And here we see our TRIUNE GOD making man in His own image. God was not talking to angels, and angels were not made in the image of God.
Gen. 1:26 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.
Gen. 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Since we're back on topic again, perhaps we need a refresher of the points when there's less bickering to to drown them out. There's nothing innately Triune about that passage. I see how you are overlaying your "God is many people" idea on top of it, but that's hardly a necessary construction.
1. You have already admitted (after some unnecessary arguing) that angels were present at the creation of the world. This is specifically stated in the book of Job, and this is easily inferred by the presence of the serpent in the Garden of Eden, and angels which are set to prevent man from reentering the garden after he is cast out.
2. You have argued that man was not created in the image of angels. This argument is dismissed because that would not be the natural reading of the passage (that was a straw man argument). As the phrase is "in our image" and we know that God is the primary inclusion within that "our" it would imply that man and angels are both created in the image of God, rather than man after in the image of angels, twice removed from God.
3. Everyone acknowledges that man is made in God's image, but few people seem to be willing to attempt to define "God's image" within this context. Pretty much most of the aspects you (Glory) attempted to come up with before are also shared by the angels. When we review the attributes of angels as described in scripture, they are described in godlike terms, certainly more so than humans. Any honest discussion needs to first define "made in God's image" before going much further.
4. I believe that someone objected that this interpretation would require that angels were the ones doing the creating. Again, this objection attempts to remove the primary component of "we" from the subject. God is the acting part of we, the other part of we would be the included observers, or part of the "royal we" where the sovereign speaks on behalf of his subjects. We do have evidence from other scripture that God sometimes does discuss his plans with his angels,
and in one case even asking them for ideas on how to solve a problem.
I believe that's a fair summary of the points on this subtopic. Genesis neither
proves nor
requires a Trinity explanation, as it can also be well understood using the elements that we are already provided.
I remember Glory's counter-argument being that the bible does not explicitly state that angels are created in the image of God. I answer that neither does the bible explicitly state that God is a Trinity. It is easily deduced that angels are created in the image of God, which requires less of a stretch than the solution that a God who repeatedly describes himself as "One" throughout scripture is actually a secret group of three individuals.
Does anyone want to rationally discuss this without the catcalling? Perhaps without the "you are evil" or gratuitous trumpeting of Triunity colors?
And as a reminder, even a Triune God of multiple personalities (or a pantheon) could still speak to his angels in this fashion. You're not being threatened, you're just being asked to
be fair and objective in your standards of proof.
Why does it matter? I have seen at least a few people turn away from recognizing
Jesus as God because they observe stupid and flawed arguments being put forth to argue Trinity, illogical arguments fueled by aggressive bullying, justified by the "We are Right therefore you are damned" mentality. They then associate the weight of flawed "Trinity proofs" with "Jesus is God" (which is true) and we lose them down that spiral. Don't be that stumbling block.