I recently came across a comment by a Trinitarian on a youtube video presenting the following as "evidence" for a plurality of persons within the One God, a la Creedal/Latin Trinitarianism:
What about these verses?
- " Remember also thy Creators [plural in Hebrew] in days of thy youth, While that the evil days come not, Nor the years have arrived, that thou sayest, `I have no pleasure in them.' " - Ecc. 12:1, YLT
- " Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker [literally 'Makers' in the Hebrew]! Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands? " - Isa. 45:9, KJV
- " For thy Maker [lit. Makers] is thine husband [lit. husbands]; the Lord of hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; The God of the whole earth shall he be called. " - Isa. 54:5, KJV
- " Neither have I learned wisdom, Nor do I have the knowledge of the Holy One [lit. Holy Ones]. " - Pro. 30:3, NASB
Plus numerous singular personal pronouns are applied to Israel (see Jeremiah 3 and Isaiah 41). Even Legion receives both singular and plural pronouns. He's one yet many.
With respect to passages such as Ecc 12:1, this apologist clearly does not know the basics of biblical Hebrew grammar. Here are two Hebrew grammars that discuss Ecc 12:1, Isa 54:5, and similar passages. They do not support the Trinitarian dogma of a plurality of persons within the one God:
In a few instances, before a suffix beginning with a consonant, the original açy of the termination has been contracted to eÖ , and thus there arise forms which have apparently plural suffixes; as ~h,yTev.mi Is 5:12, Dn 1:10, 16; ~h,yaer>m; their appearance, Dn 1:15, Gn 41:21, cf. Na 2:5; ~h,yjeAn* who stretched them forth, Is 42:5; defectively ~h,peao) Ho 7:5 (cf. ~h,wEn> Ez 34:14); on the other hand, the examples in Is 14:11, Gn 47:17, which were formerly classed with the above, are really plurals. But ^yn<òx]m;( thy camp, Dt 23:15 (^n<òx]m;( occurs just before),^yn<òq.mi thy cattle, Is 30:28 (probably also ^yd<ñf' 1 K 2:26), %yIa;ñr>m; Ct 2:14, and wya'r>m; the sight of him, Jb 41:1 (with the y here retained orthographically), wyl'[]m;( Ez 40:31, &c., are still to be explained as singulars.—On a few other examples which may perhaps be thus explained, see § 124 k. Before the plural ending the original termination ay reappears in ~yIx'mu(m. Is 25:6 (part. Pu. from hx'm') . . . On the other hand, we must regard as doubtful a number of participles in the plural, which, being used as attributes of God, resemble plurales excellentiae; thus, yvo'[ my Maker, Jb 35:10; %yIv;oñ[ Is 54:5; wyv'o[ y Ps 149:2; h'yv,o[ Is 22:11; ~h,yjeAn* stretching them out, Is 42:5; for all these forms may also be explained as singular, according to § 93 ss.—wyf'g>nO* Is 3:12 might also be regarded as another instance, unless it be a numerical plural, their oppressors; moreover, wym'yrIm. him who lifteth it up, Is 10:15 (but read probably AmyrIm.); wyx'l.vo) him who sendeth him, Pr 10:26, 22:21 (so Baer, but Ginsburg ^xñ,l.vo)), 25:13 (in parallelism with wyn"doa]). These latter plurals, however (including wymyrm), may probably be more simply explained as indicating an indefinite individual, cf. o below.—For ^yr<ñm.vo) y Ps 121:5 (textus receptus) and ^ya,ñr>AB) Ec 12:1 (textus receptus) the singular should be read, with Baer. (Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar, ed. E. Jautzsch, pp. 273-74, 399)
Plural of abstraction. An abstract noun is quite often expressed by a plural, which properly speaking aims at the various concrete manifestations of a quality or of a state; thus tAxJuB; security originally meant the sure circumstances, the sure things, secura, from which the transition was made to security.
Qualities: tAnWma/ integrity Pr 28.20† (the singular is frequent) and ~ynIWma/ (7 x; sg. !Wmae 1 x); tAnyBi intelligence Is 27.11† (the sg. is freq.); tAnWbT. intelligence (6 x; sg. freq.); tA[De knowledge 1Sm 2.3; Jb 36.4† (sg. h['De 4 x); tAxJuB; security Jb 12.6† and ~yxij;b.mi Is 32.18; Jr 2.37 (sg. freq.); tA[Wvy> salvation Is 26.18; Ps 18.51; 28.8; 42.6; 44.5 etc. (sg. freq.); tAWh; evil (misfortune and malice); tAdWmx] excellence Dn 9.23; tAmxe vya Pr 22.24 (= hm'xe vya 15.18 bad-tempered man); tApr'x] shame Dn 12.2; tAkPuh.T; perversity (no sg.); ~yrIv'yme rectitude; ~ynIAa strength Is 40.26, 29; ~ymix]r; compassion; ~yrIT's.miB. Jr 13.17; Ps 17.12; Lm 3.10 and ~yrIT's.MiB; Ps 10.8; 64.5 in secret (like rT's.MiB; Hb 3.14; Ps 10.9); ~yrIroM.m; bitterness Jb 9.18; ~yQit;m.m; sweetness Ct 5.16; ~yDIm;x]m; charm, beauty Ct 5.16; ~y[ivu[]v; pleasure, delights (no sg.); ~ygIWn[]T; pleasure, delights. Instances are mainly poetic. Cf. also § 90 f.
h States: ~yrIWxB. adolescence (state or time) Nu 11.28(¿)†; tArWxB. Ec 11.9; 12.1†; ~yliWtB. virginity (state): Lv 21.13, etc. (but time: Jdg 11.37); ~ynIquz> old age (state or time; contr. !q,zOò quality of old age: senility); tAlWlK. engagement (time: Jr 2.2†); ~yrIWgm. sojourning; ~yrIW[n> youth (time) [comp. r[;nOò (poetic) time: Ps 88.16; Pr 29.21; Jb 36.14; perh. quality of youth 33.25†]; 1 x tArW[n> Jr 32.30; ~yrIwEn>s; kind of blindness (false vision) Gn 19.11; 2Kg 6.18†; ~ymiWl[] youth (time: Ps 89.46; Jb 33.25; state Is 54.4 (= celibacy); quality of youth = youthful vigour, Jb 20.11); ~yliKuvI childlessness Is 49.20. Perhaps the word ~yYIh; life should be included here.
i Actions: ~ynIWnz> fornication, prostitution; ~yrIPuKi atonement (MH also rWPKi); ~yaiWLmi consecration; ~ymixunI and ~ymiWxn>T; consolation; ~yxiLuvi sending back, dismissal (MH x;WLvi); ~ymiWLvi retribution Is 34.8 (~WLvi Ho 9.7; Mi 7.3†); ~yrIMuvi watching Ex 12.42†; ~ynIWnx]T; supplication. (Paul Joüon and T. Muraoka, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew [Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 2006], 471)
