The following is a discussion in a Hebrew Grammar of the use of the plural in Hebrew. What you are referring to is the intensifying plural, or plural maiestatis, amplifying the person, thing or idea. Hope this helps to clarify the discrepancy.
PLURALIS MAJESTATIS If the plural form does not express a normal
numerical plural, but indicates that something or someone is mighty, big,
terrible or respectable, it is called the pluralis
majestatis or royal plural.[1]
[1] Van der Merwe, C., Naudé, J., Kroeze, J.,
Van der Merwe, C., Naudé, J., & Kroeze, J. (1999). A Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar
(electronic ed., p. 363). Sheffield: Sheffield
Academic Press.
§ 124. The Various Uses of the Plural-form.3
a
1. The plural is by no means used in Hebrew
solely to express a number of individuals or separate objects, but may also
denote them collectively. This use of the plural expresses either (a) a combination of various external
constituent parts (plurals of local
extension), or (b) a more or less
intensive focusing of the characteristics inherent in the idea of the stem (abstract plurals, usually rendered in
English by forms in -hood, -ness, -ship).
A variety of the plurals described under (b),
in which the secondary idea of intensity
or of an internal multiplication of
the idea of the stem may be clearly seen, is (c) the pluralis excellentiae
or pluralis maiestatis.[1]
Of (c):
the pluralis excellentiae or maiestatis, as has been remarked above,
is properly a variety of the abstract plural, since it sums up the several
characteristics2 belonging to the idea, besides possessing the
secondary sense of an intensification
of the original idea. It is thus closely related to the plurals of
amplification, treated under e, which are mostly found in poetry. So especially
אֱלֹהִים Godhead, God (to be distinguished from the numerical plural gods, Ex 12:12, &c.). The
supposition that אֱלֹהִים is to be regarded as merely a remnant of
earlier polytheistic views (i.e. as originally only a numerical plural) is at
least highly improbable, and, moreover, would not explain the analogous plurals
(see below). That the language has entirely rejected the idea of numerical
plurality in אֱלֹהִים (whenever it denotes one God), is proved especially by its being almost invariably
joined with a singular attribute (cf. § 132 h), e.g. אֱלֹהִים צַדִּיק Ps 7:10, &c. Hence אֱלֹהִים may have been used originally not only as
a numerical but also as an abstract plural (corresponding to the Latin numen, and our Godhead), and, like other abstracts of the same kind, have been
transferred to a concrete single god (even of the heathen).[2]
3 3
Cf. Dietrich, ‘Über Begriff und Form des hebr. Plurals,’ in the Abhandl.
zur hebr. Grammatik,
Leipzig, 1846, p. 2 ff.
[1] Gesenius, F. W. (1910). Gesenius’ Hebrew grammar. (E.
Kautzsch & S. A. E. Cowley, Eds.) (2d English ed., pp. 396–397). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
2 2
The Jewish grammarians call such plurals רִבּוּי הַכֹּחוֹת plur. virium
or virtutum; later grammarians call
them plur. excellentiae, magnitudinis, or plur.
maiestaticus. This last name may have
been suggested by the we used by
kings when speaking of themselves (cf. already 1 Macc. 10:19, 11:31); and the plural used
by God in Gn 1:26, 11:7, Is 6:8 has been incorrectly
explained in this way. It is, however, either communicative (including the attendant angels; so at all events in Is 6:8, cf. also Gn 3:22), or according to
others, an indication of the fullness of
power and might implied in אֱלֹהִים (see Dillmann on Gn 1:26); but it is best
explained as a plural of self-deliberation.
The use of the plural as a form of respectful address is quite foreign to
Hebrew.
[2] Gesenius, F. W. (1910). Gesenius’ Hebrew grammar. (E.
Kautzsch & S. A. E. Cowley, Eds.) (2d English ed., pp. 398–399). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
