Let the breaking begin!

[StarCannon]

[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 air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.


So. Who is this "our"? Some claim that the devil is in the details and woe be given to the translator who left this in the bible. Either the us refers to gods in plural... it doesn't refer to any angels or any idea of a trinity... in and of itself. Us. Diction, friends, diction.

Would this not also imply that man is divine in nature; an equal to god and not truly a subordinate except in ignorance?

Some thoughts on this, anyone?

 

[CShephard53]

[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 air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.


So. Who is this "our"? Some claim that the devil is in the details and woe be given to the translator who left this in the bible. Either the us refers to gods in plural... it doesn't refer to any angels or any idea of a trinity... in and of itself. Us. Diction, friends, diction.

Would this not also imply that man is divine in nature; an equal to god and not truly a subordinate except in ignorance?

Some thoughts on this, anyone?

DOESN'T imply trinity? Where do you get that? Trinity doctrine dictates three persons, one God. God in three persons. IF the ONE God is talking about ALL THREE persons, He's not going to say I, is He?

No, it would not imply us being divine, as we are not the ones creating.

 

[StarCannon]

But how does this passage imply trinity? I don't see it in there at all. Jesus isn't even mentioned at this point. Neither is spirit.

"Our likeness" implys more than one being... not trinity, which is something different...

We create works of art. We create buildings. We create societies. We write. We propogate. We defend ourselves from infection and intruder. We make decisions. How are we not but small gods in charge of our own universes? Isn't that what god does but on a smaller scale anyway?

 

[CShephard53]

But how does this passage imply trinity? I don't see it in there at all. Jesus isn't even mentioned at this point. Neither is spirit.

"Our likeness" implys more than one being... not trinity, which is something different...

We create works of art. We create buildings. We create societies. We write. We propogate. We defend ourselves from infection and intruder. We make decisions. How are we not but small gods in charge of our own universes? Isn't that what god does but on a smaller scale anyway?

Doesn't mean we're divine. How does it imply trinity? By being plural, and when taken in context with the whole of the Bible. You know, the numerous passages talking about the Trinity, the most popular being at the end of Matthew 28.

 

[StarCannon]

Implies divinity of man.

When taken in context of the entire history going on at that time in the world and taken in context in and of itself, it implies multiple beings.

Father - god
son- jesus
spirit - the gift of being able to perform miracles.

Three seperate things and taking into account mathematics: three does not equal one.

 

[MichaelW]

When it mentions the "Us" could it be related to Lady Wisdom, or Friend Truth. Jesus is in this case the very Word of God alive and in the flesh (now spirit); So would this imply that the Friend or the Spirit was of the "Us"?

And at the beginning of John "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God". This would imply that Jesus the Word of God and the Son of God was also of the "Us".

Am I correct.

 

[français]

Not to be rude, but you obviously have no knowledge of the semetic languages! (btw, as I am sure you know, the OT was written in Hebrew.)


We, our, and us are used many times in the Semetic languages to express majesty, or importance, or royalty. It is not speaking of more then one person, nor is it speaking of Trinity. It is merely speaking in a Royalty way. That is how the Semetic languages are.

Sometimes using the plural in the semetic languages shows royalty. For example, one of the names for God in hebrew is Elohim, and is used many times throughout the Bible. Well, Elohim is plural. It literally mans "The Gods." Eloah would be the singular form. In Hebrew, the im ending expresses plural (just as in english adding an S at the end usually does.) For example: Hashamayim - Heavens etc etc.


So, you need to look at this in light of the Semetic Languages and you need to be looking at the Hebrew grammatical rules, not the english in this case.

 

[MichaelW]

Because a man and his spirit are not thought unequal but are one in nature the Spirit of God does not count as a separate being.
And because the Son can not act independently of the Father how can they be counted as separate either, or is your hand which is not your brain counted as a separate entity?

 

[StarCannon]

If that is indeed the way that the hebrew royalty spoke, then perhaps they should add an astertisk to the passage and say so, francais Save some of the rest of us some thought-room for other things.

I'm done arguing that now.

 

[français]

If that is indeed the way that the hebrew royalty spoke, then perhaps they should add an astertisk to the passage and say so, francais Save some of the rest of us some thought-room for other things.

I'm done arguing that now.

Anyone who knows even of the basics of the Bible could tell you that the words are expressing royalty in the Hebrew language. Any scholar, rabbi, or priest with knowledge would tell you such.

There is no need for one to put a footnote for such. People should know such. Even when I read it in english I do not see it as speaking about more then one person.

But, just to satisfy you.. Some commentary does...

The text tells us he was the work of Elohim, the Divine Plurality, marked here more distinctly by the plural pronouns Us and Our to express royalty and superiority

 

[StarCannon]

Some of us don't spend our lives studying religous texts, therefore I would not know.

I simply thought there might have been something worth discussing in the passage. Perhaps not the diction, or at least not in the way I had first thought.

 

[CShephard53]

Implies divinity of man.

When taken in context of the entire history going on at that time in the world and taken in context in and of itself, it implies multiple beings.

Father - god
son- jesus
spirit - the gift of being able to perform miracles.

Three seperate things and taking into account mathematics: three does not equal one.

Good thing we're not talking about math, then, isn't it?

 

[StarCannon]

I dunno, I kinda like math. The one math course I'm taking is my GPA buffer at this point in time.