Sheshbazzar

Actually Loomis, I have no problem with YHWH being "baal", because
"YHWH is my baal", ("YHWH hua baal'i") YHWH is my Owner",
"My baal is YHWH", ("Baal'i hua YHWH") My Owner is YHWH".
Some forgot YHWH for Baal, some forgot YHWH for Melech, some forgot YHWH for Amen, some forgot YHWH for Elyon, some forgot YHWH for Gawd, some forgot YHWH for Adon, and some forgot YHWH for 'other' elohim.
But we will remember the Name of YHWH our Elohim, the maker, and the sustainer of all of the elohim, Who gave unto them all of their names.

CaliNORML

Perhaps they can still be of all one.

In the following I use the Loch Ness monster as an example, I am not saying it exists.

The "Photo Evidence" of this creatures existence shows a long neck, the waters surface, a "hump," water and then a third "hump." Logically I am to believe that parts of "Nessy" lie beneath the surface connecting the neck and humps making this a whole creature. Because I do not see the connection above the surface this "water" between body parts could be interpreted as 3 different creatures.

Are "Gods" only just what we see here in the physical world, when they could all be connected as one and we just have not figured out this is really just all the same thing. The same yet with different parts seen at different times above the surface of our understanding.

KMS

Half-Life

Why can't you guys see that "us" means Jesus and the Holy Spirit? Since the Bible speaks of FUTURE references, one can logically conclude that the "us" refers to Jesus and the Holy Spirit.

Why is there such a discrepency?

If the word "Elohim" refers to a single God, then why would the writers translate it as "us?"

Chris Weimer

You still have to prove where the Old Testament says that Jesus is God. You have not done so.

Loomis

I think singular title “Elohim” came about because someone was reading some old stories about a group of gods called elohim and they didn’t understand that the word was plural.

Or,

Because they new it was plural but wanted to make a strong monotheistic / corrective statement.

The "us" refers to The Elohim (singular) and his girlfriend.

Let us make humankind in our image, after our likeness
…
male and female he created them.

The Elohim (singular) in Genesis 1 probably began life as the god named Aten.

Half-Life

"Our image" just means that God and Jesus thought of what man and women would look like and created them. It doesn't mean God was talking to his girlfriend! lol

Chris Weimer

Girlfriend, angels, other gods, Jesus - out of these four, Jesus has the least amount of support. Other Gods comes next, then girlfriend, but angels (heavenly host) has the most support, considering it fell in line with Jewish thought at the writing of Genesis.

Loomis

Nope. I changed my mind. I was wrong. I admit it. I take it all back. But I think I’ve got it this time.

My thinking was that since the first creation story is based on the Egyptian creation myths that the “us” would be Aten and his girlfriend. (Ala Greenberg’s “101 Myths of the Bible”) But I’ve discovered better candidates.

I bet the “us” refers to the “messengers” and the “flaming fire” in Psalm 104:4.

Psalm 104:4

He makes the winds his messengers,
and his attendants a flaming fire.

If you aren’t familiar with the similarities between Psalm 104, Genesis 1, and the “Great Hymn to Aten” you should google it. Also note that in Ugaritic mythology Yam’s messengers appear as flaming fire before the assembly of El.

That’s it. There can be no doubt. There is no room for disagreement.

If anyone has a better idea (that doesn’t include superstitious claims of real spirit creatures) I’d love to here it.


The Great Hymn to the Aten

jeffevnz

OK, the opinions about how to translate "elohim" appear to be diverse and deeply entrenched, so let's stop worrying about that for now...

But what about the strange passages where God seems to be addressing peers ("let us make man in our image and likeness" or "let us go down there and confuse their language")?

The idea that God is talking to angels here seems strange unless they also have His power to create man in their image or to confuse language. If God is the only one that has these powers, wouldn't He say something more along the lines of "Watch this. I'm gonna go down there and confuse their language."? Note that God is performing the action alone in this case. Presumably, He does not need help.

This doesn't prove anything, but the idea that these passages are alluding to multiple gods is, at the very least, an obvious possibility that merits consideration.

I'm interested to hear a Christian perspective on this.