Meaning of "Us" in Genesis.

Though Genesis 1:26 says "Let Us [plural] make man in Our [plural] image, according to Our [plural] likeness..." the very next verse indicates the singularity of the Creator -"And God created man in His [singular] own image ..."It is kind of mysterious, isn't it? I believe the answer is in the fact that God is a trinity. God is the Triune God - Father - Son - Holy Spirit. Each are eventually said to be God. And again we see the Son and the Father as the Divine "We" coming to make an abode in the believers in God incarnate - Jesus Christ:"Jesus answered and said to him, If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word, and My Father will love him, and WE will come to him and make an abode with him" (John 14:23)The Divine "We" in John 14:23 is also the Divine "Us" in Genesis 1:26 with one important difference. The difference is that in Genesis 1:26 God has not yet been incarnated as a man of flesh and blood. This plan is not outworked and unfolded yet on the earth. We only have a hint that something is mysterious about the multi - uni nature of God. Before Adam and Eve ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil God did NOT want them to "stay away" from the tree of life. That is why it was in the midst, the middle of the garden.It was after Adam and Eve partook of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil that God put up a fearsome barrier between them and the tree of life so that man would not live forever in his condition that came about from eating the tree of knowledge of good and evil.You have a simply named tree and a complicatedly named tree. It is actually a dichotomy between a tree of life and a tree of death. The tree of death has an attractive sounding name. It is of knowledge. How can knowledge be negative? Not only is it attractively a tree of knowledge, but it a tree of knowledge of good and evil.The negative tree has such an attractive sounding name. In reality it is simply a tree of death, plain and simple -for in the day that they ate of it they would die. God warned them of that.Today, my opinion is that perhaps the name of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was given to it by an enemy of God. Something like this I imagine:God says, Okay, we'll have two trees to represent two ways to live Satan. A tree of life to represent My way and a tree of death to represent your way.Satan says "Oh no, no. Don't call it the tree of death. Call it something more attractive like, let us say, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil."God says, "Ok. But if man eats of it you and he are going to be damned forever. That is unless man takes my way of salvation from your deception and damage. "Now I could have it wrong. And I admit that this is how I presently feel today. My opinion is based on the dialogue that God had with Satan in the book of Job where we see again a man between God and His enemy, put to a kind of test to vindicate either Satan or God.Now I know that many on this forum insist that introducing "Satan" into Genesis is a violation of Jewish culture. We've been through those debates plenty. But I still definitely see the Satan exposed in the New Testament as the enemy of God and man in the Old Testament.I don't think I'll go over those arguments again should someone object. Food is something that you take into you and becomes a part of you. The symbol of the tree with fruit to eat suggest that what man ate is what he would become. It would constitute his "tissues" so to speak. You know the saying "You are what you eat." What man ate would be what got into him and became a part of him.Man was meant to receive God Himself into him as life. Man was meant to internalize the uncreated Person of God. God created man in the image of God so that God could fit into man. You should think of this like a human hand fitting into a glove which is made in the image of a human hand.In some way man is "God shaped". Man is a vessel meant to contain God as his divine supply of life. God is to be lived. God is to be expressed from within man. God is to come into man and be expressed from within man. Man is to receive God and live in a mingled and united way with God. This is for man's enjoyment and for God's expression.God already had plenty of angels that lived forever. So I don't think he simply wanted another creature - man, to live forever. God wanted something more than just another everlasting creature.God wanted a creature to be mingled with Him. God wanted to be united with a creature in a blended way of union. He wanted a God-Man. Not just a good man did God want. He wanted a God-man. That is a man who lives God and allows God to live within him.The other tree is the other way. It is the way other than the way that God intends. That is really all that we have to know about it. Man should take God's way. Man should not take any other way.There was no warning to Adam that if he failed to eat of the tree of life he would die. So I strongly assume that Adam was created with an everlasting life. When he ate of the forbidden tree it began to die. The tree of life was now forbidden to him. Apparently the effects of having both trees would cause the tree of life to be the more powerful of the two - he would live forever.God would not have man constituted with two elements and mixed with the two trees. The two trees were mutually exclusive. Adam could have one or the other. He could not have both. So even though we are not explicitly told that Adam had previously eaten of the tree of life, I think the logic of the story indicates that Adam had not ever eaten of the tree of life. For some reason he postponed doing so.But most important to this post - these two trees reveal to elements, two constitutions which could fill man's being. Man was meant to be united with God. In the fall of man man was united with God's enemy Satan. Man became "Satanified" and collectively expresses the one who is at enmity with God - Satan.Christ Jesus, on the other hand is what God meant by "man". He is the universal minigling and union of the Divine Life and the Human Life. He is the God-man which God intended to have in the creation of man. He is also the Savior and the Head of a new humanity in salvation.Today, we can only partake of the life of God because in the death of Christ God counts the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and its effects to have been terminated forever in Christ's death. OTherwise we today could not partake of the Holy Spirit or of the life of God in regeneration in Christ.Witness Lee & Watchman Nee teach regeneration Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Arach did you notice that in the Hebrew Bible some people went alive down into Sheol in the book of Numbers? The people who rebelled with Korah, I mean.It seemed that God was so displeased that He didn't wait for them to become "shaded". The earth opened up and they and their tents and possessions descended with them alive into Sheol.See Numbers 16:29-30.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Arach,Among your possibilities could you give me some other examples of God speaking this way: I'd like to see your other examples of God speaking this way anywhere in the Bible. I am also considering where such a similiar utterance may be.Let me know if you find one. Otherwise I think #1 is very weak in explaining the "Us" in Genesis and Isaiah. I think mentioning other gods is one matter. Mentioning other gods with Himself as "Us" is a completely different matter.I don't think you could find an example of God speaking about Himself and any other demi-gods false or true as "Us". He certainly would not say so in reference to the divine act of creating man.Examples, you might refer to are welcomed if you have any. This sounds like the "christian triune god" is other than the Bible's God in Genesis.Do you mean that the Triune God of the New Testament - Father - Son - Holy Spirit, is some other God besides the God of Genesis? That is the same God there. Don't you believe that that is the same God in the New Testament as is in Genesis? I don't know anything about this. You mean that God likes to imitate the earthly kings? Do you mean that He listens to the kings of the world and thinks its pretty cool the way they talk. So He copies their style of speaking and refers a couple times to God in the "royal we" like some monarchs of the world?Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Arach,I only have time to zero in a little on one paragraph of your post. You surely don't mean that. Why then are there so very many names for God in the Old Testament? Is it the fact that because God is multifacetted that He is revealed with many different names?Remember that the truths of so many other books in the Old Testament are based on the Torah. First of all I question why you say that you know something about what I believe when I have never stated any such thing.I believe that the 66 books of the Bible are one divine revelation from God to man. That is not the same thing as "one text that is all the same ideologically". So before you say that you know something about what I believe, perhaps you should first find out what it is I beleive.The 66 books of the Hebrew canon and New Testament canon are one reveletaion from God. I think the word theologians use is one plenary word of God.I don't like the phrase "all the same ideologically" unless you are talking about God's own Divine ideology. And by the phrase "one text" I am not sure what you mean, I don't think the entire Bible is "one text".So Arach, I am a little cautious of you forming your arguments and putting them in my mouth. Okay? Do you assume here to be telling me something that I am not aware of Arach?You have at least 40 different authors over a period of some 1,600 years. I am acutely aware of how God used many authors to convey His revelation in the Bible. The Bible reveals many facets to God. Which before you implied did not exist. Least we take one aspect of God and count that as the ONLY side to God, the Bible reveals OTHER sides of His personality.I don't count this so much as "argu[ing] against other aspects of God. Sometime there may be a flavor of men on earth arguing. But behind the scene I think you just have God revealing Himself from different angles.We humans like to get on a single principle and drive it onward withuot end. God has many facets which require not only TIME to unfold but CONTRAST to be highlighted so as to cultivate our appreciation.Case in point - Elijah hiding in the cave. He was use to seeing God do mighty acts like blasting the mountains apart with a strong wind, or shaking the ground with an earthquake, or being a great devouring fire. God had to teach the prophet Elijah that the mighty divine acts could also occur in the still small voice of human conscience.Was this an argument against former philosophies? Well, I consider it more as God patiently and lovingly teaching the great prophet Elijah that God could perform His work in other ways besides great displays of physical calamity.At any rate, these differences in angles to God's personality confirm a many facetted God rather than a one facetted God. That is an interesting subject. And I am not sure the shift is in personality at all.Is there no mercy and forgiveness in the Old Testament? The Hebrew kings had a reputation of being merciful kings when all was said and done.The change is there in some way. We should all be able to see that. God becomes incarnate as a man - Jesus Christ. And the Man becomes the life giving Spirit to indwell man to carry out the new covenant of inscribing His living laws on the hearts of His people.There is a change as the Triune God passes through the process of Incarnation, human living, death for redemption, resurrection, awscension, and life impartation as the pneumatic life giving Spirit of Christ.I don't know if I would discribe this as a shift in personality. I'll think about it.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Arach,I think you should make up your mind here. You want to say that my Christian theology falsly assigns many facets to God on one hand. On the other you want to say that the supposed "one text" / "one ideology" view that I am suppose to hold violates many facets to God.Can you have it both ways Arach? Which criticism do you want to level at Christian theology? Either we make too many sides to God or we ignore the many sides to God?Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

That is not a mistake I made.

The following passage indicates that God wanted the Israelites to know Him by more than one name. The truth is clear. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had one experience of God and knew Him by one wonderful name, El Shaddai. Now God was going to take a further step with His people and they would know Him by another wonderful name, Jehovah. It is the same God. It is multifaceted God. And He is a God making Himself known by more than one name. Thus we have written to us -"I appeared ... as El Shaddai ... BUT by My name Jehovah I did not make Myself known to them."We should not think of this name matter as simply a different pronouncement or different sound. It means to experience God on a new plain of His nature and character. You have a point. The argument of the three friends of Job is indeed a typical reaction of the pious. You do not have to start with Paul to find the concept of two covenants. Jeremiah speaking from God promises a new covenant.However. I think I mean the character of "mercy" itself. You say mercy has a different flavor in the New Testament than from the Old Testament. In spiite of the two covenants, I think mercy is pretty much just mercy."His mercy endures forever," the Psalm 136 repeats again and again."Flavor of mercy" is a little fuzzy for me tio contemplate this morning.Anyway, I don't want to find myself straying the issue at hand. And that is the mystery of "Us" as used in Genesis and Isaiah. I need to go to the mountaintop and view the whole land. Then come down and remember the big picture.There is a place for what you say. But I think we are going to probably have some differences of interpretation. I think the big picture and the final destination of the whole revelation has to be seen clearly to stay calibrated.There are many many "curious" thinks in the Bible to make good conversation. I like to not be destracted too much from the big picture. How does it relate to the big picture?Anyway, that is all the time I have right now.You're point with Job I agree with.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

The Recovery Version reads as thus:"And I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as the All-sufficient God; but by My name Jehovah I did not make Myself known to them." (Exo. 6:3)I think your logic All-sufficient God does not equal a name but
Jehovah equals a name, is not a strong rational.Lets go back to Genesis and see how God used El Shaddai. If Abram had said to his wife and servants the next day "the All-sufficient God has made a covenant with me" I think we cannot discount that as as revealed identifying name for the God that he met.This name El Shaddai - All-sufficient God, was passed down from Abraham to his son Isaac. So Isaac also identified this covenanting God by the name El Shaddai. Then God again uses this identifying name to speak to the third generation Jacob: IMO, we certainly should count El Shaddai was one of the names for God in the Old Testament.The truth is clear. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had one experience of God and knew Him by one wonderful name, El Shaddai.and in any case: I trust the editorial staff of the publishers of the Recovery Version of the Bible. Dr. Kerry S. Robichaux being the main translator from Hebrew to English. I trust his spelling as both respectful and legitimate.It may not be the only possible transliteration. I don't think it is necessarily less respectful than your transliteration. In fact the RcV captitalizes El Shaddai whereas you do not captitalize your version of that identifier. So perhaps your version is less respectful. Where am I "shoe-horning pieces in where they don't actually fit."I have been away from the board for a few weeks. What specifically did you find me shoe-horning? Are we talking about "Us" being said by God in the Old Testament? I believe this refers to the Trinity. I believe that. I respect that others don't believe it, but I do.Is that the shoe horning you say I am doing?The word Genesis implies things in their beginning stage - like a seed. The basic revelations of the Bible are in seed form in the book of Genesis. It is the initial revelation and the rest of the Bible contains the development and maturation of those seed revelations.For example we are told that Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him (Abraham) as righteousness. If I said as the Apostle Paul said, that this was an early indication of God's desire to justify by faith would you say "Oh no. You are shoehorning in a foriegn concept into the Hebrew Bible"?What you call "shoe-horning" I call say is your failure to recognize that the major revelations of the whole Bible are found in their initial seed form in Genesis. Justification by faith is there in Genesis in seed form. And I believe the Triune God is also there seen in the phrases including God saying of Himself "Let Us".I know you seem to be always trying to conserve some idea you have of Jewish purity of the Old Testament. And I think in some sense that can be done yet without forcing a barrier, a wall between the Old and New Testament which mostly based on human cultural elements and overlooks that a Divine Mind is overseeing the writing.There are divine truths which I think transcend the cultural elements which you are so eager to preserve. I think the problem is not with me shoehorning. The problem is with you trying to perform excorcism on all New Testament truth seen in seed form in Genesis.Abraham beleived God. And it was counted to him for righteousness.(See Gen. 15:6)Is that also shoe horning Pauline theology into the Old Testament? Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I still believe that the writers were inpsired/guided/ spoken to by God."The problem" for some "Well how can every single part of the Bible claim universal agreement from all readers?" I don't think universal agreement effects the inspiration of the Bible. I don't think that different opinions on how to interpret passages demonstrates that the Bible is not inspired.For one, some things seem more important than others.Some things (for a given time) seem more important than others.Some things (for a particlar age) seem to stand out in greater importance than other things.Behind the Bible is the living Spirit of the Bible illuminating portions that speak to a particular age the burden of God for that age.I don't think believers in God are left to themselves. Behind the living book is the living God assisting in our understanding.I don't think cooperation with God's plan depends on "getting it right" on every single issue. We can afford to say here and there that we are not sure what was meant as I have done. And you noted that. I may change my mind.I believe that God has spoken. I can't follow that with a belief that God is so incompetent or didn't have the foresight to realize that everything would be lost in translation and copying. That would be too bad. Do you think everything was lost in translation?Well, there are crucial matters which seem to be repeated in so many different ways that if we didn't get clear in one part we are likely to get clear in another part.Then there is the issue that God looks for our obedience. If He gives truth to us and we obey that, He will then give us a little more. There is such a thing as "premature knowledge". A certain passage may not at the present be benefitial to my spritual growth. That is why I do not understand it. Latter when my obediance to what I do understand is made secure, the Holy Spirit at that time may guide me into widened and deeper understanding.I don't think the Bible is mainly given to satisfy man's curiosity. "God breathed" or inpsired involves God imparting something of His life and of Himself into the open hearted reader. My life has been edified and even changed by verses which I don't fully understand.To him who has will more be given. He who has not, even what he has will be taken away. This was taught by Christ. I may not be able to interpret 75% of a book in the Bible. But if I am open to God the 25% that He has touched my heart with and I do understand I can embrace with faith and live by it.I don't think we are left alone. I don't think we have to concur 1000% on every detail of teaching. I don't think that God is not in the picture to assist us. And I don't think I should throw up hands in dispair that His word has all been lost in translation and copying so as to make serious study of God's word a fruitless task.Neither should lose appreciation with how amazingly little central and cardinal truths have really been effected by centries of copying. I mean we know that there is a problem with how many horses Solomon had in his stalls. But that Christ is God incarnate and rose from the dead seems uneffected by many copies. Or that God was Yahweh of the Hebrews and a Creator of the world.Many many major doctrines which can be our guides for the rest of our lives are clear. I don't think I need to say that it is all lost and that God should have consulted more with us that we could educate Him on the problems of different human opinions which would arise.Rather, with time, patience, humility, and flexibility the layers of God's revelation can be pierced deeper and deeper in our understanding. There may not be two Christians on earth who agree on every single point of doctrine. But I can testify that still thousands, tens of thousands, even millions come together around the glorious truths that we are clear about. And we see God build us up and together in love.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I agree with this except that I would capitalize Father, Son, and Spirit.And coming back to the "Us" of Genesis, this is the same "Us" of the Triune God as mentioned in the powerful prayer of the Son to the Father in John 17. That prayerful climax was for the completion of the perfecting of the saved believers in Christ into a divine / human oneness by being mingled with God.Jesus Christ prays: The God Who said "Let Us make man in Our Image, and according to Our likeness ..." (Gen. 1:26) is the same God Who in the New Testament as God incarnated in a man Jesus said " ... even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us ..."The oneness of the believers in the Triune God must be "perfected". It must be arrived at through the process of God dispensing Christ more and more into the entire beings of all the believers. As you said "The spirit of the two is simultaneously the multipresent spirit of both father and son ...".In His new testament salvation the Triune God dispenses this "multi-present" , "life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45) into His redeemed people for thier transformation and building up in love. God Himself as the oneness is building Himself into the corporate group of believers to make them one in the divine "Us" Who created man in His image for His eternal purpose.The Divine "Us" of the Trinity us dispensed into the believers to perfect them eventually into the city New Jerusalem. This is carried out by means of the divine "We" of the Father and the Son (in the Holy Spirit) coming to make an abode within each believer: For Christ and the Father to make an abode with the believer should not be taken lightly. This is only initiated by being regenerated in the born again experience. It is a process which eventually leads, whether in this age, or in the next age, to Christ and His Father saturating, filling, totally dispensing the Divine life and nature of God into His people. God wants to therefore build Himself into His redeemed people and be the very factor of oneness of this new race of divine/human, deified humanity.He said "Let Us" make man in our image so that He could build the divine "Us" into man for the producing of His Bride and Wife, the New Jerusalem of Revelation 21 and 22.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

The point which qumusaburo makes is important. The fall of man has damaged the mind of man. Sin has damaged the thinking of man. The mind is the leading part of the human soul. And the salvation of the New Testament includes the renewing of the damaged mind.Transformation of the soul by the Holy Spirit takes place by the renewing of the mind Romans 12:2.G.H. Pember wrote:" ... intellect is not merely fallible, but the most dangerous of all gifts, unless it be guided by the Spirit of God. For it can call evil good, and good evil: it can put darkness for light, and light for darkness; bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter."Ron Kangus wrote:"Surely the fall and the entrance of sin into our being has not left our mind unaffected. Although our mind can still think, reason, consider, imagine, and remember, it has been poisoned, and now it is powerfully influenced by the sin in our flesh. It is vital for every believer in Christ to see the state of his fallen natural mind in the light of God's Word."

​

[Mind Bending or Mind Renewing, Ron Kangus, Gene Ford -Publisher,1977, pg.14] Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I think spiritual experience is important too in the work of translation.If we cannot discern between our human spirit and the Spirit which is God Himself we will have difficulty understanding what the New Testament means in certain places.I am told that every translation is also an interpretation. I have no problem with that. It is probably true to a degree. Hopefully the interpretation of those with experience in spiritual life will reflect helpfully and positively on the scholarship.There are also no chapter or verse numbers in the original Greek text. However, some find the chapter and verse numbers helpful. Although I would not mind once in my life reading the Bible completely free from chapter and verse numbers.Anyway, it is important to discern the difference between the human spirit and the Holy Spirit which is God Himself. And it is important to see when the human spirit and the Holy Spirit are united to be "one spirit". For example First Cor. 6:7 "He who is joined to the Lord is one spirit"That means the human spirit and the Holy Spirit are united to be one blended and mingled spirit. Such truths are not trivial in the experience seeking readers of the Bible.If every instance of spirit is in small letters, readers will have difficulty knowing what the word of God means in many places."The Lord be with your spirit""God is Spirit and they who worship Him must worship in spirit and in reality"" ... the spirit of your mind""Now the Lord is the Spirit""the last Adam became a life giving Spirit""the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak""The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God ."(Rom. 8:16) Here is a verse where the capital S Spirit and the small s spirit help the reader to understand what the word of God means.And that knowing is based not only on liturary scholarship but also spiritual experience. Those who experience the Spirit who is God being with their human spirit through regeneration lend a helpful hand to guide readers into the meaning.Sure, someone with only Greek knowledge may translate that with all small letters to be "true to the original text". But academically it may be pure. Experiencially it is not clear. And God wants us to search the Scripture to find Him as life.So I praise God for those with experience who also have the skill of translation. And through their experience help the reader to navigate through difficult passages about the interaction between God and man with clarity.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I am not sure I contradicted this last sentence at all. Let me first give you the whole quote of the Recovery Version of verses 26 an 27. I have no complaint that the same word is used for God in both verse 26 and 27. But in 26 you have "Us" refering to this God. And in verse 27 you have "His" refering to God.We do not see "Us" paired with "Thier". We see "Us" coupled with "His" and with "He".It is rather mysterious. And my opinion is that this is a window into the triune nature of God which is lattered developed in subsequent books of the divine revelation.A helpful footnote of the Recovery Version reads for Gen.1:26: Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Some belief not shared yet by "the rest of humanity" may be belief in what is the truth.Certainly "the rest of humanity" doesn't share some of the opinions you have expressed here either.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Moses wrote "Let Us ..." in obedience to the God. He could have written "Let Me ..." but he did not. At least in these three places in Genesis he did not (Genesis 1:26; 3:22; 11:7).We might add Isaiah 6:8 which also contains the Divine "Us".We cannot blame that on a New Testament writer or expositor. You have to blame Moses for introducing this puzzle or mystery.Moses wrote "the man has become like one of Us". You have to realize that this was penned by this prophet and man of God. If it is mysterious, ( and I beleive it quite is ), you have to lay responsibility for that at the feet of the writer of Genesis.You cannot blame Christians for what was written there in Genesis.Now here is something you may blame Christians for writing. However I believe that it is the truth: Here the apostle Paul writes of things which were revealed to the New Testament apostles and prophets which were not made known to the sons of men.The New Testament apostles and prophets had revelation from God which was not previously revealed to sons of men in previous generations.There is no explicit claim concerning the "Us" in Genesis in this passage. However, the apostle John writes of the Father, Son, as the life giving Holy Spirit being the Divine "We" coming into man to make an abode with the lovers of Christ. I am pursuaded that the Divine "Us" of Genesis ultimately is the same God as the Divine "We" in the Gospel of John.The interpretation is "retrospective" only in the sense that revelations not made known to the sons of men in pre-new covenant age times has now been revealed to God's holy apostles and prophets in spirit in the New Testament age.Both the Divine "Us" and the Divine "We" have to be understood in relation to God dispensing His life into man. God is Triune for the purpose of imparting His life into man.The law of Moses could not give God's life to man. It could expose man as to how much man needed salvation from being apart from God. God's intention from the creation was that man would receive into his being the life of God. This is why he placed Adam before the tree of life. After man's transgression and fall God gave the law to totally expose all fallen sinners. But the law could not give life.Christ came to be Redeemer and life imparter - life giver by giving to man Himself - "the last Adam became a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45)So this Divine "We" of the New Testament Gospel of John is the same Triune God as the Divine "Us" coming as a man, dying for our redemption on the cross, resurrecting, and becoming "a life giving Spirit" to dispense the life of God into His believers Jew and Gentiles.If the interpetation of the Trinity being seen in the Genesis "Us" it is because the fuller disclosure of the dispensing of God into man as Divine life is much more revealed in the new covenant than in the old.Paul says that the law was a child-conductor leading us up to faith in Christ:"So then the law has become our child-conductor unto Christ that we might be justified our of faith." (Gal. 3:24)The image of the law of Moses here is as a tutor or accompaning instructor leading the student into deeper knowledge and more complete understanding. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.