I’ve argued in my book, “The Unseen Battle,” that the most coherent view of the “sons of God/Bene ha elohim” in Psalm 82 is a supernatural view. The sons of God are spiritual beings allotted over the nations as guardians who went into rebellion (Deut 32:8-9) and are then judged for their wickedness in Psalm 82.
One of the strongest objections to this view is what Jesus says in John 10:34-38.
“Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods” ’? If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside—what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’? Do not believe me unless I do the works of my Father. But if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.”” (John 10:34–38, NIV)
I want to pose some questions that I believe will help us understand the words of Jesus on His own terms. This will involve some theological retrieval as well as assessing the social situation.
The gospel of John has seriously high Christology. It is a “theological” gospel through and through. Therefore we must ask a question of method. Why would John, who wants to consistently make much of the cosmic Christ, then communicate that Jesus is just another “son of God” as a human being, just like everyone else already is? In this there seems to be a theological inconsistency by reading the “sons of God” reference of Jesus as advocating for a human rulers view. It flows against the thematic structure that John has develops throughout the gospel.
The response of the people is really curious - why do they want to stone him if he is simply making a claim everyone else can? Is it possible that those hearers received the words of Jesus in a way that is neglected if we opt for a humanizing of the “elohim” of Psalm 82:6? When we consider that the first reading of the Hebrew phrase, “bene ha Elohim” and how it was interpreted in the OT and the LXX from the earliest readings was a supernatural view, we are faced with an important decision. Which interpretation history will we opt for here in John? One that has its roots with the Jewish Rabbinic movement that attempted to demytholagize the supernatural reading (Genesis Rabbah 26:5), and then gains traction with Julius Africanus (from what I can tell) or an interpretive tradition that is rooted earlier?
If the point was for Jesus to connect himself to “human rulers” there are other Psalms that would do that without ambiguity. Jesus could have easily opted to quote Psalm 2, 45, or 72 among others.1
So what is Jesus doing here? I would want to argue that Jesus is acknowledging that God has already self disclosed that there are divine Sons of God, specifically angelic/supernatural beings. God is not simply just among those divine beings, he is one with the Father who is the uncreated creator.
And the people get riled up again and try to take him out. Jesus makes a claim that is offensive to the religious rulers. These rulers could care less if Jesus is simply saying he is the same as the rest of God’s human children. It is the fact that Jesus is saying He is more than even the spiritual beings that God created that got everyone all worked up.
Consider this. If Jesus appealed to a human rulers view he would have de-escelated the situation and contradicted the very theological trajectory of John as a Gospel. Instead Jesus affirms His divinity, declares his supremacy over all created things (earthly and spiritual) and the religious rulers hate him for it.
We need to read the Bible in its own context. This is exactly why I wrote, “The Unseen Battle.” To retrieve an understanding of spiritual warfare, cosmic conflict within the framework of the victory of Jesus on the Bible’s own terms - not ours.
If you read through these Psalms you will notice that the point being made about the Davidic King are all earthly and temporal or spatial terms. It deals with expansion of land and territory. Perfect examples to use if Jesus wanted to further the view of human rulers or kings. Jesus does not. And it is not because he is unaware of these Psalms. Psalm 2:7 is used in connection to the baptism of Jesus and His transfiguration.
@For by Him all things were created in heaven and on earth, [things] visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities; all things were created and exist through Him [that is, by His activity] and for Him.”
Colossians 1:16