tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3335270607657867160.post4259767802286935..comments2023-03-01T11:37:09.936-08:00Comments on Answering Judaism: Deuteronomy 6:4: Trinity VS Shema?Answering Judaismhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08118361261862962380noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3335270607657867160.post-50772606134743032932018-02-25T16:39:13.224-08:002018-02-25T16:39:13.224-08:00Are all the places that ehuad is used as a compoun...Are all the places that ehuad is used as a compound plural places in which the noun is plural?Andy Stitthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10705869221751871260noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3335270607657867160.post-55730241425846800082017-12-22T10:48:30.905-08:002017-12-22T10:48:30.905-08:00Sorry for the late reply Sir Anthony. The Shema it...Sorry for the late reply Sir Anthony. The Shema itself isn't a proof text for my position or yours.<br /><br />It only points out how many Gods exists, namely one (YHWH) which both of us can agree on. His nature however isn't the subject matter that is being addressed in the Shema despite the number of people who have used the argument.<br /><br />Even taking Echad to mean single, the Trinitarian position isn't toppled to be honest.<br /><br />I wouldn't disregard the Shema itself as being a singular usage in light of what I have said. I would contest only that in later years Jews and Christians have argued and even Christians amongst each other whether or not the Shema proves the Trinity or doesn't but I could be wrong on that point.Answering Judaismhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08118361261862962380noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3335270607657867160.post-48790008296439593362017-12-15T08:49:40.774-08:002017-12-15T08:49:40.774-08:00It is a very great and simple fallacy that ECHAD m...It is a very great and simple fallacy that ECHAD means more than one single! Any linguist or lexicon will tell yuu that. Echad, as "one" in English can modify any noun in the universe. Echad still means one single and not more.<br />Thus one flesh is not two fleshes. It is false to say that the meaning of "one" is more than one. Echad can of course modify a collective noun like "one family," but "one" there still means one and not more.Carlos Xavierhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08314004034624937054noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3335270607657867160.post-57272767975858969422016-03-03T17:19:03.919-08:002016-03-03T17:19:03.919-08:00The Jewish people have a right to define the creed...The Jewish people have a right to define the creed of which they are the custodians. Jews know well that their creed is unitarian. That is because YHVH is a single person, thousands of times! YHVH is still one Person in Ps 110:1. It is quite false to say that the Shema allows for the Trinity.<br />Trinitarians may call themselves monotheiss but it is fallacious to say that the Shema is other than unitarian.Carlos Xavierhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08314004034624937054noreply@blogger.com