Why does Scripture quote God saying: “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness..” (Genesis 1:26)? Is God a Trinity composed of multiple divine entities?

Why does Scripture quote God saying: “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness... ” (Genesis 1: 26)? Is God a Trinity composed of multiple divine entities?

According to Reformed Samaritanism, the verse wherein God is quoted saying, “Let us make man... ” (Genesis 1: 26) is to be understood as hinting at the idea that the Creator doesn’t do anything without first getting His heavenly household involved.
For example, when God wanted to judge wicked king Ahab, He first summoned His angels, and them proceeded to ask them how could they become partners in the project. As is written:
«I saw the Lord sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left. And the Lord said, “Who shall persuade Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramothgilead? ” And one said on this manner, and another said on that manner. And there came forth a spirit, and stood before the Lord, and said, “I will persuade him”. And the Lord said unto him, “Wherewith? ” And he said, “ I will go forth, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets ”. And he said, “ Thou shalt persuade him, and prevail also: go forth, and do so” »- 1 Kings 22: 19-22.

Let’s not deceive ourselves; God’s own faith is results oriented!

Our dear brothers and sisters, we have to beware, as the sin of self deception can do great harm to our soul, preventing it from enjoying peace. And that’s why Bible says: “ There is no peace, saith my God, to the wicked ”- Isaiah 57: 21. We can choose to deceive ourselves, twisting the word of God and forcing it to say whatever is convenient to our preconceived religious ideas. But by so doing, we only damage our souls, and risk ending up suffering from severe depression, as well as grave mental diseases.
The point we are trying to make is the following: God’s true faith has little to do with the “having the right theology” kind of paradigm we have come to cherish. Neither is it embracing a hidden, abstract, or esoteric belief. Rather, it is the “down to earth” [practical] commitment with justice, mercy, and humility. In other words, He who fears God, and is just, merciful, humble, and honest, already has the right religion (Micah 6: 8), regardless of the name we choose to give it.
For example, consider the fact that Bible never mentions Persian King Cyrus ever embracing the Hebrew faith. In fact, most likely Cyrus remained a committed Zoroastrian (who worshiped the God called Ahura Mazda) his entire life. Yet, foretelling his coming [150 years in advance], prophet Isaiah called Cyrus “God’s anointed” (or “Messiah”, as per the Hebrew text of Isaiah 45: 1). Why? Because Cyrus would do the incredible act of helping exiled Jews rebuild their ruined Temple (thereby restoring their service to God).
So, the Creator cared much more for Cyrus deeds, than for his imperfect Zoroastrian theology. Notice the supreme importance of the fact that God is far more interested in the things we do, than in the things we claim to believe. And even the Christian gospel bears witness to the same truth, when it goes on to exalt the three “Magi” that came from the East, looking for the king of the Jews (Matthew 2: 1). What was a Magi? It was a Zoroastrian priest! In fact, when it comes to God's true religion, the Christian writings use the following non-theological description-- “ Pure and undefiled religion before God the Father is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself unstained from [the moral defilement of the] World ”- James 1: 27. Peace be upon you!

«Reformed Samaritanism teaches that not only is Christianity a great religion, but also that God fearing Christians will definitely inherit a good share in the world that is to come. Still, being committed with Divine truth, Reformed Samaritans are not embarrassed to acknowledge the fact that Christian theology is like a politician’s campaign trail (only his party members would fail to recognize the intentionally ambiguous, contradictory, and self serving nature of the promises he make! ). Consider the following example: While on one hand Jesus claims he ought to be honored, as he who refuses to honor him refuses to honor his Heavenly Father (“… He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him”- John 5: 23); on the other hand he claims not to be interested in receiving human glory (“I receive not honour from men”- John 5: 41)»

¡ Cuidado con la religió n esbozada por el noble apó stol Pablo!

El cristianismo es una fe maravillosa; y el apó stol Saulo (paz y bendició n sean con é l) fue un hombre santo y bueno. Pero la realidad objetiva es que la noble teologí a cristiana bien podrí a describirse como “La religió n personal de Saulo”.
¿ Por qué? Pues porque, a pesar de no haber caminado fí sicamente con Jesus [siendo por tanto el apó stol que menos conoció acerca del Jesus histó rico], Saulo de Tarso [cuyo original nombre Hebreo era “Saú l”] termina siendo el autor de la mayorí a de las cartas que comprenden el Nuevo Testamento. En otras palabras, el Nuevo Testamento se trata mayormente no de las palabras de Jesú s, sino de las palabras de Saulo; de lo que Saulo personalmente consideraba ser el significado de las palabras atribuidas al Nazareno.
Pero en este sentido, el creyente debe ser extremadamente cuidadoso, ya que Saulo tení a la habilidad de hacer afirmaciones exageradas; tal y como lo era afirmar ser “un hebreo de hebreos” (Filipenses 3: 5), cuando en realidad ni siquiera sabí a algo tan tan bá sico y fundamental como quié n era el sumo sacerdote hebreo (Hechos 23: 5).
De hecho, el creyente debe ser extremadamente cuidadoso al depositar ciega confianza en lo dicho [o hecho] por Saulo. ¿ Por qué? Nuevamente, porque Saulo parece haber sufrido de algú n tipo de desequilibrio mental (¿ tormento? ). Y esto ú ltimo le condujo a describirse a sí mismo [así como a su interpretació n del evangelio] usando palabras tales como “tonto”, “loco”, “necio”, etc; algo que ningú n sensato profeta hebreo habrí a considerado jamá s.
Como está escrito: “Lo que hablo, no lo hablo segú n el Señ or, sino como en locura... ” (2 Corintios 11: 17); “¡ Ojalá me toleraseis un poco de locura! Sí, toleradme... ”- (2 Corintios 11: 1); “Otra vez digo: Que nadie me tenga por loco; o de otra manera, recibidme como a loco... ” (2 Corintios 11: 16); “… agradó a Dios salvar a los creyentes por la locura de la predicació n” (1 Corintios 1: 21).
¿ Qué explicació n racional podrí amos dar a las palabras [y acciones] de Saulo? Bueno, quizá s deberí amos tener en cuenta que, cuando el rey Saú l se volvió orgulloso y arrogante, Dios permitió que un espí ritu maligno le atormentara, a fin de refrenar su exagerado orgullo. Como está escrito: “El Espí ritu de Dios se apartó de Saú l, y le atormentaba un espí ritu malo de parte de Dios” - 1 Samuel 16: 14.
Asimismo, cuando Saulo (o, “Saú l”) de Tarso se volvió orgulloso y arrogante, Dios permitió que un espí ritu maligno le atormentara, a fin de refrenar su exagerado orgullo. Como el mismo Saulo afirma, cuando escribe: “Y para que la grandeza de las revelaciones no me exaltase desmedidamente, me fue dado un aguijó n en mi carne, un mensajero de Sataná s (es decir, un demonio) que me abofetee, para que no me enaltezca sobremanera” - 2 Corintios 12: 7.
Lamentablemente, así como el castigo del rey Saú l incluí a morir a manos de sus enemigos paganos [los filisteos], quienes terminaron decapitá ndole (1 Samuel 31: 8-9), el castigo de Saú l de Tarso incluirí a morir a manos de sus enemigos paganos [los romanos], quienes tambié n le decapitarí an.
Y esto ú ltimo significa que el juicio de Dios sobre Pablo fue segú n sus propias palabras (“… Mal siervo, por tu propia boca te juzgo... ” - Lucas 19: 22). ¿ Por qué? Porque este ultimo habí a declarado con anterioridad que, el fin de cada hombre, será conforme a sus obras (“… cuyo fin será conforme a sus obras” - 2 Corintios 11: 15).
En otras palabras, si un creyente elige comportarse como lo hace un pagano [despreciando la Ley de Dios, tal como Pablo despreció la Ley de Dios, llamá ndola “maldició n”, y “esclavitud espiritual”], entonces es justo y apropiado que tal creyente sea entregado en manos de los paganos [¡ a quienes propiamente pertenece! ]. Que Dios tenga misericordia de todos nosotros. Amé n.

“The Jewish faith is a perfectly valid way of serving the Almighty. Yet, with very few exceptions, modern Jewish establishment is to ancient Hebrew Faith what a modern Reality show is to Reality: a shameless case of identity theft, wherein an oppressive, morally bankrupt, and extremely powerful elite craftily steals [by means of cultural appropriation] what used to be an ancient and noble identity. Why would they do that? In order to turn it into a convenient “shield” (or “lightning rod”) protecting them from any rightful criticism and/or public demand for moral accountability. In other words, self proclaimed Jews will see nothing wrong whenever a gentile challenges God’s words and/or actions; but he will feel blasphemously insulted and discriminated whenever such gentile dares to question and/or challenge anything said or done by any member of the Jewish establishment; just as if the words and actions of such people were above those of the Almighty God they [falsely] claim to represent”