Difference between revisions of "Talk:Elohim"
(New page: First, in the Elohim section the reference to Gen 1:1 as an example of Elohim being plural is incorrect. There are places in the Hebrew Bible where Elohim is used in the plural, but this i...) |
|||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Second, the part of this page that follows about the nature of the godhead is important stuff, but doesn't it belong somewhere else? Perhaps a link from this page to a page devoted to the godhead, or to the plurality of gods would be better no?--[[User:Jlc46|Jlc46]] 20:23, 30 July 2008 (UTC) | Second, the part of this page that follows about the nature of the godhead is important stuff, but doesn't it belong somewhere else? Perhaps a link from this page to a page devoted to the godhead, or to the plurality of gods would be better no?--[[User:Jlc46|Jlc46]] 20:23, 30 July 2008 (UTC) | ||
| + | :Perhaps the second part could be moved or incorporated into this article [[Heavenly_Father]]? --[[User:Jlc46|Jlc46]] 20:26, 30 July 2008 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Thirdly, the idea that the term Elohim was deleted in the Old Testament is just wrong... it was translated... Elohim is the Hebrew word for god, God, gods, pagan gods, or even as an adjective meaning divine. Since we use it as a personal name for God the Father, sometimes we assume that it was always used in that way, and this is a mistake. It is just their word for god like the Greek Theos.--[[User:Jlc46|Jlc46]] 20:56, 30 July 2008 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Dear Jlc46 -- You have the ability and background to do all of the above, and they are all sound ideas. Assuming you have the time, please go ahead with all these edits. Move whatever you deem proper to the Heavenly Father or Godhead articles and link to them from this article. A separate article should explain the notion of plurality of gods. We've skimmed past the idea that humans can attain godhood, which philosophy is a spur in the sides of those who hate the Church. We need to explain that philosophy and the beauty of it thoroughly... somewhere else. [[User:Gboyd|Gboyd]] 18:25, 31 July 2008 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | I just looked over this article, and the changes are excellent, thank you. [[User:Gboyd|Gboyd]] 18:29, 31 July 2008 (UTC) | ||
Latest revision as of 11:29, 31 July 2008
First, in the Elohim section the reference to Gen 1:1 as an example of Elohim being plural is incorrect. There are places in the Hebrew Bible where Elohim is used in the plural, but this isn't one of them. I know Joseph made this argument in an unofficial spur of the moment talk once, but we shouldn't judge Joseph because his Hebrew teacher didn't tell him everything he needed to know (of course Joseph only had a few beginning lessons in Hebrew). Although the doctrine of the plurality of Gods is true, and was revealed to Joseph (See Abraham 4:1) and is correct, in Gen 1:1 we have barashit (in the beginning) bara (he created, masculine SINGULAR plural verb) elohim (God, the one who created). Elohim can be plural or singular, just as there are many words in English that end in an s, but that are not plural. We can tell when it is being used in the plural or in the singular by the verbs and adjectives that are used, because in Hebrew the verbs and adjectives agree in gender and number with the nouns that they modify. It is significant that the JST of Genesis 1:1 (Moses 2:1) leaves the elohim as God singular, while the Book of Abraham version (likely drawn from a very different text) reveals the doctrine of the plurality of gods involved in the creation. It would be logical to then go back and try and see that plurality in the Genesis version, but it just isn't there when you look at the Hebrew carefully. I am therefore deleting this reference and adding some information about the Hebrew translation of Elohim, the question is, does a discussion of Joseph's "translation" of Genesis 1:1 belong anywhere or should we just leave it out, it is a sticky subject since the doctrine is right but Joseph's evidence for it is based on his misunderstanding of Hebrew.--Jlc46 20:23, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Second, the part of this page that follows about the nature of the godhead is important stuff, but doesn't it belong somewhere else? Perhaps a link from this page to a page devoted to the godhead, or to the plurality of gods would be better no?--Jlc46 20:23, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
- Perhaps the second part could be moved or incorporated into this article Heavenly_Father? --Jlc46 20:26, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Thirdly, the idea that the term Elohim was deleted in the Old Testament is just wrong... it was translated... Elohim is the Hebrew word for god, God, gods, pagan gods, or even as an adjective meaning divine. Since we use it as a personal name for God the Father, sometimes we assume that it was always used in that way, and this is a mistake. It is just their word for god like the Greek Theos.--Jlc46 20:56, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Dear Jlc46 -- You have the ability and background to do all of the above, and they are all sound ideas. Assuming you have the time, please go ahead with all these edits. Move whatever you deem proper to the Heavenly Father or Godhead articles and link to them from this article. A separate article should explain the notion of plurality of gods. We've skimmed past the idea that humans can attain godhood, which philosophy is a spur in the sides of those who hate the Church. We need to explain that philosophy and the beauty of it thoroughly... somewhere else. Gboyd 18:25, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
I just looked over this article, and the changes are excellent, thank you. Gboyd 18:29, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
