The Royal "We" of Genesis

[John Zain]

Here’s an important topic to consider

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Genesis 1:26
Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness …â€
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Some say … this is an early pointer to the Triune GOD.

Others say … this is just “the royal we of majestyâ€.

Question: Do we have any royal ‘we’s anywhere near the time of Moses?

Theory: The royal “we†of majesty ... did NOT exist 3,500 years ago.

In the case of kings …
the royal “we†can easily refer to the king + family, or advisors, or the royal court, etc.
--- The first recorded use of the expression was in 1169 when Henry II of England (d. 1189)
… assumed the common theory of "divine right of kings," that the monarch acted conjointly
with the deity. Hence, he used "we" as "God and I ..." or so the legend goes. … Wikipedia
--- Queen Victoria (in at least one account … she was not speaking for herself alone,
but for the ladies of the court.) … Wikipedia

In the case of GOD … who does the “Us†and “Our†refer to?
Do the “Us†and “Our†refer to GOD + His angels?
If it refers to angels:
-- the created angels did some creating of their own.
-- man was made in the image of both GOD and angels.

 

[theLords]

John, what is the counter argument that non Christians pose about the Royal We?

 

[theLords]

Some would say Islam's attempts at various forms of apologetics are incredibly ridiculous as well :yes

 

[Alabaster]

"We are not amused."

 

[theLords]

Your looking at the royal wes first use in english speaking lands - in english, the royal we is not used much. In semetic languages it is widely used to this day, and always has, this why no jews ever wondered who the "we" in genesis was refering to, because in Hebrew, the "we" is obviously refering to the Highest ranking King in the Universe, God. Go learn a semetic language (Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic, persian) and you will see

[how utterly ridiculous the royal we argument for the trinity is.]

It's quite obvious that you understand how to communicate your point without being condescending, no?

 

[Elijah674]

Other arguments for the trinity are not ridiculous - they are wrong in my oppinion, but not like the royal we argument - the royal we argument is a very uneducated view of things - its like if if a non english speaker saw the word "but" and told all of the other non-english speakers that English speakers are constantly talking about their rear ends - its really hard to explain how uninformed the royal we argument for the trinity is unless you actually spend time speaking and learning the semetic languages.

Now John said:

[/FONT][/COLOR][/B]

It appears Sheikh Wikipedia was wrong again - use of the royal we and all its forms is much older - for example: The Romans used it in govt documents. The Greeks also employed its use as described in this article:Basil L. Gildersleeve, Syntax of Classical Greek, chapter pref1
Homer employed the use of the royal we in the Odesy and the Illiad - in the Greek, when Achilles is struck in the his leg with an arrow he tells penelope "Our leg has been injured.." (I dont think they shared a leg - but to deduce that they did share a leg is along the same lines as deducing the royal we is trinatarian)
the royal we is used in the Quran - in many passages Allah is refered tro as Al Hakimeen - a Plural of Hakim or wise - no Muslim ever deduced that there were 3 or more Most Wise entities in the universe.

In hebrew Elohim is in fact a plural - adonai is a plural meaning "My lords" - The jews went into Canaan - a land where they were polytheist - and told them to worship One God - and referd to that God as Ha-Elohim - Employing the royal we whilst talking to polytheists who understood that the royal we was refering to One Godand not their pantheon of gods.

Hi, 'i' suggest that you just skip the K.J. Jer. 17:5 ones & just do your own thinking! First off there are other 'Let Us' for the Royal 'WE' as in Gen. 11:7 for the plural. But in Gen. 3:22 we see 'IMMORTALITY' that lives FOREVER. All else of the Godheads creation were only having CONDITIONAL IMMORTALITY. Not so with the Godhead! See K.J. 1 Tim. 1:17 & 1 Tim. 6:16.

And if you read 'prayerfully' + slowly for yourself, you found that it takes the tree of life for the Godheads creation (angels, + others worlds in the Heb. plural) to even have Conditional immortality! See Rev. 21:25 & then on through verse 1 & 2 of chapter 22.

--Elijah

 

[theLords]

Other arguments for the trinity are not ridiculous - they are wrong in my oppinion, but not like the royal we argument - the royal we argument is a very uneducated view of things - its like if if a non english speaker saw the word "but" and told all of the other non-english speakers that English speakers are constantly talking about their rear ends - its really hard to explain how uninformed the royal we argument for the trinity is unless you actually spend time speaking and learning the semetic languages.

Now John said:

[/FONT][/COLOR][/B]

It appears Sheikh Wikipedia was wrong again - use of the royal we and all its forms is much older - for example: The Romans used it in govt documents. The Greeks also employed its use as described in this article:Basil L. Gildersleeve, Syntax of Classical Greek, chapter pref1
Homer employed the use of the royal we in the Odesy and the Illiad - in the Greek, when Achilles is struck in the his leg with an arrow he tells penelope "Our leg has been injured.." (I dont think they shared a leg - but to deduce that they did share a leg is along the same lines as deducing the royal we is trinatarian)
the royal we is used in the Quran - in many passages Allah is refered tro as Al Hakimeen - a Plural of Hakim or wise - no Muslim ever deduced that there were 3 or more Most Wise entities in the universe.

In hebrew Elohim is in fact a plural - adonai is a plural meaning "My lords" - The jews went into Canaan - a land where they were polytheist - and told them to worship One God - and referd to that God as Ha-Elohim - Employing the royal we whilst talking to polytheists who understood that the royal we was refering to One Godand not their pantheon of gods.

That's fine and dandy when you use the eyes of the flesh, but this logic is quite faulty.

Which came first: the chicken or the egg? Who came first: God or man? Who spoke first: God or man? Did Homer come before God or was he created by God?

Genesis is giving the account of creation. God spoke the words "Let us make man in our image." He was the first ever to use the "royal we."

Man came after Him and then adopted God's "tongue" and the use of the "royal we" in the form they saw fit. That line of thinking holds no weight.

 

[sk0rpi0n]

Theory: The royal “we†of majesty ... did NOT exist 3,500 years ago.

......


The "royal we" is a language thing. It doesnt exist in English but it does in some other languages.
I dont know how exactly it works in Hebrew but in the language I speak, the plural variation of the same word is used to respectfully address, say, a parent.
The same word can be applied to address a large group of people as well.


And on the trinity bit, there are SO MANY verses from the OT and Jesus' OWN words that confirm that God is one.
I'd rather listen to these verses than some "scholar" who claims to have interpretated the bible correctly so as to reach the conclusion that "trinity" has a biblical basis.

 

[Alabaster]

It is amazing to me to what lengths people will go to to deny the triune God. Men's minds do not compare to the perfection of God's word.

 

[jasoncran]

aside from the fact that one has two ignore or overlook that statement that christ made in revalation that jews would say the lord would say.

in isiah the lord says i am the begging and the end and besides me there's no other and i wont give my glory to another

yet in revalation

i am the first and the last the alpha and the omega. so if the son claims what the father has as glory then what was jesus.

and what of hebrews that states thy throne oh god is above the angels and God said to God.

so?

 

[sk0rpi0n]

It is amazing to me to what lengths people will go to to deny the triune God. Men's minds do not compare to the perfection of God's word.

It appears you are denying the (many) scriptures that state clearly and without doubt that God is one.
Jesus himself said God is one... whos side am I really on here?

 

[jasoncran]

It appears you are denying the (many) scriptures that state clearly and without doubt that God is one.
Jesus himself said God is one... whos side am I really on here?

no jesus is said this jesus is the son God and God the father is in me, and I in in you and we are one.

that means a unity nothing there about contra trinitarism arguments.

in fact if jesus is the son of God and God the father is in him and he is on us that means the father and and the son are with us.

and what of this verse for if you have seen me you have seen the father that means the son is equal to the father.

 

[theLords]

This seems to be the fall back argument in every discussion - if evidence doesnt support a theory, then its clearly from the Holy Spirit.

Heres the way I see it - Billions of people for thousands of years understand that when you refer to someone in the plural - its a sign of respect. then some people who dont even know how to read the language those billions of people spoke/speak come along and give a whole new meaning to what they say to support a belief they have.

In my oppinion its very prideful to say they knew nothing of the meanings behind the words they used everyday, but you do because your imbued with some holier understanding.

The clearest evidence behind the Royal we is that the canaanintes knew the Jews worshipped only one God - even when the cannanites came into town telling them "you all should worship Elohim (lit: The Gods)" - they didnt say "Oh you mean one God or 3 or more gods when you say Elohim?" it was understood because they all spoke the same derivative languages - No Jew before christianity came along ever said "you think maybe Elohim means more than one God?" because the use of teh royal we was something "everybody knows".

appearantly the Holy Spirit didnt give them the same divine insight you guys have.

You clearly did not read my post, as I did not refer to the Holy Spirit in it at all.

"Do not judge lest you be judged" You keep calling me prideful and yet, "From the overflow of the heart the mouth speaks." I'm grateful the Lord is allowing me to see the state of the heart where you form your opinions. "Do not be deceived God is not mocked for whatever you sow you shall reap." I also reject those word curses in Jesus' name. Amen.

God spoke in the plural form in regards to Himself before man was even created. Before rational thought existed. It doesn't make sense to say that the egg came before the chicken.

It's interesting that you say that the Jews never tried to define God as the first Christians were all Jews. Salvation wasn't extended to the Gentiles until after after Christ's ascension. Yet, they all searched their Scriptures and came to confess Jesus Christ as the Messiah, the Son of God, God. Did they have some common understanding as to what the nature of God is? How could they have come to confess Christ as God and then proceed to dedicate their entire lives for Him until they met "the prophets death"?

The Gentile Christians were the first to define the Triune God. Makes sense, since they were not born and raised as Jews but often came from polytheistic and pagan backgrounds not having much knowledge about the Hebrew Scriptures.

 

[theLords]

no jesus is said this jesus is the son God and God the father is in me, and I in in you and we are one.

that means a unity nothing there about contra trinitarism arguments.

in fact if jesus is the son of God and God the father is in him and he is on us that means the father and and the son are with us.

and what of this verse for if you have seen me you have seen the father that means the son is equal to the father.

I enjoyed what you were saying, but I think I would have enjoyed it more if I was able to fully understand what you were saying, lol

Don't type so fast, slow down brother!:type

 

[jasoncran]

lords, John a jew wrote this

in the beggining was the word and word was with God and word was god.

so i think that he knew about the trinity as it was revealed to him and by tradition all the gospels were written at least thirty yrs after the messiah ascenscion.

 

[jasoncran]

I enjoyed what you were saying, but I think I would have enjoyed it more if I was able to fully understand what you were saying, lol

Don't type so fast, slow down brother!:type

what i meant was

jesus said " I and Father are one. and He is in me and I am in you"
i took that to mean that the lord is saying he is equal to the father and both dwell in us , and side not of course the holy spirit is there as well.
and later its written that we ought not to grieve the Holy Ghost and also the bible says that if jesus leaves and returns to heave the comfort will come and he will teach us what we need to know.

so if the Lord is in heaven how can the holy spirit being the same thing be here as well?

the holy spirit being a seperate being as the lord said of the h.s.

he will teach you and bring all things i have said to remembrance and wont speak of his own.

so that means by simple logical grammar(which i'm crappy at) the persons christ and the holy spirit must be seperate and also father.

because if jesus is the father then he woudnt have said I and father are one but instead would say i am the father.

he also said i go unto my fathers house.

that three part the unity is where they same things meaning they all recieve worship.
jesus never stopped anyone from worshipping him, and with that statement of if you recieve me or believe on me shall i correct myself you believe on the father. so by worshipping the son you also worship the father

now then the holy spirit that person is a little tricky. we cant blaspheme him but he is able to be grieved, and also has fruits and leads one to repentance.

but is he able to be worshiped?i would say yes as he often leads that worship of father, and yet the father is also a spirit.

 

[theLords]

lords, John a jew wrote this

in the beggining was the word and word was with God and word was god.

so i think that he knew about the trinity as it was revealed to him and by tradition all the gospels were written at least thirty yrs after the messiah ascenscion.

Yes! I know what you are referring to. I believe those that walked closest to the Lord knew Him in His fullness and believed (and it was credited to them as righteousness.) Moses sat on a mountain for 40 days and nights in the Lord's presence and glory. I wouldn't be surprised if Moses knew about cars, airplanes, and little boxes that heat up your food in 30 seconds or less!!!

 

[jasoncran]

i hate those newer translations and it was imputed to him rightenousness.

few would see "credit" that way.

and heres one we modern english users see addict as
1 cor 16 the verse that says they have adicted themselves to the ministry in 1611 english that meant to dedicted oneself too, totally different then todays version.(the word adict)

 

[Gendou Ikari]

Your looking at the royal wes first use in english speaking lands - in english, the royal we is not used much. In semetic languages it is widely used to this day, and always has, this why no jews ever wondered who the "we" in genesis was refering to, because in Hebrew, the "we" is obviously refering to the Highest ranking King in the Universe, God. Go learn a semetic language (Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic, persian) and you will see how utterly ridiculous the royal we argument for the trinity is.

There is the alternate explanation that because the world elohim' is plural, it referred to a pantheon of gods. Does anybody know if the plural "we" is used to refer to Yahweh in other books of the Tanakh?

 

[sk0rpi0n]

no jesus is said this jesus is the son God and God the father is in me, and I in in you and we are one.

that means a unity nothing there about contra trinitarism arguments.

in fact if jesus is the son of God and God the father is in him and he is on us that means the father and and the son are with us.

It still remains that Jesus established a clear distinction between "Father" and "son".
Jesus prayed to God. He never told anyone that he was actually God, but instead said that he was doing his Fathers will.

and what of this verse for if you have seen me you have seen the father that means the son is equal to the father.

Its either....
A) Jesus contradicts himself. He was not serious when he instructed folowers to worship the one true God thast he himself worshipped... or when he said things like "the Father is greater than I"

or

B) Its simply like saying "if you see this ticket to Hawaii you have seen Hawaii" or "if you see this lottery number than you have seen a prize of $1 million.

Take your pick.