Genesis 1:26

You got a meeting with Trump? You'd be the only one wanting to see him right now. Perhaps you are testifying on his behalf.

 

I have had three semesters of Hebrew (one undergraduate and two at graduate level) and it is not a slam dunk at all. Moreover, every Hebrew scholar I have spoken to - including on who is a Bible translator - does not agree with that view.

I would prefer that it be a sign of the Trinity, but we should not interpret the scripture according to our preferences.

 

Hank, this isn't a translation issue but an interpretation issue.
The text and its translation is rather stable across a variety of Bibles.

...and you really don't need a lot of Hebrew to translate this portion of Scripture. ​

The issue is what does the text mean?
Here's where things become difficult!

John Walton in his book, The Lost World of Genesis has popularized the notion that Genesis 1 is a Temple text, a symbolic representation of God and his temple.
With this understanding the consideration of God speaking amidst the Divine Council comes to the forefront.

Rob

 

Speculation is the mother of false theology. While any of us can prefer one of the several interpretations, all of us should accept that the meaning is ambiguous. Another important point is that when you take an ambiguous text and read into it support for your doctrine, that is shoddy bible study.

 

Just a few days ago I also posted a thread which discusses Gen 1:26. Here it is: The Deep Roots of the Great Commission

 

Indeed I do believe that Genesis does have a connection to the Trinity. Now any self respecting Jew will try to dispell it (I can just hear them, "Hear oh Israel, The Lord our God, The Lord is one" ...... Yes oh venerable Refusers of Christ, yes---One in Three.

 

So what is your point? Same as my point.

HankD

 

It's within the realm of possibility.

HankD

 

Which would be called progressive revelation!

 

I don't care. IMO You are still wrong.
By my way of thinking it is a slam dunk.

Elohim started out as a common plural word - not the name for Almighty God and it is NOT His name..
It was used later for collections of deities e.g. the elohim of Baal, ashteroth...
Then go to the fact that elohim is used as a connective with the tetragrammaton (LORD-GOD - YHWH-Elohim) after Adam sins and God reveals his connective name to him.
Elohim is plural not dual, there is no cardinal number associated with it so it has the value of "3".
You have graduate Hebrew? Do the research yourself.


HankD

 

OK believe what you will.

But do some original thought, put down the commentaries.

HankD

 

I have never read a book by Perer Lombard. Don't know who he is.

HankD

 

Hank, this really isn't about you.
There are options; You have expressed yours... rather forcefully I might add.
You've provided some reasoning why you believe so.

Others think differently and have provided some reasoning as well.
If you're curious research it.
If you're not, honor those that reason differently with kindness.

Recognize that those with differing opinions about the meaning of the 'us' in Genesis 1:26 at the same time also believe in the Trinity just as strongly as you do.

Rob

 

Osmosis :eek:

HankD

 

Yes, I should realize that everyone is entitled to my opinion! :Cool

HankD

 

I value your opinion Hank... Here's my two cents... Let us is referring to the Trinity... Or as I heard one preacher say it... Three in one and one in three and the one in the middle died for me... I guess we can call this Trinity 101... Brother Glen:D

 

Since I usually disagree with Tyndale1949, I must say I like the "three in one, one in three and the one in the middle died for me."

 

Yeah I borrowed that and here's another one on how you spell JOY... Jesus first... Others second... And Yourself last... Or Jesus first... Yourself last... And nothing in between... You brethren are free to use any of them... Remember you heard it here first... And thanks Van for making me younger!... Brother Glen:D