View source for Israel and Humanity - General considerations on the simultaneous use of singular and plural

II.

Study of the word Elohim.

§ 1.

GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS ON THE SIMULTANEOUS USE

THE SINGULAR AND PLURAL.

The name of God Most High, <i>El Elyon  </i>, as the title of God of gods which we discussed earlier, leaves imply the existence of <i>Elohim  </i>. We must now examine in more detail what that word has motivated cons ancient Judaism double charge of polytheism. It argues in effect that, firstly, he <ref> Page 175 </ref> was applied to the gods of the Gentiles, which is a recognition of the divinity and, secondly, its plural form, when the employed it to designate the God of Israel, involved the denial of his unit.

We answer the first objection when writers are sacred to other gods, the Elohim, they stand in terms of their worshipers and adopt their language. This name is applied to every thing of eminent greatness of any kind whatsoever, even inanimate things, more so can anyone give the angels who identified themselves with the pagan gods, not only for This monotheism is compromised. It is easy to cite examples of this custom to designate as the gods of men superior in dignity, especially those in which they were inclined to see a kind of true incarnation of the divine. This way of using the terms relating to God, innocent at first, could eventually become one of shirk. Many scientists now think that many people in the name of God was a word superiority. However, it is more natural to suppose otherwise is to say that the character of divinity has been applied, as we have said, everything that seemed eminently superior. In any case, it is right that is called by that name the angels and spirits in general and it can even be considered plausible, as argued by Spencer, that the words God and spirit, which in us different meanings were synonymous with the origin or rather that there was originally only one word for the supernatural.

If we examine more closely the use of the word <i>Elohim  </i>, which provides a plural argument to the charge of polytheism, we find that most of the time only the name is plural, the verb and other words that accompany it remain rather singular, but there are also cases where the verb is plural as the name itself. There is really an index of polytheism in the sacred writer or at least a trace of polytheism in an earlier era that it remains to determine the date? One is forced to admit that almost always the sacred authors' intention is clearly monotheistic and therefore that our adversaries could be reported against the Judaism of this plural form, they <ref> Page 176 </ref> should prove that polytheism, they want to see the expression, at least subsequent to Abraham or even Moses, in any case it was at one time, form a dominant and exclusive religion of the Hebrews. The word in fact is not proof in itself, because we do ourselves no difficulty in accepting the hypothesis that Moses and Abraham used it to express their ideas monotheistic, polytheistic language still in use in their day . The genius of the Hebrew language which tended to show the superiority of the plural marker also lent to the introduction of this custom. A passage from Genesis where the word Adonai (my Lords), although plural in grammatical form, is sent to a single individual, we offer clear evidence: "My lords (Adonai), if I find favor in your eyes, pass not, I pray thee, from thy servant "<ref> Genesis, XVIII, 3. </Ref>.

This use of the plural to indicate the excellence of a thing because it is intended to imply that the thing spoken worth more alone. The grammatical plural Translated by awakening the idea of totality, of the indefinite, where there is only one step to that of the infinite, the general synthesis of the Pleroma as we pretend to discover in the word Elohim, that is to say the absolute divinity, and that says absolutely said substantial unity, but the God he just confess to assert any conceivable truth, the One who is everything and, as Hartmann called the God of humanity to come.

Elohim has been interpreted by commentators as the old name of the One in whom are gathered all the forces and, above ~ exegetes of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, the Midrash on the Book of Joshua said, referring to the words "God saint of the last chapter, which are the plural "Gods saints, holy God meant it in all kinds of holiness" <ref> קדוש בכל מיני קדושות: Jalkut see in verse 19 of Chapter XXIV. </Ref> and Rabbi Leon Modena issued on his side: "holy gods, this means that all forces personified in the gods worshiped by the pagans are in Him" <ref> Maghen vehereb </ref>.

If the word Elohim itself already a value, we must add that the use of that word plural singular verb expresses a critical philosophy of religion, because the contrast between the singular and the plural is the convergence of pagan notions of deity to the God of Mosaic monotheism, is historically as the starting point is theologically as elements, attributes, ideas which make up the God.

Examples taken from plural to singular, we will mention one that has particular significance because it confirms a manner as obvious as possible our explanation. It is provided by the book of Proverbs: "Wisdom has built her house, she has carved out her seven pillars" Proverbs <ref>, IX, 1. We could see in these first seven columns Wikipedia, the seven sciences of the Middle Ages </ref>. In the Hebrew text the word wisdom is plural and the verb that follows the singular: "The wisdom has built her house, and as he here refers to the divine wisdom in creating the world, it plays the same role as the names of God other occasions. The name of the Supreme Wisdom is in the plural because, as stated by mutual agreement the commentators, it is the supreme science embracing in a perfect synthesis of all the special sciences.

The independent criticism arrives today to conclusions that are perfectly aligned with our deductions. "Religion," says Hartmann, appears indifferent to the beginning to theism, pantheism, monotheism and polytheism, and presents a kind of balance of these elements. Consciousness has not yet realized the extent of the differences that we score in between transcendence and immanence, unity and multiplicity, then according to need time, it envisages its deity as foreign or as inner world, as one or as many. This seems confirmed by the facts, but can we not say that the instinct, the intuition of the junction of two ideas remained, however, and one was not sacrificed to the other? The same author continues: "The childish mind that thinks in pictures, can not be dispensed with and anthropopathiser anthropomorphize, it is not surprising that under this law deals with the various natural forces and become for him as many different personal gods. On the other hand, it is the essence of these forces to be immanent in nature, and all their disputes do not prevent the feeling impressed a distinctively religious way of perceiving the connection and unity of the whole Nature. <ref> Page 178 </ref> Each of the major natural forces seemed identical to the others in that it regards it as a revelation of the supernatural and the divine that is why all occasions primitive religion uses without scruple the figure called <i> pars pro toto </i> That is to say that every natural force has become an object of worship and worshiped as a god in that it is a manifestation of the divine universal < ref>> Religion of the Future, ed. Alcan, pp. 142, 143. </Ref>
 
Unity and multiplicity, or rather, unity in multiplicity, is the answer to the riddle in all cases where we find a contrast another name and the word which is the subject or words that describe him. And that's probably what is established in the claims of Christian exegesis found in these examples of evidence of the Trinity. But in reality this is not a trinity, that is, it's infinite attributes of God which is the focus, strength synthetic, and it goes back to the Hebrew theosophy which Christianity has only a second triad, while the Kabbalah recognizes an infinite number of <i> sephiroth </i> or divine attributes. We are then left in the presence of these <i>genealogies  </i> at the majestic evolution which Paul believed to impose bounds and he rejected as useless and futile as well as disputes relating to the Act <ref> Epistle to Titus, III, 9. </Ref>

This way of expressing the complexity of the idea was very much in the spirit of antiquity. Just remember the variety, the bizarre, complications and sometimes even the monstrosities of religious symbols in various places, the disguises of men into animals, the hybrid figures, deities hermaphrodite, young and old both like Janus, Hercules dressed as a woman and Venus with a human face. Epigraphy as iconography gives us similar examples. Indeed, among the entries polytheists of Arabia, there is one in which the name of the goddess Athtar is preceded by a verb in the masculine gender.

We could talk about other divine names as Adonai, Shaddai, which, like the word Elohim is plural, but we simply recall that the holiest and most August names of God, the Tetragrammaton is that contrasts quite ready to Elohim as indicating, contrary to the latter name, the age of monotheism, presents an anomaly similar <ref> Page 179 </ref> not, it is true, in numbers, but in time this word falls outside any law grammatical, lexical and any rules, by merging the three verb tenses in a single word, an exception is language that makes his strange somehow sacred. It is a fact that can enlighten us and reassure us at the same time on the value of the word Elohim and its grammatical irregularity, because it reflects the spirit that presided over the formation of the divine names.

Here also the word Elohim used by the sacred writers in a sense strictly monotheistic, though it is the plural to singular side, much more, with the expressed intention to condemn polytheism, we translate literally: "The Jehovah (is) it (is) the Elohim "<ref> I Kings VIII, 60. </Ref>, and again: "You alone You are Elohim <ref> Psalm LXXXVI, 10. </Ref>. Is it possible that the writers who have used the word Elohim in a spirit of monotheistic faith is as clean as could ever give him, regardless of other irregularities of language, meaning even remotely reminiscent of the polytheistic idea?


== References ==
<references />

[[Category:Israel and Humanity]]

[[fr:Israël et L'Humanité - Considérations générales sur l'emploi simultané du singulier et du pluriel]]