All things necessary, convenient, and delightful, being prepared for the accommodation of Man: light, that he might see; air, that he might hear and breathe; dry land, on which he might walk; herbs and fruit-trees, for his gratification and sustenance; fish, fowl, cattle, and creeping things, for his service: then God proceeded to make him, as the last and greatest display of his wisdom and power, the master-piece of all sublunary creatures, whose creation alone is represented in the sacred History, as an effect resulting from a divine consultation. “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” It appears from the ingenious Parable of Protagoras in Plato, it was a very ancient opinion that man was last created after the other living creatures.
In all the former works, God only said, Let such and such things be, and they were; he spake the word, and it was done. But now, when Man was to be made, God is spoken of as calling a council, “Let us make man, in our image, after our likeness.” This imports that Man was to be a creature different from all that had been produced, and far more excellent and wonderful in his constitution; a compound of flesh and spirit, heaven and earth, put together, the visible image of the Divine glory, and dedicated and devoted to his Creator’s service. Man was the work of Elohim, the Divine Plurality, marked here more distinctly by the plural pronouns us and our; all the Three Subsistencies in the Godhead are represented as united in counsel and effort to bring into existence this astonishing creature.
Aben Ezra, a Jewish Rabbi, imagined that the souls of all men were made on the first day of the creation, and that God consulted them to obtain their consent before he would assign them bodies of flesh, hereafter to be created. This is a groundless hypothesis, derived from the Platonic philosophy; for God says, “Let us make man in our image,” which shows that Adam’s soul had then no existence, for in that case, it doubtless would have been in the image of God.
Some other Jewish Doctors, as Manasseh ben Israel, ridiculously conceived that God spake to the elements. But this is more absurd than the former; for the expression, “Let us make man,” implies capacity of consultation in those spoken to, and real efficiency. But the elements are not intelligent beings, neither efficient, but only material parts of man.
Nor does God here speak to the angels, as the authority of the Paraphrase, which is called Jonathan’s, suggests. The words of the Paraphrase are these: “God said to the angels, which ministered before him, Let us make man.” It is a noted saying of the Jewish Rabbis, that God does nothing without consulting his family above: they mean, his holy angels. Several heretics, in the first and second centuries of Christianity, were of opinion, that this lower world was made by angels. This notion is likewise erroneous: God here speaks to those in whose image man was to be formed, but he was not made in the image of angels.
It is pretended by those who are enemies to the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity, that this is a figurative way of speaking, only to express the dignity of God, not to denote any plurality in him; that he here speaks in the plural number after the manner of princes, who say, We will and require, or, It is our pleasure. But this is only a far-fetched invention, to evade the doctrine of the Trinity, by persons in latter times, and no way agreeable to the first ages of the world, or the Hebrew style. Melchizedeck, Abimelech, Pharoah, and Balak, all speak in the singular number. The kings of Israel used the same style, as did Saul, David, and even Solomon in all his glory. And also the Eastern monarchs: “I (Darius) make a decree. I, even I, Artaxerxes the king, do make a decree.” Nor is there in the Scriptures one example to the contrary.
Beside, how absurd it is to suppose that God would borrow his mode of speaking from a practice which did not exist! And even granting this possible, yet the cases are not parallel. For though a King, or Governor, may say us and we, there is certainly no figure of speech that will allow a single person to say, one of us, when he speaks of himself. It is a phrase that can have no meaning, unless there be more persons than one concerned. Yet in addition to US and OUR, this we find is the style in which God has spoken of himself.
There are some persons who maintain, in opposition to the clear light of revelation, that there is but one Subsistence in the Divine Nature. This was the opinion of the Sabellians, a denomination which arose in the third century; and, certain persons, in modern times, have embraced the same. These contend that God here speaks to himself, as consulting with himself, to create man, and that, though the words be plural, yet the sense is singular, as if he had said, Let me make man.
One of the Persons, or Subsistencies in the Godhead, here speaks to the other Two, and who more likely than the Father, who is first in the order of arrangement, as given by the sacred Writers. The Father, not the Son, is the first; the Son, not the Holy Spirit, is the second; and the Holy Spirit, not the Father, is the third. Hence, the Father, when he said, “Let us make man,” addressed himself to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, who were therein joint and equal Creators with him. “None saith, Where is God my Maker?” in the Hebrew, Makers, is the language used in the Book of Job, implying a Plurality of Persons in a Unity of Essence: a phraseology like that of Solomon, “Remember thy Creator,” in the original, Creators. The prophet Isaiah adopts the same style, “Thy Maker is thine husband,” in the Hebrew, thy Makers are thy Husbands. Thus it evidently appears, that this consultation was among the Persons in the Godhead; that all the Three, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, were concerned in man’s creation; and were therein joint Creators, equal in nature, power, and efficiency.
Dr. Waterland says, that this text, Let us make man, has been understood of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, or at least of Father and Son, by the whole succession of Christian writers, from the times of the apostles; which is a circumstance of considerable importance, and will impress the minds of sincere and impartial men. That the Christian Fathers were unanimous in their judgment, that these words were spoken by the Father to the Son, or Spirit, or both, appears in their works, from which we shall adduce a few proofs.