Is the God of Genesis 1 El or Yam?

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Now you are a Kabbalist?

Even the Shekhina has the Prince of the Shekhina Metatron.

A Messenger of the Presence of God called Youth, formerly known as Enoch.

There is only the only - all that is. And the only thing you cannot deny is that you exist but as what?

originally posted by: Disturbinatti
a reply to: Itisnowagain

Now you are a Kabbalist?

Again you are labelling me!!
Forget labels you cannot put me or what i post in a box with a label on it.
Has anything I have written made any sense to you? Discuss what you read instead of trying to categorise it. What I write is not of any particular religion - it is the root of all religion. If you want look up 'Advaita' or the modern name for that is 'non duality' which means 'not two'.
The assumption is that reality is made of at least 'two' but it is not two. There is no you plus existence - that is two. Remember 'when the two become one, the kingdom shall be revealed'!
There is simply what is.

Do you want to know the truth or do you want to be lost in labels?

originally posted by: Disturbinatti
God is what can't be seen but is omnipresent.

Consider this - can YOU see what is seeing? Right now look to what is seeing these words. That which is seeing will never be seen - That which is hearing will never be heard.

Created all but is uncreated.

Here now there is an appearance - these words - this is the manifest - this is the image of God - this is how God is appearing - it is too late to change it - it IS.
But it is gone - where did it go? Was anything ever created? All is passing.

a reply to: Disturbinatti
God has 1 unique personal distinctive name. And using a different language for words such as "God", "lord" and "name" doesn't make it a name (regardless if you vary it up a bit with different grammatical variants of the Hebrew words for "god", "gods", "a god", "the god" and "God", which are:

ʼEl (= God)
ha·ʼElʹ (= the God)
ʼe·limʹ (plural, can refer both to "God" or "gods" depending on the grammatical context)
ʼelo·himʹ (gods), ʼElo·himʹ is the plural of ʼelohʹah (god). Sometimes this plural refers to a number of gods (Ge 31:30, 32; 35:2), but more often it is used as a plural of majesty, dignity, or excellence. ʼElo·himʹ is used in the Scriptures with reference to Jehovah himself, to angels, to idol gods (singular and plural), and to men. It's not a name.

The Greek Term. The usual Greek equivalent of ʼEl and ʼElo·himʹ in the Septuagint translation and the word for “God” or “god” in the Christian Greek Scriptures is the·osʹ. From which the English words "theology" and "theism" are derived.

Both "Allah" and " ʼElo·himʹ " are not names because they are simply different language variants for the word "god". It's a nice trick to obscure and confuse people about God's personal unique and only distinctive name: "Jehovah". Just pretend they're names and then argue that God has many names in demonstration of Jeremiah 23:27. The god of confusion (the god of this system of things) is behind this, you know him as Shaitan. It helps a lot with promoting the doctrine of the Trinity as well, it hides some of the more obvious things that are wrong with it and clearly contradicting what the bible teaches about Jehovah and Jesus as individuals that are united in their purpose (one in purpose) as Jesus would like his disciples to be as well, of one mind, in agreement about what is true and what is false and what to do and what not to do, all walking one spiritual path:

John 17:1,22

Jesus spoke these things, and raising his eyes to heaven, he said: “Father, the hour has come. Glorify your son so that your son may glorify you,
...
22 I have given them the glory that you have given me, in order that they may be one just as we are one.

The verse above is always conveniently ignored when Trinitarians try to use the other verse where Jesus mentioned that he and the Father are one as an argument for the Trinity relying heavily on the preconditioned eisegesis in the hearer of their argument.

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

When trees drop their leaves it is in reaction to the cold and the sap is drawn into the trunk and roots. There is no warning. We have nothing to do with it.

a reply to: Disturbinatti
Just to demonstrate that I'm not just making this up or that I'm not only using 1 source for my information...

Allah ...is the Arabic word for God in Abrahamic religions. In the English language, the word traditionally refers to God in Islam.[3][4][5] The word is thought to be derived by contraction from al-ilāh, which means "the god", and is related to El and Elohim, the Hebrew words for God.[6][7]

Source: Allah - Wikipedia

Notice that wikipedia doesn't say here that "Allah" is the name of God. It's the Arabic word for God, just as I said earlier. Of course they can't resist sharing misinformation about this and still call it a name in the "etymology" paragraph. That's wikipedia for ye. Notice the contradictory statement in this piece of text they use here:

Cognates of the name "Allāh" exist in other Semitic languages, including Hebrew and Aramaic.[19] The corresponding Aramaic form is Elah (אלה), but its emphatic state is Elaha (אלהא). It is written as ܐܠܗܐ (ʼĔlāhā) in Biblical Aramaic and ܐܲܠܵܗܵܐ (ʼAlâhâ) in Syriac as used by the Assyrian Church, both meaning simply "God".

So not a personal distinctive name, unlike suggested earlier in that piece of text by calling it a name. If it simply means "God", then it's not His name. Especially if constantly the link is made with the Hebrew words for "God", "god", "gods", "a god" and "the god" (El and Elohim according to wiki and as I've shown there are more grammatical variants of this word). Remember that those words given by wikipedia as "El and Elohim" are also applied to a multitude of other gods in the bible (the Hebrew Scriptures). Just like the word "human" can be applied to a multitude of different humans. Don't you think it's kinda silly to suggest that someone's name is "the name" or "the God" or "God" or "human" (someone specific, not when talking about a whole race or type of living being)? In whatever language you say the last part?

I once went to a church (Roman Catholic I think) and asked some people there because they were singing about God's name what God's name was and they told me it was Jesus. No mention of Jehovah at all. But at least they didn't tell me that "God" was His name, they could understand at least that suggesting that would be silly. Interesting to see how those who think that changing language mid-sentence somehow circumvents that issue see no problem in suggesting exactly that.

Something I was just wondering to myself when thinking about sources for information, does the Quran say anything about Babylon the Great? It's kinda useful to be aware of that particular source of misinformation and how to recognize it.

El... the ohim means (of Him) or those that follow.

A shadow follows all light... so how can any light be received when left in the idea of a darkness? When an ego shines it's own glory... and all others are deemed ignorant or inferior to such a self or being? Foolish lambs? Sheep? Chaff in the wind?

Somethings are best left unsaid; a god of bias and duality?

Bend over and see if the sun and moon meet in the reflection of one's own pools called eyes, there should be no voice in anyone's head; just sounds echoing off of empty canyon walls.

Thinking is a consideration of a moment called future, the intent drives in a circle of kamma.

However; once known how to do all one needs to do? All thoughts flow as outflows in the voices of others at a distance; through the vibrations present to those attached to it, drawn to it. Like a magnetic wave.

The earth makes such a sound:

a reply to: Disturbinatti

The Trinity, the Rosary and magic Holywater are all Hindu relics imported into Catholocism.

a reply to: Disturbinatti

You are aware that you attack Christianity on the basis of a number saying three cannot be one? Sahabi has shown you how one can indeed be tree, and that it's just a matter of perspective, knowledge or wisdom. The Trinity as I said is extra-biblical and is one of several things the Church has adopted from the East. That doesn't mean that one can't have three aspects or appearances, like how the triangle has three edges and three corners, and if you cut it out you turn the two dimensional triangle into a 3D object with two or even twelve faces. Or how about a game of poker? There-- one hand with three in one can win you millions of dollars. Or your Koran? Mow many Suras? How many pages? The Comma Johanneum on the other hand, is a Medieval magic formula that sneaked into certain bible translations and is a well know forgery.

Claiming one religion is better than the other is preaching and often includes hate and what certain believers would interpret as blasphemy and feel hurt and offended by it, and it's a shame we have to be bothered with such in here. If you ask me, freedom of speech shouldn't interfere too much with freedom of religion and vise versa. Still, there should be humbleness and tolerance to be expected with both.

originally posted by: whereislogic

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
The supposed name of God is Heb. אלהים «Elohim».

No, that's not a name, that's just saying "God" in Hebrew.

I'm afraid not. Elohim acts and works like a proper noun, see biblehub.com... and note how there is no definite article involved with Elohim. Had Elohim been a regular word, we would expect the text to say «vayomer ha-elohim» if it wouldn't have been the title or name of God. However, te text goes «Vayomer Elohim», it's a proper name. Also we see here that he suggests making humans in their image, one speaking to another or many. The name Elohim suggests pluralty -im and you can even see hints of it mimicing duality, El-ayim, and in Genesis 1:1 the plural Elohim is coupled with the verb bara as singular, suggesting a name or royal title. In Genesis 1:26 Elohim treats himself as plural, saying «Nachaseh Adam» or «Let us make human». In the next verse the text goes «Vayibara Elohim» showing Elohim is One power or being, since vav (and even vav yod) prefix shows Elohim is a name or title carried by a single entity, since «vay-» as a prefix denotes singularity, in this case masculine, due to the next letter yod thus «And [he] Elohim created» or literally «And-created Elohim» where Elohim is subject (since it lacks the at-prefix had it been object). Bara is singular when Elohim is subject, and Elohim looks plural (like Adam a name made in the image of said entity) or dual.

In every way Elohim works as a name or a title held by one entity in the text of the Bible. It puts on singular meaning although it is clearly a plural word had it been a regular noun as you suggest. It acts like a proper noun, and wears singular surroundings

On the other hand, in this thread I show that behind the word the BHS and BHL spell out as Elohim, lies a mystery. The Hebrew letters spelling out Elohim Heb. אלהים might actually be divided in a more sensible way אל-ה-ים, which actually turns it into two, as «Father of Yam» or even «God of the waters» and let's not forget «Father of Leviathan» or lit. «El-ha-Yam».

Just like "Allah", the Arabic word for "God" isn't a name. And neither is the Hebrew word for "name" (hashem) a name.

Apples and oranges.

And neither is the Hebrew word for "lord" a name (or the English words for that matter, none of these words are God's distinctive personal name).

Genesis 4:26. biblehub.com...

Here you can see how the Name of God was indeed an object (an idol) of an entity they started to summon the name of even in the time of Abel's firstborn son Enosh, and it was called the «Name of JHVH» or Heb. בשם יהוה «Beshem Jahveh». What's in a name, eh?

In the chant 2 Samuel 6:2 biblehub.com... the Name of JHVH is also the Name used for the Ark of the Covenant, the «Aron-ha-Elohim» and that that name dwelled between the cherubim using verbs twice to make it simpler to remember and chant, suggesting the twofold nature of the hashem, in my opinion reflected in the word translated Heavens in genesis 1:1 Heb. «Ha-shem-ayim» a dual noun lit. «the two names.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim

Generally these stories tell us that Yam was the god of water, oceans, rivers and seas, and was a sort of anthropomorphism of water and oceans, so his temper and personality reflected his personality as anything from calm and innocent like a lamb, just to suddenly transform into a furious monster threatening to destroy all living things with massive floods. El was Yam's father and together they fought side by side as enemies of Baal who was the Old Testament Devil, I bet you have at least heard of the latter.


In Genesis 1 God is awfully concerned with water, busy dividing and moving about seas and waters and Elohim even relates to the cosmos as oceans. To top this, water in all shapes and forms was the traditional domain of Yam in the eyes of the Semitic population living in Canaan and the area in and around today's Palestine/Israel, back in the days when Genesis was supposed to have been written.

God is not a person.
God is all that is.
God is the ocean and what appears is the ocean waving.
The waving makes the ocean appear as if it is not one but many.

The belief is that there is a you separate from 'other things' - but the you that appears is just a wave appearing in the one ocean. There is only the ocean - there is only what is. There is only the only - that is, whatever actually is.

Wow! New-Wave Aquatic Pantheism? You sound like you have material enough to make a whole new religion.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Apart from preaching pantheism, you seem to add little to the general subjects discussed here.

a reply to: Utnapisjtim
I don't know of any bible translating research that suggests that "Elohim" is not the Hebrew word for "God" or "gods". So if you are not denying the basic meaning of Hebrew words, then you must be suggesting that "God" is the name of the one who is referred to as "Jehovah" over 7000 times in honest English bible translations. To me that just sounds ridiculous. It's like saying my name is human just because my race is called human. That doesn't make it my personal name. Or a doctor saying that his name is doctor just because he's a doctor. Best not be a doctor working in a hospital, how would you know which doctor to go to if none of them will use their actual name. Names is how you tell different doctors and humans apart, it's the same with telling different gods apart so you don't end up loving and serving the wrong one.

“Listen, O Israel: Jehovah our God is one Jehovah. 5 You must love Jehovah your God with all your heart and all your soul and all your strength. (Deuteronomy 6:4,5)

Notice the usage of both God's name as well as the words for "God" in Hebrew on biblehub in those verses (different grammatical variants). You can hardly confuse the Divine name for the Hebrew words for "God" in Hebrew, they look entirely different.

Importance of the Name. Many modern scholars and Bible translators advocate following the tradition of eliminating the distinctive name of God. They not only claim that its uncertain pronunciation justifies such a course but also hold that the supremacy and uniqueness of the true God make unnecessary his having a particular name. Such a view receives no support from the inspired Scriptures, either those of pre-Christian times or those of the Christian Greek Scriptures.

The Tetragrammaton occurs 6,828 times in the Hebrew text printed in Biblia Hebraica and Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. In the Hebrew Scriptures the New World Translation contains the divine name 6,973 times, because the translators took into account, among other things, the fact that in some places the scribes had replaced the divine name with ʼAdho·naiʹ or ʼElo·himʹ. (See NW appendix, pp. 1561, 1562.) The very frequency of the appearance of the name attests to its importance to the Bible’s Author, whose name it is. Its use throughout the Scriptures far outnumbers that of any of the titles, such as “Sovereign Lord” or “God,” applied to him.

Noteworthy, also, is the importance given to names themselves in the Hebrew Scriptures and among Semitic peoples. Professor G. T. Manley points out: “A study of the word ‘name’ in the O[ld] T[estament] reveals how much it means in Hebrew. The name is no mere label, but is significant of the real personality of him to whom it belongs. . . . When a person puts his ‘name’ upon a thing or another person the latter comes under his influence and protection.”—New Bible Dictionary, edited by J. D. Douglas, 1985, p. 430; compare Everyman’s Talmud, by A. Cohen, 1949, p. 24; Ge 27:36; 1Sa 25:25; Ps 20:1; Pr 22:1; see NAME.

“God” and “Father” not distinctive. The title “God” is neither personal nor distinctive (one can even make a god of his belly; Php 3:19). In the Hebrew Scriptures the same word (ʼElo·himʹ) is applied to Jehovah, the true God, and also to false gods, such as the Philistine god Dagon (Jg 16:23, 24; 1Sa 5:7) and the Assyrian god Nisroch. (2Ki 19:37) For a Hebrew to tell a Philistine or an Assyrian that he worshiped “God [ʼElo·himʹ]” would obviously not have sufficed to identify the Person to whom his worship went.

In its articles on Jehovah, The Imperial Bible-Dictionary nicely illustrates the difference between ʼElo·himʹ (God) and Jehovah. Of the name Jehovah, it says: “It is everywhere a proper name, denoting the personal God and him only; whereas Elohim partakes more of the character of a common noun, denoting usually, indeed, but not necessarily nor uniformly, the Supreme. . . . The Hebrew may say the Elohim, the true God, in opposition to all false gods; but he never says the Jehovah, for Jehovah is the name of the true God only. He says again and again my God . . . ; but never my Jehovah, for when he says my God, he means Jehovah. He speaks of the God of Israel, but never of the Jehovah of Israel, for there is no other Jehovah. He speaks of the living God, but never of the living Jehovah, for he cannot conceive of Jehovah as other than living.”—Edited by P. Fairbairn, London, 1874, Vol. I, p. 856.

The same is true of the Greek term for God, The·osʹ. It was applied alike to the true God and to such pagan gods as Zeus and Hermes (Roman Jupiter and Mercury). (Compare Ac 14:11-15.) Presenting the true situation are Paul’s words at 1 Corinthians 8:4-6: “For even though there are those who are called ‘gods,’ whether in heaven or on earth, just as there are many ‘gods’ and many ‘lords,’ there is actually to us one God the Father, out of whom all things are, and we for him.” The belief in numerous gods, which makes essential that the true God be distinguished from such, has continued even into this 21st century.

Source: Jehovah: Insight, Volume 2

a reply to: whereislogic

My cat's name actually means Lord, that doesn't mean he is one. Elohim read consensually translates God. However in modern translations it is written and treated like a name, since the Hebrew and Greek treats it like a name. Capital G in God, no articles involved, God is a name, the name of a deity. To the Freemasons his name is even given by the first letter in this name, as seen in their logotype, G. Elohim as a common noun is plural, but it takes on singular verbs it's subjected to. A name. Elohim is a name, and I believe it is best translated into the El-of-Yam. The Father of Yam/Leviathan. Leviathan was a great hero worshipped in many ways. Yam/Leviathan was an anthropomorphism of the River Nile, that would turn into Yam Suph (lit. the Papyrus Yam) once a year.