God in the Three Persons -

in the Old Testament

The Christian doctrine of God is important, yet difñcult to com-

pr_ehend and explain. Ihis ís not surprising because the finite human
mlnd.cannot fully comprehend the inñnite God.I At the center of the
doctrme of God is the Godhead or Trinity, by which ís meant that “God
eternally exists as three persons, Father, Son, and Hoyl Spirit, and each
person is fulyl G0d, and there is one God.”2 Thus, Christians generally
believe in one multi-personal God-a triune God-not three Gods. The
concept of the Godhead is central to the Christian understanding of
God and the work of salvation through Jesus Chr1'st.3 But fundamental
as it is to Christian theology, the concept is nevertheless shrouded in
mystery: “The Trinity is an absolute mystery in the sense that we do
not understand it even after it has been revealed.”4 For this reason, the
subject has been studied throughout the ages of Christ1'anity.5 While for
some Christians the subject 1's “only a matter of intellectual curiosity,”
for others it is a “somewhat arbitrary test offaith.”6 The extreme percep-
tual polarization notwithstanding, the Christian understanding ofGod
cannot adequately be expressed apart from the concept of the Trinity.
There is the need, therefore, to continue the study of this subject.
Although scholars generally agree that the Godhead/Trinity is
biblicaL there is some doubt whether the concept is expressed in the
Old Testament. For example, it is claimed that “because the Old Testa-
ment is pre-Christian, it does not provide any Trinitarian understand-
ing of God,” so that “it would be theologically unjustiñable to suggest
some Kforeshadowinga of the Trinity in the Old Testament.”7 Other
theologians, however, do ñnd the concept of the Trinity in the Old

new ed. (Grand Rapids, MIz Eerdmans, 1996), 89.

' See e.g., Louis Berkhof, Systematic 7he010gy,
Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Leicester: Inter-
2 Wayne Grudem, Systematic 7he010gy: An
Varsity, l994), 226. Emphasis in the oríginaL
7heology, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1998), 347.
3 See Millard J. Eríckson, Christian
revised and updated (New York: Harper Collins,
4 chhard P. McBríen, Catholícism,
on the Doctrine of the Trinity,” Andrews
l994), 316. See also Raoul Dederen, “Reflections
l-22; Gerhard PfandL “'Ihe Trinity in Scripture,”
Uníversity Seminary Studies 8 (l970):
Society 14.2 (2003): 80-94.
lournal ofthe Adventíst 7heological
of the doctrine, see McBrien, 275-330; Fernando L.
5 For a bríef summary of the history
ofSeventh-dayAdventi5t Yheology, ed. Raoul Dederen
Canale, “Doctrine of God,” Handbook
2000), 140-148.
(Hagerstown, MD: Review & Herald,
6 McBrien, 321.
7McBrien, 280.
 that while the Godhead
Testament8 The present study presupposes
is clearer in the New Testament, the Old Testament nonetheless con_
tains some indications of this concept. The Old Testament eXpresses
and insists particularly on the oneness 0fG0d. Yet, the oneness ofGod
seems to be presented as a plurality-in-oneness-a plurality within
one God.9 In what follows, an attempt is made to demonstrate that the
monotheism expressed in the Old Testament, and clearly found in the
New Testament,1° does not preclude the conception of a plurality of
persons within the one God of the Hebrews.

The Oneness of God

The Old Testament leaves no room for polytheistic belief and
worship. The Hebrew religion was unequivocally monotheistic (Exod
20:1-3; Iosh 24:1-24). There are instances where some individuals or
generations worshipped Canaanite deities, yet the perspective of the
biblical text ís strictly against polytheism (e.g., Iudg 2210-15). Even
those who practiced syncretistic worship often acknowledged their
rebellious deviation from monotheism (Iudg 10:10-16). The doctrine
of monotheísm is highlighted in the Old Testament through (1) the
use of singular verbs and pronouns for God and (2) direct statements
regarding the oneness of God.

Ihe Use of Singular Verbs and Pronouns

Íhroughout the Old Testament singular verbs are used for God
(e.g., Gen 1:1, 3-5; Exod 3:4, 7-10; etc.). Even though the English
word “God” is the translation of the Hebrew word Elohim which is
a plural noun, this word almost always takes a singular verb (Gen
1:1-5). God speaks of Himself through the use of singular verbs (e.g.,
Gen 6:7), and biblical writers report His actions through the use of
singular verbs (e.g., Gen 1:27).
In addition to the use of sm'gular verbs, pronommal references to
God are almost always in the singular. For example, God refers to H1m'-
selfas “I” (Gen 9.›9,- Isa 43.-10, 11), “Me” (Gen 9:12), “My” (Gen 9.-9), and
“I am He” (Isa 43:10). In Isaiah 42z8 God says, “I am the LORD, that is My
name; And My glory I w1ll' not give to another, Nor My praise to carved

8 Berkhof, 85; Erickson, 347; Norman R. Gulley, “Trinity in the Old Testament,” joumal Of
the Adventist Theological Society 17.1 (2006): 80-97; Canale, 121-123; Grudem, 226_
9 As we shall see below, the evidence in the Old Testament contradicts the view that God is
one divme person who appears in different modes of revelation. Cf. “Monarchianism,” in
New Dictionary of'Iheology, eds. Sinclair B. Ferguson and David F. Wright (Downers Grova
IL: InterVarsity, l988), 440-441, and “Unitarianism,” in New Dictionary of Theology, 700_
10 As ín the Old Testament, there are explicit statements in the New Testament regarding the
6; l Tim 2:5; Ias 2:19).
oneness of God (e.g., Rom 3:29, 30; l Cor 8:6; Eph 4:5,

4
images_.”“ The use of singular pronouns for God throughout Scripture
clearly lndicates that there is only one true God, the God of Israel.

Explicit Statements Regarding the Oneness of God

Several statements in the Old Testament require the Israelites to
adhere strictly to monotheism because there is only one true God.
For example:

1. “To you it was shown, that you might know that the LORD
Himself is God; there is none other besides Him . . . Therefore
know this day, and consider it in your heart, that the LORD
Himself is God in heaven above and on the earth beneath;
there is no other” (Deut 4:35, 39).
2. “I am the LORD, that is My name; And My glory I wíll not give
to another, Nor My praise to carved images” (Isa 42:8).
3. “I, even I, am the LORD, And besides Me there is no savior”
(Isa 43:11).
4. “I am the LORD, and there is no other; 771ere is no God besides
Me” (Isa 45:5).
5. “Remember the former things of old, For I am God, and there is
no other; I am God, and there is none like Me” (Isa 46:9).

The belief in and worship of one God is so fundamental to the

Iudeo-Christian religion that it takes priority in the Decalogue:

I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the

land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have
no other gods before Me. You shall not make for yourself a
carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven
above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water
under the earth (Ex0d 20:2-4).

In this commandment, the God of Israel refers to graven imag-

es that are considered gods by the surrounding nations, but are not
comparable to Him; He is the only true God who deserves worship.
Monotheism ís also emphasized in Ioshuçfs parting words in Ioshua
23 and 24. In these two chapters, Ioshua recalls the ñrst command~
ment (Exod 20:1-3) and reiterates the fact that the Lord would no
longer fulfill His promises if Israel worshipped the Canaaníte gods
(e.g., Iosh 23:16; 24.-14, 15, 20, 23, 24). King Davíd would later aHirm,
“Therefore You are great, O LORD GOD. For there is none like You,

“All Bible texts are from the New King Iames Version, unless indicated otherwise.

5
nor is there any God besides Y0u” (2 Sam 7:22).
Among non-Israelites, the God of Israel was also recognízed by
some as the only living God, whose deeds are not comparable to those
of other gods, For example, Rahab refers to the God of Israel as “the
LORD your God, He is God in heaven above and on earth beneath”
(]osh 2:l 1). And King Nebuchadnezzar declares, “Truly your God ís the
God of gods, the Lord of kíngs” (Dan 2.'47) and “there is no other God
who can deliver” like the God of Israel (3:29).
A central statement regarding the oneness of God is Deuterono-
my 6242 “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one'.” 'Ihis
text has traditionally been known among the Iews as the Shema,12 as it
commands Israel to “listen” and respond to the fact that the Lord God
of Israel is the only true God. Translators and Hebrew grammarians
have struggled with the translation and interpretation of this text.13
Some translations read as followsz

“Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD” (KIV)

“Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one!” (ESV)
“Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD is one.'”
(NAU; cf. NET)

In this text, Moses is teaching that Yahweh, the God of Israel, ís

“one.” Unlike the surrounding cultures who may believe in and wor-
ship many gods, Israel has only one God, Yahweh! But what does “0ne”
(Heb. e›cha'd) in verse 4 mean? Does it mean God is one person (1'.e.,
soh'tariness)?14 Or does it mean God is a unity of more than one per-
son? The word e'cha'd mostly means “0ne” in contrast to two or three.
Yet, it can also convey the notion of a plurality-in-oneness.15 For ex-
ample, in Exodus 2423 the Israelites are said to have answered the Lord
with “one” voice. In this instance, the idea is that the people answered
m' unison. More instructive is Genesis 2.-24, which states that a married

12 Shema (“hear”) is the ñrst Hebrew word in Deuteronomy 6:4.

13 See Peter C. Craigie, Deuteronomy, The New International Commentary on the Old
Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, l976), 168; Duane L. Christensen, Deuteronomy
1:1-21:9, Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 6a rev. (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 199l),
142; I. G. McConvílle, Deuteronomy, Apollos Old Testament Commentary, vol. 5 (Leicester:
Inter-Varsity, 2002), I40~141.
“ Some would even suggest that e'cha'd is a title or name for God (Craigie, 168). The thrust
of the argument in Deuteronomy 6-to worship only Yahweh-suggests, however, that
e'cha'd is not íntended to be understood as a name but rather as the uniqueness and unity of
Yahweh.
15 Herbert Wolf, e,h_a'd,” 771eological Wordbook of the Old Testament, 2 vols., eds. R. Laird
Harris, Gleason L. Archer, Ir., and Bruce K. Waltke, (Chicago, IL: Moody, l980), 1230, notes
that e'chãd “stresses unity while recognízing diversity within that oneness.”
couple becomes “one” (e”cha'd) Hesh. The implication is that while the
word êchãd conveys the idea of oneness, it also allows a plurality within
that oneness16 For this reason, the oneness of God expressed in Deuter-
onomy 6:4 is not to be understood necessarüy as precluding a plurality
within the one God of IsraeL The main point is to prohibit Israel from
recognizing and worshipping the deities of surrounding cultures. And
so in Deuteronomy 6:13-15, Israel is commanded to fear and serve
Yahweh alone. This injunction not to follow “0ther gods” further em-
phasizes the statement in verse 4 that Yahweh is the only true God.17
The foregoing discussion allows for the observation that the one~
ness of God is a signiñcant doctrine in the Old Testament The ques-
tion is whether Scripture presents the oneness of God to preclude
any notion of a plurality-in-oneness. Some have concluded that the
Hebrews could never have conceived of God as existing in a unity
of three persons (i.e., three-in-oneness). Such a conclusion, however,
does not stem from evidence in the Old Testament itself, but probably
from later Iewish tradit1'ons.18
We certainly cannot assume that the Israelites in Old Testament
times ofñcially recognized the existence of the triune Godhead and
articulated such a doctrine. But the fact that they may not have rec-
ognized the existence of the Trinity/Godhead does not mean that ít
never found an expression in the Old Testament What is clear is that
while the Old Testament does not explicitly present the Godhead as

“5 Some scholars have recognized that e”cha'd in the Shema expresses not only uniqueness but
also the unity of God (Christensen, 145; Craigie, 169). According to Woodrow Whidden,
Ierry Moon, and John W. Reeve, The Trinity (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 2002),
33«34, the Shema speaks of the uniqueness of God as the only true God, but it also “refers
to the oneness that results from a unity of numerous persons.”
17 Zechariah l4:9 is close to Deuteronomy 6:4 by stating that in the latter days “Yahweh will
be one, and his name shall be one.” As suggested in Zechariah 14, the oneness of Yahweh
concerns itself with the worship of Yahweh alone as opposed to other gods; it does not mean
that there is only one divine person who is called G0d. Cf. McConville, l41.
13 In later Jewish theology, there seems to have been intimations of some mysterious type of
plurality within God. For example, in commenting on Deuteronomy 624 the Zohar refers to
“the mystery of the threefold divine manifestations designated by YHVH Elohenu YHVH-
three modes which yet form one unity” (T71e Zohar, 5 vols. trans. H. Sperling, M. Simon
and P. Levertoff [London: Soncino, l984], 32134). Alan F. SegaL Two Powers in Heaven,
Early Rabbinic Reports about Christianity and Gnosticism (Leiden: Brill, 1977), 164, 173,
has pointed to traditions of a 'second God' ín Iudaism as in Philo, who speaks of the logos
as “God's partner in creation. [And] to this effect, he calls the logos, 'The Beginning,' ”Ihe
Ruler of the Angelsl and signíñcantly 'the Name of GodÍ [And] . . . because the logos is an
emanation of God, [he] can also talk about him as God's oífspring, or the flrst-born son
of God.” Philds reference to a 'second God) was based on his reading of such passages that
speak of God in plural terms, the distinction between God and the Angel of Yahweh, and
other texts such as Exodus 24 and Daniel 7 (Segal, 183-184).

7
consisting of three persons, its depiction of the oneness of God no-
where precludes by default any conceptions of a Godhead or Trinity.
G What we ñnd is that in the passages which assert the oneness of
od, the contrast is consistently between the God of Israel on the one
hand and the gods of the Canaanites on the other. The contrast is never
between the one-person God and a plurality Within that one God. In
other words, when the Old Testament asserts the oneness of God, such
oneness excludes only false deities, not a plurality ofpersons within the
true God. If more than one person constitutes the one true God, the
other person(s) Within that Godhead are deñnitely not “other gods” as
understood in the Old Testament. The “0ther gods” that Israel is com-
manded not to worship are gods of human production (Exod 20:1-6).
To summarizez The oneness of God consistently expressed in
the Old Testament does not address the issue of whether or not
there is only one divine person; the oneness of God only excludes
the worship of demonic and/or human-made gods. Hence, it cannot
be said that because the Old Testament emphasizes the oneness of
God, it knows nothíng of a plurality Within God: that 1's, that several
divine persons could legitimately constitute one God.19

Plurality-in-Oneness Within God

and
In the Old Testament, divine names appear in both singular
of a juxtaposition
plural word-forms. Íhere are also a few instances
of these singular-
of singular and plural references to God. The use
of a plurality-in-oneness
plural word-forms seems to convey the idea
Within God.

Yahweh, Elohim, Adonay

is Yahweh (Exod 6:2-8; Isa
The personal name of the God of Israel singular verbs
in form and takes
42:8). This name is always singular
personal pronouns (e.g., Gen 2:4-9, 15-22). By imp1i-
and singular
is one God (Deut 6:4). Unlike the name Yahweh, the
cation, Yahweh
“God” and Adonay “L0rd” are plural in form (e.g., Deut
names Elohim God of Israel (Gen 1)
Elohim can refer to the
lO:17; Ps 35:23; 38:15).
of the nations (e.g., Iosh 24:2, l4, 23). When it refers to
or to the gods
Elohim takes singular verbs and pronouns (Gen 1:1,
the God of Israel,
when the reference is to human-made gods or demons, plural
35). But 8; 1 Kgs 20:10; Isa
used (e.g., Exod 32:1,
verbs and pronouns are usually
_______._.- this
Testament ülustration of the plurality-in-oneness of God is in
l9 An ínterestmg New further explains
C hrist, “I and the Father are one” (]ohn 10:30), which He
statement of Iesus (cf. v.
and I in Him” ( v. 38). In John 10, Jesus makes claims to divinity
as “the Father is in Me, God.
is more than one person who is
33) and thus makes clear that though God is 0ne, there

8
37119)- Slmll_arl.y, Adonay 1's plural in form (literally “my lords,” e.g., Gen
l9:2, 18) but 1t lS _treated as singular when it refers to the God of Israel
(.Gen 15:2). Desplte the use of these plural name forms, corresponding
smgular folcrms are attested in the Old Testament: El “God,” Eloah “God,”
and Adon Lord” are each used with reference to the God of Israel.20
Although Elohim often refers to deíties 1'n general, it 1's also a títle
or name of the one true God. In the latter case, C. F. Keil and F. Del-
it.zs.c_h note that “Elohim . . . 1's not used for the abstract, in the sense of
d1v1n1ty, but . . . 1's used without the article, as a proper name for the
true God.”21 But 1'f Elohim 1's a title or name of the one true God, why
1's 1't 1'n the plural form? And why does the plural form mostly take
singular verbs and pronouns?
The use of the plural forms Elohim and Adonay for the God of Is-
rael has been understood in several ways.22 A common interpretation
1's that these plural forms are plurals of majesty or royal plurals. Among
theologians, for example, Walter Eichrodt has suggested that Elohim
1's a plural of majesty that presents the Creator God as the sovereign
ruler of the universe.23 As we shall observe during our discussion on
the use of plural verbs and pronouns with Elohim 1'n Genesis 1:26, the
“plural of majesty” 1'nterpretation does not seem to be supported by
biblical evidence. Not only does the Old Testament not attest to a plu-
ral of majesty, it 1's difñcult to explain why only the divine names are in
plural while the accompanying verbs and pronouns are almost always
1'n singular, even in passages reporting solemn, direct divine speeches.
While the speciflc function of the plural forms Elohim and
Adonay may be debated, 1't may be noted that the consistent use of
plural verb and pronoun forms for Elohim in its reference to “gods”
indicates that these gods are understood to be different entities. The
biblícal writers thus seem to be careful in their use of verbs and pro-
nouns for Elohim in reference both to the one God of Israel and to the
multiplicity of gods in the surrounding nations.
7:9; 10:l7; loshua 3:10; Nehemiah
Z"For El see e.g., Genesís 31:l3; 35:l, 3; Deutcronomy
Nehemiah 9:17; Iob 3:4;
9z31; Isaiah 5:16; 42:5. For Eloah see c.g., Deuteronomy 32:15, l7;
3:3. lílouh can rcfcr to “god(s)” (e_g_, 2
12:6; Psalm 18231; 50222; Isaiah 44:8; Habakkuk
and Elohim seem to be closely related,
Chron 3211 5; Dan 1 l:37, 38). It appcars that whilc El
sincc the latter has its own plural form, Elim
Elohim may not neccssarily bc thc plural nfEL
l l:36). For lAdom sec e.g.. Exodus 23:l7; 34:23;
“gods” (e.g., Exod lSzl l; Pss 29: l; 89:7; Dan
with rcícrence to “god" or “g0ds.”
Ioshua 321 l, 13. Each of these terms is also used
3 vols.. (Iommemary on the Old 'I'estament,
“ C. F. Keíl and [~'. l)cIit/,'.s'ch, I'hL' Pcnlutcuch,
chd_rickson. l989), l:73.
trans. James Martin (rcprint, Pcabody. MA:
(j) the ()ld 'lc's!ament: Pentateuch, eds. T.
n D. W. Baker, “(j(›d, Namcs 0f," I)ictionary
Gruve. le lntcharsity, 2003), 3.62,
Desmond Alexander and David W. Bakcr (l)owncrs
Old 'Ik›stament. 2 vols. (Philadclphia, PA: Westmmster,
23 Walter Eíchmdt, 'Iheology rf› the
l961).1:l87.
F _Arguing against the view that Elohim is a plural of majesty, G. A.
_. Knlght has noted that such understanding reads a modern concept
mto the ancient Hebrew text, since the kings of Israel/Judah are all
addressed in singular. Instead, Knight suggests that Elohim is an ex-
ample of a quantitative pluraL Like the Hebrew nouns mayim “water”
.and shámayim “heaven”-nouns which are plural in form but sm'gular
m meaning-Elohim expresses a quantitative diversity in unity.24 Keü
_and Delitzsch have argued that Elohim is to be taken as a plural ofinten-
SIñcationz outside of Israel Elohim ís “an external (numerical)” pluraL
but in Israel it is “an internally multiplying (intensive) plural.”25 This
would mean that with reference to the God of IsraeL Elohim expresses
a plurality of persons in God.26
The use of the singular name Yahweh alongside the plural name-
forms Elohim and Adonay could be an indication that the God of Is-
rael ís singular and plural at the same time. Otherwise, it is difñcult
to explain Why one divine designation should consistently appear m'
the singular form while others are in the pluraL even though singular
forms of such designations are attested. Yet, a plurality within the true
God must be diíferent from that of the Canaanite gods, for unhke
these other Elohim, the true Elohim regularly takes singular verbs and
pronouns. This is not to assume, though, that the Israehtes of Old
Testament times necessarily understood the plural name-forms to de-
note plurality within God.
Before turning to the next section, a word needs to be said re-
garding the interpretation of Elohim and Yahweh. In monotheistic
contexts, Elohim and Yahweh refer to the God of Israel. )a'hweh is
Elohim, and Elohim is Yahweh-Yahweh Elohim. Again, in such con-
texts Elohim is a title/name. In the section discussing the Angel of
Yahweh, we will observe that Yahweh and Elohim mostly refer to the
dis-
same dívine person. Yet there are some instances where a subtle
Iudg l3).-“'
tinction seems to apply between the two (e.g., Gen 22;
the
While the distinction is not all too clear in the Old Testament,
Old Testament pas-
New Testament-, in its interpretation of many
Heb. Elohim)
sages, primarily reserves “God” (Gr. theos translating
Heb. )'a'h-
for the Father but often uses “Lord” (Gr. kyrios translating
10:13/]oel 2:32;
weh) for Jesus Christ (e.g., Matt 3:3/Isa 40:3; Rom
of the Trinity (Edinburgh: Oliver 8z
34 G. A. F. Knight, A Bíblical Approach to the Doctrine
Boyd, 1953), 20. 4
25 Keil and Delitzsch, 73.
Herman Bavnick, Reformed Dogmatics: God and Creatlom ed. lohn Bolt, trans.
26 Gulley, 84; ~
2004), 2:261..
Iohn Vriend, 4 vols. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker,
Delítzsch, 113; J. H. Hertz, Yhe Pentateuch and Hajrorahs (London: Soncma
17 Cf. Keil and
1978), 6-7.

10
Rom l4.'10, ll/Isa 45z23; 1 Pet 2:8/Isa 8:l4; Heb l:8/PS 45:6, 7).28
Yet because the persons within the Godhead are equal, each can be
called Elohim or Yahweh.

qutaposition of Singular-Plural References to God

Genesis 1:26, 27 provides an interesting platform for understand-
ing a plurality-in-oneness. God creates ,a'da'm “man” as male and fe-
male (Gen 1:26; 5:2). rlhe man and the woman are considered one,
üdám “human.” In Genesis 1:27 the use of a singular pronominal suf-
ñx “him” underscores the oneness of ,a'dãm. Yet the use of the plural
verb, “let them rule,” in verse 26 means that the oneness of kidãm
“human” is a multi-personal unity-”ádám refers to more than one
person. Genesis 2:23, 24 further demonstrates that two persons who
are equal in nature and share the same substance can be “one flesh”
(”echa'd bàsãr). The singularity-plurality feature of ”ãdãm in Genesis
1 and 2 could reflect some aspect of Elohim who is presented both as
singular and plural in Genesis 1:26, 27. We shall discuss this in detail
in the next section. Sufñce it to highlight the usage of singular and
plural verbs and pronouns ín these verses as follows:

Then God said, [singular] 'Let Us make [plural] man in ___Our

__g_imae [plural], according to Our hk'eness [plural]. . . So ___God
own imae [singular] in the
created [singular] man in H____g_is
image of God He created [singular] him; male and female H__e
created [singular] them, (Gen 1:26-27).

From these verses, we may conclude that just as “man” is a plu-

rality-in-oneness as revealed through the use of singular and plural
verbs and pronouns, so may the similar use of singular-plural verbs
and pronouns depict a plurality-ín-oneness within God.29 The picture
we have here is not perfect, but it ís not without exegetícal support, as
we shall soon see.

Plurality of Divine Persons: Godhead

A number of passages in the Old Testament imply that God exists
as more than a solítary divine person. In a few passages God speaks
to Himself through the use of plural verbs and pronouns, The Angel
of Yahweh is identiñed with Yahweh/God and yet sometimes distinct

God are in the New Testament

m Thus, things that are in the Old Testament said of Yahweh,
1:10-12; Isa 8:l4/l Pet 2:8).
said of Iesus Christ (Ps 68:18/Eph 4:8-10; Ps 102.'25, 27/Heb
29 Gulley (89) states that “the Persons of the Godhead are imaged in the oneness of man and
woman in marr1'age.”

11
 than one divine
from Yahweh/God. There are also references to more
passages seem to
person simultaneously in some texts. Finally, some
the concept of
present three personalities who constitute God, hence
the Godhealer1'nity.

Use of Plural Verbs and Pronouns for God

pre-
Several passages are known for their use of plural verbs and
Genesis
nouns with reference to Elohim/ Yahweh. These include (l)
Gen-
1:26, 27; (2) Genesis 3.-22; (3) Genesis 11:7; and (4) Isaiah 6:8.30 In
esis 1:26, God”s intention to create human beings is expressed, un11k'e
plural
the other acts of creation in the chapter, by the ñrst common
with
verb “let us make.”31 This plural verb is followed by two nouns
11k'e-
plural pronominal sufñxesz “ín our 1m'age” and “according to our
of a plu-
ness.” Some see these plural forms in Genesis 1:26 as evidence
and
rality withm God,32 others interpret them as a plural of majesty,33
some believe that God in this text is addressing the heavenly host.34
The best way to understand the plural forms in Genesis 1:26 is that
the
Elohim speaks to other divine beings.35 While those who prefer
idea of the plural of majesty or self-deliberation can cite a few ancient
monarchs who referred to themselves in the pluraL36 the countless
H1m'self
instances where Elohim talks about Himself or deliberates with
1:26 is
only m' the smgular do not allow for the conclusion that Genesis
a plu-
a case of the plural of majesty or self~deliberation. Furthermore,
shift from singular
ral of majesty or self-deh'beration cannot explain the
the angelic
to plural m' verse 26. Those who argue that Elohim addresses

Testament use plural verb forms and

3° Apart from these, other passages in the Old
7:23; lob 35:10; Ps 58:ll; Prov 30:3;
adjectives for Elohim (e.g., Gen 35:7; Josh 24:19; 2 Sam
Eccl 12:l; Isa 41.'23; 54:5)7
A Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan,
3' In the words of Bruce K. Waltke, Genesis: preceding creative
(or its equivalents) of the seven
2001), 64, “The impersonal Klet there be'
by the personal 'let usÍ Only in the creation of humanity is the divine íntent
acts is replaced In
°and so it was) is replaced by a threefold blessing.
announced beforehand. The formula See
the narrator places humankind closer to God than the rest of creation.”
these ways,
Sarna, Genesi$, 'Ihe IPS Torah Commentary (Ph¡l'adelphia, PAz Iewish
also Nahum M.
Publication Society, 1989), 11. l977),
Clues to Creation in Genesis (L0ndon: MarshalL Morgan & Scott,
32 P. I. Wiseman, 19 (1968): 68-69.
197; Davíd I. A. Clines,“The Image of God in Man,” Tyndale Bulletin
Paradise to Prisom Studies in Genesis (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, l975),
33 Iohn James Davis,
Press, 1984), 87.
79; John T. Willis, Genesis (Abílene, TX: Abilene Christian University
Word,
I. Wenham, Genesis 1-15, Word Biblícal Commentary, vol. 1 (Waco, TX:
34Gordon
1-11: Studies in Structure and 771eme, Iournal for
l987), 27-28; Patríck D. Miller ]r., Genesis
no. 8 (Sheñíeld: Shefñeld, 1978), 9-26_
the Study of the Old Testament Supplements,
48.
35 See also Grudem, 227; Keil and Delitzsch,
and Demetríus respectively using plurals
36l Macc 10:19 and 11:3l report kíngs Alexander
to be read into the Old Testament.
of majesty, but these are examples too late

12
host face the problem that such an interpretation would mean Adam
and Eve were created in the image of Elohim and the angels. Such un-
derstanding runs counter to verse 27, which unequivocally states that
humans were created in the un'age of Elohim, not the angels.
Genesis 1 and the entire biblical record do not allow for a poly-
theistic understanding of Elohim when used with reference to the true
God. But as we shall see below, the Old Testament allows for plurality
of persons in the one true God. The use of plural forms ín Genesis
l:26 hints at such plurality Gerhard F. Hasel has reviewed the major
scholarly views on the plural “let us” in Genesis 1:26, concluding that
it is a plural of fullness:37

This plural supposes that there is within the divine Being the
dístinction of personalities, a plurality within the deity, “a
unanimity ofintention and plan.” In other words, a distinction
m' the divine Being with regard to a plurality of persons is
here represented as a germinal idea. Thus the phrase 'let
us” expresses through its plural of fullness an intra-divine
deliberation among “persons› within the divine Being.38

Haser suggestion that “let us” is a plural of fullness bears añinity

with the view that the name Elohim (and Adonay) is an internal plu-
ral (Ke11' and Delitzsch) or a quantitative diversity in unity (Knight). In
other words, the plural form is probably used to emphasize the point
that the decision to create human beings was taken by a plurality of
persons who constitute God.39 What is clear is that the parallel phrases
“our hk'eness” and “our image” indicate that the human beings Elohim
created (v. 27) share some Characteristics with their Creator4° that other
creatures in Genesis l do not share, be they spirituaL physical, or both.
Although the idea of plurality within Elohim appears to be un-
derscored in verse 26, it is not possible to determine how many di-
vine persons were involved. The conclusíon that the Trinity is referred
to in verse 26 is plausible, but this can be supported only by further

TIGerhard F. HaseL “Meaning of *Let Usy in Genesis l:26,” Andrews University Seminary
Studies l3.1 (1975): 65; Derek Kidner, Gene5is: An Introduction and Commentary, Tyndale
Old Testament Commentar1'es, (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1967), 50-52.
38 Ibid.
39 Ibid.
Genesis l-2,”
4° See chhard M_ Davidson, “The Theology of Sexuality in the Beginningz
on the phrase “Let us
Andrews University Seminary Studies 26.1 (1988): 9. Commenting
the male and female
make man” he says, “The asp ect of personal relationship between
differentiation and relatíonship in
is further highlighted by the analogy o f God,s own
contemplating the creation of humanity.”

13
revelation in Scripture of the persons of the Godhead. In two other
instances in the book of Genesis, Yahweh/God speaks in the plural.
The words that occur in plural forms in the Hebrew are underlinedz

Then the LORD God said, “Behold, the man has become ___11ke'
one of Us, to know good and evil” (Gen 3222).

And the LORD said, “Indeed the people are one and they all
have one language, and this is what they begin to do; now
nothing that they propose to do wíll be withheld from them.
Come, ___g__let
Us o down and there confuse their language, that
they may not understand one anothefs speech” (Gen 11:6, 7).

As in Genesis 1:26, these plural forms occur in direct quotations

whereby the Lord speaks to Himself, or addresses others ínclud-
ing Himself. Again, whíle in 1:26 plural forms are used in the direct
speeches of the Lord, the execution of the actions intended in the
speeches are reported through singular verb forms: (1) After God said,
“let us [pl.] make man” (Gen 1:26), God “created [sg.] man” (V. 27); (2)
after God said, “man has become like one ofus [pl.]” (3:22), God “sent
[sg.]” the man and his wife out of the garden; and (3) after God said,
“let us [pl.] go down and there confuse their language” (11:7), the
LORD “scattered [sg.]” the people abroad. It is worth observing that
even though the human writer keeps the divine speeches in plural
forms, his reports of the divine actions betray his understanding that
Yahweh/God is one. Hence the use of singular expressions.
Another instance in the Old Testament where a plural pronoun is
used by God is Isaiah 6:8-'A'lso I heard the voice of the Lord, say1'ng:
'Whom shall I send, And who will go for Us?› Then I said, 'Here am
I! Send me.›” In this chapter, Isaiah sees the Lord (Adonay) seated in
the temple. The prophet does not see other divine persons apart from
the Lord, who is being attended by the seraphim. Yet when the Lord
speaks, He does so both in the ñrst person singular-“whom shall I
send” (ñrst person singular)-and in the ñrst person plural-“who
shall go for Us.”
Against the View that the angelic host is being addressed in Isaiah
6:8, it may be noted that in 40:l3, 14 the Lord seems to indicate that
He has no need of counseling with His creatures, who may include
created heavenly beings. In any case, it is still puzzling to ñnd that
the Lord speaks both in the singular and in the plural within parallel
sentences in 6:8. In chapter 6 there is an interesting use of the divine
names Adonay and Yahwehz (1) Isaiah sees Adonay seated (V. 1), the
seraphim praise Him as Yahweh of hosts (V. 3), and Isaiah declares

14
 ms unworthmess upon seeing Yahweh (V. 5) and (2) Adonay speaks
directly with Isaiah (vs. 8, 11), but in His speech He mentions that
1ah'weh (m'stead of “I” or “We”) will certainly remove His people (V.
12). VVhüe the reason for the switch from Adonay to Yahweh and back
is unclear, it is possible to thmk of a plurality of persons in Adonay/
lra'hweh. NVithin this context the use of the plural pronoun “us” in
verse 8, “wh11'e not proving the Trinity, suggests that there is a plural-
ity of bem'gs in the speaker.”4l
In Genesis l:26, 3222, 11:7, 8, and Isaiah 6:8, the juxtaposition of
sm'gular and plural forms seems to portray a plurality within God.
This said, however, we should acknowledge that the plural Verbal and
pronominal references to God are still somewhat mysterious. But if
these passages refer to pluralíty within God, then the mystery sur-
rounding the juxtaposition of singular-plural forms only reflects the
mystery of the Godhead. It also appears that while the writers of these
passages faithfully reported the speeches of God, they may not neces-
sarüy have clearly understood the plural-singularity within God. This
ls' suggested by the fact that while the divine quotations are kept in
the pluraL the executions of the divine actions are always conveyed by
the human writers through the use of singular Verbs and pronouns.

God and the Spm"t of God in Genesis 1:2

A common interpretation of the phrase “Sp1'rit of God” (ruach Elo-
him) m' Genesis 1:2 is that it refers to the Holy Spirit, which must be
seen as tak1n'g an active role in creation.42 Another option is to take
ruach Elohim to mean “wind of God”-meaning either a wind in which
15' the div1n'e presence or a “mighty” wind.43 The phrase ruach Elohim
elsewhere has the meaning of divine spirit (e.g., Gen 41:38, NAS), Spir-
it Of God (Exod 31:3; 35:31; Num 24:2; 1 Sam 10:10; 11:6; 19:20, 23;
2 Chx 15:1; 24:20), or evü spirit from God (e.g., 1 Sam 16:15, 16, 23;
18:10). Th15' would suggest that ruach Elohim, in the context of Genesis
1:2, refers to the Holy Spirit. If Moses in Genesis 1:2 intended only to
refer to a “wm'd” blowing over the earth, why would he add Elohim?

“ PfandL 82. See also Geoffrey Grogan, “Isaiah,” Yhe Expositork Bible Commentary, ed.,
Frank E. Gaebelein (Grand Rapíds, MI: Zondervan, l986), 6:57.
ü See e.g., Taeke Iansma, '“And the Spírít of God Moved upon the Face of the Waters,'”
Vetus Testamentum 20 (l970): 16-24; Paul Elbert, “Genesis l and the Spiritz A Narrative-
Rhetorical Ancient Near Eastern Reading in Light ofModern Science,” Iournal ofPentecostal
Theology 15 (2006): 25-26; HaseL 65.
° E.g, G. Henton Davies, “'Ihe Holy Spirit ín the Old Testament,” Review and Expositor 63
( l966): l30; Edward P. Arbez and John P. We1'sengoff, “Exegetical Notes on Genesis 1:1-2,”
Cathohc' Bible Quarterly 10 ( l948): l47-150; Sabatíno Moscati, “The Wind in Bíblical and
Phoen1c'lan' Cosmology,” lournal ofBiblical Literature 66 ( l947): 305-310.

15
 And would he describe the blowing of a w1n'd by the word “hover1n'g”
(Heb. ra'chaph)? It is somewhat díHicult to answer these questions whüe
maintaining the position that ruach Elohim refers to “w1'nd.” But the
view that ruach refers to the Holy Spirit does not go without díchul~
ties either. For example, if ruach Elohim refers to a div1n'e personality
(i.e., the Holy Spirit), what is His function m' verse 2, and why is He not
referred to again in the narrative proper? Moreover, if ruach Elohim is
a divine person, why would He be saíd to be “hovering” (ra'chaph) over
the waters which seemíngly cover the entire earth? The word rãchaph
occurs again in Deuteronomy 32:11, 12. There, God is said to protect
His people just as an eagle “hovers” (ra'chaph) over its young. It appears
from Deuteronomy 32 that the activity conveyed through the word
rãchaph is that of an 1'ndiv1'dual, not an 1m'personal elemcent44
The usage of the phrase ruach Elohim elsewhere and in the context
of creation seems to give the phrase the meaning “Sp1'rit of God.” The
view that ruach refers to the Holy Spirit ís the interpretation favored by
most Evangelical and Adventist scholars. If the Holy Spirit is m' view
m' verse 2, then the mention of Elohim and ruach Elohim m' Genesis 1
provides evidence for the idea of a plurality within God.

Yahweh, God, and the Angel of Yahweh

The Old Testament makes many references to the Angel of Yahweh
or the Angel of Elohim. The three names Elohim, Yahweh, and Angel
of Yahweh/Elohim can all refer to one divine person. With reference
to the one true God, Elohim and Yahweh are synonymous, though as
indicated above, the New Testament seems to interpret these terms
sometimes to refer to distinct divine persons. In several instances in
the Old Testament, however, Yahweh/Elohim and Angel of Yahweh/
Elohim are presented as distinct divine persons. This means that the
Angel of Yahweh may either be synonymous to, or distínct from, Elo-
him or Yahweh.45 A few passages can be cited to illustrate both the
identity and the distinction between Yahweh/Elohim and Angel of
Yahweh (shortened henceforth as °A'ngel”).

44 See E. J. Young, Studies in Genesis One (Nutley, NJz Presbyterian & Reformed,
1976),
36-37; Roberto Our0, “The Earth of Genesis l:2: Abiotic or Chaotic? Part
3,” Andrews
University Seminary Studies 38 (2000): 63.
45 The title 'A°ngel of the Lord” and its cognate °A“ngel of God” appear
about seventy times
in the Old Testament. In a few instances, the “Angel of the Lord”
is presented as a created
being (i.e., ordinary angel), but in most instances, the °A'ngel
of the Lord” is a technical title
of a divine person. The Hebrew mala'k (often translated
“angel›,) simply means “messenger,”
is a “messenger,” he must be

16
 Angel appears
771e Angel is Yahweh/Elohim - In Genesis 16, the
These promises
to Hagar and gives her divine promises (vs. 7-12).
Not only does
are made by the Angel himself, as if he were Yahweh.
but having
the name Yahweh in verse ll seem to refer to the Angel,46
calls Him
understood the Angel to be Yahweh, Hagar subsequently
God (V. 13).
clearly found
The identity of the Angel with Yahweh/God is also
is Yahweh/God who ap-
in Genesis 31 and 32. While in Genesis 28 it
Himself as the “God of
pears to Iacob, in 31:11 the Angel identifles
with Iacob (32:24)
Bethel” (V. 13). The Man who subsequently wrestles
(V. 28) and by Iacob (V.
is identiñed as God both by the Man Himself
who is God (Hos 12:4,
30).47 Hosea identifles this Man as the AngeL
5). Exodus 3:2-4 identiñes the Angel with Yahweh/God:
of ñre
And the Angel ofthe LORD appeared to him in a flame
bush
from the midst of a bush. So he looked, and behold, the
Then
was burning with ñre, but the bush was not consumed.
sight,
Moses said, “I w1l'1 now turn aside and see this great
Why the bush does not burn.” So when the LORD saw that
he turned aside to look, God called to him from the midst of
the bush and said, “Moses, Moses!” And he said, “Here I am.”

In these verses, the Angel is also called Yahweh and God (V. 4).
In the verses that follow, the Angel requires Moses to remove his
sandals in reverence to God (V. 5), and subsequently refers to him-
self several times as Yahweh and as God (Vs. 7-18). The Angel also
calls Himself “I Am” (V. 14). Thus, in this passage the divinity of
the Angel is clearly marked; he is fully God as he is identiñed with
Yahweh/God.
Aga1'n, in his interactions with Gideon in Iudges 6:1 l-25, the An-
gel is referred to as Yahweh (Vs. 14, 16, 23-25). When Gideon per-
ceives that it ís the Angel who appears to him, he cries out, “Alas. O
LORD GOD! For I have seen the Angel of the LORD face to face" (V.
22). Read against such passages as Genesis 32z30 and Exodus 33:11. it
appears that Gideon, as did the Israelites in generaL rccognized this

46 Some have seen in verse 11 a distinction between two divine pcrsonsz 'lhc "Angcl uf
pcrsun (V. H).
the Lord, who is Yahweh, is presented as referring to Yahweh in lhc third
thus hinting at the exístence of a possible difference bclwccn thc Angcl nf lhc Lord th is
Yahweh, and Yahweh” (Canale, 122).
47 In Genesis 48, Iacob himself identiñes the Angel with (¡'nd: "And hc hlmscd losvplL and
saídz 'God, before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac walkcd. 'lhc Gud who hus tbd mv
all my life long to this day, Ihe Angel who has redccmcd mc frnm ull cviL lllcss lhc lads . . .' “
(Gen 48:15, 16; cf. 24:7, 40; Exod 32:34).

17
 . . S '] he sam_e 1'struc of the_ SAn
Ygel wh 0 appca
An el as a dlvme peron.
to Mganoahk wífe UUdg 13)' Whlledlvme the Angel L ahweh/G°d› herels'd
as a distinct 1 person. 'Ihis leads us to the
sometimes presented . the Ange . C
.
second assertlon regardmg Yahweh/God - Jenesis 22 opens
Yhe Angel is God yet distinctfrom
of “G0d” (EthÍm) ÍO Abraham ÍO sacriñce Isaac (vs.
with the command
it is the Angel who calls.out “of Heaven to stop the
l, 2). Subsequently,
triarch from sacri ñcing his son (V. 11), statlng, Now I know that yOu
Pa cknowledges that it is Yahweh who pmvid_
and the Angel seems to repon the
ed the lamb in place of Isaac (V. 14),
ensues (vs. 15-18). In Gene515'
words of Yahweh in the solemn oath that
it appears the Angel is different from Yahweh/God_
22, therefore,
and the Angel comes up
The distinction between Yahweh/God
are made to God (v_
again 1'n Numbers 22z22-38, where references
22-27, 31-35). God ín His
22), Yahweh (vs. 28, 31), and the Angel (vs.
Angel to oppose the prophet
anger against Balaam seems to send the
who opens the mouth
on his way (V. 22). In the encounter, it is Yahweh
eyes and enables
of the donkey (V. 28). Yahweh also opens Balaamjs
him to see the Angel (V. 31). The Angel speaks to Balaam as God
Balaam refers to
would: “Your way is perverse before me” (V. 32), and
Him as God (V. 38; cf. v. 35). In Numbers 22, therefore, Yahweh and
the Angel are God.
In Ioshua 5:13-15, the Commander ofthe army of the Lord pres-
ents Himself as divine, and Ioshua worships Him as such. Like Moses
before the “burning bush' (EX0d 3), Ioshua is required to remove his
sandals (Iosh 5:15). The connection between Exodus 3 and Ioshua
5 allows for the conclusion that the Angel who appears to Moses is
probably identical to the Commander who appears to Ioshua. This
would further conñrm that the divine Angel is the one whom Yahweh
sends to lead Israel to the land of Canaan (Exod 23:20-23). Accord-
ingly, the Angel would later reveal to Israel that it was He who had led
them out of Egypt in fulñllment of His promise, but that He would no
longer drive out the Canaanites from the land because of Israer per-
sistent disobedience (Iudg 2:1-4). Following the words of the Angely
the Israelites weep bitterly and then offer sacriñces not to the Angel
but to Yahweh (V. 5). Here, as ín several other instances, the Israelites
seemed to have distinguished between Yahweh and the Angeh bOth
of them, nonetheless, were recognized as divine. Other texts where a
distinction is made between Yahweh and the Angel are Exodus 23330v
21; 2 Samuel 24z15, 16; and Zechariah 3.
. In summary, the deity of the Angel is highlighted in several W ays
1n tlhe Old lTestamentz (1) He is identiñed and recognized as God, (2).
He lS descrlbed in terms that beñt the deity alone, (3) He calls himS@“

18
m

other References to Divine Plurality

In addition to the distínction made bet ween the Angel
and Yah~
Testament de ict a
Within the God of Israel. As Wayne Grudem °
says, “therep are ppalsusraaghetsy
where one person is called °God' or “the Lord* - . . _
from another person who is also saíd to be Goad.n”*'d9lWeSdlswtlll'nlgbm'Shed
discuss a feW of these passages in this section. - l nefly
lee the Angel of Yahweh passages reviewed above, Psalms 45
and 110 suggest that at least two persons can be referred to as God in
non-polytheistic contexts. The New Testament speciñcally interprets
Psalm 45:6, 7 to refer to God and His Son, Iesus Christ (Heb 1.-8, 9).
Simílarly, in His interpretation of Psalm 110:l in Matthew 22:43-46,
Jesus Christ seems to indicate that Yahweh in Psalm 110:1 refers to
God the Father and Adonay refers to Himself (i.e., God the Son).
Isaiah 9 describes future glories that would attend God's people
(v. 1). The one who will bring about the glorious future is a divine Son:
“For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is givem And the govern-
ment will be upon His shoulder. And Hís name will be called Won-
derfuL Counselor, Mighty G0d, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace”
(Isa 9:6).
The yet-to-be-revealed God-son will exercise endless authority
on the throne of David (v. 7; cf. 22222). And “the LORD [Yahweh] of
hosts” is saíd to make this happen (v. 7). In verses 6, 7, then, we ñnd
references to two divine persons: Yahweh (v. 7) and the God-SOD WhO
ís also called “Mighty God” (v. 6).50 The speciñcs of the prophecy of
M

ed. T.
48Cf. M. F. Rooker, “'Iheophany,” Dictionary of the Old Testament: Pentateuch,
2003), 863-
Desmond Alexander and David W. Baker (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity,
MI: Zonderviam 1981), 300, notes that “this
K864' G. C. Aalders, Genesis (Grand Rapids,
special manifestatlon ofthe being of God h1'mself.”
messengef lthe Angell must be seen as a
” Grudem, 227. Th - 3
]. Young°
w See the discussion of divine titles in Isaiah 926 in Edward
vols. (Grand Rap¡-ds, MI_. Eerdmans, 1965), 3:332-340. Iohn Oswalt, jheBBoookokOfOfISIaslaaihák
G e nd Rapids) Mk
Old Testamednt ( rreaad e_l gibbor as
Chapters 1-39, New International Commentary on the
while attempts have been ma e tO
uEerdmans› 1986), 247, has argued that
great her0," the phrase is best translated “mighty GOd-

19
Isaiah 9 fmd their fulñllment in Jesus Christ, who not only is bOm
as the son of David, but also as the Son of G0d, and therefore is God
(Matt l4:33; John 3:16; 20:28; Phil 2:6; Titus 2:13). "lhus, in Isaiah 9
both Yahweh and the promised Son are God.
The concept of servant is recurrent in Isaiah 42-53.Sl The servant
is sometimes identiñed with Israel/Iacob (e.g., 41:8, 9; 44:1), but other
times the reference is to the promised Messiah (e.g., 49:5, 7; 50:10)_ In
the latter case, the Servant is described as “my servant, whom I uph0]d)
my chosen, in whom my soul delights” (42:1, ESV; cf. Matt 3:17)_ The
Servant of Yahweh is further described as a suffering Servant, dying to
cleanse humans from their sm's and iniquities (52:13-53:12). In these
passages the Servant and Yahweh are distinct persons; it is YahWeh
who accomplishes His purposes for humanity through the Servant52
For example, the distinction between the two persons is highlighted
in Isaiah 53.-10: “Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him [the Servant];
He has put Him to grief. When You make His soul an offering for sin,
He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days, And the pleasure of
the LORD shall prosper ín His hand.” The New Testament description
of the suffering and death of Iesus Christ clearly recalls the suffering
servant motif in Isaiah 52 and 53.53 If the Servant is the Messiah, Iesus
Christ, then He and Yahweh are divine, yet distinct persons.
Thus far, we have seen that the God of Israel in the Old Testament
is not necessarily conceived of as strictly one divine person. There is
a plurality of divine persons within God. Sometirnes the plurality is
presented without reference to a speciñc number of divine persons
(e.g., Gen 1:26). At other times the plurality is presented in a binary
sense, that is, two divine beings (e.g., Angel of Yahweh and Yahweh/
God). The notion of two divine beings is more common ín the Old
Testament than the concept of a trinity of divine beings. In a few pas-
sages, however, references are made to three persons who are God. To
this we now turn.

51 On the so-called “Servant Songs,” see Grogan, 14-20.

52 The descriptions of the Servant in Isaiah suggest clearly that He is to be identiñed with
the God-son in Isaiah 9:6. 'Ihe same person is said
to be the Shoot/Branch of Iesse asa
11:1, 10) or of David (Jer 23:5) or Yahwehs' Servant
who is the Branch (Zech 3:8; 6I12)- For
example, in Jeremíah 23:5, 6 and 33:14-18,
Yahweh promises to raise a Branch from DaVíd
who shall reign forever. In Micah 512 the
reference ís to the coming of “One to be Rulef m
Israel,” an eternal King who shall stand
in the strength of Yahweh and in the majesty Ofthe
name Of Yahweh hÍS GOd (-V 4). Both Yahweh and the promised Branch are presented as
divine persons. Matthew 2:5, 6
Speciñcally records the fulñllment of thíS PTOPheCy
522 m Jesus Christ. Of Micah
53 Matthew 8:17; Luke 22:37;
The Book of Isaiah Chapter JOhn 12133§ Acts 8:32, 33; l Peter 2:22. See also Iohn N. Oswallt_*
Grogan, 300-303. 5 40'56 (Grand Rapíds, MI: Eerdmans, 1998), 375'379' 39 ,

20
 _ Th_ree Persons of the Godhead
In llght of the dlscussion above, one cannot deny that the Old
Testament COHCCÍVCS Of a plurality in God. We have observed that
even Within monotheistic contexts, there is more than one person
who is called God. What this means is that the one-God concept is
not understood to mean that God is a solitary divine person. In oth-
er words, Old Testament monotheism does not preclude a plurality
of persons Within the one God. Within the overarching theme of the
oneness Of G0d, We ñnd that (1) God speaks in plural terms Within
Hímself; (2) the Angel of Yahweh is called Yahweh/God, but is at the
same time presented as a divine person distinct from Yahweh/God;
(3) God ordains and commissions God; and (4) the divine Servant
of Yahweh-the Messiah-is distínct from Yahweh/God, yet is Him-
self the “Mighty God.” Besides the general concept of a plurality in
God, some passages in the Old Testament, speciñcally in the book
of Isaiah, seem to suggest that the plurality in God is a three-in-
oneness plurality. These passages include Isaiah 42:1; 48z16; 61:1-3;
and 63:8-12, 16.
The Servant of Yahweh concept in Isaiah 42-53, as briefly noted
ín the previous section, is particularly important for understand-
One
íng Isaiah 42:1, “Behold! My Servant whom I uph01d, My Elect
He will
in whom My soul delíghtsl I have put My Spirit upon Him;
is Yahweh
bring forth justice to the Gentiles.” '1he speaker in this verse
which
(41:21; 42:5, 6). Yahweh refers to His servant and to His Spirit,
servant in Isaiah
in Isaiah is often the endowment of the Servant The
this servant is
42z1 does not seem to be the natíon IsraeL The fact that
from the ser-
specially introduced here may imply that he is different
Furthermore, since Isaiah
vant already mentioned in 4128 (i.e., Israel).
to Israel, it is not likely that the nation itself is the
42 is addressed
is the divine Servant, the
servant It is probable that here the servant
not speciñcally presented
Messiah (Isa 9:6).54 In Isaiah 42 the Spirit is
but rather as a “divine force and supernatural power who
as a person,
tals]¡<.”55 While the personhood of
equips the recipient to perform his
is not clear, Isaiah 42 doubtless presents three distinct enti-
the Spirit
mission and purpose: Yahweh,
ties inseparably united in the divine
the Servant, and the Spirit
also seems to make reference to three divine per-
Isaiah 61:1-3
Yahweh, and the Anointed
sonalitiesz the Spirit of Adonay Yahweh,

40-66, 107~110; Grogan, 255. The New Testament

54Young, 3:108-109; Oswalt, Chap ters
o f Iesus Christ (Matt 3:17), thereby adding
echoes Isaiah 42:l in the context of the baptism
Isaiah 4221 is the divine Servant
Weight to the conclusion that the servant in
55 Young, 3-.110.

21
one, who is sent by Yahweh to proclaim salvation to His peopl
In the New Testament, Iesus Christ applied Isaiah 61 to Himselef'
in Luke 4.-16-21. 'lhe Servant in Isaiah 52, 53, and 61 has generall
been identiñed with Iesus Christ.56 Taking Isaiah 42:1 together withy
52213-53:12 and 61:l-3, we can conclude that the Servant of Yahweh
is the pre-incarnate Messiah who is sent by God the Father to save the
world through His life, ministry, death, and resurrection (cf. Mark
16:6; Iohn 3:16, 17). While the Spirit of Yahweh is not clearly present-
ed as a person in Isaiah 61:1, its otherwise consistent occurrence in
Messianic contexts in Isaiah as the indíspensable divine endowment
in the mission of the Servant sent by Yahweh gives the impression
that in such contexts Yahweh, the Servant, and Yahweh, the Spirit are
distinct, divine personalities.57
Íhe distinction made in Isaiah 42z1 and 61:1-3 of three divine
personalities continues in Isaiah 63 with further clarity. The Chapter
opens with a description of “One . . . glorious in His apparel” and
who is “mighty to save” (v. 1). There is mention of the soaking of His
garments in blood, depicting the Vengeance He metes out against the
enemy in order to effect salvation for “my redeemed” (vs. 2-6). "Ihus,
the description is that of a divine Person who saves His people and
judges His enemies. From Verse 7 on, the prophet is proclaiming the
“lovingkíndnesses of the LORD.” In Verses 8-12, 16, we readz

For He said, (Surely they are My people, Children who will

not lieÍ So He became their Savi0r. In all their ainction He
of His Presence saved them; In
was aHlicted, And the _g_________Anel
His love and in His píty He redeemed them; And He bore
them and carried them All the days of old. But they rebelled
Hol Sirit; So He turned Himself against
and grieved ____y_p__His
them as an enemy, And He fought against them. . . .Doubtless
You are our Father, Though Abraham was ignorant of us,
O LORD are our
And Israel does not acknowledge us. _,______J_,_.You
Father; Our Redeemer from Everlasting is Your name.

In these Verses, reference is made to Yahweh, the Angel of HÍS

Presence, and the Holy Spir1't. None would question the divinity 0f

56 Oswalt, Chapters 40-66, 562~563; Grogan, 16~20; Young, Isaiah, 3.'458.

57 In Isaiah 61:1 “there is a notable contrast between Spirit at the beginning of the .ñr5t
clause and me at the close of the second, and in each clause the Lord is mentioned. This 15.a
Trinitarian shade that should not be overlooked. Not to be overlooked also is the emphaSIS
upon me, which suggests that the speaker is a person of unusual signíñcance” (Young›
Isaiah, 3:459).

22
 Yahweh, the God of Israel (Isa 42:8). In Isaiah 63216 Yahweh is called
Savior and Father. The term “father” is not a technical term as often
used in the New Testament, yet it reveals the understanding that He
is the true Father of Israel. But again, Yahweh is distinct from the An-
gel of His Presence and His Holy Spirit58 The reference to the °A°ngel
of His Presence” clearly recalls passages such as Exodus 14219 and
23z20-23, where Yahweh is said to have sent His Angel before Israel-
the Angel in whom is the name of Yahweh. Within this context, the
angel in Isaiah 63 is no ordinary angeL but the Angel of Yahweh who
is a divine person sometimes identical to, and at other times distin-
guishable from, Yahweh.59
The third divine personalíty in Isaiah 63 is the Holy Sp1'rit.6° The
Spirit is here said to have been put within Israel during the Exodus,
but Israel rebelled and grieved the Spirit (vs. 10, 11). The Hebrew
word for “grieved” ((ãtzab) has a range of nuances including “hurt”
(1 Chron 4:10; Eccl 10:9), “twist” (Ps 56:5), and “distress” or “grieve”
(Gen 6:6; 34:7; 45:5; 1 Sam 20:3; Ps 78:40; Isa 54:6). It is never used for
an impersonal subject or object, since only a person can be grieved.
By usíng “grieved” in Isaiah 63:10, Isaiah explicitly touches on the
personhood of the Holy Spirit Which is found only implicitly else-
where (e.g., 42:1; 48:16; 61:1). As in Isaiah 63.-10, Psalm 78:40 com-
bines the verbs “rebel” and “gr1'eve” to convey how Israel rebelled and
grieved God during the Exodus. The grieving of Yahweh in Psalm 78
is equated with the grieving of the Holy Spirit in Isaiah 63, sínce both
passages share the same thematic context. Yet, because Isaiah consis-
tently índividualizes Yahweh and the Holy Spirit, the two ought to be
seen as distinct,61 divine personalities in addition to the AngeL62 the
three sharing the same nature and being inseparable in their purpose

58The individuality of the Holy Spirit need not be questioned simply because the text says
“His Holy Spirit” (cf. Isa 42:l; 48.-16). In several places in Isaiah Yahweh refers to “My
Servant,” yet it is clear that Yahweh ís different from His Servant (e.g., 42:1; 52:13; 53:11).
59 Cf. Gulley, 85. Alec Motyer, Isaiah, The Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Downers
Grove, IL: InterVarsíty, 1999), 387, notes that the Angel “speaks as the Lord and is yet
distinct from hím, in whom the holy God taccommodates) hímself to live among sinners, an
Old Testament anticipation of Iesus.”
60 The phrase “Holy Spirit” ís rare in the Old Testament. It is mentioned in Psalm 51111 and
Isaiah 63:10, 11. Similar phraseology occurs in the Aramaic texts of Daniel 4:8, 9, 18; 5211.
°1Cf. Oswalt, Chapters 40-66, 607: “Since the adjective holy ís used of God)s Spirit only here,
in verse 11, and Psalm 51:11, we may safely assume that it is used on purpose, and is not just
part of an honoriñc title.”
62 Gulley, 92, has noted that in Isaiah 63 we have “( l) Yahweh, (2) angel of Yahweh, and (3)
Spirit of Yahweh, and explicit reference to the Trínity, and a speciñed relationship between
themz the Son and Spirit are related to the Father, for they both share the name Yahweh with
the Father. The Trinity is chesed love (cf. 'G0d is love,' Gr. agape, 1 Iohn 4:8, 16).”

23
for humanity.63 The references to G0d,s “.lo'vingkindness” and IsraerS
yet their redemption b
rebellion- distressing and grieving the Sp1r1t,
the Angel is ample evidence that the three.pers_0ns of the Godheady
have always actively been involved in salvatlon hlstory.64

Father, Son, and Holy Spirit

The New Testament revelation of the titles of the three persons of
the Godhead as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is implicit in the Old Tes-
tament. God is called Father (Deut 32:6; Isa 63:16; 64:8; Mal 1:6; 2;10)
fatherly attributes are ascribed to Him (Deut 1:31; 8.-5; Prov 3:12; Isá
l:2; 30:1, 9), He is the Father of Israel (Jer 3:4; Hos 11:1), and Israel is
His ñrstborn (Exod 4222). In a special sense, God is the Father of the
Davidic kings (2 Sam 7:14) and of the Messiah (Ps 2:2, 7). Although
God is called Father in the Old Testament, the “father” appellation is
not a technical term that designates the ñrst person of the Godhead
as we ñnd in the New Testament.
The Old Testament also speaks of a God-Son yet to be born (Isa
7:14; 9:6) who shall reign on the Davidic throne as the divine Branch
(Ier 23:5, 6; 33:14-18; Zech 3:8; 6:12) ín everlasting peace and righ-
teousness (Isa 11:1-16). Thís God-Son 1's also pictured as the Servant
of Yahweh, whose suffering and death would bring healing to human-
ity (e.g., Isa 52, 53). The God-son is mysteriously begotten by God (Ps
2:7) and is Himself God (e.g., Ps 45:6, 7; Isa 9:6). And the references to
the birth and the divinity of the Son suggest that He is the God-man
(Isa 7:14; 9:6; Dan 7:13).65
The Old Testament also makes references to the Holy Spirit or
the Spirit of God. The Spirit is presented as taking an active role in
creation (e.g., Gen 1:2; Iob 33:4; 34214, 15). The Spirit of God dwells in
human beings (e.g., Gen 41238; Num 27:18; l Sam 16:13) and enables
individuals to perform certain tasks (Exod 31:3; 35:3l; Num 11225;
24:2; Dan 4:8, 9; 5:11). For example, the judges and the prophets ex-
ecuted their duties through the Spirit (Judg 3:10; 6:34; 11:29; l3:25;
1 Sam 10:6-10; 2 Chron 15:l; Mic 3:8). The Spirit speaks through
people (2 Sam 23:2; 1 Kgs 22:24). In 2 Samuel 23:2, 3 the “Spirit of
the Lord” parallels the “God of Israel” (also Isa 30:1). Psalm l39:7, 8
attributes the divine characteristic of omnipresence to the Spirit and
equates Yahwehs' presence with the Spirit The Spirit can take actions
on His own (2 Kgs 2:16; Ezek 11:5, 24; Mic 2:7). For example, EZekÍe1
ll reports the Spirit's falling upon the prophet and instructing him

“Grudem, 238; Dederen, 16. See also Grogam 342; Dclitzsch, 454-455.
M l')ederen, 2().
'*5See also ()swalt, Chapters 1-39, 245; Gmgam 74.

24
 to Speak the W0rdS Of the Lord (V. 5). The Spirit
brings about revival
and change of hear.t (Ezek 11:19; 18:3l; 36:26, 27; 37:1-14). People
Can take counsel WIth the Lord as well as with
the Spirit (Isa 30:1).
Fl-na11y, Isaiah 63 .presents the Lord, the Angel of His
Presence, and
the Holy Spirit as dlstinct personalities (Vs. 9, 10).
In addition to other
passages (e.g., Gen 633; 2 Sam 23:2, 3; Isa 48:16;
Ezek 11:5, 24; Mic
2_.7), Isaiah 63210 reveals that the Spirit of God has personal charac-
teristics.66 As such, the Spirit is said to have been “grieved” by Israel
in the wilderness (V. 10; Cf. PS 106.'33).67 The personal characteristics
notwithstanding, the Old Testament does not explicitly imply that the
Spirit was understood aS one of three divine persons as is the case in
the New Testament.

Summary and Concluding Remarks

While some scholars would deny any foreshadowing of the God-
head or Trinity 1'n the Old Testament, evidence from the text seems
to suggest otherwise. The Old Testament particularly emphasizes
monotheism. Yahweh/God is the only true God. Not only are singular
verbs and pronouns used for God, but many direct statements serve
to highlight the oneness of God. But the oneness of God as consis~
tently expressed in the Old Testament does not preclude a plurality
of persons within the one God; it only precludes the recognition and
worship of demonic and/or human-made gods as was current in the
surrounding cultures. So we ñnd that in the passages where the one-
ness of God is asserted, the contrast is consistently between the God
of Israel on the one hand and the gods of the Canaanites on the other.
Although the Old Testament stresses monotheism, it neverthe-
less envisages a plurality in God. There are indications that God ex-
ists as more than one divine person. First, the biblical text uses plural
names, Verbs, and pronouns for the one God in contexts that suggest
plurality of divine persons. Second, several passages explicitly present
at least two divine persons who are clearly distinguishable from each
other (e.g., Yahweh vs. Angel of Yahweh and Yahweh vs. His Servantl
God-son, the Messiah). In the book of Isaiah, the general concept of
plurality in God elsewhere in the Old Testament becomes a plural-

°° The personal characteristícs of the Spirit can also be gleaned from the verbs used to
describe the Spirit'5 action. The Spirit is said to “be” (e.g., Num 24:2; Iudg 3.'10), tO “Clothe”
(C.g., Judg 6:34, ESV), to “come mightily” (e.g., Judg 14:6, 19; 15:14; 1 Sam 11:6; 16:13), or
to “fall” upon persons (e.g., Ezek 11:5).
671n Nehemíah 9220 God is said to have given His “good Spirit” to cause Israel to be prudent
during the wílderness trek (cf. Ps 106:33). This ímplíes not only that the Angel of Yahweh
Was with Israel durm'g the Exodus, but also that the Spirit was also moving with IsraeL It is
aLPPropriatcz therefore, that personal characteristics are accorded the Spirit as in Isaiah 63.

25
 Intriguingly, while Isaiah
ity of three persons within the one God.
of IsraeL he neverthe-
consistently stresses the oneness of the God
h, the Angel/Servant, and the Holy Spirit as
1'n their nature
three distinct, divine personalities who are indivisible
revelation of
and purpose for humanity. Finally, the New Testament
Father, Son, and Holy
the titles of the three persons ofthe Godhead as
God as Fa-
Spirit appears implicit in the Old Testament as it presents
We can thus
ther, His Angel/Servant/Messiah, and Hís Holy Spirit
existing 1'n a
conclude that the Old Testament conception of God as
concept of the
plurality of persons foreshadows the New Testament
Godhead.
From the references to divine persons in the Old Testament, we
these di-
can speak, softly though, of functional differences between
vine persons ín their mission to humanity. Elohim/ Yahweh appears
to be the highest point of reference. He sends the Angel/Servant of
the
Yahweh as a father would send a son on a missi0n. He also gíves
Spirit to the Servant for His míssion. Thus, the Angel/Servant and the
Spirit accomplish the task of Elohiml Yahweh, who is Himself keenly
involved in the mission of redemptíon. And the AngellServant, who
is also Yahweh and God, makes references to the authority of Elohim/
by
Yahweh. In these functíons, Elohileahweh comes ñrst, followed
the Angel/Servant who is the primary emissary and agent for the re-
demption of God,s people, and then the Spirit who is said to accompa-
ny and empower the ministry of the Angel/Servant. The Holy Spirit-
whose work is closely associated with that of the Servant Messiah-is
not explicitly revealed as a divine person until the revelation of the
Messiah in the New Testament.68 Thus understood, the Old Testa-
ment picture of plurality within God prepares for the explicít revela-
tion of the Messíah and the Holy Spirit as God, and ñts perfectly with
the New Testament portrayal of the Trinity as a relationship of three
equaL divine persons with different functions in the plan of salvation.

68Cf. Ioel 2:28-29; Acts 2:4-38.

26