Investigating the original intent of Jesus' statement, "You are gods" (John 10:34).

(Original article published 06-12-2006 available at the Franklin Road Baptist Church Website )   

To discover the "original intent" of Jesus' statement, Psalm 82, the source of Jesus' quotation in John 10:34, must be understood. The psalm begins by asserting that God (v. 1a) is the Judge of "the gods" (v. 1b). The psalmist then directs attention to God's indictment of the "gods" (vv. 2-7). God accused them of prejudice in favor of the wicked and of oppressing the poor, the innocent and the needy (vv. 2-4). He accused them of being blinded by their might, of being corrupted by their power, and of perverting the nation's legal "foundations" (v. 5). Sound familiar? Because they thought themselves to be invincible, God reminds the arrogant "gods" of their mortality and that he had appointed them to office (v. 6-7). The song closes with the congregation's petition to God to administer justice on the earth (v.8).

Because Jesus quoted this psalm in his argument with the Jews, any understanding of his words must be connected to the psalm's original intent. As the Master Lawyer, we assume that Jesus' reference to the Law of Psalm 82 was a key part of his defense against the charge of blasphemy that the Jews were leveling against him for stating, "I and the Father are one" (Jn. 10:30).

In order to determine the original intent of the psalm's declaration, "I said, 'You are gods", two interpretive questions must be answered: first, who are the "gods" to which the psalm, and then Jesus, refer (Ps. 82:1b, 6a); and second, who is the designated speaker in the phrase "I said"?

Scholars offer three interpretations of the identity of the "gods": a. that gods refer to pagan idols; b. that gods refer to angelic beings; and c. that gods refer to human judges who were vice-regents in the administration of Israel's theocratic kingdom. As already intimated and for good reasons, the "gods" of Psalm 82 can only refer to human judges. Here's why.

Psalm 82 begins, "God [Elohim] takes His stand in His own congregation; He judges in the midst of the rulers [elohim]." In the psalm's opening verse, there are two "elohim" references. First, there exists the single and sovereign God (Elohim) who possesses authority over his earthly vice-regents (the elohim). Like "the gods" in Psalm 82:1b and 6a, "elohim" is elsewhere translated "judges" or "rulers" in the Old Testament (see Exodus 21:6 and 22:8).[4] God had therefore invested "the gods" with authority to administrate the Law in Israel's theocratic kingdom (v.1). For the purpose of administering day-to-day justice in the theocratic kingdom, "the gods" were the human extension of God.

Second, the immediate context also identifies these "gods" to be human authorities. God chastises them for showing partiality in their judgments, for oppressing the unfortunate, and for ignoring the needy (vv. 2-4). Such offenses can only be committed by human rulers. Further, it is because of their crookedness that "All the foundations of the earth are shaken" (v. 5). For reason of judicial malpractice, the "shaken-foundations" metaphor signals a collapse of the legal system. As David questioned elsewhere, "If the foundations are destroyed, what can the righteous do?" (Ps. 11:3). For better or for worse, human judges administer earthly justice. Angels and/or pagan gods do not.

Third, regarding these "gods" (i.e., elohim, vv. 1b, 6a) the psalm declares, "Nevertheless you will die like men, and fall like any one of the princes" (v.7). Because God is eternal (Psalm 90:2), angels are immortal (Lk. 20:36), and pagan gods are lifeless (Hab. 2:19; Acts 17:29), these mortal "gods" are human, not divine.

And fourth, the correlation between Psalm 82:6 and Jesus' quotation of it in John 10 necessitated that the "gods" to whom Jesus referred corresponded to the "gods" in the psalm. If the "gods" to whom Jesus referred in John 10 were many of Judah's judges (i.e., "the Jews"), the reference to "the gods" in Psalm 82 must likewise have referred to Israel's judges. The fact that in his quotation Jesus viewed that the "gods" of Psalm 82:1b and 6a were equivalent to the Jews indicates that "the gods" were not angels or pagan deities. If they were, then it becomes difficult to see the relevance of Jesus' reference in the controversy. The "gods" in Psalm 82 whom Jesus made analogous and extended reference to in John 10, were human judges.

The second issue to be resolved is this: who is speaking when Psalm 82:6 states, "I said, 'You are gods'"? Was speaker the psalmist (Asaph), or God (Elohim)? For a number of reasons the speaker must be identified as God.[5] If the inner contents of the psalm are a unit that flow in continuity after the introduction (v. 1) until the closing petition (v. 8), then it should be concluded that as in the surrounding verses (vv. 2-7), the speaker in verse 6 is God. The "you-are-gods" statement is intended by God to remind Israel's judges that they served under his authority, by his appointment and at his discretion. The statement "I said, 'You are gods'" may have recalled the investiture ceremony by which Israel's theocratic judges were officially appointed to their position. In assuming their office, the judges were told, "You are gods." With those words of investiture, the judges were reminded of their solemn relationship with God and their obligation to fairly administrate his justice on earth. The ceremony by which a Supreme Court justice is sworn in to uphold the U.S. Constitution by placing his hand on the Bible perhaps illustrates the statement.

By declaring them to be "gods" in his defense against the accusation of blasphemy, Jesus made at least five points to the Jews: one, their authority to judge was on loan to them from God; two, they would account to God for any miscarriage of justice they might perpetrate; three, like the corrupt judges of Psalm 82:5, Jesus inferred they were corrupt and did not "understand" and walked "about in darkness" (Jesus after all, was the light of the world! John 8:12; 9:5); four, because of the legal precedent set in Psalm 82:6 where the Law called judges "gods," Jesus was innocent of blasphemy; and five, by identifying with the divine Speaker in Psalm 82 (i.e., in symphony with God in Psalm 82:6 Jesus also decreed to judges, "I said, 'You are gods'"), Jesus further affirmed that he was God! And Jesus did so by the authority of Scripture, for as he said, "the Scripture cannot be broken" (Jn. 10:35). The subtly of contemplative religionism is they hijack a Scripture Jesus used to affirm his deity and apply it to themselves.

By calling them "gods" Jesus in no way asserted that the Jews were "enlightened" beings. In fact, the opposite is the case. Jesus' quotation of Psalm 82 subtly implicated the Jews with the "darkness" that characterized the judges of that day. Neither the Jewish judges or people were "gods" for reason of indwelling divinity. After all, they would "die like men". The Jewish authorities were "gods" only in so far that God invested his authority with them. That was the "original intent" of Psalm 82:6, and that is the sense, it may confidently be asserted, in which Jesus called the Jews "gods" in John 10:34.

Had Jesus meant as mystic, New Age, cultic and Word of Faith religion infer, that all people are "gods," then he was quilty of teaching polytheism, something that the context of John 10 (the issue was blasphemy) and the spirit and the letter of Jewish Law did not and will not bear (see Deut. 6:4). If Jesus was affirming the existence of "gods" other than the Father and Himself, he would have been in violation of the First Commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" (Ex. 20:3). Some might accuse that by declaring himself to be God in John 10:30, Jesus introduced the possibility of multiple gods. But that accusation cannot stick in light of Jesus' declaration, "I and the Father are one" (Jn. 10:30). There is unity within the Trinity!

If there be "gods" in our nation today, these "gods" are not mystical contemplators who believe they bear within them a divine nature they hope to encounter by engaging the mystical Third Eye, but rather the "gods" are judges presiding over our legal system. As Jesus intended it to be understood, but recognizing that our government is a democracy and not a theocracy, can the nine justices of the United States Supreme Court be considered "gods"? In a sense, Yes! But should New Age gurus and devotees to mystical or contemplative spirituality be considered "gods"? Absolutely not! For reason of the divine authority invested in judges by God, and as Jesus affirmed before the Jews he faced, Psalm 82:6 was meant to recognize the authority of some, not the divinity of all.

With Jesus' statement to the Jewish judges, "I said, 'You are gods'", a couple of themes stand out. First, those judges possessed authority from God. And second, those same judges, as is the rest of humanity, were accountable to God. Therefore, it evidences a "leap into the dark" when mystical religionism "spins" a statement Jesus meant to affirm the authority and accountability of the Jews to God, turns the intent of Jesus' words upon its head, and announces the universal divinity of humanity. By quoting Psalm 82 Jesus was not telling the Jews they were deities, but from that proper Old Testament perspective, he was reminding them of their accountability to Almighty God!

Like Lucifer, Adam and Eve, Tyre and Babylon, and the anti-Christ, those who live in practical denial of God's holiness for reason of affirming their own divinity are heading for certain judgment (compare Is. 14:14; Gen. 3:5; Ezek. 28:2; Is. 47:8-9; 2 Thess. 2:4). Those claiming their deity at the expense of God's glory will one day be subpoenaed to the High Court of the universe, there to appear before Judge Jesus (Jn. 5:26-30). Before him and in that final moment of truth, they will be called upon to defend the indefensible, namely, that they being mere humans, first assumed, then projected and finally self-asserted themselves to be "gods." Then, and probably only then, will they come to the stark realization that they were no gods at all.

God's holiness marks him out to be separate and apart from man the creature (Is. 6:1-5). Application of Jesus' saying "Ye are gods" for the purpose of affirming human theosis, that man is or can become God, treats the Holy God as common. A theologian humorously stated, "God created man in His own image and likeness, and man has been returning the compliment ever since!" But God has said, "I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another . . ." (Is. 42:8). If God intends to uphold the holiness and glory he will share with no one else, then the Holy One must surely be provoked by the "compliment" of the contemplators. By arrogantly asserting their deity, they seem to imply that God cannot live without them!

As the Apostle Paul wrote of the mystics' delusion of theosis, "Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man . . ." (Rom. 1:22-23a).

By Pastor Larry DeBruyn

____________

[1] In enunciating the view of humanity held by most teachers of the human potential movement, psychologist M. Scott Peck wrote: "God wants us to become Himself (or Herself or Itself). We are growing toward godhood." See M. Scott Peck, The Road Less Travelled (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1978) 270. In its "Adam-God" doctrine, Mormonism teaches, "As man is, God once was; as God is, man may become." See "Mormonism," Dictionary of Cults, Sects, Religions and the Occult, George A. Mather and Larry A. Nichols, Editors (Grand Rapids: ZondervanPublishingHouse, 1993) 194. Word of Faith teachers assert that because Christians are "little gods," they can through positive confession decree their own health and wealth. See Walter Martin, "You Shall Be As Gods," The Agony of Deceit, Michael Horton, Editor (Chicago: Moody Press, 1990) 89-105.

[2] The Gold Scales, "The Divine Light and the Third Eye," http://oaks.nvg.org/eg3ra4.html

[3] Because of the negative cast John seemingly ascribes to the "Jews," some accuse the gospel of anti-Semitism or racial stereotyping. But the reader should know that in his references to the Jews, John, himself being a Jew, most likely was referring to the leadership of the nation at that time (Jn. 1:19;5:10,16,18;7:13;9:22; etc.). As to how to understand the frequent mention of "the Jews" in the gospel, Morris comments that John employs the term Jews, ". . . to denote the Jewish nation as hostile to Jesus. It does not necessarily denote the whole nation. In fact characteristically it means the Jews of Judea, especially those in and around Jerusalem." If Jews may at times be a synonym for Judaens, then the expression also differentiates Judaeans from Galileans and Samaritans (Jn. 4:9). See Leon Morris, The Gospel of John (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1971) 130-131. One must be careful to think that John's designation "Jews" carries a narrow racial meaning (i.e., the Jewish people).

[4] In reference to the adjudication process, Exodus 21:6 advises, "Then his master shall bring him unto the judges [the elohim]." Again, reads Exodus 22:8, "If the thief be not found, then the master of the house shall be brought unto the judges [the elohim]."

[5] Willem A. VanGemeren, "Psalms," The Expositor's Bible Commentary, Vol. 5, Frank E. Gaebelein, General Editor (Grand Rapids: ZondervanPublishingHouse, 1991) 536. VanGemeren understands the speaker to be God because the "I" is emphatic and is followed by a verb of speaking. Resembling Psalm 2:6, "I said . . ." appears to be the speaking of a divine decree.