I think you are missing the point about all this. Firstly, the plural is a problem for Jews just as it is for you in the Qu'ran as I outlined earlier - that is why; if it really is God speaking can't He get a simple thing like this right.
The Bible does sometimes use plural forms of words, not only of Yahweh, but also regarding many other persons and things. It is but an assumption based on imagination, however, to think that the plural usage means "persons" of one God, or "persons" of whatever is being spoken of.
I know that one scripture that is often cited by our trinitarian brothers is Genesis 1:26, which reads (World English Bible translation):
God [ELOHIM] said [singular verb], “Let us make [plural] man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the sky, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”
It is claimed that ELOHIM, being plural in form, means that their idea of “Godhead” has three persons, and that the plurality of “let us” means that one person of God is speaking to another person of God, using the plural form “us”.
Obviously, God here is speaking to someone. Normally, if a person says to his friend, “Let us do this or that,” we do not think that the person who is speaking is speaking to another person of himself. Likewise, in those instances where God says “let us”, “we”, etc., God is not speaking to another person of Himself, but he is speaking to someone else who is not Himself. Indeed, the default reasoning should be that Yahweh is speaking to someone else who is not Himself.
The truth is that the idea that God is here speaking to Himself (allegedly as two different persons of Himself) has to be imagined, assumed, added to, and read into what the scripture actually says, and such has to be assumed only to conform to preconceived doctrine, which also has to be imagined, assumed, added to, and read into, each and every scripture that is used to allegedly support the extra-Biblical doctrine.
The plurality of ELOHIM means “gods”, not “persons” or “attributes”; thus, to apply this word to the Creator in plural terms would mean that Yahweh is gods [plural], not persons in one God. Nevertheless, the word in its meaning contains the attribute of mightiness, but this is one attribute, not attributes (plural).
Nevertheless, the scriptures do not apply ELOHIM to Yahweh with plurality, anymore than Yahweh Himself applies ELOHIM to Moses with plurality. (Exodus 7:1) Indeed, if ELOHIM used of Yahweh means that Yahweh is more than one person, then to be consistent, the one making such a claim should also claim that God made Moses more than one person to Pharaoh.
In reality, like several other Hebrew words, the plural forms of EL can be used in singular contexts to denote what we in English might call the superior or superlative degree. Regarding this usage in Biblical Hebrew (as well as some other ancient languages), scholars often call this the “plural intensive” usage, where a plural form of a word is used in a singular context and thus the plural form is viewed as singular, but is intensified in meaning (similar to the English superior or superlative degree). In other words, the plural form of a word is treated as though it were singular, but only intensified in meaning. In English we do this by adding “er” or “est” to many words, such as high, higher, highest, or we might add “more” or “most” before words. (However, in English, especially in its archaic forms, the plural is often employed as a plural intensive when addressing majesty, a judge, etc., as in “your Majesty”, and “your Honour”, instead of “thy Majesty” or “thy honour.”) Therefore, in Exodus 7:1, Yahweh stated that He was making Moses, not persons, to Pharaoh, but rather one person of superior might (ELOHIM) to Pharaoh.
The point, however, is that ELOHIM is used of the one Yahweh, the “one God” who is the Creator of His people. Yahweh is not more than one Yahweh, nor more than one god, nor is he more than one person. “Hear, Israel: Yahweh is our God; Yahweh is one.” “Hasn’t one God created us?” — Deuteronomy 6:4; Malachi 2:10.
Throughout the scriptures, the Bible usually uses singular pronouns and verbs that describe Yahweh as one person. (I, he, singular you, etc., not we, they, them, etc.) Yahweh does not address himself as we, us, our, etc., nor is he doing so in Genesis 1:26, or the other “us” or “we” verses (Genesis 3:22; 11:7; Isaiah 6:8) that some trinitarians like to point to as alleged proofs that God is more than one person. Please note that out of the entire Old Testament, these four instances (Genesis 1:26; 3:22; 11:7; Isaiah 6:8) are the only instances where it is claimed that Yahweh uses plural pronouns of Himself; all through the Old Testament the pronouns are singular. Nevertheless, if we closely examine those other three verses also, we can see that Yahweh is actually speaking to someone else when He uses the terms “us” or “we”.
So who was Yahweh speaking to as recorded in Genesis 1:26? Although there are some hints in the Old Testament, we have to look to the New Testament for the answer to this. John 1:1,2 tells us that the one who became flesh was with God in the beginning that is spoken of there. That “beginning” is not the beginning of the entire universe, as many have assumed, but it is the “beginning” of the “world” (Greek, Kosmos) that was made through the one called “the Word.” (John 1:10) All in this world was made through the one called “the Word”. Not one thing (pertaining to the world that was through the Word) was made without the Word. (John 1:3) This one titled “the Word” became flesh, and came into the world that was made through him, and that world did not recognize him. (John 1:1,2,10) Jesus identified himself as that one who was with the “only true God” before the world of mankind was made. (John 17:1,3,5) “God”, whom the Word was with, refers to the One whom Jesus addressed as “the only true God”, that is, his God and Father. Jesus was with the only true God, and thus John 1:3,10 is really speaking of Jesus as the one through whom the world of mankind was made. Therefore, by comparing spiritual revealment with spiritual revealment (1 Corinthians 2:10-12), we can see that the one whom “the only true God” was addressing in Genesis 1:27 is Jesus.
However, someone may object, doesn’t John 1:1 tell us that, not only was the Word with God, but also that the Word was “God”? Doesn’t this prove the trinitarian idea that God is more than one person? We have to answer no! It should be obvious, by comparing John 1:1,2 and John 17:1-5, that Jesus was with the only true God. Would John then say that Jesus “was” the only true God whom he was with? John twice states that the Word was with God, thus giving emphasis to this thought. The thought of two persons as the only true God is not inherent in the words of John 1:1,2, but the idea has to be imagined, assumed, added to, and read into what John wrote. One has to imagine and assume that John, in referring to “God” whom the Word was with, means the first person of the alleged trinity as the Father. We know it is true that “God” whom the Word was with is the God and Father of Jesus, because of Jesus’ words as recorded in John 17:1,3,5. However, the part about the Father being a person of a trinity has to be imagined, assumed, added to, and read into, what John wrote in John 1:1,2, and Jesus’ reference to the Father as the “only true God” in John 17:3 has to either be ignored, or in some manner be interpreted (again this is often done by imaginative assumptions being added to and read into what Jesus stated) in order make Jesus’ words still mean that Jesus is a person of the only true God. Likewise, the trinitarian has to imagine, assume, add to, and read into what John said that the Word is the alleged second person of the trinity.
So why would John say that the Word was “God”, if we are not to imagine and assume he is a person of the only true God? Is there not only one God? Can Jesus be “God” who is not the only true God? And wouldn’t this mean that there is more than one true God? The answer again lies in comparing spiritual revealment with spiritual revealment (1 Corinthians 2:10-12), not by imagining, adding, and reading into the scripture a lot of assumptions that would make Jesus a person of his God. What is the true scriptural answer to why John would refer to Jesus as God?
It is obvious that John is not referring to Jesus as “God” in the same manner in which he speaks of “God” whom Jesus was with. In other words, it should be obvious that Jesus is not “God” whom he was with, and as mentioned before, John emphasized this by repeating it again in John 1:2. The Greek word for God is usually transliterated as “theos”, and forms of this word are used twice in John 1:1. What many do not realize is that there is a scriptural Hebraic tradition that allows the usage of the words for “God” in a more general sense of might, power, authority, etc. Most translations of the Bible into English as well as other languages recognize this usage. We can use the most popular English translation — the King James Version — to illustrate such usage. This can be demonstrated in such verses where the KJV renders the word for “God” (forms of EL and ELOHIM in the Hebrew) so as to denote strength, power, might, rulership, etc., such as in the following verses: Genesis 23:6 (mighty); Genesis 30:8 (mighty); Genesis 31:29 (power); Deuteronomy 28:32 (might); 1 Samuel 14:15 (great); Nehemiah 5:5 (power); Psalm 8:5 (angels); Psalm 36:6 (great); Psalm 82:1 (mighty); Proverbs 3:27 (power); Psalm 29:1 (mighty); Ezekiel 32:21 (strong); Jonah 3:3 (exceeding). If one were to substitute “false god” in these verses, we would have some absurd statements. This proves that these words are used in a sense other than the only true God, or as “false god.” If such Hebraic usage is applied to Jesus (who was with the only true God) in John 1:1, we would have “the Word was mighty,” and all makes perfect sense without adding all of the imaginations and assumptions that would have to accompany viewing the scripture through the tint of the trinity doctrine. Jesus was indeed a mighty one with the only true God before the world of mankind was made. Thus, the scriptural conclusion is that it was this “mighty” one that the only true God addressed in Genesis 1:27, using the term “let us.”
Christian love,
Ronald
ResLight
Restoration Light Bible Study Services
http://godandson.reslight.net
- as they dont believe in the trinty and it is their book.