Bishop's Epistle: OLD TESTAMENT PLURALS (Answering Objections to Modalism)

The Pluralists’ Objection

The Pluralists feel that in the plural pronouns of the Old Testament (Gen 1:26; 11:7 and Isa 6:8) they have found an indication of a plurality of persons within the Godhead. In this chapter we will deal with each of these three passages in turn.

Genesis 1:26

“And 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 fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.”

According to the teaching of the Pluralists, the plural pronouns “us” and “our” in this text prove that God is more than one person. According to this line of reasoning, it is Father God who is speaking to the other two persons of the Godhead (if one is a Trinitarian). So, God the Father says to God the Son, and to God the Holy Spirit “Let Us make man in Our image, and after Our likeness.” If the Pluralist is an Arian or Binitarian, then one sees the Father speaking to the Son.

Modalism’s Response

The Trinitarian Dilemmas
There are many problems created by this line of reasoning, the least of which is not the very next verse in the passage.

“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them” —Genesis 1:27.

In v27 God is referenced by the single pronouns “his” and “he.” So, then, the same argument which would make God a plurality of persons in v26, because of the plural pronouns, would make Him a single person in v27, by virtue of the single pronouns. Consistency is a virtue that the Pluralists’ dogma cannot afford. To remain consistent with the evidence of the number of the pronouns, there is a stalemate produced between vv26 and 27. That is to say: One cannot argue that the plural pronouns of v26 prove a plurality of persons, if one is not prepared to argue that the single pronouns of v27 prove a single solitary person. Since neither Trinitarianism, Binitarianism nor Arianism are prepared to be consistent with their “pronoun” argument, the weakness of their position becomes apparent.

A more serious dilemma is created by the Pluralists’ interpretation of Genesis 1:26, in that God the Father is given accomplices in creation. We see the predicament created by this when Isaiah 44:24 is presented: “I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself.” Here, Yahweh (“LORD” in all caps) states clearly that He alone made the heavens and the earth. Now, according to Trinitarian, Binitarian and Arian dogma, He did not do it alone, but the “Us” were present to assist Him. If there were an “Us” participating in the act of creation, then Isaiah must be misquoting Yahweh. Or, Yahweh is taking credit for work that He did not do alone, in which case He would be lying. Of course, we know the truth: Yahweh created all things by Himself, without the aid or assistance of anyone else. Therefore, the Pluralistsʼ interpretation of Genesis 1:26 is in error, and another understanding must be sought.

The Solution — Plurality of Majesty

According to Isaiah 44:24 there is one single creator of all things in heaven and earth: “I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself.” Notice the words in this text” “I, “alone,” and “myself.” There are no accomplices recognized here. The quandary presented by Genesis 1:26 and Isaiah 44:24 is solved when one considers Ephesians 1:11, “In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:” Amazing!

From Paulʼs letter to the Ephesians we are told that God “worketh all things” after counseling with His own will. In Genesis 1:26 Yahweh is counseling with someone, this is true. The question is: Who? Whomever Yahweh is counseling with took part in the creation of mankind. Since we have a clear testimony from Yahweh Himself (Isaiah 44:24), that He alone created, we must conclude that: If Yahweh counseled with anyone concerning creation, it would have been Himself. Interestingly enough, this is exactly the Apostle Paulʼs understanding; for, he wrote to the Ephesians that God created after taking counsel with Himself. So, then, the question: To whom was God speaking in Genesis 1:26 (when he said: “let us make man”) would be answered by Ephesians 1:11, where it is stated that He was counseling with His own will. If one is unhappy with the phrase "Plurality of Majesty" then I might say that the Hebrew divines favored a "Plural of Self-Deliberation”; which, to me, amounts to the same thing. Just Amazing!

The plural pronouns employed by Yahweh is a common usage of speech among monarchs and rulers. This is called the Plurality Of Majesty. The majestic status of a king is far above that of his subjects, so much so, that a king may commonly speak of himself in the plural, thus, the Plurality of Majesty.

Examples of the Plurality of Majesty may be seen in many places throughout Scripture; but, especially, in Ezra 4:11ff and Daniel 2:36. In the book of Ezra 4:11-18 we read the narrative of a letter being sent to king Artaxerxes. In v11 the prophet Ezra writes the following: “This is the copy of the letter that they sent unto him, even unto Artaxerxes the king.” Then in v18 the King is speaking concerning the letter and states: “the letter which ye sent unto us...” in this case the Plurality of Majesty is demonstrated, in that the king refers to himself in the plural. Another example is Daniel 2:36. In this passage Daniel refers to himself in the plural, when he comes before Nebuchadnezzar, to tell the king of the dream and its interpretation. Daniel said, “This is the dream; and we will tell the interpretation before the king.” Notice that Daniel says: “WE will tell...” In this place Daniel employs the Plurality of Majesty in reference to himself.

As we return to the passage in question (Genesis 1:26 and 27) an interesting point should be made; namely, in v26 God is speaking of Himself, while in v27 God is being spoken about. In other words, in v26 God speaks in the first person, in the Plurality of Majesty; while in v27 God is spoken of in the third person singular. This would be quite natural, if the Plurality of Majesty is the correct understanding. Although Moses recorded the words of Yahweh with the plural pronouns, he did not have the understanding that these plural pronouns indicated plural persons; for when he gave commentary on the words of Yahweh, he used single pronouns for God. Moses understood the Plurality of Majesty; so that when he gave commentary on the words of Yahweh, he wrote, “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him, male and female created he them.” The important point to note here, is that God is never referenced with plural second or third person pronouns such as “Ye” (You all) or “Their.” When plural pronouns are used for God it is always when He is referencing Himself, thus, the Plurality of Majesty.

Genesis 11:7

“Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one anotherʼs speech.”

According to Trinitarian Pluralists, the LORD (Yahweh) is speaking to the other two persons of the Trinity, or, if Arian or Binitarian (those who believe in two persons), to the Son.

Modalism’s Response

The Pluralists, whether they be Trinitarian, Binitarian or Arian, defeat themselves with this line of reasoning. And this is how: The word “LORD,” from v6, is in all capital letters: which means it is the Tetragramaton (the four letters YHWH, which stand for the name of God).

Notice, then, that Yahweh says; “Let Us...”
If the Pluralists are correct, Yahweh is speaking to OTHERS.
Since they (especially the Trinitarian) believe Yahweh is the group name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, they defeat their own argument.

We say that the Pluralists defeat their own argument in this line of reasoning, because those spoken to would, of necessity, not be Yahweh: the preceding verse said “And the LORD (Yahweh) said,...” So the LORD (Yahweh) said to others, who are not, themselves, Yahweh, “Let us go down...”

Depending upon the school of Pluralists in this discussion, Yahweh is either the group name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, or the name of God the Father. Either way, the argument of plurality of persons within the Godhead being proven by the plural pronouns defeats itself. Either Yahweh (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) is speaking to the Angels (or a multitude of other ideas) who are not Yahweh; or Yahweh, the Father, is speaking to the Son and/or the Holy Spirit, who are not Yahweh. The weight of this is felt when we discover: If one is not Yahweh, then not God. This is made clear from the following texts:

Exodus 6:3 “And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty; but by my name JEHOVAH (Yahweh) was I not known to them.”
Deuteronomy 6:4 “Hear, O Israel; The LORD our God is one LORD:” (Hebrew: The Yahweh our Elohim is one Yahweh.)

Either way, whether Yahweh is speaking to angels or speaking to the Son and/or the Holy Spirit (who are not Yahweh) Trinitarianism, Binitarianism, Arianism, and like minded isms, are defeated by their own argument, in that other persons of the Godhead are not found here.

The plain truth of this narrative is this: Only one came down to see the work of manʼs hands (Genesis 11:8). The one that did come and scattered man upon the face of the earth was Yahweh Himself. Where were the “Us?” The answer is: they were never there. God counsels with His own will, according to Ephesians 1:11, “In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:”

From whom would the God of all the universe seek counsel? Who would be His equal that He would value his, or her, opinion? This is another example of Yahweh speaking of Himself in the plural, to show power and majesty. This use of language is called the Plurality of Majesty (also called the Plurality of Plentitude) and is seen in Genesis 1:26; Daniel 2:36; Ezra 4: 11, 18.

III. Isaiah 6:8

“Also I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, whom shall I send, and who will go for us?”

Again, those who wish to find “persons” in the Godhead point to this passage as a proof text. Here, they hope to find their persons of Trinitarianism, and/or Binitarianism, and/orArianism , etc.

Modalism’s Response:

This passage from Isaiah is of a different nature than the plural pronoun passages from Genesis 1:26 and 11:7, which we have reviewed in our preceding comments. We say that this passage from Isaiah is different, because in Genesis 1:26 and 11:7, God speaks of Himself in the plural; however, here, in Isaiah 6:8, God speaks of Himself in the singular and uses the word “I.” Notice, that when Isaiah quotes the words of the LORD he says that the LORD said “Whom shall I send, ...”

When one observes the law of context (which one must), we discover the following things from this passage:

There is one speaker;
The terms “I,” and “us,” are in the same statement;
The “us” must mean the LORD and others.

By looking at the context of the Scripture under consideration we must ask, “Who are the ʻUS?ʼ” Of course the Bible is clear in giving the answer to our question, “Who are the ʻUSʼ?” The answer is found in Isaiah 6: 1-2, which is the introduction to our narrative.

“In the year that king Uzziah died I saw also the LORD sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple. Above it stood the seraphims: each one had six wings; with twain he covered his face, and with twain he covered his feet, and with twain he did fly.” (Isaiah 6:1-2).

In these two verses the “Us” are identified as:

1. The LORD (YHWH),
2. His train (His following),
3. The Seraphim.

I might be so bold, at this point, to venture an explanation as to why such a statement was made, or such a question would be asked by Yahweh. Just why did Yahweh ask, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?” The answer is twofold: First, to show the benefactor as Yahweh Himself, for He asked, “Whom shall I send... .” Only one is sending in power and might (Ps 62:11; 65:6; 121:1-8). Second, to show the beneficiary, for Yahweh asked: “Who will go for us?” Therefore the benefactor sends the sent in behalf of all of Heaven: the “Us.” (See, 1 Cor 6:3; 1 Pet 1:12; Heb 12:22.) So, then, in Isaiah 6:8, Yahweh sent Isaiah the prophet to preach to the world in behalf of the “Us:” namely, those who inhabit heaven, i.e. the train (those who follow the King) and the Seraphim.

There are no plurality of persons in the Godhead seen in this passage, or in any other plurals of the Old Testament. The smoke and mirrors that have been used for centuries by the Pluralist theologians, of all stripes, are but tools of religious prevaricators, to lead astray those who do not care enough to vet their claims.

Apostolically Speaking;
☩☩ Jerry L Hayes
(Mar David Ignatius)

Be sure to listen and subscribe to the Bishop's Podcast: Apostolic Bishop, at:

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-apostolicbishops-podcast/id1472262392?fbclid=IwAR2FlRYnNsw5Vu_Bz4PjyEdiAxFMawhtD2BFr_S7WysrpFcYjuQYSHGAlZ

Read other Essays from the pen of the Bishop on the subject of the Godhead:

Godhead Theology is a study of Christian Godhead theology. ... Was He God or not? In Godhead Theology Bishop Jerry Hayes follows that debate through the first 300 years of the Church's history. Our book is in five sections: Section One ... demonstrates Modalistic Monarchianism as the original orthodoxy of the Chruch; Section Two introduces the Apostolic Creed ... ; Section Three is an affirmation of Modalistic Monarchianism; Section Four is Modalism's responses to objection from the pluralists Trinitarians, Binitarians, Arians and Semi-Arians. Included are two comprehensive indexes: Subject Index and Scripture Index. 613 pages.

Own this classic book today by ordering from the link provided here:https://www.amazon.com/Godhead-Theology-Modalism-Original-Orthodoxy/dp/1516983521/ref=sr_1_4?keywords=Bishop+Jerry+hayes&qid=1554244653&s=books&sr=1-4

The Jesus Debate is a written debate between Bishop Jerry Hayes and Prof. Willy Olmo. This book contains all papers submitted between this two knowledgeable men. Bishop Hayes affirms and defends the Oneness of God; Prof. Olmo affirms and defends Arian Unitarianism.

Own this classic debate by ordering from the link provided here:
https://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Debate-Modalism-Arianism-Unitarianism/dp/1484036670/ref=sr_1_6?keywords=Bishop+Jerry+hayes&qid=1554244653&s=books&sr=1-6

The Hayes vs Mulbah Debate is a formal written debate on the subject of the Godhead, between Bishop Jerry L Hayes (Onenessarian) and Minister Andrew Mulbah (Trinitarian). This work contains the debate in its entirety plus other related material. Included are the two Creeds from which both disputants argue their respective views: The Apostolic Creed (the statement of faith for the Oneness/Modalistic Monarchian theology) and the Athanasian Creed (the official statement of faith for the Trinitarian theology).

Own this remarkable debate today, by ordering it from the link provided here:https://www.amazon.com/Hayes-Mulbah-Debate-Oneness-Trinity/dp/1727358953/ref=sr_1_8?keywords=Bishop+Jerry+hayes&qid=1554244653&s=books&sr=1-8

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT BY

PURCHASING OUR BOOKS OF YOUR LIBRARY

Be sure to listen and subscribe to the Bishop's Podcast: Apostolic Bishop, at:

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-apostolicbishops-podcast/id1472262392?fbclid=IwAR2FlRYnNsw5Vu_Bz4PjyEdiAxFMawhtD2BFr_S7WysrpFcYjuQYSHGAlZ

Bishop's Epistle

Monday, July 15, 2019

OLD TESTAMENT PLURALS (Answering Objections to Modalism)

No comments:

Post a Comment

Bishop, Abbot General