Genesis

D

didymus

Well-Known Member
Messages
506
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Some of us were having a discussion in the christian thread regarding some verses in Genesis and the use of Us and Our.

Genesis 1:26 Then God said, " Let Us make man in our own image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth."

Genesis 3:22 Then the Lord said," Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil.........

The main question is the use of Us and Our. Do you have a comment on this apparent pluralism of God?
 
I have a few comments.

1. It's the royal "we" which can also be demonstrated in other places biblically.

2. It's referring to the angels (there's a nice midrash that addresses this in which after God says this all of the different angels of different virtues take sides as to whether or not man should be created because of man's nature and while they are arguing God creates man.)

3. It's referring to God's consort, possibly Asherah (not a Jewish belief but could make sense in the context of man and woman being created.)

4. Could refer to a panthon of lesser gods. (also not a Jewish belief.)

Dauer
 
Traditionally either one or two on the list. Either it's a royal we or it's the angels. The midrash I mentioned used this at-the-surface contradictory verse (the one "create them in our image") to voice on theological concerns. Midrash is not taken literally.

Dauer
 
I looked up a better answer for you. Unfortunately it doesn't make mention of the other verses, or mention this one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluralis_Majestatis

There were sites that did make mention, but this gives the most concise answer as to what the royal we actually is.

There may also be other Jewish answers. I saw something I did not investigate that said that kaballistically this is the sum of all the sefirot being referenced to.

Dauer
 
could,nt (our image) mean; external shape of being, and in (our likness) mean eternal being.
 
Oh, rudiger... (sorry, I had to say that.)

Anything's possible. I think that's a bit of a midrashic reading. It's a paralellism and it could simply be there for emphasis, to show that man is physically in the image of God. It could also be showing that in addition to being in the image of God, man somehow behaves similar to God which is unlike the behavior of animals and this is possibly another way of saying that man projected his image onto God, though not consciously. I don't know what it initially meant. I don't think there's any clear evidence in the Torah for an immortal soul.

Dauer
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top