Except for Christ, no human being has ever directly heard the actual voice of the Father or seen His form and shape (John 1:18; 5:37; 6:46; 1 John 4:12).

So the Word was indeed the God of the Old Testament

Of course, since Jesus came to reveal the Father (Matthew 11:27), the logical conclusion is that the Father was not generally known by those in Old Testament times except for a few of the Hebrew patriarchs and prophets. King David, for example, is one who understood (Acts 2:30).

Partially quoted earlier, Hebrews 1:1-2 states: "God, who at various times and in different ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His [or 'a'] Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds."

In this opening passage of the book of Hebrews the clear implication is that the Father is the moving force behind the whole Old Testament. In context, verse 2 interprets verse 1. Though God the Father is the prime mover behind the Hebrew Bible, it is through Jesus Christ that He created the entire universe.

He dealt with man through the agency of the preexistent Word, Christ.

Elohim is a noun that is plural in form but normally singular in usage—that is, paired with singular verbs—when designating the true God. For a comparable modern expression, consider the term United States. This proper noun is plural in form but singular in usage. It is used with singular verbs. For example, Americans say, "The United States is going to take action," not "The United States are going to take action." The plural form does signify multiple states—but, taken collectively, they are viewed as one nation.

It is the same with Elohim. The word Eloah, meaning "Mighty One," is the singular form. Elohim, meaning "Mighty Ones," is plural. And, indeed, there were two Mighty Ones, the Father and the Word. But, collectively, as Elohim, the two are seen as one God. Elohim said, "Let Us make man in our image, according to Our likeness" (verse 26).

It is also claimed that the Hebrew ‘Elohim’ is a uniplural or collective noun and that such nouns (e.g. the English noun ‘crowd’) often govern singular verbs. This claim contradicts leading Hebrew grammars, which claim that throughout the OT and when referring to the true God, the Hebrew noun 'Elohim' behaves as a singular noun, and governs only singular verbs, singular adjectives and singular pronouns. And only when 'elohim' refers to a number of pagan gods or humans (e.g. judges), that it behaves as a plural noun; and then governs plural verbs, plural adjectives and plural pronouns. So grammatically ‘Elohim’ is never a collective (uniplural) noun. That in reference to the true God, the noun ‘Elohim’ is singular, is well illustrated in Genesis 1:29, where this noun governs the singular pronoun ‘I’.

Originally posted by oliveoil
If you read Greek, What original manuscript are you referring to?

Originally posted by oliveoil
How can anyone say that the Comma does not apper in The Original Greek Text is beyond me.

The Comma Johanneum is a comma (a short clause) contained in most translations of the First Epistle of John published from 1522 until the latter part of the nineteenth century, owing to the widespread use of the third edition of the Textus Receptus (TR) as the sole source for translation. In translations containing the clause, such as the King James Version, 1 John 5:7-8 reads as follows (with the Comma in bold print):

5:7 "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
5:8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one."

The resulting passage is an explicit reference to the Trinity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

It does not appear in the older Greek manuscripts, nor in the passage as quoted by many of the early Church Fathers. The words apparently crept into the Latin text of the New Testament during the Middle Ages, "[possibly] as one of those medieval glosses but were then written into the text itself by a careless copyist. Erasmus omitted them from his first edition; but when a storm of protest arose because the omission seemed to threaten the doctrine of the Trinity (although that doctrine had in fact been formulated long before the textual variant), he put them back in the third and later editions, whence they also came into the textus receptus, 'the received text'."[1] Modern Bible translations such as the NIV, NASB, ESV, NRSV and others tend to either omit the Comma entirely, or relegate it to the footnotes.