Luke 1:28 - And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the LORD is with thee: blessed art thou among women.
Imagine Mary - a poor Nazarene living in the middle of nowhere - being in impoverished and isolated circumstances suddenly being addressed as royalty. It’s tremendous to think (and I believe this shines through the Word in her exchange with Gabriel) that she’d DONE nothing to warrant such a greeting. She simply WAS, as God made her. For THAT she was favored by Him. We who are co-heirs with her Son DID nothing to warrant that exalted station, either. We simply ARE as God made us. Redeemed and accepted. Amen.
Good day Ms. Alice, you’re blessed by God, learned so much from God through you, thank God and thank you. I want us to be Scripture buddies and learn from each other, I promise you won’t be disappointed.
I'm blessed to hear that! Substack is a great platform for us to discuss scripture. Feel free to leave comments under any of my posts and I usually respond as soon as I saw them.
I would have preferred a one on one discussion, because substack can only respond post by post. Anyway, watch this video (17 mins), I’m very interested in your feedback, in addition please tell me which chapter do you think would be suitable for me to read from the Bible. All praise to God. https://youtu.be/4jBAsy04aBY
Nice pick up! It’s amazing what little nuggets of gold you find. Like God can’t do a miracle and he needs us to come up with ideas for him. Makes you wonder, where else we might be trying to “help” God, when really all he wants is faith and for us to just follow his lead. Personally, I can see rather than leaning on the Lord in all things I lean on exercise and things you can do in the gym like, even to a point of zealously making time for it, absolutely at the cost of my time in His presence. Another place is always being shy about sharing the word, as if people will be offended and my testimony will reflect badly on God when I share.
Just wanted to confirm and corroborate your interpretation of the 3 visitors in Gen 18 as the instantiated (but not incarnate) Trinity.
If you go to Biblehub.com and look up Strong's number h4397, take note of the entry, "the theophanic angel," which points to God directly representing himself in visible and palpable form, such as his direct manifestation to Abraham and Sarah in Gen 17-18, Hagar in Gen 16 & 21 (these visits bracket and therefore interpret the 3 visitors in just the way you interpret them, commensurate with Abraham's addressing them as "Adonai" in 18:3), Moses in Exodus 3, to the Israelites throughout the Law, to Joshua (6), Samuel, etc.
Bible Hub will give you a listing of all the instances of "Mal'ak" (h4397), most of which are clearly God speaking directly to a person(s). God's personal involvement and personal confrontation are indispensable to understanding his covenants with us, as well as our intimate covenants with one another.
Note also the use of the word "angel" with regard to Peter (Acts 12:15): it is used in the same manner as Genesis 16 through 21, namely a direct representation of Peter himself, similar to our idea of a ghost. This shows clearly how the Hebrews viewed the word "angel," namely that an angel was frequently not a third party creature, but the very person, frequently God himself. A theophanic representation/manifestation.
Everything is personal in Scripture--even the Law per Prov 1:3, Psa 45:4, and Matt 23:23. God speaks using others, but is immediately present to us in their words, and also in our minds and hearts, for He "fills all things in all ways."
Your dialogue between magicians in your story about Yisrael seems to indicate you understand God's abiding presence in creation, so that we should not be surprised when our triune God manifests Himself personally. Yet it is good to be able to better articulate it in defense against detractors and their specious arguments
When God gives particular promises, it is difficult to refrain from envisioning more particularly what He has in mind, projecting our own expectations on His promises. So difficult to rightly use His gift of imagination and mind.
Per the book of Proverbs, God only teaches simple-minded people, and I myself have been guilty of complicating things with my own imagination, letting it run riot over his promises, like a child who's always asking, "are we there yet?"
To add to your humor about the multiplicity of our plan B's, consider God's picture of the simple minded in the form of the donkey who knows his master in Isaiah 1. I truly think Jesus, when he rode into Jerusalem on a donkey, had Isaiah 1 in mind, proving to us again that a donkey has simpler and purer trust than we do.
For us to carry God's glory, we have to be as simple-minded as a donkey, and yet not dig our heels in like a stubborn ass.
Have you noticed that Mary is quoting Rahab when she says, "be it to me according to your word."? Rahab is held next to Abraham as a paragon of faith, but she is, like Mary, full of Wisdom and presence of mind, and is speaking truth that only the Holy Spirit teaches to the simple minded. Jos 2:12 is an incredibly wise statement, from which Solomon crafts Proverbs 31:26.
Solomon, who couldn't find a righteous woman among a thousand wives (Eccl 7:28) treasures Rahab as the noble wife. It is clear that Mary also treasured her, and was the one who passed Rahab's story on to Matthew (her biographer) and to her own sons (James is emphatic about Rahab's Faith, because Mary was emphatic about Rahab's faith.. Go figure that a virgin treasured a prostitute of Jericho. Just the type of peculiar people God calls before the foundation of the world.
Two more things to consider:
1) Your discussion of the limits of rationality are right in line with the central confession of Christianity: The song of Moses (Deut 32), per Rev 15. Deut 32 is super-rational, with a Wisdom which transcends and encompasses all aspects of who we are, especially our ability to reason ourselves into wayward folly. CS Lewis often appealed to a wisdom and logic higher than that of the syllogism and conventional assumption. His theology was often bad, but he did understand with the heart of a child.
2) The Hebrew root word for "faithful" connotes a parent feeding a child, specifically a mother nursing an infant. It is right in line with Christ's injunction, "feed my sheep," which recalls Jacob's sleepless vigils to ensure safe delivery of lambs and kids, something David surely also experienced, even facing off against a bear and a lion. It has more to do with humble care than perfect trust as it's focus, likely what Paul has in mind when he tells the Romans, "let love be genuine."
If you think about this in terms of Mary, the idea of faithfulness is flip-flopped: her trust is based on her knowledge of God's faithfulness in taking care of her and the child God promised. She is like that simple-minded sheep or donkey, who carries God's glory knowing God will carry her.
I confess that I myself have been "too sharp," tending to reason out His promises and find them for myself. He has soundly thrashed me for it, proving to me my folly in very painful, heart-rending, and humiliating circumstances.
I have heard Him testify: "you are not saved by your wisdom, but by my Wisdom."
I have now learned to surrender each time my imagination wants to run riot, and simply tell Him, "You will do what you will do." I have likewise seized upon Psa 25:12, Prov 19:21, and Prov 20:24.
He is the God who says, "I will be what I will be."
I posted this under your comment "what's wrong with you?", but I can't see the reply I posted so I'll post it here too:
We live in an age where society/people are easily steered by words/lies Proverbs 26:22-28, if you proclaim something that is incorrect and a fellow believer corrects you then you will receive it joyfully because truth is of Yehovah. (Not focusing on how different people say things differently than yourself)
If the individual refuses to receive that council, admonishment, correction, etc…. Then it exposes the message to the light by revealing the heart of the speaker. 2 Tim 4:3
I recently and coincidentally was shown your channel by the YouTube feeds, I gave it a listen but felt burden to say something and not just turn away.
If you will not receive my words as counsel then I can follow the advice of Matthew 10:14. However, since you're speaking to an audience I pray you would feel burdened not to speak your own “truth” but the true word of Yehovah as given in the Bible.
Young lady, I'm glad you're reading the Bible but please show some humility and stop teaching lies as truth.
*Abraham took his dad Terah and other relatives with him too, not just Lot. If anything, Abraham wanted to leave his things to Eliezer.
*Hagar was a secondary wife, her child was hers, hence Sarah didn't hesitate to send both away.
*"Incarnated Trinity"? Really? The faith of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is monotheistic. ONE true God - Yehovah (He who was, He who is, He who shall be).
The scriptures say not to add or take away a jot or tittle. You're too young in the faith and making many mistakes, but those who are Babes in the Word take it as truth. Ask God to send you a true teacher of the truth and silently wait.
Remember the text was divided by chapters much later. Genesis 11:31 Terah left with them "to go into the land of Canaan". Genesis 12:5 states "and the souls that they had gotten in Haran" left with them "to go into the land of Canaan".
Where did he tell Abraham to go to? Genesis 12:1 Yehovah tells him to leave, Genesis 12:5 the land of Canaan, Genesis 12:7 Unto thy seed will I give this land: (Canaan). Genesis 11:31 Terah left with them "to go into the land of Canaan". Terah didn't just happen to leave for Canaan, before Jehovah instructed Abram to go there.
3 And he went on his journeys from the south even to Bethel, unto the place where his tent had BEEN at the beginning, between Bethel and Hai;
Gen 13:14 And the LORD said unto Abram, after that Lot was separated from him, Lift up now thine eyes, and look from the place where THOU ART northward, and southward, and eastward, and westward:
Gen 13:15 For all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever.
You may read it linearly, but Hebrew thinking is circular. Hence the land he left was Ur of the Chaldeans and the land he went to was Canaan.
“Adonai” is the plural of “Adon,” and Genesis specifically states the plurality of person in One God with “let us make man in our image.” Proverbs 8 clearly defines God in plurality, as Wisdom was “brought forth” before anything was created, the same Holy Spirit who proceded from Father and Son (Jn 15:26). She was God's fellow workman.
There is far more proof than this. The De Decretia (defense of the Nicene Creed) provides an excellent argument using Old Testament passages, to disprove the Arian position, which claimed monotheism was the religion of the Jews, and is the religion of the “true” Church.
You are right about Eliezer, but that does not exclude Lot as a possible “plan B,” making your assertion superfluous cavil.
As for the reckoning of Ishmael as a son, a secondary wife is no more problem than the levirate marriage was a problem for a dead brother’s name to be carried on by the biological son of his brother.
None of what you said is true: you referenced Pagan Catholic tradition as your proof. I've studied that Adonai postulate and it's false, no true Hebrew scholar can agree with you. The triune god came from the Catholics before the Nicene Creed but was "codified" about that time. It is Babylonian in origin and is a reference to Nimrod, Semiramis and Tammuz; hence Revelation 18:2 speaks about coming out of Babylon in the last days, because that pagan multi-god religion has continued since.
The lineage of Ishmael's (Muslims) and the lineage of Isaac (Hebrews/Jews) are both monotheistic, Why? Because Abraham their father that them about his God Yehovah. During the time of Yehoshua/Jesus it was also monotheistic, it didn't change until after the "Church" had a lot of Pagan converts that brought their Pagan traditions with them. I'd be willing to guess you keep the Pagan tradition of Christmas, you probably even violate the Bible and put a Christmas tree in your house. (Jeremiah 10:1-5) Or do you observe the Pagan tradition of Easter which also dates back to Babylon and Semiramis/Ishtar/Easter/Queen of Heaven. All pagan traditions in violation of Yehovah's Word (Exodus 34: 12-17).
"does not exclude Lot as a possible Plan B" ???? Unless you can say as Messiah "It is Written" then you're telling stories? But I have found most "Christians" don't believe the "stories in the old testament" really happened? They merge paganism with God's Word, and state things like evolution plus creation. They believe in Millions of Years and not the approximately 6,000 years since God created ALL.
As for the "levirate marriage"? Maintaining the family lineage and land within the tribe is completely different from a second wife; which was the purpose of a brother marrying the older brother's widow and having a heir. Multiple wives are allowed within God's command for man, sure in the Garden of Eden before the fall it was one wife and one husband, but not afterwards. This too the Roman Catholic Church changed sometime in the 12th-14th century.
All major Christian faiths subscribe to all the Creeds including the Nicene Creed, and definition of Chalcedon. All of them subscribe to Ambrose, Athanasius, and Tertullian's clear and irrefragable defense of the triune God as three distinct persons in one "substance."
The "Hebrew" scholars you speak of do not include all Hebrew scholars, and are as questionable as Josephus, who was simply writing to save his own skin--promoting a Caesar-like Moses by way of personal agenda.
My Complete Jewish Bible (CJB) translation of Gen 1:26 still uses first person plural, "us," "our." אֱלֹהִ֗ים (El'hiym) is masculine plural, not singular by any means.
It would be impossible for God to be eternally loving or eternally righteous without distinct persons to love/be loved righteously.
The God of Hebrews and Christians is not the self-contained, perfect tense, static god of worldly philosophy. אֱלֹהִ֗ים is and overflowing wellspring of life and light (Psa 36) who is always perfectly unfolding, never retreating back to nothing (sin is annihilation, the return to nothing). אֱלֹהִ֗ים so overflows with personality that He expresses himself in three persons, two masculine, one feminine (רוּחַ rûaḥ; "Spirit"). Hence male and female are both created in His image, and are made to not be alone, but to answer (עָנָה ‘ânâ) one another as in Col 3:16.
If you look backward into Greek and Babylonian theology, you will find that they are actually monotheistic--their gods emanated from a single creator god, who had to be kept pristine and untarnished by his creation, using daemons as proxies so as not to be sullied by material/carnal substance. Irenaeus (Against the Heresies) and Augustine (City of God books 9-10) give a very accurate accounting of pagan theology/ontology, exposing the gross inconsistencies of polytheistic mono-oroginism, demonstrating how important Biblical ontology is (Eph 1:23, Rom 11:31, Acts 17:28).
You are welcome to believe what you wish, but what you assert is not consistent with the sound doctrine held by all four main branches of Christian teaching as recorded in confessions, canons, creeds, and catechisms, all of which are simply restatements of Scripture drawn from its themes and interconnected assertions.
Again, you're referencing the pagan Roman Catholic Church (RCC), all the people you mentioned are their so called "church fathers".
The Jews have the written Law which is the Torah or the Tanakh/Old Testament, and they have the Oral Law which is the writings/interpretations by the Rabbis as THEY understood the Scriptures. Most Jews give the Oral Law the same credence if not more than the Written Law; similar to most Christian denominations today. Some really believe they can't understand the Scriptures without the aid of "holy men"; which is a lie and swings the doors open to apostasy. However, the Karaite Jews only believe in the Written Law. Some Christians are like the Karaite Jews in the sense that they only believe in what is written. Like Jesus/Yehoshua they say "It is written" in the Bible.
This belief that Elohym is plural or that God is love and He needs others for Him to be able to Love, are just Catholic in origin word play to create doctrines out of thin air. In other words certain phrases were created to give credence to the idea; the idea isn't plainly stated in the Bible but brought forth by the imaginations of fallen men. The Roman Catholic Church (RCC) did the exact same thing to bring in Sunday worship, Pagan Holidays, the reckoning of the start and end of the Day-Month-Year, the Rosary, the Trinity via consubstantiation, the Saints, making Mary an eternal virgin and the Mother of God i.e. the Queen of Heaven, the candles, the Miter, the Papal Tiara, the Papal Ferula, the Latin Mass, the infantilization of Messiah via a baby Jesus and the glorification of death via many depictions of a mutilated Jesus on the cross instead of a risen Savior, the Eucharist/Sacrament which leads to the catholic process of Transubstantiation or the turning of the bread to the literal body of Christ to be "literally" crucified again and again at the whims of a priest, the liturgy/vain repetitions/mantras, the pyramid scheme hierarchy which Revelation 2:6 calls the doctrine of the Nicolaitans (which are just forms of controlling the church/people), calling a priest Father which the Bible condemns (Matthew 23:9), the RCC confession which is the placing of a priest in the place of God to even offer the forgiveness of sin, the Papal "lineage from Peter", etc.....
Some of these things have been around almost 1,800 years after they've been Christened by the RCC, but it doesn't make them any less Pagan. Your argument is just the same, Christened pagan doctrines/theology, accepted by most as being true because they've been around since almost the start of the Apostolic church. However, this stuff was not what the original Church was taught by Jesus/Yehoshua and/or His disciples taught.
As for Babylon or Greek theology being monotheistic: you're confusing having one main god with many "lesser" gods as monotheistic. IT IS NOT. (MONO - one, theistic - belief in god. NOT one committee of three gods, but belief in one/Only True God Yehovah John 17:3)The first people of Babylon are not far removed from the flood and Noah, so could they have known about the one true God? Yes, but they rejected it and started to set themselves up as gods; like Satan told Eve/Hawwah.
As for the "four main branches of Christian teaching as recorded in confessions, canons, creeds, and catechisms all of which are simply RESTATEMENTS of Scripture drawn from its themes and interconnected ASSERTIONS.", thank you for proving all that I have said right. This is what I've been saying which can be summed up like this "THE DOCTRINES OF MEN".
Restatements have a major flaw- every translation is an interpretation, so restatements focus on one concept and lose everything else.
Assertion defined as: a positive statement or declaration, often without support or reason:
Luke 1:28 - And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the LORD is with thee: blessed art thou among women.
Imagine Mary - a poor Nazarene living in the middle of nowhere - being in impoverished and isolated circumstances suddenly being addressed as royalty. It’s tremendous to think (and I believe this shines through the Word in her exchange with Gabriel) that she’d DONE nothing to warrant such a greeting. She simply WAS, as God made her. For THAT she was favored by Him. We who are co-heirs with her Son DID nothing to warrant that exalted station, either. We simply ARE as God made us. Redeemed and accepted. Amen.
Amen!
Good day Ms. Alice, you’re blessed by God, learned so much from God through you, thank God and thank you. I want us to be Scripture buddies and learn from each other, I promise you won’t be disappointed.
I'm blessed to hear that! Substack is a great platform for us to discuss scripture. Feel free to leave comments under any of my posts and I usually respond as soon as I saw them.
I would have preferred a one on one discussion, because substack can only respond post by post. Anyway, watch this video (17 mins), I’m very interested in your feedback, in addition please tell me which chapter do you think would be suitable for me to read from the Bible. All praise to God. https://youtu.be/4jBAsy04aBY
Alice, thank you very much for this very profound teaching, it spoke to me a lot. Be blessed
Psalm 27:14 NKJV
Nice pick up! It’s amazing what little nuggets of gold you find. Like God can’t do a miracle and he needs us to come up with ideas for him. Makes you wonder, where else we might be trying to “help” God, when really all he wants is faith and for us to just follow his lead. Personally, I can see rather than leaning on the Lord in all things I lean on exercise and things you can do in the gym like, even to a point of zealously making time for it, absolutely at the cost of my time in His presence. Another place is always being shy about sharing the word, as if people will be offended and my testimony will reflect badly on God when I share.
Just wanted to confirm and corroborate your interpretation of the 3 visitors in Gen 18 as the instantiated (but not incarnate) Trinity.
If you go to Biblehub.com and look up Strong's number h4397, take note of the entry, "the theophanic angel," which points to God directly representing himself in visible and palpable form, such as his direct manifestation to Abraham and Sarah in Gen 17-18, Hagar in Gen 16 & 21 (these visits bracket and therefore interpret the 3 visitors in just the way you interpret them, commensurate with Abraham's addressing them as "Adonai" in 18:3), Moses in Exodus 3, to the Israelites throughout the Law, to Joshua (6), Samuel, etc.
Bible Hub will give you a listing of all the instances of "Mal'ak" (h4397), most of which are clearly God speaking directly to a person(s). God's personal involvement and personal confrontation are indispensable to understanding his covenants with us, as well as our intimate covenants with one another.
Note also the use of the word "angel" with regard to Peter (Acts 12:15): it is used in the same manner as Genesis 16 through 21, namely a direct representation of Peter himself, similar to our idea of a ghost. This shows clearly how the Hebrews viewed the word "angel," namely that an angel was frequently not a third party creature, but the very person, frequently God himself. A theophanic representation/manifestation.
Everything is personal in Scripture--even the Law per Prov 1:3, Psa 45:4, and Matt 23:23. God speaks using others, but is immediately present to us in their words, and also in our minds and hearts, for He "fills all things in all ways."
Your dialogue between magicians in your story about Yisrael seems to indicate you understand God's abiding presence in creation, so that we should not be surprised when our triune God manifests Himself personally. Yet it is good to be able to better articulate it in defense against detractors and their specious arguments
Thank you, Alice. This was incredibly helpful.
When God gives particular promises, it is difficult to refrain from envisioning more particularly what He has in mind, projecting our own expectations on His promises. So difficult to rightly use His gift of imagination and mind.
Per the book of Proverbs, God only teaches simple-minded people, and I myself have been guilty of complicating things with my own imagination, letting it run riot over his promises, like a child who's always asking, "are we there yet?"
To add to your humor about the multiplicity of our plan B's, consider God's picture of the simple minded in the form of the donkey who knows his master in Isaiah 1. I truly think Jesus, when he rode into Jerusalem on a donkey, had Isaiah 1 in mind, proving to us again that a donkey has simpler and purer trust than we do.
For us to carry God's glory, we have to be as simple-minded as a donkey, and yet not dig our heels in like a stubborn ass.
Have you noticed that Mary is quoting Rahab when she says, "be it to me according to your word."? Rahab is held next to Abraham as a paragon of faith, but she is, like Mary, full of Wisdom and presence of mind, and is speaking truth that only the Holy Spirit teaches to the simple minded. Jos 2:12 is an incredibly wise statement, from which Solomon crafts Proverbs 31:26.
Solomon, who couldn't find a righteous woman among a thousand wives (Eccl 7:28) treasures Rahab as the noble wife. It is clear that Mary also treasured her, and was the one who passed Rahab's story on to Matthew (her biographer) and to her own sons (James is emphatic about Rahab's Faith, because Mary was emphatic about Rahab's faith.. Go figure that a virgin treasured a prostitute of Jericho. Just the type of peculiar people God calls before the foundation of the world.
Two more things to consider:
1) Your discussion of the limits of rationality are right in line with the central confession of Christianity: The song of Moses (Deut 32), per Rev 15. Deut 32 is super-rational, with a Wisdom which transcends and encompasses all aspects of who we are, especially our ability to reason ourselves into wayward folly. CS Lewis often appealed to a wisdom and logic higher than that of the syllogism and conventional assumption. His theology was often bad, but he did understand with the heart of a child.
2) The Hebrew root word for "faithful" connotes a parent feeding a child, specifically a mother nursing an infant. It is right in line with Christ's injunction, "feed my sheep," which recalls Jacob's sleepless vigils to ensure safe delivery of lambs and kids, something David surely also experienced, even facing off against a bear and a lion. It has more to do with humble care than perfect trust as it's focus, likely what Paul has in mind when he tells the Romans, "let love be genuine."
If you think about this in terms of Mary, the idea of faithfulness is flip-flopped: her trust is based on her knowledge of God's faithfulness in taking care of her and the child God promised. She is like that simple-minded sheep or donkey, who carries God's glory knowing God will carry her.
I confess that I myself have been "too sharp," tending to reason out His promises and find them for myself. He has soundly thrashed me for it, proving to me my folly in very painful, heart-rending, and humiliating circumstances.
I have heard Him testify: "you are not saved by your wisdom, but by my Wisdom."
I have now learned to surrender each time my imagination wants to run riot, and simply tell Him, "You will do what you will do." I have likewise seized upon Psa 25:12, Prov 19:21, and Prov 20:24.
He is the God who says, "I will be what I will be."
Yes I do
I posted this under your comment "what's wrong with you?", but I can't see the reply I posted so I'll post it here too:
We live in an age where society/people are easily steered by words/lies Proverbs 26:22-28, if you proclaim something that is incorrect and a fellow believer corrects you then you will receive it joyfully because truth is of Yehovah. (Not focusing on how different people say things differently than yourself)
If the individual refuses to receive that council, admonishment, correction, etc…. Then it exposes the message to the light by revealing the heart of the speaker. 2 Tim 4:3
I recently and coincidentally was shown your channel by the YouTube feeds, I gave it a listen but felt burden to say something and not just turn away.
If you will not receive my words as counsel then I can follow the advice of Matthew 10:14. However, since you're speaking to an audience I pray you would feel burdened not to speak your own “truth” but the true word of Yehovah as given in the Bible.
Young lady, I'm glad you're reading the Bible but please show some humility and stop teaching lies as truth.
*Abraham took his dad Terah and other relatives with him too, not just Lot. If anything, Abraham wanted to leave his things to Eliezer.
*Hagar was a secondary wife, her child was hers, hence Sarah didn't hesitate to send both away.
*"Incarnated Trinity"? Really? The faith of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is monotheistic. ONE true God - Yehovah (He who was, He who is, He who shall be).
The scriptures say not to add or take away a jot or tittle. You're too young in the faith and making many mistakes, but those who are Babes in the Word take it as truth. Ask God to send you a true teacher of the truth and silently wait.
Where did the bible say Abraham took his dad and other relatives?
Remember the text was divided by chapters much later. Genesis 11:31 Terah left with them "to go into the land of Canaan". Genesis 12:5 states "and the souls that they had gotten in Haran" left with them "to go into the land of Canaan".
Yes but God didn’t tell Abraham to “go leave your country…” until Genesis 13.
Where did he tell Abraham to go to? Genesis 12:1 Yehovah tells him to leave, Genesis 12:5 the land of Canaan, Genesis 12:7 Unto thy seed will I give this land: (Canaan). Genesis 11:31 Terah left with them "to go into the land of Canaan". Terah didn't just happen to leave for Canaan, before Jehovah instructed Abram to go there.
3 And he went on his journeys from the south even to Bethel, unto the place where his tent had BEEN at the beginning, between Bethel and Hai;
Gen 13:14 And the LORD said unto Abram, after that Lot was separated from him, Lift up now thine eyes, and look from the place where THOU ART northward, and southward, and eastward, and westward:
Gen 13:15 For all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever.
You may read it linearly, but Hebrew thinking is circular. Hence the land he left was Ur of the Chaldeans and the land he went to was Canaan.
“Adonai” is the plural of “Adon,” and Genesis specifically states the plurality of person in One God with “let us make man in our image.” Proverbs 8 clearly defines God in plurality, as Wisdom was “brought forth” before anything was created, the same Holy Spirit who proceded from Father and Son (Jn 15:26). She was God's fellow workman.
There is far more proof than this. The De Decretia (defense of the Nicene Creed) provides an excellent argument using Old Testament passages, to disprove the Arian position, which claimed monotheism was the religion of the Jews, and is the religion of the “true” Church.
You are right about Eliezer, but that does not exclude Lot as a possible “plan B,” making your assertion superfluous cavil.
As for the reckoning of Ishmael as a son, a secondary wife is no more problem than the levirate marriage was a problem for a dead brother’s name to be carried on by the biological son of his brother.
None of what you said is true: you referenced Pagan Catholic tradition as your proof. I've studied that Adonai postulate and it's false, no true Hebrew scholar can agree with you. The triune god came from the Catholics before the Nicene Creed but was "codified" about that time. It is Babylonian in origin and is a reference to Nimrod, Semiramis and Tammuz; hence Revelation 18:2 speaks about coming out of Babylon in the last days, because that pagan multi-god religion has continued since.
The lineage of Ishmael's (Muslims) and the lineage of Isaac (Hebrews/Jews) are both monotheistic, Why? Because Abraham their father that them about his God Yehovah. During the time of Yehoshua/Jesus it was also monotheistic, it didn't change until after the "Church" had a lot of Pagan converts that brought their Pagan traditions with them. I'd be willing to guess you keep the Pagan tradition of Christmas, you probably even violate the Bible and put a Christmas tree in your house. (Jeremiah 10:1-5) Or do you observe the Pagan tradition of Easter which also dates back to Babylon and Semiramis/Ishtar/Easter/Queen of Heaven. All pagan traditions in violation of Yehovah's Word (Exodus 34: 12-17).
"does not exclude Lot as a possible Plan B" ???? Unless you can say as Messiah "It is Written" then you're telling stories? But I have found most "Christians" don't believe the "stories in the old testament" really happened? They merge paganism with God's Word, and state things like evolution plus creation. They believe in Millions of Years and not the approximately 6,000 years since God created ALL.
As for the "levirate marriage"? Maintaining the family lineage and land within the tribe is completely different from a second wife; which was the purpose of a brother marrying the older brother's widow and having a heir. Multiple wives are allowed within God's command for man, sure in the Garden of Eden before the fall it was one wife and one husband, but not afterwards. This too the Roman Catholic Church changed sometime in the 12th-14th century.
All major Christian faiths subscribe to all the Creeds including the Nicene Creed, and definition of Chalcedon. All of them subscribe to Ambrose, Athanasius, and Tertullian's clear and irrefragable defense of the triune God as three distinct persons in one "substance."
The "Hebrew" scholars you speak of do not include all Hebrew scholars, and are as questionable as Josephus, who was simply writing to save his own skin--promoting a Caesar-like Moses by way of personal agenda.
My Complete Jewish Bible (CJB) translation of Gen 1:26 still uses first person plural, "us," "our." אֱלֹהִ֗ים (El'hiym) is masculine plural, not singular by any means.
It would be impossible for God to be eternally loving or eternally righteous without distinct persons to love/be loved righteously.
The God of Hebrews and Christians is not the self-contained, perfect tense, static god of worldly philosophy. אֱלֹהִ֗ים is and overflowing wellspring of life and light (Psa 36) who is always perfectly unfolding, never retreating back to nothing (sin is annihilation, the return to nothing). אֱלֹהִ֗ים so overflows with personality that He expresses himself in three persons, two masculine, one feminine (רוּחַ rûaḥ; "Spirit"). Hence male and female are both created in His image, and are made to not be alone, but to answer (עָנָה ‘ânâ) one another as in Col 3:16.
If you look backward into Greek and Babylonian theology, you will find that they are actually monotheistic--their gods emanated from a single creator god, who had to be kept pristine and untarnished by his creation, using daemons as proxies so as not to be sullied by material/carnal substance. Irenaeus (Against the Heresies) and Augustine (City of God books 9-10) give a very accurate accounting of pagan theology/ontology, exposing the gross inconsistencies of polytheistic mono-oroginism, demonstrating how important Biblical ontology is (Eph 1:23, Rom 11:31, Acts 17:28).
You are welcome to believe what you wish, but what you assert is not consistent with the sound doctrine held by all four main branches of Christian teaching as recorded in confessions, canons, creeds, and catechisms, all of which are simply restatements of Scripture drawn from its themes and interconnected assertions.
Again, you're referencing the pagan Roman Catholic Church (RCC), all the people you mentioned are their so called "church fathers".
The Jews have the written Law which is the Torah or the Tanakh/Old Testament, and they have the Oral Law which is the writings/interpretations by the Rabbis as THEY understood the Scriptures. Most Jews give the Oral Law the same credence if not more than the Written Law; similar to most Christian denominations today. Some really believe they can't understand the Scriptures without the aid of "holy men"; which is a lie and swings the doors open to apostasy. However, the Karaite Jews only believe in the Written Law. Some Christians are like the Karaite Jews in the sense that they only believe in what is written. Like Jesus/Yehoshua they say "It is written" in the Bible.
This belief that Elohym is plural or that God is love and He needs others for Him to be able to Love, are just Catholic in origin word play to create doctrines out of thin air. In other words certain phrases were created to give credence to the idea; the idea isn't plainly stated in the Bible but brought forth by the imaginations of fallen men. The Roman Catholic Church (RCC) did the exact same thing to bring in Sunday worship, Pagan Holidays, the reckoning of the start and end of the Day-Month-Year, the Rosary, the Trinity via consubstantiation, the Saints, making Mary an eternal virgin and the Mother of God i.e. the Queen of Heaven, the candles, the Miter, the Papal Tiara, the Papal Ferula, the Latin Mass, the infantilization of Messiah via a baby Jesus and the glorification of death via many depictions of a mutilated Jesus on the cross instead of a risen Savior, the Eucharist/Sacrament which leads to the catholic process of Transubstantiation or the turning of the bread to the literal body of Christ to be "literally" crucified again and again at the whims of a priest, the liturgy/vain repetitions/mantras, the pyramid scheme hierarchy which Revelation 2:6 calls the doctrine of the Nicolaitans (which are just forms of controlling the church/people), calling a priest Father which the Bible condemns (Matthew 23:9), the RCC confession which is the placing of a priest in the place of God to even offer the forgiveness of sin, the Papal "lineage from Peter", etc.....
Some of these things have been around almost 1,800 years after they've been Christened by the RCC, but it doesn't make them any less Pagan. Your argument is just the same, Christened pagan doctrines/theology, accepted by most as being true because they've been around since almost the start of the Apostolic church. However, this stuff was not what the original Church was taught by Jesus/Yehoshua and/or His disciples taught.
As for Babylon or Greek theology being monotheistic: you're confusing having one main god with many "lesser" gods as monotheistic. IT IS NOT. (MONO - one, theistic - belief in god. NOT one committee of three gods, but belief in one/Only True God Yehovah John 17:3)The first people of Babylon are not far removed from the flood and Noah, so could they have known about the one true God? Yes, but they rejected it and started to set themselves up as gods; like Satan told Eve/Hawwah.
As for the "four main branches of Christian teaching as recorded in confessions, canons, creeds, and catechisms all of which are simply RESTATEMENTS of Scripture drawn from its themes and interconnected ASSERTIONS.", thank you for proving all that I have said right. This is what I've been saying which can be summed up like this "THE DOCTRINES OF MEN".
Restatements have a major flaw- every translation is an interpretation, so restatements focus on one concept and lose everything else.
Assertion defined as: a positive statement or declaration, often without support or reason: