Against Marcion IV

Debunking the claim that Yehovah God had a physical form.

Claim: Yehovah is a physical being with a physical form.

Linguistic Refutation: The Hebrew word "מִתְהַלֵּ֥ךְ" (mit'hallēk) in Genesis 3:8 is often translated as "walking" in English Bibles, leading to the common interpretation that God was physically walking in the Garden of Eden. However, this term does not necessarily imply a physical, anthropomorphic action on the part of God.

The verb "מִתְהַלֵּ֥ךְ" is in the Hitpael stem, a reflexive or intensive form of the verb "הלך" (halakh), which means "to walk." The Hitpael form often indicates a repetitive, habitual, or self-directed action. In this context, "mit'hallēk" can imply a more abstract movement, like "moving about" or "making His presence felt," rather than literal walking. This verb form suggests a dynamic, ongoing presence rather than a specific physical action.

The phrase "in the cool of the day" (literally "the wind of the day" or "the breezy time of the day") in Genesis 3:8 sets a scene that could be symbolic or atmospheric rather than a literal narrative of events. It could suggest a time of day when God's presence was typically perceived, perhaps in a way that the first humans were familiar with, indicating a relational or covenantal encounter rather than a physical one.

Claim: Elohim is a divine council and Yehovah is really Satan a member of that council as seen in the Book of Job.

Context: In the Hebrew Bible, "Elohim" (אֱלֹהִים) is one of the primary names used to refer to God. Interestingly, "Elohim" is a plural noun in Hebrew, but it predominantly refers to the singular God of Israel, Yahweh. This raises the question: why is a plural form used to refer to a singular deity?

ntext:

Misinterpretation: Elohim as a Council of Gods

At first glance, one with little command of Hebrew might assume that "Elohim" suggests a plurality of gods, perhaps implying a polytheistic framework or a divine council. However, this interpretation is inconsistent with the overall monotheistic message of the Hebrew Bible. Instead, the use of "Elohim" is better understood through a linguistic phenomenon known as the plural of majesty.

3. The Concept of Plural of Majesty (Pluralis Majestatis)

Pluralis majestatis is a grammatical construction where a singular entity is referred to in the plural form to express honor, grandeur, or authority, rather than numerical plurality. This concept is found in several ancient languages, including those of the Semitic family.

Application in Biblical Hebrew:

In Biblical Hebrew, "Elohim" is a prime example of pluralis majestatis. Although grammatically plural, "Elohim" is used with singular verbs and adjectives when referring to Yahweh, emphasizing His supreme authority and majesty.

Example 1: Genesis 1:1

Original Hebrew: בְּרֵאשִׁית בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ

Transliteration: Bereshit bara Elohim et hashamayim ve'et haaretz

Translation: "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth."

Analysis: The verb "bara" (בָּרָא), meaning "created," is singular, demonstrating that "Elohim" (אֱלֹהִים), though plural in form, refers to a singular God.

Example 2: Deuteronomy 6:4

Original Hebrew: שְׁמַע יִשְׂרָאֵל יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵינוּ יְהוָה אֶחָד

Transliteration: Shema Yisrael, Adonai Eloheinu, Adonai echad

Translation: "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one."

Analysis: "Eloheinu" (אֱלֹהֵינוּ), meaning "our God," is a plural form, but "Adonai" (יְהוָה) and "echad" (אֶחָד), meaning "one," clearly affirm the singularity of God.

4. Plural of Majesty in Other Ancient Semitic Languages

The plural of majesty is not exclusive to Hebrew but also appears in other Semitic languages, such as Ugaritic and Akkadian, where it similarly conveys grandeur and respect for a singular entity.

Ugaritic Example:

In Ugaritic, the word "ʾilm" (𐎛𐎍𐎎) is a plural form of "god" (singular: "ʾil"). While Ugaritic was a polytheistic culture, "ʾilm" could be used to refer to the supreme god El in a majestic sense, reflecting honor rather than actual plurality.

Akkadian Language:

Akkadian Example:

In Akkadian, "ilu" (𒀭) is the singular form for "god," and "ilanu" (𒀭𒀀𒉡) is the plural. While "ilanu" might refer to multiple gods in some contexts, it could also be used to denote the majesty of a singular, supreme deity, such as Marduk, especially in a royal or divine context.

Arabic Language:

Arabic Example:

In Classical Arabic, rulers would often use the term "نحن" (nahnu), meaning "we," instead of "أنا" (ana), meaning "I," when issuing decrees or commands, signifying their royal authority. This is another example of pluralis majestatis.

Example Sentence: "نحن أمرنا" (Nahnu amarna) – "We have commanded."

Analysis: The use of "we" (نحن) by a single ruler underscores their majesty and authority, despite being a singular entity.

Phoenician

Phoenician, a Canaanite language closely related to Hebrew, also exhibited similar grammatical structures. Although we have limited texts, there are instances where plural forms are used in a context that could indicate honor or reverence, particularly in inscriptions.

Example in Phoenician:

The plural form "Elim" (𐤀𐤋𐤌) can be found in inscriptions. While "Elim" might refer to multiple gods, in some contexts, especially in royal inscriptions, it could reflect a form of reverence or elevate a single deity, similar to "Elohim" in Hebrew.

Aramaic

Aramaic, another major Semitic language, had significant influence across the Near East and was used extensively in both everyday and official contexts. While Aramaic generally does not use a plural of majesty in the same way as Hebrew, there are instances where plural forms are used in a reverential or majestic context.

Example in Aramaic:

In some Aramaic inscriptions and texts, the word "Alaha" (ܐܠܗܐ) is used to denote God, similar to the Hebrew "Elohim." While "Alaha" is generally singular, the usage of plural forms in other contexts within Aramaic texts, particularly for divine beings, reflects the Semitic tradition of using plurality for reverence.

Amorite

Amorite, an ancient Semitic language spoken by the Amorites in the early 2nd millennium BCE, is not as well-documented as some other Semitic languages. However, some personal names and phrases preserved in Akkadian texts suggest that Amorite speakers used similar concepts.

Example in Amorite:

Names like "Ilu-shama" (𒀭𒀀𒋼𒈠) (meaning "God has heard") often incorporate the word "Ilu" (god), which is also found in plural forms in other contexts. The exact usage of plural forms in Amorite is less clear due to limited sources, but it reflects a shared Semitic linguistic culture where gods and divine concepts were often expressed in plural forms, possibly for reverence.

Linguistic Refutation: In the Book of Job, the narrative begins with a scene in heaven where the "sons of God" (בְּנֵי הָאֱלֹהִים, b'nei haElohim) present themselves before Yehovah. Among them is "Satan" (הַשָּׂטָן, haSatan), who appears in the role of an adversary.

2. Distinct Identities: Yehovah and Satan

Yehovah and Satan are presented as two distinct beings with different identities and roles.

Yehovah (יְהוָה) in the Text:

Yehovah is portrayed as the sovereign God, the Creator, and the ruler of all things. His name is used consistently to refer to the supreme deity, and He acts with authority and justice.

Satan (הַשָּׂטָן) in the Text:

The term "Satan" (הַשָּׂטָן, haSatan) literally means "the adversary" or "the accuser." In the Book of Job, "Satan" is not a personal name but a title, highlighting his role as one who opposes and accuses. The definite article "ha" (הַ) attached to "Satan" underscores that this is a title, not a proper name.

3. Hebrew Grammar and Structure

A. Use of the Definite Article with "Satan"

Hebrew Text: Job 1:6

Hebrew: וַיְהִי הַיּוֹם וַיָּבֹאוּ בְּנֵי הָאֱלֹהִים לְהִתְיַצֵּב עַל־יְהוָה וַיָּבֹא גַם־הַשָּׂטָן בְּתוֹכָם

Transliteration: Vayehi hayom vayavo'u b'nei haElohim lehit-yatzeb al-Yehovah vayyavo gam-haSatan b'tocham.

Translation: "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before Yehovah, and Satan also came among them."

Analysis: The phrase "וַיָּבֹא גַם־הַשָּׂטָן" (vayyavo gam-haSatan), "and Satan also came among them," indicates that Satan is one of the attendees and not the same entity as Yehovah. The use of "הַ" (ha), the definite article, clearly shows that "Satan" is a title. In contrast, "יְהוָה" (Yehovah) is always used as a proper noun, signifying the unique identity of the sovereign God.

B. Different Roles and Actions

Hebrew Text: Job 1:7

Hebrew: וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה אֶל־הַשָּׂטָן מֵאַיִן תָּבוֹא וַיַּעַן הַשָּׂטָן אֶת־יְהוָה וַיֹּאמַר מִשּׁוּט בָּאָרֶץ וּמֵהִתְהַלֵּךְ בָּהּ

Transliteration: Vayomer Yehovah el-haSatan me'ayin tavo? Vaya'an haSatan et-Yehovah vayomer mishut ba'aretz ume'hithalech bah.

Translation: "And Yehovah said to Satan, 'From where do you come?' So Satan answered Yehovah and said, 'From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking back and forth on it.'"

Analysis: The dialogue structure clearly distinguishes Yehovah from Satan. Yehovah is the one who questions, and Satan is the one who answers. The different verbs used—Yehovah speaks and questions, Satan responds—emphasize their distinct roles. This interaction would be incoherent if they were the same being, as it would require self-dialogue, which is not supported by the text.

C. Semantic Differences

Yehovah’s Role:

Yehovah is depicted as the supreme ruler and judge. He sets the boundaries for what Satan can do, showing His authority over Satan. This demonstrates that Yehovah is in control, and Satan operates under His permission. Yehovah is God Almighty who presides over the meeting.

Satan’s Role:

Satan acts as the accuser or adversary, challenging the integrity of Job. His role is subordinate to Yehovah, as he must seek permission to test Job and is restricted by Yehovah’s commands.