Elohiym in Gen 1:1 is not plural of persons

[follower of Christ]

Who is the "Him?" Elohiym or Yahshua? Him is singular, and "they" would be plural.

The texts show that 'Him' is Jesus Christ.

For He has delivered us from the power of darkness and has translated us into the kingdom of His dear Son; in whom we have redemption through His blood, the remission of sins. who is the image of the invisible God, the First-born of all creation.
For all things were created in Him, the things in the heavens, and the things on the earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers, all things were created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and by Him all things consist.
(Colossians 1:13-17 MKJV)

 

[wavy]

You think "Let us make man" makes sense if the angels were not expected to participate, nor had they the power to do so?

If you said "Let us go get pizza" you would expect others to come with you.

I admit it does sound a little awkward at first, but it isn't too far-fetched considering that God created (singular) man in his image so that 'let us' expresses more of the intention/wish of Yahweh and his divine coterie rather than the act itself. In ancient thought I see nothing wrong with this formulation.

The angels are nothing when compared to God. They can't be lumped into a "divine assembly" with God where God is the chief representative. That would be like the president of the US holding a handful of slugs and saying "Let us veto this bill" as if the slugs were a part of his entourage. The angels are nothing and have nothing that God did not give to them.

I understand that's your theological opinion but I don't think that's relevant to the text.

I wonder, do you think that God gave the "main ideas" to the writers of the Old Testament and expected them to use the language that fitted best? Or did He give them each and every exact word to write down?

I would think that with the importance of what God was conveying, He would leave nothing to expositor error, and give the writers the exact wording He wanted used. That's my opinion.

Well, honestly I think that's ridiculous...unless God liked to experiment with different writing styles and languages. More sensibly, these are characteristic of whoever the writer is, not of some kind of vagarious 'divine dictation'.


Finis,
Eric

 

[JudaicChristian]

So much for logic! Va-rooomm.

 

[follower of Christ]

So much for logic! Va-rooomm.

I agree.

 

[glorydaz]

Anyone have thoughts on the video posted above? Just wondering.

~Josh

I thought it was very informative.

I don't, personally, think it was referring to the land...as in being formed in "our" image, but I did enjoy the study, nonetheless. I believe God is so full we cannot really comprehend Him with our human understanding. I talk to myself, but my Word cannot create and my Spirit cannot go forth across the land. I'm constrained by time and place, while God is not. Cool video, though...thanks for posting. :yes

 

[glorydaz]

The triune God may have created it all and Jesus may have been there. But Genesis does not express this itself.

Nor is it required to.
Colossians tells us all we need to know about the matter ;)

Unfortunately it seems your exegesis isn't sophisticated enough to understand the difference.

How about keeping your personal remarks to yourself :yes
My method is sophisticated enough to know to read the ENTIRE bible, not just bits and pieces and then pretend Im in a position to teach others ;)

Indeed...spiritual knowledge trumps human understanding any day of the week. :yes

 

[Aaron the Tall]

I wouldn't make a doctrine out of "divine dictation," but there seems to be some precedent in Scripture. The prophets certainly seem to be mediating exact quotations from God. I definitely wouldn't say they were using creative license in some of the detailed and extravagant prophecies.

I see what you mean about the writing styles. We see how Paul writes in a certain style - and the Psalms are composed in the poetic style of the day. So yes, I see how Scripture is colored by the understandings and character of the author. I don't think this necessarily negates the possibility of God speaking to the writers in a style that they understood. God in fact created each writer, knew them inside and out, endowed them with their creative understanding, and knew the writing styles of the times. It doesn't seem outlandish that He spoke to them in a way that would harmonize with their own style of writing. I think certain phrases in the Bible, even certain specific words, are central to true doctrine - and I think God would want to make sure the writers got His thoughts across in an exacting manner.

 

[glorydaz]

I wouldn't make a doctrine out of "divine dictation," but there seems to be some precedent in Scripture. The prophets certainly seem to be mediating exact quotations from God. I definitely wouldn't say they were using creative license in some of the detailed and extravagant prophecies.

I see what you mean about the writing styles. We see how Paul writes in a certain style - and the Psalms are composed in the poetic style of the day. So yes, I see how Scripture is colored by the understandings and character of the author. I don't think this necessarily negates the possibility of God speaking to the writers in a style that they understood. God in fact created each writer, knew them inside and out, endowed them with their creative understanding, and knew the writing styles of the times. It doesn't seem outlandish that He spoke to them in a way that would harmonize with their own style of writing. I think certain phrases in the Bible, even certain specific words, are central to true doctrine - and I think God would want to make sure the writers got His thoughts across in an exacting manner.

Well put.

 

[wavy]

I wouldn't make a doctrine out of "divine dictation," but there seems to be some precedent in Scripture. The prophets certainly seem to be mediating exact quotations from God. I definitely wouldn't say they were using creative license in some of the detailed and extravagant prophecies.

I see what you mean about the writing styles. We see how Paul writes in a certain style - and the Psalms are composed in the poetic style of the day. So yes, I see how Scripture is colored by the understandings and character of the author. I don't think this necessarily negates the possibility of God speaking to the writers in a style that they understood. God in fact created each writer, knew them inside and out, endowed them with their creative understanding, and knew the writing styles of the times. It doesn't seem outlandish that He spoke to them in a way that would harmonize with their own style of writing. I think certain phrases in the Bible, even certain specific words, are central to true doctrine - and I think God would want to make sure the writers got His thoughts across in an exacting manner.

Fair enough. However, this does negate your rhetorical critical question: 'Was God copying the vernacular of a future generation?'

You have now admitted that is exactly what God did, and God anticipating the writing style of each author rather than the author writing in his own style becomes a distinction without a difference.


Finis,
Eric

 

[Aaron the Tall]

Again I can't demand this be truth because how could one know for certain? But if I were to guess - I would say that the "us" in Genesis 1:26 was one of those words that God wanted in there specifically for his purpose, not just so it would sound comprehensible to the writer and the readers (who were strictly monotheistic I might add).

I think it is commonly held that Moses wrote the first 5 books of the Bible. (maybe you have research that shows otherwise) If the use of "us" for the Ultimate Power is something he was familiar with, you would have to conclude that he got that idea from Pharoah while living in Egypt. I am not an Egyptian scholar, so I wouldn't venture to say whether or not the Pharoahs spoke in the "majestic we" but that is not the impression I get when I read Pharoah's words in Exodus. But, it seems a stretch that Moses would take any aspect from the pagan Pharoah-god and the polytheism of Egypt and use it to express the story of the One true God.

Just a thought.

 

[glorydaz]

I find it interesting that man is made in God's image. But we're a far cry from what we will be.
By the time God is done perfecting us, I imagine we'll be talking to ourselves, too. ;)

He's giving us a new spirit...

Eph. 2:5 - Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)

Ezekiel 36:26 - A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.

He's renewing our soul...

Romans 12:2 - And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

2 Corinthians 3:18 - But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.

We'll have a glorified body...

1 Corinthians 15:52-53 - In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.

Philippians 3:21 - Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.

 

[Godfrey]

He's giving us a new spirit...

It’s even better than that, He's already given us a new spirit

Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come! - 2 Cor.5.17

I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. - Gal.2.20

For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, and you have been given fullness in Christ – Col.2.9-10

For you died, and your life is now hidden with Christ in God. – Col.3.3

... you have taken off your old self with its practices and have put on the new self – Col.3.9-10

 

[glorydaz]

He's giving us a new spirit...

It’s even better than that, He's already given us a new spirit

Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come! - 2 Cor.5.17

[quote:318gswqq]I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. - Gal.2.20

For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, and you have been given fullness in Christ – Col.2.9-10

For you died, and your life is now hidden with Christ in God. – Col.3.3

... you have taken off your old self with its practices and have put on the new self – Col.3.9-10

[/quote:318gswqq]
You're correct. That was a poor choice of words on my part. :D

 

[Anth]

No, you claim that Jesus is absent, friend.
Since you werent there you arent in a position to claim that a truine God did not create it all.
And since WE believe the scriptures, not you, WE will take the word of those scriptures that Jesus WAS present at creation. Your agreement simply is not required in the matter

Follower

Your gentle rebuke to Wavy contained within enuf arrogance that I had to respond. I DO believe the Scriptures and the man Christ Jesus IS my Lord and my God - whom I worship.

I can tell you unequivocally that Jesus was NOT physically present at the Creation - which in fact Col 1 statements support in that there is NO AGENCY ascribed to the son in the contact.

Despite a 7x70 other verses all supported the fact that Jesus did not personally exist until his conception, IP1:20 is altogether sufficient - it goes without saying that if Jesus was foreknown, he was was not known. You were also foreknown (Eph1) BUT you and I, I daresay, were not physically present at the creation.

Best,
Aner

 

[Free]

Jesus may have not been physically there but he was there nonetheless.

 

[follower of Christ]

Follower

Your gentle rebuke to Wavy contained within enuf arrogance that I had to respond.

Leave the psychoanalysis to the professionals, please

I can tell you unequivocally that Jesus was NOT physically present at the Creation

Gotta love how when the evidence fails then some just add words like 'physically' to put a twist on things that seemingly cant be argued against. ;)

- which in fact Col 1 statements support in that there is NO AGENCY ascribed to the son in the contact.

Sorry friend but something in your view is apparently seriously amiss...

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation, because by Him all things were created, those in the heavens and those on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things are held together.
(Colossians 1:15-17 EMTV)

Can be created BY Him and THROUGH Him if He isnt there, chap

Despite a 7x70 other verses all supported the fact that Jesus did not personally exist until his conception,

Wow...what a statement !

IP1:20 is altogether sufficient - it goes without saying that if Jesus was foreknown, he was was not known. You were also foreknown (Eph1) BUT you and I, I daresay, were not physically present at the creation.

Irrelevant.
GOD was there and HE knows how it went down. His word says that Jesus was there...sorry

 

[Anth]

First, let me clarify - "physically" s/b "personally".

Jesus was not personally present in reality until he was conceived by the HS in Mary's womb.

Follower's statements above are mostly just off the cuff thoughts without any substance.

To make IP1:20 irrelevant is simply to avoid the fact that this statement renders the traditional Christology null and void in a singular Biblical swoop (thanks to the Holy Spirit through Peter).

The only comment that began to approach substance was his copying scripture - however, he used a false translation.

Follower - before you do any exegesis of the text - try reading the Greek first.... There is NO agency in Col 1 in the Greek - the English translators LIED when they translated the prepositions dia and ev as agency.

re: Arrogance
Is now to only be exceeded by your condescenion, ignorance and silliness. As a disciple of Jesus Christ
I have been given the authority to judge behavior - and to do so in righteousness. My judgements -as the judgements of my Lord - are true.

Best,
Anth

 

[follower of Christ]

First, let me clarify - "physically" s/b "personally".

Jesus was not personally present in reality until he was conceived by the HS in Mary's womb.

eehhh....wrong. ;)

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation, because by Him all things were created, those in the heavens and those on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things are held together.
(Colossians 1:15-17 EMTV)

He was there, friend. Right there in the beginning. He was with God and He was God, just as John proves.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God.

All things came into being through Him, and without Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overtake it.

There was a man sent from God; his name was John. This one came as a witness, to bear witness concerning the Light, so that all might believe through him. He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. He was the true Light; He enlightens every man coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world came into being through Him, and the world did not know Him. He came to His own, and His own received Him not. But as many as received Him, He gave to them authority to become the children of God, to those who believe on His name, who were born, not of bloods, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but were born of God.

And the Word became flesh, and tabernacled among us.
And we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and of truth. John bore witness of Him and cried out, saying, This was He of whom I spoke: He who comes after me has been before me, for He was preceding me. And out of His fullness we all have received, and grace for grace. For the Law came through Moses, but grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.
(John 1:1-17 MKJV)

"He was in the beginning with God"
WHO WAS WITH God there, friend
Whomever it was IS God ;)

Follower's statements above are mostly just off the cuff thoughts without any substance.

oh please....find a new line.
Ive given scriptural evidence and you have yet to do anything but handwave it away. ;)

To make IP1:20 irrelevant is simply to avoid the fact that this statement renders the traditional Christology null and void in a singular Biblical swoop (thanks to the Holy Spirit through Peter).

You have GOT to be kidding

Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,
(1 Peter 1:20 KJV)

Not a word there disagrees with the other passages above, gent.

The only comment that began to approach substance was his copying scripture - however, he used a false translation.

PUHlease.
I can use a dozen others that all say the very same thing.
Shall I start posting them ?

Follower - before you do any exegesis of the text - try reading the Greek first.... There is NO agency in Col 1 in the Greek - the English translators LIED when they translated the prepositions dia and ev as agency.

READERS TAKE NOTE
Have ya ever noticed that some here always have to come back to how God is so pathetic that He couldnt even protect His word from corruption

re: Arrogance
Is now to only be exceeded by your condescenion, ignorance and silliness.

I certainly hope you have something to actually offer here, chap.
So far I see nothing but ad hominems ;)

As a disciple of Jesus Christ
I have been given the authority to judge behavior - and to do so in righteousness.
My judgements -as the judgements of my Lord - are true.

You'll have to understand if I dont recognize your 'authority' in the matter ;)

 

[JudaicChristian]

Oh boy! :crazy

 

[follower of Christ]

Getting directly to this particular absurdity...

Anth wrote:
Follower - before you do any exegesis of the text - try reading the Greek first.... There is NO agency in Col 1 in the Greek - the English translators LIED when they translated the prepositions dia and ev as agency.

How about we read more than your two words and see what the CONTEXT shows? ;)
READERS look at the passage yourself and tell us if this is about the Son of God, or not ;)

Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light: Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son: In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence. For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;
(Colossians 1:12-19 KJV)

Huh...
It SAYS 'Son'...and waddayaknow, it MEANS 'son' :yes

G5207
????
uihos
hwee-os'
Apparently a primary word; a “son†(sometimes of animals), used very widely of immediate, remote or figurative kinship: - child, foal, son.

Isnt that ironic ?

The passage also says very clearly
"In whom we have redemption through his blood"
Hmmm...now I wonder WHOSE blood it is by whom we have redemption .
Could it be....an 'agent' ;)

And whomever this is is the head of the church...
"And he is the head of the body, the church"
I WONDER who that might be.... ;)

Some here are stuck in a word or two and falsely accuse our translators of being incompetent.

What do you think, Anth....another round of drinks ?



.