Who is God referring to in Genesis? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> The Bible



Message

2by2 -> Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/6/2008 8:48:47 PM)

Genesis 1:26 says, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness" .

And Genesis 3:22 says "Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever "--

Who do you think he is referring to in these verses? Is he speaking to the Holy Spirit?

I appreciate your input as I seek wisdom....[sm=icon_smile_idea.gif]



MrFribbles -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/6/2008 9:21:09 PM)

I've heard that this is probably not a direct reference to other members of the godhead. At the very least, that wasn't the human author's original intent, seeing as how the authors of the Old Testament had no real concept of the trinity that we know of.
There are two other explanations that seem pretty solid to me. Either 1, it is sort of a "royal we," like you sometimes hear monarchs using, or 2, God is addressing the heavenly hosts (see also: 1 Kings 22 and Job 1), or in other words, the spirit beings.



2by2 -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/6/2008 9:23:25 PM)

Ahh, yes. The heavenly hosts.

Thank you for these references.



ta_mosquito -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/6/2008 9:25:46 PM)

Except I don't think we were made in the image of the other heavenly beings...



MrFribbles -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/6/2008 9:31:43 PM)

quote:

Except I don't think we were made in the image of the other heavenly beings...


Why not?



Anisavta -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/7/2008 12:11:58 AM)

quote:

I've heard that this is probably not a direct reference to other members of the godhead. At the very least, that wasn't the human author's original intent, seeing as how the authors of the Old Testament had no real concept of the trinity that we know of.
There are two other explanations that seem pretty solid to me. Either 1, it is sort of a "royal we," like you sometimes hear monarchs using, or 2, God is addressing the heavenly hosts (see also: 1 Kings 22 and Job 1), or in other words, the spirit beings


"I have heard..." who did you hear this from? What scripture reference did they use in making this claim?
How do you know what the human author's origional intent was? If indeed Moses was the author of Genesis, then he was lead by the Holy Spirit to write what he was directed to write. He might have had a better understanding of the unity of Elohim than we do.

The angels helped G~d create us? The angels are created just as we are.

Gen 1:26 And God said, Let Us make man in Our image, after Our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the heavens, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over all the creepers creeping on the earth.
Gen 1:27 And God created man in His image; in the image of God He created him. He created them male and female.

We were created in the image of G~d, not angels. That is what Genesis 1:27 says. I will believe what is written in the Word - by the Word, not in someone's musings.



MrFribbles -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/7/2008 12:36:13 AM)

quote:

"I have heard..." who did you hear this from? What scripture reference did they use in making this claim?


Oh, just people who have spent their entire lives studying God's word. And are apparently equipped enough in their knowledge to be the heads of various Bible/Missions departments at a conservative Bible college.
As for using Scripture references... I'm not sure if they cited anything in particular, except for an understanding of the Hebrew language and the culture that the author's were in.

quote:

How do you know what the human author's origional intent was?


How do any of us? But I do believe that, while the Holy Spirit did guide the authors of Scripture, He also allowed their own personalities and cultural influences affect the manner in which the truth of God was presented.

quote:

The angels helped G~d create us? The angels are created just as we are.


quote:

We were created in the image of G~d, not angels. That is what Genesis 1:27 says. I will believe what is written in the Word - by the Word, not in someone's musings.


I find it a bit disheartening that you seem to be accusing me of not really believing God's word, and instead I am blindly following someone's false teachings, based on me offering a possibility. But perhaps I misunderstand your intent...
Anyway, I am certainly not suggesting the possibility that the angels helped create us. Only God creates. But I do believe God takes pleasure in involving the heavenly hosts in His creative process in some way. In some cases, He even lets them make suggestions, even though He is, of course, fully capable of making decisions Himself. I imagine that, if the "we" refers to the heavenly hosts, it is a bit like the Bob Ross show (which, if you're not familiar with Mr. Ross, is a painting show on PBS). He gathers around His spiritual creations so that they can rejoice with Him in the highlight of His creation - us. The "we", then, is the crowd He has gathered to share in the joy of His creation.
As for why He would use the "our image" language, I would say that it is not beyond the realm of possibility that angels are also made in God's image, and so He is saying something like, "Just like I made you in my image, I'm going to make man in my image as well!"



FurGodWurLivin -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/7/2008 3:45:36 AM)

quote:

Except I don't think we were made in the image of the other heavenly beings...
quote:

Why not?
You want a list? We have no wings, we are not full of eyes all around, we only have one face......... sounds kind of convincing for me.
quote:

I've heard that this is probably not a direct reference to other members of the godhead. At the very least, that wasn't the human author's original intent, seeing as how the authors of the Old Testament had no real concept of the trinity that we know of.
That sounds a little flimsy to me... because you have to square it with David writing in Psalms "The Lord said to my lord...". Considering that most conservative scholarship believes that the first five books of the Bible were written under prophetic revelation by Moses a great deal of time after it happened, I'm more than willing to believe that God, who knows that He is three in one, would recount the story accurately.

In fact, just to throw an interesting wrench into this discussion, one of the names of God (as already mentioned by Anisavta) is Elohim... anybody notice that that is a plural word? It is also one of the predominant names of God in the Old Testament. Why would the authors ascribe a plural name to God if they had no clue that He was triune in nature?

Adam



MrFribbles -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/7/2008 10:56:01 AM)

quote:

You want a list? We have no wings, we are not full of eyes all around, we only have one face......... sounds kind of convincing for me.


Assuming, of course, that the "image" language speaks of physical appearance. Personally, I do not believe that it does. If that were the case, God would be a hermaphrodite, since both man and woman are created in His image.
Rather, I feel it deals with things which make us intrinsically different and "higher" than the animals. Things like our ability to reason, to be creative and appreciate beauty, and of course our ability to make moral decisions and be held accountable for them.

quote:

That sounds a little flimsy to me... because you have to square it with David writing in Psalms "The Lord said to my lord...".


That doesn't necessitate David having a knowledge of the trinity. Just because he believed the Messiah would be greater than he was does not mean he believed the Messiah would be God Himself, come in the flesh. Also, if such knowledge was so readily available to the Jews, why were they murderous with rage when Jesus made claims of deity?

quote:

Considering that most conservative scholarship believes that the first five books of the Bible were written under prophetic revelation by Moses a great deal of time after it happened, I'm more than willing to believe that God, who knows that He is three in one, would recount the story accurately.


And you're more than welcome to. It's certainly within the realm of viable possibility.
However, I just don't see that "recounting the story accurately" here proves that this passage is a trinitarian proof-text. If God literally did say "us" before creating man (and I have absolutely no reason to believe that He did not), that still does not mean that the "us" refers to the members of the godhead.

quote:

In fact, just to throw an interesting wrench into this discussion, one of the names of God (as already mentioned by Anisavta) is Elohim... anybody notice that that is a plural word? It is also one of the predominant names of God in the Old Testament. Why would the authors ascribe a plural name to God if they had no clue that He was triune in nature?


Elohim was not a name used exclusively by the true God. Indeed, it was not even a title reserved solely for the divine and spiritual. Some human rulers were called Elohim. Angels are called Elohim. False gods and goddesses were called Elohim. The plural nature here, I believe, is used as a means of emphasis to describe the greatness (be in real, in God's case, or false, in false-god's case) of the Elohim being described.
Basically, I do not believe the plurality of Elohim can be used as a solid defense for the trinity any more than the singular use of Jehova can be used as an attack against this essential doctrine.



LCannon -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/7/2008 2:31:11 PM)

Us-"You are Jehovah, the Eternal God, His Son is the God of Redemption and the Holy Spirit is the God of Conviction.'



MrFribbles -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/7/2008 2:42:45 PM)

quote:

Us-"You are Jehovah, the Eternal God, His Son is the God of Redemption and the Holy Spirit is the God of Conviction.'


LC, I'm not sure where you're coming from with this. Could you please elaborate further?



Anisavta -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/7/2008 2:58:37 PM)

quote:

Oh, just people who have spent their entire lives studying God's word. And are apparently equipped enough in their knowledge to be the heads of various Bible/Missions departments at a conservative Bible college.
As for using Scripture references... I'm not sure if they cited anything in particular, except for an understanding of the Hebrew language and the culture that the author's were in.


You are still being vague. What conservative Bible college are you speaking of?
I'm not sure if they cited anything in particular
You are using what many get in trouble in their arguments of scripture. Namely "someone said that... and I am not sure what their references are but they must be true becasue they said it..."
I just want to get an understanding of where you are getting your material.

BTW the name Jehovah is not a name at all but a hybrid of YHVH and ADONAI used by the Masoretes who were scribes between the 7th and 11th Centuries. They created the name so people could have a pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton.

The plural (im) in El - Elohim is a unique grammatical construction found only in Hebrew. It is a singular/plural configuration basically meaning one being more than one. And yes elohim means more than just G~d. But it is the meaning of judge which G~d chose to be called when He wasn't using His covenant Name YHVH.



MrFribbles -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/7/2008 3:26:00 PM)

quote:

You are still being vague. What conservative Bible college are you speaking of?
I'm not sure if they cited anything in particular
You are using what many get in trouble in their arguments of scripture. Namely "someone said that... and I am not sure what their references are but they must be true becasue they said it..."
I just want to get an understanding of where you are getting your material.


http://true441.youthsite.org/index.cfm?PAGE_ID=1555&EXPAND=543

Dr. Carl Sanders (incidentally, not the same Carl Sanders who supposedly invented the anti-christ microchip - though he does get a kick of showing us those websites in class) and Mr. Dave Shive, 4th and 5th people down. Incidentally, I feel that it is difficult here to base an argument on whether or not one cites enough Bible verses, since the question deals more with original languages - a subject both of these men are immensely skilled in.

quote:

BTW the name Jehovah is not a name at all but a hybrid of YHVH and ADONAI used by the Masoretes who were scribes between the 7th and 11th Centuries. They created the name so people could have a pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton.


My apologies, I should have clarified. I, personally, often use Jehova, being uncomfortable using the proper Hebrew name. It is a personal conviction of mine, and I apologize for not being more clear about it.
However, my point still remains - that name is singular. If the grammatical plurality of Elohim proves the trinity, then by the same argument the singular nature of that name of God should be considered as evidence against it.

quote:

The plural (im) in El - Elohim is a unique grammatical construction found only in Hebrew. It is a singular/plural configuration basically meaning one being more than one.


Could you please share where you are getting this from? : )

quote:

And yes elohim means more than just G~d. But it is the meaning of judge which G~d chose to be called when He wasn't using His covenant Name YHVH.


But it is also used of men. Individual men. Are they one, yet more than one? Or are we to understand that the false gods called Elohim are somehow triune, or otherwise multiple in nature?



Anisavta -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/7/2008 4:30:24 PM)

quote:

Could you please share where you are getting this from? : )


Checked out your link - quite an impressive group. Thank you.

My information is from my Hebrew teacher at my synagogue. I am a Messianic Jew.
My teacher is a 77yr old Israeli who received her masters in linguistics from UC Berkeley. Not only does she teach us the aleph bet but also the history and nuances behind the language (her mother tongue).

Your argument for Elohim not being evidence of a Unity is the very one used by the non - believing Jewish rabbis to prove that Yehsua is not Messiah.



MrFribbles -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/7/2008 4:45:48 PM)

quote:

I am a Messianic Jew.


Oh cool, so is my room mate. : )

quote:

My teacher is a 77yr old Israeli who received her masters in linguistics from UC Berkeley. Not only does she teach us the aleph bet but also the history and nuances behind the language (her mother tongue).


Just goes to show that two people who are well-versed in their fields can still have disagreements. One thing I have come to learn is that just because someone we respect says something, that does not mean it is automatically true. And I've also come to see that, as long as the views being proposed don't directly contradict Scripture's clear and obvious teaching, these disagreements are fine; assuming, of course, they don't lead beyond disagreement and into the realm of division.

quote:

Your argument for Elohim not being evidence of a Unity is the very one used by the non - believing Jewish rabbis to prove that Yehsua is not Messiah.


Really? Interesting. I wonder how that make that connection. God is three in one, and one in three. To me, the idea of Elohim referring to a single being does not exclude that being from being trinitarian in nature; it's just that the particular title of Elohim in and of itself would not lead to that conclusion.
Indeed, if we were to base our understanding of the trinity on the plural or singular nature of words, then the New Testament would leave us high and dry, since most occurrences of God (theos) or Lord (kurios) are singular in nature.



Anisavta -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/7/2008 4:54:25 PM)

quote:

Indeed, if we were to base our understanding of the trinity on the plural or singular nature of words, then the New Testament would leave us high and dry, since most occurrences of God (theos) or Lord (kurios) are singular in nature.


That's the difference between Greek and Hebrew thought. And the New Testament is only half of the Book.

Tell your roomie SHALOM for me!



Bluethread -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/7/2008 5:09:16 PM)

The reason for using Scripture to justify ones point, when logic and common experience do not suffice, is because we all seem to accept the Scriptures as authoritative. To quote those one personally reveres does not tend to ad much credibility to ones arguiment. For this reason I am reluctant to say, "The Rabbis say..." unless we are talking about what is common among the Jewish community. If I were to say that, I have no doubt my point would not only not be justified, but some in this forum would find such a styatement as "proof" that I am wrong. So, in all fairness, we need to realize that rabbinics are not just derived from Jewish rabbis(teachers), but christian teachers(rabbis) should be veiwed with equal scepticism.

Also, the introduction of ones pet doctrines to a discussion, when it is not directly related to the question leads us off on rabbit trails, making it hard to stay on topic. Therefore, unless someone is suggesting that being made in the image of Adonai means we each are made up of three personalities, let's leave that proposed attribute to another thread.

If I understand the question, it is asking what attributes were imparted upon man at creation and the fall respectively?

I believe that we were give the power of volition at creation. By that I mean a knowledge of ones self as seperate from ones environment and the ability to act on that understanding. At the fall, we chose to decide what is best for ourselves without consulting Adonai and in doing this aquired the mean of deriving a miriad of destructive behaviors. Among those are self destructive behaviors that lead to death.



ta_mosquito -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/7/2008 9:20:38 PM)

quote:

If I understand the question, it is asking what attributes were imparted upon man at creation and the fall respectively?

Actually, the OP was asking about the use of "US" in the creation of man in Genesis. [;)]



Anisavta -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/8/2008 1:23:38 AM)

quote:

Just goes to show that two people who are well-versed in their fields can still have disagreements. One thing I have come to learn is that just because someone we respect says something, that does not mean it is automatically true. And I've also come to see that, as long as the views being proposed don't directly contradict Scripture's clear and obvious teaching, these disagreements are fine; assuming, of course, they don't lead beyond disagreement and into the realm of division.


Not sure I understand what you mean.
If you are comparing a native born Israeli who's mother tongue is Hebrew and thinks in Hebrew against a well educated but seminary taught person who learned the language from another person who learned it no doubt from another person - I can't see the comparison.
And are you saying that although you respect your sources you don't agree with them and you question their truth or are you saying you don't agree with my Hebrew teacher?
I think your challenge of the Genesis scripture of Elohim is shakey at best.
You are saying in essence, maybe G~d didn't mean what He said when He said "Us". Then you aquate the Us to perhaps the "royal we" as in "We are not amused" or that He is speaking to His other created beings giving them a hand in the creation of humans. And this even though we know from scripture the Holy One will not share His glory with another.

Gen 3:1 Now the serpent was more cunning than any beast of the field which ADONAI Elohim had made. And he said to the woman, Is it so that God has said, You shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
From this scripture we see that the enemy is putting doubt into Eve's mind by asking her if she really heard G~d correctly.
Even though the Hebrew language makes it clear that Elohim is the plural form of El yet there is question of the Unity of G~d just because some question it because they are English speakers who have learned Hebrew and it goes against their Western mindset?
Just things to ponder.



makarizo -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/8/2008 6:56:42 AM)

the word elohiym is a plural word..meaning the Gods, or the strong ones... it is also used in verses 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8, and so on, many more times, but it is translated "GOD" singular.... I don't know why.



45degreeN -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/8/2008 8:11:40 AM)

Disputes such as this concerning the nature of God establish that there is no doctrine that can be safely ascertained from this information and we need to allow for diversity. Those who insist upon God being singular, and those who insist upon the trinitarian doctrine, neither one can prove their point conclusively so we need to allow for each others point and not make dogma over it. Dogma only serves to separate ourselves and that is clearly not what God wants





Elohim is the plural of Eloah it is not the plural of El.



drmark -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/8/2008 12:06:30 PM)

quote:

So, in all fairness, we need to realize that rabbinics are not just derived from Jewish rabbis(teachers), but christian teachers(rabbis) should be veiwed with equal scepticism.
Excuse me, Bluethread, but I put a whole lot more confidence in the teachings of a Spirit-filled and Spirit-led Christian than I do a lost unbeliever!! You've missed this distinction totally, IMO.

quote:

Disputes such as this concerning the nature of God establish that there is no doctrine that can be safely ascertained from this information and we need to allow for diversity.
C'mon, 45N, what kind of relativistic mumbo-jumbo is this? The nature of the Triune God is essential Christian doctrine, not "allowance for diversity"! Dogma is precisely what separates us from the unsaved and God Himself spoke it clearly in John 14:6.



Anisavta -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/8/2008 1:45:42 PM)

quote:

Elohim is the plural of Eloah it is not the plural of El.


Beg to differ.
The root of Elohim is El.

quote:

but it is translated "GOD" singular.... I don't know why.


The word GOD is Elohim in each of the following verses.



Bluethread -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/8/2008 2:27:20 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: drmark

quote:

So, in all fairness, we need to realize that rabbinics are not just derived from Jewish rabbis(teachers), but christian teachers(rabbis) should be veiwed with equal scepticism.
Excuse me, Bluethread, but I put a whole lot more confidence in the teachings of a Spirit-filled and Spirit-led Christian than I do a lost unbeliever!! You've missed this distinction totally, IMO.

quote:

Disputes such as this concerning the nature of God establish that there is no doctrine that can be safely ascertained from this information and we need to allow for diversity.
C'mon, 45N, what kind of relativistic mumbo-jumbo is this? The nature of the Triune God is essential Christian doctrine, not "allowance for diversity"! Dogma is precisely what separates us from the unsaved and God Himself spoke it clearly in John 14:6.


Of course, I to would put a whole lot more confidence in the teachings of a Spirit-filled and Spirit-led person over one who is not. The only problem is that the only person I am sure is Spirit-filled and Spirit-led in all of His opinions is a Jewish Rabbi, Yeshua Ha Meshiach(Jesus the Messiah)

"allowance for diversity" may be a bit PC, but I agree with the point, Unless we can prove something diffinitively to the satisfaction of the hearer, we need to give that person the opportunity to reflect. Though some say, "A man's best friend is his dogma.", to demand others agree with our views is not in the nature of civil discussion.



drmark -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/8/2008 3:12:40 PM)

quote:

The only problem is that the only person I am sure is Spirit-filled and Spirit-led in all of His opinions is a Jewish Rabbi, Yeshua Ha Meshiach(Jesus the Messiah)
Then I suggest you re-read 1 Cor 2:12-16, Bluethread. I am sure of my relationship with Yeshua and I trust Him to have His mind. The Trinity is not an "opinion" to be taught by rabbis!



Page: [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI