Social Justice: Are the ‘Elohim’ in Psalm 82 Human or Divine?

What do the gods have to do with Social Justice?

One of the most discussed—and debated—texts when it comes to the divine council worldview (DCW) is Psalm 82.  A recent objection raised a familiar critique:  how can the figures described as “gods” (elohim) be spiritual beings when they’re condemned for such overtly human failures?  Shouldn’t they be judged only for usurping the worship that is due God, if the problem was that they were taking that worship wrongly?  

The critique points out that in Psalm 82, these elohim:

1. Judge unjustly
   
   
2. Show partiality to the wicked
   
   
3. Fail to give justice to the weak and fatherless
   
   
4. Ignore the rights of the afflicted and destitute
   
   
5. Do not rescue the weak and needy
   
   

And the objection is this:  how could any of that be true of spiritual beings?  Isn’t this obviously a reference to human judges?  How would communication between gods and people happen?  Aren’t spiritual beings only “in charge” of worship?  

The claim supposes that the Bible presents no way in which there’s mediation between the gods and people whereupon these judgments might fall upon spiritual beings rather than humans.

So, let’s tackle this claim and objection.

Divine-Human Mirror in the Ancient World

First, we need to think in terms of an ancient Near Eastern (ANE) worldview.  In that world, kings and rulers were not secular administrators, they were representatives of the divine realm.  The “mirror” between heaven and earth:  earthly authority reflects heavenly authority.  This is the context in the ANE, across the board, in every culture of the time.  The Bible doesn’t refute this or challenge it.

So, in fact, in this context, wouldn’t it be bizarre if the Bible did suggest that judgment is due only to humans?  

God:  “Don’t worry, guys, I’ll be sure to punish pharaoh and the other kings for their failures to rule justly, but their deities will get away with it, scott free.” 

I mean, really….how much sense would that make in this landscape of thought?

In the ancient mindset, the failure of a leader was tied directly to the failure (or the displeasure) of the deity.  If the people are defeated, it’s down to two options:  the god also was defeated in godly combat, or the god was mad at the people and expressing his wrath.  That’s why it has to be overtly explained in the prophetic writings that YHWH did not fail when his people were captured and exiled.    

Again:  if the people lost the land, then the usual conclusion would be the defeat of their deity.  But this is not the case of YHWH and the exile, because the exile was option 2:  YHWH pouring out his wrath on the people who turned away from him.  The people of Israel didn’t fail because YHWH had failed, they failed because they refused to align themselves with YHWH and his covenant, and so judgment fell upon them.  

Back to the general ANE context:  just as God enacts His will through human agents--whether prophets, priests, or the body of Christ--so too, the spiritual beings in the DCW framework weren’t expected to act independently of humanity.  They were believed to influence, empower, and direct the rulers and systems aligned with them.  

And vice versa.  The people influenced the gods via worship.  That’s where and how “worship” enters the equation.  It’s not just that worship of false gods was bad solely because they weren’t YHWH--it was bad because the gods were being trusted to provide justice, and they weren’t going to provide justice.  God's righteousness wasn't being done.  The worship of most people was on account of petitions to bring about good and right things.  So, even when it came to things like rain or fertile crops or a healthy delivery of a baby, the gods’ actions were tied to human action.  

No, the gods weren’t throwing lightning bolts, and the Bible presents God--not Baal--as the one who gives rain.  But we need to enter the thinking of the ancient person to understand this ancient text.  These supernatural forces were believed to govern everything that humans care about:  natural forces, military outcomes, fertility of the land--hence the widespread belief in their power.  It is critical to note that Israel’s Scriptures constantly correct this worldview by showing that it is YHWH alone who truly controls rain, fertility, and victory.  But those same Scriptures show that Israel fell into worship of these powers because of the power that they offered.  

Did These ‘gods’ Govern Through Intermediaries?

God does...so why would we presume that the other deities did not?

The objection rightly notes that Israel had a clear structure for divine communication:  YHWH to Moses, to the people.  But Israel was not alone in its belief that gods communicated through intermediaries.  Pagan nations had their own kings, prophets, and priests who were believed to be mouthpieces of the gods.

And within Israel itself, this concept is clearly reflected in how its judges were understood and how judgment is described as happening.  In Exodus 21:6 and Exodus 22:8–9, disputes are to be brought “before elohim.”  Some interpret this as a reference to human judges being directly called gods.  But a more coherent reading is that these human judges were standing in the place of God—they were His representatives, authorized to render judgment on His behalf.

This isn’t just semantics.  It reflects a deeply rooted theological principle:  those who wield judgment do so only as stewards of divine authority.  That is the biblical context.  Whose authority is being lived out in the judgment of the human rulers?  For Israel, it was to be YHWH's judgment.  For those people under authority of lower elohim (ie, they had extra mediation between themselves and YHWH), they were to reflect the judgment of the lower elohim (who were, themselves, supposed to reflect YHWH's righteousness...you see the pattern here?).

In Israel’s ideal framework, the courtroom was a sacred space where God’s justice was mediated through human agents.  The word elohim wasn’t actually referencing the judges at all, or calling them divine; it was used because the judges were meant to reflect God’s divine justice.  So the term “elohim” isn’t a referent to the judges, but to God.  

This is exactly what we see in the Divine Council worldview.  And it makes the “human judges view” nonsensical.  YHWH elohim is not being judged, so the human judges of Israel are not in view in Psalm 82 in its original context, since the human Israelite judges are connected to elohim not in the general use of the term (elohim - gods of the nations), but in the specific one (YHWH elohim).  

In other words, since it is God's judgment being enacted in Exodus 21-22, "elohim" is a direct referent to God, YHWH elohim.  And since YHWH elohim is not the referent in Psalm 82 for the elohim being judged, then Psalm 82 cannot be in the context of the Israelite judges, who were to reflect YHWH's rule (not the elohim-gods-of-the-nations rule; kings and rulers of other nations would be under their authority).  

We're going to keep explaining, because the term elohim is, admittedly, overly fuzzy for us English readers.

Sacred Ground: Where Divine Judgment Descends

I know this is complex, so let's break it down with some charts, shall we?  Comparing the passages will show us some useful pieces of information that relate to cosmic geography.  

Exodus 21:6 - "elohim"

* The action of making a slave into a permanent member of one's house is a covenantal action, which requires divine witness.

Exodus 22:8-9 - "elohim"

* This passage is a better comparison for Psalm 82, because wrongdoing is occurring (and not just need for divine witness), though both Exodus 21:6 and 22:8-9 show the context of divine action.  Note in particular the location.  The doorpost would be the familial liminal (divine) space.

Before moving to Psalm 82, let's look even more into this concept of judges being representatives of the divine.  Exodus 18 is where the judges (plural--not just Moses) come into play.  Note the purposes and the function.  This is not a text where the judges are supposedly being named "elohim," but nonetheless elohim is being invoked.  This is the context for the next several chapters where law and judgment are introduced/explained.

Exodus 18:15-16 - "elohim"

* The judgment being given is not one that stems from Moses, but from God himself.  Moses (and in turn the judges he appoints) functions as a mediator between the people and God.  The judges form another layer of mediation, like this:

Israelites → Judges → Moses → God (elohim)

No judgment was ever meant to be a "mere" human judgment.  They were to reflect the divine power over them.  

Now, let's look at Psalm 82...does this show God judging human or angelic mediators?  In the DCW, the layers of mediation outside Israel look like this:

People → King/priests → gods (elohim) → God (elohim)

Remember that mediation occurs within liminal (divine) space.

Psalm 82:1 - "elohim"

* Note the phrase “in the midst” (bᵉqerev) in Psalm 82:1. For those who argue that the elohim here are human judges, this phrase is often interpreted as a mundane description...simply that God (figuratively) stands among an assembly of earthly rulers, wherever they might be.  But this raises a critical question:  where is the divine setting in that view?  In Exodus 21:6 and 22:8–9, the very passages most often cited to support “humans-as-elohim," the courtroom is explicitly sacred/divine.  As I've argued, the term elohim in those passages doesn’t name the human judges, but rather identifies the divine authority under which judgment is rendered. 

By contrast, in Psalm 82, if the assembly consists only of humans and the setting is not explicitly divine, the phrase “in the midst of the elohim” loses theological weight.  The psalm opens with “God takes his stand in the divine assembly,” which already evokes the Divine Council frame found elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible (e.g., Job 1:6, 1 Kings 22).  Therefore, “in the midst of the elohim” is best read as a spatial locator within a divine courtroom, not a metaphor for a social group.  God's council does not merely “happen”--it happens in a divine location, reinforcing His role as cosmic Judge.

In sum, the textual and cultural logic and the consistency of divine presence and authority across these uses of elohim suggest that even in Psalm 82, we are looking at God presiding in a divine realm, not merely among earthly leaders.  The Israelite human judges were accountable and to reflect YHWH; if we presume that the "elohim" of Exodus 18, 21, and 22 is consistent with "elohim #2" of Psalm 82, then there is, in fact, a lack of coherence between the two in the "human" explanation, since in any case at all, "elohim" in the Exodus passages must refer to YHWH (or at minimum, be a reflection of YHWH).  

This is hard to visualize, so here's an attempt to do it graphically, from the perspective of the "human view":

Exodus:  Judges → reflect → God (elohim)

Psalm 82 (human-view):  Judges → reflect → God (elohim)

In short, the “human elohim” reading of Psalm 82 actually undermines the very connection the Exodus texts are making between human judges and elohim.  If these judges are not reflecting YHWH’s divine character and authority, then calling them elohim becomes theologically incoherent.  In Exodus, any reference to elohim presumes that judgment takes place within a sacred structure—under divine commission, before YHWH, not apart from Him.  

This coherence reflects broader ANE patterns, where kings, prophets, and priests operated within their own temples and sacred spaces, representing their patron deities.  Sacred thresholds, altars, and holy assemblies were spatially and theologically bound to divine presence (not just YHWH's, but any divine presence).  Israel was called to be YHWH’s treasured possession, exclusive in loyalty.  That's why YHWH says he is a "jealous God."  

Yet Israel repeatedly blurred these lines, dismantling divine exclusivity through syncretistic worship (e.g., 2 Kings 21:7).  They invited other gods into YHWH’s space.  In this light, Israel wasn’t alone in deserving judgment and wrath.  

Justice at the Intersection of Heaven and Earth

The spiritual beings in Psalm 82 were not independent actors—they were governing through human intermediaries.  And when those intermediaries failed in their duties, the fault was not just human corruption--it was also spiritual rebellion.

When God’s covenant people failed to uphold justice, He did not turn a blind eye.  He poured out His wrath and sent them into exile.  So what about the nations who followed other gods?  If their human rulers oppressed the weak, and their spiritual patrons (the lower elohim) did nothing to restrain or correct that injustice, should those divine overseers not be held accountable as well?  If they exercised authority over nations yet failed to reflect even a shadow of God’s righteousness, then Psalm 82 is the expected prosecution.  Divine responsibility demands divine reckoning.

Exodus 12:12 - For I will pass through the land of Egypt that night, and I will strike all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and on all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgments: I am the LORD.

Again…these gods weren’t abstract ideas.  Their worship was bound up in real expectations of power.  Think of Pharaoh’s magicians in Exodus or the dramatic contest between Elijah and the prophets of Baal in 1 Kings 18.  These weren’t mere rituals or symbolic gestures; they were believed to invoke real divine response.  The people expected their gods to act, and I figure we ought to believe them when they (and the Bible) claim they had done so.  This is exactly why syncretistic worship became such a persistent temptation in Israel:  the gods of the nations weren’t just cultural symbols; they were perceived as providers, protectors, and patrons of earthly success.  

I know I keep repeating myself, but in the biblical worldview, the spiritual and earthly realms were deeply intertwined.  Earthly injustice pointed to spiritual failure—and vice versa.  We have many places in Scripture which show prosecution of humans.  Psalm 82 describes that shared accountability in the form of judgment on the elohim.  

Misplaced Worship and Responsibility

Here’s another thing to consider.  If Psalm 82 is a judgment on the people–then what new information does this give us?  What context is it judging within?  One big reason some want to see these as “people” is because of how Jesus quotes Psalm 82 in John 10.  (That’s a whole thing itself that we’ll be getting into at various points.)  But who is specifically being called out?  

In the human-elohim view, there’s usually a few ideas.  Maybe this is a judgment on the people at Sinai.  Maybe it’s a judgment at the time of the prophets.  Honestly, it’s not actually clear at all which humans are supposedly being judged in this Psalm, which should make us wonder.  That on top of the strange judgment of “dying like men,” since…you know, men already die.  (In some arguments, this “death” is a figurative disgrace because the presumption is that the people are setting themselves up as God in their pride and so the judgment of “death” is a recall that they aren’t God…again, an idea that doesn’t stem from the text itself but must be presupposed.)

So you see, there’s some issues of presumption there.  But Psalm 82 isn’t merely a critique of prideful abandonment of God.  It’s a cosmic courtroom drama that doesn’t just slap against a lack of right worship, but a societal problem of enacting justice.  None of the contexts that are presupposed (at Sinai or during the exile) seems entirely to fit our numbered list of failures that we started with, honestly.  …But they do fit the realm of national governance gone unchecked, which aligns with the spiritual beings view.  

This is what makes Psalm 82 so striking:  it forces us modern people to see that the line between worship and governance, between spiritual allegiance and societal justice, is not as cleanly divided as we often think.  In the ancient world, and in Scripture, who you worship shapes how you rule.  Misplaced worship leads inevitably to misplaced responsibility--and eventually to divine indictment.

The people of Israel did receive God’s wrath for their misplaced worship and for their lack of righteousness; they went into exile.  The nations also experienced God’s wrath in their own defeat.  Is it really so strange that we should see the national gods likewise being judged?  

These elohim weren’t just passive recipients of misguided devotion; they were active participants in a system that failed to reflect God’s character.  Their sin wasn’t merely accepting worship, it was permitting and perhaps even promoting injustice among the nations under their charge.

Psalm 82 reminds us that YHWH is not indifferent to injustice, wherever it occurs or whoever is responsible.  Whether through human kings or heavenly powers, God expects those who bear His image--or carry His authority--to reflect His justice.  When they don’t, He steps in.

If you're interested in exploring more, check out these related episodes on Genesis Marks the Spot:

Divination to Adoration - Worship Then and Now (Worship, Part 2) - Episode 042

The Cup of Wrath: Inheriting Your Desire at the Banquet - Episode 126

Wrath and the gods: Deut. 32 and the Mirror of Judgment - Episode 127

Want to do study similar to those charts I made above?  Check out how here (with free printable study guides!):

From Words to Worlds: Free Bible Study Guide on Frame Semantics