Print Page | Add To Favorites | Close Window | Send To A Friend | Save This Page
FAQ # 219
QUESTION 219
: “If, again, he allege His own
word when He said, 'I and the Father are one,' [John 10:30], let
him attend to the fact, and understand that He did not say, 'I and the
Father am one, but are one.' For the word 'are' is not said of one
person, but it refers to two persons, and one power” (Hippolytus, 'Against
the Heresy of One Noetus'). Isn't that so?
If I'm making a guess list to my party and I was inviting
some elite men, two of the persons I would put on it are the Mayor of
Coral Springs and the President of the better business bureau of Coral
Springs. To my surprise, as told by my Secretary at the party, the Mayor
is also the President of the better business bureau. If I were to go to
the persons checking off the names/appellations at the door, I would point
to Mayor and BBB president and say, "these two are one." However,
did I mean these two are coming together as a couple or buddies. No. I
meant the titles ascribe to the selfsame person. But I couldn't say, "these
two is one," or, "these two one." Not only is that not
proper English, but it also sounds absurd; especially coming from me the
affluent host. When I said “these two are one” to the door's maid, he
knows what I was saying.
Similarly, John 10:30 did not ascribe to a distinction
and plurality of two persons, but was saying, like the example above,
that the titles ascribe to the selfsame person. To the early Christian
church and us genuine born again believers, we know that's what it means.
It is just proper English to apply plurality to seemingly
plural subjects. The translators would never have put "am one"
even if that was said; because it is just not proper grammar in Greek,
Latin or English. When two anything are in play in a sentence, then the
plural verb is used; regardless if the two are the same or not. Language
has a little mathematics to it, that is, this must go in this case regardless
of, or else it is not a proper sentence or in Math's case, a proper equation.
Only to us, who know the truth and reading it, would know what it means.
For instance, by law and standards we must be accompanied by an officer
before going directly into the prison. If not, you are not going in. Now,
does this mean that you cannot physically go into the prison, you have
two feet? NO. It is just proper procedures that we must follow, for various
reasons. Similarly, English has many proper procedures we must follow,
regardless of: And applying "are one" in this sentence is fundamental,
par none.
It's just proper English to
do so. For instance, in Gen. 1:26 "Elohim" (God said) is used
for one person, but because the word is plural then for the sentence to
be grammatically correct the pronouns has to be plural - "'us' in
'our' image." But as exhausted in chapter 6 (GOD?) and these FAQ's,
it was speaking of one person though the plural Elohim is often used to
do so. Nevertheless, some of these instances of the word weren't carried
over from the 'original'. Similarly, when Christ said, "my Father
and I are one," it suggests a plural and thus plural verb must be
used to make the sentence grammatically correct; thus grammar cannot always
determine the spiritual. For example, my thoughts and I are one. It would
be illogical in grammar to have two seemingly subjects in speculation
and use singular verbs. In other words, you wouldn't say my thoughts and
I am one. Hence, you have to say, "are one;" though we all know
what you mean, for a man is his thoughts. Yet because two subjects are
presented it automatically results in a plural verb usage and it becomes
easy to assume that the subject are two distinct things or persons in
unity, rather than the same thing or person.
Go to top of Page | Get the Book | Buy it here or here or here or here | More FAQ's