Nothing like those golden oldies, eh guys? ;) Kidding, kind of. I do respect the fact that you're trying. But whenever a trinitarian tries to move beyond English Bible verses, and into language studies, this IS typically the first such thing we hear. Echad does NOT imply any kind of compound unity. No serious Hebrew scholar would tell you such a thing. Primarly because your very first Hebrew class is going to dispel that notion, when you learn to count. Echat, Shtayim, Shalosh.. The word clearly means "one" just as it is written. In fact, looking through these examples, it's a little odd that they're trying to show every word BUT Echad as a compound unity. There are two verses people typically cite to try to show Echad as a compound unity. I couldn't tell you where they are, but one deals with a herd of cattle, and another with a bunch of grapes. Both fall flat for the same reason. It's not compound unity to refer to ONE herd (not "one compound unity of cattle" ), or to refer to ONE bunch (as opposed to a "compound unity of grapes" ). These, like all other biblical uses of the word Echad, are a number, pure and simple.. one.

XS (Extra Small) SM (Small) MD (Medium) LG (Large)