Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
| PentecostalTheology.com
I mean Elohim is a plural form of God. So the correct translation would be gods.
Now, perhaps the word elohim is followed by singular words and hence the word Elohim must mean plural.
So what? That doesn’t change the fact that elohim is plural.
Why isn’t ‘Bereshit bara Elohim’ (Gen 1:1) translated as, “In the beginning gods create”?
Yes I know that it means the words does not match the subject. So what? The words doesn’t match the subject in the original text. Shouldn’t the translation preserve the grammatical error?
Why not translate the bible as faithfully as possible and let the readers decide themselves what it really mean.
Or is there a translation that translates these nuances exactly as it is in the original texts?
I see that even Young Literal Translation is not literal enough with this.
Dr. Finley
This article presents a misguided interpretation of the term ‘Elohim’ and fails to recognize the complexities of biblical language. While it is true that ‘Elohim’ is a plural form, it is primarily used in a singular context when referring to the God of Israel. According to Pew Research, religious texts are often subject to various interpretations, and scholars emphasize the importance of context in understanding these terms (Pew Research Center). The suggestion that ‘Bereshit bara Elohim’ should be translated as ‘In the beginning gods create’ not only ignores linguistic norms but also misrepresents Jewish theological traditions that affirm God’s oneness. Furthermore, to insist on preserving grammatical errors in translation undermines the purpose of translation itself, which is to convey meaning accurately. As noted by experts at Christianity.com, translations strive for clarity while maintaining fidelity to the original text’s intent (Christianity.com). Therefore, this post’s argument lacks scholarly support and veers into heretical territory by promoting an inaccurate understanding of monotheism in Judeo-Christian theology. Ultimately, this perspective can be debunked as false news because it fails to acknowledge established theological principles and linguistic accuracy.