"Let us go down and confuse their language."

[robbiedaug]

The royal we existed in Semitic languages for thousands of years.

It's not introduced in England.

Hi Hazelelponi,
First, you say it was the Christians, now you say it's from the ancient Semitics.
Well, i am really glad this topic is making people search the internet for answers, it just goes to show that NONE of us "really" know why God is expressed as plural, or why gods are expressed as plural.
Mankind has always worshipped MANY gods at one time until Moses, and even after Him, many regions continued to worship many gods.

Well, okay, it WAS introduced to England by Longchamps in the late 1200s, BUT yes, you are correct.
It was used as early as the 4th century AD.
Royal we - Wikipedia
Even in Islam, according to this wiki article, Allah expressed Himself in the plural, sometimes.

Youtube's Christian Prince discusses this plurality to challenge Muslims about Islam and about the Biblical Trinity which is WHAT brought me here to this forum.
Christian Prince (CP) does not mention the Royal We in his debates, however, and i wonder why not.

So, i do thank you for bringing this information to my attention. It's something to think about.
I need to think more on this before going further.
In the meanwhile, i will be reading this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elohim#Other_plural-singulars_in_biblical_Hebrew

Thanks,
Robbie

 

[Hazelelponi]

Nevermind...

 

[robbiedaug]

Yoo hoo, Hazelelponi?

I thanked you, and you say, "Nevermind"?
Don't you want to say, "You're welcome, Robbie?

 

[Hazelelponi]

Yoo hoo, Hazelelponi?

I thanked you, and you say, "Nevermind"?
Don't you want to say, "You're welcome, Robbie?

I removed my post. That was what the nevermind was.

And your welcome..

 

[robbiedaug]

ok ... let's try a different approach.

They Each Are In Full Cooperation with one another, therefore 3 in 1 = us

The Father creates, the Son redeems, and the Holy Spirit sets apart. Yet they perform these roles in full cooperation with the other members. In each operation, all three members are present.

Although the Father is preeminently the Creator the Son and Spirit were also involved.

The Son is the Redeemer, yet God the Father and the Spirit are described as sending the Son to redeem.

The Holy Spirit is the Sanctifier, yet the Father and Son also cooperate in this work.

They Testify To Each Other

The Father testified to the Son

And a voice from heaven said, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased." (Matthew 3:17).

The Son testified to the Father

Jesus gave them this answer: "I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does (John 5:19).

The Son testified to the Spirit

But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you (John 14:26).

Later, the Holy Spirit testified to the Son.

When the Counselor comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father, he will testify about me (John 15:26).

Hi eleos,

Hmm.
Do you really think you even addressed the question i asked?
You copy/paste all this unrelated stuff for what purpose?
Blah, blah, blah! MY GOSH! lol

Many Christians think they can answer with a lot of blah blah, by quoting Bible verses. You've really wasted your time with all of that.

Read Hazelelponi's response on page 1 post #10 which i had completely misunderstood. And again, she repeated herself on page 2, in posts # 33 and 40.
She gave the best answer to the question.

And you're probably sitting, there, still thumbing through the Book deciding which unrelated verse to post next to TRY to... (?)... to...pffft, i dunno - explain the Trinity!? That was not the question. I apologize if my question was not very clearly asked. I've re-read my first post and it seems i may have given off the impression that i was asking about the Trinity.
I thought the thread title or subject was clear enough.


Thank you for trying, though, i do appreciate your effort, but really, next time someone asks a tough question, look at the question and then look at your responses before you click on "Post Reply". Sometimes the answer is simply NOT found in the Bible.

Thanks,
Robbie

 

[eleos1954]

Hi eleos,

Hmm.
Do you really think you even addressed the question i asked?
You copy/paste all this unrelated stuff for what purpose?
Blah, blah, blah! MY GOSH! lol

Many Christians think they can answer with a lot of blah blah, by quoting Bible verses. You've really wasted your time with all of that.

Read Hazelelponi's response on page 1 post #10 which i had completely misunderstood. And again, she repeated herself on page 2, in posts # 33 and 40.
She gave the best answer to the question.

And you're probably sitting, there, still thumbing through the Book deciding which unrelated verse to post next to TRY to... (?)... to...pffft, i dunno - explain the Trinity!? That was not the question. I apologize if my question was not very clearly asked. I've re-read my first post and it seems i may have given off the impression that i was asking about the Trinity.
I thought the thread title or subject was clear enough.


Thank you for trying, though, i do appreciate your effort, but really, next time someone asks a tough question, look at the question and then look at your responses before you click on "Post Reply". Sometimes the answer is simply NOT found in the Bible.

Thanks,
Robbie

Well I'm sorry if I misunderstood what you were asking about, and I'm glad you got the answer you were looking for from Hazelelponi and thank you for your "kindness", I do try and provide information and stay on topic and yes, out of Gods word and apologize, if that somehow does not seem appropriate to you.

God Bless.

 

[robbiedaug]

...if that somehow does not seem appropriate to you.

What the heck is that supposed to mean?

 

[Mark51]

Consider a scant and few scriptures about the relationship, authority, and so forth between Jesus an God Almighty.-Exodus 20:3, 5; Deuteronomy 4:24; Proverbs 8:27, 30; Matthew 4:10; John 17:5; Colossians 1:15.

 

[robbiedaug]

Hi Mark51
I don't know if those verses help, much,

Muslims demand further proof that we believe in only one God.
In the verses i've mentioned where "Us" is used, it causes Muslims to get angry because it seems to them that we believe in more than one god.
They love bringing up the Trinity as if there are three gods.
Then God uses "Us" twice.

Did you read Hazelponi's post #33 on page 2?
"Let us go down and confuse their language." <-- click on this
There is a blue link at the bottom of that post.

Thanks

 

[Rubiks]

Hi Hazelelponi,
First, you say it was the Christians, now you say it's from the ancient Semitics.
Well, i am really glad this topic is making people search the internet for answers, it just goes to show that NONE of us "really" know why God is expressed as plural, or why gods are expressed as plural.
Mankind has always worshipped MANY gods at one time until Moses, and even after Him, many regions continued to worship many gods.

Well, okay, it WAS introduced to England by Longchamps in the late 1200s, BUT yes, you are correct.
It was used as early as the 4th century AD.
Royal we - Wikipedia
Even in Islam, according to this wiki article, Allah expressed Himself in the plural, sometimes.

Youtube's Christian Prince discusses this plurality to challenge Muslims about Islam and about the Biblical Trinity which is WHAT brought me here to this forum.
Christian Prince (CP) does not mention the Royal We in his debates, however, and i wonder why not.

So, i do thank you for bringing this information to my attention. It's something to think about.
I need to think more on this before going further.
In the meanwhile, i will be reading this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elohim#Other_plural-singulars_in_biblical_Hebrew

Thanks,
Robbie

The royal we never existed in ancient semitic languages or any ancient near east language for that matter.

 

[Rubiks]

Hi Mark51
I don't know if those verses help, much,

Muslims demand further proof that we believe in only one God.
In the verses i've mentioned where "Us" is used, it causes Muslims to get angry because it seems to them that we believe in more than one god.
They love bringing up the Trinity as if there are three gods.
Then God uses "Us" twice.

Did you read Hazelponi's post #33 on page 2?
"Let us go down and confuse their language." <-- click on this
There is a blue link at the bottom of that post.

Thanks

Monotheism is pretty much a meaningless term. Even the most ardent defenders of monotheism unquestionably accept the existence of all kinds of heavenly beings; they just refer to them as "angels" or "demons." This isn't inherently different from the Greek belief of Zeus being a chief deity and all other "deities" emanating from him.

"Monotheism" to the ancient Israel had more to do with the sole worship of the supreme deity than the rejection of the existence of other deities. Even much of angelology and demonology had evolved from prior "polytheistic" beliefs.

 

[JackRT]

Monotheism is pretty much a meaningless term. Even the most ardent defenders of monotheism unquestionably accept the existence of all kinds of heavenly beings; they just refer to them as "angels" or "demons." This isn't inherently different from the Greek belief of Zeus being a chief deity and all other "deities" emanating from him.

"Monotheism" to the ancient Israel had more to do with the sole worship of the supreme deity than the rejection of the existence of other deities. Even much of angelology and demonology had evolved from prior "polytheistic" beliefs.

This point of view has come to be called henotheism.

 

[ColinJesusboy28]

Before God created the earth God's son was already with Him. They were together even in the beginning.

 

[RDKirk]

The Trinity, i can explain,
<snip>
The Trinity is easy to explain

Then you're doing better than the Council of Nicaea and every Pope.

More likely, you just haven't thought about it carefully enough.

 

[robbiedaug]

Monotheism is pretty much a meaningless term.

Shout that to a group of Muslims in an Islamic area. You will be surrounded quite quickly by angry people.

Even the most ardent defenders of monotheism unquestionably accept the existence of all kinds of heavenly beings; they just refer to them as "angels" or "demons."

Heavenly beings are not gods, they are more like God's servants. They will appear as gods to primitive people, but once they learn that God is greater, angels are more like a single fire-cracker compared to God's power.

"Monotheism" to the ancient Israel had more to do with the sole worship of the supreme deity than the rejection of the existence of other deities. Even much of angelology and demonology had evolved from prior "polytheistic" beliefs.

"In Judaism, God has been conceived in a variety of ways.[1] Traditionally, Judaism holds that YHWH, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and the national god of the Israelites, delivered the Israelites from slavery in Egypt, and gave them the Law of Moses at biblical Mount Sinai as described in the Torah. According to the rationalist stream of Judaism articulated by Maimonides, which later came to dominate much of official traditional Jewish thought, God is understood as the absolute one, indivisible, and incomparable being who is the ultimate cause of all existence. Traditional interpretations of Judaism generally emphasize that God is personal yet also transcendent, while some modern interpretations of Judaism emphasize that God is a force or ideal." - Wiki
God in Judaism - Wikipedia

 

[robbiedaug]

I say the Trinity is easy to explain and you say...

Then you're doing better than the Council of Nicaea and every Pope.

The Trinity sounds confusing to you if you think the popes can't explain it

More likely, you just haven't thought about it carefully enough.

Are you talking to yourself in print??

How would you deal with this imam??

 

[Rubiks]

Heavenly beings are not gods, they are more like God's servants. They will appear as gods to primitive people, but once they learn that God is greater, angles are more like a single fire-cracker compared to God's power.

Sounds like a semantic dispute instead of one in substance. There is no universal definition of "god" that is true of all religions. Each religion defines the term very differently. Graeco-Roman paganism could be described as atheistic, monotheistic, or polytheistic depending on the definition one uses.

 

[robbiedaug]

Hi Rubiks,
Discussing other gods from other religions is off topic, no?
I responded to your comment because of the "Off Topic" things you say in this post:
"Let us go down and confuse their language."

Muslims look at us like we are totally stupid for "believing in a fairy tale". I know THEY are wrong BUT how to prove it, is the problem that this thread asks.
Like i've said, i can explain the Trinity, and even then, they shake their heads in disbelief.

The most suitable answer i got on this thread's MAIN question was from Hazelponi when she brought up the very logical "Royal We". Royal we - Wikipedia It is worth a serious read.
Hazlponi is a former Muslim. I think Muslims are, in general, pretty informed when it comes to religion because they read their Qur'an and OUR Bible almost to the point of memorizing.
However, they do NOT believe a lot of what our Bible says.
We must consider that our English language Bible was a translation from whatever language they each wrote in back then. Some were in Greek, some Aramaic, some in Hebrew. NONE of it was in English and ALL of it was translated.

When we Christians are questioned, we simply put a halo over our head and quote verses from the Bible, basically with our fingers, crossed thinking/hoping that by quoting a verse, or many verses, that it will answer a question or satisfy the questioner when in many cases, it does not answer the question nor satisfy the questioner. It seems to only satisfy themselves by being able to quote Biblical verses.
As proof of that, i'll ask the VERY OFF-TOPIC question, 'WHAT was Cain's wife's name in Nod when the only people on the earth were Adam and Eve's children?'
She must have had a name if he took her as his wife.
The answer (her name) is NOT found in the Bible, however.

I, sometimes, wonder if i am questioning my faith.
I, often, wonder if the Councils of Nicaea ever considered that the Bible as they knew it WAY back then would ever be in the hands of the populace. There were MANY God-inspired Books and Gospels back then that the Council reviewed AND REJECTED. And that is why people like me ask these questions.
And let's NOT ever forget that the Bible was not available to us for centuries.
Why Christians Were Denied Access to Their Bible for 1,000 Years | HuffPost

I don't want to get off topic and stay there.

Thanks
Robbie

 

[RDKirk]

Hi Rubiks,
Discussing other gods from other religions is off topic, no?
I responded to your comment because of the "Off Topic" things you say in this post:
"Let us go down and confuse their language."

Muslims look at us like we are totally stupid for "believing in a fairy tale". I know THEY are wrong BUT how to prove it, is the problem that this thread asks.
Like i've said, i can explain the Trinity, and even then, they shake their heads in disbelief.

The most suitable answer i got on this thread's MAIN question was from Hazelponi when she brought up the very logical "Royal We". Royal we - Wikipedia It is worth a serious read.
Hazlponi is a former Muslim. I think Muslims are, in general, pretty informed when it comes to religion because they read their Qur'an and OUR Bible almost to the point of memorizing.
However, they do NOT believe a lot of what our Bible says.
We must consider that our English language Bible was a translation from whatever language they each wrote in back then. Some were in Greek, some Aramaic, some in Hebrew. NONE of it was in English and ALL of it was translated.

When we Christians are questioned, we simply put a halo over our head and quote verses from the Bible, basically with our fingers, crossed thinking/hoping that by quoting a verse, or many verses, that it will answer a question or satisfy the questioner when in many cases, it does not answer the question nor satisfy the questioner. It seems to only satisfy themselves by being able to quote Biblical verses.
As proof of that, i'll ask the VERY OFF-TOPIC question, 'WHAT was Cain's wife's name in Nod when the only people on the earth were Adam and Eve's children?'
She must have had a name if he took her as his wife.
The answer (her name) is NOT found in the Bible, however.

I, sometimes, wonder if i am questioning my faith.
I, often, wonder if the Councils of Nicaea ever considered that the Bible as they knew it WAY back then would ever be in the hands of the populace. There were MANY God-inspired Books and Gospels back then that the Council reviewed AND REJECTED. And that is why people like me ask these questions.
And let's NOT ever forget that the Bible was not available to us for centuries.
Why Christians Were Denied Access to Their Bible for 1,000 Years | HuffPost

I don't want to get off topic and stay there.

Thanks
Robbie

Robbiedawg, you haven't been on this forum for very long, and you seem to think that you're smarter than everyone else around here.

If you hang around for a while, you'll find out that you're not walking in here with anything that doesn't get said every couple of months.

 

[robbiedaug]

Robbiedawg, you haven't been on this forum for very long, and you seem to think that you're smarter than everyone else around here.

If you hang around for a while, you'll find out that you're not walking in here with anything that doesn't get said every couple of months.

RDKirk
First of all, it's Robbiedaug, not "Robbiedawg".
The "w" is at the other side of the keyboard from where the "u" is". So, that is not a typo. That is a sneaky, cheap way of calling me a dog.
I apologize if i seem more intelligent than you.

I can assure you that i am not smarter than everybody as you so wrongly accuse me of thinking i am.
I never once claimed to know it all. You did.
The Bible does not condone reproaching others. So, why do that to me? Do you, perhaps, believe that you are better than me and that you can try to intimidate or embarrass me publically just because i am new here??
Are you trying to form a lynch-mob against me?

I did not read the entire forum's entries.
I came here hoping to find answers to questions i have been thinking about.
I am not here to have people quote Bible verses instead of using their minds to answer my questions.

I am sincerely sorry if i offend YOU, so much, brother.
Why do you even bother with someone like me?
There are many, many, many other people to whom you can dictate.

Thank you for showing me WHO you really are.
One more thing. The number of posts members have made does neither impress me nor intimidate me.

AND you even quote this, in your signature:
"No one serving as a soldier gets entangled in civilian affairs, but rather works to please his commanding officer. -- 2 Timothy 2:4"

And "Service Before Self -- Philippians 2:3"

It appears that you are quite a hypocrite.