Echad, Words Are Important, Their Meanings Matter

Echad  (eh-‘ghahd) is the Hebrew word trans­lated one, only, and alone in the Old Testament.  It occurs 962 times in the Bible[1] and is translated 903 times (by my count) as the word one, five times as the word alone,  and one time as the word only.

The Theological Wordbook of the Old Testa­ment has the following information on the word echad: 

This word occurs 960 times [there exists a discrepancy on the number of occur­rences be­tween authors] as a noun, adjec­tive, or ad­verb, as a cardinal or ordinal num­ber, often used in a dis­tributive sense. It is closely identified with ya­had “to be united” and with ro’sh “first, head,” especially in connec­tion with the “first day” of the month (Gen 8:13). It stresses unity while recog­nizing diversity within that One­ness….Sometimes the phrase “as one man” can mean “all at once” (Num 14:15), but when Gideon was told he would defeat Midian ” as one man” it probably meant ” as easily as a single man” (Jud 6:16).  The phrase can also refer to a nation aroused to take united ac­tion against gross injustice (Jud 20:8; I Sam 11:7). Zepha­niah’s men­tion of people serv­ing God “with one shoulder” (3:9) likely means “shoulder to shoulder,” solidly united. Likewise in Ex 24:3 “with one voice” expresses that all Is­rael was involved in entering into the Covenant with Yahweh. The concept of unity is related to the tabernacle, whose cur­tains are fastened to­gether to form one unit (Ex 26:6, 11; 36:13). Adam and Eve are described as “one flesh” (Gen 2:24), which includes more than sexual unity. In Gen 34:16 the men of Shechem suggest intermar­riage with Jacob’s children in or­der to become “one people.”  Later, Ezekiel predicted that the fragmented na­tion of Israel would someday be re­united, as he sym­bolically joined two sticks (37:17). Once again Judah and Ephraim would be one na­tion with one king (37:22). Abra­ham was viewed as “the one” from whom all the people de­scended (Isa 51:2; Mal 2:15), the one father of the nation. Diver­sity within unity is also seen from the fact that `echad has a plural form,`ahadim. It is trans­lated “a few days” in Gen 27:44; 29:20, and Dan 11:20. In Gen 11:1 the plural mod­ifies “words”: “the whole earth used the same language and the same words.” Apparently it refers to the same vocabulary, the same set of words spoken by every­one at the tower of Ba­bel.  The first “same” in Gen 11:1 is singular, analogous to “the same laws” of the Passover applying to native-born and foreigner (Ex 12:49; cf. Num 15:16), or to the “one law” of sure death for approaching the Persian king with­out invitation (Est 4:11). In the famous Shema of Deut 6:4, “Hear, O Is­rael….the lord is one,” the question of diversity within unity has theolog­ical im­plications. Some scholars have felt that, though “one” is singular, the usage of the word allows for the doctrine of the Trinity. While it is true that this doc­trine is fore­shadowed in the OT, the verse concentrates on the fact that there is but one God and that Is­rael owes its exclu­sive loy­alty to him (Deut 5:9; 6:5).  [2]

Please notice the vivid picture that these authors paint of the word echad and its alleged contribution to the por­trait of God’s triunity. It immediately in­troduces the pri­mary function of the word as an il­lustration of diversity within unity. It then develops this thought with other texts of the Bible until it fi­nally concludes by applying its inter­pretation to the Shema of Israel, Deuteronomy 6:4. If we were to search no further, or worse yet, if there were no other sources available, we would be led to believe that this was the only interpretation possible for echad.

The next reference comes from a Theology text and includes summaries of both elohim and echad:

OBJECTIONS TO GOD’S UNITY

The theological objections to God’s oneness fall into two basic categories. First, there are those who deny there is only one God (as opposed to many gods). Second, others claim there are many beings or parts in God. the latter is a challenge to God’s simplicity, which was treated earlier (see chapter 2).

Objection One—Based on Plural References to God

Most of these objections are based on biblical references to God in the plural. The term “God” itself is plural in form; God sometimes speaks in the plural (“we” or “us”—cf. Gen. 1:26), and even the word for “one” in Hebrew (echad) can mean “many.”

Response to Objection One

First, it is true that the very word for God in the Old Testament (elohim) is plural in form; indeed, it can be translated “gods” (see Ps. 82:6). However, when used of God, it is plural grammatically, not ontologically.[3] It is plural in literary form, but not in actual reality. The verses that use this form, for God but that declare He is absolutely one are proof that this form is not intended to indicate a plurality of gods (emphasis mine).

Second, the use of “we” or “us” of God is another literary form known as a royal or regal plural (emphsis mine). It is used of royalty and of God in Semitic cultures. Even in a rigid monotheism such as Islam, where there is only one person in the Godhead, there are still references in the Qur’an to God as “we” or “us” (see Sura 6:55, 76, 7:117,138, etc.).

Third, the Hebrew word for one (echad) used of God can and does mean “many in one.” For example, in Genesis 2:24 it refers to male and female as one (echad) flesh. At best this is an implication of the Trinity, not an affirmation of polytheism, for the Bible clearly condemns polytheism. Nonetheless, while not allowing that there are many gods (polytheism), or many beings in the Godhead (tritheism), the Bible does allow for a plurality of persons within the unity of essence by such terms as echad (emphasis mine). So while not opposing monotheism, the term echad does favor trinitarianism.

Fourth, and finally, the Bible seems to imply there are many gods by the very command not to worship them (Ex. 20:3): “You shall have no other gods before me.” however, the “other gods: can be taken as imaginary, namely, gods created by us but not the real God. Or, they can be understood as the demons behind these gods that are not to be worshiped (1 Cor. 10:20). Paul summed it up well:

We know that an idol is nothing at all in the world and the there is no God but one. For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”), yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live. (1 Cor. 8:4-6)

Objection Two—Based on God’s Trinity

Of course, the main objection to God’s unity is the claim that there is a plurality within this unity—that there are three persons (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) and yet only one God. This appears to be a flat contradiction, affirming that there is only one God and yet there are three gods.

Response to Objection Two

The orthodox Christian response to this charge is that God is three and one in different senses. He is three persons, but He has only one essence (nature) (emphasis mine). Therefore, it is not a contradiction, since it does not affirm that there are three persons and yet only one person in God or that there are three natures and yet only one nature in Him. How there can be three persons and yet only one nature is a mystery, but not a contradiction, as will be shown below.[4]

 I emphasized five portions in the above quote. The first discussing the question of plurality in the word elohim, is an extension of the last chapter on elohim. Please note the stance this author held in 2003 that elohim is not intended to show plurality of gods but he maintains in the last highlighted section that it allows for three persons in one essence. This contrasts with the article quoted by John W. Ritenbaugh who favored translating elohim in the Shema “Gods is.”

The second highlighted phrase above takes us back to the question of “Who is the Us” chapter with his endorsement of the plural of majesty explanation I provided to understand who God was referring to in Genesis 1:26.

The third highlighted phrase: “the Bible does allow for a plurality of persons within the unity of essence by such terms as echad” is not surprising considering the author’s Trinitarian roots but it shows no regard for the general truth of the Bible. In light of God’s proclamations such as: “I am Yehovah’ thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before me” (Ex 20:2-3), or “Unto thee it was shewed, that thou mightest know that Yehovah’ he is God; there is none else beside him” (De 4:35), or Hezekiah’s prayer stating “O Yehovah’ God of Israel, which dwellest between the cherubims, thou art the God, even thou alone, of all the kingdoms of the earth; thou hast made heaven and earth” (2 Ki 19:15), how can one defend “plurality of persons within the unity of essence” of God? When Yehovah’ states clearly that “there is none else beside him” or “thou art God even thou alone,” what else or who else can be beside Him or with Him? The answer is nothing and no one. It is appropriate to include the fourth highlighted section “He is three persons, but He has only one essence” here. I state the same point again: How can God have none beside Him, be alone, and yet be three persons? Biblical truth, common sense, and logic would tell you He can’t. But there is a way: make up new non-Biblical terminology such as unity of essence (Homoousian: same substance or essence with the Father [5]) and hypostasis (not used by this author) to support a doctrine that was also created to fit the need. Hypostases is “a term used in theology to signify person. Thus the orthodox hold that there is but one nature or essence in God, but three hypostases or persons.” [6]

The fifth and final highlighted statement is: “How there can be three persons and yet only one nature is a mystery, but not a contradiction….” The Greek word mystery is Strong’s Concordance NT:3466 musth/rion, musterion (moos-tay’-ree-on) “a person initiated into sacred mysteries, which is from muéœ (3453), to initiate, learn a secret. A secret, or esoteric knowledge.[7] Musterion is translated mystery twenty-two times in the KJV, five times as mysteries, and once as testimony. Of the twenty-seven mystery/mysteries the one verse that could be misconstrued to imply a plurality would be Colossians 2:2, but this would only refer to the duality of the Father and of Christ, it excludes the third person of the Holy Spirit, and only in the KJV.

Col 2:2That their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledgement of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ; KJV

Col 2:2My purpose is that they may be encouraged in heart and united in love, so that they may have the full riches of complete understanding, in order that they may know the mystery of God, namely, Christ, NIV

Col 2:2that their hearts may be encouraged, having been knit together in love, and attaining to all the wealth that comes from the full assurance of understanding, resulting in a true knowledge of God’s mystery, that is, Christ Himself. NASB

None of the mysteries mentioned in the Bible refer to three persons, or plurality in God’s nature. Louis Berkhof, in his Systematic Thelolgy states, “The Hebrew word echad, translated by “one” may also be rendered “an only,” the equivalent of the German “einig” and the Dutch “eenig.” And this would seem to be a better translation. Keil stresses that fact that this passage does not teach the numerical unity of God, but rather that Jehovah is the only God that is entitled to the name Jehovah. [8]

The Trinitarian position declares echad to be a uniplu­ral adjective, reasoning that it does not mean one and only one in all cases but could be interpreted to mean three or many more in a group of one. The first source offered this interpretation as our only op­tion while the second source offers it as one option among many others (see defi­nition #7 above in bold). The chief appli­cation of this interpretation by Trini­tarians is in the Shema found in Deuteronomy 6:4:  Hear, O Israel: The Yehovah’ our God is one (echad) Yehovah’. He­brew: Shema Israel, Adonai Eloheinu, Adonai echad. They be­lieve that since elohim is a uniplural noun de­scribing the three members of the Trinity as the one God, and echad is a uniplural ad­jective describing several items in one unit or group, that the Shema is a perfect description of the triune God. The Trinitarian interpretation results in  Deuteronomy 6:4 ceasing to be a verse supporting  the oneness of God; it be­comes a verse portraying the character­istics of their triune God.  They interpret it to say: Hear O Israel, our three sep­arate Yehovah’s, is one unit of Yehovah’. The verse that Jews have be­lieved in and have been perse­cuted for throughout the ages has been twisted into a statement for plural­ity in God.

The following verses are popular Trinitarian ex­amples of the appli­cation of this particular definition of echad. Genesis 2:24: Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife:  and they shall be one (echad) flesh. The Trinitarian position states that two individuals, two entities, are being called one.  If two people can be described as one with the word echad, Trinitarians believe that three persons of a Godhead can be called one. The key point with this entire discussion is:  One what?In the case of Genesis 2:24 are they called one person?  No, they are called one flesh. The word cleave used in this text is defined: to im­pinge, i.e. cling or adhere. [9] I do not think a biology lesson or a Bible study on marriage is necessary here for anyone to understand how a man and his wife can be consid­ered one FLESH.  The Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (TWOT) states: “Adam and Eve are described as “one flesh”(Genesis 2:24), which includes more than sexual unity” but when we use 1 Corinthians 6:16 as a cross ref­erence, it appears that it means exactly sexual unity causing them to be “one flesh.” What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh. To settle a debate over whether “one flesh” refers to sexual unity is not the point. The point is that the word flesh does not mean one man, one woman or one person. Echad is be­ing used as an ad­jective to describe “flesh.” Exodus 24:3  And Moses came and told the peo­ple all the words of the lord, and all the judgments: and all the people answered with one (echad) voice .One what? One person’s re­ply? No! One voice. Does “one voice” being heard mean that of “all the people” there was only one individual speaking?  Of course not! It is simply understood to be the voice of many peo­ple speaking in unison so that you heard one sound. In this text using the word echad, does “one” re­ally mean “one” in the context that it is meant to be used? It abso­lutely does! Numbers 13:23 And they came unto the brook of Es­hcol,and cut down from thence a branch with one (echad) cluster of grapes, and they bare it be­tween two upon a staff.Again, you must ask yourself the question: One what? One grape? No. One cluster of grapes. Is one cluster of grapes the same as one grape? Absolutely not! In addition to that, the word here is grapes (plural). If echad was used in refer­ence to the word grapes, the phrase would be non­sensical. In the phrase, “one cluster,” does one suf­ficiently describe what the nu­meral “one” is sup­posed to describe?  Without a doubt!

If echad was used to describe diversity within the Nature of God in the same fashion that it de­scribes a di­versified unity in the above mentioned texts (and similar texts), God would be three Gods and Trinitarians would be tritheists. If God is one in the same way that the man and woman are one, the Trinity would have three totally dissim­ilar entities coming together to form the one (echad-united) De­ity. If God is one in the same manner that the people of Israel were one in voice when they answered Moses, then the persons of the triune Godhead have as much in common with each other as the individual citizens of the Jewish nation.  One cluster of grapes indicates more than one grape. One voice of the peo­ple indicates more than one person speaking. One Lord of the gods indicates more than one god.

The focus of our discussion of echad thus far has been totally on verses that speak of a single group of diversi­fied objects. If this has led you to believe that all texts that translate echad as one intend to com­municate the con­cept of a single (one) group of diversified objects, I hope to redirect your think­ing by focusing now on texts where it does not refer to groups. Genesis 2:21 And the lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one (echad)of  his ribs.  How many ribs? Maybe God took a single rack of ribs (As you would receive a rack of barbe­cue ribs in a restaurant). Genesis 22:2  And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one  (echad) of the moun­tains which I will tell thee of.How many mountains did Abraham go to? Exodus 25:19 And make one (echad) cherub on the one (different word) end and the other cherub on the other end. How many cherubs on one side? Leviti­cus 16:5 And he shall take of the congregation of the children of Is­rael two kids of the goats for sin offer­ing, and one (echad) ram for a burnt of­fering. How many rams? Maybe God meant a “whole herd.” Look at Numbers 7:14-82 where God directs one bullock, or ram, or lamb to be offered. God said ONE. Trinitarians claim that one is supposed to mean a group. Numbers 10:4 And if they blow but with one (echad) trumpet, then the princes, which are heads of the thousands of Israel, shall gather themselves unto thee.  Were they supposed to blow with an orchestra of trumpets in uni­son? I hope I have made my point. Of the 943 times (by my count) that echad is trans­lated “one,” it is translated to indicate a single charac­ter 901 times. It is translated “alone” three times (Josh 22:20, 1 Chron 29:1, Isa 51:2). 1 In the re­maining instances when it is in­volved in describing a group effort, it still means one. I challenge you to go through a Strong’s Concordance to find an example of OT #259, “one” describing plurality without grammatical support from the rest of the text.

In reference to the Shema, the claim that the linking of the word Elohim and echad in the same statement indi­cate plurality of God is totally un­founded. So much bias has been infused into that statement that the accuracy of it is negligible. It be­comes a Trinitarian doctrinal state­ment instead of a Biblical description of God. Deuteron­omy 6:4 is speaking of ONE WHAT? ONE GOD! This is made clear by the scribe’s reply to Jesus’ statement that the Shema was the most impor­tant command­ment in Mark 12:32, “Master, thou hast said the truth:  for there is one God; and there is none other but he.” If elo­him or echad are referring to more than one of any­thing, they are re­ferring to more than one GOD, which would make Trinitarians polythe­ists, or at least tritheists. Remember, for elohim to indicate any plural­ity, it would indicate a plurality of gods; not one God in three but three gods. If the Bible could be quoted as saying one gods, Trinitarians may have a legitimate argument, but that very statement would be contradic­tory. It would have to declare one Trinity.

I have found no basis to believe that “ONE” means anything but “ONE” when it is used to de­scribe the nu­merical amount of an object, or objects; but most especially when it is used to de­scribe the numerical integrity of God. Whether it be one country, one voice, one cluster, one flesh or one GOD; ONE MEANS ONE!

[1] H.W.F. Gesenius, Translated by Samuel Prideaux Tregelles, LL.D.,Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament   (Baker Book House © 1979) pp.28, 29.

[2] Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, R. Harris, Gleason Archer, Bruce Waltke, Volume 1, p. 30 © 1980 by The Moody Bible Institute of Chicago.

[3] Ontologically, Definition: Adj. Of or relating to the argument for the existence of God holding that the existence of the concept of God entails the existence of God.

Ontology, noun, the metaphysical [philosophical] study of the nature of being and existence.

[4] Systematic Theology, Volume Two: God, Creation, Dr. Norman Geisler, Copyright © 2003. Published by Bethany House Publishers, p.277-278.

[5] HOMOOUSION: A term used to describe the orthodox view of the person of Christ, established at the Council of Nice in opposition to Arius (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright ©  by Biblesoft, Inc.)

[6] ibid, Hypostasis

[7] From The Complete Word Study Dictionary: New Testament © 1992 by AMG International, Inc. Revised Edition, 1993.

[8] Systematic Theology, by Louis Berkhof, PC Study Bible formatted electronic database Copyright © 2012 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)

⁵⁴ Strongs, Hebrew and Chaldee Dictionary,  #1692.