Big, Not Many
Great is the Lord, and greatly to be praised, In the city of our God, His holy mountain. Psalm 48:1 (English Bible) NASB
Great – Sometimes we just absolutely must know the subtle differences in Hebrew in order to comprehend the deeper message of the text. That is the case here.
If I asked you what it means to say that God is great, what would you say. Would you say that this means He is powerful, important, praiseworthy, glorified, authority and of the highest value? You’d be right, of course, for the Hebrew word gadol means all of these things. But this word has two close synonyms that are not used of God. Those two synonyms are rabab and raba. They also mean “great.” Why aren’t they used of God? Because they mean “great in number.” They are used for what is numerous, that is, much more than one. Do you find it interesting that when “great” is applied to God it is never about more than one? Unfortunately, in translation all these Hebrew terms turn into one English word, “great,” and we never know the difference.
David shouts it out! “Great is the Lord.” He doesn’t mean “Multiple is the Lord.” He means that YHWH is more powerful than we can imagine, more holy than we can dream, more praiseworthy than we can express, more glorified than all creation’s acknowledgement, more in control than we can believe. God is gadol. That’s why we praise Him. There is none like Him. Not one.
If you read the whole verse, you noticed that David’s words in English use the adverb “greatly.” Once again we are victims of transference from one language to another. In Hebrew the word is me’od. It is not the same word used in the opening exclamation, “Great is the Lord.” This word, me’od, means “exceedingly, much, force, and abundance.” You’ll find it in Deuteronomy 6:5 (“with all your strength”) and the Genesis 1:31 (“exceedingly good”). Interestingly, this word also points to the absolute unity of YHVH. McBride says, “The three parts of Deut 6:5: lēbāb (heart), nepeš (soul or life), and meʾōd (muchness) rather than signifying different spheres of Biblical psychology seem to be semantically concentric. They were chosen to reinforce the absolute singularity of personal devotion to God. Thus lēbāb denotes the intention or will of the whole man; nepeš means the whole self, a unity of flesh, will, and vitality; and mĕʾōd accents the superlative degree of total commitment to Yahweh.”[1]
In Hebraic thought you just can’t get away from the idea that God is ONE! Absolutely, permanently, without qualification. He is gadol and worthy of me’od. Now you have two words to work with.
Topical Index: gadol, me’od, great, greatly, Psalm 48:1
[1] Kaiser, W. C. (1999). 1134 מאד. In R. L. Harris, G. L. Archer, Jr. & B. K. Waltke (Eds.), Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (R. L. Harris, G. L. Archer, Jr. & B. K. Waltke, Ed.) (electronic ed.) (487). Chicago: Moody Press.
God is great and (Hallelujah!) God is good!
“Interestingly, this word also points to the absolute unity of YHVH. McBride says, “The three parts of Deut 6:5: lēbāb (heart), nepeš (soul or life), and meʾōd (muchness) rather than signifying different spheres of Biblical psychology seem to be semantically concentric. They were chosen to reinforce the absolute singularity of personal devotion to God. Thus lēbāb denotes the intention or will of the whole man; nepeš means the whole self, a unity of flesh, will, and vitality; and mĕʾōd accents the superlative degree of total commitment to Yahweh.”[1”
It seems that you are implying that McBride’s quote proves the suggestions that this word points to the absolute unity of YHVH. McBride’s quote is about the absolute singularity of personal devotion to God. Not about the absolute singularity of God. He is talking about commitment.
If Moses wanted to get across that H”S is one as in one consciousness why did he not use Yachad for example?
Yachad as used in:
(Gen 22:2 WTT) וַיֹּ֡אמֶר קַח־נָ֠א אֶת־בִּנְךָ֙ אֶת־יְחִֽידְךָ֤
(Gen 22:2 YLT) And He saith, ‘Take, I pray thee, thy son, thine only one
(Jer 6:26 WTT) וְהִתְפַּלְּשִׁ֣י בָאֵ֔פֶר אֵ֤בֶל יָחִיד֙ עֲשִׂ֣י לָ֔ךְ
(Jer 6:26 YLT) The mourning of an only one make for thee,
But he used Echad in Deut 6:4.
Echad as used in:
(Gen 2:24 WTT) וְהָי֖וּ לְבָשָׂ֥ר אֶחָֽד
(Gen 2:24 ESV) and they shall become one flesh.
(2Sa 7:23 WTT) וּמִ֤י כְעַמְּךָ֙ כְּיִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל גּ֥וֹי אֶחָ֖ד בָּאָ֑רֶץ
(2Sa 7:23 NET) Who is like your people, Israel, a unique nation on the earth?
But again that is not what Moses wanted to get across. He is speaking about the unique of H”S. Not about whether He absolutely, permanently, without qualification ONE.
“As Deurloo comments:
YHWH, the one God, who holds a unique position in the world of the gods, has acquired a people
of his own which, as such, holds a unique position in the world of the peoples and as such
commands the peoples’ respect (4:6ff.). This exceptional position is Israel’s ‘to be or not to be’ as
גּ֥וֹי אֶחָ֖ד (2 Sam. 7:23), as a confessional community. In all its generations, all Israel—in
Deuteronomy never the ‘house of Israel’ but always ‘children of Israel—is constituted by the
statement יְהוָ֥ה׀ אֶחָֽד.”
[As quoted by Dr Heiser in Chapter 4.1, note 409 of “The Divine Council in late canonical and non-canonical second Temple Jewish Literature.”]
“In Hebraic thought you just can’t get away from the idea that God is ONE! Absolutely, permanently, without qualification.” sounds very Greek to me.
My source : http://www.torahofmessiah.com/elohim.html
A quick look at the usage of Echad
Echad
The other main argument from the Hebrew used to teach that God is a “plural” entity is that the Hebrew word echad in the shema of Deuteronomy 6:4 means, not a simple “one”, but rather a “compound unity” of one, a “togetherness”. Those who teach this will often also teach than there is a different word for a “simple” one, yachid, so that the absence of this word in Deuteronomy 6:4 is, apparently to them, significant.
First, it should be noted that when one learns the Hebrew numbers, it is echad, not yachid, that is the Hebrew for the number “one”: echad is one, shenayim is two, shalosh is three, arba is four, etc. Any Hebrew grammar book, whether of Biblical or modern Hebrew, would demonstrate that echad, not yachid, is the everyday Hebrew word for the numeral “one”.
And when one looks in the Tanakh itself at the frequency and usage of the two words – echad and yachid – it is very quickly and easily seen that echad, not yachid, is in fact the standard Hebrew word for a simple one. Echad is used over 900 times in the Hebrew Bible, making it the most frequently used adjective in the Tanakh. Here are some examples of its usage where the word “one” is translated from echad: “one place” (Gen. 1:9); “one man” (Gen. 42:13); “one law” (Ex. 12:49); “one side” (Ex. 25:12); “one ewe lamb” (Lev. 14:10); “one of his brethren” (Lev. 25:48); “one rod” (Num. 17:3); “one soul” (Num. 31:28); “one of these cities” (Deut. 4:42); “one way” (Deut. 28:7); “one ephah” (1 Sam. 1:24); “one went out into the field” (11 Kings 4:39); “one shepherd” (Ezek. 37:24); “one basket” (Jer. 24:2); “one [thing]” (Ps. 27:4); “Two are better than one” (Ecc. 4:9); “one day or two” (Ezra 10:13).
Sometimes it is simply part of a number, like “eleven” (echad + ‘asar, one plus ten), in , for example Genesis 32:22. Sometimes it is as well translated by an indefinite article (a[n]): “a new cart” (1 Sam. 6:7); “a juniper tree” (1 Kings 19:4,5); “a book” (Jer. 51:60).
Perhaps most importantly, echad clearly has the meaning of single, alone, ONLY one, or JUST one, the ideal of a limit of one (Num. 10:4; Josh. 17:14; Esth. 4:11; Isa. 51:2). In Deuteronomy 17:6, for example, it really isn’t precise English to translate echad merely as “one”. For if the “one” witness referred to is the second of the third witness, then that one witness is enough to convict the hypothetical person of murder. The meaning is that a person must not be put to death of the evidence of only one witness (which is the way the NRSV translates it). Echad means “one” and ONLY one.
Some make the argument that because echad is used in passages such as Gen. 1:5 (evening and morning were “day one [echad]”, or “first day”), Gen. 2:24 (a husband and wife shall be “one” flesh) and Ezek. 37:17 (two sticks are to become “one” stick), echad is therefore meant to be understood as some kind of a compound unity. To begin with, such examples make up but a very small minority of the uses of echad, the vast majority being of the variety listed above. It is improper exegesis to define a word on the basis of a small percentage of its usage. But even this extreme minority of usage does not mean that echad actually has a different meaning than a simply one in these passages. In Gen. 1:5, “day” is the word that has “parts” to it (i.e., “evening” and “morning” make up the day), not echad. In Gen. 2:24, “flesh” acts as the collective noun (what the man and the woman as comprise together). [12] The key factor in all such passages – a factor missing from Deut. 6:4 – is that two or more “parts” are mentioned, such that the reader can immediately discern that there is some kind of “coming together” of the people or things mentioned, usually for just one purpose or goal. Echad, in fact, must maintain its meaning of “just one” for these expressions to convey their intended sense. To make our point clear: Deut. 6:4 does not say, “YHWH our God, though three (or two or whatever plural number you like), is one.” There is no hint of “coming together” here. The verse says that YHWH our God is plainly, simply, one.
Once again, scholarship is in agreement. The Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Lexicon, the standard Hebrew lexicon of the Bible used in seminaries, list eight ways echad is used – e.g. meaning “each/every,” or “a certain,” or “only,” etc. – but there is no mention or hint in the entire echad article that echad ever means any kind of compound unity. [13] And the “echad” article in the Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament also nowhere teaches that echad implies a compound unity. It says that Deuteronomy 6:4 is essentially saying that YHWH is the one and only God for Israel (Vol. I p. 196).
My source : http://halfshekel.com/echad/
In addition to this the Greek usage in Mark identifies with the numerical usage of Echad as ONE
Jesus Christ was once asked what the greatest commandment was. His answer began with:
MARK 12:29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one (heis) Lord:
This conversation between Christ and the scribe (cf. Mark 12:28) probably occurred in the Hebrew language. If this is in fact the case, then when Christ Himself quoted Deuteronomy 6:4, the translator of Christ’s words saw fit to translate the Hebrew word “echad” into Greek as the word “heis.” “Heis” is the Greek word for “one” in Mark 12:29. According to concordance p. 752, Greek lexicon p. 26 of the above Concordance, the word “heis” means:
1520 εις heis, a primary numeral;
If, on the other hand, this conversation between Jesus and this (perhaps hellenized) scribe occurred in the Greek language, then the word “heis” came directly from the mouth of Jesus Christ Himself.
In either case, based upon whatever the original Hebrew word “echad” meant in Deuteronomy 6:4, that word was brought into Greek as the word “heis”—a “primary numeral”—that is, a number. The primary number “heis” was used at Mark 12:29 because the original Hebrew word “echad” is also a primary numeral (and numbers typically indicate a quantity).
One final thing and I promise, I’m done.
The LXX translation of Deuteronomy 6:4 also uses the Greek word for the numerical one.
1520 εις heis, a primary numeral; <— from my previous comment source
My source for the verse in the LXX : http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Deu&c=6&t=NKJV#s=t_conc_159004
You will see the Greek word there at the end of the verse.
εις <— this is what your looking for
6:4 καὶ ταῦτα τὰ δικαιώματα καὶ τὰ κρίματα ὅσα ἐνετείλατο κύριος τοῖς υἱοῖς Ισραηλ ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ ἐξελθόντων αὐτῶν ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου ἄκουε Ισραηλ κύριος ὁ θεὸς ἡμῶν κύριος εἷς ἐστιν
LXX Septuagint
Like
And this “theme” (or reality) of “oneness” continues into the N.T.. ~ That in the dispensation of the fulness of times He might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in Him. In Christ we too have been claimed as God’s own possession, since we were predestined according to the one purpose of Him who accomplishes all things according to the counsel of His will.
And the pattern of “oneness” or unity in the Body (of believers) continues.. ~ There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling; one LORD, one faith, one baptism, one God and (one) Father of all who is over all and through all and in all.
I wonder! (or at least tend to lean in this direction..) Is God (who is One) Would His favorite number be “one?” Is not our LORD the perfect example of “unity” (or oneness) of the human and the Divine? And again..- (in His words) ~ I and my Father are one ~ (John 10.30)
In ‘higher’ dimensions, the abstract ‘number’ of ‘things’ from ‘lower’ dimensions gets dissolved all the time. In fact, I am beginning to I suspect that the hardest paradigm to get out of in this discussion for all of us may be the third dimension!
Seriously, y’all, is there anyone here on this forum that does not believe the Word when He states that God is One? Really?
What are we trying to do? ‘Prove’ that Yeshua HaMashiach is not God? If so, then why mess around with NUMBERS of THINGS? Surely there are better ways of exegesis than that!
Ok, back to the dimensions. Anyone here read Flatland? Flatterland? The points in the first dimension get dissolved into lines in the second one, and the lines in the second dimension get dissolved into cubic space in the third. What little we think we know of the fourth dimension, time (which is getting hard for us as it passes out of our sensory grasp), is that it dissolves space. Anyone see a pattern? Not to mention a Someone beyond all dimensions! Are we really trying to pull Him down and run Him through our little bean counter here in this measly third dimension?
Not that we should not do this. If there is a question out there at all, we should all count it our business, I believe, to ask it first, and best, so as to end up with the correct answer. I am all for it!
But, personally, I think I stand with Carl on this one. He just patiently plugs away, reciting what the Word has to say about Himself over and over and over.
Like like like, Carl.
“Seriously, y’all, is there anyone here on this forum that does not believe the Word when He states that God is One? Really?”
Apparently there are many who don’t believe He is One, or else we would not be having this discussion.
Ultimately the question is this: HOW does it change your salvation walk if Yeshua, son of man, son of God, is not God, the son? Does it diminish God the Father? Does it even diminish Yeshua HaMassiach? Does it change anything He taught, or the Resurrection, or the promise of His return?
Before your react, try asking yourself what would REALLY change about your walk. And remember, the idea that we just have to find the “correct” answer is Greek, not Hebrew.
LIKE! Thumbs up!