How do Trinitarians distinguish whether the Hebrew bible is referring to the "being" or "person[s]" of God in the verses that declare oneness?

Question

The authors of the Hebrew bible make several statements declaring the oneness of God:

Deuteronomy 6:4 - "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one."

Isaiah 44:6 - "Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts: 'I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god.'"

Deuteronomy 4:35 - "To you it was shown, that you might know that the Lord is God; there is no other besides him."

Deuteronomy 32:39 - "See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand."

1 Kings 8:60 - "That all the peoples of the earth may know that the Lord is God; there is no other."

Under trinitarian hermeneutical approaches, these verses are not contrary to the trinity because they actually refer to the single being of God, not to the trinitarian multiplicity of persons.

How do trinitarians know that the verses of the Hebrew bible which make positive claims about the "oneness of God" are in fact only referring to the "being of God"? How are these verses exegeted for the referent to be only the "being of God"? What about the wording of these verses give a clue about the distinction between "person" and "being"?

Answer 1

The oneness of God is a matter of nature. The diversity of God is a matter of person. It is confusing to use two terms which overlap : 'being' and 'person'.

Divine nature is a matter of spirit. 'Spirit the deity' said Jesus (literally) and we idiomatically translate that as 'God is a spirit' in English. (For the nature of God, as Jesus indicates, is spirit.)

But he also said 'I and the Father are one'. And since he uses 'one' as grammatically neuter, it is correct to apply that to 'spirit' (which, in Greek, is also grammatically neuter) and to say 'I and the Father are one (in spirit)'. I repeat : for the nature of God, as Jesus says, is spirit.

Thus, as to the nature of Deity, we observe there to be, as instructed by Deity Himself, a unity.

---

But Jesus also said, 'My Father is greater than I', which is a matter of personal relationship, not of nature.

Thus the scripture demonstrates to us a plurality of person within one divine nature. That nature is a matter of eternal existence. God is. And the nature of that existence ('is') . . . . . is spirit.

To use unscriptural terms, particularly Latin terminology, and English words such as 'essence' and 'substance', has not helped in the past. In my own view.

Within that divine and eternal existence, there are relationships of person. Yet these Persons exist, eternally, with neither beginning nor ending, in a state of absolute unity, in Divine Love.

---

But that revelation awaited the coming of the Son, incarnate. It could not - yet - be spoken of or demonstrated. Therefore there is sometimes an ambiguity which cannot be resolved until the Son is manifested.

There is an ambiguity which encompasses more than could, then, be comprehended whilst, as yet, the Son was not revealed.

Retrospectively, we often see more than was available to those who wrote scripture in the past. Yet, in spirit, they were given words beyond their, then, understanding.

However, it requires considerable spiritual understanding to interpret each and every occasion of such insights according to what was yet to be revealed.

And if one denies that there are personal relationships within the divine nature, then one will not be able to interpret those hints in past times when the veil was - almost - lifted.

Such persons, who limit the revelation of the Deity in the New Testament, will have to be content with a limited view of the Deity as to the Old Testament.

Answer 2

God the Father as Representative

When Old Testament verses speak of God, Trinitarians often understand these references as primarily addressing God the Father, while not excluding the Son and the Holy Spirit. The Father is viewed as the primary person of the Trinity in terms of relational titles and roles. He is seen as the main representative or the person most directly associated with the one being of God. This aligns with Jesus' references to the Father as "the only true God" (John 17:3). When the context of the referent is ambiguous about whether it's God the father or his angel or avatar, and in all the general references of God, it's safe to assume, it's the father, the first person of the trinity.

The common references and worship of God in the Bible is directed to God in heaven, who is identified as the father. There is no need to separate and distinguish the so-called persons of the trinity, to be in this confusion. The Metatron divine Word or Angel are representative forms into the world, as the Shekinah or Spirit of God is his presence on earth.

2 Corinthians 13:14: "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all."

Answer 3

Summary
As may be seen in the tags, "trinity" and "eisegesis" the OP believes any reading of the Hebrew Bible understood as agreeing with the Christian belief of "Trinity" is reading an unfounded belief into the text. Hence this question:

How do trinitarians know that the verses of the Hebrew Bible which make positive claims about the "oneness of God" are in fact only referring to the "being of God"?

The Christian canon is both Old and New Testament and the Old is read in light of the New. As Paul states, the Old has divine actions which are hidden until they are fulfilled. For example, when Genesis reports God as saying, "Let us make man in our image and after our likeness..." the Christian looks beyond an eisegetical divine council and understands the plural pronouns include both God the Father and the Son of God.

1 Corinthians 8:6

yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live.

The plural "us" is explicit, yet the identity of "us" is hidden until the Son reveals the Father. The inability to differentiate or speculate which person or which being cannot erase the explicit oneness in God's action in creating man.

Arguably, the Christian explanation of "person" follows passages in the Hebrew Bible which describe "personal" encounters with God. Labeling them as a "theophany" is a convenient way to side step the very issue at the heart of this question. The Living God's personal involvement with creation, and specifically taking action to redeem man from sin should not cause one to see those actions as conflicting with oneness, or being, or nature.

When Moses calls God a "Rock" we do not take this out of context to consider how the being of God as "Rock" is conflicting with God's oneness. To the contrary, a Trinitarian looks into the hiddenness of the Hebrew text in order to see what Moses saw.

1 Corinthians 10:4

and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ.

Seeing what is living in words which narrowly describe an inanimate rock is not eisegesis.

The Triunity of God
The Old Testament has ample evidence describing the oneness and being of God.

• The word most frequently understood as God is אֱלֹהִים, Elohim which is plural. Inherent to Elohim is the ability to understand that which is plural is at the same time one.
• There are three words understood as God. In addition to Elohim, there is אֱלוֹהַּ, Eloha the singular from which the plural Elohim is derived and אֵל, El. The understood oneness of the plural Elohim does not preclude one acting as one.
• There are three "personal" names for God, יֵהוּא, יֵה, and היה. Moses who saw God face to face knows Elohim as היה and יֵהוּא and יֵה.

Overall, there is a triad of types of identification, two which have a triad of different terms.

What is present in the Old Testament as a whole is first made explicit when Elohim self-identifies in Genesis using first-person plural pronouns three times.

Genesis 1:26-27

Let us make man in our image and after our likeness...God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

An initial reading raises the essence of the OP's question: how does oneness not conflict with us and our? Obviously, one could understand "Us" as God and the Spirit of God (cf. Genesis 1:2) and have a satisfactory explanation. But this conflicts with the being and oneness of "God" demanded by those who reject the New Testament. Therefore eisegesis is necessary: one God consulted with a divine council before making man.

Trinitarians do not ignore the New Testament in order to narrowly understand the Hebrew Bible. To the contrary, they understand the New as revealing that which was hidden in the Old Testament. Thus, from a New Testament perspective, the pronouns include the "oneness" of Father and Son who, despite being "singled out" are "one" (cf. John 10:30).

"Let us, Father and Son speaking as one (cf. John 16:13), make man in our image and after our likeness..."

Ironically, this branded as eisegesis because the plurality must be a divine council. Why? Because when reading the Hebrew Bible one cannot distinguish positive claims about the oneness of God when it is possible to to see a text as referring to a divine council not the being of God.

Significantly the plurality of verse 26 is continued in the actions in verse 27.

• The plural in the verb asa (1:26) is replaced by bara which is singular but unnecessarily repeated to describe creation as three actions.
• The subjects of bara are God, He, He, following the pattern of the pronouns us, our, our. This too is an unnecessary element of the composition, unless the plural declared continued to act as one in the creating.

A careful reading of Genesis 1:26-27 supports understanding what is plural acting as one. Since the plans and the description of creating man are given in terms of three the implication of plural is three but at the same time described and able to be understood as one.

• Three first-person plural pronouns
• Three uses of the verb bara (not the asa)
• Three subjects for bara

"Let us make...our image...our likeness...God created...He created...He created" highlight an inherent misconception in the question. The text demands both plural and singular. Genesis 1:26-27 is the defining description of unity or oneness.

Applying Triunity
When later passages speak of "oneness" they are reminders of the definition from Genesis. Any passage which lacks corroborating action is a reminder, not a new definition.

Deuteronomy 6:4

Hear, O Israel. The LORD our God, the LORD is one.

On the other hand, when action is present, the plural is present.

Deuteronomy 32:39

"See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no God beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand."

This passage employs the same pattern as Genesis. It begins by God self-identifying using two singular first-person pronouns, אני אני הוּא.The unnecessary repetition, I, I AM describes that which is plural acting as one. It parallels Let us...

The initial declaration of self is followed by two first-person plural actions: I kill and I make alive...I wound and I heal. These parallel our image...our likeness. Here, as in Genesis, we see Elohim self-identifying as plural and describing an individual's actions in plural terms.

Conclusion
The definition of unity is given in Genesis 1:26-27: understanding the tripartite God means to see that which is plural acting as one.

Old Testament passages like Deuteronomy 32:39 describe God as plural, I, I AM... coupled with two dual actions, kill and make alive and wound and heal. Question which is which or "being" or "person" cannot erase what is clearly described as plural acting in oneness.

Answer 4

Since Jesus was intentionally kept a mystery before his incarnation, it would be surprising to find direct references to the trinity in the Old Testament(Hebrew Bible). However, we would expect hints. Consider some of the possible hints listed in https://zondervanacademic.com/blog/what-does-the-old-testament-say-about-the-trinity

Answer 5

Before answering this question let me make two points about trinitarianism:

1. There are various formulations of trinitarianism, some of which use language that is foreign to the Bible. As is well-known, even the word "trinity" is unknown in the Bible.
2. The other problem with the trinitarian doctrine, as commonly formulated, is its distinctions where no such is expressed in the Bible.

Therefore, we should be careful, especially in hermeneutics, to attempt, as far as possible, to use Biblical language and not to go further than the Scripture goes.

1 Cor 4:6 - ... so that you may learn from us not to go beyond what is written. Then you will not take pride in one man over another.

Much of the difficulty surrounding unitarian, binitarian and trinitarian theology arises from over-zealous souls attempting to understand or formulate what is not revealed. In this vein, the Bible does not use language such as "person" vs "being"; "hypostatic union", etc.

So, what does the Bible say about the nature of God - frankly, not much - we are mostly told about God's character (gracious, kind, forgiving, just, etc) and not His nature. All we know is:

• There is one God, YHWH, and no other, Deut 4:35, 6:4, 32:39; 2 Sam 7:22, 1 Kings 8:60, Isa 44:6, 45:5, 6, 14, 18, 21, 22, 46:9, 1 Cor 8:4; Eph 4:6, 1 Tim 1:17; John 5:44, 17:3. But then the NT reveals that Jesus, the Father and the Holy Spirit are God! Matt 1:22, 23; John 1:1, 18, 20:28; Col 2:9, Rom 9:5, Heb 1:8, 9; Tit 2:13, 2 Peter 1:1, 1 Tim 3:16; Phil 2:5-8
• There is only one Creator who is the one God, YHWH, Isa 44:24, 45:18 (Ps 33:6, 9). But then the NT reveals that Jesus is the creator along with the Father and the Holy Spirit, John 1:3, 10, Col 1:16, 17, Heb 1:2, 10, (Rev 3:14)
• There is only one Savior who is the one God, Isa 43:3, 11, 14, 44:24, 45:17, 21, 49:7 (See also Hos 13:14, Isa 49:7). But then the NT reveals that Jesus the only Savior, Matt 1:21; Acts 4:12; 2 Tim 1:10; Tit 1:4, 2:13, 3:6; 2 Pet 1:1, 11.

Thus, we could continue for many other attributes of God/YHWH. Even in the Old Testament, God is referred to in many places as more than one person such as:

• Zech 2:6-12 – the LORD (= YHWH) claims three times that He has been sent by the LORD. For example, V8 says: For this is what the LORD of Hosts says: “… Then you will know that the LORD of Hosts has sent Me.”
• In Jer 51:19-23 we have the LORD of Hosts/armies being sent by the LORD .
• Isa 48:11-16 – again, the LORD has been sent by the LORD.
• Isa 63:7-16 – the LORD (described as a Father) sends His divine servant (the angel of His presence) and His Holy Spirit who is grieved (compare Ps 78:40).
• Ex 23:20 – the angel of the LORD’s presence has the power to forgive sin (but will not). This and the previous reference clearly make the Angel of the Presence the pre-incarnate Jesus.
• Hos 1:7 – the LORD saves by the LORD their God.
• Prov 30:1-4 – the Son of God is as unfathomable as God Himself.
• Psalm 110 – “The LORD says to my Lord” – Jesus asked about this Psalm on how someone could be both Son and Lord of David – see Matt 22:44, Mark 12:36, Luke 20:42, Acts 2:34.
• Ps 45 (quoted by Heb 1) talks about the “Son” being God in addition to God the Father.
• Gen 1:1, 2, 26, 11:6, 7 – God refers to Himself in the plural pronoun.

To finite humans, God is a mystery - if we understood God, we would be God, which we are clearly not!

This is as far as we can go - God is unique, and God is one. But God is also great, grand but still intimate, ie, close to each one of us, Acts 17:27, 28.

Answer 6

Small for an answer but I always assumed it is the Father speaking through His Son and revealed to us by His Spirit, unless the conetxt clearly refers to the Son or Spirit. I never interpreted a refernce to God anywhere as to the essence of his nature, unless that is what it is talking about clearly as a subject. In simple terms when its not clear, it is the Father principally.

I do not think it is just a correct insticnt because I am his child but it is because of the overall relationships between the Father, Son and Spirit. It is principally the Father that we must deal with and who has laws that we must comply with, so many mentions of God in the Old Testament is the Father naturally. It is the Son of the Father sent to reconcile us to the Father by satisfying his Laws, and so in the gospels, of course, we hear a lot straight from the mouth of the Son.

When it is the Spirit, the scripture uses the name Spirit, so that never seems to be an issue in any situation.

I guess I never reallly had this questions and still don‘t.