Peewee Loc: San Antonio, TX

You will be blessed by this video, it covers some of what you are talking about but it is long, 2hrs. If it's not a good time, just go to the 14:00 minute mark and listen for one minute. You'll understand when you hear it. Then you'll want to back up to the beginning and hear it all.

https://youtu.be/Le5s8bncDy8

Rose42

I have limited bandwidth and don't see many videos. Is there a transcript of it? I'm missing out on a lot of info.

Peewee Loc: San Antonio, TX

Not that I'm aware of Rose. Is your low bandwidth because you have an old computer or live out in the country? Do they have wi-fi in town? If they do, an I-pad or laptop would allow you to watch as much as you like. A lot of coffee shops and libraries have free wi-fi now. My mom is mostly deaf and can sign. I take my I-pad and go to Best Buy so I can see and talk to her. I hope that helps you. Just make sure you have earphones or those earbuds so you don't disturb others.

The video I posted above is by Zev Porat at a Dallas conference a year or two ago. Maybe you will get bad video but good audio due to bandwidth? There isn't much to see but the message is awesome. He is a young bald-headed messianic rabbi, he's family disowned him when he became a believer. Offered him millions to reject Jesus. His family is high up in the Sanhedrin in Israel. He was trained from childhood to be in the Sanhedrin, he knows his scriptures and has revealed things I would have never seen in the Bible. Good luck and let me know.

Rose42

I can get around it but when I'm out I tend to not bother with and/or forget about the internet. I'll have to make it a point to remember.

Amazing isn't it that we have so much at our fingertips - including talking to your Mom.

I will endeavor to remember to check it out - or at least download it for later watching. Thanks!

Zemirah Loc: Sojourner En Route...

This is your forte, Peewee,

https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/the-aramaic-afterlives-of-genesiss-giants/?mqsc=E4090605&dk=ZE96OBZF2&utm_source=WhatCountsEmail&utm_medium=BHDDaily%20Newsletter&utm_campaign=ZE96OBZF2

I received this is my morning email from Biblical Archaeology Review's Bible History Daily.

The Aramaic Afterlives of Genesis’s Giants

Dead Sea Scrolls Digital Shorts, Episode 3

This work which has been found in multiple fragmentary copies among the Dead Sea Scrolls steps into the gap and explores the untold story of the Nephilim.

As part of the Dead Sea Scrolls Digital Shorts series, it explores the historical, cultural, and theological questions of the Aramaic Book of Giants by asking the question, “What happened to the giants in the Bible?”

If interested, the full episode is now available online by subscribing to Dr. Andrew Perrin’s YouTube channel and following BAR Bible History Daily for news of future episodes.

Peewee Loc: San Antonio, TX

Thanks and bless you! You know me too well, ha!

Peewee Loc: San Antonio, TX

Going to a Skywatch conference, at the Hyatt on the Riverwalk on the 4th - 6th called the Copper Scroll Conference. Getting excited. I'll get to meet some of my favorite people. Jonathan Cahn, Carl Gallops, Zev Porat, L.A. Marzulli, and others. Jim Barfield is the one I want to hear the most. He's the one who will be speaking on the Copper Scroll and Qumran. I hope he has new updates to reveal. And I hope to purchase Jonathan Cahn's new book the Oracle and get it signed by him. It goes from 8 am to 10 pm for three days, so I get a nice break from OPP and the loony left. Leave on the 10th for Baton Rouge to see my super sweet mom and sis for a few too-short days. She's getting so tiny I'm afraid the hug her too hard, I'm afraid she'll break or I'll hurt her. Hard to remember her as the mom with the 16" biceps and shooting 50 free throws without missing when I was a kid. She was the first jockette I ever knew. It's going to be a good month.

Zemirah Loc: Sojourner En Route...

This is going to be a blessed month for you.

I hope the conference starting tomorrow lives up to your expectations.

Seeing your Mother and sister will be priceless.

God protect your journey.

Peewee Loc: San Antonio, TX

It was so good! The person I wanted to hear most was Jim Barfield. He was the second speaker and he didn't disappoint. He covered so much ground. He's had a whirlwind ride since he made the discovery of Qumran and the buried treasures. He started out with an overview of his life before he got his download. All his research was his own and one day he was cutting his grass at home with a push lawnmower. Stopped, went to the house got a glass of ice tea, called his wife, asked her to sit down and started trying to explain to her what happened while cutting the grass. He told her he had been studying the Copper Scroll which consists of 12 panels. Hammered out as Babylon was headed to destroy Israel. It was hammered out from the back and upside down. So that when it was finished, turned over you could read it. So there were some mistakes because they were rushing to complete it. But just some letters stamped out backward but still readable.

He told his wife this is going to sound crazy but I think I'm a Benjamite. I know where the Temple treasures are buried but not because of my research. It was like I was remembering it being buried as if I was there when it happened. A few weeks later at work, it was the brown-bagging day of the week when everyone packs their own lunch and they all eat together. A Cheyenne woman he worked with said, I might be able to help you I know the guy who is over Qumran in Israel. I can give you his name, email address, and phone number and call him for you and set up an introduction and maybe a meeting. So that happened and he flew to Israel and they met.

It was kind of like yeah, sure, show me what you have. He showed him the first page and the guy's mouth dropped open. By the time he got to the 5th page the guy was in shock. And told him tomorrow we are going to Qumran. They walked the area with Jim pointed out the spots he believed held buried temple treasure. So they arranged for a certain type of ground sled metal detector. It can distinguish between gold, silver, and iron. When they got the results back it confirmed where the detector read huge amounts of gold and silver. It also confirmed that the temple mount is the correct spot of the temple. If you compare the Israel landmarks to the Qumran landmarks they match and have the same names. Qumran even matches Israel but on a smaller scale in reverse. They already have discovered 75 pounds of gemstones or a talent. of gemstones in a cave. According to the scroll, there should be 1,275 silver vessels, 900 talent of gold which is 181,250,000.00 in today's money. He said to look up and read the Damascus Document. Maybe you understand this and how to look it up "CD-A VIII, XV Damascus Doc". He also said to read 2nd Maccabees 1-8. Exodus 10:4 & 10:27, Hebrews 15 & 12-15. Moshe Feiglin-Hawk. I was writing fast so that may not be totally accurate and I haven't try to look it up yet. He also said read Hagy & Zach. Two young boys of about age 13 were chosen to give the secrets of Qumran because they might survive the 70 years of captivity in Babylon. There is suppose to be a copy of the scroll hidden with the treasure that is sealed so that if there is a dispute about the copper scroll the seal can be broken on the silver scroll and the dispute resolved. When you line up all the hot spots from the ground sled they are in a straight line. If you extend the line to the hills around Qumran, that's where they believe the Temple furniture is located. Qumran is in the territory of Benjamin. The cave where the gems were found was tested and covered with a man-made concrete plaster.

If Bibi is reelected and he secures the Jordan Valley and the area of Judea and Samaria they can probably do more excavations. Of course, if they dig it up now Jordan and the Palestinians will try and claim the treasures. So to me, that says Bibi will eventually be reelected as PM by his lonesome or jointly with Gantz. But now an Arab by the name of Ahmad Tibi who advised Arafat in the past may throw his hat in the ring. We live in interesting times.

Met Carl Gallops and his son who is doing great work in Peru. Zev Porat had us on our feet. L.A. Marzulli was great but I had heard and seen it on YT already. Jonathan Cahn and Carl Gallops are who I'm looking forward to tomorrow. It cost me 33.00 to park and I left early. Going to have to leave earlier in the morning so I can find a "free" parking space. SA has become a tourist trap Mecca downtown. Bicycle cops writing tickets were everywhere fleecing the public. May park further away and take a bus, taxi, or Uber to shuttle me to the Hyatt. A club sandwich at the Hyatt cost 13.00. Thankfully a Denny's is nearby and had a nice meal for 8.00. I become a tightwad at times when I feel I'm being ripped off. Other than that it was a great day and met some wonderful people. A pastor from north TX by the name of Todd Lawerence opened up the conference and he was really good and delivered a great message. My kind of preacher, about my age, funny but blunt, and nothing sugar-coated or watered down and he's only been preaching for about six months.
I spotted two for real cowboys, I can tell, looked like calf ropers or bull doggers, very stout men. If they were wearing different duds I'd think they were professional wrestlers or pro football players. Will try to speak with them tomorrow just out of curiosity. They look like dad and son but don't favor one another. Maybe they teamed up to compete in team roping or something. If they are somewhat local maybe I can bum a ride on another good horse before I get too old.

TommyRadd Loc: Midwest USA

Wow, your dishonesty and methods of deception are just appalling.

What this article, and thereby you, are doing is called “eisegesis”: reading back into a text what you want it to say, rather than “exegesis” which is getting from it what it is saying. It is also called an “anachronism” to read back into an earlier time a concept that was not developed until much later.

There are at least two ways to understand the Targum's use of debar/word that have nothing to do with a trinity.

One is that what they were doing was using debar (word) as a tool to distance God from directly speaking with themselves. It was much like how they, without any true biblical support, use “LORD” in place of the Tetragrammaton (YHVH “Yahweh”). In that case it was because of a superstitious tradition not to write the very holy name of God. Now, if “LORD” had the same exact equivalent of meaning and respect as YHVH, why would they need a “replacement/alternative”? The whole point was in substituting something of lesser, thus anything but “coequal”, status.

It is the same with debar/word of the Lord being used in the Targums. They used it as a tool for something less than Yahweh Himself and yet representing Yahweh. But they NEVER developed the idea of God being “one substance in three or more persons”. Thus, when you look at the article, it is only the Trinitarian apologist who suggest they “meant” a literal entity other than Yahweh, not the Targums themselves. This is nothing but dishonesty on the part of Trinitarians.

Secondly, Jews often used anthropomorphisms as literary tools that were not to be taken as literal. For example, "wisdom", in Proverbs 8:

“1Doesn't wisdom cry out? Doesn't understanding raise her voice?
2On the top of high places by the way, where the paths meet, she stands...
12"I, wisdom, have made prudence my dwelling. Find out knowledge and discretion...
16By me princes rule; nobles, and all the righteous rulers of the earth.
17I love those who love me. Those who seek me diligently will find me...
20I walk in the way of righteousness, in the midst of the paths of justice;
21That I may give wealth to those who love me. I fill their treasuries.
22"Yahweh possessed me in the beginning of his work, before his deeds of old.
23I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, before the earth existed...
27When he established the heavens, I was there; when he set a circle on the surface of the deep...
30then I was the craftsman by his side. I was a delight day by day, always rejoicing before him...” Proverbs 8:1-30

Note how “wisdom” here is clearly spoken of as if it was a distinct personal being. Biblical Jews didn’t have a problem with such anthropomorphic expressions. They understood them simply as literary tools by which to describe the characteristics of their invisible God in ways we humans can understand.

Why don’t Trinitarians add the “person” of God’s “wisdom” to their “persons” in the “godhead”? Two reasons that I know of: first, wisdom is characterized as female, and Jesus was God’s male son, so that won’t do; secondly, the Trinity is based off of ancient triads of God’s, in particular, Platonism’s first cause, logos, and world soul, not ancient quads. So, to be true to their actual source in paganism, they have to stick with just three persons in the godhead.

Only the pagan-minded would interpret wisdom in Proverbs 8 to be a literally distinct person or “entity” from God, and yet that is precisely how and what Trinitarians do with God's "word" in the Targums and John’s prologue.

Let’s read John 1 “as if” John had used “wisdom” instead of “word” and see if it sheds any light of understanding for us:

“1In the beginning was the Wisdom, and the Wisdom was with the God, and the Wisdom was God; 2this one was in the beginning with God; 3all things through her did happen, and without her happened not even one thing that hath happened...14And the Wisdom became flesh, and did tabernacle among us, and we beheld her glory, glory as of an only begotten of a father, full of grace and truth.” John 1:1-3,14 with Proverbs 8

Now, it may seem like I’m stretching a point, but the fact is the Bible does call Christ both the wisdom and power of God:

“but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ is the power of God and the wisdom of God.” 1 Corinthians 1:24

So then, if the Trinity is true, for one, God the Father must not have any personal wisdom or power, because these are character traits ascribed to the second person in their trinity. Furthermore, there must be at least a fourth and female member of the Godhead, because, obviously, God’s word talks about “Wisdom” in terms of being a distinct personal entity from God Himself. Of course not; trinitarians are just that inconsistent with the way they treat the biblical information. And they are simply willingly ignorant of the literary devices used in the Bible.

It is in the Jewish sense of God's wisdom that John used “the word”. Neither John nor any other biblical writer, described Jesus' birth or life as an “incarnation” of a second diefic person. To the contrary, Jesus himself, and John with him, explained Jesus being the "word of God" in terms that absolutely contraindicated the idea of a personal incarnation of a preexistent person named word, whose personal value was that of “the word of the Lord”. Rather, the Bible teaches that Jesus was the word because He faithfully delivered, and lived, God’s word:

“The words… I speak not from myself; but the Father who lives in me.” (John 14:10)

“The word which you hear isn’t mine, but the Father’s who sent me.” (John 14:24)

“He who sent me is true; and the things which I heard from him, these I say...” John 8:26

“…I do nothing of myself; but as my Father taught me, I speak these things” (John 8:28).

“For I spoke not from myself, but the Father…he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak… The things therefore which I speak, even as the Father has said to me, so I speak.” (John 12:49-50)

“Now…the words which you have given me I have given to them, and they received them...” (John 17:7-8)

"I have given them Your word and the world has hated them; for they are not of the world, just as I am not of the world." John 17:14

“For he whom God has sent speaks the words of God…” (John 3:34-35)

"Jesus therefore answered them, "My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me." John 7:16

"No longer do I call you servants, for a servant does not understand what his master is doing. But I have called you friends, because everything I have learned from My Father I have made known to you." John 15:15

"This is the revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show His servants..." Revelation 1:1

“For Moses indeed said to the fathers, ‘The Lord God will raise up a prophet for you from among your brothers, like me. You shall listen to him in all things whatever he says to you. It will be, that every soul that will not listen to that prophet will be utterly destroyed from among the people.’” (Acts 3:22–23)

"I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers. I will put My words in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him." Deuteronomy 18:18

Ignoring and negating such verses as these are what expose the trinity as devilish in construction. For laying aside these words of the Bible, Trinitarians hold their traditions in higher regard and authority than Scriptures, making these words of God's of no effect on their understanding.

So, it is clearly in the same sense that the Targums used the word of God, and that Proverbs 8 used the word wisdom, that John used “the word” in John 1. Not as a coequal yet distinct person from God, but as an attribute of the one true God’s own character that relates to mankind. Even John never, ever said that God’s “word” preexisted as anything personally distinct from God. It wasn’t until the word was made flesh, i.e. “born”, that this distinct “person”, Jesus of Nazareth, is spoken of as a different person from God. And that person, Jesus, was not personally God the Self-Existent One:

“The Son can do nothing of himself…” (John 5:19)

“I can of myself do nothing” (John 5:30)

“All authority has been given to me in heaven and on earth…” (Matthew 28:18–19)

Continued in Part Two

TommyRadd Loc: Midwest USA

Part Two

The fact is, you trinitarians don’t even believe John 1 as it is written, unless you can read back into it (eisegesis) what it doesn’t say.

“And the Word became {egeneto, “to cause to be” -Strong’s} flesh, and did tabernacle among us, and we beheld his glory, glory as of an only begotten of a father, full of grace and truth.” John 1:14

Note carefully that it clearly says in John that the word was “made” or “became” flesh. It doesn’t say the word was merely “joined to” flesh.

If “the word” and “God” are meant to mean the same thing, then it would be saying “God was made flesh”, but it doesn’t say that, because the person of God Himself, being immutable (unchangeable), cannot be transformed into human flesh.

“For I am Yahweh, I change not...” Malachi 3:6

“God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent” Numbers 23:19

But that is the opposite of what Trinitarians would have to say if they believed John 1:14 as written; until it is pointed out how ludicrous that idea is.

Then the way Trinitarians artificially deal with this massively “inconvenient truth” is to claim the son was merely “joined to flesh.”

For example, Trinitarians like Gregory Thaumaturgus (ca. 213 – ca. 270 AD) would clearly say, the Person of the Son is composite:

“All (the persons) are one nature, one essence, one will, and are called the Holy Trinity…one nature in three persons, and one genus. But the person of the Son is composite in its oneness, being one made up of two, that is, of divinity and humanity together, which two constitute one. Yet the divinity does not consequently receive any increment, but the Trinity remains as it was. Nor does anything new befall the persons even or the names, but these are eternal and without time…” Gregory Thaumaturgus, On The Trinity, Fragment From The Discourse

This was how Trinitarianism denied that the Word was “made” flesh in the same way that anti-Christian Gnostics did.

“Therefore did the Lord also say to his disciples…’Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise again from the dead, and that repentance for the remission of sins be preached in his name among all nations.’ Now this is he who was born of Mary; for he says: ‘The Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected, and crucified, and on the third day rise again.’ The Gospel, therefore, knew no other son of man but him who was of Mary, who also suffered; and no Christ who flew away from Jesus before the passion; but him who was born it knew as Jesus Christ the Son of God, and that this same suffered and rose again, as John, the disciple of the Lord, verifies, saying: ‘But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing ye might have eternal life in his name,’ –foreseeing these blasphemous systems which divide the Lord, as far as lies in their power, saying that he was formed of two different substances. For this reason also he has thus testified to us in his Epistle: ‘Little children, it is the last time; and as ye have heard that Antichrist doth come, now have many antichrists appeared…’”142


The entire Gnostic issue, which Irenaeus addressed and refuted here, was that they were “saying that He [that is Jesus Christ as the Word made flesh] was formed of two different substances.” What Irenaeus wrote against the anti-Christians became the fundamental platform of Trinitarianism. Anti-Christianity was the source of the Trinitarian idea of the two natures or substances in Christ.

Not only that, but the deific nature of the Trinitarian Son did not receive anything, or change in any way, by being joined to human nature. This was according to the official Trinitarian dogma we read from Gregory. And it was also just exactly like Gnosticism. This was how Trinitarianism denied that the Word was “made” flesh in exactly the same way that anti-Christian Gnostics did. By “reinterpreting” “was made flesh” to the unbiblical “was joined to flesh.”

Tertullian confessed this in Against Praxeas. He sayid,

“But as for me, who derive the Son from no other source but from the substance of the Father…how can I be possibly destroying the Monarchy from the faith…?”309

This confession is the mark of anti-Christianity. That Tertullian derives the Son “from no other source but from the substance of the Father…” is an outright admission that he does not accept the Son deriving his personality from Eve, Abraham, and David. This is exactly what the Bible has against the Gnostics—the denial that Jesus is of the flesh. Tertullian’s “no other source” excludes and rejects Jesus’ humanity.

If the son is made of no other substance than that of the Father, then human flesh is excluded. And when flesh is excluded, you have brought your theory under John’s condemnation:

“By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit who confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, and every spirit who doesn’t confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God, and this is the spirit of the antichrist, of whom you have heard that it comes. Now it is in the world already.” (1 John 4:2–3)

“For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who don’t confess that Jesus Christ came in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the Antichrist.” (2 John 7)

Keep in mind that for Tertullian, God has an actual material substance. Since he derives the Son from no other source than that deific substance, we can see that Tertullian has directly adopted the Gnostic denial of the Son’s flesh by adopting the blasphemous Gnostic doctrine of two natures.

The Trinity actually denies the Son that was made flesh and made of his mother Mary. Tertullian wasn’t the only one. This is also according to explicit statements from Athanasius, the champion of Nicene Trinitarianism:

“…nor, as man from man, has the Son been begotten… ‘Son’ is nothing else than what is generated from the Father.” Athanasius, Four Discourses Against the Arians, Discourse 1, Chapter 5, par. 14.

“…We are driven to say that what is from the essence of the Father, and proper to him, is entirely the Son…that which is begotten is neither affection nor division of that blessed essence. Hence it is not incredible that God should have a Son, the Offspring of his own essence; nor do we imply affection or division of God’s essence, when we speak of ‘Son’ and ‘Offspring’; but rather, as acknowledging the genuine, and true, and Only-begotten of God, so we believe.” Athanasius, Four Discourses Against the Arians, Discourse 1, Chapter 5, par. 16.

This is how Trinitarianism denies that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh. They do so by claiming belief in a Son who is of no other substance than deific substance. That means flesh is excluded. Trinitarianism explicitly rejects the biblical one and only begotten Son of God. They actually have two sons, the one they claim was “eternally begotten” and the one that the Bible says was from Mary.

From this point, any claim that Trinitarians believe in a human Son should be regarded as lip service.

Continued in Part Three

TommyRadd Loc: Midwest USA

Part Three

I was listening to Focus on the Family this morning. An author was giving an example of her being submitted to her husband. Briefly, they had a little girl who wanted some boots, and her husband (for reasons he explained later) said no. Rather than protest at that time, she simply yielded to her husband and told their daughter no. Within a couple weeks a family member gave them some hand-me-downs and among them were a better pair of boots than they were going to buy for their daughter. That is simple submission. Trinitarians do the opposite, both in attitude and magnitude. By negating and redefining the most important commandment of all, as explicitly interpreted in the Greek in Mark 12:29-40 as being one singular He, Trinitarians make it evident that in the highest way possible Trinitarians most adamantly and determinedly disobey, disrespect, and dishonor their head.

This little stunt in trying to rewrite history and claim some of the most monotheistic, and thus inherently anti-Trinitarian people in history, as supporters or evidence of your later doctrine only goes to prove that you Trinitarians are among the most disobedient, dishonest (and self-deluded) people ever to walk the face of the earth... and you applaud yourselves for it to boot! That is because in your hearts you know the monotheism of the Jews set the standard in defining God’s personal unity, so you have to attempt to drag them into your error to justify your lies. Such is despicable dishonesty and determined deception! This is NOT how people who love the truth act.

What makes the pagan Trinity idol so despicable and moves it out of the realm of “a mere topic of discussion” is the fact that God considers such idolatry as spiritual adultery against Him. For Trinitarians to go to pagans, as they have done, for the words and concepts with which to describe the god they worship, is like a wife committing adultery with their neighbor to show her husband she loves him. It just doesn’t work that way.

"One who says, "I know him," and doesn't keep his commandments, is a liar, and the truth isn't in him." 1 John 2:4

“One of the scribes came, and…asked him, ‘Which commandment is the most important [or first] of all?’ Jesus answered, ‘The most important is, ‘Hear, Israel, the Lord our God, [grammatical number: singular] the Lord is one[grammatical number: singular]: 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.’ This is the first commandment... The scribe said to him, ‘Truly, teacher, you have said well that He [grammatical number: singular] is one, and there is none other...’ When Jesus saw that he answered wisely, he said to him, ‘You are not far from the Kingdom of God.” (Mark 12:28–34)

“The Lord our God (grammatical number: singular) is one* (grammatical number: singular)" Mark 12:29

One: Greek "heîs, hice; a primary numeral; one" -Strong's

For more evidence that the Trinitarian interpretations of the Jewish Targums are dishonest eisegesis of the Jewish texts, here are a couple more web pages that address the issues and soundly rebuff the trinitarian theory that Jews ever understood God as they do.

https://letthetruthcomeoutblog.wordpress.com/page/2/

https://robertcargill.com/2010/12/17/how-not-to-read-the-targums/

Zemirah Loc: Sojourner En Route...

Your Prophetic conference sounds so meaningful, Peewee. Being in the room with Evangelists and Bible teachers is another dimension than watching YouTube.

I hope you were able to take notes for future reference as you post to OPP. You can share more of what you learned.

Too bad you don't have a bike... Parking in a bike rack would be a solution to being ripped off.

If the two horsemen are able to furnish you the ride you wish, especially on Quarter horses, take pictures.

Thanks for sharing your day's experiences.

Zemirah Loc: Sojourner En Route...

Three pages beginning with personal insults, followed by precanned twisted Scriptures and repetitious private interpretation is not readable.

TommyRadd Loc: Midwest USA

Here, let me make it simpler for you:

"One who says, "I know him," and doesn't keep his commandments, is a liar, and the truth isn't in him." 1 John 2:4

“One of the scribes came, and…asked him, ‘Which commandment is the most important [or first] of all?’ Jesus answered, ‘The most important is, ‘Hear, Israel, the Lord our God, [grammatical number: singular] the Lord is one[grammatical number: singular]: 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.’ This is the first commandment... The scribe said to him, ‘Truly, teacher, you have said well that He [grammatical number: singular] is one, and there is none other...’ When Jesus saw that he answered wisely, he said to him, ‘You are not far from the Kingdom of God.” (Mark 12:28–34)

“The Lord our God (grammatical number: singular) is one* (grammatical number: singular)" Mark 12:29

One: Greek "heîs, hice; a primary numeral; one" -Strong's