2

In Genesis 1 God (Elohim) says

"Let Us make man in Our image"

Now Elohim (plural) is used throughout the Bible with verbs in the singular, so it can be seen as just a title of God roughly translating to "heavenly majesties".

But "let Us make" (verb) and "Our" (possessive pronoun) is clearly plural, and God is clearly talking to Himself. (Edit apparently God is not clearly talking to Himself ;-))

Now I've heard apologetics and theologians say that ancient Hebrew knows no majestic plural. Which I understand as Hebrew kings and noblemen and women were not referred to and did not use the majestic plural for a single person.

Is this true? When did the majestic plural first appear in history and where? When did it first appear in Israel?

John Smith
  • 131
  • 4
  • 2
    Gesenius, § 124, 1., (a) – Der Übermensch Jan 31 '23 at 23:53
  • @John Singh. Assuming that "that ancient hebrew knows no majestic plural." How do you think "let Us make man in Our image" be understood? – Alex Balilo Feb 01 '23 at 00:04
  • Does this answer your question: Interpretation of Genesis 1:26? – agarza Feb 01 '23 at 00:05
  • 1
    Same question on [linguistics.se]: Does Biblical Hebrew have a plural of majesty? –  Feb 23 '23 at 12:43
  • There is no evidence of a royal we in ancient texts anywhere or in any language. It is a modern idea imposed on a theologically contested text by those who don’t want to read the word the way it was written due to theological biases. – Nihil Sine Deo Mar 04 '23 at 14:22
  • 2
    @NihilSineDeo It is of interest that my most staunchly Trinitarian Hebrew professors (Jewish Christians) affirm that the Bible does not support the Trinity directly, and they believe in, and teach, the royal we explanation. I tend to agree with you that it is not a royal we. In either case, most of the debate about the royal we is based on apparent anomalies in Hebrew grammar. I think we have misunderstood the grammar. Hebrew has many exceptions among nouns, where verbs and adjectives must be seen to know if the noun is plural or not. Elohim is just one of these. – Biblasia Mar 04 '23 at 14:31
  • 1
    This isn't a duplicate it is a question that pertains to a different scripture, which involves verb and pronoun usage, and is the only place in God's word were this particular construction takes place. Which also involves the topic of the divine deliberations of Gods counsel (1Kings 22:15-19). – ThatwemaybethepraiseofHisglory Apr 17 '23 at 18:26

2 Answers2

4

Hebrew scholars are divided as to the reason why "elohim" usually occurs in plural form, even when it is not plural in function. One theory is that it is equivalent to a "plural of majesty" (pluralis majestatis). Proponents of this theory believe the plural form magnifies the greatness of God, and is akin to the usage of the ancient kings who referred to their singular persons by the plural "we." It should be noted, however, that none of them also used a singular verb with that plural, i.e. they did not say "we is"--which is the Hebrew form. (A few of my Hebrew instructors have held this theory.)

A second common theory states that the word "elohim" itself is not originally a Hebrew word, but is a loanword from Syriac/Aramaic. Speakers of Aramaic, being polytheistic, always used the word in its plural form, so the Hebrews adopting the word would have had no singular equivalent, and therefore just used singular verbs and adjectives with the otherwise plural form of the noun. (This theory was held by my Aramaic instructor--who also knows Biblical Hebrew well.)

Genesis 1:26 is a special verse, being unique in using a plural verb with "elohim" when referencing the true God. Before assuming that this must refer to a plural "God," one must understand that "elohim" does not mean only "god" in Hebrew usage. It can apply to human judges (e.g. Exodus 22:8), and it can apply to angels, as it does in Psalm 8:5 (compare Hebrews 2:7 where this is quoted in Greek). So whomever the other individual(s) may be in Genesis 1:26, it is not at all clear that the verse establishes them on an equality with God. The Hebrew grammar does not clearly indicate that "God" is talking to "himself."

Conclusion

Because no one knows all of the exact reasons why Biblical Hebrew uses a word that appears plural in form to address God, it is important to be careful of making claims that are not fully supported. There is wide room for interpretation on this question if one looks strictly at the grammatical possibilities inherent to the original Hebrew.

Biblasia
  • 4,923
  • 6
  • 25
  • you said >it is not at all clear that the verse establishes them on an equality with God. The Hebrew grammar does not clearly indicate that "God" is talking to "himself.<... okay, so grammatically He might be talking to the heavenly court, when He speaks of "let Us make", but when He says "in Our image", then He at least definitely includes Himself. Now if the heavenly court is made in God's image, then it would still be weird, if the Sovereign included the heavenly court in the "in Our image"... but I guess that might just be colloquial speech among friends ;-) – John Smith Feb 22 '23 at 10:55
  • can you give me a source, which states that "we is" is the hebrew pluralis maiestatis? – John Smith Feb 22 '23 at 10:58
  • @JohnSmith. The "image" of God is not His appearance. It is His character. Because all the host of Heaven were made perfect in character, they, too, were made in God's image, just as Adam was. Adam's son, born after his fall, is said to have been made in Adam's image, and God's image is no longer mentioned. Regarding the "pluralis majestatis," here is an interesting LINK that excerpts that portion from a larger work. An online search will find many more of a similar nature. – Biblasia Feb 22 '23 at 13:14
  • Elohim NEVER applies to humans in the original text, only in translated and therefore interpreted text, so that’s not a true statement. – Nihil Sine Deo Mar 04 '23 at 14:20
  • @NihilSineDeo Feel free to argue your opinion with the Jewish professors of Hebrew who say otherwise. I attended a two-hour conference on just that question last year--and the professors affirmed, even emphasized, that "elohim" is not always "God/god" in meaning, and has broad application. I will agree that translators sometimes interpret. But so do readers. In any case, there is no question but that the Bible writers knew "elohim" does not always mean "God." Hebrew as quoted in Greek tells that story. – Biblasia Mar 04 '23 at 14:26
  • Elohim not always meaning God of Heaven is different than it being assigned to humans. Furthermore you can always find some professor somewhere to say whatever you want him to say, doesn’t make him right just because he has the title of a professor. Professors are wrong too, history has shown this repeatedly to be the case. – Nihil Sine Deo Mar 05 '23 at 05:29
  • @NihilSineDeo Jesus himself applies "elohim" to humans. Compare Psalm 82:6 with John 10:34. "I have said, Ye are gods [אֱלֹהִ֣ים/elohim]; and all of you are children of the most High." (Psalm 82:6, KJV) AND "Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods [Θεοί/theoi]?" (John 10:34, KJV). Who will dare say Jesus was wrong? – Biblasia Apr 17 '23 at 19:11
  • @Biblasia please stop you’re embarrassing yourself. In the OT Elohim NEVER refers to humans ever. The only time Elohim is ascribed to humans is in translated text but not in the original. Psa82 if those were humans but they are not because Psa 89 says they meet in the sky, then what kind of punishment is it to punish them with mortality if they are humans and are already mortals. Jesus wasn’t wrong you are wrong. Whatever Jesus meant in v34 He also meant in v30 and v38 and if Jesus was claiming to be one with God which He was then he couldn’t have been claiming Psa82 is about humans. – Nihil Sine Deo Apr 17 '23 at 20:47
  • @NihilSineDeo Jesus clearly applied "elohim" to humans--and since you say he was not wrong, then neither am I wrong to do the same. In the OT, "elohim" most certainly does apply to humans, in multiple cases. It is not a matter of translation, as you claim. It is a matter of Hebrew word definitions. The Hebrew for "elohim" is much broader than the English "God/god" expresses. You seem to be trying to read Hebrew with English eyes. – Biblasia Apr 17 '23 at 23:43
  • @Biblasia please stop pestering me with your erroneous opinions. If Jesus was referring to humans, why would they try to stone Jesus for claiming to be a human? You don’t even make sense, you’re not thinking things through and you have provided no evidence where humans were referred to as Elohim. I know the passages in question and they don’t exist in the Hebrew the way that they are translated. That last sentence is the definition of gaslighting. – Nihil Sine Deo Apr 18 '23 at 02:25
2

The Hebrew word translated "God" is Elohim (H430); which is also translated "gods" throughout the Hebrew canon (Ex.12:12,18:11), this is because Elohim is a plural noun. But always in all scripture, when Elohim is used for the God of Israel, it is used in a grammatical singular sense, because it governs the singular verb and adjective, speaking of one (Yahweh is Elohim, no other elohim is Yahweh), this is the simple interpretational key to determining its use when refencing the God of Israel, and any other would be a clear perversion to one of the most fundamental rules of hermeneutics (interpreting it differently than its use in every other occurrence, to satisfy one's own theological understanding)

In Gen.1:26, elohim is being used in its natural plural sense, by the plural verb "let us make", and the possessive pronoun "our". In every other occurrence where elohim is used with the plural verb it is not used for the GOD of the bible. So why read GOD into this scripture? The text should read like this: And (the) gods (elohim) said, let us make man in our image and likeness: that they may have dominion...now we know that GOD is the only creator, but the bible does teach of a divine counsel of spirit beings that deliberates in making decisions (Dan.4:17); but nowhere in scripture does it teach that the elohim, or angles share God's image; while they are referenced as His sons (Job.38:7), nowhere do they bear the title "image". The word does however teach that from among this divine counsel some have rebelled. So what is taking place in Gen.1:26, are the rebellious elohim of the divine counsel, that are making the wicked suggestion that man be made in their image and likeness (1King.22:19-22; Ps.82;86.8); that's why the serpent later tempts them with the temptation, "you will be like the elohim (the gods)".

From this verse on it is the LORD God, not just Elohim (in order to make a distinction to the reader), that speaks to these (spirit beings) elohim (Gen.3:22;11:6-7; Isa.6.8); as the Most High Elohim of the divine counsel (Ps.89:5-8). Showing that God is not the one that is speaking in Gen.1.26; but rather what we have here is the "us" being used as a grammatical clue to draw the reader's attention to the authors (elohim) thought play; which is veiled within the narrative of the multiple previous statements "And God said".

And in response to their suggestion, it says "God made man in His own image" (not theirs), this seems to be the reason for the little poem of repetition that is in (Gen.1:27) in order catch the reader's attention on what is taking place in these verses (meditation literature).

The close context clues of verses 14-18 give further support as this being the meaning, where the hosts of heaven (sun, moon, stars, spirit beings are referred to as stars throughout the scripture,Ps.148:1-3; Jud.5:20; Dan.8:10; Amos.5:26; Job.38:7; Rev.12:4,9) are given rule over the day and night, and assigned with separating the light from the dark as God did in v.4 (delegated authority); which in ancient near eastern cosmology, the sun, moon, and stars are metaphorically used for the (elohim) gods(astral mysticism, where deities are associated with heavenly bodies). Who were believed to maintain the function of the cosmos. They wanted man to rule over earth in their image (instead of God's image), as they (the elohim) ruled in the heavens, they wanted to rule over humanity in a kingdom where they receive the glory and worship (Deut.4.19).

Further evidence is clearly seen in Ps.8; which quotes Gen.1.28, speaking of the glory and honor that God allotted to Man over all creation ...thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; Thou has put all things under his feet; all sheep and oxen...Ps.8:6-8.

Paul's refence to Christs exaltation in Eph.1:22 quotes Ps.8 "And hath put all things under his feet" He describes these "all things" as the principalities, powers, mights and dominions; Eph.6.12 describes them as the rulers of darkness of this world, as the evil spirits in the heavens.

Well where does it mention in Ps.8, that evil heavenly ruling spirits would be included in these "all things" that are to be placed under Mans feet?

In Ps.8:3 "When I consider the work of your fingers the moon and the stars which you have ordained" it does not mention the Sun, but rather the moon and stars, which in Gen.1.14-18 where given dominion over the night (the rulers of darkness, Eph.6:12; Col.1:13).

Then in Ps.8:5 "For you made him a little lower than the elohim"; now remember that the moon and stars in Ps.8:3 are the works of Gods fingers, then it says Man will be given dominion over the works of God's hands(this is to draw the reader's attention to what was previously mentioned as being the works of Gods fingers, the moon and stars, which are included in the works of God's hands), that have been placed beneath His feet, to which Paul interprets as being the evil spirits that have been placed beneath the feet of Christ; Man was made a little lower than the elohim (which the moon and stars that the psalmist was considering are meant to represent), but Man as God's image has now been exulted above them, above the evil spirits in the heavens (Eph.1.20-23;Col.1:15-16).

With all that I don't see the majestic plural, but rather another word that has the same form in both singular and plural, and the context and grammar must decide.

ThatwemaybethepraiseofHisglory
  • 209
  • 1
  • 12
  • 1
    "where the hosts of heaven are given rule over the over..."-Can you provide a source for this? Also, what is ANEC? – agarza Feb 01 '23 at 03:05
  • I have added some clarifications. – ThatwemaybethepraiseofHisglory Feb 01 '23 at 05:35
  • 1
    You've now made almost 30 edits to this post. Please try to see if you can bundle your edits together, or avoid making trivial ones. Thank you. – curiousdannii Feb 13 '23 at 21:45
  • 1
    @curiousdannii, does it cause problems for others if someone makes trivial changes to their own posts? (I can see that making one every day or two and thereby keeping it active would be bad, but is there anything wrong with many edits within the same day?) – Ray Butterworth Mar 27 '23 at 18:58
  • @RayButterworth The main issue is constantly bumping the post, but it's a bad habit in general. – curiousdannii Mar 27 '23 at 21:02
  • Except Jesus confirms that man is made in the image of God not the benei ha’elohim. Matt22:21 so that part is incorrect. Man was not made in the image of the gods but of echad Elohim Father Son and Spirit as per Isaiah 48:16 (12-17) – Nihil Sine Deo Apr 18 '23 at 02:45
  • no one said we were made in their image that's what they wanted, and it was believed throughout ancient cultures the "sons of the Gods". and think about the image of the beast in rev, this is a theme that runs through the bible i just picked up on it i this verse – ThatwemaybethepraiseofHisglory May 06 '23 at 04:40