Do you acknowledge the word “elohim” is plural?
Can “echad” from the shema be used in a “united plural” way?
Who is this talking about in Proverbs 8:22-36?
Who is it speaking of in Isaiah 53?
When God appeared to people in the Tanakh, who was it if it wasn’t God?
I don’t believe in the Trinity like the mainstream as you can see from Proverbs Ch.8. With that said, when God appeared in the Tanakh, I believe it was Yeshuah(Jesus). That being the case we can infer that he also has the name of God, YHVH, just like any son would be named after their father. And together they are also referred to as the God of Israel, YHVH. I know that seeing me type these names out is disgusting to you but didn’t God say his name would be glorified?
In Isaiah 48:12-22, who is the one who was there in verse 16?
The real problem you should have is where people say that Yeshuah did away with the Torah. They will all realize soon we received lies from our fathers. Starting with the sabbath. Not in one place do we see in the Tanakh say we shouldn’t observe the sabbath anymore. He tells them he hates “their” sabbaths which means they weren’t keeping God’s sabbaths as instructed or at the correct time. Sorry if you already knew all of this but I have to make sure that it gets out there because soon we might not be able to.

Please don’t do that… How you read your “New Testament” may cause you to think you’re helping someone, but, just no… American-style Evangelical Protestantism isn’t the be-all and end-all so many insist…

And plenty of us are traditionally and liberally Jewish and see much of the so-called “gospels” as portrayed, in many respects are restatements of Rabbis Akiva and Hillel, and, apart from the hagiographies, little different from traditional rabbinical Judaism.

You Evangelicals seems to have the insistence that, anyone not you is somehow hellbound… I’m not Christian, but am Jewish, and such things from such as you are beyond insulting. You may not intend as such, but you have to know, you folks don’t have the lock on being the finite intending on interpreting the Infinite. You think you, as finite, have the Infinite all figured out… guess who’s mistaken…

Hmm… considering that my Bible, the Tanakh (“Old Testament,” and, as I’m Jewish, doesn’t include the “New Testament”), was written in Hebrew, Chaldaic, Aramaic, and, in some respects, Greek, maybe not as clear as American-style Evangelical Protestantism would like it to be, but you do you you.

I will only offer that G-d, as He knows Himself to Be, has been my best eternal friend for as long as I’ve been on this planet, and I hit 66 this past Valentine’s Day.

That one may reject an interpretation of G-d is nowhere the same as rejection of G-d Himself.

I honor our noble host for giving voice to so many illustrations of the Supreme Absolute of the Multiverse, but, frankly, if any illustration is sufficient, it’s not
G-d… just an observation, as G-d as G-d is, is beyond any possible description, however learned and astute, else, by definition, it can’t be the Absolute… merely a picture which may or may not be of use.

But such cannot truly describe the Infinite, as attempted by the finite, as maybe a moment’s thought might be.

A liberal, open-minded Jewish description seems to work for me, but go figure that I learn from so many other other paths.

Just sayin’

Just to ask, by “rejecting Him,” precisely what does that mean? For example, I am a devoted and quite liberal Reform Jewish man, and my faith in ha Shem has never been stronger nor more adamant… I’d just like to ask, as it seems to be for so many, that I’ve no interest in the American-style Evangelical Protestant view of Rabbi Y’Shua (“Jesus”), nor is he my “Lord and Savior,” but, to me a rabbi who adeptly adapted the teachings of rabbis who preceded him by a generation or so, to be of comfort and support to his fellows, equally laboring under the Roman Occupation… for my thoughts about that, I’ve somehow “rejected” G-d.

Just asking, as the way you phrased your comment indicates you’d likely consider this liberal old Jew as somehow “rejecting” G-d… If so, no… no rejection of G-d as He knows Himself to be… just the rejection of what He’s supposed to be, according to some, is all.

Plenty among my fellow US citizens who can only view someone as being a “real” , if one’s politics happen to be what is now called “conservative,” but has crap-all to do with anything other than far-right fascism.

One doesn’t have to claim the label of “conservative” to be a real Christian, a real Jew (as is my own particular faith path), nor any other path of faith.

Just it seems those who are so adamant in claiming that label are truly convinced that one can’t be a “real” adherent of any path unless one’s political views line up with what does not claim the label, but is little different from any politically fascist stance.

Sorry that may suck to learn that, but it is as it is.

I would offer only that so many in this country of my birth and service who claim the label of “conservative” are nothing of the sort…

Very much the same that those who are so adamant about claiming the label of “Christian” are really only adhering to a particularly American-style Protestant interpretation of the faith, yet insist that their interpretation is the only “real” Christian path of the faith…

What claims to be “conservative,” in the US, and has absconded with the label, are really more along the lines of traditional fascist views. Might suck to learn that, but, quite frankly, in this time in which we live, Reagan, as he really was, would be viewed a RINO, Nixon a “Socialist,” and, G-d forbid, Eisenhower would be accused of being a flaming “Marxist.” So, no… what is accepted as “conservative,” whether spiritually or politically (and they have become joined at the hip) is nowhere near what the label has been. Just what it has been made to be, in this weird early 21st century.