Elohim

[Elijah John]

"Elohim" is plural in Hebrew.

Modern Jews interpret this as a plural of majesty referring to God, as singularity.

Trinitarian Christians see the term as implied Trinity.

Who is right, and why?

Or does the term imply a vestige of polytheism, as in a pantheon?

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

My understanding is that if the plural subject was in fact refering to more than one person (as per the trinitarian view) the corresponding verb or adjective would be conjugated in the plural which is not the case when refering to YHWH.

"The plural of majesty [for elohim] ... occurs in a [numerically] singular sense" and is "constr[ued] with a verb ... and adjective in the singular." - Gesenius' Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament, p. 49

"That the language has entirely rejected the idea of numerical plurality in Elohim (whenever it denotes one God) is proved especially by its being almost invariably joined with a singular attribute." - Gesenius - Kautzsch's Hebrew Grammar, 1949 ed., pp. 398, 399

[bjs]

"Elohim" is plural in Hebrew.

Modern Jews interpret this as a plural of majesty referring to God, as singularity.

This would be anachronistic. There is no evidence that the concept of the plural of majesty (the royal we) existed when most of the OT was written.

Trinitarian Christians see the term as implied Trinity.

True, though it is important that they focus on the word implied. The plural of Elohim is not enough to get us to the Trinity on its own.

Or does the term imply a vestige of polytheism, as in a pantheon?

Probably not, since Deuteronomy 6:4 says Hear O Israel, the LORD (Yahweh) your God (Elohim), the LORD is one.

The explicit statement that the Elohim is one makes a polytheistic or pantheistic view untenable.

[JP Cusick]

"Elohim" is plural in Hebrew.

Modern Jews interpret this as a plural of majesty referring to God, as singularity.

Trinitarian Christians see the term as implied Trinity.

Who is right, and why?

Or does the term imply a vestige of polytheism, as in a pantheon?

The use of plural of = "Let us make man in our image" - can be wrongfully claimed as the majestic, but no King or Queen would ever refer to their self in the plural as Kings or Queens or as plural Presidents or plural Gods.

When majesty uses plural it is to say we the people or we as with our subjects, but never ever as plural to their self and their high position.

There is only one King and one Queen and yet there are many Gods / Elohim.

The doctrine of the Bible is that there is a Kingdom in the Heavens where there are Angels and spirits of different rank and they are all Gods = all are the Elohim.

Even human beings are considered to be Gods, even if we might just be demigods.

The name of Yahweh means Father, and so Yahweh Elohim means = Father of the Gods, which is why Jesus tells us to call God as the Father because we humans are the children of God which means that humans are Gods too.

"And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven." KJV, Matthew 23:9

[Elijah John]

"Elohim" is plural in Hebrew.

Modern Jews interpret this as a plural of majesty referring to God, as singularity.

This would be anachronistic. There is no evidence that the concept of the plural of majesty (the royal we) existed when most of the OT was written.

What then, do you think is an explanation of the word in it's original context, the original intent of the writer. One that a Jew of the day would accept?

[kayky]

It really depends on when the poem that opens Genesis was actually written. It is much younger than the Eden myth that follows it. So it's probably impossible to come up with a definitive answer. I think we can say without much doubt that its author(s) had no concept of trinitarianism.

It is, however, interesting to note that Abraham was not a true monotheist. He simply looked at the Canaanite pantheon and chose the head god El, the father of Baal, to be his family's only god. This tribal god, for many generations, led Israel to victory in battle only because he was more powerful than the gods of other tribes. Polytheism thrived in Israel up to the Babylonian exile. I think it was in exile that these people learned what it meant to be Jewish. It wasn't until they returned from exile and rebuilt the Temple that Judea could be said to be truly monotheistic.

[Elijah John]

It really depends on when the poem that opens Genesis was actually written. It is much younger than the Eden myth that follows it. So it's probably impossible to come up with a definitive answer. I think we can say without much doubt that its author(s) had no concept of trinitarianism.

It is, however, interesting to note that Abraham was not a true monotheist. He simply looked at the Canaanite pantheon and chose the head god El, the father of Baal, to be his family's only god. This tribal god, for many generations, led Israel to victory in battle only because he was more powerful than the gods of other tribes. Polytheism thrived in Israel up to the Babylonian exile. I think it was in exile that these people learned what it meant to be Jewish. It wasn't until they returned from exile and rebuilt the Temple that Judea could be said to be truly monotheistic.

I'm not good with my timelines. Was Isaiah a pre or a post exilic prophet? Or a prophet in the exile?

Several of the passages from his book seem to indicate a true monotheism.

[bjs]

I'm not good with my timelines. Was Isaiah a pre or a post exilic prophet? Or a prophet in the exile?

Several of the passages from his book seem to indicate a true monotheism.

The first 50 chapters are generally agreed to have been written a couple hundred years before the exile. The latter portion of the book is debated.

[bjs]

"Elohim" is plural in Hebrew.

Modern Jews interpret this as a plural of majesty referring to God, as singularity.

This would be anachronistic. There is no evidence that the concept of the plural of majesty (the royal we) existed when most of the OT was written.

What then, do you think is an explanation of the word in it's original context, the original intent of the writer. One that a Jew of the day would accept?

Im not really sure. I know of no Jewish commentary on the topic prior to the Dead Sea Scrolls, and even then we dont get any real discussion on the topic until after the start of Christianity. (There may be earlier writings on the topic, I am just unaware of them.) I assume that they viewed this as part of the mystery of God, much the way Christians view the Trinity today.

Personally, as I do believe in the inspiration of the scriptures, I think that it was setting the stage for understanding the Incarnation and the Trinity. Without explaining everything, God was giving a gentle hint that He is one God who exists as more than one person. I cant see how it would have made any sense until the full revelation came in Christ.

[bjs]

It really depends on when the poem that opens Genesis was actually written. It is much younger than the Eden myth that follows it. So it's probably impossible to come up with a definitive answer. I think we can say without much doubt that its author(s) had no concept of trinitarianism.

It is, however, interesting to note that Abraham was not a true monotheist. He simply looked at the Canaanite pantheon and chose the head god El, the father of Baal, to be his family's only god. This tribal god, for many generations, led Israel to victory in battle only because he was more powerful than the gods of other tribes. Polytheism thrived in Israel up to the Babylonian exile. I think it was in exile that these people learned what it meant to be Jewish. It wasn't until they returned from exile and rebuilt the Temple that Judea could be said to be truly monotheistic.

The extensive use of the name Yahweh throughout the Jewish scriptures makes it extremely difficult say that Abraham and his descendants followed El the father of Baal. Elohim is more likely a generic term for God, as opposed to a specific name. There is too much focus on Yahweh being separate from the Canaanite pantheon to say that He was really one of them prior to the exile. Unless of course you are suggesting that the scriptures were re-written following the exile to fit a new theology, in which case we can say that Abraham originally believe anything we want him to have believed.

Polytheism did exist in Israel prior to the exile, but there was also a constant and strong opposition to it. Specifically, the writings of the prophets often condemned the people for polytheistic practices.