Dec
26
Three Reasons to NOT Read the Trinity into Gen. 1:26
This isn’t exactly a Christmas post, but it’s “Christmas-adjacent” (like Die Hard). How? It involves Scripture and the incarnation of the Son of God. In particular, the first verse in the Bible that is taken as an indication — even “proof” — of the triune nature of Yahweh. It reads,
“Then God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.'” — Genesis 1:26 (ESV)
Proponents of this view point to the fact that ‘elohim, a Hebrew plural noun, is used for the singular God of Israel. However, what they usually fail to take into account is that ‘elohim is also used for singular foreign gods (e.g., Chemosh (1 Kings 11:33), Dagon (1 Sam. 5:7), Baal (1 Kings 18:24)). Similarly, the plural form of “lord/master” (‘adon) is used in Judges 19 to signify the Levite’s authority over his servant and concubine, as well as by David in 1 Sam. 26 to convey Saul’s authority over Israel’s armies.
Bruce K. Waltke, a revered professor of Old Testament and Hebrew, has pointed out (as have others) that the above usage is called a plural of majesty or an honorific plural. Specifically, Waltke says that such plurals are used for a singular individual who is “so thoroughly characterized by the qualities of the noun” that a plural is needed to give it extra emphasis.
Another aspect to consider is the lack of solid evidence anywhere else in the Old Testament of an understanding of Yahweh as triune. For one thing, references to the Messiah may indicate that he would be more than human (Isaiah 9:6), but none clearly express deity. Also, when a Davidic king is called a “son” of God (Psalm 2:7), it merely (though not insignificantly) refers to his being adopted as God’s vice-regent for His people on Earth.
Furthermore, the personhood of the Holy Spirit is not manifest in the Old Testament, either. The Spirit of God represents the Lord’s presence among His people (Exodus 33:14). The Spirit is “god’s dynamic activity and power at creation” (Gen. 1:2) and “the means by which God empowers individuals to do His will” (Judges 3:10). When the Spirit was “grieved” by the rebellion of the wilderness generation (Isaiah 63:10), progress is made toward a more personal view, but it isn’t fully developed until the New Testament. (Or, perhaps more accurately, the concept developed during the intertestamental period and was revealed in the New Testament.)
The final line of evidence against the “Trinity in the O.T.” view is a bit more controversial. I don’t know about you, but I always heard (and, for most of my life, pretty much accepted) that the use of “Let us” and “our” in Gen. 1:26 is an example of God using the “royal we/us” (not to be confused with Waltke’s “plural of majesty”), as is done in English. Actually, it would be dialogue within and amongst the Persons of the Trinity. However, if it is, that’s the only place in the Old Testament where he does that.
Arguably, the more plausible alternative is that God was announcing His creative intent to the divine council. (The Divine Council View of Scripture has been taught by many but is most recently popularized by Michael S. Heiser.) This assembly consists of heavenly creatures, probably high-level angels or similar, over whom God has complete authority (Psalm 89:7; Daniel 7:10) and that are sometimes referred to in Scripture as “the sons of God” (e.g., Gen. 6:2; Job 1:6; Psalm 29:1). They “assist” God in the commissioning and instruction of His prophets (Isaiah 6), as well as putting lying spirits in the mouths of false prophets in order to carry out God’s sovereign plan (1 Kings 22:19-22). God has delegated authority and guardianship over the nations to council members (Deut. 32:8; Daniel 10:13,21), but many have rebelled, and He upbraids them for abusing their authority and promoting injustice (Psalm 82).
There is more to the case for the Divine Council View in general, of course. But, as for the matter at hand, consider that it satisfies the plural in the Gen. 1 passage, and it works quite well for Gen. 3:5,22; Gen. 11:7; and other passages that can be somewhat puzzling. For example, Psalm 82:1 states that God (‘elohim) stands in the divine assembly (lit. “the assembly of God”, ‘adat-‘el) and judges among the gods (‘elohim). That second ‘elohim obviously has nothing to do with the Trinity.
I haven’t totally bought into Heiser’s teachings, but I think he makes fair points and conclusions about this. All things considered, the view that the divine council was the audience for God’s announcement in Gen. 1:26 appears to have stronger biblical support than that it was meant to convey the Trinity, especially when considering the historical context. Canonically, we can see that any potential shadows of trinitarian doctrine were fleshed out (no pun intended) much more explicitly in the New Testament.
(H/T David A. Croteau and Gary E. Yates, Urban Legends of the Old Testament)
