Evangelion
<b><font size="2">δυνατός</b></font>
Continued...
A popular alternative to this view is the idea that God referred to himself in the language of royalty (known as the pluralis majestatis.) Writing in his Hebrew Grammar, Gesenius advances the following explanation:
Let's look at two of them.
First, the well-known tower of Babel story:
This doesnt leave us with too many options. But when we compare these verses with other passages in which references to Gods angels are interchangeable with references to God Himself (such as Genesis 18 & 19), we find that it is possible to harmonise the evidence of Scripture without resorting to a "plurality of persons" within the Godhead.
Next, the vision of Isaiah
The problem for Trinitarians who take Genesis 1:26 as a reference to the alleged "plurality" of God, is that (a) only four passages in the entire Bible can be advanced in support of this argument (and in one of those, we are expressly told that God is surrounded by His angels), (b) if God had intended to reveal Himself as a "plurality", it is peculiar that He didn't make it clearer, and (c) there is simply not enough consistency in the argument itself, let alone the Biblical data.
No Trinitarian has ever succeeded in explaining why God attempted to "prove" His alleged "plurality" by referring to Himself in plural form within the meagre scope of a pitiful four verses, which, if taken as a reference to plurality, flatly contradict the grammatical consistency that we find elsewhere in the Bible.
A popular alternative to this view is the idea that God referred to himself in the language of royalty (known as the pluralis majestatis.) Writing in his Hebrew Grammar, Gesenius advances the following explanation:
Greatness, especially in a metaphorical sense, as associated with power and sovereignty, is plurally expressed. Hence, there are several nouns which are used in the plural as well as the singular, to denote Lord or God (Pluralis majestaticus vel excellentioe) e.g. Eloahh. God is scarcely found in the singular, except in poetry; in prose; commonly elohim; adon, lord, old form of the plural adonai, the Lord, kat exochen (God), shaddai, the Almighty. Often the idea of greatness is no longer associated with the form, the mind having accustomed itself to contemplate the powerful in general as a plural. Another example of the plural majestatis is the use of we by Deity in speaking of Himself (Gen. 1:26; 11:7; Isa. 6:8) and by kings. The German language has it not only in this latter case, but in addressing a second person by Ihr and Sie. This plural is also found in modern Arabic and Persian.
Ezra 4:17-18.
Then sent the king an answer unto Rehum the chancellor, and to Shimshai the scribe, and to the rest of their companions that dwell in Samaria, and unto the rest beyond the river, Peace, and at such a time.
The letter which ye sent unto us hath been plainly read before me.
Let's look at two of them.
First, the well-known tower of Babel story:
- Genesis 11:6-7.
And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.
Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech.
This doesnt leave us with too many options. But when we compare these verses with other passages in which references to Gods angels are interchangeable with references to God Himself (such as Genesis 18 & 19), we find that it is possible to harmonise the evidence of Scripture without resorting to a "plurality of persons" within the Godhead.
Next, the vision of Isaiah
Isaiah 6:8.
Also I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, Whom shall I send, and who will go for us? Then said I, Here am I; send me.
I Kings 22:19-22.
And he said, Hear thou therefore the word of the LORD: I saw the LORD sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left.
And the LORD said, Who shall persuade Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead? And one said on this manner, and another said on that manner.
And there came forth a spirit, and stood before the LORD, and said, I will persuade him.
And the LORD said unto him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt persuade him, and prevail also: go forth, and do so.
The problem for Trinitarians who take Genesis 1:26 as a reference to the alleged "plurality" of God, is that (a) only four passages in the entire Bible can be advanced in support of this argument (and in one of those, we are expressly told that God is surrounded by His angels), (b) if God had intended to reveal Himself as a "plurality", it is peculiar that He didn't make it clearer, and (c) there is simply not enough consistency in the argument itself, let alone the Biblical data.
No Trinitarian has ever succeeded in explaining why God attempted to "prove" His alleged "plurality" by referring to Himself in plural form within the meagre scope of a pitiful four verses, which, if taken as a reference to plurality, flatly contradict the grammatical consistency that we find elsewhere in the Bible.
Upvote
0