Revisiting "ye are gods"

[theplains]

John 10:30-38

"I and my Father are one. Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him. Jesus 
answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those 
works do ye stone me?  The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone 
thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself 
God. Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?  If 
he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be 
broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, 
Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God? If I do not the works of my 
Father, believe me not. But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: 
that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him".

Psalm 82:1-2, 6-7

"God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods. How long 
will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? ... I have said, Ye 
are gods; and all of you are children of the most High. But ye shall die like men, 
and fall like one of the princes".

Why would Jesus flip the focus of the Jewish claim of him being God (which would be 
blasphemous if he is not God) to the gods of Psalm 82 (which would not be blasphemous 
if those beings were really deities)?

Did the Jews in the days before Christ ever put a label of blasphemy against those 
gods of Psalm 82:6 or were they only putting this label on Christ?  

Does Christ's response deal with the identity of God himself (which would account 
for their blasphemy charge) or gods in a lesser sense (which was never considered 
blasphemous in the past)?  Is Christ trying to defend his true identity or is he really
trying to challenge how the Jews regarded Christ's teaching about himself?  Is he also
rebuking his listeners as the judges of Psalm 82:1-2, 6-7 who were dealing unjustly?

How can these gods, if they are true deities instead of false deities, die like men?

This reminds me of another, but dissimilar, interaction Christ had with a person in 
Luke 18:18-19. Christ's response was neither a rebuke, denial, or affirmation.

"And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit 
eternal life? And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save 
one, that is, God".

His reply is indicative of wanting that person to understand the ramifications of what
he was asking when he referred to Jesus as "Good Master". 

[CV75]

1 hour ago, theplains said:

John 10:30-38

"I and my Father are one. Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him. Jesus 
answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those 
works do ye stone me?  The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone 
thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself 
God. Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?  If 
he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be 
broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, 
Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God? If I do not the works of my 
Father, believe me not. But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: 
that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him".

Psalm 82:1-2, 6-7

"God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods. How long 
will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? ... I have said, Ye 
are gods; and all of you are children of the most High. But ye shall die like men, 
and fall like one of the princes".

Why would Jesus flip the focus of the Jewish claim of him being God (which would be 
blasphemous if he is not God) to the gods of Psalm 82 (which would not be blasphemous 
if those beings were really deities)?

Did the Jews in the days before Christ ever put a label of blasphemy against those 
gods of Psalm 82:6 or were they only putting this label on Christ?  

Does Christ's response deal with the identity of God himself (which would account 
for their blasphemy charge) or gods in a lesser sense (which was never considered 
blasphemous in the past)?  Is Christ trying to defend his true identity or is he really
trying to challenge how the Jews regarded Christ's teaching about himself?  Is he also
rebuking his listeners as the judges of Psalm 82:1-2, 6-7 who were dealing unjustly?

How can these gods, if they are true deities instead of false deities, die like men?

This reminds me of another, but dissimilar, interaction Christ had with a person in 
Luke 18:18-19. Christ's response was neither a rebuke, denial, or affirmation.

"And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit 
eternal life? And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save 
one, that is, God".

His reply is indicative of wanting that person to understand the ramifications of what
he was asking when he referred to Jesus as "Good Master". 

The Jews in John 10 should have known the scriptures and that Jesus was the Son of God (the Most High God, rendering Himself God) because they were gods (as in less high gods, rulers in the earthly kingdom) and should have known. Abinadi makes the same charge against the wicked priests of King Noah in the Book of Mormon. God is the most high ruler and judge, and these Jews were His appointed mortal rulers and judges on earth (hence they die; they also err) and they should have known Him.

So, I do not think Jesus flipped the claim – he reminded the gods of the kingdom on earth that they should have known who they were, and who He and the Father are. The Jews knew who the gods of Psalms 82 were, and also God the Most High, but would refuse to acknowledge Jesus in the mix.

Christ is proclaiming His true identity, which the gods (the Jewish leaders reproaching Him) should have recognized and taught. He is pointing out and condemning their adversarial negligence and insistent opposition, which would include unjust judgment (rulership, governance in the kingdom).

[Pyreaux]

I favor Dr. Michael S. Heiser, the following was heavily edited from what can be found in full at www.thedivinecouncil.com

Should the Plural אלהים of Psalm 82 Be Understood as Men or Divine Beings?

Jesus’ Use of Psalm 82:6 in John 10:34

1. Jesus’ prefaced his quotation by asserting that he and the Father were one (10:30).
2. This claim was regarded as blasphemy in that Jesus was making himself out to be God (10:33).
3. Jesus quoted Psalm 82:6 to establish his claim to be God. 
4. Rewords his oneness statement that the Father was in him, and he was in the Father. 

The common consensus of this quotation is that Jesus was endorsing a human-gods view and thereby saying the law allows him and any human to claim to be a god on the basis of Psalm 82:6. This spoils the special deity status that Jesus after doubles down on.

Unless the אלהים of Psalm 82 were not humans, and Jesus is indeed describing his specific type of divinity and that it features unity with the Father.

The common consensus is the phrase "to whom the word of God came" refers to the Jews who received the law at Sinai (i.e., the Pharisees' forefathers). 

Unless "to whom the word of God came” are the other אלהים of the divine council in 82:1. Means the Jews are not אלהים, rather Jesus reminds his enemies that their Scriptures say there are other divine אלהים, the divine sons—and he is declaring himself a god on the same basis as one of these gods.

Why the אלהים of Psalm 82:1 are Divine Beings

The plural אלהים of Psalm 82:1 are called “sons of the Most High”, Elyon, in verse 6.  Elsewhere the “sons of God” are very obviously divine beings (e.g., Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7-8). One passage, Hosea 1:10, refers to humans (“sons of the living God”), and Israelites on occasion were referred to as Yahweh’s “son” (Exo 4:22-23) and the Davidic kings as a "son" (2 Sam 7). How can we be sure Psalm 82 aren't human?

Psalm 82 Should Not Be Isolated

Are there any other passages that feature the same language of divine plurality in a council? Psalm 89:5-7 eliminates any ambiguity with respect to the language in question.

5 Let the heavens praise your wonders, O LORD, your faithfulness in the assembly (קהל (of the holy ones! 
6 For who in the clouds (בשחק (can be compared to the LORD? Who among the sons of God/the gods (אלים בני (is like the LORD, 
7 a God greatly to be feared in the council (סוד (of the holy ones, and awesome above all who are around him?

Psalm 89 rules out the notion that Yahweh’s council of אלהים sons of God refers to an assembly of humans because it explicitly places that council “in the clouds.” There is no text that suggests that there are a group of human judges in the heavens ruling with Yahweh over the nations. That position is only being offered because of a perceived threat to monotheism.

Deuteronomy 32 as a Backdrop to Psalm 82

Psalm 82 council אלהים are being judged for their corrupt administration over their inherited nations, which rules out them being human. The last verse implores for the God of Israel to rise up and “inherit” all the other nations. The lemma behind “inherit” (נחל ( is precisely the same lemma used to describe the punitive judgment of the nations at the tower of Babel, when Elyon allotted the nations to the sons of God as an inheritance. Yahweh was allotted Israel, those same divine beings were allotted the nations that he was not inheriting.

Deut 32:8 When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance (Hiphil, נחל(, when he divided mankind, he fixed the borders of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God [האלהים בני[.
9 But the LORD’s portion is his people, Jacob his allotted heritage (נחלה(.

The Qumran reading (in brackets) is superior to the Masoretic text in Deut 32:8, which reads שראלׂי בני”) sons of Israel”). If we begin at Deut 4:19-20 and then work toward chapter 32, we find that the “host of heaven” is identified as “other gods” (ים ִ֔ ִר ח ֲא ים ִ֣ ִלהֹ א ( Israel was not allotted to but worshipped by Israelites in defiance of Deut 4:19-20.

Deut 4:19 Lest you lift up your eyes to heaven, and when you see the sun and the moon and the stars, all the host of heaven, you be drawn away and bow down to them and serve them, whom the LORD your God has allotted to all the peoples under the whole 
 
Deut 29:23-25 (Eng., 29:24-26), which contains phrases found in Deut 32:8-9, where the nations were allotted by Elyon to the sons of God:

24 . . . all the nations will say, ‘Why has the LORD done thus to this land? What caused the heat of this great anger?’ 25 Then people will say, ‘It is because they abandoned the covenant of the LORD, the God of their fathers, which he made with them when he brought them out of the land of Egypt, 26 and went and served other gods ( ים ִ֣ ִלהֹ אים ִ֔ ִר ח ֲא (and worshiped them, gods whom they had not known and whom he had not allotted to them.

Later in Deut 32:17, these same אלהים are identified as demons. 

יִזְׁ בְׁ חִ֗ ּו לַּ ש דִ ים֙ ל ִ֣ א א ֹלִ֔ הַּ א ֹלהִ ֶ֖ ים ל ִ֣ א יְׁד ףֵ֑ ּום חֲ ד שִ ים֙ מִ ק ר ִ֣ ב ב ִ֔ אּו ל ָּ֥ א ׂשְׁ ף רֶ֖ ּום אֲ ב ת יכֶ ֱֽ ם׃
“They sacrificed to demons—not to God—to gods they had not known, new ones that had come recently which your fathers had not known about.”

Since these other אלהים, the host of heaven and sons of God in Deuteronomy, are described as demons, we cannot deny their reality, at least if we care about getting our beliefs about the spiritual world from the Bible. We also cannot say these other אלהים are mere idols, pieces of wood and stone, since demons are not wood and stone. The Old Testament‟s “denial phrases” (e.g., “there is none besides me”; “there is none like me”) can be addressed another time. 

The Judges of Israel

The most familiar argument for the human view of אלהים is the one that insists certain Old Testament passages name the elders of Israel as אלהים judges.

Exodus 22:6-8 [Eng., 22:7-9] from the JPS Tanakh:

6 When a man gives money or goods to another for safekeeping, and they are stolen from the man’s house—if the thief is caught, he shall pay double; 7 if the thief is not caught, the owner of the house shall come near (נקרב (to God (האלהים (that he has not laid hands on the other’s property. 8 In all charges of misappropriation—pertaining to an ox, an ***, a sheep, a garment, or any other loss, whereof one party alleges, “This is it”—the case of both parties shall come before God (האלהים(: he whom God (אלהים (declares guilty (ירשיען (shall pay double to the other.

To deny that the plural אלהים in Ps 82:1 are divine beings, they assume that אלהים and האלהים in Exod 22:6-8 are human beings (the elder-judges of Israel). Exodus, where Moses appointed judges in Exod 18:13-24. Note the occurrences of אלהים and :carefully הא להים

17 But Moses’ father-in-law said to him, “The thing you are doing is not right; 18 you will surely wear yourself out, and these people as well. For the task is too heavy for you; you cannot do it alone. 19 Now listen to me. I will give you counsel, and God (אלהים (be with you! You represent the people before God (האלהים(: you bring the disputes before God (האלהים(, 20 and enjoin upon them the laws and the teachings, and make known to them the way they are to go and the practices they are to follow. 21 You shall also seek out from among all the people capable men who fear God, trustworthy men who spurn ill-gotten gain. Set these over them as chiefs of thousands, hundreds, fifties, and tens, and 22 let them judge the people at all times.

There is nothing in Exodus 18 that compels us to understand אלהים or האלהים as referring to the elders, this passage can quite readily refer to the God of Israel. The same is true of Exodus 22. There is nothing in either passage say the men appointed by Moses are actually called אלהים or האלהים in the text. Thus no support for seeing human אלהים in Psalm 82.

The Death of gods

In Psalm 82 verses 6-7 is actually saying the אלהים suffer the loss of their immortality: 

אֲ ֱֽ נִ י־א ָ֭ מַּ רְׁ תִ י א ֹלהִ ִ֣ ים אַּ תֶ ֵ֑ ם ּובְׁ נ ֶ֖י ףֶ לְׁ יִֹ֣ון כֻּ לְׁ כֶ ֱֽם׃ 7 א ָ֭ כ ן כְׁ א ד ִ֣ם תְׁ מּותֵ֑ ּון ּוכְׁ אַּ חַּ ֶ֖ ד הַּ ש רִ ִ֣ ים תִ פ ֱֽ לּו׃ I said, „You are gods (אלהים(, even sons of the Most High (עליון בני(, all of you; nevertheless, like humans you will die, and fall like any prince.‟

Apparently, their punishment is the loss of immortality, resulting in death like mortal humans. So they must have been immortal beings, a once divine immortality, if they will now die like a human only due to a punishment.

Edited July 27, 2023 by Pyreaux

[teddyaware]

20 hours ago, theplains said:

John 10:30-38

"I and my Father are one. Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him. Jesus 
answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those 
works do ye stone me?  The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone 
thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself 
God. Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?  If 
he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be 
broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, 
Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God? If I do not the works of my 
Father, believe me not. But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: 
that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him".

Psalm 82:1-2, 6-7

"God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods. How long 
will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? ... I have said, Ye 
are gods; and all of you are children of the most High. But ye shall die like men, 
and fall like one of the princes".

Why would Jesus flip the focus of the Jewish claim of him being God (which would be 
blasphemous if he is not God) to the gods of Psalm 82 (which would not be blasphemous 
if those beings were really deities)?

Did the Jews in the days before Christ ever put a label of blasphemy against those 
gods of Psalm 82:6 or were they only putting this label on Christ?  

Does Christ's response deal with the identity of God himself (which would account 
for their blasphemy charge) or gods in a lesser sense (which was never considered 
blasphemous in the past)?  Is Christ trying to defend his true identity or is he really
trying to challenge how the Jews regarded Christ's teaching about himself?  Is he also
rebuking his listeners as the judges of Psalm 82:1-2, 6-7 who were dealing unjustly?

How can these gods, if they are true deities instead of false deities, die like men?

This reminds me of another, but dissimilar, interaction Christ had with a person in 
Luke 18:18-19. Christ's response was neither a rebuke, denial, or affirmation.

"And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit 
eternal life? And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save 
one, that is, God".

His reply is indicative of wanting that person to understand the ramifications of what
he was asking when he referred to Jesus as "Good Master". 

It’s very simple. Jesus was using pure logic when he defended himself against the charge of blasphemy by appealing to the scriptures and telling his enemies (paraphrasing), ‘that if God himself called prophets of the past gods, and the plain meaning of that verse of scripture can’t be denied, why are the Jews so angry with him for saying that he was merely the Son of God?’ In other words, the Lord was saying that the precedent for holy men to be called gods had already been set. Jumping through rhetorical hoops in an attempt to explain away the clear meaning of the Lord’s scripture based defense overcomplicates a plain and simple line of argument that’s easy to understand.

[Benjamin McGuire]

17 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

It’s very simple. Jesus was using pure logic when he defended himself against the charge of blasphemy by appealing to the scriptures and telling his enemies (paraphrasing), ‘that if God himself called prophets of the past gods, and the plain meaning of that verse of scripture can’t be denied, why are the Jews so angry with him for saying that he was merely the Son of God?’ In other words, the Lord was saying that the precedent for holy men to be called gods had already been set. Jumping through rhetorical hoops in an attempt to explain away the clear meaning of the Lord’s scripture based defense overcomplicates a plain and simple line of argument that’s easy to understand.

And rather than worrying about the stuff from Heiser and the question of what the Psalm really means, I just want to point out the problem with this particular perspective.

Mormonism (and Christianity more broadly) does not believe that Jesus is merely a prophet (and in that sense, a god or a son of god without having any form of divinity). So we don't believe, in reading this text, that Jesus is saying that He isn't divine, that he is merely some human prophet, who, like human prophets of the past, can be referred to as a god or as a son of god. If we believe that Jesus is God or the Son of God, then such a claim is allowing Jesus to answer His critics by dissembling. At the same time, the Jews that Jesus is talking to don't accept this argument either - since if they did, they would recognize that he wasn't committing blasphemy. Instead, they come away from the discussion even more convinced that Jesus had committed blasphemy.

For these reasons, this sort of simple explanation is usually rejected.

[Dario_M]

Lord our God. 🙏

Edited July 28, 2023 by Dario_M

[CV75]

21 hours ago, Pyreaux said:

I favor Dr. Michael S. Heiser, the following was heavily edited from what can be found in full at www.thedivinecouncil.com

Should the Plural אלהים of Psalm 82 Be Understood as Men or Divine Beings?

Jesus’ Use of Psalm 82:6 in John 10:34

1. Jesus’ prefaced his quotation by asserting that he and the Father were one (10:30).
2. This claim was regarded as blasphemy in that Jesus was making himself out to be God (10:33).
3. Jesus quoted Psalm 82:6 to establish his claim to be God. 
4. Rewords his oneness statement that the Father was in him, and he was in the Father. 

The common consensus of this quotation is that Jesus was endorsing a human-gods view and thereby saying the law allows him and any human to claim to be a god on the basis of Psalm 82:6. This spoils the special deity status that Jesus after doubles down on.

Unless the אלהים of Psalm 82 were not humans, and Jesus is indeed describing his specific type of divinity and that it features unity with the Father.

The common consensus is the phrase "to whom the word of God came" refers to the Jews who received the law at Sinai (i.e., the Pharisees' forefathers). 

Unless "to whom the word of God came” are the other אלהים of the divine council in 82:1. Means the Jews are not אלהים, rather Jesus reminds his enemies that their Scriptures say there are other divine אלהים, the divine sons—and he is declaring himself a god on the same basis as one of these gods.

Why the אלהים of Psalm 82:1 are Divine Beings

The plural אלהים of Psalm 82:1 are called “sons of the Most High”, Elyon, in verse 6.  Elsewhere the “sons of God” are very obviously divine beings (e.g., Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7-8). One passage, Hosea 1:10, refers to humans (“sons of the living God”), and Israelites on occasion were referred to as Yahweh’s “son” (Exo 4:22-23) and the Davidic kings as a "son" (2 Sam 7). How can we be sure Psalm 82 aren't human?

Psalm 82 Should Not Be Isolated

Are there any other passages that feature the same language of divine plurality in a council? Psalm 89:5-7 eliminates any ambiguity with respect to the language in question.

5 Let the heavens praise your wonders, O LORD, your faithfulness in the assembly (קהל (of the holy ones! 
6 For who in the clouds (בשחק (can be compared to the LORD? Who among the sons of God/the gods (אלים בני (is like the LORD, 
7 a God greatly to be feared in the council (סוד (of the holy ones, and awesome above all who are around him?

Psalm 89 rules out the notion that Yahweh’s council of אלהים sons of God refers to an assembly of humans because it explicitly places that council “in the clouds.” There is no text that suggests that there are a group of human judges in the heavens ruling with Yahweh over the nations. That position is only being offered because of a perceived threat to monotheism.

Deuteronomy 32 as a Backdrop to Psalm 82

Psalm 82 council אלהים are being judged for their corrupt administration over their inherited nations, which rules out them being human. The last verse implores for the God of Israel to rise up and “inherit” all the other nations. The lemma behind “inherit” (נחל ( is precisely the same lemma used to describe the punitive judgment of the nations at the tower of Babel, when Elyon allotted the nations to the sons of God as an inheritance. Yahweh was allotted Israel, those same divine beings were allotted the nations that he was not inheriting.

Deut 32:8 When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance (Hiphil, נחל(, when he divided mankind, he fixed the borders of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God [האלהים בני[.
9 But the LORD’s portion is his people, Jacob his allotted heritage (נחלה(.

The Qumran reading (in brackets) is superior to the Masoretic text in Deut 32:8, which reads שראלׂי בני”) sons of Israel”). If we begin at Deut 4:19-20 and then work toward chapter 32, we find that the “host of heaven” is identified as “other gods” (ים ִ֔ ִר ח ֲא ים ִ֣ ִלהֹ א ( Israel was not allotted to but worshipped by Israelites in defiance of Deut 4:19-20.

Deut 4:19 Lest you lift up your eyes to heaven, and when you see the sun and the moon and the stars, all the host of heaven, you be drawn away and bow down to them and serve them, whom the LORD your God has allotted to all the peoples under the whole 
 
Deut 29:23-25 (Eng., 29:24-26), which contains phrases found in Deut 32:8-9, where the nations were allotted by Elyon to the sons of God:

24 . . . all the nations will say, ‘Why has the LORD done thus to this land? What caused the heat of this great anger?’ 25 Then people will say, ‘It is because they abandoned the covenant of the LORD, the God of their fathers, which he made with them when he brought them out of the land of Egypt, 26 and went and served other gods ( ים ִ֣ ִלהֹ אים ִ֔ ִר ח ֲא (and worshiped them, gods whom they had not known and whom he had not allotted to them.

Later in Deut 32:17, these same אלהים are identified as demons. 

יִזְׁ בְׁ חִ֗ ּו לַּ ש דִ ים֙ ל ִ֣ א א ֹלִ֔ הַּ א ֹלהִ ֶ֖ ים ל ִ֣ א יְׁד ףֵ֑ ּום חֲ ד שִ ים֙ מִ ק ר ִ֣ ב ב ִ֔ אּו ל ָּ֥ א ׂשְׁ ף רֶ֖ ּום אֲ ב ת יכֶ ֱֽ ם׃
“They sacrificed to demons—not to God—to gods they had not known, new ones that had come recently which your fathers had not known about.”

Since these other אלהים, the host of heaven and sons of God in Deuteronomy, are described as demons, we cannot deny their reality, at least if we care about getting our beliefs about the spiritual world from the Bible. We also cannot say these other אלהים are mere idols, pieces of wood and stone, since demons are not wood and stone. The Old Testament‟s “denial phrases” (e.g., “there is none besides me”; “there is none like me”) can be addressed another time. 

The Judges of Israel

The most familiar argument for the human view of אלהים is the one that insists certain Old Testament passages name the elders of Israel as אלהים judges.

Exodus 22:6-8 [Eng., 22:7-9] from the JPS Tanakh:

6 When a man gives money or goods to another for safekeeping, and they are stolen from the man’s house—if the thief is caught, he shall pay double; 7 if the thief is not caught, the owner of the house shall come near (נקרב (to God (האלהים (that he has not laid hands on the other’s property. 8 In all charges of misappropriation—pertaining to an ox, an ***, a sheep, a garment, or any other loss, whereof one party alleges, “This is it”—the case of both parties shall come before God (האלהים(: he whom God (אלהים (declares guilty (ירשיען (shall pay double to the other.

To deny that the plural אלהים in Ps 82:1 are divine beings, they assume that אלהים and האלהים in Exod 22:6-8 are human beings (the elder-judges of Israel). Exodus, where Moses appointed judges in Exod 18:13-24. Note the occurrences of אלהים and :carefully הא להים

17 But Moses’ father-in-law said to him, “The thing you are doing is not right; 18 you will surely wear yourself out, and these people as well. For the task is too heavy for you; you cannot do it alone. 19 Now listen to me. I will give you counsel, and God (אלהים (be with you! You represent the people before God (האלהים(: you bring the disputes before God (האלהים(, 20 and enjoin upon them the laws and the teachings, and make known to them the way they are to go and the practices they are to follow. 21 You shall also seek out from among all the people capable men who fear God, trustworthy men who spurn ill-gotten gain. Set these over them as chiefs of thousands, hundreds, fifties, and tens, and 22 let them judge the people at all times.

There is nothing in Exodus 18 that compels us to understand אלהים or האלהים as referring to the elders, this passage can quite readily refer to the God of Israel. The same is true of Exodus 22. There is nothing in either passage say the men appointed by Moses are actually called אלהים or האלהים in the text. Thus no support for seeing human אלהים in Psalm 82.

The Death of gods

In Psalm 82 verses 6-7 is actually saying the אלהים suffer the loss of their immortality: 

אֲ ֱֽ נִ י־א ָ֭ מַּ רְׁ תִ י א ֹלהִ ִ֣ ים אַּ תֶ ֵ֑ ם ּובְׁ נ ֶ֖י ףֶ לְׁ יִֹ֣ון כֻּ לְׁ כֶ ֱֽם׃ 7 א ָ֭ כ ן כְׁ א ד ִ֣ם תְׁ מּותֵ֑ ּון ּוכְׁ אַּ חַּ ֶ֖ ד הַּ ש רִ ִ֣ ים תִ פ ֱֽ לּו׃ I said, „You are gods (אלהים(, even sons of the Most High (עליון בני(, all of you; nevertheless, like humans you will die, and fall like any prince.‟

Apparently, their punishment is the loss of immortality, resulting in death like mortal humans. So they must have been immortal beings, a once divine immortality, if they will now die like a human only due to a punishment.

I think Mosiah 15: 13 - 19 carries this idea that there are mortals to whom the word of God is given, past, present and future, the Savior being the founder of this peace. King Noah's priests were not "still publishing peace!" (verse 16).

[Pyreaux]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

I think Mosiah 15: 13 - 19 carries this idea that there are mortals to whom the word of God is given, past, present and future, the Savior being the founder of this peace. King Noah's priests were not "still publishing peace!" (verse 16).

I absolutely think humans, patriarchs, kings, and Christians through a receiving the word of God, by theophany or ritual, became adopted by God as his "son", and join the genos or species of elohim-gods, just as the heavenly elohim-gods were adopted. Humans are ideally to become the new sons of God. But I don't think Psalm 82 and John 10 are the prooftexts. Though its absolutely a proof text, if one insists the gods of Psalm 82 are human. We'd define their mortal godhood by Transfiguration and Theosis.

Edited July 28, 2023 by Pyreaux

[CV75]

43 minutes ago, Pyreaux said:

I absolutely think humans, patriarchs, kings, and Christians through a receiving the word of God, by theophany or ritual, became adopted by God as his "son", and join the genos or species of elohim-gods, just as the heavenly elohim-gods were adopted. Humans are ideally to become the new sons of God. But I don't think Psalm 82 and John 10 are the prooftexts. Though its absolutely a proof text, if one insists the gods of Psalm 82 are human. We'd define their mortal godhood by Transfiguration and Theosis.

I think the language of Mosiah 15 allows an interpretation of Psalms 82 suggesting a hierarchy between the founder/word-giver and the found/publishers, whether the gods/judges are human^(mortals) or human^{(pre-, post- or resurrected immortals)}. So, technically, I guess they don't even need to be human, but Abinadi seems to be referring to human beings, the Father and the Son being two of them as one God conceived into the mortal flesh.

[manol]

The word translated as "gods" in Psalms 82:6 is "elohim", and it is a plural word.  But since there were no capital letters in biblical Hebrew, that word is effectively IDENTICAL to "Elohim" which means "God"!  So here is an alternative translation of that verse:

"Ye are God; and all of you are children of the most High."

Let's insert this into John 10:36-38:

"Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are God?  If he called them God, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?"

So Jesus was saying, in effect, "Don't get bent out of shape because I claim to be the Son of God - YOUR scripture says that YOU [unto whom the word of God has come] are God!" 

Yeah I know, that probably sounds like blasphemy.  Well it did to them too. 

And the only reason I bring this alternative translation up here is because so many near-death experiencers report becoming "one with God", and/or that "oneness with God" is our true nature. 

Here are a few of them:  They Were Shown the Truth - Who We REALLY Are! | Near Death Experience Compilation 9 - YouTube

Circling back to Psalms 82:6-7 one more time:

"Ye are God; and all of you are children of the most High.  But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes."

Imo this could be read as "you are all God, FULLY experiencing mortality."  

 

 

[InCognitus]

On 7/27/2023 at 8:35 AM, theplains said:

John 10:30-38

"I and my Father are one. Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him. Jesus 
answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those 
works do ye stone me?  The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone 
thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself 
God. Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?  If 
he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be 
broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, 
Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God? If I do not the works of my 
Father, believe me not. But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: 
that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him".

In the context of the gospel of John, Jesus never identifies himself as God, instead he declares himself as the "Son of God" a number of times, and repeatedly says that God is his "Father".  In the view of the Jews at that time, the "sons of God" were considered to be the elohim (gods) of their scriptures.  And making oneself a son of God is the same as declaring oneself to be equal with God.

So, you really need to back up to verse 22 to really see the full context of what's going on in what you quote above:

Quote

22 And it was at Jerusalem the feast of the dedication, and it was winter.
23 And Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon’s porch.
24 Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly.
25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father’s name, they bear witness of me.
26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.
27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand.
30 I and my Father are one.
31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.
32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?
33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
(John 10:22–33)

Compare the above to John 5:17-18:

"But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work. Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God." 

Continuing on with John 10, notice that Jesus recognizes that calling himself the Son of God or that God is his Father is why they are accusing him of blasphemy:  

Quote

34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?
37 If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not.
38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.
39 Therefore they sought again to take him: but he escaped out of their hand,
(John 10:34–39)

The whole problem is not that Jesus is claiming to be God, but that Jesus is claiming God as his Father and saying he is the Son of God, and this is why the Jews saw him as making himself equal with God and accused him of blasphemy.

Note the context of Psalm 82 that you quote:

On 7/27/2023 at 8:35 AM, theplains said:

Psalm 82:1-2, 6-7

"God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods. How long 
will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? ... I have said, Ye 
are gods; and all of you are children of the most High. But ye shall die like men, 
and fall like one of the princes".

The Psalm says the gods in this chapter are "children of the most High", or in other words, sons of God.

The rabinic interpretation of Psalm 82 from that time period is that they understood Israel's reception of the covenant on Mount Sinai as rendering Israel immortal, thus becoming "gods".  But after they sinned in making the golden calf, they were again condemned to mortality.  (See Psalm 82 in Contemporary Latter-day Saint Tradition, Daniel O. McClellan, p 93)

On 7/27/2023 at 8:35 AM, theplains said:

Why would Jesus flip the focus of the Jewish claim of him being God (which would be 
blasphemous if he is not God) to the gods of Psalm 82 (which would not be blasphemous 
if those beings were really deities)?

Jesus didn't flip the focus at all.  Quoting Dan McClellan: 

Quote

 

[Jesus] takes the time to identify the divine beings as those to whom the word of God came. He then takes the time to identify himself as the one sanctified by God and sent into the world. The implication of Jesus’s argument is that if the Israelites are made divine by the reception of God’s word, how much more divine is that word itself, anointed, made flesh, and sent into the world. Jesus’s identification as the Word of God, the Messiah, and the Son of God are by far the most important to John.....

Throughout John Jesus never identifies himself as God. He identifies himself as the Son of God, and the Jews understand that father/son relationship to imply equality with God. This is not to indicate ontological identification with him, but equality. It should be kept in mind that the epithet “Son of God” had quite a rich literary heritage in the Greco-Roman period of which the gospel authors would have been aware and by which they have been convincingly shown to have been influenced. In none of those other contexts is the “Son of God” understood to be ontologically identified with God.

We need not understand the accusation of v. 33 to be that Jesus is claiming to be God himself, but just that he is a human claiming to be divine.  His response is that other humans have been made divine by the reception of the Word.  How much more divine is the son of God -- that very Word himself.  The Jews get upset when Jesus says he and the Father are one, but what did he mean by “one”? John uses the language of oneness elsewhere to refer to a unity of glory. In John 17:22 Christ states that the glory that God gave to Christ has been given to his disciples, that they may be one just as God and Jesus are one. In John 10:38 Jesus exhorts the Jews to believe that the Father is in Jesus and Jesus is in the Father. He does not seem to mean they are one being, though. In John 17:21 Jesus prays, “That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us.” As the Son of God, Christ is unified with God in glory. He shares in God’s glory, and this is unacceptable to the Jews.  (Psalm 82 in Contemporary Latter-day Saint Tradition, Daniel O. McClellan, p 94-95)

 

Jesus use of the Psalm also has a greater implication.  Again, to quote McClellan:  "John’s message is this: The Israelites were briefly made immortal and thus divine by the reception of God’s Word. The Word is now incarnate among you, and he is inviting you to receive him. John 10:34–36 and Jesus’s appeal to Psalm 82 is not just about Jesus’s divinity, it is also about the divinity of those who hear and believe." (page 96)

On 7/27/2023 at 8:35 AM, theplains said:

Did the Jews in the days before Christ ever put a label of blasphemy against those 
gods of Psalm 82:6 or were they only putting this label on Christ?  

It was likely because of scripture like Psalm 82 that they made the charge of blasphemy, since the Psalm describes the "children of the most High" in the heavenly court of God as "gods".

On 7/27/2023 at 8:35 AM, theplains said:

 Is he also
rebuking his listeners as the judges of Psalm 82:1-2, 6-7 who were dealing unjustly?

No.  See the response I posted to this Psalm being interpreted as human judges in the other thread.   

On 7/27/2023 at 8:35 AM, theplains said:

How can these gods, if they are true deities instead of false deities, die like men?

See above.

The question you should really be asking is, why would it be a punishment for humans to "die like men" since they are already mortal and would already "die like men"?  To quote Heiser:  "if the ĕlōhîm in Psalm 82 are humans, why are they sentenced to die “like humans”? This sounds as awkward as sentencing a child to grow up or a dog to bark. The point of verse 6 is that, in response to their corruption, the ĕlōhîm will be stripped of their immortality at God’s discretion and die as humans die." (You've Seen one Elohim, You've Seen Them All? A Critique of Mormonism's Use of Psalm 82, p. 225)

Edited July 30, 2023 by InCognitus

[theplains]

On 7/28/2023 at 8:00 AM, teddyaware said:

It’s very simple. Jesus was using pure logic when he defended himself against the charge of blasphemy by appealing to the scriptures and telling his enemies (paraphrasing), ‘that if God himself called prophets of the past gods, and the plain meaning of that verse of scripture can’t be denied, why are the Jews so angry with him for saying that he was merely the Son of God?’ In other words, the Lord was saying that the precedent for holy men to be called gods had already been set. Jumping through rhetorical hoops in an attempt to explain away the clear meaning of the Lord’s scripture based defense overcomplicates a plain and simple line of argument that’s easy to understand.

Were the gods of Psalm 82 accused of blasphemy?

[theplains]

On 7/27/2023 at 11:37 AM, CV75 said:

The Jews in John 10 should have known the scriptures and that Jesus was the Son of God (the Most High God, rendering Himself God) because they were gods (as in less high gods, rulers in the earthly kingdom) and should have known.

So it seems you believe the gods of Psalm 82:1 are not deities but rather the Jewish human judges
(or rulers) on earth.

[teddyaware]

2 hours ago, theplains said:

Were the gods of Psalm 82 accused of blasphemy?

You’ll have to ask God that question, since he’s the one who said the ancient prophets were gods and children of the Most High. Interestingly, Jesus is God the Son and yet he also died like men.

In the Book of revelation, the Lord promises us that those who overcome the world will be crowned as eternal kings and priests in heaven and be enthroned on the very throne God himself. The apostle Peter also testifies that the faithful will hold God’s “royal priesthood” (I.e the priesthood that pertains to becoming heavenly kings and priests) and also become partakers of the very “divine nature” that God himself possesses. The Savior also promises that the faithful who overcome will become joint heirs with Christ in the possession of all things that he himself possesses.

Based on all these glorious promises, I would imagine that you must believe that those who overcome the world will, at very least, become godlike. So I would think that it’s not that you don’t agree that men will become like God — sinless, holy, and powerfully empowered with divine might — but you believe men will not inherit all things that God and Christ possess. So I surmise that your disagreement is focused more specifically on the degree of divine empowerment that the faithful will receive, and not on whether or not those who overcome the world will become very much like God in many ways. Yes?

 

Edited August 1, 2023 by teddyaware

[theplains]

10 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

Based on all these glorious promises, I would imagine that you must believe that those who overcome the world will, at very least, become godlike. So I would think that it’s not that you don’t agree that men will become like God — sinless, holy, and powerfully empowered with divine might — but you believe men will not inherit all things that God and Christ possess. So I surmise that your disagreement is focused more specifically on the degree of divine empowerment that the faithful will receive, and not on whether or not those who overcome the world will become very much like God in many ways. Yes?

Adam and Eve had become like God but they were not Gods.

[theplains]

On 7/30/2023 at 1:23 AM, InCognitus said:

In the context of the gospel of John, Jesus never identifies himself as God, instead he declares himself as the "Son of God" a number of times, and repeatedly says that God is his "Father".  In the view of the Jews at that time, the "sons of God" were considered to be the elohim (gods) of their scriptures.  And making oneself a son of God is the same as declaring oneself to be equal with God.

Psalm 82:6 says, “I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High”.

If Jesus making himself a son of God (declaring he is equal with God) is blasphemous then why 
is being called gods not considered blasphemy?
 

On 7/30/2023 at 1:23 AM, InCognitus said:

Continuing on with John 10, notice that Jesus recognizes that calling himself the Son of God or that God is his Father is why they are accusing him of blasphemy:  

If I say I am one of the sons of God and that God is my Father, would anyone have a 
valid case to accuse me of blasphemy?
 

On 7/30/2023 at 1:23 AM, InCognitus said:

The Psalm says the gods in this chapter are "children of the most High", or in other words, sons of God.

The rabinic interpretation of Psalm 82 from that time period is that they understood Israel's reception of the covenant on Mount Sinai as rendering Israel immortal, thus becoming "gods".  But after they sinned in making the golden calf, they were again condemned to mortality.  (See Psalm 82 in Contemporary Latter-day Saint Tradition, Daniel O. McClellan, p 93)

By “gods” then, I assume you believe they are rather judges, rulers, or God’s representative 
on earth - not deities - since they are not putting a charge of blasphemy against themselves.
 

On 7/30/2023 at 1:23 AM, InCognitus said:

It was likely because of scripture like Psalm 82 that they made the charge of blasphemy, since the Psalm describes the "children of the most High" in the heavenly court of God as "gods".

Were these “children of the Most High” deities like all exalted beings in LDS theology?

Was assigning the term “children of the Most High” to a group of people considered blasphemous 
to Jews before Jesus came?

[teddyaware]

48 minutes ago, theplains said:

Adam and Eve had become like God but they were not Gods.

I can only conclude that you resorted to this lame deflection because you find my scriptural defense of the LDS position on theosis so compelling that you’d rather not have to address it.

The Lord did indeed tell Adam and Eve that they had become “like God,” but only in the sense that they were now accountable before him and no longer in a naive and childlike state. He also solemnly warned them that they were now in a totally lost and fallen state that required living faith in Christ and his atonement, sincere repentance, submission to baptism, the reception of the enlightening, strengthening, and sanctifying power of the Holy Ghost, and enduring in faith to the end before being able to become fully like God.

50 But God hath made known unto our fathers that all men must repent.

51 And he called upon our father Adam by his own voice, saying: I am God; I made the world, and men before they were in the flesh.

52 And he also said unto him: If thou wilt turn unto me, and hearken unto my voice, and believe, and repent of all thy transgressions, and be baptized, even in water, in the name of mine Only Begotten Son, who is full of grace and truth, which is Jesus Christ the only name which shall be given under heaven, whereby salvation. shall come unto the children of men, ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, asking all things in his name, and whatsoever ye shall ask, it shall be given you. (Moses 6)

Edited August 1, 2023 by teddyaware

[CV75]

2 hours ago, theplains said:

So it seems you believe the gods of Psalm 82:1 are not deities but rather the Jewish human judges
(or rulers) on earth.

Psalm 82:1, I believe, can refer to all kinds of gods. I beleive Jesus used this verse to relate to the mortal, human kind He was addressing in John 10. I beleive that other applications are also valid: any god but the Most High and His chosen companions will "die like men," literally and figuratively, and some never to be redeemed.

[CV75]

2 hours ago, theplains said:

Psalm 82:6 says, “I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High”.

If Jesus making himself a son of God (declaring he is equal with God) is blasphemous then why 
is being called gods not considered blasphemy?
 

If I say I am one of the sons of God and that God is my Father, would anyone have a 
valid case to accuse me of blasphemy?
 

By “gods” then, I assume you believe they are rather judges, rulers, or God’s representative 
on earth - not deities - since they are not putting a charge of blasphemy against themselves.
 

Were these “children of the Most High” deities like all exalted beings in LDS theology?

Was assigning the term “children of the Most High” to a group of people considered blasphemous 
to Jews before Jesus came?

Q1: Jesus taught all along He was the Son of God, which is different than a son or child of God, of the kingdom, etc. This rubbed the Jews the wrong way all along, so they called His claim blasphemous while the general terminology is not. 

Q2:  No, for the same reason. You are mot claiming to be the Son of God.

Q3: I do not think exclusively so, but there could be some overlap given our understanding of restored doctrine. In the days of Pslams, these would be the Lord's people,  whether on earth or gathered to their fathers. But the saying was made to an audience of mortals who were meant to understand that they are erstwhile, ostensibly, or faithful children of God. We apply that understanding, as with scripture in general, to ourselves.

Q4: I do not think so, and I'm sure there are readily available references supporting that.

Edited August 1, 2023 by CV75

[InCognitus]

On 8/1/2023 at 11:13 AM, theplains said:

Psalm 82:6 says, “I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High”.

If Jesus making himself a son of God (declaring he is equal with God) is blasphemous then why 
is being called gods not considered blasphemy?

In Psalm 82, do you think God calling those divine beings "gods" is blasphemy?  The scripture says what it says.  How can we accuse God of blasphemy?

In John 10, the question comes down to what did the Jews of that time consider to be "blasphemy".  When Jesus pointed out that God in scripture refers to other divine beings as "gods", they couldn't argue with scripture, but they still wanted to find some reason to condemn Jesus.  They found ways to accuse people of blasphemy when they were trying to get rid of them.  Even Stephen was accused of blasphemy for speaking words against Moses and against God for repeating the things that Jesus said about the temple (Acts 6:9-14). 

On 8/1/2023 at 11:13 AM, theplains said:

If I say I am one of the sons of God and that God is my Father, would anyone have a 
valid case to accuse me of blasphemy?

Perhaps, but it depends.  Saying it alone may not be enough, but performing miracles on the Sabbath while saying God is your Father might put you into the blasphemy department, as it was when the Jews accused Jesus of blasphemy for saying "God was his Father, making himself equal with God".

On 8/1/2023 at 11:13 AM, theplains said:

By “gods” then, I assume you believe they are rather judges, rulers, or God’s representative 
on earth - not deities - since they are not putting a charge of blasphemy against themselves.

You misunderstand the verses:  

"Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;  Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?"  (John 10:34–36)

Jesus said this applied to "them... unto whom the word of God came".  This wasn't necessarily to the Jews at the time of Jesus.  So no, they wouldn't put a charge of blasphemy "against themselves". 

Also, it isn't likely that the divine beings in God's divine council depicted in Psalm 82 are mortal men on earth, as you seem to be arguing. 

First of all, God's divine council of gods is depicted in other places in the Bible, and not just in Psalm 82.  In Psalm 89:6-8, it says:  "Your wonders, O LORD, are praised by the heavens, Your faithfulness, too, in the assembly of holy beings. For who in the skies can equal the LORD, can compare with the LORD among the divine beings, a God greatly dreaded in the council of holy beings, held in awe by all around Him?"  The divine beings here are depicted in heaven around God.

Second of all is for the reason I asked of you last time and in the other thread, which was:  In Psalm 82 if the gods are really mortal humans, why would it be a punishment for mortal humans to "die like men" since they are already mortal and would already "die like men"?  To quote Heiser:  "if the ĕlōhîm in Psalm 82 are humans, why are they sentenced to die “like humans”? This sounds as awkward as sentencing a child to grow up or a dog to bark. The point of verse 6 is that, in response to their corruption, the ĕlōhîm will be stripped of their immortality at God’s discretion and die as humans die." (You've Seen one Elohim, You've Seen Them All? A Critique of Mormonism's Use of Psalm 82, p. 225)   How do you make sense of this?

On 8/1/2023 at 11:13 AM, theplains said:

Were these “children of the Most High” deities like all exalted beings in LDS theology?

Was assigning the term “children of the Most High” to a group of people considered blasphemous 
to Jews before Jesus came?

Apparently it was considered blasphemous enough that they began changing scripture to conflate the "sons of God" and "gods" of the Old Testament with angels. 

Take Deuteronomy 32:8-9 for example.  The Dead Sea Scrolls text 4QDeutj reads:  

"When Elyon gave the nations as an inheritance, when he separated the sons of man, he set the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God (bny 'l[hym]). For Yahweh's portion was his people; Jacob was the lot of his inheritance".

The later translations of the Septuagint (LXX) read:

"When the Most High divided the nations, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the boundaries of the nations according to the number of the angels of God (aggelón theou). And his people Jacob became the portion of the Lord, Israel was the line of his inheritance".

The Masoretic Hebrew Text reads:

"When Elyon gave the nations their inheritance, when he divided all the sons of man, he set the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of the sons of Israel (bny yshr'l). For Yahweh's portion was his people, Jacob was the lot of his inheritance".

The later editions of the Septuagint removed "sons of God" in other places in the Old Testament as well, and replaced them with "angels", in verses like Job 1:6, Job 2:1, and Job 38:7.  

Another example is Psalm 8:5, where the KJV says of man, "For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour."  But the actual Hebrew word in that verse is Elohim (gods), and some translations like the RSV says "For thou hast made him but little lower than God", or like the ESV, which says "Yet you have made him a little lower than the heavenly beings".   A Jewish translation of this verse renders it this way with a Rabbinical commentary that follows:  “what is man that You have been mindful of him, mortal man that You have taken note of him, that You have made him little less than divine, and adorned him with glory and majesty;”  The Radak (Rabbi David Kimhi, 1160-1235) commentary of this verse makes these observations:  “For Thou hast made him but little lower than Elohim: – that is, the angels - in that the spirit of man is of the (same) quality as that of the angels, which is incorporeal just as they are incorporeal; and the inferiority consists in the fact of its {i.e. man's spirit) being (lodged) in a body.”  Here, the 12th century Rabbi said that the “elohim” in this verse refers to angels even though the Hebrew word in this verse is Elohim (God or gods).  And the Septuagint translates this verse as ángelos (Greek for angels), and the Septuagint version is quoted in the New Testament (Hebrews 2:7, 9). 

This is all an attempt at changing the meaning of "sons of God" into a different classification of beings, taking them out of the divine realm.  Having it read "sons of God" was offensive, because it meant that God has "sons" and they would have equality with God as his children. 

[theplains]

On 8/1/2023 at 1:40 PM, teddyaware said:

I can only conclude that you resorted to this lame deflection because you find my scriptural defense of the LDS position on theosis so compelling that you’d rather not have to address it.

The Lord did indeed tell Adam and Eve that they had become “like God,” but only in the sense that they were now accountable before him and no longer in a naive and childlike state. He also solemnly warned them that they were now in a totally lost and fallen state that required living faith in Christ and his atonement, sincere repentance, submission to baptism, the reception of the enlightening, strengthening, and sanctifying power of the Holy Ghost, and enduring in faith to the end before being able to become fully like God.

It might be more appropriate to change the phrase "become like God" to "become God".  This
would, I think, align more fully to what you believe.  

[theplains]

On 8/1/2023 at 1:54 PM, CV75 said:

Psalm 82:1, I believe, can refer to all kinds of gods.

What kinds of gods are there?

[CV75]

3 hours ago, theplains said:

What kinds of gods are there?

Let's try this: offer your most useful list, and I will add to it if I can -- in the interest of time. If it helps fine-tune the conversation, set forth a scope and semantic (e.g., exclude what you consider to be the false gods named in the Bible; include only the kinds of gods mentioned in what we generally consider to be monotheistic religious texts, histories, oral traditions, etc.; or any gods other than the one you personally worship; anything useful to address the underlying question). Thank you,

[theplains]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

Let's try this: offer your most useful list, and I will add to it if I can -- in the interest of time. If it helps fine-tune the conversation, set forth a scope and semantic (e.g., exclude what you consider to be the false gods named in the Bible; include only the kinds of gods mentioned in what we generally consider to be monotheistic religious texts, histories, oral traditions, etc.; or any gods other than the one you personally worship; anything useful to address the underlying question). Thank you,

Incognitus replied to me in another thread.  He provided this list:

    1.  “A general appellation of deities or divinities”.  This could be either false gods or gods that 
    exist in reality.
    2.  In application to Christ as God
    3.  Spoken of the only and true God: with the article… and very often; with prepositions
    4.   Θεός is used of whatever can in any respect be likened to God, or resembles him in any way: 
    Hebraistically, equivalent to God's representative or vicegerent, of magistrates and judges
    5.   Of the devil  (“the god of this age”), 2 Corinthians 4:4; the person or thing to which one is 
    wholly devoted, for which alone he lives, e. g. the belly in Philippians 3:19.

 

[theplains]

On 8/1/2023 at 3:49 PM, CV75 said:

Q3: I do not think exclusively so, but there could be some overlap given our understanding of restored doctrine. In the days of Pslams, these would be the Lord's people,  whether on earth or gathered to their fathers. But the saying was made to an audience of mortals who were meant to understand that they are erstwhile, ostensibly, or faithful children of God. We apply that understanding, as with scripture in general, to ourselves.

If Latter-day Saints living on earth today are in the group “ye are gods” spoken of 
in Psalm 82:6, how are you a god?