In "Our" image

[Father's Love]

I have read this many times and heard many speak on it. "Let us make man in our image". I have heard that since God is royalty that he speaks of himself in the third person, I have heard trinitarians say this is evidence of the Holy trinity, I have heard he was speaking with the angles pertaining to their image.... The scripture tells us what is happening. What are the only two things in existence at that time? God and the earth. When God said let us make man in our image he was speaking with the earth. And next it puts action to words, he created man of the dust of the earth (image of earth) and breathed life into him (image of God). That is why we can chose to serve the one and only God or we can chose to serve the flesh. We are made of both thus have free will.

[Luke]

Originally Posted by Father's Love

I have read this many times and heard many speak on it. "Let us make man in our image". I have heard that since God is royalty that he speaks of himself in the third person, I have heard trinitarians say this is evidence of the Holy trinity, I have heard he was speaking with the angles pertaining to their image.... The scripture tells us what is happening. What are the only two things in existence at that time? God and the earth. When God said let us make man in our image he was speaking with the earth. And next it puts action to words, he created man of the dust of the earth (image of earth) and breathed life into him (image of God). That is why we can chose to serve the one and only God or we can chose to serve the flesh. We are made of both thus have free will.

So the earth made man?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Father's Love

I have read this many times and heard many speak on it. "Let us make man in our image". I have heard that since God is royalty that he speaks of himself in the third person, I have heard trinitarians say this is evidence of the Holy trinity, I have heard he was speaking with the angles pertaining to their image.... The scripture tells us what is happening. What are the only two things in existence at that time? God and the earth. When God said let us make man in our image he was speaking with the earth. And next it puts action to words, he created man of the dust of the earth (image of earth) and breathed life into him (image of God). That is why we can chose to serve the one and only God or we can chose to serve the flesh. We are made of both thus have free will.

Angels. Angels existed. The Stars existed. The Universe existed. Animals existed.

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Angels. Angels existed. The Stars existed. The Universe existed. Animals existed.

So did the angels or the animals make man?

[votivesoul]

We could just use some parsimony here and recognize that "us" and "our" are merely results necessitated by the grammatical construct of the Hebrew language, since God or elohim is technically a plural word (even when not denoting a plural subject), thus seemingly requiring a translation suggesting some form of plurality.

After all, when in the next verse, it becomes the third person singular "He", everything else reverts back to being singular in the translation.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

So did the angels or the animals make man?

No, God did. But He could have addressed angels as passive participants, being present and perhaps observing Creation.

Job 38:4 "Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding.
Job 38:5 Who determined its measurements--surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it?
Job 38:6 On what were its bases sunk, or who laid its cornerstone,
Job 38:7 when the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

We could just use some parsimony here and recognize that "us" and "our" are merely results necessitated by the grammatical construct of the Hebrew language, since God or elohim is technically a plural word (even when not denoting a plural subject), thus seemingly requiring a translation suggesting some form of plurality.

After all, when in the next verse, it becomes the third person singular "He", everything else reverts back to being singular in the translation.

The verbs are singular

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

The verbs are singular

"said" in Hebrew is third person masculine singular, but "make" is first person common plural.

So only one Being spoke, even though that one Being, being the subject, is plural in form (i.e. elohim). However, that one Being used a plural verb to refer to a noun (in this case image) which is also in a first person plural construct in Hebrew.

It's a grammatical requirement that such words "make" and "image" have "us" and "our" attached to them in this particular verse. It's merely a language thing.

It's the same with the English translation. We would not write "let us makes", since that is grammatically incorrect. But he or she or it makes, is correct.

It's just the way the words have to be based on the rules.

Sure, we might assume an implied meaning, but that is just speculation. We look at Scripture from the vantage point of having it all together in a single tome at one time. But back when this was spoken, when it was passed down through oral tradition, and finally, when it was written down for posterity, not all of the rest of the Bible existed, so no one back then would have been able to proof-text Genesis 1:26 and cross reference it to, say Job 38:4 and 7, for example.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

"said" in Hebrew is third person masculine singular, but "make" is first person common plural.

So only one Being spoke, even though that one Being, being the subject, is plural in form (i.e. elohim). However, that one Being used a plural verb to refer to a noun (in this case image) which is also in a first person plural construct in Hebrew.

It's a grammatical requirement that such words "make" and "image" have "us" and "our" attached to them in this particular verse. It's merely a language thing.

It's the same with the English translation. We would not write "let us makes", since that is grammatically incorrect. But he or she or it makes, is correct.

It's just the way the words have to be based on the rules.

Sure, we might assume an implied meaning, but that is just speculation. We look at Scripture from the vantage point of having it all together in a single tome at one time. But back when this was spoken, when it was passed down through oral tradition, and finally, when it was written down for posterity, not all of the rest of the Bible existed, so no one back then would have been able to proof-text Genesis 1:26 and cross reference it to, say Job 38:4 and 7, for example.

One being spoke (singular) to some other beings other than the speaker

[Praxeas]

Interesting quote I found. Someone on Facebook mentioned Rashi

1:26 “Let Us make” The form (BDB 793, KB 889) is Qal IMPERFECT, but is used in a COHORTATIVE sense. There has been much discussion over the PLURAL “us.” Philo and Eben Ezra say it is “the plural of majesty,” but this grammatical form does not occur until much later in Jewish literary history (NET Bible says it does not occur with VERBS, p. 5); Rashi says that it refers to the heavenly court (cf. 1 Kgs. 22:19–23; Job 1:6–12; 2:1–6; Isa. 6:8), but this cannot imply that angels had a part in creation, nor that they have the divine image. Others assume that it is an incipient form of the concept of a Triune God.
Interesting is the fact that in the Mesopotamian accounts of creation the gods (usually linked to individual cities) are always contending with one another but here not only is monotheism evident but even in the few PLURAL expressions there is harmony and not capricious discontent.


Utley, R. J. (2001). Vol. Vol. 1A: How it All Began: Genesis 1–11. Study Guide Commentary Series (33). Marshall, Texas: Bible Lessons International.