|
LET US MAKE MAN
Despite the testimony of Jewish scholarship, despite the consistent record from the Bible itself that "God is One: there is not other", some have stepped forward to offer a challenge. And they have turned to the first chapter of Genesis for the basis of that challenge: Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness". (Gen. 1:26) According to some Christian writers, this verse indicates that God is one Being—but a Being composed of more than one divine person. In discussing the clause, "Let us make man", the commentator Matthew Henry suggested that "The three persons of the Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, consult about it and concur in it." [Matthew Henry’s Commentary, Vol. 1, p. 10) If this conjecture is accurate, then we have a serious challenge to the strict statements of other Old Testament Scriptures. But is the above conjecture accurate? And what does Hebrew scholarship say about Genesis 1:26? With regard to the latter question, Dr. Ephraim A. Speiser wrote that even though plural pronouns are used, a singular sense is meant. In his own words: "Here God refers to Himself, which may account for the more formal construction in the plural." [The Anchor Bible: Genesis, p. 7]
The statement in Genesis could be a kind of "literary plural". And
according to Dr. Speiser’s translation of the Hebrew idiom, we should have in
the English: "Then God said, ‘I will make man in My image, after My likeness’."
[ibid, p.4]
Some translations have this rendering. I don't particularly like it, because in attempting to remove the "confusion" it promotes a lie. "My" is not what the text says... it says "Us" and "Our." There may be more merit for this rendering than some might think, for Speiser calls our attention to the fact that "the very next verse uses the singular throughout". Here is the next verse: So God created man in His own image; He created him in the image of God. He created them male and female. (Gen. 1:27) This structure is found throughout Scripture in reference to YHVH. It should not come as any big surprise to find such a rendering in Genesis. What should be more surprising is that the Name (YHVH) is used beginning in Chapter 2. The literary plural very well could have been employed in Genesis 1:26 since in this verse God is quoted as the One speaking (hence the plural), whereas in the next verse God is not speaking (hence the singular). The literary plural (using "we" for "I") is a device used by speakers and writers in all languages. And that distinguished Greek scholar A. T. Robertson has noted that the apostle Paul utilized the literary plural on several occasions in his epistles. [A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, p. 407] The above explanation has been expanded by a responsible Hebrew source which comments: "The use of the plural, ‘Let us make man’, is the Hebrew idiomatic way of expressing deliberation as in xi:7; or it is the plural of Majesty, royal commands being conveyed in the first person plural, as in Ezra iv, 18." [J. H. Hertz, The Pentateuch and Haftorahs, p. 5] The ABC's rendition of "literary plural" is a similar argument to the "majestic Plural" (a one hundred year-old argument according to my sources to combat the Deity of Yeshua) of the Orthodox Rabbis. However... they ignore one vital point. Why does the Text use plural terms AS WELL AS singular terms for YHVH? If there was a consistency in the Text, I might fall for the argument. It also fails to take the feminine/masculine aspects of the words into account as well (please note there are no neuter terms in Hebrew... a noun is either male or female). For example.... Abba (Heb. Masc., Sing.) Adon (Heb. Masc., Sing.) Adonai (Heb. Masc., Pl.) Adoni (Heb. Masc., Sing./Pl.) Adonim (Heb. Masc., Pl.) Eyn Sof (Heb. Masc., Sing.) Devar ha YHVH (Heb. Masc., Sing.) El (Heb. Masc., Sing.) Elah (Aram. Masc., Sing.) Elahah (Aram. Masc., Emph.) Eloah (Heb. Masc., Sing.) Elohei (Heb. Masc., Pl.) Elohim (Heb. Masc., Pl.) Elyon (Heb. Masc., Pl.) Hayah Asher Hayah (Heb. Masc., Sing.) Ruach haKodesh (Heb. Fem., Sing.) El Shaddai (Heb. Fem., Pl.) Maryah (Aram. Masc., Sing.) Shekhinah (Heb. Fem., Sing.) Yah (Heb. Masc., Sing.) Yeshua (Aram. Masc., Sing.) YHVH (Heb. Masc., Sing.) And in addition to the reasonable testimony of Jewish scholarship, even Christian scholars have come forward to challenge the tritheistic interpretation. The popular Oxford Annotated Bible of the Revised Standard Version offers a very plausible possibility: "The plural us, our (3:22; 11:7) probably refers to the divine beings who surround God in His heavenly court (I Kings 22:19; Job. 1:6; Is. 6:8; compare Ps. 29:1) and in whose image man was made." [p. 2] The Oxford's Annotated Bible RSV's argument that GOD was speaking to the "heavenly Court" seems to have forgotten that man was created in God's image, not in the image of a "heavenly court." Also, I know of no Trinitarian who espouses a tritheist doctrine. This is a purposeful twist of facts proposed by strict monos and Jesus-Onlies. This explanation of Genesis 1:26 is a logical one for two reasons: (1) One Spirit-Being called God has identified Himself as the Creator. And if the Creator was speaking to others, He was definitely speaking to others who were not God. For the verse states, "And God said …" (2) God could have been informing His angels of His intentions of the creation, because angelic beings do surround Him; according to the Bible, the angels are there. The red-highlights are hopeful words used by someone who was not there at creation, hoping to alter the given facts to fit an agenda. God could NOT have been speaking to anyone else but Himself because men were created in the Image of God, NOT in the image of angels and attendants. For example, a prophet of God once told of a vision which he had experienced. He related: I saw Yahweh sitting on His throne, and all the host of heaven standing beside Him at His right hand and at His left. (I Kings 22:19) The use of the singular pronouns attests to the fact that the prophet saw One seated on the throne—with the angelic host in His presence. A commentator seems to have forgotten that Daniel tells us that YHVH sat on thrones (plural). Likewise, a king of Israel is quotes as praying: O Yahweh the God of Israel, the One who is enthroned above the cherubim, You are God, even You alone, of all the kingdoms of the earth; You have made heaven and earth. (2 Kings 19:15) Thus we learn that King Hezekiah prayed to a God who was "One" enthroned above His cherubim. And the Bible informs us that Hezekiah’s prayer was answered in a mighty way by that God. [2 Kings 19:20-37]
THE HEBREW INTENSIVE PLURAL But many people appear to be confused about the Godhead question; and one thing which has led to that confusion is a misapplication of the Hebrew word Elohim, a regular term for "God" in the Old Testament Scriptures. Since Elohim is a plural form, some Christian authors have emphasized that the name signifies "The plurability of persons in the Godhead, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost". [Henry, ibid, p. 2; see also Nathan Stone’s Names of God, pp. 11, 12; and V. E. Howard’s "The Godhead: One or Three?" Those writers who point to Elohim as a "plurality of persons in the Godhead" usually do not have very much to say about the Hebrew language itself—the language in which the word is found. And it should be stated that in Hebrew many words are found in the plural form—but which have a singular connotation. To give only a few examples, the Hebrew terms for "water", "life", "face", "heaven" are all found normally in the plural spelling--even though the meaning is singular! As with Elohim, these words have that masculine plural ending -im; and as with Elohim, the connotation is a singular one. Water (Mayim) is plural because water is plural -- it is impossible to have one water in the Hebrew mindset (i.e., separate and show me one water -- once water can be seen by the eye or felt on the tongue, it is already "waters" in the Eastern mindset). Life (Chai or Chayim) is used depending upon context. Face (panav, panim) has both a plural and singular voice. In fact, in the Blessing of the High Priest, the singular Panav is used in reference to the face of YHVH. Heaven is always used plurally because the Hebrew mind is unable to unwrap the change between the heaven of the atmosphere, the heaven of outer space, and the heaven as the throne of YHVH. Since they cannot be distinguished by a fine line, they are lumped together. The Apostle Shaul refers to the Third Heaven in his writings as well. Also, the water molecule (H2O) is so light that it should be in gas state on earth. Therefore, in God's infinite wisdom, He gave water the ability to create polymers -- the ability to collect together in order to increase their atomic weight. Therefore, God shows forth His wisdom within the Hebrew text by using the plural form "waters." To use "Elohim" as the definitive proof of multiplicity in the Godhead is a dumb argument. The word "Echad" along with Elohim and innumerable "breaches" of grammar in reference to YHVH combine to establish the truth of the multiplicity of YHVH. The most comprehensive Hebrew-English lexicon which Christian scholarship has produced therefore explains that the plural form Elohim is simply the "plural intensive" [Florence Brown, S. R. Driver, and C. A. Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament, p. 43] with a singular force. In similar fashion, the highly respected Bible Dictionary by Dr. William Smith calls it "the plural of majesty". [Teacher’s Edition, p. 220] The Hebrew-English lexicon, BDB, was quoted as saying that the plural form Elohim is simply the "plural intensive" (p.43, col. 2, point 2a). However, this is a twist of the author's work. According to the BDB, this use of Elohim is used for gods and goddesses like Dagon, Chemosh, and Baal. Its use in 2 Kings 17.26-28 seems to indicate that the Syrians believed YHVH to be just another mountain or valley god. Points 2b and 2c are other uses of this plural intensive that includes Moshe's "godlike" relationship of Aharon (2b), and the works or things specially belonging to God (2c). Jewish scholarship points out that "Elohim is a plural form, which is often used in Hebrew to denote plenitude of might". [Hertz, ibid, p. 2] Plenitude of might! Elohim can express "plenitude of might" because of the very nature of the word itself. Elohim is the plural spelling of Eloah; but El is the abbreviated singular form—and thus the root word. Basically, El signifies "strength", "power", "might"; therefore, Elohim definitely could denote, as one scholar has suggested, "the fullness of divine strength, the sum of powers displayed by God". [Smith, ibid, p. 20] I do love this argument but this argument can tear one's Biblical word study into sudden turmoil if taken too far. I have seen people completely alter the Plain Sense meaning of the text in favor of word deconstruction and have fallen into heresy. In fact, I know one dude who believes that the citizens of Great Britain are God's chosen people (British = brit <covenant> + ish <man>). Thus when the Hebrew writers referred to God in the Old Testament as either El or Elohim more than two thousand times, those writers were apparently thinking of Him as "Mighty God". El is singular and Elohim is plural. If one wants to use the Majestic Plural argument, one must confront the change of tense, mood, gender, and voice within the Hebrew Text. The God of the Bible is the One who created the heavens and the earth out of nothingness. The God of Abraham is depicted as the One who guides and controls the course of mankind. This God upholds the laws of the universe—thus sustaining the order of His creation. Elohim—the Mighty God—is an appropriate appellation for the God of the Bible. Yes indeed! PAGAN TRINITIES? *snip* In I Kings 11:5 the writer records that "Solomon went after Ashtoreth, the goddess of the Zidonians". This example is worthy of special note because the term "Ashtoreth" has the suffix -eth, the regular Hebrew ending for a singular feminine noun. And yet this goddess is called none other than elohim—a masculine plural noun in spelling! The author wrote, "In I Kings 11:5 the writer records that "Solomon went after Ashtoreth, the goddess of the Zidonians". This example is worthy of special note because the term "Ashtoreth" has the suffix -eth, the regular Hebrew ending for a singular feminine noun. And yet this goddess is called none other than elohim—a masculine plural noun in spelling!" However, the actual Hebrew text uses the term "Elohai" (if my transliteration is correct) which would indicate a female god.
--slade |
- [TruthTalk] 'Elohim' Sabbath Study Chris Barr
- Re: [TruthTalk] 'Elohim' Sabbath Study Slade Henson
- Re: [TruthTalk] 'Elohim' Sabbath Study Knpraise
