Elohim Unveiled: Decoding the Divine Duel of gods and God in Scripture

Are the gods rightly called "gods?" It all depends on what you mean.

In my previous post, I explained the difference between the modern use of the word God and the etymologies of this English term and the main Hebrew, Greek, Latin equivalents. What we discovered is that etymologically, what we call “g-o-d” originates in ideas of “power” or “might,” something “sacred” or “shining,” something from the “sky,” and something that is “invoked” or to whom something is “poured out” as in a libation and not in the incommunicable attributes that the Bible uses to describe the eternal, omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent Creator. The reason He and they can all be designated with these same titles is because they all share those attributes. The difference is that God, who also has these qualities or attributes, has them all in a unique and singular sense, which is what sets him apart as “God of gods” (Deut 10:17; Ps 136:2; Dan 11:36). 

But a question can arise as to whether or not other elohim—other gods—are gods by their very nature or if this is a false attribution. The nature of a thing is what it is. Men and women are humans. That is what we are. That is our nature. Dogs are dogs, cats are cats, etc. God is God. So what are the gods? Drew Grumbles, who’s article sparked by first post, agrees that angels and demons are real, and that they are also designated as elohim. What he disagrees with is that they are properly called elohim—gods. Rather, this is a designation that unbelieving pagans wrongly attribute to these creatures, as he permits only one definition of God for these terms. 

That definition would be something like what the Westminster Shorter Catechism says, “God is a spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable, in His being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness, and truth.” If this is the only definition of God that is permissible, then yes, all other entities called gods have this term improperly attributed to them. On this, all agree. What we disagree with is that this is the only definition of these terms that the Bible uses. Thus, we are dealing with a semantic disagreement, not a theological one. 

Does the Bible ever use our four terms to refer to only one entity that truly exists? Yes! Any time there is a verse of comparison, we have something like the Catechism’s definition of God in mind. For example, Isa 44:6, “Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts: I am the first and I am the last, and besides me there is no god.” What is in view here is God’s eternality, the fact that he alone is uncreated. God alone is I AM. In this sense (this definition), God is the only God that exists. Again, something like Deut 4:39, “Know therefore today, and lay it to your heart, that the Lord is God in heaven above and on the earth beneath; there is no other.” Here, the point is that there are no gods that are Lord of heaven and earth. God alone is powerful enough, wise enough, holy enough, big enough to rule both heaven and earth. Implied are many incommunicable attributes that no other being possesses. In this sense (this definition), no other gods exist. If one is attributing to the definition “gods” (created elohim), these incommunicable attributes, then no other gods exist. 

The problem is, in these very same verses, God is being compared to real entities that do exist. And never, not even a single time, does Scripture ever say that they do not exist or, more to Grumble’s point, that they are not properly called gods (we will look at a couple of the verses used against this in my next post). In fact, it says the opposite, “If he called them gods to whom the word of God came…” (John 10:35). I can’t get into a detailed exegesis of this passage here (I’ve done this many times on podcasts, including the Reformed Fringe), but for sake of argument, let the reader presuppose that this refers to heavenly beings.^[1] The text isn’t saying that these entities are not really gods because humans have wrongly ascribed this term to them. It says that God called them gods. It is a designation that He gave to them.

Above, I cited Isa 44:6 “… besides me there is no god.” This is an interesting idea that is translated differently by the KJV where it says, “I am the first, and I am the last; And beside me there is no God.” “Besides” is a word that conveys ontology or existence or as the NET translations puts it, “there is no God but me.” However, “beside” me probably conveys something like location. “There is no god next to me,” i.e. that is my equal. This must be the sense of the similar phrase when the Bible has the king of Babylon say in his heart, “I am, and there is no one beside me” (Isa 47:8 KJV), or of the king of Nineveh who says, “I am, and there is no one else” (Zeph 2:15). Obviously, the boast is not that they are the only king or city that exists on the earth. It is a claim of rivalry, not ontology.^[2] The point here is that it could theologically refer to either idea. There is only one uncreated God and he has no rivals—even amongst other gods that exist. Both ideas are perfectly orthodox in all Christian circles.

But if God is calling them gods (theoi/elohim), does this mean that God was ascribing to created beings the definition of the Shorter Catechism onto these beings? Absolutely not! Therefore, the term must mean something else, something less, something that conveys God’s attributes or functions that are communicable to creatures—that is attributes that they have in common due to God creating them that way. In the context of this particular Psalm it appears to be the function of ruling in a divine council. Since they ruled wickedly, they are judged and even sentenced to die “like men.” 

This is why in the very same verses that presuppose a unique definition of the Lord God in his attribution “God,” he can still be compared to real actual beings that are truly gods in some proper sense. In what sense? In the sense that they are powerful, mighty, sacred, shining beings, creatures from the sky that humans invoke and worship—albeit wrongly. When this is in mind, it is perfectly justifiable to call them gods, for this is exactly what God created them to be and this is why God called them gods and the Bible consistently teaches that they are in fact gods.

Sometimes, both definitions of God can be in the same verse. Ex 15:11, “Who is like you, O LORD, among the gods? Who is like you, majestic in holiness, awesome in glorious deeds, doing wonders?” One definition is presupposed for God (He is transcendently majestic, holy, awesome, powerful, etc.). One definition is presupposed for the gods (they are immanently, creationally, finitely majestic, holy, awesome, powerful). Again, Deut 3:24, “O Lord GOD, you have only begun to show your servant your greatness and your mighty hand. For what god is there in heaven or on earth who can do such works and mighty acts as yours?” Again Psalm 86:8, “There is none like you among the gods, O Lord, nor are there any works like yours.” The gods perform works, sometimes even great and terrible works, but none are comparable to God’s, not on a finite scale where God’s works are just a lot bigger, but on a finite to infinite scale! They are powerful; God is omnipotent. They have vast knowledge; God is omniscient. Etc.

Scripture consistently affirms the Lord as the sole uncreated God, defined by unique, incommunicable attributes like eternality and omnipotence (Isa 44:6; Deut 4:39), yet in the same verses, it applies elohim and related terms to real, created beings—angels and demons—whose very nature includes communicable attributes like power, sacredness, and heavenly origin (Ps 82:1, 6; Ex 15:11). These other elohim are properly called gods according to their created essence, as affirmed by God Himself (John 10:35), not because they share the Lord’s divine nature but because their inherent qualities align with the functional etymology of elohim and theos (might, shining). Properly understanding this allows us to retain the biblical data without fear of blurring the distinction between the Lord God and any of his creation. Deut 10:17 says, “For the Lord your God is God of gods and Lord of lords,” demonstrating that Scripture itself subordinates lesser gods to the Lord, ensuring no confusion with monotheism. This dual usage, often in the same verse (Ps 86:8; Deut 3:24), preserves the Lord’s supremacy as the “God of gods” while acknowledging the ontological reality of lesser gods, ensuring a coherent biblical monotheism without semantic confusion. August 8, 2025 Doug Van Dorn

^[1] Even if it didn’t, someone is still being called elohim by God and that’s the point here.

^[2] This is made clearer by the different Hebrew phrases ʾapsî ʿôd in Isa 47:8 vs. mibbalʿāday in 44:6.