Berešit bara Elohim - 10 March 2023 - Blog

Thank you very much for this "bereshit", but why is the Hebrew verb "bara" singular with the plural noun "Elohim"? See Genesis 1:1. That was skipped. Is this an anomaly deliberately made by theologians? In my native Serbian language, such a grammatical phenomenon is irregular. If a student wrote such a grammatical error, he would get a bad grade as big as a house.

It's a well-known feature of Biblical Hebrew that's also present in other ancient semitic languages. It's an intensive plural, i.e. a way to add emphasis to a singular subject through the use of the plural form. It has nothing to do with theology because it's applied to a variety of topics, for example the "beast" in the book of Job is just one and yet the plural form is used.

"It's an intensive plural, i.e. a way to add emphasis to a singular subject through the use of the plural form.''

Look at Genesis 20:13. Why is the intensive plural not used here? Both the verb and the noun are used in the plural.

Apparently, the redactors forgot to put the verb in the singular.

''Word Origin

probably pl. of behemah''

But here all verbs are singular.

Intensive plurals can be expressed just by a plural noun (as it happens thousand of times with elohim, in Job 40,etc.) or by a plural noun+ plural verb. The concept is the same, it's just a different degree of intensity. Genesis 20:13 is an example of intensive plural, the more radical one where even the verb is in the plural. Again, theology has nothing to do with it because the same pattern occurs in many other contexts throughout the Bible. When God disapproved of Cain's offer, Genesis 4:5 says "So Cain was very angry, and his countenance fell" but the Hebrew text literally says that "his faces fell[plural verb]". Was Cain a monster with more than one face? Of course not, the meaning is singular despite the plural verb. Genesis 21:2 says that "Sarah conceived and bore Abraham a son in his old age" but the Hebrew word is "zequnim", literally "old ages" (from the singular zaqun). 2Samuel 7:23 is very interesting: David is praying to Yhwh and says "And who is like your people Israel, the one nation on earth whom elohim went[plural verb] to redeem for himself ". Here we have a plural noun (elohim) followed by a plural verb (haleku/they went), all very similar to Genesi 20.13, but the pronoun is singular: it's "lo" ("for himself"), not "lahem" ("for themselves"). If that's not clear enough, one can read the previous verse where David says "Therefore you are great, adonai Yhwh. For there is none like you, and there is no elohim besides you." The biblical authors didn't forget anything, nor made mistakes when they used those intensive plurals (with or without the plural verb).They were simply using what was perfectly natural in their language. In Malachi 1:6 Yahweh says "If I am a master, where is your fear of me?" whereas the Hebrew text literally says "If I am masters", because it uses the plural word "adonim" (masters, lords) instead of the singular "adon", but the meaning is obviously singular and the pronouns are singular too, ("I/"ani", fear of me /"morai")

''Genesis 20:13 is an example of intensive plural, the more radical one where even the verb is in the plural.''

Why then do theologians translate such places as judges. Why was this more radical plural not used, for example in Genesis 1:1?

The intensive plural doesn't mean "judges". I don't know who told you that but it's absolutely wrong. Perhaps you heard Biglino say that in regard to Psalm 82 but he's mistaken. No translation in the world, not even the most religious one, translates it with "judges". Unfortunately Biglino is often inaccurate and superficial. Theologians don't use the expression "indefinite superlative": it was used by a Jewish person on an internet forum and Biglino has been repeating it for twelve years. No actual scholar would even think of quoting an anonymous user of an internet forum. At any rate that Jewish person wasn't wrong: he was trying to explain that the intensive plural *conveys* the idea of a superlative, but it's not really a superlative. Intensive plurals are always nouns. The Bible doesn't always use the form plural noun+plural verb because it's literature, not mathematics. Writing is a form of art, not a mechanical process: authors have their stylistic preferences and they don't repeat the same things over and over again. The Bible has dozens of authors, and even a single book like Genesis has been written by many authors in different periods, and they had different styles. Just think of the two accounts of the creation of man, or the fact that Genesis 1 never mentions the tetragrammaton while Genesis 2 uses it a dozen times, almost once per verse.

''Just think of the two accounts of the creation of man, or the fact that Genesis 1 never mentions the tetragrammaton while Genesis 2 uses it a dozen times, almost once per verse.''

Which report do these verses belong to: the first or the second? Adventists claim that it is a single report.

''4These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens, 5And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.'' Genesis 2:4,5

Religious persons usually say it's a single account because they have to defend the idea that the Bible is divinely inspired and therefore perfect, but everyone with an open mind can see that they are actually two separate accounts stitched together at 2:4. The fact that throughout the first chapter the divine name is never used while it's everywhere in chapter two, clearly shows that those two stories were written by different authors in different periods.

I also think that these are two reports. But let's go back to the question of superlatives. In the Serbian language in which I am thinking, there is also an absolute superlative, but I have never heard of an indefinite superlative until now. If such a thing exists in the Hebrew language and if we apply it to the word "Elohim", we have to ask ourselves in what way Elohim is indeterminate? By what characteristic is God indeterminable?

You are wasting your time with the opinion of an anonymous user of a forum written twelve years ago. Do you realize how silly it is? There are hundreds of millions of religious fanatics in the world, each one with internet access and each one believes they know the truth about God. Isn't it ridiculous? That specific person shares a religious concept where God is so immense, so beyond human comprehension that He can't be properly described or imagined. His greatness is such that He is indefinable and therefore His essence can be merely hinted at through an intensive plural, or "indefinite superlative" as that guy said.

I completely understand you and I know exactly that you are right, but some questions keep tickling me. I hope you understand me.

''That particular person shares the religious concept that God is so vast, so beyond human understanding that it cannot be properly described or imagined. His greatness is so great that He is indefinable, and therefore His essence can only be hinted at through the intensive plural, or "indefinite superlative" as the guy said.''

Let us assume that such a concept is completely correct. This means that we as human beings will never know the essence of the Creator of the universe. This further means that the Creator made us with potentials that are not nearly enough to understand the Person who created us. That would be truly sad, just as it would be sad for earthly parents to give birth to a child who has no potential to understand them. However, in the New Testament we find the verses of the apostle Paul who describes God and says this:

''Because in it we live, move and exist; as some of your poets also said, Because we are also his offspring.'' Acts 17:28

In another place he says that he preaches to the people of the Unknown God.

''For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you.'' Acts 17:23

So they don't know Him, but they could know Him. Therefore, this is the opposite concept from the one presented by the anonymous forum participant.

''The intensive plural doesn't mean "judges". I don't know who told you that but it's absolutely wrong.''

King James Bible ''Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever.'' Exodus 21:6

NASB Translation

divine (1), divine being (1), exceedingly (1), God (2326), god (45), God's (14), goddess (2), godly (1), gods (204), great (2), judges (3), mighty (2), rulers (1), shrine* (1).

There it's translated as judges because of the context, not because it's an intensive plural (which it is, of course). As I said before, the intensive plural adds emphasis and it's therefore very generic, it doesn't mean anything in itself.

''It's translated there as judges because of the context, not because it's an intensive plural (which it is, of course). As I said earlier, the intensive plural adds emphasis and is therefore very generic, meaning nothing by itself.''

I know it's because of the context, but I also know that it's translated differently also because of the context.

E.g:

The New American Standard Bible

"then his master will bring him to God, and he will bring him to the door or doorpost. And the master will pierce his ear with an awl; and he will serve him constantly.''

When a translation is based on context, it's inevitable to have different opinions on how to render a certain word. The translation with "God" in that verse is very literal and therefore correct but not very clear to the general public, so I understand the choice to make its meaning more explicit. At the time the Bible was written the judges of Israel were considered to act on behalf of God (see for example 2 Chronicles 19), that's why Exodus uses the word elohim to mean judges.

''Intensive plurals can be expressed just by a plural noun (as it happens thousand of times with elohim, in Job 40,etc.) or by a plural noun+ plural verb. The concept is the same, it's just a different degree of intensity. Genesis 20:13 is an example of intensive plural, the more radical one where even the verb is in the plural. Again, theology has nothing to do with it because the same pattern occurs in many other contexts throughout the Bible. When God disapproved of Cain's offer, Genesis 4:5 says "So Cain was very angry, and his countenance fell" but the Hebrew text literally says that "his faces fell[plural verb]". Was Cain a monster with more than one face? Of course not, the meaning is singular despite the plural verb. Genesis 21:2 says that "Sarah conceived and bore Abraham a son in his old age" but the Hebrew word is "zequnim", literally "old ages" (from the singular zaqun). 2Samuel 7:23 is very interesting: David is praying to Yhwh and says "And who is like your people Israel, the one nation on earth whom elohim went[plural verb] to redeem for himself ". Here we have a plural noun (elohim) followed by a plural verb (haleku/they went), all very similar to Genesi 20.13, but the pronoun is singular: it's "lo" ("for himself"), not "lahem" ("for themselves"). If that's not clear enough, one can read the previous verse where David says "Therefore you are great, adonai Yhwh. For there is none like you, and there is no elohim besides you." The biblical authors didn't forget anything, nor made mistakes when they used those intensive plurals (with or without the plural verb).They were simply using what was perfectly natural in their language. In Malachi 1:6 Yahweh says "If I am a master, where is your fear of me?" whereas the Hebrew text literally says "If I am masters", because it uses the plural word "adonim" (masters, lords) instead of the singular "adon", but the meaning is obviously singular and the pronouns are singular too, ("I/"ani", fear of me /"morai")''

Why are there cases where the noun is singular such as "Eloah" or "El". Does this perhaps express indifference towards God? I do not think so.

''Wherefore thou art great, O LORD God: for there is none like thee, neither is there any God beside thee, according to all that we have heard with our ears.''

Therefore, it does not say that there are no other Elohim, but that none of them is like Yahweh according to what they heard.

El is rarely used , about 250 times whereas elohim occurs over 2,500 times, and its main function is stylistical, i.e. it appears in expressions that highlight a specific aspect of Yahweh and it's also a way to avoid too close repetitions of elohim in a sentence. For example: "I am your Elohim Yahweh, I am a jealous El" (Exodus 20:5); "And Elohim said to him: I am El almighty" (Genesis 35:11); "Now therefore our Elohim, El the great, the mighty, and terrible..." (Nehemia 9:32); "So Joshua told the people: you will not be able to serve Yahweh, because he is a holy Elohim, he is a jealous El" (Joshua 24:19). Eloah is even rarer than el: it occurs only sixty times, mainly in the the book of Job and Psalms. It's considered a poetic form, hence its rarity. 2 Samuel 7:22 does say that no other elohim exists, it's in the very sentence you quoted: "...neither is there any God beside thee...". As to the "hear" part, you have to read from the beginning of the chapter. Yahweh reminds David (via the prophet Nathan) of all the things he had done for Israel and for David himself, and David replies by acknowledging it as a proof that indeed Yahweh was the only Elohim as they had heard. This is not surprising at all because because it must be considered that the whole world was polytheistic in those times and Israel itself wasn't always faithful to Yahweh, on the contrary it was often tempted to abandon him and follow other gods. Even Solomon, the legendary great and wise king of Israel, turned to polytheism and idolatry (1Kings 11).

''The expression "Yahweh Sabaot" carved on the stone means "Jehovah of hosts". This seems to show that in addition to God's name, the expression "Jehovah of hosts" was also common in biblical times. Therefore, it is quite understandable that in the original text of the Hebrew part of the Bible, this expression appears in 283 places, mainly in the books of the prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah and Zechariah.''

It shows that Jehovah is the most important Elohim among many others. As benefactor and warrior and righteous Elohim. He is the head of the congregation of Elohim. See: Psalm 82. In the Bible we can find verses that use the term Yahweh El Elion. See: Genesis 14:22