Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Brady R. Johnson" <brady AT seanet.com>]

According to Jewish reading of Gen. 1:26, the use of the plural means that
God consulted with the angels.  The angels are not co-creators, nor is
there a plurality of deities engaged in creation.  The commentary to
Stone's Tenach says this:

----------------
Targum Yonasan paraphrases:  "And God said to the ministering angels who
had been created on the second day of Creation of the world, 'Let us make
Man.'"

When Moses wrote the Torah and came to this vers (let us make), which is in
the plural and implies that there is more than one Creator, he said:
"Sovereign of the Universe!  Why do You furnish a pretext for heretics to
maintain that there is a plurality of divinities?"  "Write!" God replied.
"Whoever wishes to err will err ... Instead, let them learn from their
Creator Who created all, yet when He came to create Man He took counsel
with the ministering angels"  (Midrash).
----------------

I have heard about a Christian interpretation that views this passage as
referring to the trinity, but I don't know where it originated or how
current it is.  I do know that there are some who still assert that
interpretation however.

Brady Johnson


>To b-hebrewers interested in translation:
>
>I have a friend in Mozambique working on getting some OT Bible portions
>into a vernacular there.  His query to me was the following:
>
>"When the guy I work with got to the part about "Let us make man in our
>image..." he was really confused.  I was thinking, since it's just a very
>simple story book and our first try at translating anything, of doing it
>in singular.
>
>What's the deal with that passage, anyway?  (Gen. 1.26) I guess Elohim
>must be plural, but I thought that was just a fixed form.  The LXX says
>"Let us make" but my Hebrew is not good enough to check there.
>My commentary says people used to think it referred to the trinity, but
>he thinks it refers to God and the angels."
>
>My own counsel was that I was going to do some research (really going out
>on a limb, I know), part of which is to get some thoughts from the group,
>particularly the translators among you.
>
>My initial word was that he not decide anything yet.  Elohim often
>(intuitively I'd say typically but I haven't counted) agrees with
>singular verb forms in 3rd and 1st person alike if I'm not mistaken.
>This instance is plural.  That seems to be something not to be brushed
>aside likely.
>
>If the associate in question thinks that 'we' refers to God and the
>angels, that would make angels co-creators with God, no?  I have a hard
>time suggesting that it be translated in such a way as to  make  Gen1:26
>inconsistent with other parts of OT theology in this language.  On the
>other hand, the plural form IS there and would seem to communicate
>something.  I'm not familiar with Jewish handling of the plural but,
>though I find specific references to the Trinity by Christians a bit too
>anachronistic for my taste, the text does seem to beg a broader
>interpretation than a singular would allow here.
>
>Your thoughts, please, and references if you have them handy?  I have yet
>to hit the library on this one, though I hope to soon.
>
>Warmly,
>Doug
>
>___________________________________________________________________
>You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
>Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
>or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
>
>---
>You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: brady AT seanet.com
>To unsubscribe, forward this message to
>$subst('Email.Unsub')
>To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu.