Elohim: ‘We’, ‘US’... Singular or Plural GOD?

[Soapy]

I have been looking at the suggestion by trinitarian believers that YAHWEH GOD [Ha Elohim] was speaking in the plural of himself when he said he was going to create mankind - that he was not speaking WITH the Elohim Angels.

But I came across something that everyone (most, I presume, given the intensity of arguments) that seems to not take note of.

Here is an anecdote:

• A child came to his mother and said, “Mom, I’ve been invited to my friend’s birthday part on Saturday”
• “That’s really great”, replied Mom. “Have you thought about what present you are going give them?”

‘Them’? It’s plural ... but ‘Friend’ is singular

Are we to assume that the ‘friend’ is a three-some, Trinity, of persons?

Here are some definitions to get the debate started:

Quotes from: Elohim | Hebrew god:

Though Elohim is plural in form, it is understood in the singular sense. Thus, in Genesis the words, “In the beginning God (Elohim) created the heavens and the earth,” Elohim is monotheistic in connotation, though its grammatical structure seems polytheistic.

Elohim, singular Eloah, (Hebrew: God), the God of Israel in the Old Testament. A plural of majesty, the term Elohim—though sometimes used for other deities, such as the Moabite god Chemosh, the Sidonian goddess Astarte, and also for other majestic beings such as angels, kings, judges (the Old Testament shofeṭim), and the Messiah—is usually employed in the Old Testament for the one and only God of Israel, whose personal name was revealed to Moses as YHWH, or Yahweh (q.v.). When referring to Yahweh, elohim very often is accompanied by the article ha-, to mean, in combination, “the God,” and sometimes with a further identification Elohim ḥayyim,meaning “the living God.”

 

[Kenny]

I have been looking at the suggestion by trinitarian believers that YAHWEH GOD [Ha Elohim] was speaking in the plural of himself when he said he was going to create mankind - that he was not speaking WITH the Elohim Angels.

But I came across something that everyone (most, I presume, given the intensity of arguments) that seems to not take note of.

Here is an anecdote:

• A child came to his mother and said, “Mom, I’ve been invited to my friend’s birthday part on Saturday”
• “That’s really great”, replied Mom. “Have you thought about what present you are going give them?”

‘Them’? It’s plural ... but ‘Friend’ is singular

Are we to assume that the ‘friend’ is a three-some, Trinity, of persons?

Here are some definitions to get the debate started:

Quotes from: Elohim | Hebrew god:

bad grammar? give her or him?

If a child is going to make a mud patty, does the child say, "We are going to make?"

 

[SA Huguenot]

The Elohim is plural, and Gesenius attempted to show that it was the use in Hebrew to show respect, "Pluralis Majestica".
Plural of Majesty.
Then came Hirsch Prinz, and proved Gesenius wrong, and as a Jewish Rabi, Hirsch Prinz, (or JWC Pauly) went through many verses in the OT giving evidence that God is called El etc.
Furthermore, the argument that Elohim is an ancient use to denote honor to a king or Lord, was never found in any other writings.
Therefore, the word does describe god as GODS.
Deu 6:4 “Hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one .
Litterally it says,
“Hear O Israel, the YHWH (He) our Elohim (plural Gods), the YHWH (he) is one .
But this is not the best description of the Trinity, there are much more,

such as God created the Earth, and His Spirit left His existence, and 'Hovered above the waters' Gen 1:2
and the Word of God created everything, and came to the earth, and lived amongst us.John 1:1 - 14

Obviously my own wording to simplify the meaning.

:

 

[Soapy]

bad grammar? give her or him?

If a child is going to make a mud patty, does the child say, "We are going to make?"

Two points:
1) It’s not bad grammar to say, ‘...give them’ even if the recipient is singular. The ‘them’ is used when the gender of the person is not known. I’m sure you say it in daily life (if the occasion arose). Similar to (to carry on the dialogue):

• “So, when was their birthday and are they going to have a sleep-over?”

2) Yes, the child would be wrong to talk in the third person... usually. But how many kids (especially girls) do you hear (have you heard personally or anecdotally) say to inanimate toys / dolls something like:

• “Let’s have a cup of tea and some biscuits!”

The main point is that GOD was not talking to HIMSELF (nor an inanimate object).

‘Elohim’, as you see, is a plural MAJESTY. This does not imply a plural PERSON. Angels (messengers / doers of the Will [of God] are also called ‘ELOHIM’.

Be it known that angels are indeed MAJESTIC, powerful and highly intelligent. Although the scriptures warns us not to make figurations of Heavenly things, we do find that humans make false figurines of what they claim angels look like... who is going to tell them that spirit angels do not LOOK ANYTHING LIKE THOSE figurines... and certainly do not have WINGS!!! For sure, what is the need!?

But Angels certainly helped in the creation of the world and in the creation of the first man, Adam.

Yahweh God spoke to the angels and said he was going to make [a] man in ‘OUR’ Image.

I know it frightens people of trinity belief to hear this but hiding from the truth is not helpful: The powerful and Intelligent angels are IMAGES OF GOD but without the self-Will entity.

Holy Angels are ‘Sons of God’ in Spirit form. This means that they mirror their ‘Father’, their creator, just as mankind in flesh form SHOULD mirror their creator Father if they profess to be Sons of God.

The angels, Spirit Sons of God, are fully capable of doing WHATEVER YAHWEH sets them to do... As such they MUST have the intelligence and POWER to do so BUT to do that and only that as YAHWEH set them.

Humans, sons of God in flesh, are FREE-WILLED but LIMITED to the physical world and our powers and intelligence is limited only to what we can sense with our physical senses in our physical world - at present.

So, even though Yahweh said, “Let US create man in our image” you will note that He went on to create msn in ‘HIS IMAGE’.

This is not to be glossed over. There were TWO parts to the creation:

1) The BODY of Adam was created - lifeless. Are you going to argue that angels cannot do that? It had no animating spirit in it - it is ‘red-clay’ in a body form (anatomical speculations not required - Moses wasn’t made aware of that aspect!)

2) The lifeless body of Adam was brought to life by the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit of God (where else can you read of a similar creation of a pure, sinless, and righteous humankind?): “And the man BECAME A LIVING SOUL”

((Scientifically, we can say that the ‘coming alive’ could be from an existing species that became ‘God-aware’... perfectly feasible!! But irrelevant to this discussion.))

So, all in all, by my reading, there was not a single attempt at claiming a multiple GOD in the word, “ELOHIM” and therefore would suggest that trinitarian stop using it as a fallacious attempt to claim a trinity expression in the Torah.

 

[rosends]

There are 2 points to make:
1. The word is a singuar or a plural depending on the verb that connects with it (or the nouns it agrees with) and it doesn't even always mean "god" or "gods" (God tells Moses that God will make him an elohim, meaning a judge)
2. The letters yod-mem sofit that people see as a pluralizing ending (though in Hebrew they are not always so) are, and Nachmanides explains, a reference beyond the word, as he sees the words as meaning "master of all other forces". So the pural is pointing out the other forces to which God is superior.

 

[Soapy]

The Elohim is plural, and Gesenius attempted to show that it was the use in Hebrew to show respect, "Pluralis Majestica".
Plural of Majesty.
Then came Hirsch Prinz, and proved Gesenius wrong, and as a Jewish Rabi, Hirsch Prinz, (or JWC Pauly) went through many verses in the OT giving evidence that God is called El etc.
Furthermore, the argument that Elohim is an ancient use to denote honor to a king or Lord, was never found in any other writings.
Therefore, the word does describe god as GODS.
Deu 6:4 “Hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one .
Litterally it says,
“Hear O Israel, the YHWH (He) our Elohim (plural Gods), the YHWH (he) is one .
But this is not the best description of the Trinity, there are much more,

such as God created the Earth, and His Spirit left His existence, and 'Hovered above the waters' Gen 1:2
and the Word of God created everything, and came to the earth, and lived amongst us.John 1:1 - 14

Obviously my own wording to simplify the meaning.

:

So you think ‘Elohim’ means ‘Three persons as one God’?

So what then of the angels being called ‘Elohim’?

 

[Soapy]

There are 2 points to make:
1. The word is a singuar or a plural depending on the verb that connects with it (or the nouns it agrees with) and it doesn't even always mean "god" or "gods" (God tells Moses that God will make him an elohim, meaning a judge)
2. The letters yod-mem sofit that people see as a pluralizing ending (though in Hebrew they are not always so) are, and Nachmanides explains, a reference beyond the word, as he sees the words as meaning "master of all other forces". So the pural is pointing out the other forces to which God is superior.

The God of Moses said that He would make Moses ‘a God’ to Pharoah ... and that Aaron, Moses’ brother would be Moses’ Prophet.

In virtually all religion with Gods, there is a Prophet who mediated between the real or supposed God, and mankind. So YAHWEH was certainly saying that Moses was to an ELOHIM over Pharoah. Note that the Israelites had difficulty hearing the direct voice of God and Moses, God’s prophet of the time, had to interpret for them.... similarly, Moses’ speech impediment meant that the Egyptians found it difficult to hear him... Aaron, prophet to Moses, interpreted for them....

Kinda fits the scriptural emphasis by repetition!

• “And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.” (Exodus 7:1)

 

[rosends]

The God of Moses said that He would make Moses ‘a God’ to Pharoah ... and that Aaron, Moses’ brother would be Moses’ Prophet.

In virtually all religion with Gods, there is a Prophet who mediated between the real or supposed God, and mankind. So YAHWEH was certainly saying that Moses was to an ELOHIM over Pharoah. Note that the Israelites had difficulty hearing the direct voice of God and Moses, God’s prophet of the time, had to interpret for them.... similarly, Moses’ speech impediment meant that the Egyptians found it difficult to hear him... Aaron, prophet to Moses, interpreted for them....

Kinda fits the scriptural emphasis by repetition!

• “And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.” (Exodus 7:1)

The word used is the same elohim word but is A) understood to be singular and B) understood to mean a judge or a superior (cf the Aramaic "l'rav" in 4:1 and Rashi's statement of שׁוֹפֵט וְרוֹדֶה in 7:1). A person is not a God.

 

[Colt]

To the Jews, Elohim was the God of gods, while Yahweh was the God of Israel. By the times of Jesus Judaism had largely eradicated previous plural concepts of deity.

 

[Soapy]

The word used is the same elohim word but is A) understood to be singular and B) understood to mean a judge or a superior (cf the Aramaic "l'rav" in 4:1 and Rashi's statement of שׁוֹפֵט וְרוֹדֶה in 7:1). A person is not a God.

Well, have it the way you like.

Honestly, though I agree that the meaning of Elohim INCLUDES ‘Judge’, I don’t think isolating one aspect of the meaning is applicable in the situation of Moses. Moses was not JUDGING Pharoah.

It would be more like ‘Master of’, or as you also said, ‘Superior’.

We also use the latter in phrases such as:

• ‘A Judge is GOD (Elohim) in his own court room’
• ‘A (Jewish) Father is GOD of his household’
• ‘A chess grandmaster is GOD of his game’

Also, expressly, Angels do not judge - yet they are ELOHIM!

God made Moses to be superior over Pharoah... sounds right!

But more than superior. A superior person does not need a prophet... so God made Moses to be more than just ‘superior’ over Pharoah.

But at least we agree that Elohim does not mean a multiplicity (let alone an explicit, three) persons as one, as the false trinity claim makes out.

 

[Soapy]

To the Jews, Elohim was the God of gods, while Yahweh was the God of Israel. By the times of Jesus Judaism had largely eradicated previous plural concepts of deity.

The Jews did not believe in any other Gods and never acknowledged any (strictly). But since ‘GODS’ are what humans call their spirit DEITIES, it is only natural that an inclusive decree would be that, demonstrably, the God of the Jews is SUPERIOR over ALL others WHO ARE CALLED GODS.

We must never forget that just as we profess AN ELOHIM for our faith, others profess an (or more) ELOHIM(S) for their faith. Christians and Jews believe in ONE ELOHIM in deference to all other religious belief systems.

We believe that HA ELOHIM told his favoured nation:

• “Hear, O Israel, YAHWEH your ELOHIM, is your ONLY ELOHIM”

As per the OP, there is no room for a multiplicity in that statement from HA ELOHIM, himself.

 

[rosends]

But more than superior. A superior person does not need a prophet... so God made Moses to be more than just ‘superior’ over Pharoah.

But at least we agree that Elohim does not mean a multiplicity (let alone an explicit, three) persons as one, as the false trinity claim makes out.

This raises an interesting point -- the classic commentary of Rashi on Ex 7:1 cites the ancient Aramaic for the word "n'vi'echa" as "m'turg'manach" -- your interpreter/translator: "This must be understood as the Targum takes it: thy interpreter. Similarly, wherever this term of נבואה is mentioned it refers to a man who publicly proclaims and utters to the people words of reproof. It is of the same derivation as, (Isaiah 57:19) “utterance (ניב) of the lips”; (Proverbs 10:31) “it utters (ינוב) wisdom”; (I Samuel 10:13) “he made an end of proclaiming (התנבות)”, which is in the book of Samuel. In old French we call him predicar; English preacher."

 

[Colt]

The Jews did not believe in any other Gods and never acknowledged any (strictly). But since ‘GODS’ are what humans call their spirit DEITIES, it is only natural that an inclusive decree would be that, demonstrably, the God of the Jews is SUPERIOR over ALL others WHO ARE CALLED GODS.

We must never forget that just as we profess AN ELOHIM for our faith, others profess an (or more) ELOHIM(S) for their faith. Christians and Jews believe in ONE ELOHIM in deference to all other religious belief systems.

We believe that HA ELOHIM told his favoured nation:

• “Hear, O Israel, YAHWEH your ELOHIM, is your ONLY ELOHIM”

As per the OP, there is no room for a multiplicity in that statement from HA ELOHIM, himself.

Not true, there are many references to "other Gods" in the Old Testament. The Jews saw their God as superior to all other Gods.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

I have been looking at the suggestion by trinitarian believers that YAHWEH GOD [Ha Elohim] was speaking in the plural of himself when he said he was going to create mankind - that he was not speaking WITH the Elohim Angels.
But I came across something that everyone (most, I presume, given the intensity of arguments) that seems to not take note of.
Here is an anecdote:

• A child came to his mother and said, “Mom, I’ve been invited to my friend’s birthday part on Saturday”
• “That’s really great”, replied Mom. “Have you thought about what present you are going give them?”

‘Them’? It’s plural ... but ‘Friend’ is singular....................

I find YAHWEH GOD (YHWH) is Not Ha Elohim because Elohim is Not the Tetragrammaton YHWH.

The 'us' at Genesis 1:26 would have been the spirit person of Revelation 3:14 B the pre-human Son of God, Jesus.
- www.jw,org

 

[URAVIP2ME]

..............We must never forget that just as we profess AN ELOHIM for our faith, others profess an (or more) ELOHIM(S) for their faith. Christians and Jews believe in ONE ELOHIM in deference to all other religious belief systems.
We believe that HA ELOHIM told his favoured nation:

• “Hear, O Israel, YAHWEH your ELOHIM, is your ONLY ELOHIM”

As per the OP, there is no room for a multiplicity in that statement from HA ELOHIM, himself.

I think it would be good to keep in mind that Adhonai' (Sovereign Lord) and Elohim' (God) are: titles.
They are Not personal names, they are Not the Tetragrammaton YHWH which stands for God's name.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

The Jews did not believe in any other Gods and never acknowledged any (strictly)............, the God of the Jews is SUPERIOR over ALL others WHO ARE CALLED GODS.................

Since God is a title and Not a personal name, then the human judges of Psalms 82 could rightly be considered as 'gods' because they were to use God's (YHWH) judgement to judge between right and wrong.

 

[Kenny]

Two points:
1) It’s not bad grammar to say, ‘...give them’ even if the recipient is singular. The ‘them’ is used when the gender of the person is not known. I’m sure you say it in daily life (if the occasion arose). Similar to (to carry on the dialogue):

• “So, when was their birthday and are they going to have a sleep-over?”

2) Yes, the child would be wrong to talk in the third person... usually. But how many kids (especially girls) do you hear (have you heard personally or anecdotally) say to inanimate toys / dolls something like:

• “Let’s have a cup of tea and some biscuits!”

The main point is that GOD was not talking to HIMSELF (nor an inanimate object).

‘Elohim’, as you see, is a plural MAJESTY. This does not imply a plural PERSON. Angels (messengers / doers of the Will [of God] are also called ‘ELOHIM’.

Be it known that angels are indeed MAJESTIC, powerful and highly intelligent. Although the scriptures warns us not to make figurations of Heavenly things, we do find that humans make false figurines of what they claim angels look like... who is going to tell them that spirit angels do not LOOK ANYTHING LIKE THOSE figurines... and certainly do not have WINGS!!! For sure, what is the need!?

But Angels certainly helped in the creation of the world and in the creation of the first man, Adam.

Yahweh God spoke to the angels and said he was going to make [a] man in ‘OUR’ Image.

I know it frightens people of trinity belief to hear this but hiding from the truth is not helpful: The powerful and Intelligent angels are IMAGES OF GOD but without the self-Will entity.

Holy Angels are ‘Sons of God’ in Spirit form. This means that they mirror their ‘Father’, their creator, just as mankind in flesh form SHOULD mirror their creator Father if they profess to be Sons of God.

The angels, Spirit Sons of God, are fully capable of doing WHATEVER YAHWEH sets them to do... As such they MUST have the intelligence and POWER to do so BUT to do that and only that as YAHWEH set them.

Humans, sons of God in flesh, are FREE-WILLED but LIMITED to the physical world and our powers and intelligence is limited only to what we can sense with our physical senses in our physical world - at present.

So, even though Yahweh said, “Let US create man in our image” you will note that He went on to create msn in ‘HIS IMAGE’.

This is not to be glossed over. There were TWO parts to the creation:

1) The BODY of Adam was created - lifeless. Are you going to argue that angels cannot do that? It had no animating spirit in it - it is ‘red-clay’ in a body form (anatomical speculations not required - Moses wasn’t made aware of that aspect!)

2) The lifeless body of Adam was brought to life by the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit of God (where else can you read of a similar creation of a pure, sinless, and righteous humankind?): “And the man BECAME A LIVING SOUL”

((Scientifically, we can say that the ‘coming alive’ could be from an existing species that became ‘God-aware’... perfectly feasible!! But irrelevant to this discussion.))

So, all in all, by my reading, there was not a single attempt at claiming a multiple GOD in the word, “ELOHIM” and therefore would suggest that trinitarian stop using it as a fallacious attempt to claim a trinity expression in the Torah.

Never claimed a multiple of God but rather a God that is comprised of three parts. Like you and me that have a spirit created from the breath of God, and a soul where God gave us free will and a body so that we can live on this earth, likewise God is comprised of three parts... The Father, The Word and His Spirit.

To be consistent with "them" for a birthday party, it would be inconsistent when YHWH said "Let us make man in our image and in our likeness". The party "them" would not fit.

Let "us" have a cup of tea would include the person along with the doll and not singular.

 

[Art1787]

I have been looking at the suggestion by trinitarian believers that YAHWEH GOD [Ha Elohim] was speaking in the plural of himself when he said he was going to create mankind - that he was not speaking WITH the Elohim Angels.

But I came across something that everyone (most, I presume, given the intensity of arguments) that seems to not take note of.

Here is an anecdote:

• A child came to his mother and said, “Mom, I’ve been invited to my friend’s birthday part on Saturday”
• “That’s really great”, replied Mom. “Have you thought about what present you are going give them?”

‘Them’? It’s plural ... but ‘Friend’ is singular

Are we to assume that the ‘friend’ is a three-some, Trinity, of persons?

Here are some definitions to get the debate started:

Quotes from: Elohim | Hebrew god:

"Elohim" can be used both ways. It can refer to the gods as a group (the divine council). It can refer to a single being, the Father. It can even tangentially refer to Jehovah, because he is "mighty." Elohim, the single being, was not talking to himself. He was talking to Jehovah and other elohim (notice the lower case), or us. We are the angels, or some of them anyway, children of Elohim.

 

[Soapy]

Not true, there are many references to "other Gods" in the Old Testament. The Jews saw their God as superior to all other Gods.

Sorry but I did say that. I said that though OTHER RELIGIOUS BELIEF SYSTEM have their GODS, the Israelites only ACKNOWLEDGED their own GOD. They only WORSHIPPED their own GOD.

Im not going to refer to dissidents Jews who entered into worship of other Gods because of weakness - YAHWEH God punished them for it - but ultimately the mass majority of those Israelites RETURNED to worship their ONLY GOD.

I’m not sure why you think I said anything else. It’s written throughout the Torah even down to the children of Israel making a golden calf and worshipping that. I’m any cases, because they lived among tribes and nations who made idols to worship, some Israelites were seduced by the glamour and drunken celebratory events that took place. Even Solomon in all his wisdom was bewitched enough to take part and was punished appropriately by Yahweh.

addendum: whenever the discussion comes up about God and Gods, there always someone who comes up with some nonsense argument - what is it about supposed Christian or Jewish posters that drives them to misinterpret simple things written in plan sight.

The greatest of these is the ‘There is no God but YAHWEH’.

This is, of course, true..... if you are Christian or Jewish.

BUT remember, or take note, that belief in Yahweh God is just that - a Jewish and Christian belief. NO ONE has the right to say about another belief system that their GOD is not real: IT IS TO THEM!!!

Therefore, the best we can do is say, as the great apostle said:

• ‘Though there may be many Gods and many Lords, FOR US (Jews and Christians) there is but ONE GOD: the Father, and ONE Lord: Jesus Christ’

So, we are to say that we believe in YAHWEH God and no other.

Even Yahweh said of himself: “I am the GOD of ALL whom are called GODS”.

 

[firedragon]

I have been looking at the suggestion by trinitarian believers that YAHWEH GOD [Ha Elohim] was speaking in the plural of himself when he said he was going to create mankind - that he was not speaking WITH the Elohim Angels.

But I came across something that everyone (most, I presume, given the intensity of arguments) that seems to not take note of.

Here is an anecdote:

• A child came to his mother and said, “Mom, I’ve been invited to my friend’s birthday part on Saturday”
• “That’s really great”, replied Mom. “Have you thought about what present you are going give them?”

‘Them’? It’s plural ... but ‘Friend’ is singular

Are we to assume that the ‘friend’ is a three-some, Trinity, of persons?

Here are some definitions to get the debate started:

Quotes from: Elohim | Hebrew god:

Elohim is pluralis majestatis. Otherwise Moses being addressed by God as Elohim to pharaoh, must be several if not three people. Moses is one man.