This Site Is No Longer Active

Check out RESTITUTIO.org for new blog entries and podcasts. Feel free to browse through our content here, but we are no longer adding new posts.



One of the most frequently recited wholesale nfl jerseys from china verses in Scripture is Deuteronomy 6:4. In other words, that verse is spoken – out loud from memory – on an extremely frequent basis. For example, observant Orthodox Jews will recite that verse at least twice a day – once in the morning, and once in the evening.

The Hebrew in that verse is pronounced as follows:

Sh’ma Yis’ra’eil Adonai Eloheinu Adonai echad.

Here is the translation of that verse, from the ESV:

“Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.

All of the other common English translations of the Bible have extremely similar renderings of that verse.

Deuteronomy 6:4 is sometimes referred to as “the sh’ma” (or “the shema”) – since it is referenced so frequently.

Interestingly, Jesus himself also recited the sh’ma. Note the following passage:

Mark 12:28-30 (ESV):

28 And one of the scribes came up and heard them disputing with one another, and seeing that he answered them well, asked him, “Which commandment is the most important of all?” 29 Jesus answered, “The most important is, ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. 30 And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’

At this point, the obvious question is: why is that verse recited so frequently? The general answer to that question is that the sh’ma very succinctly summarizes the difference between the God of the Bible – Yahweh – and the pagan gods of other religions. Basically, that verse explicitly states that there is only ONE Almighty God. This is in stark contrast to the multiple, competing gods, in the pantheons of most other religions.

As a result, reciting the sh’ma is a very simple, convenient way for a person to re-confirm that he believes in the God of the Bible – rather than believing in multiple, pagan gods.


The Hebrew word “echad”

The very last word in the sh’ma is the Hebrew word echad. That word is rendered as “one” in most English translations of the Bible; some translations use “alone” instead. In either case, the straightforward, common-sense understanding of echad in the sh’ma tells us that only one person is Almighty God – and that one person is our Heavenly Father – Yahweh.

Some groups have an alternate belief about echad, though. In essence, those groups assert that echad refers to a “compound unity”. In other words, they believe that echad refers to one group, which contains multiple members. For example, they state that echad means “one” as in “one baseball team”; as opposed to “one” as in “one chair”.

So, according to that understanding of echad, the sh’ma could be translated this way:

“Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is a compound unity.

Of course, the reason why this alternate understanding of echad is important is because it allows some groups to “spin” the sh’ma – into an endorsement for the Trinity! In other words, some groups state the following: “The sh’ma tells us that God is one. That is true – but that “one” refers to a compound unity. So, the sh’ma is telling us that there is only one God – but He is comprised of multiple persons.”


How is echad actually used in Scripture?

The crux of the above argument is that “echad” refers to a “compound unity”. Of course, in order to determine if that argument has any merit, it is necessary to examine how that word is actually used in Scripture.

The word echad (and its feminine version achat) appears 970 times in Scripture. In the vast majority of cases – over 600 times – the word echad explicitly refers to a simple, unitary one. In other words, in almost every case, echad refers to one single item – rather than to one group of items.

This concept is usually expressed in English translations with the word “one”; but the words “single”, “unique” and “first” are used as well, depending on the context. Here are some examples of echad meaning a simple, unitary one:

And God said, “Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one (echad) place, and let the dry land appear.” And it was so. (Genesis 1:9, ESV)

So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one (achat) of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh. (Genesis 2:21, ESV)

We are all sons of one (echad) man. We are honest men. Your servants have never been spies.” (Genesis 42:11, ESV)

“My servant David shall be king over them, and they shall all have one (echad) shepherd. They shall walk in my rules and be careful to obey my statutes. (Ezekiel 37:24, ESV)

It [the Passover meal] is to be eaten in a single (echad) house (Exodus 12:46, NASB)

I will remove the iniquity of this land in a single (echad) day (Zechariah 3:9, ESV)

For it will be a unique (echad) day which is known to the Lord (Zechariah 14:7, ESV)

But my dove, my perfect one, is unique (achat) (Song of Solomon 6:9, NASB)

The name of the first (echad) [river] is Pishon; it flows around the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold. (Genesis 2:11, ESV)

And the waters continued to abate until the tenth month; in the tenth month, on the first (echad) day of the month, the tops of the mountains were seen. (Genesis 8:5, ESV)

Clearly, all of the above examples refer to one single person, place or thingnot to one group of items.


What about these cases?

As mentioned, in the vast majority of cases, echad refers to one single item. However, in a small minority of cases, echad refers to one group of items. Here are three examples of this:

Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one (echad) flesh. (Genesis 2:24, ESV)

God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first (echad) day. (Genesis 1:5, ESV)

And they came to the Valley of Eshcol and cut down from there a branch with a single (echad) cluster of grapes (Numbers 13:23, ESV)

Here is a “summary” of the above examples:

Example 1: Echad is used to describe a husband and a wife – together – as one flesh.

Example 2: Echad is used to describe an evening and a morning – together – as the first day.

Example 3: Echad is used to describe a single cluster of grapes.

Some groups point to those specific examples, to try to prove that echad – in the sh’ma – refers to the Trinity. In other words, they assert the following:

Echad, in the sh’ma, is used to describe the Father, Son and Holy Spirit – together – as one God.

However, is the above assertion really true? Do the three examples listed above actually describe the doctrine of the Trinity?

Consider those three examples again. In example 1, Scripture states that a husband and wife – togetherbecome “one flesh”. This means that the husband – by himself – does not fully comprise the one flesh; and that the wife – by herself – also does not fully comprise the one flesh. Instead, the husband and the wife, by themselves, are only parts – or “halves” – of the one flesh.

Similarly, in example 2, Scripture states that an evening and a morning – together – became the “first day”. This means that the evening – by itself – does not fully comprise the first day; and that the morning – by itself – also does not fully comprise the first day. Instead, the evening and the morning – by themselves – are only “subsets” of the first day.

The same principle applies to example 3. One single grape – by itself – does not fully comprise the entire cluster; one grape is just a single member – a subset – of a cluster of grapes.

The reason why the above items are important is because the doctrine of the Trinity asserts the following:

The Father is fully God, the Son is fully God, and the Holy Spirit is fully God. However, there are not three Gods, but one God.

Of course, that doctrine is entirely different than the examples provided above. Consider example 1 again – it states that the husband and the wife – by themselves – are NOT fully the “one flesh”. The Trinity doctrine, though, states that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit – by themselves – ARE fully the “one God”.

To make the contrast even more clear, consider the following: In order to cause example 2 to agree with the Trinity doctrine, Scripture would have to say something like this:

The evening fully comprised one entire day, and the morning fully comprised one entire day. However, there were not two days, but one day.

Of course, the above assertion is pure nonsense. What Scripture actually states is that the evening was just part of the day, and the morning was just part of the day – and that the two of them, together, comprised one full day.

Now, consider this: In order to cause the Trinity concept to agree with the examples above, one would have to say something like this:

The Father is “one third” of God, the Son is “one third” of God, and the Holy Spirit is “one third” of God; and the three of them – together – comprise one God.

However, most Trinity proponents strongly disagree with the above statement. This is because they are completely focused on the idea that each “person” of the Trinity is fully God – and that there are not three Gods, but one God. That concept is not expressed by the word echad at all – not in any of the places where it appears in Scripture.



Some mainstream expositors make the following type of blunt assertion, whenever they discuss the sh’ma: Echad means a compound unity – period.

The implication of that assertion, of course, is that echad only means a compound unity. In other words, that assertion implies that in every case where echad is used, it always refers to one group of items – rather than to one single item. However, as mentioned above, in the vast majority of cases, echad actually refers to just one single item.

So, the implication that echad always refers to a “compound unity” is demonstrably false.

Not only that, but even in the minority of cases where echad does refer to a compound unity, the meaning still does not conform to the doctrine of the Trinity. Basically, in the cases where echad refers to one group of items, it is clear that each member of the group is only a subset of the listed “compound unity”.

For example, Scripture states that a husband and a wife – together – become “one flesh”. This indicates that the husband and wife are each “subsets” of the one flesh – but that together they comprise a “complete” one flesh. This is the opposite of the Trinity doctrine – which states that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are each fully God – but there is still just one God.

The final item to note is that many other passages in Scripture state that only our Heavenly Father is Almighty God. That, in turn, tells us that echad – in the sh’ma – refers to just one person: our Heavenly Father.

First of all, note that the phrase “God the Father” does appear in Scripture – in many places – but the phrases “God the Son” and “God the Holy Spirit” do NOT appear anywhere in Scripture. The terms that actually do appear in Scripture are the Son of God and the Spirit of God.

Next, consider the two passages below. In the first, Jesus himself states that our Heavenly Father is the only true God, while Jesus is the one who was sent by God. Similarly, Paul tells us that the Father is our God – while Jesus is our Lord – i.e., our “master”, or “boss”:

John 17:1-3 (ESV):

1 When Jesus had spoken these words, he lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, “Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you, 2 since you have given him authority over all flesh, to give eternal life to all whom you have given him. 3 And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.

1 Corinthians 8:5-6 (ESV):

5 For although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth—as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”— 6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.

Finally, Jesus explicitly denied that he was Almighty God; and he even stated that our Heavenly Father was his God – just like He is our God. Consider the following passages:

Mark 10:17-18 (ESV):

17 And as he [Jesus] was setting out on his journey, a man ran up and knelt before him and asked him, “Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” 18 And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone.

John 20:17 (ESV):

17 Jesus said to her, “Do not cling to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’”

The information in this post will hopefully prove useful, if one encounters the argument of “Echad in the sh’ma proves the Trinity”.


91 Responses to “What does the Hebrew word “echad” mean?”

  1. on 29 Sep 2013 at 2:52 pmJas

    Considering there are 3 possibilities for the meaning of Echad I would be very careful with hanging my hat on it meaning one in number.
    It can mean one in number, it can mean in unity and also it can mean FIRST in rank ,the last is the more probable because Yhwh states in Ex 20 to not have any OTHER gods before him, Otherwise he,they are not to be held as secondary or even compared .
    But I whole heartily agree with your purpose of writing to show the trinity as false just not your conclusions which in this case doesnt prove a thing other than you choose one of the possibilities because it is required in your belief.

  2. on 01 Oct 2013 at 8:10 pmTim (aka Antioch)

    Thank you, Brian! It was a new angle for me in how you broke down the ‘compound unity’ argument. One grape is part of the cluster but it is not the cluster, I think, destroys the notion that each person of the godhead can be a distinct person and fully God at the same time.

    Because of the weightiness of this verse, the spin to make compound unity work is most disturbing. If God is a trinity, then the shema means God is a parser of words.

  3. on 05 Oct 2013 at 11:48 amXavier


  4. on 05 Oct 2013 at 3:48 pmJas

    Actually the use of the word echad in Gen 1 means first day.
    However, the Hebrew language has an alternative word for “one,” as well, which is YACHID (the feminine, YACHIDA) and does not occur very often in the OT – twelve times to be exact, but is specifically used whenever an ONLY/Individual One or Single Entity/Unit is implied, as whenever in Gen. 22:2 & 12, Isaac is called Abraham’s “only son,” and in Jdgs. 11:34, Jephthah’s daughter – his “only daughter.” Nonetheless, even this word, can and does, sometimes mean a kind of Group of One, although more loosely inferred than is ECHAD. To this end, the word YACHIDA, has its main emphasis respective of a SINGULAR Entity – one and only one…and most likely would have been the word of choice relevant to Deuteronomy 6:4, if the absolute numerical singularity of ONE had been intended.
    So even though echad can mean unified ,the use of it in Deuteronomy 6:4 to mean that is very low ,about the same as it meaning a single one. The highest probability is Rank which puts a fly in the ointment for both monotheism and trinitarianism.

  5. on 06 Oct 2013 at 2:35 pmXavier


    “One” is an adjective “Rank” is a noun. So I don’t really know what you mean here.

    Also, ask any Jew what echad means and you will get something like this response from Rabbi Singer:

    The word echad in the Hebrew language functions in precisely the same manner as the word “one” does in the English language.

    In the English language it can be said, “these four chairs and the table constitute one dinette set,” or alternatively, “There is one penny in my hand.” Using these two examples, it is easy to see how the English word “one” can mean either many things in one, as in the case of the dinette set, or one alone, as in the case of the penny.

    Although the Hebrew word echad functions in the exact same manner, evangelical Christians will never offer biblical examples
    where the word echad means “one alone.” Thus, by only presenting scriptural verses such as Genesis 1:5 and Numbers 23:13, it creates the illusion to the novice that the word echad is somehow synonymous with a compound unity. Nothing, of course, could be further from the truth.

    For example, Deuteronomy 17:6 reads:

    “At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; but at the mouth of one (echad) witness he shall not be put to death.”

    Or Ecclesiastes 4:8 reads:

    “There is one (echad) alone, without a companion; yes he has neither son…”

    In the above two verses the exact same Hebrew word is used, and clearly the word echad is referring to one alone, not a compound unity.

  6. on 06 Oct 2013 at 3:55 pmJas

    Echad describes what postion in rank, so what is your point.
    First what,second what, third what???
    Why would I ask a jew who to stay in grace with other jews or out of need is forced by doctrine.
    Not sure who told you first is a noun but they misled you.

  7. on 06 Oct 2013 at 9:24 pmXavier


    Echad simply means the numeral “1”. Nothing to do with “rank”.

    And if you want to know the meaning of words in other languages why not ask a native speaker? Or simply consult a Hebrew lexicon.

  8. on 06 Oct 2013 at 9:51 pmJas

    Actually Echad does not simply mean numeral one, it can but in the case of Deuteronomy 6:4 it means First in Rank as the Elohim of Israel. I can find 1000’s of Jews whose native language is Hebrew who claim it means a compound unity be that as it may they have converted to messianic judaism of the triny flavor.
    Like I said the fact that Echad in Deuteronomy 6:4 means first causes as much problems for monotheism ,jew or christian as it does for trinitarians. Why dont you read and translate every usage of Echad in OT which you will see 90% that first is a better choice in the verse but most translators are trinitarians or have some doctrine to protect like your belief

  9. on 07 Oct 2013 at 1:14 amXavier


    Echad appears over 900 times in the Hebrew Bible, making it the most frequently used adjective in the Tanakh (so, its frequency is just what we would expect for the number 1, like our English “one”).

    “one place” (Gen. 1:9); “one man” (Gen. 42:13);

    “one law” (Ex. 12:49);

    “one side” (Ex. 25:12);

    “one ewe lamb” (Lev. 14:10);

    “one of his brethren” (Lev. 25:48);

    “one rod” (Num. 17:3);

    “one soul” (Num. 31:28);

    “one of these cities” (Deut. 4:42);

    “one way” (Deut. 28:7);

    “one ephah” (1 Sam. 1:24);

    “one went out into the field” (1 Kings 4:39);

    “one shepherd” (Ezek. 37:24);

    “one basket” (Jer. 24:2);

    “one [thing]” (Ps. 27:4);

    “Two are better than one” (Ecc. 4:9); “one day or for two” (Ezra 10:13).

    Sometimes it is simply part of a number, like “eleven” (echad + asar [= “ten”]), in, for example, Gen. 32:22. Sometimes it is well translated by an indefinite article (“a, an”): “a new cart” (1 Sam. 6:7); “a juniper tree” (1 Kings 19:4, 5); “a book” (Jer. 51:60).

    Perhaps most importantly, echad clearly has the meaning of “single,” “only one,” or “just one,” the idea of a limit of one (Num. 10:4; Josh. 17:14; Est. 4:11; Is. 51:2).

    In Deut. 17:6, for example, it really isn’t precise English to translate echad merely as “one.” For if the “one” witness referred to is the second or the third witness, then that one witness is enough to convict the hypothetical person in the passage of murder. The meaning is that a person must not be put to death on the evidence of only one witness (which is the way the NRSV translates it). Echad means “one” and only one.

  10. on 07 Oct 2013 at 8:04 amJas

    Echad appears over 900 times in the Hebrew Bible

    Yes indeed it does and I said Echad could mean “one”, I even allowed for a 10 % possibility . As for most of your examples above many could be that the one was the first.
    Out of the 960 occurrences the Net bible only translates it as “one” 467 times and translates it as “first” 60 times which for a very trinitarian leaning translation is amazing.
    But you can keep on claiming Echad simply means one if that is what is required for your belief

  11. on 07 Oct 2013 at 8:37 pmTim (aka Antioch)

    So do we have three possible interpretations?

    1) One (God is one [not two, or three, etc…])
    2) Compound Unity (God is one but multiple ‘components’)
    3) First (God is first)

    The more I think about it, I am actually thinking #3 makes the most sense. God is first – that makes more sense since it follows that we are to love God with all our hearts, minds, soul, strength. That does seem more like a declaration of priority and not number.

    Either way, I still think the compound unity argument is pitiful for the reason Brian pointed out. The components of that unity are not each that unity as the trinity teaches. All other comparisons of echad to compound unity fail in that respect.

  12. on 07 Oct 2013 at 9:34 pmJas

    I agree it is a very low probability Deuteronomy 6:4 is speaking of a equal unity and even if The Elohim in this verse was speaking of the Most High and any other agent God set up over Israel in unity it would not support the trinity what so ever. You can not have 3 equal persons making up the Godhead if one is called the MOST HIGH

  13. on 07 Oct 2013 at 10:42 pmXavier


    In what language does the word “one” mean “priority/rank”?
    Please provide proof.

  14. on 08 Oct 2013 at 12:00 amJas

    Actually every language the word for “one”can mean postion of rank, in english we normally use the word “first” in place of “one”, other languages may use same word allowing context to define meaning.
    Even in english “one” can describe rank like “we are number one”

  15. on 08 Oct 2013 at 1:39 amTim (aka Antioch)

    Jas said it. Thinking also of the Ford slogan – Quality is job 1!

  16. on 08 Oct 2013 at 1:43 amTim (aka Antioch)

    And just re-reading the article – Gn 2:11, the name of the ‘first’ river seems to support the notion that ‘echad’ can mean ‘first’.

  17. on 08 Oct 2013 at 2:04 amBrian Keating


    As Tim mentioned above (and also as listed in the original post) there are three “basic meanings” of echad:

    1. One single item – e.g., one rib;

    2. One group of items – e.g., one “flesh” (husband + wife);

    3. First in rank, or first in time – e.g., the first day of the month.

    Meanings 1 and 2 are “mutually exclusive”. In other words, in any given case, echad can either refer to one single item, or it can refer to one group of items – not to both concurrently.

    Meaning number 3 is completely different. In other words, first in rank does not have anything to do with “simple unity” or “compound unity”. That is, God can still be first in rank – regardless of whether He is one person or multiple persons.

    Certainly, Scripture does speak of other “gods” – i.e., heavenly beings (such as angels). Scripture also states that we must not hold any other gods in higher regard than Yahweh. So, Yahweh is certainly “first in rank” over heavenly beings, as per meaning 3.

    However, is that what is meant by echad, in the sh’ma? Well, as mentioned, the reason why the sh’ma is recited so frequently is because it describes the difference between the God of the Bible, and the pagan gods of other religions. The reason why this is important is because IF echad – in the sh’ma – means “first in rank”, then the sh’ma would NOT actually be describing any difference between Yahweh and pagan gods. Consider this:

    – Yahweh is first in rank over other heavenly beings;

    – Zeus is first in rank over other pagan Greek gods;

    – Odin is first in rank over other pagan Norse gods;

    – Ra is first in rank over other pagan Egyptian gods;

    – Dagda is first in rank over other pagan Celtic gods;

    – Anu is first in rank over other pagan Babylonian gods;

    and so on, and so on…

    So, if echad in the sh’ma means first in rank, then the sh’ma is not describing any difference between Yahweh and the leaders of pagan pantheons. As a result, it is extremely unlikely that echad in the sh’ma means first in rank.

    Instead, it appears likely that echad in the sh’ma means a single person – our Heavenly Father. In other words, only one person is Almighty God (El Shaddai). This means that Yahweh – alone – has absolute power over everything in creation. This is radically different than the pagan gods of other religions. For example, Zeus is first in rank of the pagan Greek gods; but he does not have absolute power over the other gods.

    In any case, echad in the sh’ma definitely does not provide any evidence, whatsoever, for the Trinity. (In fact, none of the appearances of echad agree with the Trinity.)

  18. on 08 Oct 2013 at 2:55 amTim (aka Antioch)

    Hi Brian,

    I agree ‘first in rank’ does not resonate. However, ‘first in mindshare’ is more what I am thinking. Nothing comes before God – it is the first commandment. This is reinforced by the next words – love the Lord your God with all your heart… We put Him first, we do everything we can to remember to put Him first.

    The monotheism of Judaism may have separated them from others at the time, but I am having a hard time making that the reason for the shema’s weightiness. I may be wrong that it was a much bigger deal at the time than it is now, but, what would be a central tenant that would have been relevant then and still so very relevant now is making God first in our lives.

    I’m still stewing on this…this is a vast change in my thinking of what the shema was about, but so far it seems to make it much more deserving of its importance.

  19. on 08 Oct 2013 at 3:27 amBrian Keating

    Hi Tim,

    Sure, the concept of “first in mindshare” certainly seems like a legitimate meaning as well.

    In any event, this article was not intended to discuss “meaning 3” of echad (the meaning of “first”). Instead, it was intended to deal with the mainstream view that “echad in the sh’ma proves the Trinity”.

  20. on 08 Oct 2013 at 8:46 amJas

    Would not discussing the “meaning 3″ of echad which has the highest probability in Deuteronomy 6:4 be profitable in your purpose of writing? Would it not also be profitable when debating a trinitarian? Some even here did not even know of the possibility much less the probability .

  21. on 08 Oct 2013 at 9:53 amXavier

    Theology is the only scholastic endevour, it seems, where anyone can make up their own words and definitions. :/

  22. on 08 Oct 2013 at 11:48 amTim (aka Antioch)

    Xavier, I don’t think anyone has made up any new definition. You may disagree that someone has interpreted a verse differently, but is it not then a Berean exercise to sort out which interpretation stands up? That’s what I see taking place now.

    Brian – agreed.

  23. on 08 Oct 2013 at 11:53 amXavier


    In what language does the word “one” mean “priority/rank”?
    Please provide proof.

  24. on 08 Oct 2013 at 5:05 pmTim (aka Antioch)

    Xavier – Gn 2:11, echad is interpreted as ‘first’. Jas gave you ‘we are number one’ as an example as well.

  25. on 09 Oct 2013 at 9:26 amXavier


    Last time…

    In what language does the word “one” mean “priority/rank”?
    Please provide proof.

  26. on 09 Oct 2013 at 11:42 amTim (aka Antioch)

    English and Hebrew, proof was given above.

  27. on 09 Oct 2013 at 1:34 pmXavier


    Please post the relevant English and Hebrew dictionary/lexicon where the word “one” is defined as “priority” or “rank”.

  28. on 09 Oct 2013 at 6:51 pmJas

    For the last time it refers to POSITION in priority or Rank which in english most of the time “first” is used but not always.
    I really think you are twisting the conversation to be about the word “rank” instead of postion of rank as a red herring.

  29. on 10 Oct 2013 at 3:10 pmXavier

    It is absurd to say that an adjective is a noun or the simple meaning of words!

    And even a child knows what ONE means: “1 and not 2 or more”.

  30. on 10 Oct 2013 at 10:07 pmJas

    Who says that an adjective is a noun? Do you think because “First”
    is used AS a noun that makes it a noun..Whenever you see First standing alone in a sentence it is because the noun it is describing has already been implied . Yes a child knows that one can mean 1 but also they know it describes order or postion, I would even say most children understand one in unity.
    The Hebrew word Echad also can be used the same way .

  31. on 12 Oct 2013 at 7:00 pmRay

    I don’t know much about Hebrew words, but I do believe that the Father and Jesus together are one Lord, and one God, that Jesus is always in agreement with the Father, and that God is always with Jesus first and foremost above any way that God may be with anyone else.

  32. on 13 Oct 2013 at 11:52 amJas

    The issue here is not about belief ,it is about possibilities and the probability of them. Brian understood the possibilities but was unwilling to expand upon all of them because his concern was to only address how trinitarians are wrong. Xavier refused to even accept all the possibilities to protect his belief. Tim understanding all the possibilities, weighed them and chose the probability which made the most sense to him. As for me all I want is all the facts so I can have the best understanding possible .

  33. on 12 Apr 2014 at 10:17 pmKeith

    I have found this debate very interesting on the Hebrew word “echad” It has confirmed to me that my understanding of the trinity is not wrong, but to the contrary, has quite a strong foundation. Where can a single have fellowship? Where can a single have unity? Where can a single have meaning? Dose not the scripture say that it is not good for man to be alone? Surely these references allude to God knowing that and seeing the futility of what happens when that does happen? What was the case when Yeshua said “Why have you forsaken me” And again where ever did that voice come from who said,” This is my Son in whom I am well pleased, hear Him”. Granted there is much we do not understand who and how God is. I am a finite person and so are you folks. But God is infinite can we understand Him? For me I lean to the trinity teaching 3 in 1. Whose blood paid the price? Was it not the blood of the Son of God? Was it not the power of the Spirit of God that brought about the Resurrection of Yeshua from the grave? Hey thee are many things that are not altogether understandable that are not really clear in the scriptures, That we can say this is this is the case, we would like to, but it does not seem to be the case.

  34. on 13 Apr 2014 at 1:45 pmJas

    If this discussion has confirmed then you certainly do not hold the “orthodox ” belief in the trinity.
    If all 3 persons are equal then they would not be in need of the other such as the Spirit of God bringing about Jesus’ resurrection . Why do you claim there are many things not understandable or really clear in Scriptures then using it to defend your belief when unitarian belief is understandable and very very clear in the scriptures and they also understand what unity really means

  35. on 14 Apr 2014 at 10:38 amSarah


    What about Malachi 2:10?

    “Have we not all one [echad] Father? Has not one [echad] God created us? Why then are we faithless to one another, profaning the covenant of our fathers?” (Mal 2:10)

    It seems to me that when echad refers to the One God, it is referring to the Father alone.

  36. on 14 Apr 2014 at 11:33 amJas

    Du 32:6 Is this how you repay 9 the Lord(YHWH),
    you foolish, unwise people?
    Is he not your father, your creator?
    He has made you and established you.
    32:7 Remember the ancient days;
    bear in mind 10 the years of past generations. 11
    Ask your father and he will inform you,
    your elders, and they will tell you.
    32:8 When the Most High 12 gave the nations their inheritance,when he divided up humankind, 13
    he set the boundaries of the peoples,
    according to the number of the heavenly assembly(gods,sons of God). 14
    32:9 For the Lord’s(YHWH)
    allotment is his people,
    Jacob is his special possession. 15

    The Most High God set aside his right to create for himself a nation. (Mal 2:10) is in reference to Israel which only has One God the Most High God as their Father . He is to remain FIRST AND ONLY to them and this verse does not deny lessor gods or subordinate beings such as HS or the resurrected Jesus

  37. on 14 Apr 2014 at 5:10 pmSarah


    I agree with you that this verse doesn’t preclude lesser gods, in the sense that elohim is sometimes applied to humans and angels in scripture.

    My point is simply this: “echad Father” doesn’t refer to a plurality of fathers called the One Father. This is important, because Malachi is using a Hebraic parallelism in this verse, such that the “one Father” and the “one God” refer to the same thing. Thus “echad Father” = “echad God.”

    In my view this verse elaborates on the Shema, leaving no room for the other two Trinitarian persons via the term echad.

  38. on 14 Apr 2014 at 6:04 pmJas

    YHWH is echad because Israel belongs to him. He set aside Israel as his private portion. Whether the HS is a separate person or not a person can not be determined from either the shema or this verse. There can only be determined that YHWH is to be First above all to Israel. As for Jesus post resurrection status I see his rank is second to only the Creator but I think it is a shared rank with the HS and above any lessor gods and heavenly beings. The fact is there exist a concept of a trinity just not the “orthodox”concept of the trinity. Some people think there is only two choices and when the line is drawn in the sand they see a concept of a trinity therefore can not accept any form of unitarianism because only one is given as a choice. There is 100 miliion heavenily beings called Angels but Du 32 shows that there were greater heavenily beings given even greater task .
    I disagree that any human has every be called gods but were set up as god’s over other humans. That would be like saying a human messenger is a heavenily being because the word for messenger is angel. Only one being other than YHWH has came visible carrying the Name YHWH which has been called the messenger or spirit of YHWH but can not be the invisible YHWH.

  39. on 15 Apr 2014 at 1:47 pmJas

    In Ezekiel’s vision of the four living beings there is another being who is called the Spirit and in Rev 4 this being (She) is also present . In the OT she is called Wisdom,Angel of YHWH,Spirit of YHWH and called YHWH’s visible Presence .The bible is very clear no human has ever seen the Most High therefore YHWH’s visible Presence Must then be another being. The shema does not discount this fact nor does any declaration that the Most High is Israel’s sovereign King not even the appointment of human kings. The bible is solely about the creation of Israel as the Most High’s portion, the purpose of Israel,the Promises made to Israel and their founding Fathers all the way back to Seth the first of Eve’s Offsprings that lead to the Offspring to fulfill the prophecy given to her and satan. This Jesus did make peace between All mankind and their Creator thereby reinstating the Possibility of Life after human death but first God must keep his promise to Israel to offer them a better method of entering and maintaining a Covenant Relationship and entering his Sabbath Rest Age. This promise must continue till every last offspring of the exiles has been reached With the Gospel or the means of this gathering cease in bring about anymore fulness from the (not my people) exiles.
    The gates of the grave will not prevail against his set apart because the One of Israel is Faithful in his Promises

  40. on 15 Apr 2014 at 5:36 pmSarah


    The bible is very clear no human has ever seen the Most High therefore YHWH’s visible Presence Must then be another being. The shema does not discount this fact nor does any declaration that the Most High is Israel’s sovereign King not even the appointment of human kings.

    I’m not even remotely arguing against the idea that YHWH’s agents can representationally bear his name. After all, that’s a central tenet of Last Adam Christology!

    Nevertheless the OT, NT, and very early church all specifically identify the creedal One God of Israel as the Father alone. Malachi says that we have “echad” Father, who is “echad” God. This shows that Israel understood the One God of the Shema to be a singular unipersonal being, namely the Father. That was my point regarding Mal 2:10.

  41. on 15 Apr 2014 at 7:57 pmJas

    You need it to be about quantity and if it was meant that way it would not be at odds with my belief that the Creator is One. But unless the early Israelites were questioning whether there was 2 in 1 or 3+ in 1 neither verses make sense. But I see it as describing a relationship not the person of God therefore it is not a proof text against any amount in 1 God. The Israelites were to worship the one who they belong to, He should be first and no others whether gods, angels or humans should come before him. The “Orthodox ” trinity has absolutely no proof anywhere in the bible and has many verses against it. We should not trying to force verses into proof text, there is plenty enough.
    I know you understand agency but you deny the HS personhood and individuality because the trinity sees it but falsely claims equality with the Creator which would be impossible because even it being the first created it was Created

  42. on 16 Apr 2014 at 10:28 amJas

    The literal reading in Hebrew of Mal 2:10 is.
    not father echad all ,not el echad create
    not god to create us, not father individually us.

    Should this verse be use as a proof text for a one person god especially since the LXX does not even use any form of the word for “one”? How many times has a trinitarian used a bad translation to be shown the literal doesn’t support that reading but it reflects the doctrine of translator . This verse could be handed back to us the same way .

  43. on 16 Apr 2014 at 12:06 pmSarah


    The transliteration of Mal 2:10 according to the LXX (Greek Apostolic Bible Polygot) is:

    ouchi pater (Father) heis (one) pas ego ouchi theos (God) heis (one) ktizo ego tis hoti egkataleipo hekastos ho adelphos ego ho bebeloo ho diatheke ho pater ego

  44. on 16 Apr 2014 at 12:38 pmJas

    You do understand the Greek Apostolic Bible Polygot is just a translation from the Masoretic Text to Greek and is not the original wording of the Greek OT known as the LXX.
    The LXX is without any word for “one” in Mal 2:10

  45. on 16 Apr 2014 at 5:30 pmJas

    2:10 οὐχὶ θεὸς εἷς ἔκτισεν ὑμᾶς οὐχὶ πατὴρ εἷς πάντων ὑμῶν τί ὅτι ἐγκατελίπετε ἕκαστος τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ τοῦ βεβηλῶσαι τὴν διαθήκην τῶν πατέρων ὑμῶν

    LXX Septuagint

    This is the orignal reading which you can see there is no word for “one” and the sentence structure is not even the same. This is the oldest reading of that verse some 600+ years before the Masoretic Text. The Masoretic text probably added “one”to the text.

  46. on 18 Apr 2014 at 11:42 amJas

    Just noticed I pasted wrong script. There wasn’t no spaces or markings in original form. I think in most ancient languages the written form was like notes meant as a memory aid . The Priesthood was taught to memorize generation to generation and so were the first christians. There were also many groups where children could reciite whole books of the bible because under persecutions it was the norm to burn the writings of so called heretics. This was the practice of the Paulines,the Abyssinian, the Jacobites, the Maronites, the Armenians and the Waldenese.
    If you would like to learn about these groups here is a link.
    While I am fairly sure echad was original in both verses I dont think it carries the meaning of describing how many but describes relationship. But even if it is quantity this does not effect the concept of the trinity where is is claimed over and over that there is only One God not 3 Gods in 1 which is found in their earliest creed .

  47. on 01 May 2014 at 1:49 pmjesse

    Are a JW ? how comes you dont say anything about YACHID ? you only dwell on the word echad but you ignore the word YACHID which means 1 as in # 1-YACHID is never used for GOD.

  48. on 03 May 2014 at 2:00 pmBrian Keating

    The Hebrew word echad has the overall meaning of “one” – in most cases referring to a unitary person, place, or thing. In some other cases echad refers to “first”, “single”, or “unique” – and in a small minority of cases, it refers to a “compound unity” (as in one group of items).

    The Hebrew word yachid has the more specific meaning of “only” – as in a “one and only son”. There are only 12 occurrences of yachid in Scripture – and in 10 of those cases it means “only”. (In the other two cases it means “lonely” – as in a person being alone.)

    The following document provides a thorough description of yachid; as well as correlating yachid to the Greek monogenes:


  49. on 03 May 2014 at 2:34 pmJas

    Actually in the majority of the uses of “echad”, “first” would be a better translation . If they wanted to express “one and only one” than “yachid” would be the only word to express that with out confusion. The God of Israel was FIRST with none beside, before him or to come but that is because Israel was The Most High Sole Possession. So echad God relates to Israel’s God’s ownership not how many persons. Like I explained to Sarah the doctrine of the trinity has no problem with the Shema because it claims only ONE God in its creed. So if it meant absolute one in number ,first or in unity it prove absolutely nothing Against the trinity. The trinity fails on the fact it is nowhere in the bible

  50. on 03 May 2014 at 3:24 pmSarah

    Brian, thanks much for the article on yachid. I found it very informative.

    Jas (RE: Post #44),

    You do understand the Greek Apostolic Bible Polygot is just a translation from the Masoretic Text to Greek and is not the original wording of the Greek OT known as the LXX

    No, it’s not from the Masoretic text. It’s from the LXX. Where are you getting your information? The whole point of the ABP is to provide a Strong’s numbering system that will facilitate Koine Greek language studies of the OT. More info here: http://www.septuagint-interlinear-greek-bible.com/intro.pdf

  51. on 03 May 2014 at 3:58 pmJas

    Ancient Koine Greek was a written text without punctuation ,word breaks and had abbreviations . Without knowing what it said through memorization it is basically a unreadable text like shorthand today is unreadable to a non trained person. Word breaks are extremely important because ascribing a single letter to the end or beginning or even perhaps the middle can change the meanings of one or both words. The jews of the first 8 centuries basically memorized the OT and had unmarked and un punctuated text as a memory guide till the Masorites made it into a readable language by vowel marking, word breaks and forms of punctuation . The Greek text of OT also in the beginning was a memorization tool and was not marked ,word breaking or punctuated till later. i will guarantee every translation of ancient greek of OT to english used the MT or oral tradition as a guide. There is not a scholar today who can translate ancient greek without a later marked text as a guide , it would be completely a guess but then again no one could dispute his guesses
    So all the Greek Apostolic Bible Polygot is guesswork if they did not use a latter text which was probably guesswork when it was marked,given breaks and punctuated or used a more reliable oral source like that of the jews

  52. on 03 May 2014 at 5:12 pmJas


    Then add the complication that greek uses many formations for one word.
    Now take out vowels for Hebrew
    Even the netbible missed “heis” in Mal 2:10 in their LXX translation probably because they were tying to translate from unmarked source

  53. on 03 May 2014 at 6:46 pmJas

    Did you take the time to learn about the true church in the link .
    They had the original books which was oral transmitted translated into old latin which was more of a communication text. Latin had word ,sentence and passage breaks plus complete structure . It was readable .
    With every edict of the romish church against this group there were always a command to destroy ALL their literature . This is the reason they taught their children to memorize whole books of OT and NT. The romish church did not want the average man to have the bible and made it a penalty of death from 4th century till they could nolonger stop it in 16th century. But these groups maintained a readable bible known as old latin or italic . How would you like to live during a time when having just a copy of the bible cost you your life or atleast everything you owned. What we have today is just only what the romish church allowed us to have, bible and concordances.
    I dont think their type of faith exist today and doubt anyone today could last one day in their shoes

  54. on 03 May 2014 at 10:32 pmSarah


    I’m certainly no expert in the area of textual criticism. From the little I’ve seen, it is a very complex field of study that I will happily entrust to those who are so trained.

    I just don’t see any reason to question the “one (echad) Father / one (echad) God” rendering of Mal 2:10 found in the MT and corroborated by every translation of the LXX that I know of. If you happen to be fluent in Koine Greek, please feel free to suggest your alternative English translation of LXX Mal 2:10. I’m all ears. Otherwise, I think I’ll stick with what we’ve got.

  55. on 03 May 2014 at 11:22 pmJas

    Who is questioning , I said I was certain that it was the original wording just do ascribe to it meaning singular but it meaning relationship between God and Israel. Monotheistic Unitarians are grasping at straws when trying to use the Shema and Mal 2:10 as proof text against the doctrine of trinity. No educated trinitarian would have a problem with either verses meaning one in quantity .
    As I said nobody today is fluent in the greek of the LXX they are only fluent in a modernization of that text type which is just guesswork at best when it was marked and punctuated . You would be just as qualified to try to make sense of the greek text as any scholar . I just dont think we should build doctrines on translations without digging as deep as possible to understand as it was writen . Some people swear by the KJV ,some by concordances, and others by how popular the translation is

  56. on 04 May 2014 at 10:41 amJas

    I do not include myself in the elect so I am not protecting. a doctrine that provides for my inclusion. I would not be but a pimple on the back of one of these. My salvation is by Grace alone which is a Gift given freely to all mankind. Grace allows for me to be raised from an eternal grave allowing me to stand in the presence of my Creator to be judged by my own actions against creation not Adam’s .Christianity along with many religions teach how we are to treat others and the rest of creation which will be profitable when pleading our case at Judgment. Since God allowed deception this factor would be taken into consideration because God is a just God but there are many evils that go against built in conscience that will cause many to not receive eternal life.
    I have problems with people who make Grace Conditional on believing their brand of Christianity which somehow replaced the elect who met the conditions both Old and New Covenants and condemn people who are far better people in their treatment of God’s Creation.

  57. on 04 May 2014 at 8:22 pmJas

    “The LXX is not the only Greek text nor is it the oldest. However, only portions and fragments of the earlier versions survive, and so “Septuagint” in common parlance has come to mean any version in Greek. Although these earlier version were the ones used by the early Christian church and are the basis for translations into other languages such as Gothic (ca 380), it is the Septuagint which is the basis for translations that Orthodox churches use today. A reconstruction of the original text of the Old Testament that Christ and his disciples knew in Greek has not yet been attempted.”

    Thought you might want to know that the designation LXX is just that and not the LXX of the legend. Could be from any post 4th century source.

  58. on 11 Jan 2015 at 12:33 amTone Griffey

    The saddest part of this entire debate is that many of you have read the bible but apparently are ever learning and never coming to the knowledge of the truth. So, I’m going to kill the entire argument with two verses of scripture that are conclusive for the trinity and proving echad has multiple meanings. In regards to Deut 6:4…. You Americans, ( none are in the bible by the way) need to seek out a Hebrew so that he can explain to you how this word is translated in context. It’s sad. It really is.

    Here are your verses…..feed well. 1John 5:7-8. (Three in one and three agree in one.)

    Oh, btw, the Masoretic Text is the only true text. Not opinion…fact.

  59. on 11 Jan 2015 at 10:59 amJas

    Neither verses are proof of Trinity, Deut 6:4 in true translation neither proves singular or plural just states YHWH is the One God of The Israelites as oppossed to that of the Gentile Nations and 1John 5:7-8 is a complete fabrication of the Romish Church.
    Btw the Masoretic Text has many corruptions just not as much as the Greek Text.
    So you see your comment neither kills the debate or adds validity to the the trinity

  60. on 14 Jan 2015 at 3:23 amJaco

    My goodness, as if shockingly inaccurate content and condescending bravado would convince people of the Trinity. Apparently there are still people living with a Medieval mindset…

    Uber fail…

  61. on 10 Jun 2015 at 6:08 amEmmitt Cooper

    the word, “echad”, may I make a suggestion. a equal “share” of the same. not a division, nor a separation. but one of the same. the “share”, or as the Greek word G243 express, “allos”.

    I neither support a trinity, nor a compound unity, or a single oneness, but a “diversity” of one, meaning the “offspring” of God as the echad, or the offspring, or as the Greek say “another).

    thank you

  62. on 06 Aug 2015 at 4:39 amDeepa

    Elohim is the hebrew word for God, and Elohim is plural because there is ‘him’ at the end.
    In genesis 1:26 it’s written: the God said,”let us make man in our image.
    again. Again God said in genesis 3:22 “the man has now become like one of us.

  63. on 28 Sep 2015 at 1:33 amLisa

    the sh’ma is our declaration on earth to all who will hear of who we will follow, as it to be either Satan (demons) or the creator who made man in the (our) image God…The Bible never denies the reality of other “gods” (elim, elohim), though it calls them demons (Lev 17:7; Deut 32:17; 2 Chron 11:15). The commandment “You shall have no other elohim before me”or God it is declaring under who’s leading / covering, authority, rule a man will be under….ownership and under who’s authority a person declaring to the whole world.
    To bring this to a trinitarian theology debate is to lose the original intent of this scripture. You can not go there as an argument for or against and to do so is foolish argument.
    Quote: the obvious question is: why is that verse recited so frequently? The general answer to that question is that the sh’ma very succinctly summarizes the difference between the God of the Bible – Yahweh – and the pagan gods of other religions Satan and his demons. Basically, that verse explicitly states that there is only ONE Almighty God and man must decide which master he will follow and love. This is in stark contrast to the multiple, competing gods, in the pantheons of most other religions. This is about and for the deliverance and healing for man as a broken lost soul. Are you Elohim’s or Satans child? Don’t get lost going down a completely different road that was never intended to be gone down. Let the Tanakh give the remz of the inner structure of the one true God involving Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Isaiah 48:16 uses three different terms to speak of the divine; I, now Adonai God, and his Spirit has sent me…and Genesis 1:26 it’s written: the God said,”let us make man in our image and Again God said in Genesis 3:22 “the man has now become like one of us. Let this be discussed and studied for trinity study. Note here in the Sh’ma (Deut. 6:4 there are two such r’mazim: (1) triple reference to God. (2) echad can mean one cluster of grapes or one bundle of sticks instead of “yachid” which nearly always excludes multiple oneness.

  64. on 28 Sep 2015 at 4:20 pmJas

    ” Isaiah 48:16 uses three different terms to speak of the divine; I, now Adonai God, and his Spirit has sent me…”

    Using this rationality when taking account the whole Bible we could come up with God being dozens yet One God. It is absurd to not just understand God can be described with many titles just as you can be described as a daughter,sister,mother,nurse, friend,etc yet you are only ONE person.
    Yes Elohim is plural yet it is a title that has been used of created beings ,heavenly and human

  65. on 09 Jan 2016 at 10:02 amPeggy Ajax

    God has given us examples in nature where He reveals himself to man, how three different things can be one thing. The example I think of most often is Water. Water is in its most common primary form is Liquid, it can also be steam and it can be ice. Three different forms, three different names, and present in three different ways, accomplishing three different activities……but all three forms are the one substance….Water.
    Lovingly in Christ the son,

  66. on 14 Jan 2016 at 9:09 pmBRUCE EDMINSTER

    Dear Sirs,

    If echad does not mean “unified”, then why did Jews in later versions of the Torah change echad to yachid in Deuteronomy 6:4? Thanks.

  67. on 15 Jan 2016 at 11:35 amJas

    There are no versions of the Torah in Hebrew that has yachid in Deuteronomy 6:4 changed by a jewish scholarship . This is a myth.

  68. on 02 Apr 2016 at 9:20 amMary

    Hebrews 11:6 And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to God must believe that He exists and that He rewards those who earnestly seek Him.

  69. on 09 May 2016 at 9:51 pmDr.Howard

    I have made a special study (I know Hebrew) of echad-translated as “one” in Deut.6:4-in all places where it is used. It’s root meaning is unity – united-unify. I just found another example of this root meaning: ll Chronicles 5:13 “And it came even to pass in unison[echad] as the trumpeters and singers were heard to be or sound as one [‘to make one ‘lit.echad]…”

    “The whole congregation together[echad] was forty and two thousand three hundred and threescore.” Ezra 2:64

    “…and they gathered themselves together as one [echad] man unto Jerusalem.” Ezra 3:1 Clearly a collective noun!

    “…the sons of judah together[echad] to oversee and the workmen…”Ezra 3:9b

    “And join them[two sticks] one to another[echad] stick into one[echad] and they shall become as one[ echad] in your hand…” Ez.37:17 ‘two sticks become one’ or echad.


    So when Deut.6:4 says, “Hear O Israel! The Yahweh[1] our Elohim[2][pl.] is ONE [echad] Yahweh[3].”
    It is not an ironclad ‘see God is a solitary number one!

    God’s name is used three times! And the central name for God is Elohim a plural word! When you have a plural in Hebrew it’s three* or more. A dual ending two more like our English. So as my old Hebrew professor (50 years studying Hebrew)used to say El Mighty – ohim Ones. Three Strong Ones* bara or ‘…created the universe.’Created is singular in Hebrew.Three creating as one. Let “us” after “our” image makes sense to me.

    See little known plural useage and Yahweh is speaking:Isaiah 41: 22 ‘To US”; “that WE may consider…” “that We may” “or US”

    23 “that WE may know” “that WE may” v26 “that WE may” “that WE may say” ….all gramatically referring to Yahew and what He was saying.

    cf Isaiah 6:8 “Whom shall I[sing.] send who will go for US[pl.pronoun]?”
    John said Isaiah saw the glory of Jesus! Verses 1-6 with Jn.12:37-41

    “In Him dwells[constantly gk] all[panta completely] the fullness[totality] of the Godhead[theiotes “state of being Theos God” gk.]bodily.” Col.2:9

    “Baptizing them in the Name[nomos gk. singular] of the Father[1] and of the Son[2] and of the Holy Spirit [3].”Note “and of the “before Son and Spirit. Nomos is sing. ,but THREE Names!

  70. on 10 May 2016 at 4:44 pmSimon

    This is an extremely well written article.

    The final evidence is in the fact that GOD and His SON do NOT CONTRADICT their own teachings.
    GOD Himself made it very clear countless times.
    “See now that I myself am he! THERE IS NO GOD BESIDES ME.
    Deuteronomy 32:39.

    Yet in the other hand Trinitarians CONTRADICT their own faith and GOD and His SON.
    As they say there are THREE GODS, which is why they use this false claim to prove their pagan trinity which was never taught by GOD and His SON or disciples, but was created at the church of Constantine 100’s of years later, and the Trinitarians so vary sadly follow it.

    This is why I believe Jesus will say to half of the people who confessed Him as Lord, I DO NOT KNOW YOU, as the very sad fact is they do not know Him.
    We need to pray for Trinitarians daily. I was one, but thank GOD, I have found the true light, that shins through Jesus.

    So the “echad” cannot mean THREE GODS, which is a desperate attempt by Trinitarians to make us believe it is a compound unity.

    Jesus said: And this is LIFE ETERNAL, that they might know thee THE ONLY TRUE GOD, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
    John 17:3.

    LIFE ETERNAL is believing GOD IS THE ONE TRUE GOD and His SON is truly the SON, and they are not THREE.

  71. on 10 May 2016 at 4:51 pmSimon

    The TRINITY teaches Jesus is GOD, and the Holy Spirit is GOD.
    Making THREE GODS.

    But the TRINITY completely and utterly contradicts what the Bible truly teaches, that the only ONE TRUE GOD has said countless times there is only ONE TRUE GOD and NO other GOD BESIDE the ONLY ONE TRUE GOD.

    So if the TRINITY is true, then how can Jesus and the Holy Spirit also be GOD, IF GOD Himself and His only ONE true SON Himself said there is ONLY ONE true GOD?

    Where in the Bible doe’s the only ONE TRUE GOD and His ONE and only TRUE SON Jesus say there is only ONE TRUE GOD? And not THREE GODS?

    Let’s read the facts of the Bible and discover the truth of the ONLY ONE TRUE GOD below?

    Translations by New International Version.

    Jesus said: And this is LIFE ETERNAL, that they might know thee THE ONLY TRUE GOD, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. John 17:3.

    GOD the ONLY ONE TRUE GOD, said in the verses below:

    Exodus 9:14
    or this time I will send the full force of my plagues against you and against your officials and your people, so you may know that THERE IS NO ONE LIKE ME IN ALL THE EARTH.

    Deuteronomy 4:35
    You were shown these things so that you might know that the LORD is God; BESIDES HIM THERE IS NO OTHER.

    Deuteronomy 32:39
    “See now that I myself am he! THERE IS NO GOD BESIDES ME. I put to death and I bring to life, I have wounded and I will heal, and no one can deliver out of my hand.

    Psalm 18:31
    For who is GOD BESIDES THE LORD? And who is the Rock except our God?

    Isaiah 43:10
    “You are my witnesses,” declares the LORD, “and my servant whom I have chosen, so that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. BEFORE ME NO GOD WAS FORMED, NOR WILL THERE BE ONE AFTER ME.

    Isaiah 44:6
    “This is what the LORD says– Israel’s King and Redeemer, the LORD Almighty: I am the first and I am the last; APART FROM ME THERE IS NO GOD.

    Isaiah 44:8
    Do not tremble, do not be afraid. Did I not proclaim this and foretell it long ago? You are my witnesses. IS THERE ANY GOD BESIDES ME? No, there is no other Rock; I know not one.”

    Isaiah 45:6
    so that from the rising of the sun to the place of its setting people may know THERE IS NONE BESIDES ME. I am the LORD, AND THERE IS NO OTHER.

    Isaiah 45:14
    This is what the LORD says: “The products of Egypt and the merchandise of Cush, and those tall Sabeans– they will come over to you and will be yours; they will trudge behind you, coming over to you in chains. They will bow down before you and plead with you, saying, ‘Surely God is with you, and THERE IS NO OTHER; THERE IS NO OTHER GOD.'”

    Isaiah 45:18
    For this is what the LORD says– he who created the heavens, he is GOD; he who fashioned and made the earth, he founded it; he did not create it to be empty, but formed it to be inhabited– he says: “I am the LORD, AND THERE IS NO OTHER.

    Isaiah 45:21
    Declare what is to be, present it– let them take counsel together. Who foretold this long ago, who declared it from the distant past? Was it not I, the LORD? And there is NO GOD APART FROM ME, righteous God and a Savior; (Jesus) there is none but me.

    Isaiah 46:9
    Remember the former things, those of long ago; I am God, and there is NO OTHER; I AM GOD, AND THERE IS NONE LIKE ME.

    Isaiah 47:8
    “Now then, listen, you lover of pleasure, lounging in your security and saying to yourself, ‘I AM, AND THERE IS NONE BESIDES ME. I will never be a widow or suffer the loss of children.’

    Joel 2:27
    Then you will know that I am in Israel, that I am the LORD your GOD, and that there is NO OTHER; never again will my people be shamed.

    As we have read above, if there is ONLY ONE TRUE GOD, and NO OTHER GOD beside the true GOD, then why do Trinitarians CLEARLY contradict GOD and His SON’s teachings and teach Jesus and the Holy Spirit are also GOD and the same GOD?

  72. on 12 Jul 2016 at 9:01 pmEd

    In hebrew grammer we have prefixes and suffixes meaning that you can put one or two letters before and after a hebrew word which can change the whole dynamic of the word and even a sentence. One particular prefix is the yod prefix or the y in english. In hebrew grammer it is undisputible that when a yod is placed before a word as a prefix, the word always becomes “masculine singular”meaning a single entity. To put that to the test in the shema it says shema Yisrael and here the prefix yod is used in a masculine singular context because the name was given to one man only who was Jacob. Now Jacob’s name in hebrew is Ya’aqov here again the prefix yod is used in a masculine singular context because Jacob was one man the same applies for his father Isaac or Yitzaq here the yod prefix is used again because Isaac is one man and not a plural form of a man.

    The shema further uses the tetragrammaton twice stating Yahawah elehenu Yahawah Echad. In Gods name the yod prefix is used again before the verb Hawah thereby Gods name means He exists .This means that Gods name is also put into masculine singular context. The words elehenu (our God) and echad (one) follow the same singular pattern because the YHWH is masculine singular. If the trinity teaching was true then Gods name has to be put in a plural form and the words elehenu and echad would also have to follow that same plural pattern. As the entire Shema is in a masculine singular context that proves beyond doubt that the trinity teaching is false as it violates hebrew grammer

  73. on 03 Nov 2016 at 7:22 pmJonas Huovila

    There is some wierd stuff in this text…..

    We can start by this:

    “The word echad (and its feminine version achat) appears 970 times in Scripture. In the vast majority of cases – over 600 times”

    They are very specific on pointing out that it appears 970 times in the scripture. But then says over 600 times, why not be say the exact number instead of saying over 600 times.

    Should be same specific on both sides.

    Then if we look how they put things into perspective.

    “However, in a small minority of cases, echad refers to one group of items.”

    They start to try right away make echad only viable for “one” by claiming the other side is “small”.

    Just by looking on numbers right away if we say its exactly 600 times echad means one and 300 times it means unity in one.

    600 is 2/3 of 900 or 66%

    300 is 1/3 of 900 or 33% how can it even be called “small”?

    Or if we even make a more proper one.

    970 times echad is used so we split 100%/970 = 0,1030927835051546

    So basicly if echad is written 1 time it’s worth 0,1030927835051546% of 100%.

    They claim echas written as ONE is written over 600 times but don’t give specific number so we will go with 600.

    0,1030927835051546% x 600 = 61,85567010309278% of the time is echad used as ONE

    that leaves 38,14432989690722% as echad being used as unity, ALMOST 40% OF TIMES ECHAD CAN BE USED AS UNITY AND THEY WANNA CALL IT SMALL TO MAKE IT GO AWAY.

  74. on 16 Jan 2017 at 11:33 amMark

    I was taught that the phrase should be translated “Jesus Christ is God, Jesus Christ is Unique”.

  75. on 29 Jan 2017 at 10:25 pmBenedicto

    I thank to this article that I believe echad is one single meaning. and there is no unity like lot’s of Christianity believe today. God have a purpose to said echad on His Words. Adam and Eve come from one source dust and spirit of GOD. so when GOD said one flesh meaning that we can’t separate Eve from Adam because they are same one source dust and spirit of GOD. When Jesus said he is one with Father, yes Jesus Echad whith His Father because Jesus is God begotten Son. Thank you so much. hope God will bless you all especially the writer for this light. let Spirit of God be with you all and bring us to the truth GOD.

  76. on 15 May 2017 at 6:51 pmLloyd A Dale

    I am a Oneness Apostolic and have never read in scripture where God is one Person or more than one. I have read that God is a Spirit. I’ve read that God is one Spirit. I understand the substitute word ‘substance’ at times is a replacement for the word person or vice-a-versa in the New Testament. But, never is it said that God is a person. He uses the word, a ‘alone’ and ‘by myself’ and along with ‘None beside me or after me’. But, I cannot believe in a plural of deities as set forth by the majority of so-called Christian world. He is so great and majestic, the reality is that human language fails in the ability to express it. Who can explain the concept of spirit that comes close to the essence that makes up God? Nobody! Who can explain God who is a Spirit being Omni-present, yet standing in a particular geographic locality at one time? Nobody! Hundreds of times God stated that he is one single solitary Deity. Trinitarians have made God more than one person by the over-wrought imaginations of their own heart, not being able to grasp the revelation of the one God in Christ. He made a body to dwell in and by that body of flesh, became kin to mankind and able to redeem his creation. Thank you! That’s my belief!

  77. on 21 Jun 2017 at 9:38 amMarvin Cayabyab

    i greatly appreciate the lengthy explanation about the word “echad”. but seemingly (though i have yet to fully understand, therefore there’s a need for me to re-read this article), the conclusions you made were derived from the use of the word elsewhere in scripture.

    to a certain extent, i am puzzled with your bias with “echad” since you haven’t (or you may have, i need to read again =)) exhaustively explained the immediate context on how the word was used in the verse itself. you went as far as going to other verses while leaving me (and maybe your other readers) without a clear exposition of the verse at hand. it seems that you digressed too far, thus your conclusion.

    the verse uses the plural form (as per hebrew parsing) of God, “ELOHIM” (eloheylu, to be more representative of the hebrew text). the singular form of God is EL. since deut 6:4 declares that “ELOHIM” (plural) is ONE, how will it fit your description of a literal numerical one? wouldn’t you contradict your conclusion then? by the way, what you refer as a “numeric one” has a specific hebrew word origin, the word “yachid”. i hope you can also do a lengthy explanation on why the author particularly used echad instead of yachid in terms of describing God.

    thank you.

  78. on 24 Jun 2017 at 4:05 pmAlicia

    I suggest reading Chuck Smith’s book: Living Water. He covers this very topic.

  79. on 24 Jun 2017 at 4:13 pmAlicia

    Check out page 28 in the book. Regarding the Shema (Deuteronomy 6:4) he says, “a different Hebrew word-yachid-is required when a singularity is meant. Had this term been used in the Shema instead of echad, we would have no basis from the Old Testament to accept the idea of a Trinity. But the fact that the plural Elohim is paired with the echad-even within the monotheist chant of the Hebrews-suggests the trinity of God.”

  80. on 04 Aug 2017 at 4:30 amChris Malan

    Very clear, echad means one. Whether the one is an atomic entity, like a grape, or a collection, like a bunch of grapes. The word ‘one’ in any language can be used the same way — one dozen eggs, one egg.

    Is the trinitarian god one collection of gods, or an atomic god? If atomic, it cannot be divided into more than one part each of which still has all the attributes of the parent. That would say Jesus god, HS god, etc. would have all the attributes of the compound god and therefore not be god. If a collection, it consists of three atomic gods. Polytheism pure and simple.

    There’s really nothing to this. It’s just obfuscation by trinitarians.

  81. on 10 Nov 2017 at 11:58 pmToKnow Him

    I just want to ask one question – Was the author of Deuteronomy 6:4 (Moses) a trinitarian? He wrote it, so unless he believed in a trinity, I don’t think you can use what he wrote to prove a trinity.

    See link:

    P.S. – Reposted since my previous post had the link for Elohim, instead of the schema.


  82. on 21 Nov 2017 at 1:04 pmjuan

    question? does Adonai came in a cloud and get in the the tabernacle of moshe and rest there? if so! why you guys believe he can only come in a temple made by man’s hand’s and not by him(Ye’shua)? Ye’shua said very clear destroy the temple and i will build it in three days; and also said this: i don’t speak in my own but who’s in me, is whom is speaking to you.
    Ye’shua “obey” that why it said: bless is HE who came on the name of the Lord!

  83. on 21 Nov 2017 at 1:09 pmjuan

    Believe, but if not it said also please read Provers 30:2-8

  84. on 15 Jan 2018 at 1:36 pmJust ME

    You overlook one scenario in which compound unity could be plausible as it applies to echad and God. God is infinite – an infinite compound unity very well could be made up of complete elements.

  85. on 14 Oct 2018 at 7:36 amJohn

    Very interesting. do we have any words that accurately describe God.
    It could be that the three meanings of echad all apply at the same time.
    God is First
    God is One
    God is unity.
    Maybe it is in one word a threefold revelation of the nature of God

  86. on 31 Dec 2018 at 6:45 pmhargis

    You would do better to seek to know the ONE true living God. An expert you are not. You only display your opinion, which is programmed from those who taught you. Seek true wisdom, which only comes from the ONE (singular) God. All pagan religions have a trinity. The truth only comes from God revealing Himself to those who diligently seek Him.

  87. on 25 Oct 2019 at 3:42 pmCole

    I’m no linguist, so I’m not even going to try and address the original question as to the meaning of the word ‘echad’ in the Hebrew language.
    However, I see there is an underlying effort here to argue against the concept of the trinity.

    Although looking at ‘echad’ is a good study, what about looking at Genesis 1:26 and address the identity of ‘us’ and ‘our’ in this verse pointing to God.

    Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.”

  88. on 09 Jan 2020 at 1:18 amSilvia Vega

    I didn’t see anyone share this scripture, where there is a Plural

    New King James Version
    that THEY ALL may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me.

    This is the end all be all as far as I am concerned. I don’t refer to God as a Trinity, but a Triune God, where all are ONE. I don’t refer to them as God the Father, God the Son or God the Holy Spirit. It is God the Father, the Son of God and the Holy Spirit or Spirit of God.

    The bible has described in context those meanings, depending on what is being talked about.

    In this verse, THEY ALL (plural/many) Jesus was talking about the believers/Christians. Jesus says the Father and He are in each other, ONE.

    And btw, whoever said that the husband and wife are halves doesn’t know what they are talking about. One male, one female, they are a whole people, not halves or subparts or whatever. They are two people who become ONE-flesh, this is a miraculous gluing/cement/bond until death of the covenant marriage.

    The bible uses echad one as in (singular) and also is used in context as (Plural/unity) just as well.

    I do believe that there may be even a rank in the Triunity of God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit). Jesus said a lot of about His Father, that we should pray to Him and so on, that the Father is good, etc…But also, God the Father has given all authority to Jesus to judge all things.

    And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.

    Ephesians 1:21
    Verse Concepts
    far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come.

    Matthew 28:18-20
    And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”

    Matthew 11:27
    Verse Concepts
    “All things have been handed over to Me by My Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father; nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal Him.

    Philippians 2:9
    Verse Concepts
    For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name,

    Colossians 2:10
    Verse Concepts
    and in Him you have been made complete, and He is the head over all rule and authority;

    Matthew 28:19
    Verse Concepts
    “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,

    1 Peter 3:22
    Verse Concepts
    who is at the right hand of God, having gone into heaven, after angels and authorities and powers had been subjected to Him.

    John 3:35
    Verse Concepts
    “The Father loves the Son and has given all things into His hand.

    Ephesians 1:20
    Verse Concepts
    which He brought about in Christ, when He raised Him from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places,

    Matthew 28:17
    Verse Concepts
    When they saw Him, they worshiped Him; but some were doubtful.

    John 17:2
    Verse Concepts
    even as You gave Him authority over all flesh, that to all whom You have given Him, He may give eternal life.

    There is a unity/bond and they work as ONE. The husband and wife are to do the same, to bring up a godly seed, that is why divorce is destructive and treacherous, and the bond of the )NE-flesh that God joined, is dissolved at death, not divorce, adultery or anything else. It would be the same if God divorced His Bride, but He won’t because they are betrothed as Paul said he betrothed us to ONE groom. We have not taken the place of Israel, we are part of it. In the OT it is refereed to the Husband and Wife, and in the NT Groom and Bride, they are the same.

    If Jesus is not part of the Triunity of God, then please explain each and every one of those verses.

    I believe the Godhead is like a family, there are several in the Vega Family, in my block are many families, but only ONE Vega Family with 6 members, Husband, Wife, and Children. One Family.

  89. on 23 Sep 2020 at 8:21 amHope

    First let’s take a look at the word Echad:
    It means “one single.” It is a numeral adjective, the ordinary word for “one” functioning very much like our English number “one.”
    “one” in English or Hebrew can modify, (describe) a collective noun, but The numeral adjective “one” is not affected in any way by the collective noun “family.” According to numerous popular websites and even a number of textbooks, the combination “one bunch,” we are invited and lured into believing, means more than one, so-called “compound one,” or “composite one,” or “complex one.” The mistake should be quite obvious. One bunch is still in Hebrew and English one bunch and not two or more bunches! It is nonsense to suppose that the word “one” has altered its meaning when it modifies (describes) a collective noun. It is the noun which is collective and gives us the sense of plurality. The word “one” is fixed, unchanged and delightfully stable in meaning, in both “one pencil” and “one bunch.” The numerical adjective, “one,” retains its meaning always as “one single.” When Adam and Eve are “one flesh,” they are not two or more “fleshes”! One still means one. The combining of Adam and Eve as “one flesh” has not in any way altered the meaning of “one” (echad), one single, one and not more.

    Now let’s look at the word Yachid:
    In no instance in the Tenach is yachid ever translated as “one”, in no instance does yachid ever function as a second Hebrew word for “one”! the basic meaning of yachid is “only” rather than “one”. This word is often used in the sense of “only son,” but “one” is not one of its definitions.

    So why does Deuteronomy 6:4 doesn’t say that The Lord is the only Lord? Why does it state that Lord is One.

    Well Deut. 4:35 and 39 and a lot more verses assert that only the Lord is G-d, and there is none other besides him. Deut. 6:4 should not be interpreted to imply that the people thought that other gods might exist, but that only Yahweh should be worshiped. The meaning is that there is no other divine being in existence, and that Yahweh is that being, a single being, whom we should worship.

  90. on 12 Apr 2021 at 2:06 pmfredsailo

    😂😂 You make me laugh…All you say just a charade to undermine trinity. You can clearly see from all the verses even where it is used as unique etc. It can clearly be seen it also conveys its association with others similar with the subject

  91. on 18 Apr 2021 at 1:21 pmMoises

    Genesis 2:24 ECHAD THEY shall become ONE flesh.
    A clear case where two different persons are ONE (ECHAD) in the original Hebrew. So Jesus is ONE with the Father, ONE GOD, not two gods, reason why the Jews wanted to stone him because he made himself to be God. The text is self-explanatory. A good proof text for this is when Jacob blesses Joseph and his sons asking God AND the angel who had redeemed him to bless the boys in Genesis 48.15-16 or in Exodus 3.1-4 we find that we have the angel of the Lord, YHVH and God referring back to the SAME ONE entity in the burning bush. To deny this is to deny Scripture because it does not suit your own theology. In Genesis 31:11-13 we have again the angel of God claiming to be GOD, the God of Bethel, so two different persons, God and the angel of God yet being the same ELOHIM, one, ECHAD. Do you want to deny the Trinity, fine, but you cannot deny the plurality of the ONE TRUE GOD from Scripture alone.


Leave a Reply