so they could not share in the credit and reward for the capture of "x " outlaw. Also. the ploy meant the assaulted person would be in a pec k of trouble , because he wou ld have to prove he was not "x" outlaw in a justice system where one was presumed to be guilty until proven Innoce nt.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trin ity

353

,,,<, The Hebrew phr ase "ehveh asher ehyell" is a Qal imperfec t, l st person sing ular verb (eh yeh l, plus a relative particle (adjec tive) (w'her), plus anothe r ehyeh. 1 ~ 1 The " WHO IS" translation is co nsistent with the translatio ns of "ho lI'n" in the NT, and is sim ilar to the standard English "I AM" translation of the Hebrew. "I Goodenough , Erwin R. Jewis h Sy mbols in the Greco-Roman Period. 01'. Cit., p. 238 . '" Goodenough . Erwin R. Ibid., p. 120 . ' ~-1 '''1 AM ' with you [or him ]": Exo 0 3: 12, 14; 04: 12. 15; Dcu 3 1:23: Jos 0 I :05; 0 3:07 ; Jdg 06: 16: 2Sa 01: 14; IC h 17: 13; 28:0 6: Psa 050:2 1; Jer 11:04 : 24:01; 30:2 2: 3 1:01; 32:38 : Eze I I :20; 14: II: 34:2 4; 36:28; 37:23; Bos 01 :09 ; 14:06; Zee 02:09: 08:08. ") "A nee hu" is a first perso n sing ular pronoun (allee) . plus a third person masc uli ne sing ular pronou n (hu) . Th e read e r wi ll rec all from the c ha pte r o n Heb rew collective noun s that anothe r pair of paired pronoun s, yo u-he (utah -/llI ) sugges ted persons of the Trinity. '''' The Hebrew "anec hu" is a first person sing ular pronoun (ance) , plus a third person mascul ine sing ular pronoun (11/1). If an ee is repeated. the fir st c nee is a personal pron oun . and the second ( 111('(' is an e mphatic pronoun , Since the pronoun is unnecessary, be ing contai ned in the verb end ing. e xistence of a pronoun is by itse lf emphatic. Reduplicatio n is a way fo r a He brew spea ker to emphasize that it is " I mysel f, and no ot her." So "a nee ane e hu" is " I myself am he: ' Most o ften onc e is spelled lUI; , but (11I1'1' is a pho netic spelling. T his is similar to how 1 phonetic ally spell " maste r" as adonee (not (/(/oni). which also serves to d istance the spell ing o f "m aster" from the spelling o f " my Lord(s) [Adona i1 ." 1 ~7 1) Chrysostom, 2) Ircnac us . 3) Novarian. and 4) Origcn were familiar with the " I AM" tra nslation of Joh 08: 58: I) Chry so stom's " Ho milies o n SI. Joh n" in Phil ip Schaff 's The Nicenc and Post Ntcenc Fathers . 14:199: 2) " Ire naeus Agai nst Heres ies" in Philip Schaff's The Nicene and Post Nicenc Fathe rs ( 14 vol ume s). Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdm an 's Publishing Com pany, 19S3), 0 1:478 ; 3) " A Treatise of Novatian Co ncerning the Tri nity" in Robe rts and Don ald son 's The Ame-Niccne Fa the rs, 0 5:624-6 25: 4) "Origen Aga ins t Celsus" in Ale xande r Robert s and Ja mes Dona ldson, The Ante -Nicene Fathers ( 1lJ volumes). G rand Rapid s: Will iam B. Eerdm an's Publ ishing Company, 198 1,04:463. ". YeI/IlIa said els ewhe re that he was not abo ut 10 prov ide unbel ie vers a sign that he was the Son of God , except the sign of his resurrection (M at 12:39-40 ; 16: 04 : Mar OS :12; Luk I I :29-30) . 1'. Act 02: 38; 0 3:06, 16; 04:10, 18: 0 5:40: 08: 12; 09: 27: 10:48: 16:18; 19 :1 3: 26: 09: Phi 0 2: 10 ''''' The Dead Sea Scrolls read "sons of Goo " at the e nd of Dc u 32:08. Th e LXX read s "angel s of God," and the MT recension reads "sons of Israel." The reading " so ns of God" log ically agree s with this paralle l passage: He made from one blood eve ry nation of men to d well on all the surface of the earth, hav ing determined appo inted seas o ns, and the hounds o f their habita tion. Matenal comdirelbs autcrars

354

Yael Natan

that they shou ld seek the Lord , if perhaps they migh t reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us (Al:I 17:26-27), The read ing "so ns of God " also agrees with the doctrine of e lection's connection with regio ns where believers live: As the gentile s heard Ihis, they werc glad. and gjonficd the word of God. As many as were app ointed to eternal life believed. T he Lord 's word was spread abroad throughout a ll the region (Act 13:48-49; see also Gen 09: 26-27). The original may have read " sons of God ." Perhaps the LXX translated "so ns of God" as "angels of God " because angels arc so metimes called "so ns of God" (Job 0 I:06; 02:0 I ; 38:07) . Angels also have areas of responsibility (Da n 10:20). T he LXX ("angels of God" ) or DSS (vsons of God") reading is logically prefe rable. T he MT rece nsio n reading is not like ly the original reading. Wh y would the number of the Israel ites (" snns of Israel"] determine the boundarie s of the nations (Deu 0 2:05; Jus 24 :04 : 2Ch 20:10; Jer 27:05-06: Dan ()4:25 )? It is more like ly the boundaries are set up either according 10 the number of e lect believers (Act 17:26-27) or clccr angels ( Dan 10:20). 'M Gen 17:07-08; Exo 06:07; 15: 17; 29:45 ; Lev I I:45 ; 22:33; 25:38: 26 :12, 45 ; Num 15:4 1; Deu 04 :20; 09:26. 29; I Ki 08 :51. 53; Jer 02:07. ,~ T he 52 times the Name, Ya h ~'l'h. is spoken by the patriarchs or heard by patriarchs are: Gen ()4:01. 26: 05:29; 09 :26; 10:09: 13:04: 14:22; 15:0 2, 07 , OS: 16:0 2, 05, II ; 18:14. 19: 19:1 3. 14; 2 1: 33: 22:14. 16: 24:03,07. 12, 27. 3 1. 35. 40. 42, 44.48. 50, 5 1. 56; 26:22. 25, 28. 29. 27:07, 20. 27; 28:13. 16. 21 ; 29:32. 33,35: 30:24, 27, 30 : 3 1:49 : 32:09 and 49: 18. ,'" Mat II :27: 28: 18: Luk 10:22; Joh 03:35: 05:22-27 ; 13:03; 17:0 2: Act 02: 36: ICo 15:27; Eph 0 I:2 1-22; Heb 02:08 ''''' DCli 07:04; 08: 19: 3 1:18; Jos 23:16: Jdg 02 :14; 10:13-14 : 2Ch 07: 19-22: 15:0506: 25:20 ; 30:07: l Ki 09:09: 2Ki 22:1 7; Psa 106:4 1-43: Jer OI :1 6: 05:19: 22: 08-09; 32:29. 32; 44:08; Amo 09 :08- 12. ' M Mat 21:43-44: Joh 07:35: Act 13:45-46: 17:04-05; 18:06: 2 1:28-29 : 22:2 1-22 ; 28:08: Rom 09: 30-33, 10:19-2 1, ITh 02: 16, and the Iike. 'M Psa 002:08: 022:27-28: 072 : I I; 086:09: Isa 02:02-03: 49:06: Dan 07: 14: Hos 02: 23; Zec 02 : I I; 08 :23: 14:09; Mal 0 1: II ; Re v I I:15. ,,,' T he mcsstamc kingdom was never abo ut ex pelling the Romans fro m Palestinc, as liberals like to assert. Yo 'hull and his disciples. and even John the Baptist, were on friendly term s with Rom an soldiers. and there is no NT ment ion of the disciples war ning the Roman s out of Palestine. The disciples are co mmonly confused with the Esscncs and Zea lots who were interested in o usting the Roman s. Interestingly. the Essene s colony at Q umran died out whe n, based on its apoca lyptic theology. the Essenes attacked the Roman legions. Ye.l h ,w ·s disciplcs. howe ver, see med to view Ihe Romans as the sane alte rnative to l:OITUpt govern ment. Moreover. if a unitarian theocracy had been in charge of Judea and Galilee. Christiani ty would not have gotte n off the ground. So the Romans were the " powers that be ordained by God" (Ro mans 13:\). In any case. the Romans were viewed as a people in necd of e vangelism. Matenal com direlbs autcrars

The Jewish Trinity

355

''''' In other wo rds, ev angelis m will go on until the end (Psa 110:0 2; co mpare Psa 106 :41; Mat 10:23; 24 ;14; Luk 1&:0&; Rom 0& :31 ; ICo 15:24: 2Co02:14-16). ''''' Ya hveh said, " Do nor fear. . .! am with yo u" (Gen 26:24; Exo 20:20; Isa 41 :10; 43:05 ; Jer 01 :08; 42: I I; 46: 2l:l ). This is s imilar to Yi:>,\ /uw 's word s in Mat 28:20, Rev 0 1;11- 18, and elsewhere. n" Mat 04:03, 06; 08:29; 14:33: 26:6 3; 21:40,43,54; Mar 01 :01; 03: II ; 15:39: Luk 01:35: 04:0 3, 09 , 4 1; 22:10; 10h 0 I:34, 49; 05:25; II :21; 19:1 ; 20 :3 1, III T hc Spirit had not yct becn se nt in greate r measure (Jo h 07:39; 16:1 3). So most people needed more convinc ing to be persuaded that Ye,I'!lIw was the Son of God than did Natha niel. m Yes hua merely meant the ")OU are Pete r" phrase 10 mimic , and thus draw attcntion to, Peter's previous answer, "You are thc Christ, the Son of the living God : ' Yes/lila was not trying to d raw attention to Pe ter as so me thought ( 110 04:03). m Herod started rebuilding the temple c irca 20 Be. so it had alread y been under construction 46 years when Ye.\ hua visited (1nh 02 :20). The temple was finall y completed in 6 2 or 64 AD. just in time for the Romans to destroy the templ e in 10 AD, Interest ingly, stone throwi ng is still a custom at thc temple site in modem times. The Je rusa lem PO.II Internet Staff reported, .... .in l erusalem riot police briefly charged into the AI Aksa mosque compound and fired stun grenades after a few Muslim worshippers threw rocks that fell on Jews praying at the Western Wall below" ('" IDF troops kill Palestinian teenager, riot police charge into Islamic shrine:' jpost.com, October 4, 2002 ; also " Israe li Police Drive Protesters from Muslim Shrine," reuters.com, October 04, 2( 02). m Jon 09: 24; 12: 18-19 ; sec also Joh 06 :26, 30-3 1; 09 :24; 10:25-26; 11:46-52; 12: 31; ICoO I:22. 17.' T hat Yeshua offe rcd no s ig ns o r philosoph ical o r sc riptural argument s, but poi nted to his pub lic min istry a nd leach ing (1oh 1&: 20 -21 ), mea ns that C hn srians are under nn obligation to argue or awe people into believin g (2Co 0 1: 12). Cbrt suans may feel free to argue if they want, of co urse , but C hristians are under no obligation to do so. Christians need only point to ward Y/'.I·hua 's ministry and resurrection Ooh 18:20-2 1), and to Mose s and thc prophet s (Luk 16:31). S igns may see m instrumental in thc co nvers io n process. but reall y are supposed to he con versation starters and thought provokers (I Co 14:21). S igns validate who exactly has the right to speak for God , as in the case of Moses and Elijah. Sometimes signs and tongues have the opposite effect and turn peopl e off to the gospe l ( l e o 14:23). No sign or argumen t can by itself remove the stumbling block of the crucifi xion ( ICo 01 :23) that separates thc elect from thosc who refuse to believe (I Sa 10:09; 10h 03: 19-2 1; Act 13:46, 4&). 17. Glasse, Cyril. The Concise Encyclopedia of Is/am. HarpcrSanftruncisco. 1991 , p. 2 16, Kahah,

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

356

Yael Natan

m "Je wish Funerary Inscriptions- Mo st Are in Greek," Bib/it'al A rcho eotogicul Re view (BA R) , Sop-Oct 199 2, p. 48, P o This is similar to how Mat thew quoted the first pan of Mic 05:02 (Mat 02:06), but le ff the reader o f Micah to fill in the rest of the verse: -. .. whose orig ins are fro m of old. fro m ancient times:' "" Joseph Caiaphas was high priest fro m I R to 36 AD, Archaeologists di scovered his tomb wh ich bears the Heb re w inscrip tion " Jello l'l.j bur [so n of] Ca i]a [Caia phas ]." The e laborate ly carved sto ne os suary st ill bor e Jo seph's bo nes when it was fo und in 199 0 in so uth Jerusalem. '"" Two persons were at the head of the "Be t Din" (Lesser Sanhedri n): on e , the actual president [Caiaphas ] with the tide Na si [prince, high-pri est] ; the other. the seco nd presiden t o r vice- pres ide nt [Annas]. who bore the title " Ab BI'I Din" ("Father of the Court") ("Sanhedrin ," The Jewish Encycloped ia , p. 44). ,,, "Yose Ben Joe zer.. .and 'rose Ben Joh anan: All the Sages listed in this chapter from this point through H illel and Shammai are kno wn as the Pairs (D urall) , and they were the head s of the Sanhedrin...one se rving as Nasi and the ot her as Ab Bet Din. (Vitry )" (M ishnah, Avot. The Li ~'in g Tatmud: The Wi,I'dom of tile Fathers and / 1.1' Classical Commentaries ; nanvlanon Juda h Go ldin, p. 9 ). '"1 Tal mud - Mas. Sotah 4311; Talmud -c Mas . Naz ir 47b: Midrash Rabbah -The Son g o f So ngs 11 :33. Note: Apparen tly, var ious biblica l verses were used to rationalize having a dep uty high priest (Lev 20:02: Num 3 1:0 6: Deu 20:0 1-03: ISa 14:03 . 19:Isa 59:1 7). '" Singer, Paul. "Interesting Times: What good are Jews",' The Jerusa lem Post (jpost.eom ). Ja nuary 2, 2003 . ,... R. I.P. is the ab brev iatio n for the Latin phra se: Requiescat In Pacem , whic h me ans, " Res t in Peace ," o r 11S humo r wou ld have it: " Recycle d Into [the] Planet. " ".' S ince Moses d id not experience peace in his life time , the prophet " Iike him" (Deu I R: 15) would not experience worldw ide peace in his lifetime (Mat 10:34). Onl y after the Messiah returns the second time will there will be peac e (Hcb 10: 13). ". Go ldman. Bernard, The Sacred Portal: A Primary Symbol in Ancient Jt/dail.· Art. Way ne Sta te University, 1966, p. 74. '" Green. Ta mara M. The C ity ol the Morm God: Religious Traditions of Harro n. E. J. Brill. New York, 1992, p. 65. '"' G unduz, Sinasi. The Knowledg e of Life : The Origins and Early Hi story of the stanaaea ns and Their Relation to th e Sa bians of the Qu ,.'a n a nd to the Hurranians. Oxford Universi ty Pre ss, 1994, p. 20 1. ". G unduz , Sinas i. The Knowledge of Lif e, ttnd. , p. 193. ,.., Edcrshc im, Alfred. Op. Cit ., Chapter XI. ,. , MacM ullen, Ramsay. Christia nity & Paganism in the fo urth to Eigh t Centuries. Yule University Press, New Haven. Massachu setts, 1997, p. 147.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Index Aden. 1li.. ~ ill Adonai. 3-4, 18- 19, l.Lli.,41 -4 2, 54-56 , 71.., 11 6 , 215 , 263, 272, 284, 293-296.

305,353. 35.8 Adonee. 3-4, 54-56, 290, 293-294 , 296, 353 , 15..& Atah-Hu , ±., 29-3 1, ftli, 10 I, us, 353, 3.5..8 Egw Eimi. 1 !..J.,4 6, 196- 197, 199-209, 227-22~ , 230-23 1, 235, 237,239-240, 328,330,335-336 , 3.5B. Ehych Asher Eh)'ch• .±. u 199-200, 203 , 353, 35.8 Eusebjus, I RQ, 273 -274. 2&0 , ) 04, 307 . 3 10, 35.8 lIaElohim, ±. 9- [0, !1., 1Ji, 26-3 1, ±.L Q 53-54, sz, 67-68, 7 1-74, sz, 86-87, !i2. ~ 100, 111- 11 3, 11 5- 11 6, us, 127, [32, 160, 242, 253, 255-260, 262, 273-276, 278-279,286-288,305.342-343,345-346, ill Khayyim. !, ~ !iL 242, 258-259, 262, 291, i l l 110 Wn, 1. !l.. 199-202, 204, 330, 353, 35.8 lIayah, J... 220, 260 , 35.& lIyonin. l. !!Q.., 220, 26 1, 285 , 3.i8 Rabbi, H, JQ,!H., 166, i l l 176, 178, ]00, 3.i8 Rabbinic, 4. !i, H, 34-35, TI., 86. §2, 114-11 5, 156, 169-170 , 174, 3.5& Rabbis. n.., 11 124, 180, 206, 290, ill Gen Ill: 2... !1., 29-30, 12... :!L ~ 6l.. 1Q, 71.. 2±. 98-99 . us, 121. 23 1-233 , 25..l.= 252, 265.261,210-212. 271, 297, 341, 351 Gen 18:26-27, 29-30, 4 1-42. ~ 55-56. ~ 7 1-73, !iL 84 -85, ill !!Q, us, 133, 155-157, 184. 2 15 , 222-224, 245, 251-252, 255-256, 265, 211-27 3, 275, 271, 288, 304,338. 351 Gen 32: ±.1 ±IL 2..1. 68-70 , 1J, .!i2, us, 2 14"2 16, 256, 265 , 267, 215- 277,304,330,

357 Gen 4S.: 53-54 . 277, 343, 345, 351 Num 2;L ±.1 ~ i2... 2..1. §L 12-14, 2..!L. 105, 108-109, ill 2 14, 246, 265-266 . 269, 219, 285. 292,304 ,328. 357 [leu J2: !1.,.f§., ±.1 58-59, ~ lIT., 91-92, ~ 96-98, iu 134- 135, 196, 203 -205, 2 13-220, 224, 233 , 242 , 244, 259, 26 1, 265, 269, 282, 285, 292, 294, 3 18, 323, 325,353, 351 Jos OS; ±.16.S... 70 -7 1, 8..!1 22.. 2L 133. 259 . 265 , 286-287. 294 , 347, 353-354, 357 jdg ll6.: az, ±[, ~ 2..1. 67-68, 2L §J, .!i2, 133-134, 21 7, 255-256, 265, 270. 215, 281- 288 .294.304 ,33 1,343,35 3, 351 Matenal com direlbs autcrars

Yael Na ta n

358

jdg II TI, J.C1.H., Q..!!..,ftl, [33- 134,228 , 265-266,270,287-288, 294, 297, 305, 343,345, ill lSa 10.: 1L. ~ ~ Ul.. 143, 272 , 275, 288, 343, 355, ill 2Sa 01.: 29-3 1, 7.2. 100-10 1, ill U2... 146, 249, 259, 266, 290-29 1, 325-326, 338, 343,353,ill Psu illl2: TI. [56, 180, 222, 228, 232, 266-267, 289-290, 292, 305, 325-326, 332, 354, ill Psa 04S.: 63-64, ill us, [23, 156, 266-267, 280 , 285, 289-290. 292, 305, 309 , 326, ill Psa 068.: 7.2. 222 , 254 , 266, 333, 345, ill Psa 082: !J1 !L 51.. 63-64, Uf1. 122, 156, 2 19, 2)6, 238, 266, 29 1-292, 3 13, 3 [8, :U5, ill Psa 02l.: 7.2. 266, 292, 326 , ill Psa 110.: ill. lib [24, 128. 21 6, 22 1, 245, 266, 290-29 1, 293 -295, 304. 325, 13& 339, 345,355, ill Pro 3.ll.: 123, 133, 229, 253-254, 266-267, 297, 327, ill Isa 01.: !J.., J!, .±L !ili... !ill. !JlL 108, ill 125. 146, 148, 152-1 54. 156, [65, 2 19, 223, 226-227 , ~ 256, 266, 296-297 , 302 , 327-328, 349, ill Isa 1l2;.±L 88-90 , 103, 11L!lL 186, 188, 2 10, 226, 244, 253, 266, 288, 293, 29L: 300, 334-335,354, ill lsa 4ft: [0 2-104 , 144, 188, 26 1, 266, 297-30 I, 3 12-313, 331 , 335 , 339, 358 Isa 48.; 8±., 103, 203-204 , 224, 266, 299, 30 1-302, 304 . 307, 339, 347, 358 Isa 42; !...8Ji., 207 , 243.246, 266, 30 1, 358 jer 23.: l2.~ 1±. 100 , 14 1, [45, 153,232, 242, 258,262,266, 304, 336 ,347, 358 Dan 01.: 11 -[ 3, §Ji, 101, 106, [16, 125, 140, [57, 163, 165-1 66, 21 3, 2 15-21 6, 2.20..,. 222 ,224-226,22 8,230-235,237, 240 -242,245,254,260-262.267, 285, 292, 305, 32 [, 328, 333, 335, 337, 348, 354, 358 Hos ui. ,ill, it.. 7.2. fi2, 21.. 143, 236, 250, 255, 265, 267, 275, 306, 308, 328, 353, 358 lIos 12: !Q, N.iL 69-70, UL 142, [48, 152, 250-25 1, 253-256, 265 , 267, 275, 298,306,327,330,348-349, 358 Amo lM: [48 , 224, 257, 267,300, 306- 307, 327. 347, 358 Mid lS.: !lli.. Ii, 154 , 2 10, 267, 290, 307, 3 13 , 337, 356, 358 Zcc 02..: .H., Q1, ss, 2.L 100, .!.ftL 242 , 267, 270-271, 307 , i l l 346-347 , 349. 353-354, 358 Zec 11.: ~lL 153- 154, 245, llil.. 308-309, 329, 354, 358 Zec 12: !Q, 143, 153, 180, 267, 307-309, 325, 328, 337, 358 Zec II 148. 153, 232, 267, 294, 309, 328-329. 346 , 358 Mal 0.1:
sz.

sa.

Matenal com direlbs autcrars

us $lUIS

M

rial 0

uto

M

rial c

d

utor

The Jewish Trinity

Matenal com direlbs autcra.s

Trinity

Trinity

Trinity

Trinity

Trinity

Trinity

Trinity

Trinity

Trinity

Trinity

Trinity

The Trinity

Trinity

Trinity

Trinity