Having received a positive reception of Dr. Grumbles’ articles and a request for a summary, we have asked him if he would be willing to offer this for us. The statements “In part [#]” are hyperlinked so that you can read his fuller argument on each point.
This article serves simply to summarize and, hopefully, clarify the arguments made in eight parts. My interest is not to continue a “blog war” nor rebut rebuttals. I am thankful for the reception of the articles and the apparent fruit that has resulted, to the praise of God.
In part 1, I introduce the issues at hand.[1] Others argue, primarily inspired by Heiser’s scholarship, that “real gods” exist. For them, other spiritual beings are properly to be considered gods since Scripture refers to them with the terms elohim/theos. Moreover, the view argues that the Reformed confessions are agnostic regarding such claims. My series contends that other gods do not exist. Angels and demons (including Satan) are at times called “gods” (1 Cor 8:5), but are not properly gods. To clarify the point under contention, I express many areas of agreement with the other view. I, too, am concerned that we take seriously the spiritual forces at work, especially the evil among the sons of disobedience. Next, I agree that real spiritual beings lie behind idols (the artifacts) and false gods (such as Moloch, Krishna, or Allah). To offer sacrifice to idols is to offer them to demons (1 Cor 10:20). To say an idol is “nothing” (Isa 44:9–11; 1 Cor 8:4) is not to say demons are fictitious but to say that these are no gods. I also agree with the other view that YHWH is supreme and uncreated. Finally, this series does not directly address the question of a divine council. Some can hold to a council of YHWH with his angels while not believing in the existence of other “real gods” in such a council.
In part 2, I move to hermeneutical and definitional questions. Hermeneutically, I argue for a method that uses the analogy of Scripture, particularly that clear Scripture interprets the unclear. Yes, this is a hermeneutical cycle, but in reality, every reader faces a hermeneutical cycle. One may claim “clarity” lies in the eye of the beholder, but one way to judge which texts are clear is to read the Scriptures with the church. The church has held to belief in one divine being, and has interpreted certain “monotheistic” texts in this way. The “other gods” view utilizes novel interpretations of texts like Isaiah 44:6 and 1 Corinthians 8:4–6. Moreover, there is a way to fit the texts that mention “the gods” with the monotheistic texts, but the fit does not work vice versa. This is what I seek to show in the following articles as I exegete many texts.
In regard to definitions, Part 2 defines the terms “god” and “angel” and explains why Scripture may call other beings “gods.” A “real god” is a being with a divine nature. According to Exod 3:14 and other texts, YHWH’s essence is his existence. Thus, we cannot separate YHWH’s divine nature from himself. It is impossible for any other being to share in YHWH’s nature, and therefore it is impossible for any other being to have a divine nature. Opponents will claim these are claims without proof, circularly assuming a certain definition of the word “god” to prove there is only one. No doubt, a semantic range for the word “god” exists. However, I seek to get the definition from Scripture, not the etymology of the word “god.” Scripture tells us about God’s nature. Moreover, yes, Scripture tells us he is the only elohim/theos. Such a claim is ontological, speaking of his nature. Thus, Scripture forces us to distinguish between god “proper” and “improper.” With that definition in mind, we must understand why biblical writers use the word elohim/theos of other beings. Angels are created analogues of YHWH. They are spirit, but not most pure spirit. They are finite. They do not possess common accidental properties with God. Angels, and sometimes men, are analogically called gods because they exercise (or even merely appear to exercise) power. To call other beings proper “gods” means they would share some common accidents with God.
In Part 3, I begin exegesis of Scripture texts. The question is whether further exegesis of Scripture bears out this definition of one God. Since exegesis is at the heart of these articles, the reader should click on each article to see the various interpretations of each text and how I propose a correct understanding of them. Here I can only “scratch the surface” of the texts.
I begin with those which affirm the existence of only one divine being—that is, monotheism. Naturally, only a few could be chosen. I begin in Deuteronomy 4:35, 39. Part of Deut 4:35 states, “. . . to know that YHWH, he is god [elohim], there is no other besides him.” Deuteronomy 4:39 says, “. . . he is God in heaven above and upon the earth beneath. There is no other.” Next, Deut 10:17 says, “For YHWH your God [elohim], he is God of gods, and Lord of lords, the God [El], great, might, and awesome . . . .” Deuteronomy 32 also serves as a significant text in this debate. While the song mentions other gods, several verses deny their existence. Deut 32:39 states in part, “See, now, that I [YHWH], I am he, and there is no other god with me.” Deut 32:17 says, “They sacrificed to demons, not God [eloah], gods [elohim] they did not know, new ones who had come recently, whom your fathers did not know.” While some say the demons are gods, the text shows that the “gods” are demons (cf. 1 Cor 10:20).[2] Deut 32:21 clarifies such when it says, “They caused me jealousy by ‘no god’ [el], caused me anger by their idols.” Deuteronomy 4 and 32 present a view of YHWH as the exclusive deity, not merely a unique one.
Part 3b continues by venturing beyond Deuteronomy. 2 Kings 19:15, 18–19 says, “And Hezekiah prayed before YHWH and said, ‘O YHWH God [elohim] of Israel, who dwells above the cherubim, you yourself are God [elohim], you alone, over all the kingdoms of the earth. You made the heavens and the earth. . . . And they [the kings of Assyria] cast their gods [elohim] into the fire, for they were no gods [elohim] but the works of the hands of men—wood and stone—so they destroyed them. And now, YHWH our God, please save us from their hand, that all kingdoms of the earth may know that you, YHWH, are God [elohim] alone.” Hezekiah proclaims that YHWH is the only elohim. The foreign kings were able to cast the idols of other nations into the fire because those elohim could not save their peoples nor keep their idols from being destroyed. Why? They do not exist as gods—they were “no elohim.” Next, Jer 2:11 states, “Has a nation exchanged gods [elohim]? (But they are not gods [elohim]). But my people exchanged their glory for what does not profit.” Similarly, Jer 16:20 states, “Can a man make for himself gods? But they are not gods.” These select texts demonstrate “Orthodox Yahwism” in Old Testament times. While Israel at times strayed into heterodoxy or heresy, God’s true people held to the conviction that only one elohim exists, YHWH, Israel’s God.
Part 4 continues in the OT, focusing on Isaiah, since this prophet so heartily emphasizes monotheism. OT scholarship generally sees Isaiah 40–48 as so monotheistic that they see a contradiction with other parts of Scripture which mention gods! Yet, for the other gods view, the texts are not proclaiming that YHWH is the only elohim who exists, merely that he is the supreme or incomparable elohim. The texts make greater claims, however. Isaiah says to the gods, “You are nothing” (Isa 41:24). Isaiah describes YHWH as the only elohim (Isa 44:6; 45:5). As I work through texts in Part 4b, I first list those that claim YHWH is the only elohim who exists (44:6, 8; 45:14, 18, 22; 46:9). The church for centuries used such verses to explain that the Son must be consubstantial with the Father, for only one elohim can exist. Next, some texts speak of YHWH as “first and last” (44:6; 48:12). These mean YHWH is the only elohim to exist from beginning to end. Finally, Isaiah gives explicit proofs for why YHWH is the only elohim. Only YHWH predicts the future and controls history (Isa 41:23–28; 42:8–9; 44:6; 45:21; 46:9–11).
In Part 5, I move to NT texts that affirm monotheism. The NT proclaims a “Christological Monotheism,” assuming from the OT that only one God exists and thus proving that Jesus the Christ is that one God and Lord. First, 1 Tim 2:5 claims that there is one God. Paul rephrases the Shema from “YHWH our God is one” to “God is one” and reaffirms that only one divine being exists. Next, James 2:19 says that even the demons believe God is one. Like Paul, James quotes the Shema. Mark 12:29 also quotes the Shema even more directly, declaring, “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.” Mark emphasizes the singularity of the divine being in Mark 12:32, when the ruler says, “You are right, Teacher. You have truly said that he is one, and there is no other besides him.”
1 Corinthians 8:4-6 provides a key text for this doctrine. Here, Paul again references the Shema with the negative statement, “There is no god but one” (1 Cor 8:4). Paul acknowledges the existence of those called gods but dismisses their real existence. They are not non-entities, for demons exist and pagans offer sacrifices to demons (1 Cor 10:20). Yet these entities are not “real gods.” When Paul concedes that there are “many gods and many lords” he means that the “gods” bear the name but not the reality. Christians (“for us”) know the truth of only one theos existing.
In examining the NT, I move in Part 5b to two passages which the “other gods” view uses to claim the existence of other gods. 2 Corinthians 4:4 provides the key text, for one (presumably Satan) is called “the god of this world.” Here, we must understand carefully proper and improper predication. In other words, for Paul to call Satan “god” is one thing; to believe he really is a “god” is another entirely. Paul calls him “god” because the devil assumes a kind of authority over the world and seeks to lead it astray, mimicking God’s authority so that he can be called “god” analogously. Hebrews 1:6 serves as the other text because of its reference to Ps 97:7 (MT), “worship him, all gods!” Yet Heb 1:6 commands God’s angels to worship God. The writer could be quoting Ps 97:7 LXX, Deut 32:43 LXX, or the Greek liturgical Odes of Deuteronomy. Probably, the writer of Hebrews refers to the beings as angels to differentiate them from Christ. To call them “gods” may detract from the uniqueness of Christ. Regardless, though, the verse says that the “gods” of Ps 97:7 are ontologically angels, not vice versa.
Having examined Old and New Testaments for texts affirming the existence of only one divine being, the series moves to deal with the texts the “other gods” view brings out to argue for their view. A locus classicus for them is Psalm 82, which Part 6 examines. The question of Psalm 82 pertains to whether it speaks of YHWH judging men or angels, calling them “gods.” Either way, however, we need not conclude that these beings are “real gods.” Even so, I argue that Psalm 82 describes human rulers as judges, not angels. First, I consider the objection that God threatens the beings with death “like men” (Ps 82:7). I argue that the threat still holds because the rulers thought themselves immune to the suffering of the lower class. Moreover, linguistic similarities to Ezekiel 28 and Isaiah 14 show how God threatens with death certain rulers who think themselves to be gods. Additionally, one questions how angels or gods could “die like men.” Men have bodies and are mortal, so these judges could die like the rest of mankind. The second objection relates to the proposition of a “divine council” in Ps 82:1a. An appropriate translation, however, is that, “God [Elohim] is standing in the assembly of God [El].” This is a “divine council” only in the sense that this is God’s council. As a polemic against Canaanite mythology, the Psalm shows YHWH is the El who calls the assemblies. Certainly, Ps 82:1b says he judges “amidst the gods [elohim].” Here, the writer calls elohim those God judges. This does not sufficiently show, however, that this is a council of spiritual beings. Men can also be called judges, and to this argument the rest of Part 7 turns.
I argue in Part 6b that, elsewhere in the OT, elohim refers to human judges. Exodus 22:8, an admittedly puzzling text, best refers to judges as elohim, rather than God. Exod 22:28 and Exod 21:6 also use the term for judges. In these cases, the term is used analogously for the “power” God has. Magistrates stand in the place of God as ministers (Rom 13:1), and so have power. Moreover, I show how in other texts of the OT, elohim is used in the contexts of men with power. In Exod 7:1, YHWH says he makes Moses “God [elohim] to Pharaoh.” According to Exod 4:16, Moses before Aaron stands “for God [elohim].” Finally, I address 1 Sam 28:13, when the witch of En-dor appears to summon Samuel. She claims she sees an elohim. The text has several complications, but even if we were to assume the witch speaks correctly, we could conclude she refers to him as a judge, a man with power.
Coming back to Psalm 82, I consider Jesus’ quotation in John 10. I note how in John 10:34–35 Jesus emphasizes the verb “call.” YHWH said they are gods, but this does not mean they are gods necessarily. If YHWH calls others gods, and Christ is one with him, he can also call someone God (himself). (the charge of blasphemy). I endorse the claim that Jesus uses an a fortiori argument. If men in Psalm 82 are called gods, how much more can Jesus Christ, true God, call himself such? Thus, we have very good reason to think that Psalm 82 speaks of men as elohim. Much of the claim about “real gods” rests, then, on a tenuous foundation.
In Part 7, I examine a few more texts that supposedly reference other real gods. Psalm 8 speaks of man being made lower than the elohim. The LXX translates the term as “angel,” and Heb 2:7 also quotes it as being about angels. Thus, we should conclude that elohim here means angels. Next, Scripture also uses the term “sons of God,” particularly in Job 1:6 and 38:7. To be called a “son of elohim” is akin to being called elohim. Thus, we interpret the texts in the same way as the many already studied. Interestingly, however, Gill takes Job 1:6 to be about men (as many also take Gen 6:2, 4). Job 38:7 refers to the angels. Even so, use of the term “sons of God” does not make these beings “real gods.” In Part 7b, I look at texts which make claims like “YHWH is God of gods” (Deut 10:17; Ps 136:2–3; Dan 2:47; 11:36) or “above all gods” (Ps 95:3; 97:9). I see these as rhetorical claims, exploiting ancient pagan motifs to assert YHWH’s replacement of other gods in the peoples’ minds. One need not assume these “gods” are “real gods” for the statements to carry weight. Because people believe these gods are real, the claims make sense.
Finally, in part 8, I examine the Second London Confession’s claim, “The Lord our God is but one only living and true God.” The “other gods” view claims that believing in other real gods does not deny this Confessional claim. They say the claim of 2LCF is merely that YHWH (“our God”) is the only “living and true God.” Other gods exist, but they are false (unworthy and unreliable) and not living (they are created). I compare the Confession to WCF and Savoy, which state, “There is but one only living and true God. . .” These do not distinguish between “our god” and others’ gods. Moreover, the language of “living and true” comes directly from Scripture (Jer 10:10), not to mention “our” (Deut 6:4). I also examine modern expositions, which both explain the singularity of God. Moreover, in comparing to WCF and Savoy further, the Westminster Larger Catechism clarifies that there are not more gods than one. In his Body of Divinity, Edward Leigh explains that Scripture denies the existence of other gods. The First London Confession also buttresses this interpretation. It says, “The Lord our God is but one God. . .” It does not include the modifiers “living and true,” and one is hard-pressed to think Second London added those words to open a door for belief in other gods. Finally, I also look at Baptist catechisms. Keach’s Catechism (1695) also says there are not more gods than one (Question 8). Keach himself gives the definition of elohim as proper only to God, but analogically used for angels.[3] Beddome’s exposition of the Catechism states that other gods do not exist. Then, the Orthodox Catechism teaches the same when examining the first two commandments. The Second London Confession, then, denies the existence of other gods. One cannot believe in “real gods” and claim the Confession.
Thus, having largely examined Scriptural texts in-depth, this series has shown that only one God (one elohim/theos, one divine being) exists. Other “gods” are not “real gods.” Other beings (men or angels) are called gods in an analogical sense. Even the demons believe God is one—and tremble!
[1] All renderings of biblical texts are the author’s translation.
[2] J. G. McConville, Deuteronomy (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 2002), 456, writes, “Other gods are now exposed, in succession, as ‘demons’ and no gods at all . . . .”
[3] Benjamin Keach, Tropologia (London: City Press, 1858), 97.