Then God said, “Let * ** us * ** make man in * ** our * ** image, in * ** our * ** likeness…”
Who is God referring too as “us” and “our”?
It’s the “editorial we”
Probably she was just doin’ a little brainstormin’ with her sister? 
Elohim, the Hebrew noun used specifically of God, is technically a feminine plural, though plurality or femaleness is not implicit, any more than a pair of pants is plural or the Nancy Bell is considered a female person (feminine gender for ships is one of the few survivals of “grammatical gender” in English).
The pronouns there are feminine plural to agree with Elohim. And the verb form is actually an English idiom, translating an oddball mode in Hebrew (somebody will be along to specify the proper name for it), which is more or less an exclamation of intent or a self-command.
Which has not stopped people from coming up with explanations for the phrasing, including:
-
The Father is addressing the other two persons of the Christian Trinity.
-
God is speaking to the other lesser gods. (Henotheism)
-
God is speaking to the “company of Heaven” – the angels and archangels who do His bidding.
-
What outburst said – except the “royal we” would be more accurate.
I was told that us and our are referring to the trinity.
The issue there would be that Genesis was written by Jews, who didn’t (and don’t) believe in the trinity. That didn’t come around until way later.
Sounds a little like Gollum there doesn’t it?
That is no problem to a True Believer, Marley – obviously, God was a Trinity all the time, but the Jews only conceived of Him in one mode, not in all three. (And Dogface will be along shortly to accuse me of Modalism for the way I phrased that! ;))
You are right, of course. That’s just the way it was explained to me, back when I was catholic.
Here is a page that makes the argument that the us and we are referring to two different gods. I don’t know how accurate it is, but it is interesting.
http://www.infidels.org/library/magazines/tsr/1994/1/1poly94.html
There is a reference (somewhere in the Bible) to a “master worker” who was alongside God.
I’ll look it up in the morning if you’re interested. Otherwise, what the other Bible scholars already said.
Actually, it’s a masculine plural.
So, I didn’t have the wording quite right, it still conveys the idea of someone else in Heaven with God during creation.
Aha! Authorized Standard Version calls it “Master Workman.”
I knew I’d seen that somewhere.
Yes, I would be interested to read that, thanks. My thought was that as Moses was writing Genesis he must of read or either been told by the holy spirit the story of creation and the “our” and “we” came from the storyteller, if you think of it in that terms.
Aha! Authorized Standard Version calls it “Master Workman.”
I knew I’d seen that somewhere.
Dreamer, scroll up a bit. It’s Proverbs 8:30.
Thank you for finding that. That is a very powerful proverb. I believe that would be the Holy Spirit speaking those words then.
It is interesting to me how in the first verse of Proverbs 8 the words *wisdom * and * understanding * sort of have their own entity and are given almost a title, if that makes sense.
"Does not wisdom call out? Does not understanding raise her voice?"
It’s as though the Holy Spirit gives those words life and goes as far as giving “understanding” the feminine title.
It never ceases to amaze me how one sentence in the bible can mean so much and though I think I know so much about it, I really know and understand very little.
I’ve also heard it said it was God comunicating with the animals that he created. Animals seemed to be much nicer back in the day of the Garden of Eden and it fits very nicely in the theory of evolution too as it could be augued that man evolved from some ape-like animal but God gave man the ‘whatever’ to bring him above the animals.
So (using the above theory), man is in the image of animals and God.
kind of like nice-but dim people and big transformers.
The traditional Jewish interpretation is that he was talking to the angels. Not that he needed their help or approval to make man, but G-d was trying to show by example that the proper behavior for a person in charge is to consult his subordinates.