was no God formed, neither shall there be after Me', and leave the comparison

to do its own work.  Peter declares that there is no other name under heaven

given among men whereby we must be saved.  The title 'Saviour' belongs pre -

eminently to the Lord Jesus Christ -- yet if we are to take the words of

Isaiah as true, Jehovah has already declared that beside Himself 'there is no

Saviour' (Isa. 43:11; 45:21).  These Scriptural statements demand our careful

attention.  Before we can proceed, therefore, in the investigation of this

most wonderful theme, we propose to seek an answer to the following

The teaching of the Bible is entirely in favour of the Unity of

God.  God is One; all other gods are false.  This being so, there

must have been an imperative necessity for the employment of the

plural Elohim in Genesis 1:1.  Humanly speaking it would appear

to have been an error of the first magnitude for Moses, in his

endeavour to teach a people just out of idolatrous Egypt that

there is but One God, to use the plural form in the very opening

sentence of revealed truth, yet he did.

Upon examination, we shall discover that many of the prooftexts

for the doctrine of Divine Unity, do not teach that God is one,

but that Jehovah is one.  It will therefore be incumbent upon us

to discover the meaning and the relationship of this title to the

doctrine of the One God.

Arising out of this investigation will be the fact that the

Jehovah of the Old Testament is found to be the Lord of the New

Testament and we are left in no doubt as to the fact that The one

Lord of the New Testament is the Saviour, the Son of God Himself,

The Man Christ Jesus.

Again and again we read that God is incomparable.  That no

likeness of Him is possible or permitted.  Yet the same Bible

declares that man was made in the Image and after the likeness of

Elohim; that Moses beheld the 'similitude' of the Lord, and that

Christ is 'the Image of the invisible God'.

In spite of the declaration that God is invisible, that 'no man

hath seen nor can see' Him, that 'no man hath seen God at any

time', the same Scriptures record that the elders of Israel 'saw

the God of Israel ... they saw God' (Exod. 24:10,11).

As these matters are investigated, other items of extreme interest will

come to light, but it would only be an encumbrance to attempt to make a list

of them here.  The first item that demands attention, therefore, is the

reason for the employment of the plural form Elohim for God, and to this we

must address ourselves.  There is no possible doubt that Elohim is a plural

noun, the A.V. so translates it in Genesis 3:5 'gods' and in over two hundred

places.  When we remember the idolatry which had surrounded Israel during

their sojourn in Egypt, the law against all other gods given at Sinai and the

extreme need to safeguard this basic doctrine, it is evident that some most

imperative necessity compelled Moses to employ such a term, especially when a

singular form, Eloah, was in use and employed very freely in the Book of Job.

The translation 'gods' meets us not only in Genesis 3, but in Genesis 31:32;

35:2,4 and in over fifty other places in the Pentateuch.  Side by side with

the strange use of the title, Elohim, however, is another feature which

materially alters the proposition, for the plural noun which ordinarily

employs a plural verb, is here found associated with the verb in the

singular.  Rules of grammar arise out of the nature of things.  Because

mankind is made up of male and female, we must have the 'he' and 'she'.

Because we sometimes speak of man in the singular and sometimes in the