Yates Plural Vs Singular Argument

 In opposition however to the thousands and tens of thousands of passages, which imply by the use of singular pronouns, that God is one person, the Trinitarians have collected together as many as three, which by the use of plural pronouns are supposed to indicate a plurality of persons in the Godhead. [Gen. 1.26; 6.7; Isa. 6.8].

First, I would observe, that by bringing forward these passages [the trinitarian acknowledges] the validity of the opposite argument of the Unitarians, which is established upon similar grounds. He acknowledges, that the number of persons in the Godhead is indicated by the personal pronouns, employed in speaking of the Godhead. His argument proceeds on the supposition, that the use of a plural pronoun in speaking of God intimates, that there is in God a plurality of persons: of course he will admit, that the use of a singular pronoun in speaking of God, denotes that God is one person only. As a Unitarian, there is nothing, which I more desire than the concession, that the number of persons in the Godhead may be inferred from the use of the personal pronouns in the Sacred Scriptures. 

(A Vindication of Unitarianism: In Reply to the Rev. Ralph Wardlaw, James Yates, 1850, pp 136-37.)

Giant Genocide Explained

From: Appendix 25, The Companion Bible by Bullinger.

We read of the Nephilim again in Numbers 13:33 "there we saw the Nephilim, the sons of Anak, which come of the Nephilim".

How, it may be asked, could this be, if they were all destroyed in the Flood ?

The answer is contained in Genesis 6:4, where we read: "There were Nephilim in the earth in those days (that is to say, in the days of Noah); and also AFTER THAT, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became [the] mighty men (Hebrew gibbor, the heroes) which were of old, men of renown" (literally, men of the name, that is to say, who got a name and were renowned for their ungodliness).

So that "after that", that is to say, after the Flood, there was a second irruption of these fallen angels, evidently smaller in number and more limited in area, for they were for the most part confined to Canaan, and were in fact known as "the nations of Canaan". It was for the destruction of these, that the sword of Israel was necessary, as the Flood had been before.

As to the date of this second irruption, it was evidently soon after it became known that the seed was to come through Abraham; for, when he came out from Haran (Genesis 12:6) and entered Canaan, the significant fact is stated: "The Canaanite was then (that is to say, already) in the land."

And in Genesis 14:5 they were already known as "Rephaim" and "Emim", and had established themselves as Ashteroth Karnaim and Shaveh Kiriathaim. In chapter 15:18-21 they are enumerated and named among Canaanite Peoples: "Kenites, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites, and the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims, and the Amorites, and the Girgashites, and the Jebusites"(Genesis 15:19-21; compare Exodus 3:8,17; 23:23. Deuteronomy 7; 20:17. Joshua 12:8).

These were to be cut off, and driven out, and utterly destroyed (Deuteronomy 20:17. Joshua 3:10). But Israel failed in this (Joshua 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:18. Judges 1:19,20,28,29,30-36; 2:1-5; 3:1-7); and we know not how many got away to other countries to escape the general destruction. If this were recognized it would go far to solve many problems connected with Anthropology.

As to their other names, they were called Anakim, from one Anak which came of the Nephilim (Numbers 13:22,33), and Rephaim, from Rapha, another notable one among them. From Deuteronomy 2:10, they were known by some as Emim, and Horim, and Zamzummim(verse 20,21) and Avim, etc. As Rephaim they were well known, and are often mentioned: but, unfortunately, instead of this, their proper name, being preserved, it is variously translated as "dead", "deceased", or "giants".

These Rephaim are to have no resurrection. This fact is stated in Isaiah 26:14 (where the proper name is rendered "deceased", and verse 19, where it is rendered "the dead"). It is rendered "dead" seven times (Job 26:5. Psalm 88:10. Proverbs 2:18; 9:18; 21:16. Isaiah 14:8; 26:19). It is rendered "deceased "in Isaiah 26:14. It is retained as proper name "Rephaim" ten times (two being in the margin). Genesis 14:5; 15:20. Joshua 12:15 (margin). 2 Samuel 5:18,22; 23:13. 1 Chronicles 11:15; 14:9; 20:4 (margin). Isaiah 17:5. In all other places it is rendered "giants", Genesis 6:4, Numbers 23:33, where it is Nephilim; and Job 16:14, where it is gibbor (Ap. 14. iv). By reading all these passages the Bible student may know all that can be known about these beings.

Hebrew plural verbs with singular meaning

Basically, in unusual instances of seeming grammatical mismatches in the Bible, a linguistic phenomenon called “attraction” has likely occurred. This phenomenon occurs in many languages, including English.

An example in English of linguistic “attraction” – a technical grammatical mismatch – is: “Turn left at the street where there is a carwash and a fast food restaurant.” Due to there being two landmarks, the sentence should have a plural verb. But, “there are a carwash” (even with addition of another landmark), grates on the ear.

This type of grammatical error is called “attraction,” where verbs or adjectives or even pronouns are so strongly connected to the form of a nearby noun that proximity overtakes the proper grammatical construction.

So, in connection to the few examples of where Elohim (for Israel’s God) is clearly the subject, though used with plural forms of verbs or adjectives, we now can see that this is an instance where linguistic “attraction” has likely occurred.

For instance, even though it literally says this in the Hebrew, we know the Hebrew Bible is not saying that “the gods” caused Abraham to wander from his father’s home (Gen. 20:13), “the gods” revealed themselves to Jacob at the place called El Beth El (Gen. 35:7), “the gods” redeemed Israel (2 Sam.7:23), or “the gods” judge the earth so that humankind can be pleased that justice prevails (Ps. 58:11). Rather, we can understand that we are reading instances in the Hebrew where linguistic “attraction” has occurred.

There are still other instances where certain Hebrew adjectives refer to Israel’s God using plural forms. A potential for confusion develops because these adjectives translate into nouns in English (e.g., Job 35:10; Ps. 149:2; Ecc. 12:1; Is. 54:5). It is difficult to convey the sense of this in English. These are not expressed in verbs or nouns, but rather by adjectives in Hebrew. The instances are:

• Job 35:10, which conveys the idea of God (eloah, singular form) who (are) making humanity (osai, pl. [= plural]);

• Psalm 149:2, the idea of HaShem who (are) making Israel (osav, pl.);

• Ecclesiastes 12:1, the idea that we are to remember God (ha-elohim, plural form) who (are) creating us (bor'eikha, pl.);

• Isaiah 54:5, the idea that HaShem of hosts (ADONAI ts'vaot), God of the whole earth (elohei khol ha-arets, plural form), who (are) mastering/husbanding Jerusalem (boalaikh, pl.), who (are) making her (osaikh, pl.).

When conveyed in this fashion, it is apparent that there are more grammatical oddities here. Yet, Hebrew language scholars who translate the Hebrew text into English are not caught off guard. They translate these into English in singular forms, knowing there is no mysterious thing happening here.

Unfortunately, however, the fact that these adjectives translate into English as nouns – “my makers” (Job 35:10); “his makers” (Ps. 149:2); “your creators” (Ecc. 12:1); “your masters/husbands, your makers” (Is. 54:5) – has opened the door to speculation that these texts are really saying the God of Israel is a mysterious plurality of makers-creators.

In reality this continues to be a matter of linguistic “attraction” that has become an occasion for mistakes to be made by those looking for hidden hints of plurality to the godhead.

https://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/56375/makers-and-creators-job-3510-121-kohelet-singular-v-s-plural

‎We must regard as doubtful a number of participles in the plural, which, being used as attributes of God, resemble plurales excellentiae; thus, עשָֹׁי my Maker, Jb 35:10; עשַֹׁ֫יִךְ Is 54:5; עשָֹׁיו ψ 1492; עשֶֹׁיהָ Is 22:11; נֽוֹטֵיהֶם stretching them out, Is 42:5; for all these forms may also be explained as singular,

‎⁦‪https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Gesenius%27_Hebrew_Grammar/124._The_Various_Uses_of_the_Plural-form#GHGpar-124-k‬⁩

A feature of the Hebrew language are plurals but this is common for words which refer to power and mastery, whether talking about God or humans.

Some common examples:

• Exodus 22:14 בְּעָלָ֥יו - "Its owners are not with it"

• Genesis 39:20 - אֲדֹנֵ֨י "The lords of Joseph took him" - where both verses are talking about a single person.

In the case of Osai, it has a pronominal suffix (plural) "ai" בָּנַי my children, however there are many Hebrew words that have Pronominal Suffixes "ai" and have "singular" sense, example:

• Genesis 43:3 my face (singular) פָנַ֔י in Hebrew reads my faces, (plural) but it is obvious that human beings have one face.

• Job 13:26 my youth (singular) נְעוּרָֽי Hebrew reads, my youths (plural) it is obvious that human beings have a single youth.

In the case of "Boreika" it has a pronominal suffix (plural), eg סוּסֶ֫יךָ your horses.

Also it has singular sense example:

• Gen. 24:51 אֲדֹנֶ֔יךָ your Lord, in this case is talking about Abraham, one Lord, despite having plural pronominal suffix, has sense "singular, in Hebrew it is literally your lords (plural).

Why "sons of God" is not sons of Seth in Genesis 6

 Genesis 6:1When human beings began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, 2the sons of God saw that the daughters of humans were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose.

4The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of humans and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown. (NIV)

The sons of Seth view: The sons of God are godly humans from the line of Seth [cp. Gen 4.26] who procreated with the daughters of wicked men from the line of Cain. And their children, the Nephilim, were great, giant, mighty kings/warriors.

• Genesis 4:26 does not say only Seth and his sons ''called on the name of the Lord'';

• The text doesn’t say “the daughters of humans” were all evil, ungodly women from Cain only; And why would godly, faithful sons of God go after faithless, ungodly women?

• The text distinguishes “sons of God” from humankind in v.1 (which would include family of Seth or Cain) and clearly states the “daughters of humankind” are human women in general, not just Cainites.

• The word adam in vv.1-2 is given two totally different meanings, i.e., v.1 broad ref. to all humans and v.2 narrow ref. to some daughters of wicked humans only. This would mean the sons of some humans took the daughters of other humans;

• At this time there is no command against marrying certain persons, e.g., Jews and Gentiles later.

• The concept of Israel’s sonship refers to the relationship between YHWH and his people, and not to the piety of the persons involved.

• The point of the language of Gen 6:1-4 is a sexual relationship, not matrimony. The wives...marriage idea comes from English translations. The Hebrew translated wives is simply the normal plural for women (nashim).

• The “taking/going in to women” is a biblical euphemism for sexual relations not exclusively used for marriage. The "taking" of a woman elsewhere means illicit sexual relationship (Gen 38:2; Lev 18:17; 20:17, 21; 21:7), as can "coming/going in to" (Gen 38:2; 39:14; Lev 21:11; Judg 16:1; Amos 2:7).

Who are the Nephilim, aka Giants?

• Humans do not reproduce a whole race of giants who go on to form whole nations, e.g., Num. 13; King Og up to 13 feet; Goliath up to 10 feet!

• The LXX gigantes, "suggests they understood the Nephilim to be the offspring of the angel marriages, for in Greek mythology the gigantes were the product of the union of earth and heaven. And this is the way most modern commentators understand the term." (WBC)

• Had Gen 6:4 intended to convey that Nephilim = the sons of God it would read:

“The Nephilim were on earth in those days, and also afterwards, who came to the daughters of men so that children were born to them."

Can angels procreate?

• In Matt 22:30 Jesus means holy angels and should not contradict angels who sinned, disobeyed by taking women in Gen 6; Jude-Peter;

• Angels are spirits but the word doesn’t mean no body! They can also become physical, see Gen 18-19; 32;

• The Hebrew for angel, malak is not used in Gen 6 but benei elohim elsewhere means angels from heaven, Job 38:7; cp. son of gods/God is a malak in Dan 3:25-28!

Oneness aka Modalist Verses

Isaiah 9:6

First, shared titles, like shared functions, even imagery does not mean the same person! Pagan kings like Artaxerxes (Ezra 7.12), Nebuchadnezzar (Ezek. 26.7; Dan 2.37) are called “King of kings." But no one would argue they are the one God as well.

That the Hebrew does not properly signify eternal or everlasting is shown by the LXX translation "father of the age to come," another title for the Messiah. Like Abraham before him, the Messiah will become father to a new people of God. Jesus himself acknowledges the title father for Abraham (John 8.39, 56; cp. Luke 16.24 when the rich man shouted, ‘Father Abraham, have some pity!')

All characteristics and functions the Messiah possesses in the messianic age belong exclusively to God and Him alone (Daniel 7:13-15, Daniel 7:27, Isaiah 9:b, Zechariah 14:4, Zechariah 12:10, etc...) Yet, visions like Dan 7 once again shows two different persons (the son of man is not the Ancient of Days). Also note, worship and service by the subjugated nations is also given to the saints of the Most High.

Lastly, Isa 9.6 was applied to Messianic figures like Hezekiah and never as a reference to God!

Genesis 19:24, Two Yahwehs?

 Genesis 19:24, NASB 1995
"Then the LORD rained on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven" Cp. Amos 4.11; Isa 13.19; Jer. 50.40

Justin Martyrs’ main argument against Trypho!

• Dialogue 52-62

A combination of illeism and the repeat of a name!

1. Lamech said to his wives....” You wives of Lamech.” Genesis 4:23

2. The LORD said, “Moses shall come near to the LORD.” Exodus 24:1-2

3. Solomon assembled the people...before Solomon 1 Kings 8:1

4. Rehoboam came to Jerusalem and assembled all the house of Judah and the tribe of Benjamin...to Rehoboam, 1 Kings 12.21

5. The LORD said “I will deliver them by the LORD.” Hosea 1:6-7

6. “I will make them strong in the LORD,” says the LORD: Zechariah 10:12

7. The LORD said to Satan, "The LORD rebuke you, Satan! The LORD, who has chosen Jerusalem, rebuke you!" Zecheriah 3:2

8. Jonathan speaking to David about himself 1 Samuel 20.12-13

9. David speaking "May God curse David" 1 Samuel 25.22

10. Abner speaking "May God punish Abner" 2 Samuel 3.8-9

Amos 4:11

• "God" is often repeated in Hebrew instead of "I,” aka illeism.

• Many translations substitute “God” for the first person pronoun (“I”), e.g., "as I overthrow Sodom and Gomorrah," NIV; also NCV, TEV, CEV, NLT.

• Same idiomatic expression verbatim Isa 13:19 and Jer 50:40.

https://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/52/52-3/JETS%2052-3%20499-518%20Malone.pdf

The Bible Christadelphian Version

 

• Satan/Devil = evil human inclination;

• Fallen angels/unclean spirits/demons = mental illnesses

Deuteronomy 32.17

They sacrificed to mental illnesses that were no gods, to gods they had never known, to new gods that had come recently, whom your fathers had never dreaded.

Psalm 95:5a LXX

For all the gods of the nations are mental illnesses.

Psalm 106:37

They sacrificed their sons and their daughters to mental illness.

Job 1:7

The LORD said to evil human inclination, “Where have you come from?” The evil human inclination answered the LORD, “From roaming throughout the earth, going back and forth on it.”

Job 1:12

And the LORD said to the evil human inclination, “Behold, all that he has is in your hand. Only against him do not stretch out your hand.” So the evil human inclination went out from the presence of the LORD.