257013864-AND-THE-GOD-SAID-2

1
2
[Type the company name]
3

1
4
ADISCUSIONADISCUSIONONONTHETEXTHETEXTOFTANACHOFTANACHPage2
Tan
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.]

2
30Words of timeless GOD never grow old and are perpetually not
31old.
Page3
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 , >[Genesis -26]
55The Hebraic TEXT in PURE LATIN ALPHABETS and Letters is as
56follow:
57
58
59
60
61
ו יאמד אלהיס נעשה אדס בצלס
כרסות נו
vN tvmD C vN mlsS C mdA hs’N mihvlA
rmaI V

3
62
63
64
WARNING. DO NOT TRY TO READ THE HOLY
Page4
TEXT FROM LEFT TO RIGHT. OTHER WISE IT
WILL BE A DISGRACE TO THE HOLY TEXT.
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
[Hebrew Text in PURE Latin Alphabets written
from right to left, with out vewels. I is used for
J or Y,Vis used for U and W,C is used for K .The
first letter of each word is a Capital Letter and
rest of the letters of each word are in Small
letters. Letter A for Aleph,V for Vau, ‘ for Ain
sS for Sde etc. ]
ATTENTION. Any error is writing Hebraic Text
in Pure Latin Alphabets is purely accidental.
For more accuracy one is advised to consult a
Tanach 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 יאמד 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.

4
89B] The word MAN is once again most fatal mistake in the alleged translations.
Page5
90The Hebrew Text contains the word ADAM , and not the Word MAN ‏.בשד 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.

5
122In a large number of languages an IMPERATIVE SENTENCE or an Imperative Verb
Page6
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 נעשה 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 NA’S 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].

6
156So even upon the standard of Trinitical Dogmas it is use of a word not in the real
Page7
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
173
174
175
The Hebraic word Elohem אלהיס [ mihvlA] [ Read the Holy
words from right to left] is a plural of words Elah [hlA]or Eloah
[hvlA]. The Word Eloah אלוה or Elah אל ה 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

7
190and gods for the Supreme Being./ One even can not say ‘’ Divine hypostases are
Page8
191Gods/ gods ‘’, according to the Dogma Of Trinity Of God.
192So the word Elohem אלהיס 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 אלהיס 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

8
224The Supreme Being. How ever such type of word was not known before the
225foundation of Athanasian Christianity.
Page9
226Now we render some more possible translation of the verse .
227AND GODS COMMANDED [THEMSELVES] ,

9
261there is no demand and thousand of places where there are demands, even then
262the PRINCIPLE is immutable .
263SEVENTH PREMILINARY
Page10
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.
2728 th 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
295Hypostases in the Ousia Of Supreme Being, and if used as a Plural Implies
Page11
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
330If so then one can use the word GODS for this plurality but The Dogma Of Trinity
Page12
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 , > IS A BETTER TRANSLATION THAN ,, AND THE GOD SAID ,
352> .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,[ אלוה ] 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
365which he has authored he would be the most surprised person in the entire
366history of authors of religious scriptures.
Page13
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 N’s-h נעשה stated above. That is the words are so
376selected that there abbreviation becomes Amaricanized form of Genesic N-‘S-H
נעשה 377
378END OF PART ONE.
379PART TWO:
380And the LORD GOD Said, ‘’ the man has become one of us , ...
381The Hebraic TEXT in PURE LATIN ALPHABETS and Letters is as
382follow:
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
ו יאמד יהוה אלהים הו ארמ היה כאחר
םםנו
[ Gen-22]
...vnmM dhaC hiH mdA H mihlA HVHI rmI V

13
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
[Hebrew Text in PURE Latin Alphabets written
Page14
from right to left, with out vewels. I is used for
J or Y,Vis used for U and W,C is used for K .The
first letter of each word is a Capital Letter and
rest of the letters of each word are in Small
letters. Letter A for Aleph,V for Vau, ‘ for Ain
sS for Sde etc. ]
398
399
400
401
402
ATTENTION. Any error is writing Hebraic Text
AND IN in Pure Latin Alphabets is purely
accidental. For more accuracy one is advised
to consult a Tanach in Hebrew.
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.
409‘And Lord GOD Commanded’ is a better rather correct translation of Hebraic
410
words. Similarly the word in Hebrew Text is הו ארמ 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
414emphasise ADAM.If GOD Hd used the word itבשד would be correct to translate it
415by the word MAN, but,God Has Used the word ADAM ארם and this is a Proper
416Noun . It must be adopted in translation as ADAM .
417
418
The word בשד is used in Genesis eg Gen-6-3.It may be noted that
the word ASAM may only be translated as man WHEN taking it as Adam

14
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.
Page15
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
427
Second 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 םםנו MIMMANU is a compound word formed by the combination of
445two words a]Mn מנ [nM]. B]H. [Vow elsרי are omited]
446If vovels are inserted then the word may be read as is Min and Hu respectively.
הו and Hv מנ 447Mn
448If joined they become MINHU [MNH]. ‏[‏HnM‏]מנהו [[FROM RIGHT TO LFT]
449A NUN nun was added to join them. It became Min-nahu מננהו [Mnnhv].
450[vhnnM]
[[FROM RIGHT TO LFT]

15
451
Page16
452Ha or h was changed by n so it become MIN-NA-NU מנננו [Mnnnv].
453[nvnnM] [[FROM RIGHT TO LFT]
454
455First two Nuns were then changed by mem with a DAGISH.
456So it changed into MIMMANU םםנו [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 םםנו is
479used
as third person pronoun.

16
480
481FORTH PRIMILINARY
Page17
482
The Hebrew word Cahud[dhC] כאחר 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
יחירי idihaI] Onkelos explains it as IAHIDI. [
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 .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

17
511[APPROXIMATELY] but can not Menisfest to become an angel or a Supermundale
Page18
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.
521
Part Three
522Let Us Go Down...........[Genesis-11-7]
523
524
525
הבה
נדרה ונבלה שם שפתם אשד לא ישמעו
איש שפת דעהו
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
vhR ptS siA v’msI aL dsA mtpS mS hlbN V hrdN
bhH

18
537
538
letters. Letter A for Aleph,V for Vau, ‘ for Ain
sS for Sde etc. ]
Page19
539
540
541
542
ATTENTION. Any error is writing Hebraic Text
in Hebraic or in Pure Latin Alphabets is purely
accidental. For more accuracy one is advised
to 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
568Athanasians become Literalist when they see literal approach supporst the
Page20
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
6001] It is evident from Hebraic Tanach renamed as Hebraic Bible and Grrek
Page21
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.

21
637ANSWER.
Page22
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
673tHE FAMOUS VERSE . And THE GOD SAID LET THERE BE LIGHT MAY ALSO BE
674TRANSLATED AS
675
Page23
ו יאמד אלהים יהי אוד ו יהי־
אור
676
rvA 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';.
681
682
683
684
685
Or more simply and more correctly
And God Commanded. Be [ O’] Light, AND LIGHT
BECAME.
The sense of the sentence may be manifested in
English 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
700One may see that such a constant distortion of Hebraic senses and meanings can
701not be unintentionally.
Page24
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.
715
716
END 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
ד הךצ חיתה תהר רבהך ו השך על־ פנני תהוס ו
דוח אלהיס
סדחפת על־
פני ה סיס
729Mim
H inP lA tphrM mihlA hVR V mvhT inP lA xshH V vhB V vhS htiH ssrA.H V

24
730
731
732

25
אלהיס 758Alhim=God mihlA
Page26
759Mrhhpt=To Sit on somelike like a bird sits on its eggs to get them hatch
760
סדחפת tphrM
761Al= on,upon lA
762Pni= face inP
763H=the H.
764
765
סיס Mim= water Mim
766The construction Ruhh Alhim implies Ruh Of Alohim./Alhim.
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
Thus the meaning is as follow.
Thus the meaning is as follow.
[ Like a bird which sits on eggs to get
them HATCHED]
Since there is no
continuous tense in Hebrew Neither Past
continuous nor Present Continous. [It may not be
reminded that Future continuous is beyond all

26
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
Hebraic thoughts,since it is the most obvious fact
Page27
of Hebrew language.] and the only possibilities are
indefinite tense [sit, sat] or active particibles [not
present participles like sitting, but sitter, or one
that sits, or one that does sit.It may however be
noted that Past Participles are in close
approximation 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 חשך [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
808This is to induce the concept of Philosophical Form and Voidness [CHOAS] in
Page28
809Genesis which can be used for supporting the DOGMA of Trinity Of GOD.
810Third preliminary.
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
842But Ruh is air which has some pressure on the face or surface of Water[s].But
Page29
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
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
AND THE EARTH [ARS] WAS NOT -HABITENT AND
EMPTY ,AND DARKNESS WAS UPON THE FACE OF
WATER. AND RUH OF GOD WAS SITTING LIKE A
BIRD WHICH HATCHES [HER EGGS] ON THE FACE
[SURFACE]OF WATER[S]
Or more Hebraically as:
AND THE EARTH [ARS] WAS NOT IN-HABITENT
AND EMPTY ,AND DARKNESS WAS UPON THE
FACE OF WATER. AND RUH OF GOD SAT LIKE A
BIRD WHICH HATCHES [HER EGGS] ON THE FACE
[SURFACE] OF WATER[S].
IT MAY BE NOTED THAT THERE IS NO
GRAMMATICAL CONTINOUS TENSE OR VERB IN
HEBREW. THERE FORE THE BEST ENGLISH

29
870
871
872
873
ALTERNATIVE IS THE INDEFINITE TENSE AND
Page30
MEANING. WHETHER IT BE PAST OR PRESENT OR
FUTURE.It may be noted that GOD never required a
continuous tense to Express His Sentences.
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
Seventh Preliminary.
A moving Spirit is more close to trinitical Spirit
rather than a not moving spirit , that is why the
dynamic translation is made rejecting the original
Hebraic word.
Athanasianism believes that Spirit is a Divine
Hypostatic Suppoitum . Unitarianisms are divided
over the issue of the spirit. Some believe that it is
a created Suppositum, some believe that it is a
NON SUPPOSITUMIC FORCE, and some believe
that is some thing created which is some time
Suppositumized by God and Other times is
reverted to Non Suppositumic state as according
to Will Of God. Question is that if this is a
Hypostasis living in the Divine Ousia Of Sureme
Being then it cannot drift away from the Ousia,
hence it can not be on the waters with out
assuming a non eternal nature. But a HYPOSASIS
CAN ASSUME ONLY a human nature, that is why if
the spirit is a Hypostasis then it must have
assumed some human nature before moving to and

30
895
896
897
898
899
fro other wise with out assuming any nature it
Page31
cannot come on earth since it can not be drifted
from Ousia leaving behind neighbouring
hypostases and to land on earth to move to and
fro.
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
CONCLUSION.
THE SPIRIT OF GOD WAS NOT MOVING TO OR FRO
AND NOT BLOWING BUT SITTING AND HATCHING
DEPOSITS OF WATHER.
THIS SPIRIT WAS NEITHER A CREATED
SUPPOSTUM NOR A HYPOSTATIC SUPPOSITUM
BUT
A WIND. [A NON SUPPOSITUMIC THING]
As it is clear that in trinitical Christology No
Hypostasis inDivine Ousia Of Triune God has
power to assume the nature OF AIR OR WIND OR
WATHER, AND HAS ONLY POWER TO BECOME
MALE HUMAN BEING By assuming [MALE] human
nature, AND PERHAPS [MALE] DOVES AS WELL By
assuming [MALE] Dove Nature .IT IS TRIED TO SKIP
THE CONSEQUENCES WHICH DOES NOT
CONCORDM WITH TRINITY AND RELATED
TRNITICAL DOGMAS, THEY HAVE MISTRANSLATED
THE STATIC RUH OF HEBRAIC TEXTY IN FEVOR OF
DYNAMIC RUH OF TRANSLATIONS. ONCE AGAIN

31
920
921
KEEP IN MIND ONCE FOR ALL TIMES THAT THE
HEBRAIC WORD
Page32
922
923
סדחפ
does not mean To Move To And Fro.
924
925
926
....................................................................................
927 iT MAY BE TRANSLATED AS PLURAL OR SINGULAR DEPENDING UPON THE
928CONTEXT.
929
930,
931. 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

32
950
951
952
Page33
953
954