When One Does Not Mean Single.

A possibility on the nature of The Trinity.

In my church on the date of publishing this post, instead of a sermon a debate was staged on the nature, and doctrine, of the Trinity. Comprising the Father, Son and Holy Spirit it is something that a lot of people, myself included, struggle to understand.

Something that helped my understanding a little, and might help readers of this too, was advanced by a contributor to the discussion.

Deuteronomy 6:4 (NIV UK) says “Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is one.” however we might be missing something in the translation from the original Hebrew, where “one” is translated from the Hebrew word Echad (feminine form Achad).

At its simplest, ‘Echad’ can be translated as ‘one’ being a plural term like ‘composite’, which we lose in the translation to English. Perhaps ‘oneness’ rather than “one” might be a little clearer. When I delved further, the best I could find that helped my understanding was a relatively simple statement of “one in essence, three in persons”, which I think encapsulates the ‘oneness’ of a composite nicely.

P.s. My personal way of looking at the Trinity it is as fire. To burn, fire requires three elements:  Oxygen (Father), Fuel  (Son) and heat (Spirit).

Advertisements

One thought on “When One Does Not Mean Single.

  1. Pingback: When One Does Not Mean Single. | Christians Anonymous

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s