PopsWeb » Page 42 of 106

ADDITIONAL COMMENTARY: God as elohim. QUOTING: "Throughout the Hebrew Scriptures two chief names are used for the one true divine Being-Elohim, commonly translated God in our version, and Jehovah, translated Lord. Elohim is the plural of Eloah (Arabic Allah); it is often used in the short form El (a word signifying strength), as in El-Shaddai, God Almighty, the name by which God was specially known to the patriarchs (Gen.17:1; 28:3; Ex.6:3).

"The etymology is uncertain, but it is generally agreed that the primary idea is that of strength, power of effect, and that it properly describes God in that character in which he is exhibited to all men in his works, as the creator, sustainer, and supreme governor of the world. The plural form of Elohim has given rise to much discussion. The fanciful idea that it referred to the trinity of persons in the “Godhead” hardly finds now a supporter among scholars. It is either what grammarians call the plural of majesty, or it denotes the fullness of divine strength, the sum of the powers displayed by God. Jehovah [Yahweh] denotes specifically the one true God, whose people the Jews were, and who made them the guardians of his truth…. Thus much is clear; but all else is beset with difficulties. At a time too early to be traced, the Jews abstained from pronouncing the name, for fear of its irreverent use. The custom is said to have been founded on a strained interpretation of Lev.24:16; and the phrase there used, "THE NAME" (Shema) [ha shem], is substituted by the rabbis for the unutterable word. In reading the Scriptures they substituted for it the word ADONAI (Lord), from the translation of which by Kurios in the LXX, followed by the Vulgate, which uses Dominus, we have the LORD of our version. The substitution of the word Lord is most unhappy, for it in no way represents the meaning of the sacred name.

"The key to the meaning of the name is unquestionably given in God's revelation of himself to Moses by the phrase "I AM THAT I AM" (Ex.3:14; 6:3). We must connect the name Jehovah [Yahweh] with the Hebrew substantive verb to be, with the inference that it expresses the essential, eternal, unchangeable being of Jehovah. But more, it is not the expression only, or chiefly, of an absolute truth: it is a practical revelation of God, in his essential, unchangeable relation to his chosen people, the basis of his covenant." —Smith's Bible Dictionary.

So, since Genesis 1:26 has been dismissed as representing a plurality of God(s), let us go and do likewise, dismissing it as a proof text for binitarian closet polytheism. (END)

THE MOTTO OF CHRIST FELLOWSHIP MINISTRIES: "You are required to preach and teach what the Bible says is the truth, not what you think it ought to be." Anyone have a problem with this? CFM may not always manage to accomplish this in practice (we do make mistakes!), yet the goal is always out before us --and we strive to reach it. Should we write and teach what we believe to be biblical reality that in fact opposes our motto, the result becomes eisegesis or a faulty inserting into scripture of our view, rather than exegesis, a revealing of the biblical view. Our standards are high and we expect to experience the same standard of excellence from other biblical expositors. When other published works significantly miss the mark, we feel obligated to rise up for biblical accuracy. Thus comes this criticism of the popular but altogether inaccurate "God is a family of gods" doctrine. When shown the error of our ways, we are more than willing to change. On the other hand, we expect to see this standard advocated in the works of others, but alas, we have been sorely disappointed.

This issue has been addressed here before (FC#2000-4— "Is the Word 'God' the Father's Last Name?"), but since the mistaken idea that "God is a family of Gods" persists in Armstrongite church of God (COG) teachings, it is necessary to address the issue once more. To say that, "God is a family" is to express much more than the indisputable biblical fact that God has a family into which some number of human beings may enter, becoming thereafter, children of God. Some preachers insist that God does not have a family (thus denying the biblical view), but rather assert that God is a family, which results in a change in the biblical definition of "God." Of a truth, the notion that God is a family is not supported in scripture anywhere at all, clever argumentation notwithstanding. What's the big difference, you say? The difference is the sovereignty of God on one hand versus the sovereignty of man on the other. The difference is the oneness of Yahweh our God versus the composite, amalgamated, or multipart, segmented god(s) generated from man's fertile and corrupted imagination. The difference is the denying of plain scripture, teaching error to the brethren, and doing it all in the name of God.

Some Church of God preachers are constantly trying to prove that God is a split binary God who is somehow destined to become multiple Gods in the future, based on a variable and convenient view of the word "God." Be careful. The language used to support this notion is persuasive and deceitful. (Continued...)