"Then God said, 'Let US make man in OUR image, and in OUR likeness'"

Where it says "god" in the english bible, it actually says "Elohim" in the original Hebrew bible called the Torah.

Elohim -

"Elohim" is the Hebrew plural word meaning "goddesses and gods", or in simple form: "the gods".

In Genesis where it says in the english bible that one "god" said let "us" make man in "our" image, doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Religious fanatics like to make up trinities or ghosts and goblins to create the pluralized part. But using the word from the original Hebrew bible "Elohim" makes more sense: Elohim (the gods) said let "us" make man in "our" image. See? Simple, and no trinity or ghosts, goblins, etc.

The beings that came to this planet created us in their image and likeness. They were able to ascend and descend the heavens in their chariots, clouds and pillars. It's not out of the realm of possibility that the chariots, clouds and pillars were, in fact, ships that they ascended and descended from the heavens in.

Think of the verses in the bible that talk about the "mount". The gods told Moses to make a perimeter around the mount and to let no one touch it and that anyone that came near the mount, whether it be man or animal, shall surely be killed.

Firstly, what is a "mount"? Dictionaries say that a "mount" is a means of conveyance. So, to make a perimeter around a means of conveyance due to possible radiation issues would be logical. For a god to just kill off animals and humans for coming near wouldn't make sense, but if there were radiation issues, then yes animals and humans would likely be killed.

Other bibles have translated "mount" into "mountain" but how do you make a perimeter around a mountain? Where does a mountain end and begin to make a perimeter around it or to even touch it? Why would the gods kill off humans and animals for coming near or touching the mountain? There would already be animals on the mountain, so I guess they would be instantly killed from god's wrath?

Some of the same above verses talk about Moses going up into the mount. Well, you can't go up into a mountain. You can go up onto a mountain. But you can go up into a ship.

How about Acts 10:11

And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth:

Then in Acts 10:16

This was done thrice: and the vessel was received up again into heaven.

What "vessel" could possibly have descended from the sky thousands of years ago and ascended back into the sky? Obviously by the verse it landed very gently like we land our helicopters.

Zechariah 5:1

Then I turned, and lifted up mine eyes, and looked, and behold a flying roll. 2 And he said unto me, What seest thou? And I answered, I see a flying roll; the length thereof is twenty cubits, and the breadth thereof ten cubits.

A flying roll? Some physical object was flying in the air thousands of years ago.

Isaiah 60:8

Who are these that fly as a cloud, and as the doves to their windows

Exactly. Who were those intelligent beings that were flying like clouds and doves, thousands of years ago? And the verse actually says "doves to their windows". Could that mean their windows on their chariots (ships)?

Psalms 68:17

The chariots of God (the gods) are twenty thousand, even thousands of angels

So the gods have a fleet of chariots (ships) that number in the 10's of thousands and that fleet has an army of angels that number in the thousands.

John 18:36

Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world

Jesus is telling you and the rest of the human race that he is not from this world.

What's unfortunate is when our creators return in their ships and their ships enter our atmosphere, the die-hard religious fanatics will pray to "god" for deliverance from these "aliens" and "demons" when, in fact, the ships will be carrying our creators and, in essence, "the gods"

It doesn't get much more clearer than this. There were physical objects flying around our skies thousands of years ago by intelligent beings that created us in their image and likeness.

To read much more visit The Bible UFO Connection.

This isnt really adding anything new to this thread, but have just come across it and yeah, its always intrigued me as well as to the use of 'we' and 'us' in this respect. I too believe this is because its being said by a group of entities/beings..the Annunaki..whom i strongly feel are our creators through genetic manipulations..and since that time have also remained as our controllers and jailers...

"There were many rulers, many civilizations, and other than in religious texts I do not know that this royal we existed, other than for a justification of the "we" in monotheistic texts." [searching4truth]

P.S.
In addition to what I just mentioned above, the reason the Majestic Plural is almost exclusively found in the texts of monotheistic religion is because Majestic Plural is a rule of semitic language (Hebrew and Arabic) and not adopted to use into English until much later.

The Lord smelled the soothing aroma” and was pleased (Exodus 29:25).

'Offer with the bread one young bull, two male sheep, and seven male lambs that are one year old and have nothing wrong with them. Offer them with their grain offerings and drink offerings, as a burnt offering to the Lord. They will be an offering made by fire, and the smell will be pleasing to the Lord.Leviticus 23

For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout,

The specific layout of the tabernacle and its courtyard is significant because it illustrates God’s prescribed way for man to approach Him.

The whole compound was surrounded by a high fence with only one entrance. A person could not simply come from any direction into the tabernacle as he pleased — he had to enter through the one gate, which was always located to the east (so that people were facing west when they entered the tabernacle — a direct opposition to the pagan sun worshippers of the day who always faced east). Upon entering the gate, he encountered the brazen altar, where he was to present his animal offering, and then hand the reigns over to the priests, who make atonement and intercession for him in the tent.

www.the-tabernacle-place.com...


My favorite, the cook out for god.
I'm not going to insert symbolism, it is what it is.
God likes food cooked on a fire, and demanded a place to eat it without being bothered by humans.
The mystery of mysteries continues only because certain humans sit on suppressed knowledge, and others embrace any teachings as proof of something unseen .

Originally posted by Full_Vision
This isnt really adding anything new to this thread, but have just come across it and yeah, its always intrigued me as well as to the use of 'we' and 'us' in this respect. I too believe this is because its being said by a group of entities/beings..the Annunaki..whom i strongly feel are our creators through genetic manipulations..and since that time have also remained as our controllers and jailers...

This is easy to say when you are speaking on belief, opinion, or fantasy and not the facts of Hebrew or Arabic. Simply put, the Majestic Plural is a rule of semitic language... any semitic speaker can verify this. Since the Old Testament was NOT originally written in English, it is foolish to use English rules or English logic when researching a SEMITIC TRANSLATION.

The OP of this thread is "Why is God speaking in pluralities?"
Old Testament originally written in semitic language = Use semitic rules to understand the scripture.

Not understanding or researching the original Hebrew is EXACTLY why we see so many splinter sects in Christianity. Now this same lack of understanding Hebrew is now leading to new age alien sects. Understand the rules of Hebrew and DENY IGNORANCE

Groupies:

It seems clear (from the text at least) that the term ‘ADAM’ according to the P writer (who also wrote Gen 1:1 to 2:4a) was seen to have been created in the Image of ELOHIM, viz. both MALE & FEMALE. Therefore Elohim (‘god’) is BOTH male AND female, i.e. Androgynous (having both male/female parts)

See e.g. Genesis chapter 5:1-2 written by the same P writer (‘school of Hezekiel’) as the writer(s) of theCreation Myth # 1 in Genesis Chapter 1 (the priest with a Babylonian Hebrew accent) where ADAM (like ELOHIM) is BOTH MALE and FEMALE (no Havvah/Hayyah/Eve in the P story)

QUOTE (Genesis 5:1-2)

This is the book of the Toledoth (ancestry or ‘generations’)of ADAM in the day that Elohim (pl) created (sg. Bara) Mankind, in the likeness of ELOHIM (pl) made he him (sg) Male AND female created he them (pl); and he (sg) called THEIR (pl) name ADAM, and he (sg) blessed THEM BOTH (pl) in the day THEY (pl) were created.

UNQUOTE

So…why do we say that GOD (heb Elohim, which is masc. pl) is a HE when the singular form of ELOHIM is "ELOAH" (a feminine goddess) which is the name of the god(dess) in the EARLY Elamite Hebrew of the poetical Sections of Job (see chapters 3-48) – though governing masculine pronouns in the text copies as they now stand.

YHWH does not exist in the earliest texts of the poetical sections of Job (in some MSS YHWH appears in the Tornado Scene).

It’s actually named as a different clan god altogether (which certainly makes you wonder HOW it got voted into the bible in the first place: most likely because YHWH and SATAN and other characters WERE ADDED to the later PROSE sections of the text (post 180 BCE – written in late Hebrew) in chapters 1 and 2 (and the very last 6 lines) all PROSE as opposed to the body of the book which is a POEM (with a different point to the story if you read the POEM part alone)

Ancient Manuscript Comparison-Tennis, anyone ?

BoneZ, isn't that a copy and paste job?

reply to post by Hydroman


Elohim reflects an even older Canaanite root El meaning Father or something, which can also be seen in an as different language as my own, Norwegian, where we have the word for fire, Eld, and in English Elder (from same as Norwegian Eldre), and we have No. Alder: Age, also Spanish article El - The, the Arabic Allah and the Arabic preposition Al and similarily Hebrew preposition El and so on. Since Arabic and Hebrew on one side and Norwegian and English on the other are not of the same branch, Ar. & Heb. are Semittic, while Eng. & No. are Indo European the word is probably way older than both these language families and probably have a common ancestry. The word reflected in Elohim may mean Fires or Powers or Forces.

Isn't it sad that we even have to discuss this and come up with different ideas about who or what the creator is..if anything? Why is it all so vague if this being really exists? Why isn't it clear, where everyone knows who and what if anything, the creator is?

Wars are fought due to different belief systems. People have to die for their beliefs. It's all so vague. Sad.

Originally posted by Sigismundus
Groupies:

It seems clear (from the text at least) that the term ‘ADAM’ according to the P writer (who also wrote Gen 1:1 to 2:4a) was seen to have been created in the Image of ELOHIM, viz. both MALE & FEMALE. Therefore Elohim (‘god’) is BOTH male AND female, i.e. Androgynous (having both male/female parts)

I've been saying this for quite a while. Kudos and star for this. Great. It gets even more interesting in the next creation myth when JHVH Elohim puts Adam to sleep and extracts a Tsela (same word as Lat. Cella BTW, rib is actually not it's original meaning, but a small chamber in a temple complex for instance), after which Jahveh Elohim "FILLS THE (shameful) WOUND DOWN THERE WITH MEAT AND CLOSE IT UP". It's obvious to me that Adam 1.0 was androgynous in nature infact capable of cloning himself/herself/itself.

Even in Catholic texts on angels these beings are discribed as being androgynous.

Originally posted by Sahabi

@ searching4truth

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.

Here's my issue, and I know intonation gets lost on the internet, so I do not mean any of this to be offensive, as I stated I extremely interested in this topic, and have never fully been able to reconcile this issue to myself. You may not know the answer, or be able to find information that proves one way or the other, and I honestly I don't expect that, the discussion itself is interesting as well.

Now, I know that Hebrew and Arabic are related although honestly I am more familiar with Arabic than Hebrew, and yes there are many words in these languages that have a more specific definition than common English words.

However, in searching the internet on this topic, which has been discussed by all three religions, the explanations are lacking. Often times the closing statements are something to the effect of "we know there is one God, the Torah uses the same tenses, the Bible uses the same tenses, the Quran uses the same tenses, etc." Along with somewhere in the rebuttal that the majestic "we" was common place....at the time. Where is any evidence of this, a couple of documents, tombs, something that indicates that this was in fact common practice. Justifying the tense or title in the Quran by citing its use in the Torah does not make it common place, it makes one example from another monotheistic religious text which share many concepts and stories.

I used the example of Henry II because often these same religious scholars point either to him or Queen Elizabeth's "we are not amused" statement. In Elizabeth's case, however, she was not referring to only herself but her court, so she did intend to use it in the plural.

I can even go along with it not being used in English nations for over a thousand years, but in that thousand years plus, where is something that illustrates this instead of continually citing English examples? There is too must history there to not be able to produce something other than another religious text to show that this was infact common place.

Found a video for your enjoyment. It's quite on-topic

Seriously though, Hebrew plural nouns can be used to both describe the quantitative and qualitative. Example the Hebrew word for trees is etsiym and it is used to describe either more than one tree, or one great tree.
In that sense, elohiym can be translated as both many gods, or one great God.

Originally posted by primus2012
In that sense, elohiym can be translated as both many gods, or one great God.

Which makes more sense:

1.) One great God said let us make man in our image.

2.) The gods said let us make man in our image.

I don't believe in blind faith, nor do I believe in a singular all powerful, all seeing, all knowing, omnipotent being that has just "always been there".

I believe some very intelligent beings came to this world, created life in their image and likeness, and gave us a set of commandments to live by. These beings flew through the sky and ascended and descended the heavens in their chariots, pillars and clouds.

And there very well may be omnipotent beings somewhere in the universe like the "Q" race in Star Trek TNG, but gods they are not.





[edit on 7-4-2010 by _BoneZ_]

Originally posted by silverstreak

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.

Angels are not God, but they are divine.
He made them in His own image because it is perfect and he wanted it that way.
The angels didn't have too much say so over anything God does or says but, God felt they should be included in the fun so the words read"Let Us make man in Our Image".


No I don't follow Christian teachings.
Have a good day!

Originally posted by silverstreak
Then God said, "Let US make man in OUR image, in OUR likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, [a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground (Genesis 1:26)

Hebrew scholar Michael Heiser has pointed out that 'in our image' actually reads 'as our image'.

This means that man was made to 'image the Lord'...
...or to act in the role of the Lord in the world.

It is then not a term that is referring to appearance or ability...
...but rather a term describing our soveriegnty over the earth...
...a soveriegnty that 'the serpent' and the 'nephiyl' tried to take from us...
...tried to take from the 'seed of men'.

What is everyone's opinion on this subject? Why do Christian churches fail to acknowledge these Giants mentioned in Genesis (at least from my experiences)?

Christians fulfil the role of keeping the scriptures alive...
...as Israel kept the stories of the messiah alive in law and ceremony...
...atheists also keep them alive by opposing them.

Have you noticed that the busiest threads on ATS are the most controversial?

If Christians and the scriptures were not opposed they would be forgotten...
...the opposition and the defence keep them alive...
...otherwise they would be lost or forgotten in some museum basement.

When the time is right Christians will acknowledge the references to giants...
...and understand how this relates to the current Alien Hypothesis...
...as some already do.

A few Chritians are being prepared in advance to reveal it to the ἐκκλησία...
...when the demons in alien clothing are finally allowed to disclose.



[edit on 7/4/10 by troubleshooter]

Again, the qualitative needs to be assumed:

Gen 1:26
And God said, Let us make man in our image after our likeness...
or
And the one great God said, let My Exalted Self make man in My Exalted Self's image, after My Exalted Self's likeness...

Also if you read Gen 1:27 it is clearly referring to a singular being:
God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.



[edit on 7-4-2010 by primus2012]

reply to post by Archirvion


Dont confuse the humans...It will only make them pontificate more into nothingness. Fighting amongst themselves who is right and who is wrong until they can no more.

It dosent matter what language anything was written, said or described in, it was ALL said, written, and described by men. Why are you all arguing your religious beleifs?
I'll bet God, if he/she/they/it exist, has never ever spoken a single word.
Religion and religious doctrin of any stripe is a reflection of its beleivers, nothing more.
Little wonder there is so much for you all to argue about, This has been ongoing for millenia, not surprising we still kill each other over it.
Beleive what you will, but dont try to impose your beleif on others.
Ironically, Its christians who most seem to ignore 'do as you would be done by'.

Heres hoping for a world where humanity gives up its childish behaviour ,takes responsibility for its own actions, and religion of all stripe is abolished forever!

[edit on 7-4-2010 by wayaboveitall]

I think the answer is simple, it is God and the sons of God he's referring to. Genesis talks about 2 different creations, and it actually sounds an awful lot like the Sumerian version of creation, and also the Kolbrin. To me, this is not a coincidence, and ancient texts like these contain profound wisdom, and allso insight into out distant past. The mystery of creation IMHO, is the key to gaze into the future. After all, to know how it all began would give a good idea how it will end.(if the universe does in fact end lol )