The Evangelical Universalist Forum

How Many Gods Are There?

How Many Gods Are There?

Every Christian I have encountered believes that there is one God only.

Many believe that this one God exists as a Trinity of persons. However, all instances in the New Testament of the word θεος (god) preceded by the article (the God) and with no other modifiers, has as its referent the Father alone, and NEVER a Trinity.

Jesus in His prayer to the Father, called Him “the only true God” and in the same sentence referred to Himself as someone other than the only true God.

And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God , and Jesus Christ whom you have sent. (John 17:3 ESV)

If Jesus had said, ’ that they know You, Me, and the Holy Spirit as the only true God , then it would be clear that He believed in the Trinity of which He would have been a part.

However, what Jesus did say, indicates that He believed in only one true God.

Clearly, the apostle Paul also believed that there was only one God—the Father, and did not indicate Jesus as being that one God or part of that one God, but as someone other than that one God:

. … for us there is one God , the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist. (1 Corinthians 8:6 ESV)

(There is) one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. (Ephesians 4:6 ESV)

For there is one God , and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.
(1 Timothy 2:5 ESV)

Elohiym is a plural noun in Hebrew, the singular of which is “Elowahh.” The word “God” frequently appears in the Old Testament in the singular form “Elowahh.” Here is one example:

They refused to obey, And they were not mindful of Your wonders That You did among them. But they hardened their necks, And in their rebellion They appointed a leader To return to their bondage. But You are God (Elowahh), Ready to pardon, Gracious and merciful, Slow to anger, Abundant in kindness, And did not forsake them. (Nehemiah 9:17)

But strangely, the plural form of the word also appears to have been applied to God. Perhaps the most unusual example is found in Psalm 82:1. Here is the Douay translation (A Catholic translation that was published in 1609-1610)

God hath stood in the congregation of gods: and being in the midst of them he judgeth gods.

However, the word “he” doesn’t occur in the Hebrew. Without it, the verse would read:

God hath stood in the congregation of gods: and being in the midst of them judgeth gods.

Now the peculiar matter is that in this verse both the first word and the last word is the plural “elohiym.” The second occurrence was translated “gods” in the Douay, whereas the first is translated “God.” Is there any justification in translating the word in these two different ways?

By the way, in the phrase “congregations of gods” a different Hebrew is used for “gods.” It is “el ale.” This is said to mean “god-like ones.”

You may be interested in the way the words appear in the Septuagint, a translation of the Hebrew into Greek around 300 B.C.

ο θεος εστη εν συναγωγη θεων εν μεσω δε θεους διακρινει

Literally in English this would read:

The God is in [the] synagogue of gods and judges gods .

So the translators of the Septuagint obviously took the first “elohiym” to mean THE God, and the second to mean “gods,” that is, if they were translating from the same Hebrew text. However, they may have been translating from an older form of Hebrew such as was found in cave 4 of the Dead Sea scrolls, and the first word may have been the singular Hebrew word “elowahh.”

2 Likes

The problem comes when you deal with other cultures and understanding of other Gods. Do we acknowledge them? Do we realize maybe we have one view to a very complex situation? Don kind of skirts this in the fact that most if not all Christians only view the Christian Bible as authoritative, but the world has many cultures and each culture has a God and a way of living and our ‘Christian God’ made them all and put the things in them he put…

Obviously you all know where I am going.

Good luck. :wink:

Reminds me of an old Harry Belafonte number!

In what way does the gospel of John create “trinitarian confusion”?

:face_with_raised_eyebrow:

I think that a sober comparison of the two founders would eliminate such a judgment. One, our Lord, sums up the Old Testament in his call for love for God and love for neighbor and even for enemies; the other was a bloodthirsty barbarian calling for violence, rape, and lying as good things for his ‘god’.
It’s really time to move beyond the Old Testament - and understand it in light of the New Testament, the new covenant, the New Age. Let what is clear and pure and lasting interpret what is fading away and temporary.

2 Likes

I guess you would say the same of Judaism. But, what if God IS Triune?

Also, consider that in Islam, to claim that Jesus is God’s son is the greatest of all sins, referred to as “shirk.” (See here and here)

Hum! This reflection on the three Abraham faiths, caused me to reflect on this question…regarding the zombies from Z-Hell (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9)

P.S. I don’t necessarily agree, with the thoughts and conclusions - of this article!

Does it matter that one believe such a thing? Does it change your faith in such a way that you can now live the victorious Christian life, whereas before you couldn’t?

qaz, neither of these even imply a “Trinity.” Trinitarians believe in a compound God consisting of 3 divine Persons.

The fact that Jesus existed before Abraham doesn’t imply that He was part of a Trinity. Nor does it imply that He was the great “I AM” as some supposed.

Also John 1:1 doesn’t say that the Word was the God. It does say that the Word was with the
God.

This phrase is usually translated, “and the word was God”. Some people read it emphasizing the word “was”. In doing so, they imply that the “word” and “God” are identical. But this is not the case since
“θεος” is not preceded by the article. In addition, the word order is changed: “θεος ‘ην ‘ο λογος” (God was the word). This word order is used elsewhere in the New Testament. For example:

God is love [ I John 4:16] “‘o θεος ‘αγαπη ‘εστιν” (God love is). Love is the kind of thing God is, the kind of “stuff” of which He consists ---- His essence.

Your word is reality. [John 17:17]. “‘o λογος ‘ο σος ‘αληθεια ‘εστιν” (The word of you reality is) Reality is the kind of thing God’s word is. It’s the stuff of which His word consists — the essence of His word.

Thus: The Expression was Deity [John 1:1] “θεος ‘ην ‘ο λογος” (Deity was the Expression). Deity is the kind of thing that the Expression of God was. It is the stuff of which He consists ---- His very essence.

Martin Luther concurred with this understanding. Whatever else he might have been, Luther was a good Greek scholar. He put it quite succinctly, saying that the lack of an article is against Sabellianism and the word order is against Arianism.

Sabellianism was a form of modalism or “oneness”, the idea that God is a single divine Individual who reveals Himself in three modes, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Arianism may have originated from the early Christian teaching that the Son of God was begotten by God before all ages, and being God’s only begotten Son, he was therefore fully deity. Arius himself, when writing in 321 A.D. to Eusebius bishop of Nicodemia, referred to the Son as “fully God”:

Ancient Greek used a definite article more frequently than we do in modern English–the way to say God would be ό θεος: the God. The same usage is replete in genealogies, take in Matthew 1:2: "Abraham begat “the Isaac”, then begat “the Jacob”, and is used in Matthew 14:29: “the Peter” walked upon the water and came to “the Jesus”. ό preceding θεος is in no way indicative of anything theological–it’s a plain grammatical rule.

More theologically, it is important to note the implications of calling Jesus LORD (small caps). Take Romans 10:9 (see also Rom 1:3-4, 1 Cor 12:3, Phil 2:11)

9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved… 13 For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

This passage references Joel 2:32, which reads:
32 And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved. For in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there shall be those who escape, as the Lord has said, and among the survivors shall be those whom the Lord calls.

Lord, often rendered LORD (small caps) is used instead of the divine name “YHWH”, reading (in English script) “Kyrios” in Greek. Stunningly, the divine name is applied to Jesus. Everyone who confesses that Jesus is Kyrios, calls on the name of YHWH. It would be blasphemous to confuse the divine name to someone other than Israel’s God. Thus, the logic of the verse suggests that Jesus, the man who walked among us, IS God, just as the Father in heaven is.

I find this biblical evidence irresistible. It makes clever sense of the biblical language to simultaneously affirm that Jesus is not another God, yet is divine with the Father. In the NT, theos is most used of the Father, while Kyrios of the Son. The NT writers were careful to confirm their monotheism while faithfully affirming the Jesus Christ is LORD, in accordance with the Scriptures.

2 Likes

Gabe, my comment about the idea of God being a Trinity was in response to a comment about Islam:

It certainly matters to Muslims if someone believes God is a Trinity. Some Muslims think the sin of “shirk” (asserting that Jesus is divine) would be worth killing for.

So, in some circumstances it may be a matter of life or death if a person argues that Jesus is really the Second Person of the divine Trinity…through whom we were all created…whose perfect Blood alone provides redemption from death, the entrance of the Holy Spirit into our hearts, and intimacy with his Father.

  • Our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ” (Titus 2:13).
  • “Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit? You have not lied to humans, but to God” (Acts 5:3,4).
  • “May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all” (2 Corinthians 13:14).
  • “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 28:19).
  • “But when the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness about me" (John 15:26).

To me, Jesus was not God, nor is the Word a person. Jesus was the personification of God’s word-" Love others as yourself."

The words that Jesus spoke did not come from himself, they were the words of Abraham, “The father of all who believe.” However, just as man did not create/invent the laws of physics, math etc., neither Abraham nor Jesus created/ invented the word. The word was from God who came before all things.

It may be so that the article is used more often than in English. However, even in Greek “the Isaac” may be used to specify that particular Isaac who begat “the Jacob” and no other.

It is the case throughout the New Testament that where “ό θεος” occurs with no other modifiers of “θεος” the referent is always the one and only “true God”, that is the Father. NEVER is “ό θεος” with no other modifiers of “θεος” used to denote the Son of God or any other being.

I think you have confused the divine name with the name of the Lord Jesus. “κυριος” is applied to Jesus because He is the lord or master of every true disciple of His. The divine name YHWH which is used of “the only true God” (as Jesus called His Father in prayer) was changed to “LORD” by the Hebrews. Why? Because to make certain that they wouldn’t take “the name of YHWH” in vain, they decided never to utter that divine name, but use “LORD” in its place.

In the following verse, the only “modifier” I see Thomas using to qualify Jesus as “God” (the Son) is the possessive pronoun “my”:

John 20:28
Thomas said to him [Jesus], “My Lord and my God [ὁ θεός μου] !”

So, are you saying Thomas was mistaken in addressing Jesus of Nazareth as his “God”–on philosophical grounds (since you don’t believe Jesus is the Second Person of an eternal divine Trinity)? Or, are you saying that Thomas’s use of the possessive pronoun “my” with “God,” in reference to Jesus of Nazareth, somehow negates “God” meaning “God”—on grammatical grounds?

We see the same possessive pronoun “my” similarly used with “God,” this time in reference to God (the Father), here:

Philippians 4:19
And my God [ὁ θεός μου] will meet all your needs according to the riches of his glory in Christ Jesus.

Further, if you do believe Thomas was mistaken in identifying Jesus as “God” (the Son) in the above verse, then presumably you also believe that the (non-Trinitarian) Jews were mistaken in their offense against Jesus, here:

John 10:33,39 AMP
The Jews replied [to Jesus], We are not going to stone You for a good act, but for blasphemy, because You, a mere Man, make Yourself [out to be] God.

…They sought again to arrest Him, but He escaped from their hands.

1 Like

In this verse the word “θεός” does have a modifier besides the article—namely the adjective (or “possessive pronoun”, as you say) “μου” (my).

Yes, but that is irrelevant to whether or not there is an eternal divine Trinity comprised of,

  • God the Father
  • God the Son
  • God the Holy Spirit

Again, I ask you,

I haven’t claimed a relevancy. But what is your reason for believing in a Trinity? The word “God” throughout the New Testament NEVER refers to a Trinity. Over 95% of the instances, it refers to the Father alone.