1

2
3

[Type the company name]

NOADISCUFTHEX
Tan

Page

5ach is the Jewish Bible Or Jewish Canon. It is not Old Covenant or Old Teatament.
6In fact the Greek translations like Septuagint[LXX],Version of Auuilla,Version
7ofTheodotion,Version Of Symmachus etc. Were never called as Old Covenant or
8Old Testament. It was fairly late that post Iesous Cannon was established and
9after it was compiled it still took a long period to Tanach or its Greek versions as
10OLD COVENANT OR OLD TESTAMENT.It may be interesting to note that even
11Syriac [Aramaic ] Verson was not known as Old or New Testament or Covenant.

12The Hebrew word for Covenant is Brit [tirB]No where in Hebrew Tanach it is called
13OLD Covenant Or Old Testament.In is very interesting to note down that even in
14the books of New Testament ,the word Old Testament or Old Covenant is
15mensioned for HEBRAIC TANACH.
16Even Iesous Himself never called the books of Hebraic Tanach as
17OLD COVENANT or OLD TESTAMENT.That is why a number of
18people in Christianity are compelled to think that the post esous
19Scriptures and Ante Iesous SCRIPTURES ARE TWO BOOKS and not
20a single book of two parts namely OC or OT and NC or NT. So if
21the word Bible may be used for each of them them then there are
22two Bibles .If the word Bible is confined to Tanach and Its
23Translations then there tre two Holy Books in Christianity, namely
24Bible and NT.[ If Iesous The ultimate Founder Of Christianity did
25not call Hebraic Books Of Hebraic Cannon as old Testament or Old
26Covenant then it is to say some thing which even Iesous did not
27say in his entire ministery.Not only Iesous but non of his disciples
28ever call tis Non Biblical Term s of OT or OC. So it is cincorrect to
29use this term even according to New - Testamental standard.]

Page

30Words of timeless GOD never grow old and are perpetually not
31old.
32Other wise the New Testament may be termed as TWO THOUSAND
33YEARS OLD TESTAMENT, or some 1700 years old but still new
34testament.
35Athanasian Christianity believes that the belief of Athanasian
36Trinity is found in Hebraic Bible. It is constantly attempted to
37prove Athanasian Trinity from the text of Tanach and Lxx. A n
38example is Isaiah 9 where the word FATHER is used to apply on
39Iesous who is not father even from the standard of Athanasian
40Christianity.
41An other example is of the Proper Noun Ammanuel, which was not
42a noun of Iesous.There is no rule that the literal meanking of a
43proper noun may be used to apply aProper Noun On a Person.Yet
44it is do so. Genesis is also used to shew that God is a trinity.
45
46There are three most misused verses in Genesis which are constantly
47being misused by A thenasianism in an attempt to prove the Dogma Of
48Trinity Of God.
49These verse do not prove trinity. It is discussed in some detain since
50Athanasianism rejects all the Jewish Commentaries in a single stroke. In this
51section there will be a critical study of
52The book [ tiSarB ] Read from right to left/
53

AND THE GOD SAID , << LET US MAKE MAN IN OUR

54IMAGE>>[Genesis

-26]

55The Hebraic TEXT in

PURE LATIN ALPHABETS and Letters is as

56follow:

57
58

vN tvmD C vN mlsS C mdA hsN mihvlA

60rmaI V
59

61<<........ARROW

OF DIRECTION.................<<

63TEXT
64WILL

67J

FROM LEFT TO RIGHT. OTHER WISE IT

BE A DISGRACE TO THE HOLY TEXT.

65[Hebrew
66from

DO NOT TRY TO READ THE HOLY

Page

62WARNING.

Text in PURE Latin Alphabets written

right to left, with out vewels. I is used for

or Y,Vis used for U and W,C is used for K .The

68first

letter of each word is a Capital Letter and

69rest

of the letters of each word are in Small

70letters.
71sS

Letter A for Aleph,V for Vau, for Ain

for Sde etc. ]

72ATTENTION.
73in

Any error is writing Hebraic Text

Pure Latin Alphabets is purely accidental.

74For

more accuracy one is advised to consult a

75Tanach

in Hebrew.

76This is the most problematic verse Of Genesis Of Torah [ PETENTIUCH ] of Jewish

77Tanch and Christian OLD COVENENT [OC/ OT]. Athenisian Christians try to provr
78the Dogma Of Trinity Of Triune God From this verse.
79But this verse does not prove this Dogma in the least sense .
80There are some obvious mistakes in its translations in different languages.
81They are discussed in several priliminaries.
82FIRST PRE MILINARY
83The following are the most obvious mistakes in a number of translations.
84A] The word said is an incorrect translation. It should be Ordered or
85Commanded.Since the Hebrew word IAMR

means Command or Order.

86Why this is translated as SAID instead of ORDERED or COMMANDED is very

87obvious. GOD CAN NOT BE COMMANDED AND THIS EXPLODES arguments in
88favour of Dogma Of Trinity.

Page

89B] The word MAN is once again most fatal mistake in the alleged translations.

90The Hebrew Text contains the word ADAM , and not the Word MAN
. Why
91Athanasian Christianity has rejected the Proper Noun ADAM in these translations
92and subtituted the Common Noun MAN in place of It. The answer is once again
93quite simple.[1]
94Adam is an Individual Human Person , and is not a Human Trinity. If God is a
95Divine Trinity then Adam Must be a Human Trinity. Thus to hide this problem the
96The Proper Knoun Adam is changed by a Common Noun MAN.
97C] INOUR IMAGE is once again an incorrect translation. First the Hebrew word
98S-L-M means SHADOW OR PROJECTION.
99It does not mean IMAGE. To translate SHADOW as IMAGE is just to force Genesis
100to be in Harmony with the ATHANASIAN COMMENTARIES OF YOHONNON OF
101NT/NC.
102So once more one must neglect this and take the original meaning OF SHADOW.
103Also the preposition IN is an incorrect TRANSLATION. The most appropriate
104translation is FROM and Not In.
105This means ADAM WAS MADE FROM SHADOW OF GOD, ADAM WAS NOT MADE IN
106THE IMAGE OF GOD/G-D./
107As the word Shadow explodes trinitical interpretations of this verse of Genesis Of
108Torah Of Tanach, ATHANASIAN CHRISTIANS TRIED TO TRANSLATE IT BY THE
109WORD image, and instead of using the word FROM as the most appropriate
110Preposition in the translation deliberately used the preposition IN.
111D] One of the worst translations is the translation # IN OUR LIKENESS#.
112The Hebrew word is DUMUS which means FIGURE,SHAPE, FORM etc.
113The word Cu preceeds it. So the word become Cu-Dumus.
114It means LIKE OUR FIGURE or Like Our Shape, Or Like Our Form , Or In likeness of
115[Our] Figure etc..
116NOW THE TRANSATION BECOMES AS FOLLOW:
117AND GOD COMMANDED, LET US MAKE ADAM FROM OUR SHADOW ,LIKE OUR FIGURE/FORM.

118Second premilinary.
119THERE ARE MORE PROBLEMS IN THE hEBREW Non Bebrew translations.
120They maybe discussed below.
121A] The problem of self imperative sentences.

Page

122In a large number of languages an IMPERATIVE SENTENCE or an Imperative Verb

123is used for the second Person and not for the first person and the third person.
124But in Hebrew an imperative sentence may be for the first or third persons as
125well.
126This generates a problem in translation and makes translations misguiding.
127The Hebrew word N--S-H

It is a self imperative VERB in the Hebraic

128sentence. That is a Peson orders Hnself.A thing which is not found in most of the
129languages. So they are forced to translate as Les Us [In the case of First Person
130Imperative sentence] or LET HIM OR LET THEM [In the case of third person
131imperative sentences]. But hese attempts make ambiguities which are used by
132ATHANASIANISM.
133In order to convey the actual meaning one may take some liberty from interliner
134translations.
135A more accurate translation in regard to sense of the Original Hebraic Text is as
136follow.
137AND THE GOD COMMANDED [ HIMSELF] MAKE ADAM FROM OUR SHADOW LIKE
138[ OUR] FIGURE/FORM. N--S-H is a self commanding verb in plural. But As GOD
139CAN NOT BE COMMANDED IT IS JUST A METAPHOR and not a word in real
140meaning of the word. [ This is perhaps the best way to convey the Idea of a Self
141IMPERATIVE SENTENCE, YET IT IS NOT AN INTERLINER TRANSLATION.] A more
142accurate literal meaning may be conveyed by the following translation.
143AND THE GODS COMMANDED [ THEMSELVES] MAKE ADAM FROM OUR SHADOW
144LIKE [ OUR] FIGURE/FORM,
145But although the word Alohem literally means GODS [] PLURAL[], IT IT MEANS A
146SINGLE GOD AS A PLURAL IN FORM OF WORD AND SINGULAR IN MEANING
147KNOWN AS PLURAL OF MAJESTY MAJESTY, OR A MAJESTIC SINGULAR.
148SIMILARLY THE WORD NAS H IS A PLURAL OF MAJESTY . THE ONLY
149DIFFERENCE IS THAT THE FORMER WORD IS A NOUN AND THE LATTER WORD IS
150A VERB.
151
152Even from the trinitical point of view Logos is God and God can not be
153commanded by First or third Hypostases. Even the Trinitical Being cannot
154command any one of the Hypostases residing in its Ousia
155[SUBSTANCE/GODHEAD].

Page

156So even upon the standard of Trinitical Dogmas it is use of a word not in the real
157meaning but in the virtual / unreal meaning.
158But if some one insists that TRIUNE GOD ORDERS ALL THOSE HYPOSTASES
159WHICH RESIDE IN THE OUISA OF THE TRIUNE GOD even then he must have to
160accept that as Each Supreme Hypostasis Is God , None of them can be
161commanded neither by the Trinitical God or Triune God Or God the Trinity Nor by
162any one of the CO-HYPOSTASES dwelling jointly in the Ousia of the Triune God Or
163Trinity. So he must have to confess that this WORD is in a Virtual meaning ,
164instead of the real meaning of the word.
165If virtual then not real and thus the dispute is just upon the two virtual meanings
166of a given word, and if so then at least neither of them can be certain , and if
167none of then are certain then no argument can be made from uncertain
168alternatives.
169Now translate the original sense as God Ordered themselves or God Order
170Himself, each meaning is just a virtual meaning.
171 THIRD PREMILINARY
172THE WORD ELOHEM AND ITS MEANING

173The Hebraic word Elohem

174words

[ mihvlA] [ Read the Holy

from right to left] is a plural of words Elah [hlA]or Eloah

175[hvlA]. The Word Eloah

or Elah

means God or god or deity.

176Consequently the plural of them means Gods or gods or deities.

177Thus the words Eloah or Elah means God or god, amd the word Elohem means
178Gods or gods.
179In the real and literal meaning the word ELOHEM can not be used for the Supreme
180Being o f Tanakh and the Supreme Being of O.C.
181Since both believe in just One God and not in more then one Gods.
182And the word ELOHEM does not mean God or god but GODS or gods in its literal
183meaning.
184From Jewish point of view GOD is UnoUnity or Mono Unity , that is only One
185Hypostatic Person In Godhead. The same is tue from the point of view of
186Unitarian Christianity and Arian ChristianitFrom Trinitical point of view there is
187Only One God Who is a Triune God and a Trinity.
188Therefore this God cannot be called GODS or gods . The plurality of Hypostases
189in the Divine Ousia [Substance]Of Supreme Being does not allow the words Gods

Page

190and gods for the Supreme Being./ One even can not say Divine hypostases are
191Gods/ gods , according to the Dogma Of Trinity Of God.
192So the word Elohem

can not be used for the Supreme Being or the

193Hypostases in the Ousia Of The Supreme Being [Godhead], and additionally not
194for the collection of them if the word Elohem means Gods or gods.
195If the word Elohem

does not mean Gods or gods, then it means God or

196god [Plural Of Majesty and Singular in meaning].In this case it does not imply any
197plurality of Hypostases in the Ousia Of the Supreme Being. Since it only means
198God or god [That is the form of the word is plural yet its meaning is
199singular.Unfortunately there is no analogue in English. It may be understood just
200by a supposed example. Suppose that the word BOOKS which is the plural of the
201word Book is used for a Single Majestic Book.Now the word BOOK does not mean
202its Real meaning , the plural Of the word Book, but it means book, plural in form
203and singular in MEANING.]. The words God and god does not imply plurality of
204Hypostases in the given singular form. The entire discussion in the support of the
205Dogma Of Trinity is based on scriptural verses and not on the singular form of the
206word God or god.
207So if the word Elohem means God or god it does not imply any plurality of Divine
208Hypostatic Persons in the Divine Ousia [Godhead] Of the Supreme Being [God].
209Thus the word Elohem has just the following possibilities.
210A] The word Elohem means God or god.
211This is the real and primary meaning of the word.[Plural]
212B]The word Elohem means Gods or gods. This is the secondary meaning of the
213word.[Singular]
214C] It means neither of these two meanings[ i.e neither plural nor singular] .
215In the first sense it is not useable to God Of Hebraic Scriptures.
216In the second sense it doesnot imply any plurality of Hypostases in the Divine
217Ousia [namely Godhead[ If it still implies some sort of plurality of Hypostases and
218Hypostatic Plurality in the Divine Ousia then it is neither in the first meaning nor
219in the second meaning.
220Assuming that the first is the regular meaning and second is the irregular
221meaning then the third is the unique meaning which is neither regular nor
222irregular but only one of its kind. Word singular in meaning yet implying plurality
223of Supreme Hypostases in the Ousia Of Its Grammatical and literal Subject i.e

Page

224The Supreme Being. How ever such type of word was not known before the
225foundation of Athanasian Christianity.
226Now we render some more possible translation of the verse .
227AND GODS COMMANDED [THEMSELVES] ,<< MAKE ADAM FROM [OUR] SHADOW
228IN LIKENESS OF OUR FIGURE/FORM/]
229This meaning is incorrect even according to Dogma of Trinity since the Words
230Gods and gods are not allowed to use for the Supreme Being or for the
231Hypostases dwelling inside the Ousia Of The Supreme Being. So replacing the
232word Gods by the word Elohem does not make the meaning correct if the word
233Elohem is used in the meaning of the word Gods or gods.
234If the word Elohem is used in the meaning of the word God or god then the word
235is not in the plural meaning and it does not imply plurality and multiplicity of
236Supreme Hypostases in the Ousia Of The Supreme Being.All the Hebraic
237Lexitonists, Grammarians and Scripturists never thought of implication of
238plurality of hypostasis in the Ousia Of God while using this word for God .
239This is a sufficient proof that to claim that it still imply plurality of hypostases
240inside the Divine Ousia even when it is not used as a Plural is a latter openion .
241One may reject the latter opinion and prefer the former opinion .
242SIXTH PRIMILINARY
243THE HEBRAIC WORD IAMAR is usually translated is SAID instead of commanded.
244It amy be translated on the demand of context as said. But its actual meaning is
245Commanded.
246It may be the case that more number of places may be translated as SAID,yet thre
247must be a demand of context to translate it as such. It does not depend upon the
248majority or minority of cases but it depend upon the context. If there are more
249number of cases where the word is demanded to mean SAID by the context, and less
250number of cases where there is no such demand by the context , then it may be
251translated as SAID on the demands not because because of the greater number of
252demands. I f there is no such demand from the context then it must be translated
253as COMMANDED OR COMMAND, SINCE A SHIFT IN MEANING FROM REAL TO
254VERTUAL DOES NOT DEPEND UPON THE MAJORITY OF CASES BUT UPON THE
255DEMANDS, AND THE INDICATIONS OF CONTEXTS, ANS SOME TIME EXTERNAL
256INDICATIONS AS WELL. The principle and rule of demands and indications are
257independent of majority or minority. This is the key point which must be kept in
258mind. So it is incorrect to argue that a greater number of cases demand that it
259must be translated as SAID, then this means that every thing has become
260TOPSYTERVY , .This is incorrect. The rule is that is thre is only one place where

263SEVENTH PREMILINARY

Page

10

261there is no demand and thousand of places where there are demands, even then
262the PRINCIPLE is immutable .

264If one delete all the prepositions and try to translate with out prepositions one
265may get a more pure meaning.
266And Ordered Elohem [Himself] Make Adam Like Our Shadow, Like Our
267figure.
268The Hebraic word Dumus may be translates as Form but it can be easily confused
269with the Theological term Form which is Nothing But the Ousia Of Divine Supreme
270Being in theological Discussions about Supreme Being. Hebraic Text are confined to the
271meanings of Hebrew Language whether Real or Virtual.
2728th Preliminary.
273They word Elohem does not prove the Dogma Of Trinity, and does not imply any
274type of Plurality. One of the simplest proof is as follow.
275This proof is directly followed from the word Elohem.
276If the Dogma Of Trinity is true then each and every Hypostasis dwelling in the
277Divine Ousia [Namely Godhead] Is God , say Logos is God.
278Now the question is.
279Is Logos Elohem.?
280If Logos is NOT then Logos is not GOD. This contradicts the Dogma Of Trinity.
281If Logos is, the Logos is Itself A Trinity and a Triune God. This is against the
282Dogma Of Trinity To believe that Some Hypostases [atleast one] in Triune God are
283Trinities.Thus the dogma of Trinity it self implies that the word Elohem can not be
284used as a plural word implying plurality of Hypostases in Divine Ousia or in any
285one of the Hypostasis. That is PERHAPS ONE OF THE REASONS ,that a number of
286protestants also agree that the word ELOHEM is just a Plural of Majesty.
287CONCLUSION
288The word Elohem is used as a singular and if it is used as a singular it loses any
289type of plurality. To claim that it still implies a sort of plurality say the plurality of
290Supreme Hypostases in the Divine Ousia Of the Divine Being is a latter invention.
291No Hebraic scholar from the day Hebraic Genesis was written to the advent of
292Athanasian Christianity ever consider this type of strange plural-singular
293amalgam.
Even if God is a Trinity and not a unoUnity or MonoUnity , the word
294Elohen when used as a singular loses any implication to the plurality of

10

Page

11

295Hypostases in the Ousia Of Supreme Being, and if used as a Plural Implies

296Plurality of Divine Beings ,not just Plurality Of Hypostases. Even if there are
297thousans of Hypostases In Divine Ousia it can not be used in its Plural
298meaningsince in this case it means nothing but Gods or gods ,and these words I.E
299Gods and gods can not be used for The Supreme Being even if there are
300thousands of mutually distinct and incommunicable Divine hypostases in the
301Divine Ousia Of Divine Being. Thus this verse does not proves trinity in the least
302meaning.
303Objection1.
304Use of plural of Majesty is an irregular case of Hebrew language. It is incorrect to
305prefer an irregular case when it is possible to take a word regular case.
306Answer .
307A] It is incorrect to reject a case just because it is irregular , since irregulars also
308exist. How ever the uses of some irregulars are regulars for certain grammatical
309things. Elohem has been a regular case for a God Of Judaism since ages.
310No one ever claimed to be irregular for GOD.
311It is very strange to claim that all he Hebraic Prophets and all the authors of
312Hebraic Scriptures used this irregular word with out knowing that it implies
313plurality of Hypostases in the Ousia Of Elohem. If they had the slightest doubt
314they would have never used this word for the GOD OF JUDAISM since they did not
315believed in the hypostatic plurality in the Ousia Of Elohem Of Judaism
316B] If this is an Irregular case then the Christological use of A SINGULAR
317IMPLYING THE PLURALITY IN THE OUSIA IS THE UNIQUE CASE OR A PLURAL
318ONLY IMPLYING THE HYPOSTATIC PLURALITY IN THE OUSIA
319Is the Unique case of Hebrew language. It is then neither regular nor irregular but
320purely unique . And if so then even an irregular case is far more preferable then
321the alleged this case .
322C] It is strange to see that if it is a real plural and not a plural of Majesty then it
323does not mean GODS . IF ELOHEM DOES NOT MEANS gods TRHEN IT IS NOT A
324PLUTRAL AT ALL, irrespective of the alleged implication of Hyposatatic Plurality
325in the Ousia Of the Subject of the word ELOHEM.
326OBJECTION 2
327There is a plurality in singularity and if so then the plural form of a word is
328useable.
329Answer.

11

12

330If so then one can use the word GODS for this plurality but The Dogma Of Trinity
Page

331Does not allow to do so even for this case. Are we to assume that there are a
332number of GODS in regared to the alleged plurality and only one GOD in regard to
333singularity.One is not allowed to claim that there are more then one GOD in regard
334to hypostatic plurality and only one GOD in regard to Osiaic Singularity.
335If not then then the word ELOHEM does not make any exception.
336Since it either means GOD if it is a Plural Of Majesty, and it means GODS if it
337means A real Plural.
338One Elohem means One God since the word Elohem means God or godif it is
339singular in meaning [Plural Of Majesty].
340One Elohem means One Gods, if it is a Real Plura [Plural Of Number ]
341
But this meaning is incorrect even if the Dogma Of Trinity is correct.If
342Dogma Of Trinity Does not allow the use Of the plural Of God or god for the
343Trinitical Plurality Of Hypostases, the same is true for the WORD ELOHEM if it
344means GODS.
345If this does not mean Gods or gods then it only means God or god with out any
346Implication to the stated above Plurality.[2]
347aaa
348
349FOOT NOTES;
350[1] THERE FORE THE TRANSLATRIONS AND THE GOD SAID , << LET US MAKE
351ADAM IN OUR IMAGE>> IS A BETTER TRANSLATION THAN ,, AND THE GOD SAID ,
352<< LET US MAKE MAN IN OUR IMAGE>> .It must be noted than the noun ADM
353Must be taken as a proper noun unless and otherwise it becomes imperative to
354take it as a common noun in its literal meaning.To translate is as as Man is
355incorrect unless and other wise three is some impossibilities [atleast one]in the
356text.

357[2]The root of the word Elohem is Elah,[

] and ELOAH is a derivative
358of Elah. The word ELOHEM [ELOAHEM] is a plural of the word Eloah.
359This word is used in Hebraic Tanach for Angels ,Kings, Judges, Chiefs and even
360false Gods./gods.
361In Exodus,it is used for Moshe [Moses]. This is sufficient to that the word when
362used as a singular implies only one person as in the case of Moses [ hsM].This
363word does not imply any sort of plurality if it is used as a singular.If the author of
364Genesis ever comes to know what arguments are made from his simple texs

12

Page

13

365which he has authored he would be the most surprised person in the entire
366history of authors of religious scriptures.
367Notes@ Pure Latin Alphabets are: ABCDEFGHILMNOPQRSTVX
368All the other Alphabets are Latin Extended Alphabets with subdivisions.
369Hemi Latin Alphabets are: KUY, K and Y were geneally used to write Greek word
370with KAPPA or Upsilon.
371
372Non Latin Alphabets are: JW
373Special Non Latin Alphabet Z
374Note. It is very likely that the famous space research centre NASA is the
375Aericanized form of Hebraic Ns-h

stated above. That is the words are so

376selected that there abbreviation becomes Amaricanized form of Genesic N-S-H

377
378END OF PART ONE.
379PART TWO:
380And the LORD GOD Said, the man has become one of us , ...
381The Hebraic TEXT in
382follow:
383

PURE LATIN ALPHABETS and Letters is as

384
385[

Gen-22]

386...vnmM

dhaC hiH mdA H mihlA HVHI rmI V

387<<........ARROW
388WARNING.
389TEXT
390WILL

OF DIRECTION.................<<

DO NOT TRY TO READ THE HOLY

FROM LEFT TO RIGHT. OTHER WISE IT

BE A DISGRACE TO THE HOLY TEXT.

13

393J

right to left, with out vewels. I is used for

Page

392from

Text in PURE Latin Alphabets written

14

391[Hebrew

or Y,Vis used for U and W,C is used for K .The

394first

letter of each word is a Capital Letter and

395rest

of the letters of each word are in Small

396letters.
397sS

Letter A for Aleph,V for Vau, for Ain

for Sde etc. ]

398ATTENTION.
399AND

IN in Pure Latin Alphabets is purely

400accidental.
401to

Any error is writing Hebraic Text

For more accuracy one is advised

consult a Tanach in Hebrew.

402
403
404This is another verse which is used for proving the Dogma Of Trinity. But once
405again this verse neither does prove Trinity nor can prove DOGMA OF Trinity.
406FIRST PREMILINARY
407The word said is once again a mistranslation. It should be Ordered or
408Commanded.
409And Lord GOD Commanded is a better rather correct translation of Hebraic
410words. Similarly the word in Hebrew Text is

Hv ADAM [mdA vH] and

411not man [rsB]. God knows why the noun ADAN is changed by the word Man and
412what are the motives behind this manupolation. We do suggest a number of
413reasons but a detail discussion is beyond the scope of present topic.He ADAM do

it would be correct to translate it

415by the word MAN, but,God Has Used the word ADAM and this is a Proper
414emphasise ADAM.If GOD Hd used the word

416Noun .

It must be adopted in translation as ADAM

417The word is used in Genesis eg Gen-6-3.It may be noted that

418the word ASAM may only be translated as man WHEN taking it as Adam

14

Page

15

419contradicteth Hebraic Tanach. Only in this condition one can argue that
420the word ADAM is used as a Petaphorical Symbol Of Mankind. Once again
421it is independent of majority or minority of cases.
422Please Keep it in mind once for all times that if the condition is present in
423a greater number of cases and the very same condition is absent in less
424number of cases, this does not changes the principle or rule..
425
426
427Second

PRIMILINARY:

428The Hebraic word MIMMANU is translated as One Of Us. This is the Grammatical
429First Person Translation. It should be translated as a Grammatical Third Person
430Translation. Eg Like One Of Them Or One Among them, Or Unparrallel among
431them etc.There are atleast 27 places in Hebraic Bible where this word is
432translated as a Third Person translation instead of First Person translation.In
433such places it is not allowed to translate it is the first person translation. One or
434two places are such that there is a possibility of both types of translation. But
435neither of them are certain. Even the Most probable is certainly Not Certain. In
436matter of believes a certain translation is required not an uncertain translation.
437So this verse can neither prove trinity nor this prove trinity on the basis of choice
438of translations. since even the most probable translation is not certain,and
439necessary condition to prove a Dogma whether the Dogma OF UNITARIANITY
440[Mono-Unity/UNI-UNITY] or Trinity] is certainiity which is not fulfiied and not
441satisfied.
442
443THIRD PREMILINARY:
444The word

MIMMANU is a compound word formed by the combination of

445two words a]Mn [ nM]. B]H. [Vow els are omited]

446If vovels are inserted then the word may be read as is Min and Hu respectively.
447Mn and Hv
448If joined they become MINHU [MNH]. [HnM] [[FROM RIGHT TO LFT]
449A NUN nun was added to join them. It became Min-nahu [ Mnnhv].
450[vhnnM] [[FROM RIGHT TO LFT]

15

16

451

Page

452Ha or h was changed by n so it become MIN-NA-NU [ Mnnnv].

453[nvnnM] [[FROM RIGHT TO LFT]
454
455First two Nuns were then changed by mem with a DAGISH.
456So it changed into MIMMANU

[Mmnv].

457[nvnM] [[FROM RIGHT TO LFT]

458
459From the very origin it is a Grammatical Third Person Pronoun.
460So the better and more accurate translation is as follow>
461I] And the LORD GOD Said, HE ADAM has become one of THEM , to know good
462and [Evil].
463
464
465Ii[And the LORD GOD Commanded, Now [behold] Adam has become one among
466them , to know good and [Evil].
467III]AND IHVH GOD COMMANDED HE ADAM BECAME ONE OF THEM............
468IV] AND IHVH GOD [ GOD IHVH] COMMANDED , HE ADAM BECAME [DID BECOME ]
469UNIQUE AMONG THEM......
470FOR THOSE WHO LIKE TO RECIEVE MORE HEBRAIC MEANING THE FOLLOWING
471LESS ENGLISH TRANSLATION ARE PRESENTED.
472V] AND IHVH GOD [ GOD IHVH] COMMANDED , HE ADAM BECAME DID BE ONE
473OUT OF THOSE/ ONE OUT OF THAT...............
474The word Behold is not present in HEBRAIC SENTENCE OF GENESIS. Yet one is
475supposed to suppose it in sense while reading the text, or to add it in mind while
476reading the text. How ever if some one does not it is equally correct sinse it is
477optional, cont a compulsion..
478It may be noted that there are several plases in Tanach where this word
479used as third person pronoun.

is

16

481FORTH PRIMILINARY
482The Hebrew word Cahud[dhC]

Page

17

480

may be translated as Unique, One with

483out Parrall,with out a partner, unparralle only one [among them ] , With Out A
484Compeer.etc.
485So a still better translation is as follow;
486Lord Lord God Commanded [Some one].Now behold Adam is become with out a
487compeer among them by having the Knowledge of Good and Bad [Evil].
488

Onkelos explains it as IAHIDI.

[ idihaI]

489

490
491Fifth Premilinary.
492If God is talking and conversing in a company of angels, supermundales, spiritual
493and heavenly beings, cherubs, etc God can say One Of Us.
494To claim that God can not include himself among heavenly Suppositums is like the
495claim that God can not incarnate in Iesous to live among people.
496God cansome how manifest among angles, and other heavenly rational
497suppostums with or with out assuming their natures if He can incarnate in human
498beings by assuming human nature to live among human beings.
499So there may be some created and made persons and hypostases not in Divine
500Ousia but out of Divine Ousia.Thus this cannot prove any type of plurality in
501Divine Ousia.
502To Claim that God cannot include Himself among Heavenly Rational Suppositums
503sayAngelic Beings, Supermundales,Spiritual Beings,Spirits, cherubs etc.a claim
504like <<God Cannot Assume Human Nature >>.S uch a claim that God Cannot
505Assume Angelic Nature but can Assume human nature is like the claim that God
506Cannot Assume Femail human Nature but Can Only Assume Male human Nature.
507Obviously only a dogmatic mind can accept such strange claims. But a Rational
508mind cannot accept such claims. What form of Christology is this that if it is
509claimed << God Can incarnate to become a human and Can live among them for
510Thirty Three years

17

Page

18

511[APPROXIMATELY] but can not Menisfest to become an angel or a Supermundale

512by Assuming their Natures just for speaking some sentences. Obviously such a
513Christology is unacceptable and CANNOT BE ACCEPTED.
514Thus if it can be believed that God Can Incarnate and become a man by Assuming
515a Human Nature and Can live among Humans for 33 years then such believers
516cannotr deny That God Can also Menifest and become an Angle by assuming
517Angelic Nature and Can live in trheir Companyfor some time atleast at the time of
518speaking these words and sentences.
519
520End OF Part Two.
521Part

Three

522Let Us Go Down...........[Genesis-11-7]
523
524

525

526vhR

ptS siA vmsI aL dsA mtpS mS hlbN V hrdN

527bhH
528<<........ARROW
529WARNING.
530TEXT
531WILL

534J

DO NOT TRY TO READ THE HOLY

FROM LEFT TO RIGHT. OTHER WISE IT

BE A DISGRACE TO THE HOLY TEXT.

532[Hebrew
533from

OF DIRECTION.................<<

Text in PURE Latin Alphabets written

right to left, with out vowels. I is used for

or Y,Vis used for U and W,C is used for K .The

535first

letter of each word is a Capital Letter and

536rest

of the letters of each word are in Small

18

for Sde etc. ]

539ATTENTION.
540in

Any error is writing Hebraic Text

Hebraic or in Pure Latin Alphabets is purely

541accidental.
542to

19

538sS

Letter A for Aleph,V for Vau, for Ain

Page

537letters.

For more accuracy one is advised

consult a Tanach in Hebrew.

543
544
545This verse is also used to prove Trinity from the Test Of Genesis Of Petentuch Of
546Holy Tanach .It is argued that it is beyond angelic power
547the change the minds of people, in a very short period of timeso that they are
548compelled to change their languages , and two forget their mother tongues
549instantly, all with out noticing what has happen to them.
550Thus the only suggestion is that God spoke to all Hypostases inside His Ousia.
551First Premilinary.
552Hebrew wordHabaa is derived from Hebrew word Yihib.This means to Give, to put,
553to place, to depart.
554It is some times used as an Auxilry verb in order to shew motivation or it is used
555to motivate for an act which is to be done.
556It does not imply plurality of Hypostases in Divine Ousia Of Supreme Being. It may
557be the case that God shew his Motivation by using this word and plural form is
558just a Plural Of Majesty. So it only means Let Me Go or Let me Give Or Let me
559Depart etc
560Second Pemilinary.
561If the word Haba conveys the sense of a Self Imperative Verb , then it must be
562known thatno one can commoand God to do an Act. A self command is not a real
563command in particular not a command for God. Thus this implies that the
564sentence cannot be taken literally but figuratively or metaphorically.If even such
565places of Jewish Tanach cannot be taken in Vertual sense then this means that
566there is no Versr intire Bible which can be taken not Literally i.e figuratively or
567metaphorically.

19

Page

20

568Athanasians become Literalist when they see literal approach supporst the
569Dogma Of Trinity and Figuratists and Metaphorists if they find
570figurative or metaphorical approach suppors their DOGMA.
571THIRD PREMILINARY.
572This interpretation does not matches with the Dogma which is suppposed to be
573proved from this verse. A very strange case indeed.
574There are only two possible cases if the Dogma Of Tinity is Assumed To Be True.
575EITHER The TRIUNE GOD or GOD THE TRINITY is commanding all the Hypostases
576Existing in the Divine Ousia Of The Triune Trinity or Any One Of The Hypostasis
577living in the Divine Ousia Of TRIUNE GOD is commanding to the rest of neighbour
578Hypostases dwelling in the same Ousia.
579Dogma Of Trinity asserts that these Hypostases can talk and can converse with
580each other and listen to each other if they will so.
581But as each Hypostasis in the Divine Ousia Is God then no one can order or
582command God. In both cases this verse can not be translated literally.
583Thus this is not in real sense or meaning , but in vertual sense or meaning.So in
584either case whether there is a Trinity or Uni-Unity the words of the verse are not
585in the primery meaning.
586If the word of the verse are not in their real meanings then the verse cannot be
587used to disprove or to prove the Dogma Of Trinity.
588Forth Premilinary.
589It may be the case that God in the company of Angels and Super mundales
590wanted to come down . That is he wanted to come down with them and not with
591out them . If it ias argued that it is outb of Angelic and Supermundalic Powers to
592change human minds and to delete their former languagess from their memories
593and to write new languages in the memory of their minds and brains, it can ot
594disprove this rendering of the verse.
595Since it is one of the weak objections of polymics.
5961] If God Is So Omnipotent then Gd Can Give Powers To Angels etc. to do so.
5972] If this Omnipotent God Does not have Omnipotence to to Grant this sort of
598power to Angels and Supermundfales, even then there are certain solutions to
599this problem not necessarilyb the trinitical one.

20

Page

21

6001] It is evident from Hebraic Tanach renamed as Hebraic Bible and Grrek
601Septuagint renamed as Old Covenant that Miracles are the WORKS and ACTS of
602GOD EVEN IF THEY ARE SHOWN BY humaqn beings. So the act of changing the
603language was actually the Act of GOD but was shown by Angels accomanying
604GOD during his comming mensioned above. The word let us does shew and only
605shew the Miracles performed by Angels and Supermundales who accompanied
606GOD during the Descension Of GOD AND HEAVENLY BEINGS on the planet earth..
6072] This is some what theological interpretation of the verse.
608In ATHANASIAN Christology it is said that the Human Nature Of Christ is not a
609Person.This Human Nature is almost like a HUMAN PERSON yet it lacks some
610thing so that it fails to be a Person.
611Now Athanasian Christologists have debated since long what is the actual
612difference between a Human Person and the Human Natrure Of Christr which falls
613short of being a person. Ifnot a human person then this Human Nature stated
614above is NOT a HUMAN BEING. IUt is still undecided what is the actual difference
615between these two, and Athanasian Theologists anf Christologists are still
616disputing . Yet one thing is certain if the Hypostatic Union ceases then the Human
617Nature Of Christ will immediately upgrade to a human person consequently to a
618human being.
619bUT IF the Hypostatic Union is some how RESTORED the immediate consequence
620is that the Upgraded human person shall immediately revert to the Original
621Human Nature.
622Thus we can say that the angels , Supermundales were United with God to form
623Hypostatic Unions and in this process these Heavenly Persons and Suppositums
624were reverted to Angelic and Supermundalic Natures. Now the plurality is just in
625regard to non divine natures and unity is with respect to Divine Natures.
626But after the Divine mission of changing the languages of humans the Hypostatic
627Union ceased . A ll the Natures were restored to their respective Personalities
628and persons, and SUPPOSITUMNESSES.
629Thus what so ever done by angles is just like the Miracles appearently shewn by
630the human nature of Iesous , even if the Human Natre did not have the power to
631show any Miracle.
632This is one of those places where Christology can be used against The Dogma Of
633Trinity.
634OBJECTION.
635HYPOSTTIC UNION REQUIRES A HYPOSTASIS AND UNITARIANITY DISBELIEVES
636IN HYPOSTASIS.

637ANSWER.

22

21

Page

638The difference between Unitarianity abd Trinity is that Unitarianity believes in

639only One Hypostasis in Godhead while Trinity believes in more that one hypostses
640in Godhead. Although Unitarian sects like Bible Students, YAHVAH Wtnesses etc
641do not mention the exact relation between Godhead and Hypostasis but it
642appears that the only difference between them is on the number of Hypostases in
643GODHEAD.Since they reject the plurality of Hypostaticm Persons in Divine Ousia
644[Godhead] but this does not mean that they reject he singularity Of Hypostses
645and Hypostatic Persons in the GODHEAD. Rationally if an Unitarian sect what so
646ever it may be have the following options.
6471] Either It believe that there is only one Hypostasis in Divine Ousia or it believe
648that God is a Hypostasis with out any Ousia, or it believe that OUSIA is in
649Hypostasis.
650If It is believed that Ousia is in the Hypostasis , then or Hypostasis is in the Ousia
651then such a Hypostatic Union is possible. It is incorrect to claim that if there are
652more then Hypostases in the Divine Ousia then any one of the Hypostasis can
653form a hypostatic union anf if there is only one hypostasis then this hypostasis
654can not form a hypostatic union. Such a claim is irrational and self reasoned.
655If it is believed that God is a HYPOSTASIS WITH OUT AN OUSIA then such a claim
656may not be accepted. But even then the ability of a Hypostasis to form a
657Hypostatic union doee not depend on the existence or non existence of
658Ousia.How ever I personally Opine thatr there can be NO HYPOSTASIS IF THERE
659IS NO OUSIA. in the case if there is ONLY ONE HYPOSTASIS in the DIVINE OUSIA
660[Renamed as Godhead for convinence] Then the Ousia is not Distinct From the
661Only Hypostsis which is in it or in which it is or both, and Ousia is Highly
662communicable to the Only Hypostasis. But Ousia is not the Hypostasis since it
663is so communicable to the Only Hypiostasis that it does not exist apart from the
664Hypopstasis even if it is Per se subsistent.
665Any how Trinity can not be proved. This interpretation nullify the arguments in
666supoprt of trinity.
667Even the minutest possibility of this interpretation breaks all the arguments from
668this verse in support of trinity ones for all.
669
670
671 Notes.There are a number of places in Genesis where the Hebrew text says God
672Commanded, and it is translated as GOD SAID.

22

675
676rvA

Page

23

673tHE FAMOUS VERSE . And THE GOD SAID LET THERE BE LIGHT MAY ALSO BE
674TRANSLATED AS

ihI V rvA ihI mihlA rmaI V

677WARNING. DO NOT TRY TO READ THE HOLY TEXT FROM LEFT TO RIGHT. OTHER WISE IT WILL BE A

678DISGRACE TO THE HOLY TEXT.

679
680AND THE GOD COMMANDED ,' LET THERE BE LIGHT';.
681Or

more simply and more correctly

682And

God Commanded. Be [ O] Light, AND LIGHT

683BECAME.
684The

sense of the sentence may be manifested in

685English as follow.
686And God commanded, EXIST [O] LIGHT AND LIGHT EXISTED.
687The word O in translation does not exit in HEBRAIC TEXT. One must omit it if he wants to be
688more Hebraic. That is why they are written in squire brackets. Omitting them gives
689translations like these given below:
690And God commanded, EXIST , LIGHT AND LIGHT EXISTED
691

OR

692And God commanded, BE , LIGHT AND LIGHT DID BE

693

OR

694And God commanded, BE , LIGHT AND LIGHT BECAME.

695
696
697
698
699

23

Page

24

700One may see that such a constant distortion of Hebraic senses and meanings can
701not be unintentionally.
702There must be some motive and some mission behind it. Even if it can be
703translated as said instead of commanded, even then it is never informed that an
704other translation is possible.
705The translation Let There be light is according to Trinitical Approach, that is GOD
706is saying to some one that he may let the light to become [or to exist.]But there is
707no Let there be but Be , Avery direct command , with out the letting of any one
708else, ruling out any possibility of saying to any hypothetical Hypostasis in the
709Ousia Of the Sayer.
710A similar game is played in Yohanon when no translator informs in general that
711the Greek word LOGOS may also be translated as Reason.
712Since to translate as In the bigening was the Reason, and Reason Was With the
713God, AND The Reason was [the] God , DOES SHAKES THE OLD CONCEPT
714conceived in minds by translations like In the Begging was the word.
715END
716

OF PART THREE

Part four.

717AND EARTH WAS WITOUT FORM AND VOID< AND DARKNESS WAS UPON THA FACE OF
718DEEP [WATER]
719. AND SPIRIT OF GOD WAS MOVING/ BLOWING TO AND FRO.
720[GENESIS -1-2]
721This verse is deliberately translated incorrect in order to shew that the
722Mentioned Spirit is the Third Hypostasis in the Ousia of Triune GOD of Trinity.]
723THE HEBRAIC TEXT IN HEBREW AND PURE LATIN ALPHABETS AND LETTERS IS
724AS FOLLOW..
725............................................
726

727

728
729Mim H inP lA tphrM mihlA hVR V mvhT inP lA xshH V vhB V vhS htiH ssrA.H V

24

731WARNING.
732TEXT
733WILL

25

OF DIRECTION.................<<
Page

730<<........ARROW

DO NOT TRY TO READ THE HOLY

FROM LEFT TO RIGHT. OTHER WISE IT

BE A DISGRACE TO THE HOLY TEXT.

734[ Hebrew Text in PURE Latin Alphabets written from right to left, with out
735vowels. I is used for J or Y,Vis used for U and W,C is used for K .The first
736letter of each word is a Capital Letter and rest of the letters of each word
737are in Small letters. Letter A for Aleph,V for Vau, for Ain sS/ss for Sde
738etc. ]
739ATTENTION. Any error is writing Hebraic Text in Pure Latin Alphabets is
740purely accidental. For more accuracy one is advised to consult a Tanach in
741Hebrew.
742
743THE ACTUAL TRANSLATION.
744AND THE EARTH [ARS] WAS NOT INHABITENT AND EMPTY ,AND
745DARKNESS WAS UPON THE FACE OF WATER. AND RUH OF GOD WAS A
746HETCHER ON THE FACE OF WATER[S]<1>
747A]
748B] One may see the word by word comparesion of the most mistranslated
749part of the verse. See that to translate Spirit Of God Or Wind Or Air Of
750God was moving to and fro is an in correct translation for all times and
751eternities.. What so ever it was -= it was sitting like a bird on the face of
752water not moving at all.[whether it be spirit or wind or air]
753Mim

H inP lA tphrM mihlA hvR V

754WARNING. DO NOT TRY TO READ THE HOLY TEXT FROM LEFT TO RIGHT.
755OTHER WISE IT WILL BE A DISGRACE TO THE HOLY TEXT
756V = And

757Ruhh[Ruh]= wind, air,spirit.ghost,soul

hvR

25

26

mihlA

Page

758Alhim=God

759Mrhhpt=To Sit on somelike like a bird sits on its eggs to get them hatch

760tphrM
761Al= on,upon
762Pni= face
763H=the

lA

inP

H.

764

765Mim= water

Mim

766The construction Ruhh Alhim implies Ruh Of Alohim./Alhim.

767Thus

the meaning is as follow.

768Thus

the meaning is as follow.

769<<

the Ruh

Of GOD was sitting on the face of

770water[

Like a bird which sits on eggs to get them

771hatch]

772Or

more accurately the meaning is as follow.

773<<

the Ruh Of GOD was sitter

774water>>
775them

on the face of

[ Like a bird which sits on eggs to get

HATCHED]

Since there is no

776continuous

tense in Hebrew Neither Past

777continuous

nor Present Continous. [It may not be

778reminded

that Future continuous is beyond all

26

Hebrew language.] and the only possibilities are

781indefinite
782present
783that

Page

780of

thoughts,since it is the most obvious fact

27

779Hebraic

tense [sit, sat] or active particibles [not

participles like sitting, but sitter, or one

sits, or one that does sit.It may however be

784noted

that Past Participles are in close

785approximation

to Passive Participles]

786The Hebraic word Ruh is deliberately kept conserved in the translation since the point is to
787shew the static nature of Ruh, and not the Dynamic nature of It irrespective of the proper
788alternative of it.
789
790
791
792
793
794FIRST PRIMILINARY
795
796

HOSHIX

[ XSH] means Darrkess . This means that there was no light

797but there was water etc. The may contemplate that there was no light and the
798Earth was inhabitant. No biological living thing was on Earth.
799No thing could be seen since there was no light to see. Every thing was in
800darkness. But there was earth in its actual form. No thing shews that there was
801no form of Earth. Such a translation is misleading.
802This also shews that there was liquid water [not ice].
803Second preliminary
804The verse does not say that earth was formless and void. In does say it was
805INHABITANT and EMPTY.
806Once again one may sense some trinitical conspiracy behind this sort of
807translation.

27

810Third preliminary.

Page

28

808This is to induce the concept of Philosophical Form and Voidness [CHOAS] in

809Genesis which can be used for supporting the DOGMA of Trinity Of GOD.

811The word TUHUM [mvhT] means Water . May be translates as deposits of

812water.But this is less verbal and Water is relatively and comparatively a better
813translation .
814FORTH PRIMILINARY
815The word RUH is translated as Spirit. But it may be translated as AIR or Wind. A
816spirit is neither solid nor liquid nor gas. Even Human Spirits [ghosts] are neither
817solid nor liquid nor gas. But the wind or air does shew gaseous form of matter.
818When compare to Water the liquid form , it is suggested that it is air or wind and
819not the spirit of or souls or ghost.
820So This Air of GOD, OR WIND OF GOD only means that Air5 or wind what so ever it
821might be was not a Suppostum in general and a rational Suppositum in particular
822and certainly Not a Hypostasis residing in the Ouasia Of Triune God with
823neighbouring Hypostases.
824But we shall see that air is more correct translation then wind since Wind is
825blowing air in a particular direction, and it moves from one place to another place
826in a particular direction. But this air was not moving at all. There for it is AIR and
827just air even if one may translate it as Wind [BLOWING/MOVING AIR IN A
828PATRTICULAR DIRECTION.]
829FIFTH PRIMILINARY
830The Hebrew word MARAPHAT means hatching.
831It is the position of a [female] Bird sitting on her eggs to hatch them. A bird some
832times even swells her body to cover her eggs.
833So Hatcher bird is the true representative of Ruh hence it is some what
834condensed air with some pressure on water since a bird does press her eggs by
835her own weight.
836This is the static Ruh of Hebraic Genesis and the Ruh of translations is dynamic
837since it blows or moves to and fro.
838This is deliberately done just to reject the concept of a Created Ruh [AIR]. The
839concept of Hypostatic Spirit moving to and fro on the face of wather may
840correspond to the movement of Hypostatic Spirit or Ghost when it incarnated in a
841dove by assuming the nature of the bird dove.

28

Page

29

842But Ruh is air which has some pressure on the face or surface of Water[s].But
843this air is pressing water and this air is reffered to God. This means that God was
844the creator of this Ruh. The reference of the RUH to God is of creative nature and
845not of hypostatic nature.
846SIXTH PRIMILINARY.
847The word face may be taken as SURFANCE like SUFACE of water instead of face
848of water but if the Hebraic words are concern Face Of Water is preferred over
849Surface of water even if the word surface is more easy to conceive in minds for a
850student of Chemistry or Physics yet Laxitonically FACE IS THE CORRECT
851TRANSLATION.
852Seventh Preliminary
853
854A more close translation close in meaning is as follow,.
855
856AND

THE EARTH [ARS] WAS NOT -HABITENT AND

857EMPTY

,AND DARKNESS WAS UPON THE FACE OF

858WATER.
859BIRD

AND RUH OF GOD WAS SITTING LIKE A

WHICH HATCHES [HER EGGS] ON THE FACE

860[SURFACE]OF
861Or

WATER[S]

more Hebraically as:

862AND

THE EARTH [ARS] WAS NOT IN-HABITENT

863AND

EMPTY ,AND DARKNESS WAS UPON THE

864FACE

OF WATER. AND RUH OF GOD SAT LIKE A

865BIRD

WHICH HATCHES [HER EGGS] ON THE FACE

866[SURFACE]
867IT

OF WATER[S].

MAY BE NOTED THAT THERE IS NO

868GRAMMATICAL
869HEBREW.

CONTINOUS TENSE OR VERB IN

THERE FORE THE BEST ENGLISH

29

IS THE INDEFINITE TENSE AND

30

870ALTERNATIVE

WHETHER IT BE PAST OR PRESENT OR

872FUTURE.It

may be noted that GOD never required a

873continuous
874Seventh
875A

Page

871MEANING.

tense to Express His Sentences.

Preliminary.

moving Spirit is more close to trinitical Spirit

876rather

than a not moving spirit , that is why the

877dynamic
878Hebraic

translation is made rejecting the original

word.

879Athanasianism
880Hypostatic
881over
882a

believes that Spirit is a Divine

Suppoitum . Unitarianisms are divided

the issue of the spirit. Some believe that it is

created Suppositum, some believe that it is a

883NON

SUPPOSITUMIC FORCE, and some believe

884that

is some thing created which is some time

885Suppositumized
886reverted
887to

by God and Other times is

to Non Suppositumic state as according

Will Of God. Question is that if this is a

888Hypostasis
889Being
890hence

then it cannot drift away from the Ousia,

it can not be on the waters with out

891assuming
892CAN
893the

living in the Divine Ousia Of Sureme

a non eternal nature. But a HYPOSASIS

ASSUME ONLY a human nature, that is why if

spirit is a Hypostasis then it must have

894assumed

some human nature before moving to and

30

896cannot
897from

31

other wise with out assuming any nature it

come on earth since it can not be drifted
Page

895fro

Ousia leaving behind neighbouring

898hypostases

and to land on earth to move to and

899fro.
900CONCLUSION.
901THE

SPIRIT OF GOD WAS NOT MOVING TO OR FRO

902AND

NOT BLOWING BUT SITTING AND HATCHING

903DEPOSITS
904THIS

OF WATHER.

SPIRIT WAS NEITHER A CREATED

905SUPPOSTUM

NOR A HYPOSTATIC SUPPOSITUM

906BUT
907A

WIND. [A NON SUPPOSITUMIC THING]

908As

it is clear that in trinitical Christology No

909Hypostasis
910power

to assume the nature OF AIR OR WIND OR

911WATHER,
912MALE

AND HAS ONLY POWER TO BECOME

HUMAN BEING By assuming [MALE] human

913nature,

AND PERHAPS [MALE] DOVES AS WELL By

914assuming
915THE

inDivine Ousia Of Triune God has

[MALE] Dove Nature .IT IS TRIED TO SKIP

CONSEQUENCES WHICH DOES NOT

916CONCORDM
917TRNITICAL
918THE

WITH TRINITY AND RELATED

DOGMAS, THEY HAVE MISTRANSLATED

STATIC RUH OF HEBRAIC TEXTY IN FEVOR OF

919DYNAMIC

RUH OF TRANSLATIONS. ONCE AGAIN

31

921HEBRAIC

922

923

WORD

32

IN MIND ONCE FOR ALL TIMES THAT THE

Page

920KEEP

does not mean To Move To And Fro.

924
925
926....................................................................................
927<1> iT MAY BE TRANSLATED AS PLURAL OR SINGULAR DEPENDING UPON THE
928CONTEXT.
929
930,
931.<2> The words SPIRIT and GHOST were once used in almost same sense. But
932now a Spirit may be Good or Bad or Neutral. But a ghost is always bad except in
933the case the word Holy is before it, Such a distinction has made a problem .Since
934it may not be objectionable to a number of persons to call Holy Spirit As Spirit Of
935God, But It may be objectionable to many of them to call HOLY GHOST as Ghost
936Of God.
937It is very interesting to note once for all that even then Holy Ghost and Holy Spirit
938are two English terms used for the one and the same Trinitical Hypostasis as
939according to English believers of Dogma Of Trinity. This is the reason that the
940incorrect translation And Spirit Of God Was Moving To And Fro is never translated
941as And Ghost Of God Was Moving To And Fro.
942But fortunately the word ghost when refers to the founder of Christianity Yeshua
943or Isu still convey a good meaning. One still find about Yeshua /Iesus that He gave
944up the Ghost, instead of he gave up the Spirit. But once again the reason to keep
945this word is to save believers in the Trinitical Dogma from believing that Issus
946gave up the Ruh Of Elohem OR The Pnuma Of Theos mensioned in their
947translation of Genesis.
948
949

951
952
953
954

Page

950

33

32