Skip to content

Grammar Analysis: Genesis 1:26–27

The divine "let us make" (נַעֲשֶׂה) — 1cp cohortative inside a 3ms narrative frame, with 1cp pronominal suffixes on "image/likeness" in v.26 abruptly shifting to 3ms suffixes and 3ms verbs in v.27. Context-neutral grammatical exposition of the number-agreement asymmetry and the four main explanations.

Text

Genesis 1:26

Hebrew (BHS): וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אֱלֹהִ֔ים נַֽעֲשֶׂ֥ה אָדָ֛ם בְּצַלְמֵ֖נוּ כִּדְמוּתֵ֑נוּ וְיִרְדּוּ֩ בִדְגַ֨ת הַיָּ֜ם וּבְעֹ֣וף הַשָּׁמַ֗יִם וּבַבְּהֵמָה֙ וּבְכָל־הָאָ֔רֶץ וּבְכָל־הָרֶ֖מֶשׂ הָֽרֹמֵ֥שׂ עַל־הָאָֽרֶץ׃

KJV: "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."

Genesis 1:27

Hebrew (BHS): וַיִּבְרָ֨א אֱלֹהִ֤ים ׀ אֶת־הָֽאָדָם֙ בְּצַלְמֹ֔ו בְּצֶ֥לֶם אֱלֹהִ֖ים בָּרָ֣א אֹתֹ֑ו זָכָ֥ר וּנְקֵבָ֖ה בָּרָ֥א אֹתָֽם׃

KJV: "So God created man in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."

Word-by-Word Parsing

Genesis 1:26

# Hebrew Lemma Parsing Gloss
1 וַ ו Conj. and
2 יֹּ֣אמֶר אמר Verb.Qal.Wayq.3ms said
3 אֱלֹהִ֔ים אלהים Noun.mp.Abs God(s)
4 נַֽעֲשֶׂ֥ה עשׂה Verb.Qal.Impf.1p (cohortative) let us make
5 אָדָ֛ם אדם Noun.ms.Abs human, mankind
6 בְּ ב Prep in
7 צַלְמֵ֖נוּ צלם Noun.ms.Abs.+1cp our image
8 כִּ כ Prep as / after
9 דְמוּתֵ֑נוּ דמות Noun.fs.Abs.+1cp our likeness
10 וְ ו Conj. and
11 יִרְדּוּ֩ רדה Verb.Qal.Impf.3mp let them rule
12 בִ ב Prep over
13 דְגַ֨ת דגה Noun.fs.Cst fish of
14 הַיָּ֜ם ים Art+Noun.ms.Abs the sea
15 וּבְעֹ֣וף עוף Conj+Prep+Noun.ms.Cst and over birds of
16 הַשָּׁמַ֗יִם שׁמים Art+Noun.mp.Abs the heavens
17 וּבַבְּהֵמָה֙ בהמה Conj+Prep+Art+Noun.fs.Abs and over the cattle
18 וּבְכָל־הָאָ֔רֶץ כל / ארץ Conj+Prep+Cst + Art+Noun and over all the earth
19 וּבְכָל־הָרֶ֖מֶשׂ כל / רמשׂ Conj+Prep+Cst + Art+Noun and over every creeping thing
20 הָֽרֹמֵ֥שׂ רמשׂ Art+Verb.Qal.Ptcp.ms.Abs that creeps
21 עַל־הָאָֽרֶץ על / ארץ Prep + Art+Noun upon the earth

Genesis 1:27

# Hebrew Lemma Parsing Gloss
1 וַ ו Conj. and
2 יִּבְרָ֨א ברא Verb.Qal.Wayq.3ms created
3 אֱלֹהִ֤ים אלהים Noun.mp.Abs God(s)
4 אֶת את Prep (obj. marker) —
5 הָֽאָדָם֙ אדם Art+Noun.ms.Abs the man
6 בְּ ב Prep in
7 צַלְמֹ֔ו צלם Noun.ms.Abs.+3ms his image
8 בְּ ב Prep in
9 צֶ֥לֶם צלם Noun.ms.Cst image of
10 אֱלֹהִ֖ים אלהים Noun.mp.Abs God
11 בָּרָ֣א ברא Verb.Qal.Perf.3ms he created
12 אֹתֹ֑ו את Prep.+3ms him
13 זָכָ֥ר זכר Adj.ms.Abs male
14 וּנְקֵבָ֖ה נקבה Conj+Noun.fs.Abs and female
15 בָּרָ֥א ברא Verb.Qal.Perf.3ms he created
16 אֹתָֽם את Prep.+3mp them

Clause Structure (BHSA)

Genesis 1:26 — Four clauses

# Type Domain Text Function
1 WayX Narrative וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אֱלֹהִ֔ים narrative frame: 3ms wayyiqtol + mp subject
2 ZYq0 Quotation נַעֲשֶׂ֥ה אָדָ֛ם בְּצַלְמֵ֖נוּ כִּדְמוּתֵ֑נוּ 1cp cohortative inside speech
3 WYq0 Quotation וְיִרְדּוּ֩ בִדְגַ֨ת הַיָּ֜ם … 3mp yiqtol dominion clause
4 Ptcp Quotation הָרֹמֵ֥שׂ עַל־הָאָֽרֶץ attributive participle

Genesis 1:27 — Three clauses

# Type Domain Text Function
1 WayX Narrative וַיִּבְרָ֨א אֱלֹהִ֤ים אֶת־הָֽאָדָם֙ בְּצַלְמֹ֔ו 3ms wayyiqtol + mp subject + 3ms object + 3ms suffix
2 xQt0 Narrative בְּצֶ֥לֶם אֱלֹהִ֖ים בָּרָ֣א אֹתֹ֑ו fronted adjunct + 3ms qatal (poetic inversion)
3 xQt0 Narrative זָכָ֥ר וּנְקֵבָ֖ה בָּרָ֥א אֹתָֽם fronted objects + 3ms qatal + 3mp object (collective)

Construct Chains

  • Gen 1:26: דְגַת הַיָּם (fish of the sea), עוֹף הַשָּׁמַיִם (birds of heaven), כָל־הָאָרֶץ (all the earth), כָל־הָרֶמֶשׂ (every creeping thing)
  • Gen 1:27: צֶלֶם אֱלֹהִים (image of God) — single construct chain, 3ms verbal agreement

The Grammatical Asymmetry at a Glance

Feature Gen 1:26 (speech) Gen 1:27 (narrative)
Verb of creation נַעֲשֶׂה Qal Impf.1cp ("let us make") וַיִּבְרָא / בָּרָא Qal Wayq/Perf.3ms ("he created")
Pronominal suffix on צלם צַלְמֵ֫נוּ +1cp ("our image") צַלְמוֹ +3ms ("his image")
Pronominal suffix on דמות כִּדְמוּתֵ֫נוּ +1cp ("our likeness") —
Dominion verb וְיִרְדּוּ Impf.3mp ("let them rule") —
Object of creation אָדָם (generic ms) הָאָדָם (articular ms) → אֹתוֹ (3ms) → אֹתָם (3mp)
Subject of creation אֱלֹהִים (mp form) אֱלֹהִים (mp form)

The subject-noun אֱלֹהִים is morphologically plural in both verses, but the finite verbs of v.26's narrative frame (וַיֹּאמֶר) and v.27's entire report (וַיִּבְרָא … בָּרָא … בָּרָא) are 3ms singular. The first-person-plural morphology is confined to the direct-speech interior of v.26 (the cohortative and the two suffixes). This asymmetry — singular frame + plural speech-interior + singular execution — is the load-bearing grammatical fact of the pericope.

Key Grammatical Features

1. נַעֲשֶׂה — Qal Cohortative 1cp of עשׂה ("let us make")

  • Parsing: Verb.Qal.Impf.1p — semantically the cohortative, the 1st-person volitive counterpart to the 2nd-person imperative and the 3rd-person jussive. Formally a short-vowel yiqtol of a III-ה root (expected שׁ-ewa rather than full qamets-he because III-ה verbs do not take the paragogic ה of the typical cohortative, cf. GKC §75l, §108d).
  • Significance — the volitional first-person plural: Waltke–O'Connor §34.5.1a: "The cohortative expresses the will or strong desire of the speaker. In cases where the speaker has the ability to carry out an inclination it takes on the coloring of resolve ('I will…'). In other cases, where the speaker cannot effect a desire without the consent of the one addressed, it connotes request ('May I…'). The sense is optative in the broadest sense." The 1cp form extends the class to shared/deliberative volition: "let us…," "may we…," "come, we will…." Waltke–O'Connor §34.1 catalogues the volitional class as: 1st-person cohortative / 2nd-person imperative / 3rd-person jussive — "The once separate forms now work together to form a volitional class" (WO p. 638).
  • The cohortative here is not addressed to a human audience. There is no vocative, no 2ms imperative apodosis, no "let us, with you," and no human candidate in the preceding narrative. The addressee of the 1cp must be reconstructed from context. This is the crux of the interpretive problem: the grammar marks the utterance as volitive-plural, but does not identify the referent of the plural.
  • Parallel Genesis cohortative-1cp divine-speech events:
  • Gen 1:26 נַעֲשֶׂה (this verse)
  • Gen 3:22 הָיָה כְּאַחַד מִמֶּנּוּ (1cp pronominal "of us," no cohortative but same plural referent)
  • Gen 11:7 הָבָה נֵרְדָה וְנָבְלָה (twin cohortative-1cp with paragogic ה)
  • Also: Isa 6:8 מִי יֵלֶךְ לָנוּ (1cp dative, divine council throne-room)
  • Grammar reference: qal-imperfect; see also gen-11-7 and gen-3-22 passage entries which treat the same 1cp/3ms switch.

2. בְּצַלְמֵנוּ כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ — Parallel Prepositional Phrases with 1cp Pronominal Suffixes

  • Parsing:
  • בְּצַלְמֵנוּ = Prep בְּ + Noun.ms.Abs צֶלֶם + Pronominal suffix -נוּ (1cp "our") ("in our image")
  • כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ = Prep כְּ + Noun.fs.Abs דְּמוּת + Pronominal suffix -נוּ (1cp "our") ("as/like our likeness")
  • Morphology of the 1cp suffix: BDB Hebrew Grammar (2005) p. 97 catalogs the 1cp pronominal suffix: on singular nouns / segholates, the 1cp is ◌ֵנוּ (linking vowel tsere + nun + shureq); on plural nouns, ◌ֵינוּ. Waltke–O'Connor §16.4 (p. 359): "The uses of the pronominal suffixes is our chief concern here, but a few words about their morphology may be useful to begin with… first common נִי / -ִי (sg.) / נוּ (pl.)." Neither construction is morphologically ambiguous: -נוּ on בְּצַלְמֵ- and כִּדְמוּתֵ- is unambiguously 1st-person common plural ("our"), distinct from 3ms -וֹ ("his"), 3mp -ָם ("their"), 1cs -י ("my"). The surface segol-tsere vocalization is the regular form with segholate (צֶלֶם) and II-ו/י (דְּמוּת) bases.
  • Two prepositions, parallel not synonymous:
  • בְּ (beth) + צלם — most commonly locative ("in"), but grammarians have debated whether a beth essentiae ("as, consisting of, in the capacity of") is in view here. Waltke–O'Connor §11.2.5 treats beth essentiae as a recognized category (though disputed in its scope).
  • כְּ (kaph) + דמות — the comparative preposition ("like, as, after the pattern of"). The rabbinic and medieval commentators (Ibn Ezra, Rashi) read the two as roughly equivalent and mutually defining; modern grammarians typically read the beth as "in" (locative-figurative, "in our image-stamp") and the kaph as "according to" (comparative, "after our likeness"). Either way, the parallelism of the 1cp suffixes is preserved — the image and the likeness are predicated of the same plural subject.
  • Lexical companion studies: צֶלֶם (tselem, H6754) and דְּמוּת (demut, H1823) — no canonical word-study entries yet in the library; flagged as gaps (see closing section).

3. וְיִרְדּוּ — Qal Imperfect 3mp ("let them rule")

  • Parsing: Conj וְ + Verb.Qal.Impf.3mp of רדה ("tread, rule").
  • Significance — plural agreement with collective אָדָם: The object created in v.26b, אָדָם, is morphologically ms.Abs singular, yet the dominion verb that follows has a 3mp plural subject ("let them rule"). The plural pronoun resumes אָדָם as a collective referring to humanity as a class — anticipated by v.27's זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה ("male and female") and explicit 3mp suffix אֹתָם ("them"). The grammatical move — singular אָדָם + plural verbal concord — is the canonical Hebrew device for collective-human reference (constructio ad sensum). Futato, Beginning Biblical Hebrew p. 180, notes that "a collective noun — that is, a singular noun referring to a group or collection of [persons/things] — may take plural verbal agreement."
  • This plural is a different plural from v.26a's 1cp cohortative. וְיִרְדּוּ is 3mp (they, masc.pl.) referring to the creatures being made; נַעֲשֶׂה is 1cp (we, common pl.) referring to the speaker(s). Conflating them ("God made them so they would rule") misreads the agreement pattern.

4. Wayyiqtol Frame + Qal Perfect Execution in v.27

  • Parsing chain:
  • וַיִּבְרָא — Verb.Qal.Wayq.3ms of ברא, "and he created"
  • בָּרָא (×2) — Verb.Qal.Perf.3ms of ברא, "he created"
  • אֹתוֹ — object marker + 3ms suffix, "him"
  • אֹתָם — object marker + 3mp suffix, "them"
  • Significance — the execution narrative is relentlessly singular. The three consecutive verbs of creation in v.27 are all 3ms. There is no 1cp or 3mp predicate of creation anywhere in v.27. The plural-sounding "us/our" of v.26 has no morphological echo in the execution. Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar §124g (quoted below under interpretation 1) directly notes this feature as the structural reason for the plural-of-majesty reading, and also the reason other readings must account for why the "plurality" disappears at the moment of action.
  • The clause structure repeats the creation-verb three times:
  • WayX (v.27a): God + obj.-acc. הָאָדָם + locative בְּצַלְמוֹ (+3ms suffix)
  • xQt0 (v.27b): fronted בְּצֶלֶם אֱלֹהִים (construct chain, no suffix) + 3ms verb + 3ms object
  • xQt0 (v.27c): fronted זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה + 3ms verb + 3mp object
  • The triad creates a chiastic-like emphasis on the image of God / he / them which most commentators read as poetic heightening (cf. the tri-colon structure of Gen 1:27 often set out as verse in modern critical editions). Waltke–O'Connor's §39.3 discussion of fronted-adjunct xQt0 clauses treats this as informational prominence, not temporal backgrounding.
  • Grammar reference: qal-imperfect; syntax-waw-conjunction.

5. אֱלֹהִים — Plural-Form Noun with Singular Verbal Agreement

  • Parsing: Noun.mp.Abs throughout — morphologically a masculine plural in ים- .
  • Significance — the most-discussed honorific-plural in biblical Hebrew: Waltke–O'Connor §7.4.3b (p. 154): "Most honorific plurals in the Bible involve the God of Israel, and the most common of these is אֱלֹהִים, used about twenty-five hundred times. When used of the God of Israel, this term usually takes singular agreement." Waltke–O'Connor continues with exempla of honorific plurals (Elohim, Qedoshim "Holy One," Adonim "Lord") and notes that the honorific-plural class also contains ordinary-majesty plurals applied to human rulers (Gen 24:9ff; Ex 21:4, 21:29, baʿălîm "master, owner") — the category is not uniquely divine. Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar §124g–i (p. 419): "plurals which have a singular meaning (§124 a) are frequently construed with the singular, especially the pluralis excellentiae or maiestatis (§g–i; on the union of these plurals with attributes, cf. §132 h), as אֱלֹהִים Gn 1:1, 3, &c. … אֲדֹנִים master, Ex 21:4; בְּעָלִים master, owner, Ex 21:29…" GKC §124g (p. 388): "The pluralis excellentiae or pluralis maiestatis is joined, as a rule, to the singular of the attribute, e.g. Ps 7:10 אֱלֹהִים צַדִּיק; 2 K 19:4, 16; Is 19:4." GKC §124h elaborates: "The pluralis excellentiae or maiestatis … is properly a variety of the abstract plural, since it sums up the several characteristics belonging to the idea, besides possessing the secondary sense of an intensification of the original idea."
  • This is the grammatical baseline that every interpretation of the 1cp cohortative must accept. The mp-form אֱלֹהִים regularly takes 3ms singular verbal agreement (as it does in both v.26's וַיֹּאמֶר and v.27's וַיִּבְרָא). The question the cohortative raises is not whether אֱלֹהִים can mean a singular-referent deity — grammar settles that in the affirmative — but why the direct-speech interior of v.26 breaks with the singular pattern while the narrative frame and the execution preserve it.

The Four Main Interpretations of the 1cp Cohortative

All four readings accept the grammatical data above. They differ on what the 1cp "us/our" refers to. Each is laid out context-neutrally with its strongest grammatical support and its principal grammatical difficulty.

Interpretation 1: Plural of Majesty (Pluralis Maiestatis)

  • Claim: The 1cp cohortative is the verbal analog of the honorific-plural noun אֱלֹהִים. Just as the plural form אֱלֹהִים can denote a singular deity, a singular speaker can use a plural verb for self-reference of rank ("the royal we"). The "us" is one speaker speaking grandly.
  • Grammatical support cited:
  • GKC §124g note (p. 362): "This last name [plural of majesty] may have been suggested by the we used by kings when speaking of themselves (cf. already 1 Macc. 10:19; 11:31); and the plural used by God in Gn 1:26, 11:7, Is 6:8 has been incorrectly explained in this way. It is, however, either communicative (including the attendant angels; so at all events in Is 6:8, cf. also Gn 3:22), or according to others, an indication of the fullness of power and might implied in the divine name אֱלֹהִים." — GKC itself rejects the plural-of-majesty reading for this verse, preferring either a communicative (divine-council) reading or an intensive-fullness reading.
  • Gesenius §124g–i gives the plural-of-majesty as a real Hebrew category for nouns (אֱלֹהִים, אֲדֹנִים, בְּעָלִים), and Waltke–O'Connor §7.4.3 treats it as a real honorific-plural class.
  • Principal grammatical difficulty:
  • No clear extrabiblical or biblical attestation of a verbal plural-of-majesty in Hebrew prior to the post-biblical era. The known plurals-of-majesty are all nominal (noun morphology). Waltke–O'Connor §7.4.3 treats the category exclusively under noun morphology, not verb conjugation.
  • The royal-we of later Hebrew and other languages (e.g., Persian-court Aramaic) is arguably an areal-historical loan pattern that post-dates pentateuchal Hebrew.
  • Joüon–Muraoka §114e note 2 (as cited in the standard digest tradition): the plural-of-majesty is "grammatically the weakest" explanation for a 1cp verb with 1cp pronominal suffixes.
  • Status: Accepted as the standard reading in rabbinic-midrashic exegesis (e.g., Gen. Rabbah) and in Christian apologetic traditions that want to deflect Trinitarian readings, but explicitly rejected by GKC for this verse and treated skeptically by Waltke–O'Connor and Joüon–Muraoka.

Interpretation 2: Divine Council / Communicative Plural (Address to Heavenly Beings)

  • Claim: The 1cp is a communicative plural — God is speaking with the heavenly court (bene elohim, the angels, the divine council) and including them in the volitive. The "us" is God + the council; the "our" is God's and the council's shared image-pattern (not the council's participation in image-giving).
  • Grammatical support cited:
  • GKC §124g note (p. 362): "It is … either communicative (including the attendant angels; so at all events in Is 6:8, cf. also Gn 3:22)…" — Gesenius' own preferred reading.
  • Isa 6:8 מִי יֵלֶךְ לָנוּ ("who will go for us") — 1cp dative within a throne-room scene populated by seraphim (6:2–3) and identified as YHWH's council.
  • 1 Kgs 22:19–22 — explicit divine-council scene with YHWH asking "who will entice Ahab?"
  • Job 1–2; Ps 82:1; 89:5–7 — divine-council assembly scenes where YHWH presides over הָאֱלֹהִים / בְנֵי אֱלֹהִים / קְהַל קְדֹשִׁים.
  • Dan 7:9–10 — throne-room with thousands ministering, read by many as the backdrop for angelic-council language.
  • Principal grammatical difficulty:
  • The "our image/likeness" reading. If "us" = God + angels, then humans are made in "our (God's + angels') image" — but angels are nowhere else said to be the image-pattern of humans, and the later biblical theology restricts the image to God alone (Gen 5:1; 9:6; cf. James 3:9). Interpretive moves here include: (a) the "our" is a shared-throne-room pronominal that doesn't imply shared image-source; (b) humans are made in God's image with the council as witnesses (the "us" is communicative-pragmatic but the "image" is God's alone); (c) the council are themselves bearers of a divine-image-pattern shared with God.
  • Gen 1 nowhere else mentions angels or a council.
  • Status: The preferred reading of much modern critical scholarship (Westermann, von Rad, Gunkel, Wenham-optional) and of some rabbinic strands (Rashi partially, Ibn Ezra); also GKC's own choice.

Interpretation 3: Plural of Fullness / Intra-Divine Plurality (Trinity / Plural-in-God)

  • Claim: The 1cp reflects a genuine plurality internal to the one God. Christian dogmatic readings identify this as Trinitarian (Father addressing Son and Spirit, or the three persons in mutual deliberation); some Jewish mystical readings (later) see a plural of divine names/attributes. On this reading, the plural subject and the plural pronominal suffixes are substantive — the "us" is multiple divine persons, the "our image" is the one-shared-divine-image.
  • Grammatical support cited:
  • GKC §124g note (p. 362): Gesenius lists this as the alternative to the communicative reading: "or according to others, an indication of the fullness of power and might implied in the divine name אֱלֹהִים." Gesenius himself declines to endorse it but preserves it as one of the two live options.
  • The singular execution in v.27 is taken as consistent with one-God-in-plurality rather than disproof: the plural inside v.26's speech expresses internal deliberation among the divine persons; the singular of v.27 expresses the one-God acting outward.
  • Gen 1:26 + v.27 paired suffixes בְּצַלְמֵנוּ / בְּצַלְמוֹ are read as the first-person-internal perspective of the plural divine and the third-person-external perspective of the one God — the "our" and the "his" refer to the same image.
  • Elohim as plural form with singular agreement is read as morphologically encoding this very pattern — a plural noun that takes singular agreement because the referent is one-God-in-multiple.
  • Wider canonical witness: Gen 3:22, Gen 11:7, Isa 6:8 (same 1cp pattern, same divine speaker); Matt 28:19 (triadic name); John 1:1–3; Col 1:16 (Son's role in creation).
  • Principal grammatical difficulty:
  • The plural-of-fullness reading reads theology through grammar that the grammar does not itself force. The same plural morphology is compatible with majesty, council, and self-deliberation readings. Hebrew grammar alone cannot distinguish intra-divine plurality from the alternatives; the reading depends on canonical-theological prior commitments and the singular execution in v.27.
  • The Trinitarian-specific reading (three persons rather than two or more) is not distinguishable by the morphology — Hebrew 1cp includes "two-or-more" without numbering.
  • Status: The historic Christian reading (Augustine, Aquinas, Calvin, Keil–Delitzsch, Hengstenberg, Hamilton, Wenham-optional). Treated skeptically by modern grammarians qua grammarians (GKC, Joüon–Muraoka, Waltke–O'Connor) because the morphology underdetermines the referential claim, though the grammar is compatible with the reading.

Interpretation 4: Plural of Deliberation / Self-Address (Plural of Self-Exhortation)

  • Claim: The 1cp is a rhetorical-stylistic plural by which a single speaker addresses themselves deliberatively — "let me / let us (i.e., myself with myself)." It is the internal-speech analog of English "come, let's see what we can do here" uttered by one person to themselves. The "our" is the self-reflexive possessive of that deliberative speech act.
  • Grammatical support cited:
  • Joüon–Muraoka §114e (as catalogued by the cross-reference tradition in Waltke–O'Connor §34.5): the cohortative can express "self-exhortation" including plural-form self-address. Waltke–O'Connor p. 638 treats the cohortative as part of a volitional class whose semantics include resolve, self-imposition, and deliberation.
  • 2 Sam 24:14 (David's deliberation "let us fall by the hand of YHWH") and some similar pragmatic self-deliberation loci where the 1cp is non-inclusive of any clear human addressee.
  • Functional analogies in other languages (English "let's see, shall we?" uttered alone; Semitic-style self-deliberative plurals).
  • Principal grammatical difficulty:
  • The category "plural of deliberation" is less well established as a discrete grammatical class than either the plural of majesty or the communicative-plural. Waltke–O'Connor subsumes it under general cohortative semantics rather than listing it as a separate plural-subject category.
  • The pronominal suffixes -נוּ on "image" and "likeness" are not self-address morphology — they are genuine possessive plurals. Self-deliberation in other languages rarely produces "our/ours" of an external object (cf. a self-deliberating singular speaker saying "shall I make a creature in our image" is unusual English). The reading must generalize from cohortative verb to possessive suffix.
  • Status: A minority reading, associated with Joüon–Muraoka's cohortative-semantics framework and some medieval Jewish commentators. Treated as a live option but not the majority view.

Summary Comparison Matrix

Reading Referent of "us/our" Explains v.27's 3ms shift? Explains 1cp suffixes -נוּ? Grammar-textbook standing
1. Plural of Majesty One speaker, royal-we Yes (same speaker throughout, register shift) Yes (royal-we extended to possessive) GKC §124g rejects for this verse; W–O treats as nominal-only; Joüon calls it "weakest"
2. Divine Council / Communicative God + angels/bene elohim Yes (council witnesses; God alone executes) Difficult (angels as image-source?) GKC §124g prefers; Westermann, von Rad, Gunkel
3. Plural of Fullness / Trinity Multiple persons in the one God Yes (internal plurality → external unity) Yes (shared divine image) GKC §124g lists as alternative; Christian-dogmatic tradition
4. Plural of Deliberation / Self-Address One speaker self-addressing Yes (narrative resumes singular after deliberative speech) Difficult (self-address of external possession) Joüon §114e; minority in grammar tradition

Cross-reference: the identical 1cp/3ms asymmetry recurs at Gen 3:22 ("one of us" — 1cp preposition + singular YHWH speaker frame) and Gen 11:7 ("let us go down, let us confound" — twin cohortative-1cp with 3ms wayyiqtol frame at v.5 and v.8). The three passages constitute a coherent grammatical pattern across Genesis 1–11; see gen-3-22 and gen-11-7 for parallel analyses.

Contextual Grammatical Notes

The Wayyiqtol Narrative Frame of Both Verses

Both v.26 and v.27 open with Qal wayyiqtol 3ms forms (וַיֹּאמֶר, וַיִּבְרָא) — the canonical Hebrew narrative-past form. Waltke–O'Connor chapter 33 treats the wayyiqtol chain as the backbone of biblical-Hebrew narrative discourse, and §33.1 notes that the form encodes sequential foregrounded action relative to preceding clauses. The frame of vv.26–27 is thus standard narrative: "and he-said … let-us-make … and he-created." The 1cp is morphologically embedded inside the direct-speech quotation (Domain: Q in BHSA); the narrative frame around the speech is uniformly 3ms.

The Triple Repetition of ברא in v.27

Three occurrences of ברא in three successive clauses: 1. וַיִּבְרָא (Wayq.3ms) — narrative mainline 2. בָּרָא (Perf.3ms) — fronted-adjunct xQt0 (poetic inversion: "in the image of God created he him") 3. בָּרָא (Perf.3ms) — fronted-adjunct xQt0 ("male and female created he them")

Waltke–O'Connor §39.3 catalogs fronted-adjunct xQt0 as marking informational prominence / topicalization rather than temporal backgrounding. The triple ברא with fronted adjuncts is a recognized poetic-prose device in creation narrative and generally treated (by critical and conservative commentators alike) as a deliberate tricolon structuring the climactic creation of humanity. BHS and most modern critical editions set v.27 out as verse.

The choice of ברא rather than עשׂה in v.27 is itself worth noting: v.26 said "let us make (נַעֲשֶׂה)," and v.27 says "and he created (וַיִּבְרָא) … created (בָּרָא) … created (בָּרָא)." The verb-shift from עשׂה (general "make, do") to ברא (specialized divine-creative verb, Qal only with God as subject throughout the HB) intensifies the predicate — not just making but creating — and is also noted by Keil–Delitzsch as interpretively significant.

The צֶלֶם אֱלֹהִים Construct Chain (v.27b)

The single construct chain of v.27 — צֶלֶם אֱלֹהִים (the only one in the verse) — swaps the 1cp pronominal suffix of v.26 (בְּצַלְמֵנוּ) for an explicit nominal possessor (בְּצֶלֶם אֱלֹהִים). This is a direct resolution: v.26's "our image" is re-specified in v.27 as "image of God." The syntactic substitution (suffix → construct-absolute) functions as an internal gloss. On the interpretive options above: - Majesty/Trinity readings: "our" = "God's" — the substitution is a translation of first-person self-reference to third-person objective reference of the same referent. - Council readings: "our" (= God + council) is narrowed in v.27 to "God's alone" — the substitution disambiguates the image-source as God specifically, not the council. - Deliberation readings: "our" (self-address) maps onto "God's" as the same single referent seen from outside the deliberative speech.

All four readings must do some interpretive work on this substitution. Grammar alone licenses all four.

Cross-References

Grammar library

  • gen-3-22 — "like one of us" (1cp preposition + suffix; same divine speaker; four-way interpretive survey)
  • gen-11-7 — "let us go down, let us confound" (twin cohortative-1cp; five-way interpretive survey)

Canonical patterns

  • Isa 6:8 מִי יֵלֶךְ לָנוּ (1cp dative, throne-room) — extends the Genesis 1–11 pattern into the prophetic-call literature
  • 1 Kgs 22:19–22; Job 1:6; Ps 82:1; 89:5–7 — divine-council scenes relevant to interpretation 2
  • John 1:1–3, 1:14; Col 1:15–16; Heb 1:2–3; 2 Cor 4:4 (εἰκὼν τοῦ θεοῦ) — NT reception of the tselem Elohim theme

Word-study gaps (flagged for future creation)

  • H6754 צֶלֶם (tselem, "image") — no canonical entry; 17 OT occurrences covering Gen 1:26, 27 (×2); 5:3; 9:6; Num 33:52; 1 Sam 6:5, 11; 2 Kgs 11:18; Ps 39:7; 73:20; Ezek 7:20; 16:17; 23:14; Am 5:26; 2 Chr 23:17; Dan 3:1 (Aramaic form). Semantic range: "statue, representational image, likeness, shadow-image." Load-bearing for the image-of-God theology.
  • H1823 דְּמוּת (demut, "likeness") — no canonical entry; 25 OT occurrences; cf. Gen 1:26; 5:1, 3; 2 Kgs 16:10; Ezek 1:5, 10, 13, 16, 22, 26, 28; 8:2; 10:1, 10, 21, 22; 23:15; Dan 10:16. Semantic range: "likeness, pattern, resemblance." Load-bearing for the tselem / demut pair.
  • H430 אֱלֹהִים (Elohim) — no canonical entry; ~2,500 OT occurrences. Load-bearing for every plural-form-with-singular-agreement question.
  • H120 אָדָם (adam, "human, mankind") — no canonical entry; load-bearing for the corporate-collective interpretation of the image-bearer.
  • H1254 בָּרָא (bara, "create") — no canonical entry; Qal always with God as subject across the HB; load-bearing for the divine-only creative-act lexeme.
  • H6213 עשׂה (asah, "make, do") — no canonical entry; general-purpose making verb contrasted with ברא.

Grammar citations: GKC = Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar (Kautzsch–Cowley, 1910 Eng. ed.); W–O / IBHS = Waltke–O'Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (1990); BDB Grammar (2005); Joüon–Muraoka (Subsidia Biblica 27, 2006); Futato, Beginning Biblical Hebrew. Morphological parsing from ETCBC/BHSA via hebrew_parser.py; English glosses from the corpus gloss table.