Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Matthew Anstey" <manstey AT portal.ca>]

Gday Doug,

You wrote,

|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.

Doug,

This passage has long troubled translators. In one current translation
project in Vanuatu, the language has singular, dual, trial, and plural
pronouns and verb forms. However, trial forms represent about 3-12 people,
and plural is about 12 or more. Try choosing a form for this one! Anyway, to
your problem. In translation there is an oft-quoted maxim, "Leave something
for the preacher." Another is, "There is always the footnote." The various
interpretations of this plural have arisen mainly through worshipping
communities reflecting (in faith? by the Spirit? [substitute here your
hermeneutic]) on the text. Rather than "steering" potential readers into the
right direction, or away from the wrong direction, let the Mozambique
readers decide. If you feel compelled, add in something in a footnote. If
the HB is truly polytheistic, readers will cotton on eventually, and if it
is truly mono/heno-theistic, they will realise this, and together with the
other passages, and other commentaries/sermons, they will struggle together
to discern the meaning of these texts. So most translators nowadays try to
use a plural form here and to leave it at that.

There are many excellent articles on this passage and many others in The
Bible Translator and other such journals.

With regards,
Matthew Anstey