A traditional Christian interpretation of these pronouns is that they refer to a plurality of persons within the Godhead. Biblical commentator Victor P. Hamilton outlines several interpretations, including the most widely held among Biblical scholars, which is that the pronouns do not refer to other persons within the Godhead but to the 'heavenly court' of Isaiah 6. Theologians Meredith Kline and Gerhard von Rad argue for this view, as von Rad says, 'The extraordinary plural ("Let us") is to prevent one from referring God's image too directly to God the Lord. God includes himself among the heavenly beings of his court and thereby conceals himself in this majority.' Hamilton notes that this interpretation assumes that Genesis 1 is at variance with Isaiah 40:13–14, Who has measured the Spirit of the Lord, or what man shows him his counsel? Whom did he consult, and who made him understand? Who taught him the path of justice, and taught him knowledge, and showed him the way of understanding? That is, if the plural pronouns of Genesis 1 teach that God consults and creates with a 'heavenly court', then it contradicts the statement in Isaiah that God seeks the counsel of nobody. According to Hamilton, the best interpretation 'approaches the trinitarian understanding but employs less direct terminology'. Following D. J. A. Clines, he states that the plural reveals a 'duality within the Godhead' that recalls the 'Spirit of God' mentioned in verse 2, And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters. Hamilton also says that it is unreasonable to assume that the author of Genesis was too theologically primitive to deal with such a concept as 'plurality within unity'; Hamilton thus argues for a framework of progressive revelation, in which the doctrine of the Trinity is revealed at first obscurely then plainly in the New Testament.
a traditional christian interpretation of these pronouns is that they refer to a plurality of persons within the godhead biblical commentator victor p hamilton outlines several interpretations including the most widely held among biblical scholars which is that the pronouns do not refer to other persons within the godhead but to the 'heavenly court' of isaiah 6 theologians meredith kline and gerhard von rad argue for this view as von rad says 'the extraordinary plural ("let us") is to prevent one from referring god's image too directly to god the lord god includes himself among the heavenly beings of his court and thereby conceals himself in this majority' hamilton notes that this interpretation assumes that genesis 1 is at variance with isaiah 4013–14 who has measured the spirit of the lord or what man shows him his counsel whom did he consult and who made him understand who taught him the path of justice and taught him knowledge and showed him the way of understanding that is if the plural pronouns of genesis 1 teach that god consults and creates with a 'heavenly court' then it contradicts the statement in isaiah that god seeks the counsel of nobody according to hamilton the best interpretation 'approaches the trinitarian understanding but employs less direct terminology' following d j a clines he states that the plural reveals a 'duality within the godhead' that recalls the 'spirit of god' mentioned in verse 2 and the spirit of god was hovering over the face of the waters hamilton also says that it is unreasonable to assume that the author of genesis was too theologically primitive to deal with such a concept as 'plurality within unity'; hamilton thus argues for a framework of progressive revelation in which the doctrine of the trinity is revealed at first obscurely then plainly in the new testament