Originally posted by letthereaderunderstand
No magic names will save you from that day....Names mean things, hence IN the name. Jesus is an action.

Jesus is an action? Like, "Hey man, how 'bout you and me go do some Jesusing this weekend?"
Or, "You've just been Jesused!" ?

It makes more sense to me that when someone says "In the name of so and so", you would be doing/requesting something under the authority of that person.

[edit on 7-4-2010 by Hydroman]

Originally posted by Archirvion
Search for Anu or enki. or the annunaki, then u get the answer HOW the christian religion and all other religions are made

I did precisely that search months ago, I discovered the two main "gods" of creation. The Bible uses the word Elohim, which means plural gods. Although Enki was heir to the throne, his half brother Anu was given prime initiative regarding managing the human beings. Homonid and ET genetic mix supposedly made us strong to do the physical work of mining and farming, but intelligent to be able to communicate and understand our overlords. Not so superior as the annunaki as to limit our age and keep us weaker and below their stature. Gold was the agenda, the annunaki needed it to sustain their failing atmosphere on their home planet. There are extinct gold mines found dating back 5,000 years. They did not want to do the mining themselves so they created us as a slave force. They put the watchers to watch over us, they ended up lusting after our women, hence the giants were born. (Hercules, Goliath, etc) Early on, Enki had the Egyptians under his wing, he taught them hidden knowledge so that they could learn and evolve, have a better life. You can see by the Egyptian culture that gold was a common theme, as was the beautiful pyramid monuments, our builders today is unable to duplicate using the alleged tools of the ancient cultures. The Egyptians also were savy when it came to the stars and the pursuits of the afterlife.
The Hebrews trembled in fear of their god, Anu, whom did not want the humans to learn higher knowledge, they were kept in fear and did animal sacrifices, and were told to obey or experience God's wrath. It was a war between the creation gods (lower case) not to be confused with the Alph and the Omega God, loving creator of all mattter and consciousness. This is very interesting stuff to me, at least it fills in missing pieces of the puzzle. As a high school student inthe 1970's I had an image of the ancient peoples of earth, as just very backward, ignorant, superstitios people. But know I realize they weren't all that way. When I learned in history class about the Myans, Aztecs and Incas lopping off fellow humans heads as a sacrifice to appease some imaginary god, I now believe the "gods" were real beings, who scared the hell out of these civilizations, holding their prosperity and safety in the balance. Maybe the gods were cruel and enjoyed the power trip, seeing humans kill each other this way. I might be wrong, but it does make more sense to me. The other side of the coin would be when things went poorly concerning rain, food and crops, these humans would sacrifice themselves and naturally good and bad times run in cycles, they may have believed their brutal practices had a positive effect

I thought Sitchin had been debunked with his translations of the Sumerian cuneform tablets. Anyone else know?

Originally posted by Sahabi

Majestic Plural: Back in the day when there was higher emphasis on grammar and eloquent composition, the Majestic Plural was used instead of singularity to express an elevated social status above common folk. "We the King of England" for example.

Trinitarian Christians do not understand the concept of the Majestic Plural and ignorantly use the words "We," "Us," "Our," etc. as justification to believe in a god-trinity.

As the poster above me stated, we realize this was done in english, but was it also done in Hebrew? And yes, I am ignorant on that subject.

[edit on 7-4-2010 by Hydroman]

[edit on 7-4-2010 by Hydroman]

This is something that can be answered in a Old Testement Bible class. In fact, it was raised at the very beginning of the course. The 'we' often refers to the royal 'we'. Discounting that, God often talks to himself in the Old Testement in the plural. It could be, also, that he is talking to the choirs of angels.

"All I know is that I know nothing." However, I will try to shed some light with the basic information that I have on the subject.

searching4truth stated that the earliest use of Majestic Plural was with Henry II. I just Googled him up to see the time of his life and reign... so we're now talking about the 1100's. Please correct me if I am wrong. You asked if I know of any earlier texts using the Majestic Plural... and Hydroman asked "if this [Majestic Plural] was done in Hebrew".

I do know that the Qur'an was written during 610CE-632CE and often uses the Majestic Plural when speaking of Allah. The Qur'an is only considered the Qur'an in it's original Arabic, no translations are valid. Arabic is a semitic language very closely related to Hebrew... Hebrew being the original language of the Old Testament. Yes, the Majestic Plural was also used in Hebrew.

Just in case anyone makes the argument that "the Qur'an is a copy of the Bible, therefore the Majestic Plurals are still valid argument of god-like aliens in monotheistic faiths" ...... Islam specifically states in the 112th Chapter of the Qur'an: "Say; He is Allah, The One and Only. The Eternal, The Absolute. He does not beget, nor was He begotten, and there is none comparable to Him."

In all honesty, I apologize if I scratched anyone the wrong way or appeared to be demeaning in my previous post.

Ok then. In Genesis 11:7 when it says, "Come, let us go down and confuse their language..." it could be written in singular which would be "Come, let me go down and confuse their language." ? Who is he saying "come" to? The angels? Why would he need them to go down with him to confuse the languages? Also, why would he need to go down to do it? His power can't reach the humans from too far away?

Originally posted by aboxoftrix
He was talking to the angels.
They too were created in God's own image.

The passage says "create man in our image" ...

Why would God reference to creating man in both the image of himself AND in the image of the angels? That language gives god-like divinity to angels.

The angels aren't God, so therefore man could not have been created in the image of the angels as well.... if you follow Christian teaching.

[edit on 7-4-2010 by silverstreak]

[edit on 7-4-2010 by silverstreak]

@ Hydroman
As I do not believe the Bible to be the true or unaltered word of God, I can not debate with you as to defend the Bible or scripture in the OT or NT. The OP simply asked "Why is god speaking in pluralities?" The clear answer when researching Hebrew or Arabic is the Majestic Plural.

If the Majestic Plural is not a "good enough" answer when referring to the Bible because of historic uncertainties... then I cite Islam and the Qur'an written in Arabic in the 600's CE. Muhammad of Mecca specifically spread the message of ONE creator, ONE God, while Allah used the Majestic Plural found the Qur'an. "If" the Majestic Plural was referring to more than one god, more than one entity, or an extraterrestrial civilization, then there would not be a HUGE emphasis in Islam on ONE God, ONE Creator.

-------------------------------------------

@ searching4truth
Hebrew and Arabic are semitic languages, extremely related, and similar. I am no expert in other languages around the world, but from the little I do know, different languages follow different rules. Some languages are so vastly different that it is extremely hard to fully translate the exact meanings, feelings, and ideas into other languages. Languages are not so simple or so similar as to simply cross-translate word for word, idea to idea.

For example, in Arabic there are many different words for "love." There is a different love-word for love between a husband and wife, a different love-word for love between family members, a different love-word for friends, etc., when in English we simply say "love" for anything ranging from endearment, companionship, intimacy, love for inanimate objects, love for activities, etc.

Point being, Majestic Plural is a reality used in ancient and modern Hebrew and Arabic, and just because there is no equivalent found in other languages, that does not mean it doesn't exist nor does it change the implications of its meaning.

As you might know, English is actually a language that borrows words and rules from many different languages. English has and always will be an ever evolving language borrowing from other languages. It does not surprise me that while the Majestic Plural was used in ancient semitic languages, it did not pop into English until much later.