162 
shoot forth, let the waters teem , let the earth bring forth, but 
when man, an intellectual being composed of spirit as well as 
matter, is to be created, it is no longer eartb or water who 
are directed to bring forth, but the concentration of all 
powers God, exclaims. We (pluralis excellentiae) will make 
man.^ 
But what do these learned Jews mean by “the concentration 
of all powers ”? It is figurative language, no doubt; but is 
not the corruption of figurative language that from which 
polytheism sprang ? The description would, I think, have 
been acknowledged by the priests of Babylon as of their 
religion. All the powers might be worshipped, it being under- 
stood that they were emanations of, and included in, “the 
God One.” 
At a later date this monotheism became a secret of the 
priests; nevertheless, in the Orphic Hymn it is very explicitly 
stated.* I notice that Mfjrig is there made one with 
Zevg, elsewhere the first wife of the first Cause of all 
things. f And the word implies Advice, counsel, a plan or 
undertaking. 
Let this be compared with the personification of Wisdom 
in the eighth chapter of Proverbs (which as a Christian I am 
not at liberty to consider as mere poetry), and it will be appa- 
rent, as I judge, that the false is but a reflection (or distortion) 
of the previously revealed true doctrine. I say previously 
revealed, for the assumption of the plural We on the part of 
the Almighty must have been intentional. In the subsequent 
revelation to Moses it is I, the personal pronoun, that is used, 
I am that I am. We have the highest authority for saying 
that more was made known to faithful men of old than Scrip- 
ture records (see John viii. 56). 
Elohim, in the first chapter of Genesis, is represented as 
forming the race of man after consultation. “Let us make man 
in our image the word is literally, shadowing forth 
Christ is called the Brightness of the Father's glory (cnravycKTfia), 
which indicates something much higher than a mere shadow ; 
also the express image of His person; the word yapaKTnp im- 
plying “ the peculiar nature or character of a thing or person,” 
(Liddell and Scott's Lex.), and therefore also leading us to a 
* Ztvg apcrrjv ytvtro , Ztvg a/ifiporoQ t7r\tTo N v/x<py 
Ztvg 7rv9p.r)v yairjg rt kcu ovpavov acrrtpotvrog, 
Zevg 7rovrov piZ,a, Ztvg ‘HXiog rjt> e ^eXrjvr], 
Ztvg Ba<ri\ei>£, Ztvg avrog cnravTuv apxiytvtQXog 
K at M ring, npiorog y tvtrojp, teat ’Epw£ 7ro\vTtp7rt]g. 
Havra yap tv Ztjvog ptyaXip radt aiopiaTi Ktirai 
‘Ev nparog , tig Aaifuvv, yivtrai ptyag dp\og cnravTivv. 
t Hesiod, Theog. Th. 886, quoted in Liddell and Scott, Diet . , sub v. Mi/ric. 
